Hi, I'm asking this question sincerely seeking the truth. Do you know if there are any theories of how the DNA replication process might have originated in the primordial soup without intelligent design? Thanks!
Keep in mind during this comment that I am a staunch Creationist but I am going to approach this video as if I were not. I cannot understand why anyone would use down's syndrome as an example to answer this question. If you were going to answer this, XYY is much better. It has no negative side effects and can be passed on. Down's Syndrome is considered, by any objective viewpoint, a deformity. It is not, nor could it be considered under any conditions, positive. It is like being born blind.
@prendes4 Not sure about the coparison to being born blind but good comment. I would like to add as well though that Darwins theory states that an evolution it to help a species. XYY does not really help in any way. Also, I would like to point out the fact that studies show testosterone remains normal it does not increase. Moreover, xyy,xxx,xxy, are shown not to be inheirited.
@prendes4 Futher XXY,XYY,and XXX, all do have downfalls that make them a hamper. Studies show that all three lead to learning disabilities, and speech problems in nearly 50%. So with the fact that it can in someway hampers a human and in no way helps; and the fact that it is not passed on (or inheirited) it does not fit the theory of evolution.
beyond trisomies, i think we could look to mutations such as isochromosomes or even robertsonian translocations; examples of extra genetic material at the level of the chromosome.
atleast that was my thought when i saw that initial 'dawkins stumped' video.
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG. Sorry dude you have about the same interest level of a dead dung beetle... (dead)
Duplicate information is not additional information and the result of xyy sydrome is still detrimenttal. There is also no species that resulted from xyy sydrome.
Mutations do not happen "evolutionarily". Mutations can effect the ultimate evolutionary outcomes, but they are not caused by evolution. They are caused by the inherent entropy of biochemistry. Organic reactions often have numerous side reactions (especially since most organic reactions have very complex mechanisms) and the fact that life processes (aided by enzymes) limit those side reactions is a testament to how efficient these processes have become over time.
I think there is a problem understanding the term "new information". If one produced a novel by cutting and pasting passages from already existing novels, some people might call that a "new" novel, but most people would agree that's not very legitimate. When we are talking about new information, the easiest example would be to go to the very FIRST living organism and explain how that information got there without an intelligent cause. Since there is nothing preceding it, this would be "new".
Okay but it cannot be inherited or passed on in the same way. Therefore it still fails to answer the Creationists question. Which is probably why Dawkins did not use it as well as down syndrome.
It's not that it's seen as a disease! It's that the example given is a joke since there is no NEW information, only replicated information of already existing information! If it was that easy I'm sure Dawkins would have thought of it, but he didn't cos he knew how dumb it would sound!
In response to everyone talking about how these are diseases and are bad blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that these are examples of the genetic code being extended to have more room for more genetic information that can be modified in successive generations.
In response to people saying a duplication of a chromosome is not adding information. Technically true, but it is adding information space, that successive generations can manipulate.
Thanks for posting your vid. I agree that DS was a poor example. It was the first one that occurred to me and I also have to admit that I was trying to insinuate that the Creationist's question was retarded. I would like to apologize for any insult I have given to those with DS in linking them to Creationists.
Does extra genetic material necessarily mean an evolutionary step up? Can the process of evolution occur without it? Can there be an advantage gained by genetic loss? Sorry if this doesn't make sense. I am not a student of biology in any way.
@Daaaaf Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If a genetic mutation survives to reproduce then it is by definition a step up, whether it is a loss or gain in genetic material, no?
@caveatemp That depends on your definition of 'a step up', if it means better adapted to the current environment, then i suppose so, although a lot of chance is involved, so it's best not to talk in absolutes.
But the whole reason that these "debates" happen is due to the fact that people want absolutes :P Like there is absolutely a god, and if you don't do what we told you he wants you to do, then you will absolutely go to hell...
Bottom line is people believe what they want to believe. If you want God to take control of your life and change you then He will. If you dont then you are in sad shape since the way you are will lead to eternal misery
Listen Sharks rarely get cancer and many humans do hows that for evolutions. Why don t the graves from the first humans come back to life if as you say everything happened without a creator?
Or maybe we are right God did create man and appointed him to return to the dust as from where he was created from.
Its a poor example but an example nonetheless and explains the possibility of additional chromosomes. BTW you say genes but thats not totally correct.
@TheInterpreterOfTime Look up complications in AIDS, preferably in a textbook. The Human Immuno Virus changes very quickly in reaction to its environment (because it copies more) and causes medications to become ineffective. Patients have to go through periodical detoxes, so that the virus will drift closer to its normal state.
It's been observed in numerous cases and remains a strong piece of evidence that there are processes that cause lifeforms to change dramatically over time
Seems it would have been more effective to emphasize that syndromes like Down's, Kleinfelter's,Turner's, etc are simply NOT heritable diseases.
the argument from creationists is that since these are "bad genetic changes" they should have been eradicated by natural selection; however, these are simply problems with meiosis itself (nondisjunction). It's not like these syndromes are caused by a mutation in actual DNA (like sickle cell disease) that could get passed down from parent to offspring.
XYY and other such examples may increase the information to that single person, but is there any actual benefit from such things? To me it sounds like mostly unwanted effects. For example, i've been reading about hormones, having too much testosterone can cause hair loss (normally caused by spiking your blood sugar). And even if there was some benefit to the increased genetic information, does that additional information actually get passed on, or would the offspring get the normal amount ?
Why did humans give up supersonic hearing like the bats have if we are products of evolution. Or being able to sleep with one eye open like the dolphins do..
There is no choice in evolution. Perhaps such traits/adaptations were not advantageous to humans and were gradually selected against over generations.
@TheInterpreterOfTime because, the original life form mutated in many different ways, creating may slightly different life forms. Slowly but surely, the same process occured in each new life form, and every time a mutation occured that was beneficial, the previous and weaker species that is lacking the improvement subsequently died off. Over millions of years, excruciatingly slowly, the original life form slowly went mutated over millions of generations into all life on earth in this way
Save your breath man. That video crops up on pretty much a daily basis. theres about a thousand copies of it on youtube. I doubt the sort of people who are convinced by such a blatently falsified video are going to be swayed by anything genuine :S
LOL FAIL
MrHayeMekka 15 hours ago
Hi, I'm asking this question sincerely seeking the truth. Do you know if there are any theories of how the DNA replication process might have originated in the primordial soup without intelligent design? Thanks!
patriotsundergod 1 month ago
Keep in mind during this comment that I am a staunch Creationist but I am going to approach this video as if I were not. I cannot understand why anyone would use down's syndrome as an example to answer this question. If you were going to answer this, XYY is much better. It has no negative side effects and can be passed on. Down's Syndrome is considered, by any objective viewpoint, a deformity. It is not, nor could it be considered under any conditions, positive. It is like being born blind.
prendes4 2 months ago
@prendes4 Not sure about the coparison to being born blind but good comment. I would like to add as well though that Darwins theory states that an evolution it to help a species. XYY does not really help in any way. Also, I would like to point out the fact that studies show testosterone remains normal it does not increase. Moreover, xyy,xxx,xxy, are shown not to be inheirited.
NANAKISONOFSETO 1 month ago
@prendes4 Futher XXY,XYY,and XXX, all do have downfalls that make them a hamper. Studies show that all three lead to learning disabilities, and speech problems in nearly 50%. So with the fact that it can in someway hampers a human and in no way helps; and the fact that it is not passed on (or inheirited) it does not fit the theory of evolution.
NANAKISONOFSETO 1 month ago
beyond trisomies, i think we could look to mutations such as isochromosomes or even robertsonian translocations; examples of extra genetic material at the level of the chromosome.
atleast that was my thought when i saw that initial 'dawkins stumped' video.
a004 2 months ago
Dat ass in the background
NeyoPro 3 months ago
@NeyoPro yep!
Entropy56 6 days ago
BOOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG. Sorry dude you have about the same interest level of a dead dung beetle... (dead)
ngimangi 5 months ago
Boring, but essentially correct.
Jdog4Jesus 4 months ago
Duplicate information is not additional information and the result of xyy sydrome is still detrimenttal. There is also no species that resulted from xyy sydrome.
Learn some real science,
watch?v=qZev7hb40uk
JungleJargon 5 months ago
Mutations do not happen "evolutionarily". Mutations can effect the ultimate evolutionary outcomes, but they are not caused by evolution. They are caused by the inherent entropy of biochemistry. Organic reactions often have numerous side reactions (especially since most organic reactions have very complex mechanisms) and the fact that life processes (aided by enzymes) limit those side reactions is a testament to how efficient these processes have become over time.
MarkRosengarten 5 months ago
I think there is a problem understanding the term "new information". If one produced a novel by cutting and pasting passages from already existing novels, some people might call that a "new" novel, but most people would agree that's not very legitimate. When we are talking about new information, the easiest example would be to go to the very FIRST living organism and explain how that information got there without an intelligent cause. Since there is nothing preceding it, this would be "new".
mearokus 5 months ago
Okay but it cannot be inherited or passed on in the same way. Therefore it still fails to answer the Creationists question. Which is probably why Dawkins did not use it as well as down syndrome.
numba1netsfan 5 months ago
It's not that it's seen as a disease! It's that the example given is a joke since there is no NEW information, only replicated information of already existing information! If it was that easy I'm sure Dawkins would have thought of it, but he didn't cos he knew how dumb it would sound!
BloodOfRayne 6 months ago
XXY is also known as Klinefelter's Syndrome.
In response to everyone talking about how these are diseases and are bad blah blah. It doesn't change the fact that these are examples of the genetic code being extended to have more room for more genetic information that can be modified in successive generations.
In response to people saying a duplication of a chromosome is not adding information. Technically true, but it is adding information space, that successive generations can manipulate.
SteamyThePunk 6 months ago
Thanks for posting your vid. I agree that DS was a poor example. It was the first one that occurred to me and I also have to admit that I was trying to insinuate that the Creationist's question was retarded. I would like to apologize for any insult I have given to those with DS in linking them to Creationists.
imrational 6 months ago
neither 47,XYY syndrome nor 46,XY/47,XYY syndrome can not be passed on as far as I know.
thuglifenos 6 months ago
Does extra genetic material necessarily mean an evolutionary step up? Can the process of evolution occur without it? Can there be an advantage gained by genetic loss? Sorry if this doesn't make sense. I am not a student of biology in any way.
caveatemp 6 months ago
@caveatemp Does extra genetic material necessarily mean an evolutionary step up?
No, in fact, there is strictly speaking no such thing. Evolution does not work towards something.
Can the process of evolution occur without it?
No, assuming everything started from scratch (single-celled organisms), information in the genome has had to increase.
Can there be an advantage gained by genetic loss?
Yes. In fact, many species which we consider 'lower' than ourselves have much larger genomes.
Daaaaf 6 months ago
@Daaaaf Sounds like you want to have your cake and eat it too. If a genetic mutation survives to reproduce then it is by definition a step up, whether it is a loss or gain in genetic material, no?
caveatemp 6 months ago
@caveatemp That depends on your definition of 'a step up', if it means better adapted to the current environment, then i suppose so, although a lot of chance is involved, so it's best not to talk in absolutes.
Daaaaf 6 months ago
But the whole reason that these "debates" happen is due to the fact that people want absolutes :P Like there is absolutely a god, and if you don't do what we told you he wants you to do, then you will absolutely go to hell...
sdsdinclover 6 months ago
Nice poster... :o)
n009135 6 months ago
Bottom line is people believe what they want to believe. If you want God to take control of your life and change you then He will. If you dont then you are in sad shape since the way you are will lead to eternal misery
j919or 7 months ago
I agree good example.
TheLamas408 7 months ago
Listen Sharks rarely get cancer and many humans do hows that for evolutions. Why don t the graves from the first humans come back to life if as you say everything happened without a creator?
Or maybe we are right God did create man and appointed him to return to the dust as from where he was created from.
TheInterpreterOfTime 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@TheInterpreterOfTime "Why don t the graves from the first humans come back to life if as you say everything happened without a creator?"
Seeing as I don't believe in hell, this is ironic... but WHAT THE HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT?
Something about zombies rising?
Why would there be zombies just because god doesn't exist?
DGneoseeker1 7 months ago
@TheInterpreterOfTime Also, since god doesn't exist, HOW could zombies rise?
DGneoseeker1 7 months ago
Its a poor example but an example nonetheless and explains the possibility of additional chromosomes. BTW you say genes but thats not totally correct.
movcrit 7 months ago
i thought klinefelters syndrome made you naturally infertile??? so you cant pass on your genes
tolikechicken 8 months ago
@tolikechicken That's not Kleinfelter's. Kleinfelter's would be XXy,XXXy, etc.
pwnerjeff 7 months ago
@pwnerjeff yes and as a result of the extra X chromosome you become infertile
tolikechicken 7 months ago
@tolikechicken The guy is talking about Xyy syndrome. There are many individuals with this syndrome who are fertile.
pwnerjeff 6 months ago
Nice butt behind to the right
333Daystar 8 months ago
WHERE IS THERE EVIDENCE OF EVOLUTION TODAY
TheInterpreterOfTime 8 months ago
@TheInterpreterOfTime yourself and every other species. You can't view evolution over night.
mllysmart 8 months ago
@TheInterpreterOfTime Look up complications in AIDS, preferably in a textbook. The Human Immuno Virus changes very quickly in reaction to its environment (because it copies more) and causes medications to become ineffective. Patients have to go through periodical detoxes, so that the virus will drift closer to its normal state.
It's been observed in numerous cases and remains a strong piece of evidence that there are processes that cause lifeforms to change dramatically over time
MrVonStrudelberg 7 months ago
Seems it would have been more effective to emphasize that syndromes like Down's, Kleinfelter's,Turner's, etc are simply NOT heritable diseases.
the argument from creationists is that since these are "bad genetic changes" they should have been eradicated by natural selection; however, these are simply problems with meiosis itself (nondisjunction). It's not like these syndromes are caused by a mutation in actual DNA (like sickle cell disease) that could get passed down from parent to offspring.
MBHockey 8 months ago
Comment removed
MBHockey 8 months ago
XYY and other such examples may increase the information to that single person, but is there any actual benefit from such things? To me it sounds like mostly unwanted effects. For example, i've been reading about hormones, having too much testosterone can cause hair loss (normally caused by spiking your blood sugar). And even if there was some benefit to the increased genetic information, does that additional information actually get passed on, or would the offspring get the normal amount ?
Automation2BFree 9 months ago
This is a better example, I have to admit. Great work, I look forward to seeing more work in the future!
TehTyg13 9 months ago
Why did humans give up supersonic hearing like the bats have if we are products of evolution. Or being able to sleep with one eye open like the dolphins do..
TheInterpreterOfTime 9 months ago
@TheInterpreterOfTime
There is no choice in evolution. Perhaps such traits/adaptations were not advantageous to humans and were gradually selected against over generations.
MarconisRadio 9 months ago
@MarconisRadio
How could supersonic hearing not be advantageous to humans
TheInterpreterOfTime 7 months ago
@TheInterpreterOfTime because, the original life form mutated in many different ways, creating may slightly different life forms. Slowly but surely, the same process occured in each new life form, and every time a mutation occured that was beneficial, the previous and weaker species that is lacking the improvement subsequently died off. Over millions of years, excruciatingly slowly, the original life form slowly went mutated over millions of generations into all life on earth in this way
stumash1 8 months ago
@stumash1
is that why there is more divorce in our generation then previous ones, because we are involving for the better.
what you're saying makes no sense to me
TheInterpreterOfTime 7 months ago
Nice ASS in the background!!!
Heck YESS!!!
helltrackrider 9 months ago
Save your breath man. That video crops up on pretty much a daily basis. theres about a thousand copies of it on youtube. I doubt the sort of people who are convinced by such a blatently falsified video are going to be swayed by anything genuine :S
Suppose we gotta try though :D
lordsilly 9 months ago