all in one lifetime iirc
EvolutionA fish that walked on land and became a rat which then became a monkey which then became a human.
all in one lifetime iirc
The sad thing is you really believe that stupidity.
the sad thing is you missed the joke
what's even sadder is you're about to respond saying "you really think didn't get it? hahahahahaha"
Evolution myths............. Mutations can only destroy information
Biologists are uncovering thousands of examples of how mutations lead to new traits and even new species.
This claim not only flies in the face of the evidence, it is also a logical impossibility
The really sad thing is I wasn't even talking about the joke, I was talking about your stance.
Here have some more...
What Do Scientists Think about Evolution?
There are scientists all over the world who know that evolutionary theory is bankrupt. Such men as *Charles Darwin, *Thomas and *Julian Huxley, and *Steven Jay Gould have admitted it. But you will not find these statements in the popular press. Such admissions are only made to fellow professionals.
Most scientists are working in very narrow fields; they do not see the overall picture, and assume, even though their field does not prove evolution, that perhaps other areas of science probably vindicate it. They are well-meaning men. The biologists and geneticists know their facts, and research does not prove evolution, but assume that geology does. The geologists know their field does not prove evolution, but hope that the biologists and geneticists have proven it. Those who do know the facts, fear to disclose them to the general public, lest they be fired. But they do write articles in their own professional journals and books, condemning evolutionary theory.
oh look, a whole section on insertions, not just deletions. if you took freshman biology you'd understand
By effect on structure[edit]
Illustrations of five types of chromosomal mutations.
The sequence of a gene can be altered in a number of ways. Gene mutations have varying effects on health depending on where they occur and whether they alter the function of essential proteins. Mutations in the structure of genes can be classified as:
- Small-scale mutations, such as those affecting a small gene in one or a few nucleotides, including:
- Point mutations, often caused by chemicals or malfunction of DNA replication, exchange a single nucleotide for another.[29] These changes are classified as transitions or transversions.[30] Most common is the transition that exchanges a purine for a purine (A ↔ G) or a pyrimidine for a pyrimidine, (C ↔ T). A transition can be caused by nitrous acid, base mis-pairing, or mutagenic base analogs such as 5-bromo-2-deoxyuridine (BrdU). Less common is a transversion, which exchanges a purine for a pyrimidine or a pyrimidine for a purine (C/T ↔ A/G). An example of a transversion is the conversion of adenine (A) into a cytosine (C). A point mutation can be reversed by another point mutation, in which the nucleotide is changed back to its original state (true reversion) or by second-site reversion (a complementary mutation elsewhere that results in regained gene functionality). Point mutations that occur within theprotein coding region of a gene may be classified into three kinds, depending upon what the erroneous codon codes for:
- Silent mutations, which code for the same (or a sufficiently similar) amino acid.
- Missense mutations, which code for a different amino acid.
- Nonsense mutations, which code for a stop and can truncate the protein.
- Insertions add one or more extra nucleotides into the DNA. They are usually caused by transposable elements, or errors during replication of repeating elements (e.g., AT repeats[citation needed]). Insertions in the coding region of a gene may alter splicing of themRNA (splice site mutation), or cause a shift in the reading frame (frameshift), both of which can significantly alter the gene product. Insertions can be reversed by excision of the transposable element.
- Deletions remove one or more nucleotides from the DNA. Like insertions, these mutations can alter the reading frame of the gene. In general, they are irreversible: Though exactly the same sequence might in theory be restored by an insertion, transposable elements able to revert a very short deletion (say 1–2 bases) in any location either are highly unlikely to exist or do not exist at all.
- Large-scale mutations in chromosomal structure, including:
- Amplifications (or gene duplications) leading to multiple copies of all chromosomal regions, increasing the dosage of the genes located within them.
- Deletions of large chromosomal regions, leading to loss of the genes within those regions.
- Mutations whose effect is to juxtapose previously separate pieces of DNA, potentially bringing together separate genes to form functionally distinct fusion genes (e.g., bcr-abl). These include:
- Chromosomal translocations: interchange of genetic parts from non logous chromosomes.
- Inters ial deletions: an intra-chromosomal deletion that removes a segment of DNA from a single chromosome, thereby apposing previously distant genes. For example, cells isolated from a human astrocytoma, a type of brain tumor, were found to have a chromosomal deletion removing sequences between the "fused in glioblastoma" (fig) gene and the receptor tyrosine kinase "ros", producing a fusion protein (FIG-ROS). The abnormal FIG-ROS fusion protein has cons utively active kinase activity that causes oncogenic transformation (a transformation from normal cells to cancer cells).
- Chromosomal inversions: reversing the orientation of a chromosomal segment.
- Loss of heterozygosity: loss of one allele, either by a deletion or a recombination event, in an organism that previously had two different alleles.
How about actually responding to what was said there? Could it be you know that's how it really is?
So what do scientists think about the theory of evolution in 2015?
you respond to everything i say with a video or article. i'm only returning the favor
you respond to everything i say with a video or article. i'm only returning the favor. although i cant really blame you, since you really know nothing about biology anyway. you wouldn't be able to meaningfully contribute to the conversation
How many times do I need to tell you, we did not come from a nothing on some ocean floor to what we see today? Do you pay any attention at all? So there was nothing and then...LIFE!!!!!!....right? You honestly believe that bull ?
Prove that life came from nothing.
you keep saying it, but you provide no argument for it. you just repeat it. your only form of argument comes from article/youtube spamming
Unlike your football YouTube videos your spamming Avante with?
i'm going to give him the same consideration he gives me. just like you, he likes to spam videos. and just like with you, i used to sit and refute each one.
instead of responding to the refutation, he just spams another video. he no longer deserves my responses. so from now on, if he's going to spam a video, i'm going to spam one back... at least until he starts responding to my comments/refutations
An argument for we can't get life out of non living organisms? Which tells us we must not have had anything to evolve.
So where did life begin and why a need to evolve at all?
thats taking circular reasoning to new heights
life from non-living organic matter is called abiogenesis.
evolution is genetic variation in populations over time. these are two entirely different conversations.
you can have evolution without abiogenesis, and you can have abiogenesis without evolution
Why are you so afraid to see what those far more schooled in this than myself have to say? They all disagree with you as do I?
why are you so afraid to see what 99% of the scientific community has to say? instead you cling to the 1%
Didn't mouse just point out that abiogenesis is impossible? And...you cannot have evolution without it...WHATS TO EVOLVE?????????????
he claimed its impossible. he didn't really have much to back up his claim
99%...???
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)