[SunderX]

Information does not exist outside of the human mind. We attribute meaning to the state of the universe through our own consciousnesses.

A message is not 'information' unless there is somebody able to look at it. DNA is not information unless there are scientists to understand it.

Hence information is in the eye of the beholder.

[Above.The.Empyrean]

Burden of proof is conferred to the party ascribing there to be an 'intelligent' designer.

[Gwilym101]

(Original post by Jason2)
When as DNA mutation lead to a complete new species? Certainly new sub-species can be created, example being breeds of dogs, but certainly not a totally different organism. If you believe this then please provide evidence. The funny thing is, species are going extinct all the time, yet evolutionists still maintain that new species are created. Muppets.

DNA mutation leads to corruption of original information, it certainly isn't enhanced.

Mutation is a source of random change in the DNA structure, it can be harmful, or beneficial but most of the time doesn't have any phenotypic effect. If it has an effect on the body it is then acted on by other forces, most notably selection. If it is useful the organism with it is more successful and passes it on to it's offspring who will also possess the mutation, gradually over time this mutation is passed on to an increasing number of offspring to subsequent generations. Eventually those that don't possess it are outcompeted and driven to extinction and the species has evolved into a new species entirely.

A good example of a beneficial and a harmful mutation is Sickle cell anemia, if you possess both recessive mutations you have the disease, but if you only possess one and are therefore a carrier, you possess resistance to Malaria (that's an enhancement in my book).

Yes new species can emerge through evolution, you want evidence? Birds. They evolved from dinosaurs, we know this as we've found fossils that possess lizard traits and bird traits in varying ratios.

Examples include Archeopteryx, a dinosaur with clawed fingers on it's forelimbs and teeth like a lizard but possessed feathers. Another example Gigantoraptor, a large, feathered, beaked dinosaur that exhibited nesting behaviour. A third is Microraptor a dinosaur with feathers on every limb (including hind limbs or legs) that potentially enabled it to glide.

There are too many examples to go into of how evolution has created the species that are alive today, but mutation is one of the key drivers in how it happened.

Species go extinct all the time, we are currently in the SIXTH MASS EXTINCTION EVENT. There have been five previous ones, that's how evolution works some species go extinct as they were out competed by more suitably adapted species.

Initially I thought you were just playing devils advocate to get a discussion going, but now I realise you're one of those idiotic creationists that ignore any evidence that doesn't fit in your world view.

[Jason2]

(Original post by Gwilym101)
Mutation is a source of random change in the DNA structure, it can be harmful, or beneficial but most of the time doesn't have any phenotypic effect. If it has an effect on the body it is then acted on by other forces, most notably selection. If it is useful the organism with it is more successful and passes it on to it's offspring who will also possess the mutation, gradually over time this mutation is passed on to an increasing number of offspring to subsequent generations. Eventually those that don't possess it are outcompeted and driven to extinction and the species has evolved into a new species entirely.

A good example of a beneficial and a harmful mutation is Sickle cell anemia, if you possess both recessive mutations you have the disease, but if you only possess one and are therefore a carrier, you possess resistance to Malaria (that's an enhancement in my book).

Yes new species can emerge through evolution, you want evidence? Birds. They evolved from dinosaurs, we know this as we've found fossils that possess lizard traits and bird traits in varying ratios.

Examples include Archeopteryx, a dinosaur with clawed fingers on it's forelimbs and teeth like a lizard but possessed feathers. Another example Gigantoraptor, a large, feathered, beaked dinosaur that exhibited nesting behaviour. A third is Microraptor a dinosaur with feathers on every limb (including hind limbs or legs) that potentially enabled it to glide.

There are too many examples to go into of how evolution has created the species that are alive today, but mutation is one of the key drivers in how it happened.

Species go extinct all the time, we are currently in the SIXTH MASS EXTINCTION EVENT. There have been five previous ones, that's how evolution works some species go extinct as they were out competed by more suitably adapted species.

Initially I thought you were just playing devils advocate to get a discussion going, but now I realise you're one of those idiotic creationists that ignore any evidence that doesn't fit in your world view.

You really are naive, aren't you? Whenever you talk about mutation you can only show adaptions. I am in no way disputing adaption. I am disputing that mutation does not lead to new species being created.

As for birds being descendants of dinosaurs, even your own religion doubts you on this: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0609092055.htm.
It's actually very amusing to see someone who can believe land creatures suddenly one day developed wings and flew off into the sunset.

In conclusion, as I've pointed out several times now, mutation only leads to corruption. It in now way creates brilliant designs such as the birds, which according to dawkins, is a little trick by nature to fool us into thinking things were designed but really aren't lol.

[sarahthegemini]

Wtf? How on Earth would it even be feasible for DNA to prove the existence of God - for a start, how do you know that any DNA found would belong to God. I'm very confused by what you're saying.

[KasanDude]

(Original post by Jason2)
You really are naive, aren't you? Whenever you talk about mutation you can only show adaptions. I am in no way disputing adaption. I am disputing that mutation does not lead to new species being created.

As for birds being descendants of dinosaurs, even your own religion doubts you on this: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...0609092055.htm.
It's actually very amusing to see someone who can believe land creatures suddenly one day developed wings and flew off into the sunset.

In conclusion, as I've pointed out several times now, mutation only leads to corruption. It in now way creates brilliant designs such as the birds, which according to dawkins, is a little trick by nature to fool us into thinking things were designed but really aren't lol.

Mutations happen constantly. Its just slight deviations from code that produce minute changes, hence two beings (even human twins) are never the same. The mutation never carries forward unless it is advantageous in that environment. For example, having an extra nose isn't adventageous, so those born that way with likely die before they mate, meaning the gene for the mutation is not carried forward. If it is not carried forward is still has a slight chance of appearing again later, because mutations happen all the time. A mutation is described as any random alteration in the genetic sequence, and it happens every time an egg is fertalized and develops into a baby.

In fact, cancer is an example of mutation. When you have cancer, it is because cells that used to be, say, skin cells mutate (alter their own DNA) and become cells for something else. It's only a handful of cells, so its not like an eye will grow in your lungs or something, but if enough cells do this, they can impede bodily functions, thereby the cancer kills the being.

If mutation didn't happen, how do you explain albinos?

[Jason2]

But albinos are still human beings. I'm not saying mutation doesn't happy, it quite clearly does. I'm just saying it doesn't create new organisms.

And I will say this, the atheistic POV is evil. For they believe someone with cancer should die. Essentially they're just a bad copy. How flaming dare you devalue life like that.

[Jason2]

(Original post by sarahthegemini)
Wtf? How on Earth would it even be feasible for DNA to prove the existence of God - for a start, how do you know that any DNA found would belong to God. I'm very confused by what you're saying.

Just as scientists blast radio waves into space hoping for a response. It's assuming et life would know what 'information' is. This is a big assumption. In fact, science is based on assumptions. Just do some research.

[jordanosborn]

(Original post by Jason2)
And I will say this, the atheistic POV is evil. For they believe someone with cancer should die. Essentially they're just a bad copy. How flaming dare you devalue life like that.

What? You are ridiculous he did not claim anything of the sort. Cancer is a mutation. Doesn't mean that he thinks they should die. A lot of scientists are atheists. Scientists also develop treatments for cancer. So how can they want them to die if they are trying to treat it?

[Gwilym101]

(Original post by Jason2)
But albinos are still human beings. I'm not saying mutation doesn't happy, it quite clearly does. I'm just saying it doesn't create new organisms.

And I will say this, the atheistic POV is evil. For they believe someone with cancer should die. Essentially they're just a bad copy. How flaming dare you devalue life like that.

What bull**** is this?

No one thinks that. That's why BILLIONS go into cancer research you idiot. The closest thing mutation and evolution have to that statement (which is clearly what you're inferring) is a person with cancer is less likely to survive and reproduce.

Don't put words in other peoples mouths, and if you don't understand evolution and mutation don't act as if you can you.

[blahblah772]

(Original post by Chris Evans)
Yes, in short, are we merely witnessing patterns or this deliberately created information. DNA is so complex, that the user is loath to call it a mere 'pattern'.

what rubbish

[jordanosborn]

(Original post by Jason2)
Just as scientists blast radio waves into space hoping for a response. It's assuming et life would know what 'information' is. This is a big assumption. In fact, science is based on assumptions. Just do some research.

Yes and if these assumptions are to be given any merit they will need to be backed up by evidence at a later date. This is were science and religion differs. Both produce assumptions but only one backs it up with evidence before there claimed to be correct. I'll let you guess which one that is.

[Jason2]

(Original post by jordanosborn)
Yes and if these assumptions are to be given any merit they will need to be backed up by evidence at a later date. This is were science and religion differs. Both produce assumptions but only one backs it up with evidence before there claimed to be correct. I'll let you guess which one that is.

Our evidence will be backed up with the return of Christ.

[oli_G]

OP doesn't understand DNA/evolution.

[jordanosborn]

(Original post by Jason2)
Our evidence will be backed up with the return of Christ.

Well until that day I will remain an atheist. Any sane person would as well. Believing in something without evidence is quite frankly idiotic.

[KasanDude]

(Original post by Jason2)
But albinos are still human beings. I'm not saying mutation doesn't happy, it quite clearly does. I'm just saying it doesn't create new organisms.

And I will say this, the atheistic POV is evil. For they believe someone with cancer should die. Essentially they're just a bad copy. How flaming dare you devalue life like that.

HAHAHAHAHA

It's funny how religion bends the words of others to serve its own purposes...

I said nothing of the sort. All I said that cancer is an example of mutation. Please show me exactly where in my post is says something like "cancer patients should die." Clearly you are delusional.

First you say that mutations do not exist. Then I PROVE that they do and you verbally attack me by claiming I said something which I did not.

Never did I say that albinos were not people. AGAIN, quit putting words in my mouth. All I said is that they're a brilliant example of benign mutation which is being carried forward, as albinos can have lives and families just as well as non-albinos. It is YOU that is putting a negative stigma to the word "mutation." Its just a scientific word. Albinos are, in a way, walking and talking proof of evolution, and for this alone I admire and respect them.

Cancer is a normal part of life, nowadays. Many people are afflicted by it. I know several. It scientifically is a mutation. If you ask ANY doctor, they will explain that cancer is just a mutation of cell DNA. Just because I would have said something like that blindness can be caused by nerve damage between the eyes and brain doesn't mean I, in any way, wish such an affliction on anyone.

And, in all honesty, it is religion that usually ends up killing people, seeing as when someone does have a geniune illness, they rationalize it by claiming it to be "god's will" and tell them to pray rather than seek professional medical aid.

Thoughts?

[fermium3]

(Original post by KasanDude)
HAHAHAHAHA

It's funny how religion bends the words of others to serve its own purposes...

I said nothing of the sort. All I said that cancer is an example of mutation. Please show me exactly where in my post is says something like "cancer patients should die." Clearly you are delusional.

First you say that mutations do not exist. Then I PROVE that they do and you verbally attack me by claiming I said something which I did not.

Never did I say that albinos were not people. AGAIN, quit putting words in my mouth. All I said is that they're a brilliant example of benign mutation which is being carried forward, as albinos can have lives and families just as well as non-albinos. It is YOU that is putting a negative stigma to the word "mutation." Its just a scientific word. Albinos are, in a way, walking and talking proof of evolution, and for this alone I admire and respect them.

Cancer is a normal part of life, nowadays. Many people are afflicted by it. I know several. It scientifically is a mutation. If you ask ANY doctor, they will explain that cancer is just a mutation of cell DNA. Just because I would have said something like that blindness can be caused by nerve damage between the eyes and brain doesn't mean I, in any way, wish such an affliction on anyone.

And, in all honesty, it is religion that usually ends up killing people, seeing as when someone does have a geniune illness, they rationalize it by claiming it to be "god's will" and tell them to pray rather than seek professional medical aid.

Thoughts?

THIS!

[Jason2]

(Original post by KasanDude)
HAHAHAHAHA

It's funny how religion bends the words of others to serve its own purposes...

I said nothing of the sort. All I said that cancer is an example of mutation. Please show me exactly where in my post is says something like "cancer patients should die." Clearly you are delusional.

First you say that mutations do not exist. Then I PROVE that they do and you verbally attack me by claiming I said something which I did not.

Never did I say that albinos were not people. AGAIN, quit putting words in my mouth. All I said is that they're a brilliant example of benign mutation which is being carried forward, as albinos can have lives and families just as well as non-albinos. It is YOU that is putting a negative stigma to the word "mutation." Its just a scientific word. Albinos are, in a way, walking and talking proof of evolution, and for this alone I admire and respect them.

Cancer is a normal part of life, nowadays. Many people are afflicted by it. I know several. It scientifically is a mutation. If you ask ANY doctor, they will explain that cancer is just a mutation of cell DNA. Just because I would have said something like that blindness can be caused by nerve damage between the eyes and brain doesn't mean I, in any way, wish such an affliction on anyone.

And, in all honesty, it is religion that usually ends up killing people, seeing as when someone does have a geniune illness, they rationalize it by claiming it to be "god's will" and tell them to pray rather than seek professional medical aid.

Thoughts?

Joseph Stalin - How many did he kill?

[KasanDude]

(Original post by Jason2)
Joseph Stalin - How many did he kill?

Unless he secretly did DNA research while running russia, he is irrelevant to this argument.

Please stay on topic.

[jordanosborn]

How many people did the crusades kill. How many people were left untreated due to science being held back by religion. How many people are killed even today for religious reasons.