|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
bbs |
search |
rss |
faq |
about |
register
|
 |
 |
digg |
del.icio.us |
sphere |
google
|
 |
|
| My God Can Beat the Shit Out of Your God For discussing any and all religious viewpoints. Intolerance will not be tolerated. Keeping your sense of humor is required. Posting messages about theological paradoxes is encouraged. |

2006-03-08, 12:52
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Northern VA
|
|
http://tinyurl.com/pgv5r
Scientists have confirmed some human mutations in the last 5000-15000 years.
|

2006-03-08, 12:58
|
|
|
Care to copy and paste the article? You need to subscribe, and though it is free, it is also a pain in the ass.
Though I doubtr it will convince anyone.
|

2006-03-08, 13:11
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Northern VA
|
|
Very odd, I didn't need to register...
---
Genes show humans are still evolving
New York Times News Service
Published March 7, 2006
Providing the strongest evidence yet that human beings are still evolving, researchers have detected some 700 regions of the human genome where genes appear to have been reshaped by natural selection, a principal force of evolution, within the last 5,000 to 15,000 years.
The genes that show this evolutionary change include some responsible for the senses of taste and smell, digestion, bone structure, skin color and brain function.
Under natural selection, beneficial genes become more common in a population as their owners have more progeny.
Three populations were studied: Africans, East Asians and Europeans. The selected genes affect skin color, hair texture and bone structure.
The study of selected genes may help physical anthropologists explain why people over the world have a such a variety of distinctive appearances, said Spencer Wells, director of the Genographic project of the National Geographic Society.
"There is ample evidence that selection has been a major driving point in our evolution during the last 10,000 years, and there is no reason to suppose that it has stopped," said Jonathan Pritchard, a population geneticist at the University of Chicago who headed the study.
The findings are in Tuesday's issue of PLoS-Biology, published by the Public Library of Science, a non-profit organization.
Copyright © 2006, Chicago Tribune
|

2006-03-08, 14:02
|
|
|
as if any more evidence were needed.
you're wasting your time here, these christians are closed to the truth, and nothing you present to them as evidence in front of them will convince them, well it will convince them, but they will never admit it to themselves or anyone else.
maybe get some evangelist preachers to read it out to the congregation? or write it out in metaphors in a 2000 year old book? that'll convince the fuckers.
|

2006-03-08, 14:05
|
|
Regular
|
|
Middle of nowhere.... need directions
|
|
What have you proven here? Do you honestly believe that these complex genetic “blueprints” happened to be created by random chance? How does this in anyway provide proof to Darwin’s theory, do you think you were brought about ultimately from inorganic(no life) matter? To me the obvious assumption would be that human genetics were “coded” by a “Coder”.. a creator? The “origin” of the genetic code leads to a metaphysical or magical element, outside the legitimate view of physical science.
tuned
|

2006-03-08, 14:06
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Northern VA
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by TerminatorVinitiatoR:
as if any more evidence were needed.
you're wasting your time here, these christians are closed to the truth, and nothing you present to them as evidence in front of them will convince them, well it will convince them, but they will never admit it to themselves or anyone else.
maybe get some evangelist preachers to read it out to the congregation? or write it out in metaphors in a 2000 year old book? that'll convince the fuckers.
|
If you have that kind of attitude then why are you even here?
[This message has been edited by Zay (edited 03-08-2006).]
|

2006-03-08, 14:20
|
|
Regular
|
|
Middle of nowhere.... need directions
|
|
I thought my response was well thought out and presented… Is your real quarrel that you can’t debate what I said? You posted what you thought, and I gave my response… I’m sorry, were hoping everyone would jump on your band wagon and plainly agree with all your bullshit? No thanks. You’ve got my response, try to debate it or don’t.
tuned
|

2006-03-08, 14:22
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Northern VA
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by tuned:
What have you proven here? Do you honestly believe that these complex genetic “blueprints” happened to be created by random chance? How does this in anyway provide proof to Darwin’s theory, do you think you were brought about ultimately from inorganic(no life) matter? To me the obvious assumption would be that human genetics were “coded” by a “Coder”.. a creator? The “origin” of the genetic code leads to a metaphysical or magical element, outside the legitimate view of physical science.
tuned
|
It's not that I believe in there not being a creator, it's that I don't believe in one because there is no evidence of one. It's as simple as that.
|

2006-03-08, 14:24
|
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by tuned:
What have you proven here? Do you honestly believe that these complex genetic “blueprints” happened to be created by random chance? How does this in anyway provide proof to Darwin’s theory, do you think you were brought about ultimately from inorganic(no life) matter? To me the obvious assumption would be that human genetics were “coded” by a “Coder”.. a creator? The “origin” of the genetic code leads to a metaphysical or magical element, outside the legitimate view of physical science.
tuned
|
They weren't created by random chance, they were created through the process of evolution, which is not random chance. As the article clearly states, it is through natural selection that these genetic codes are being selected, and being passed on, something which is not chance.
Moreover, since you bring up a "coder"/"Creator", then please explain why we have sequences in our DNA that do absolutely nothing. Explain why "junk DNA" exists. This is something to be expected if we came about through a process of evolution, as an organism has no imperative to throw out DNA that does not prove to be harmful; however, is not compatible with an intelligent creator/designer/coder as useless, "junk DNA" is sub-optimal.
P.S. Incredulity isn't a valid argument. Just because you refuse to accept the possibility, doesn't mean it isn't true.
[This message has been edited by Rust (edited 03-08-2006).]
|

2006-03-08, 14:38
|
|
Moderator
|
|
Northern VA
|
|
Quote:
quote:Originally posted by Rust:
P.S. Incredulity isn't a valid argument. Just because you refuse to accept the possibility, doesn't mean it isn't true.
|
I don't ignore the possibility, but absence of evidence is absense of evidence, and nobody shuold pressure you to believe in something they can't back up.
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off
|
|
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 07:36.
|
|
 |

totse.com certificate signatures
|
 |
 |
About | Advertise | Art | Carnality | Community | Contact Us | Copyright Policy | Entertainment | FAQ
Link to totse.com | Science | Search | Society | Submissions | Technology
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
|