| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"Mr. B" |
| Date: |
07 Jan 2008 05:15:57 PM |
| Object: |
Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
I apologize for posting to a Jehovah's Witnesses newsgroup, but this thread
appeared on alt.atheism and caught my attention. Â I don't mean to offend
anyone here, and I am sorry if I do.
curtjester1 wrote:
If it's obvious, then why post it? Â There should be 1,000's of traits
between a human and an ape, just like any other potential transitions.
There are, in fact, thousands of shared traits between humans and apes, but
many of them are not visually apparent. Â For example, blood types:
Chimpanzees, Gorillas, and Orangutans all have human blood types (as
opposed to less closely related species, such as horses, which have a
completely different blood type system). Â Another example is the digestive
system; Chimpanzees can digest human food with little difficulty, and there
are cases of Orangutans becoming overweight from overindulging on human
candies and treats. Â A trait that is common in all primates, including
humans, are specialized neurons that connect different regions of the
brain, which is part of what gives primates their comparatively higher
intelligence. Â You don't have to take my word for it, this stuff comes
right out of biology textbooks.
When could mutations possibly advance? Â These are defects are they
not?
Not always, and in fact, we can observe mutations in modern humans that are
not defects. Â Remember, DNA codes for a lot of different functions, and
some mutations may cause changes that are not visible but still very
important. Â For example, there is a group of African women who have a
mutation that makes them immune to AIDS; the mutation prevents their cells
from creating the receptor site for the HIV virus, and therefore the virus
has no affect on them. Â If we weren't taken proactive measures to try and
prevent the spread of HIV, this mutation would give this group an advantage
in terms of surviving the AIDS epidemic...
And natural selection, isn't that just a way of wanting to
explain what you are trying to prove? Â Maybe nature doesn't select at
all, but is part of an overall plan to control populations...already
'built in'.
Please refer to the paragraph above; people with this natural immunity to
HIV would be "naturally selected" if no measures were taken to prevent the
spread of the virus. Â When biologists speak of "natural selection," that is
the process they are referring to. Â Richard Lenski et. al. have been in the
process of performing a long-running (more than 10 years) experiment on E.
Coli. that involves exposing an E. Coli. population to harsh conditions
(such as elevated or lowered temperature) and observing the natural
selection process in the population. Â One famous part of the experiment
involved the research deliberately removing a key gene that codes for an
enzyme used by E. Coli. to digest glucose (the primary food source for most
living things), and putting the population in an environment containing
both glucose and a separate food source. Â At first, only the other food
source was consumed, but when it ran out, some members of the population
had mutations that allowed for the digestion of glucose -- in fact, two
different mutations were recorded, both taking the place of the previously
removed gene.
As I said at the beginning of this post, I don't mean to offend anyone, but
there was a fair bit of misunderstanding in the post I was replying to. Â I
hope that I have answered a few questions about the meaning of "natural
selection" and the similarities biologists are referring to when they speak
of humans and apes (or other species).
-- B
.
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
07 Jan 2008 09:54:10 PM |
|
|
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:15:57 -0500, "Mr. B" <un@dis.closed> wrote:
I apologize for posting to a Jehovah's Witnesses newsgroup, but this thread
appeared on alt.atheism and caught my attention. I don't mean to offend
anyone here, and I am sorry if I do.
You're far too polite for this forum, son. <G>
The JWs and other religious morons don't give a rodent's behind
whether or not they offend us. Why care whether we offend them?
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
07 Jan 2008 11:30:04 PM |
|
|
John Baker wrote:
You're far too polite for this forum, son. <G>
The JWs and other religious morons don't give a rodent's behind
whether or not they offend us. Why care whether we offend them?
There are two reasons why I am so polite:
1. Unlike many atheists, I have not dropped my religion all together. I
have simply taken a more realistic view of my religion, accepting the
origins of it, and focusing more on the philosophical teachings of it. My
religion (as I have learned it) teaches us to be polite and respectful of
each other. It also teaches us that knowledge and understanding are
virtues.
2. An unfortunate perception of atheists is that we are out to rid the
world of all religions. I don't want to further than perception by simply
writing a post that knocked down criticisms of evolution, I only wanted to
clear up some obvious misconceptions about evolution. I thought it might
help calm the furies if I started out by explaining that I wasn't out to
undermine anyone's religion.
-- B
.
|
|
|
| User: "Michael Gray" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
08 Jan 2008 01:59:33 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 00:30:04 -0500, "Mr. B" <un@dis.closed> wrote:
John Baker wrote:
You're far too polite for this forum, son. <G>
The JWs and other religious morons don't give a rodent's behind
whether or not they offend us. Why care whether we offend them?
There are two reasons why I am so polite:
1. Unlike many atheists, I have not dropped my religion all together. I
have simply taken a more realistic view of my religion, accepting the
origins of it, and focusing more on the philosophical teachings of it. My
religion (as I have learned it) teaches us to be polite and respectful of
each other. It also teaches us that knowledge and understanding are
virtues.
2. An unfortunate perception of atheists is that we are out to rid the
world of all religions. I don't want to further than perception by simply
writing a post that knocked down criticisms of evolution, I only wanted to
clear up some obvious misconceptions about evolution. I thought it might
help calm the furies if I started out by explaining that I wasn't out to
undermine anyone's religion.
The lying bastards will change your tune.
Sooner or later.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Mr. B" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
08 Jan 2008 05:06:26 PM |
|
|
Michael Gray wrote:
The lying bastards will change your tune.
Sooner or later.
I'd like to think that I am stronger than that.
-- B
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Baker" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
09 Jan 2008 11:02:41 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:06:26 -0500, "Mr. B" <un@dis.closed> wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
The lying bastards will change your tune.
Sooner or later.
I'd like to think that I am stronger than that.
I used to think that too..... ;-)
-- B
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Mark K. Bilbo" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
09 Jan 2008 09:46:55 AM |
|
|
On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 18:06:26 -0500, Mr. B wrote:
Michael Gray wrote:
The lying bastards will change your tune. Sooner or later.
I'd like to think that I am stronger than that.
Yeah. Ten years ago, I said that too...
--
Mark K. Bilbo a.a. #1423
EAC Department of Linguistic Subversion
------------------------------------------------------------
"If the Bible proves that God exists then comic books prove
the existence of Superman."
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Uncle Vic" |
|
| Title: Re: Twenty Questions For Evolutionists --- Walt Brown |
07 Jan 2008 11:03:17 PM |
|
|
One fine day in alt.atheism, John Baker <nunya@bizniz.net> bloodied us
up with this:
On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:15:57 -0500, "Mr. B" <un@dis.closed> wrote:
I apologize for posting to a Jehovah's Witnesses newsgroup, but this
thread appeared on alt.atheism and caught my attention. I don't mean
to offend anyone here, and I am sorry if I do.
You're far too polite for this forum, son. <G>
The JWs and other religious morons don't give a rodent's behind
whether or not they offend us. Why care whether we offend them?
Besides, reality offends them, so why should humanity care about them?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Convicted by Earthquack.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
