>according to evolutionary theory life began 3.8 billion years ago
>human DNA is made up of 2.3 billion base pairs
>the only mechanism for increasing an organism's DNA from nothing is through a copy mutation
>The vast majority of mutations are harmful and lethal to the organism
Do people on /pol/ seriously believe that we evolved from nothing?
I'm not even a Christian, but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
How did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell? This is a feat that not even the best scientists can do in the lab with the most favorable conditions.
So how did life form?
>>78033280
>So how did life form?
When i fucked your mom and squirted you into existence, fuccboi
>>78033430
Sperm cells are already living, faggot
I believe in creation and microevolution
>>78033280
>ow did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell
Cells are individual BUT cells are made of non-living
What does that mean ?
That "living" thing is made out of non-living.
The "life" itself is just bunch of chemical reactions.
There also isnt death.
only lost of conciousness. and I am not sure about that one.
>>78033280
kys
>>78033280
That's the end all question isn't it? No one knows the answer to where life came from but that us what makes it so fascinating. You'd be better off looking into the question yourself then asking pol
>>78033280
>>78033759
literally nothing exists, so we should all kill ourselves
>>78033430
C U C K E D B Y C H A N G
U
C
K
E
D
How do you live with yourself?
>I'm not even a Christian, but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
But it's not.
>How did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell? This is a feat that not even the best scientists can do in the lab with the most favorable conditions.
How did we go from nothing existing at all to the big bang?
>>78033280
>I'm not even a Christian, but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over
billions of years is zero.
>hyberbole
Sage
>>78033280
>The vast majority of mutations are harmful and lethal to the organism
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-war-is-over-we-won/
>>78033280
aboitic genesis, it's possible if you roll the dice enough times
>>78033280
>How did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell?
I don't know and neither does anyone on this planet. We have theories but we don't know for sure.
>So how did life form?
An absolutely incredibly unlikely event happened (the first very primitive life form came into being), it managed to begin multiplying.
The fact that it used a nucleic acid made it prone to mutations. Due to the massive amount of resources for it to consume and the lack of space constraints, the growth of the first species was exponential.
A lot of organisms developed fatal mutations and died, but some (extremely rare ones, but the amount of organisms alive played in their favor) didn't and went on to spread their genes.
Over massive amounts of time, gradually there were spontaneous improvements. Organisms began to split into species, only the mutations useful to the species in a certain environment were kept, and eventually life evolved into it's current state.
There's a lot of issues with this theory, but they are likelihood issues not possibility ones.
For example, there's a thing called the Fermi Paradox, asking why we haven't detected any signs of life on other planets even though we should (considering the scale of the universe).
All in all, we have completely no idea why we're here or what caused us to be here in complete detail. Maybe our descendants will, but we don't.
That's really just a reason to cherish life though. It's an amazing rare thing and we shouldn't squander it.
>>78033915
>>78033430
Samefag chink.
>>78033914
I havent researched what "existence" is, but I have a theory.
Existing is something you can measure
>>78033280
>the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
You're not a biologist either, clearly.
Or a statistician.
Or a smart guy.
>>78034181
so all of our 2.3 billion base pairs of DNA were created by copy mutations?
Is that the theory?
How does a protein-encoding gene spontaneously get created when a single mutation in the chain breaks the whole damned thing?
>>78033280
>copy mutation
a glitch in the matrix
>>78035289
memes aside, a copy error is the only way to expand the size of the existing genetic code.
We're supposed to believe that incredibly complex genes responsible for encoding proteins necessary to live are the result of copy errors that just happened to line up in a usable form.
>>78034641
Sure thing Susko...you can't even be sure that other people exist, let alone measure it.
>>78035440
>>78034781
do either of you understand how virus' interact with dna and or understand how much dna is actually used and isn't just junk?
>>78034781
>so all of our 2.3 billion base pairs of DNA were created by copy mutations?
Yes. The average human body has 37.2 trillion cells in it, each one of which has one chance to mutate.
It's a rare thing, but when you ramp up the scale it becomes very likely.
>How does a protein-encoding gene spontaneously get created when a single mutation in the chain breaks the whole damned thing?
Hundreds of trillions of cells in various organisms develop the gene, a lot die, but a few specific ones get to survive. At that point it's just a question of how long organisms with the mutation can survive.
Again, extremely rare but becomes very common once you rank up the scale of it.
Think about your ancestors, all of them. If you take any person on the planet (yes, ANY person) and look at their ancestral line, you can go up 40 generations at maximum and you'll find out they are related to you.
Sure, there are potentially more ancestors than people on the planet, but eventually you find out that the majority of people on earth have one single common ancestor, and through the marvels of genetic relationship he or she has somehow come to have practically every person on earth as his/her descendants.
It only has to happen once.
I like to refer to a quote by Elon Musk on this: "The first step is to establish that something is possible, then probability will occur."
>>78033280
dick dawkins thinks its aliens or multiverse just anything but god
>>78033280
When you have trillions of organisms dividing every 5 minutes over a period of a billion years, the probabilities begin to stack up
>>78035440
>that just happened to line up in a usable form
define usable
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KK_kzrJPS8
>do either of you understand how virus' interact with dna and or understand how much dna is actually used and isn't just junk?
The amount of DNA classified as 'junk' keeps decreasing year by year.
>>78035651
>Yes. The average human body has 37.2 trillion cells in it, each one of which has one chance to mutate.
>It's a rare thing, but when you ramp up the scale it becomes very likely.
But only mutations that happen in sexual cells are passed on to the following generation.
>>78035651
>Yes. The average human body has 37.2 trillion cells in it, each one of which has one chance to mutate.
>It's a rare thing, but when you ramp up the scale it becomes very likely.
spaghetti code from 14 billion years ago is bound to have some hiccups :^)
>>78035851
Damn right, and life has been doing that for 3.8 billion years.
>>78033280
>this is a feat that not even the best scientists can do in the lab
false
also, billions of years is an unimaginable amount of time, give almost anything long enough and it can happen
>>78033934
It is
I R WINRAR
>>78034413
IDs exist for a reason dumbass
>>78035851
>But only mutations that happen in sexual cells are passed on to the following generation.
>>78033914
You first friendo :^)
>>78034158
Infinite times? But billions of years is infinitely closer to zero than to infinity years, and billions of events/generations and or quintillions of chemical reactions is also infinitely closer to zero than to infinity
>>78034181
Probably an infinitely unlikely event
>>78036010
how can one possibly change their ID?
>>78035928
>14 billion years
That aside, not really. Genetic evolution is a very good optimiser. Anything that harms an organism's chance of success will generally get wiped out.
>>78036021
I think he was talking about the typical view of organisms, that being ones with dedicated systems for reproduction, IE humans.
>>78036021
forgetting how earth was dominated by basic single celled life forms first
>>78036065
keks were had
>>78033280
>>The vast majority of mutations are harmful and lethal to the organism
How'd that exam go anon?
>>78036021
>a leaf
>>78036010
how can one possibly change their ID?
>>78036100
How are you reaching infinity as the upper bounds of the possibility of abiotic genesis? you're pulling it out of your ass? do tell
>>78035986
Ah so scientists can create a living cell in the lab?
And billions of years is not unimaginable. Its 800 million generations in human terms. We have more than 8 billion people living on the planet right now.
>>78033280
>Uses the word 'evolution' but isn't talking about evolution.
>Instead speaks of abiogenesis.
>>78036169
>That aside
As a computer programmer, I view DNA as the most sophisticated hardware platform ever designed.
>>78036330
>more than 8 billion
>>78033280
the vast majority of mutations are not harmful.
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/mutations.html
>>78033280
>poster can't grasp a simple concept like evolution
>look at flag
of course
>>78035986
You'd have to have an average of one perfect copy mutation per year that gets passed on to the next generation for 2.3 billion years to get to where we are today.
Maybe you could argue that could plausibly happen in single celled organisms, but that would be impossible once to get to primates.
The generational period drops increases to years. Evolution theory also depends heavily on natural selection, so not only would the mutation have to occur, but that particular creature and it's offspring would have to out-survive all it's peers.
Even with billions of years there is not enough time for this to take place.
>>78036323
Probabilities have been calculated for abiogenesis, and they were larger than the estimated number of atoms in the known universe. When you come to the possibility of then having life reproduce successfully, without error (which reduces the possibility of mutation) and then have a whole series of favourable mutations in unfavourable conditions (high rates of UV radiation, low levels of organic material to feed on, and a whole range of variables making early life extremely difficult).
>>78033280
I also don't really get the "nothing exploded and created the universe" theory.Maybe it's like trying to explain to a cat how an internal combustion engine moves a car and we'll never understand.
>>78036323
An 'infinity' is implicitly the 'upper bound' of the possibility of anything. Your post is syntactically meaningless
>>78036425
I'm talking about both you idiot.
>>78036493
Ok Heman, its a while since I checked, but no doubt you can answer my other points if you aren't retarded
>>78036761
Not in the OP.
>>78036647
>>78036718
you have no idea how to create useful percentages do you? please cite me where you saw these probabilities that have been calculated. Point is chemists believe that with the right mixture it is possible, which puts the bounds at anything but infinity. Also infinity is not implicity the upper bound, because then everything would be meaningless.
>>78036631
>increases to years
It's not really that bad though. Humans are genetically optimized to breed every 12-13 years. It's entirely possible to have a lot of change.
>>78036647
>Probabilities have been calculated for abiogenesis, and they were larger than the estimated number of atoms in the known universe.
Is that in parallel with every single organism on the planet or is that for a single organism?
>>78036794
>create a living cell
We've actually made ""living"" cells by loading artificially created DNA into the cell bodies of single celled bacteria. It's not that hard to imagine making a completely artificial cell from there.
The origin of life is definitely a problem in terms of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. While studying it, it was always at the back of my mind. Most of the problems OP brought up are irrelevant. You can test evolution through mutation in a standard undergrad Microbiology experiment through the use of mutatgens on Bacteria or Yeast.
>How did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell?
This is the bigger problem is how life actually started. RNA almost certainly evolved first and it can catalyse its own formation and this is likely how the first self-replicating nucleic acids formed. But there are still problems because Molecular Biology is so interconnected it is almost impossible to think of one thing existing without the other. Even if you could get a membrane around self-replicating RNA, you still need protein channels to get many things into the cell (especially charged things like Phosphate). Then of course you've got to be able to divide that cell somehow, which as far as we know requires proteins. This is probably the biggest problem. You need protein to do just about anything, and you need DNA to make protein (as well as proteins to make proteins because making a protein is energetically unfavourable). To make DNA, you also need proteins.
It's a huge headfuck and the more you think about it and learn about it, the more of a problem it becomes. It really is easier to just assign the origin of life to divine intervention. Unfortunately it is quite a difficult thing to study because we're trying to work our back through billions of years of evolution to that point where you did not need all of these extras that are so essential to modern prokaryotes.
RNA is the key I think and we are learning a hell of a lot about that at the moment.
>>78036542
They aren't helpful either. Nor are they particularly significant. The more significant the mutation, the far likelier they are to be harmful. Also we don't always know whether a mutation might be harmful under certain circumstances.
This website repeats the absolute and unadulterated bullshit that the favourable survival prospects for black moths in sooty fog conditions is somehow mutative. A fact for you pathetic ignorant fags, it is not.
Also for the moron who thinks scientists have created cells in a lab, you suck
>>78036590
>Slovenia
Backward ass country riding on donkeys and surrounded by shit
>>78037031
>It's entirely possible to have a lot of change.
But it doesn't happen. Humans don't spontaneously mutation complete new sections of DNA and pass it on.
Instead we get things like albinism, down syndrome, tay sachs disease. etc.
>>78036631
Jesus youre retarded.
Do you really think the very first DNA sequence is still existent today? Mutations happen, mutations that benefit the species tend to stay while ones that detriment it generally die off, though not all of them.
See: Down Syndrome, the mirror
Mother nature put those animals here to show us the diversity of mutations and how we alone amongst an almost infinite number of organisms are the ones capable of knowing that, you could've been any of those but you're lucky enough to know you're not and you still want to be a nigger and make a false equivelance about how that somehow means we came from nothing. how we came from nothing is different from how did we evolve, so fuck you.
>>78036100
That's comparing apples and oranges. Infinity isn't a number, it's a concept.
>>78037158
One could potentially say we're messing with evolution by allowing people with faulty genomes to reproduce, but I'm not going to go full 14/88 here.
>>78037047
This Anon speaks the truth, the ultimate problem is how life started to begin with.
Also senpai, I'm 23 at the moment and I've been working since 14 (bad family life), do you recommend I go into microbiology or some other course like that as an adult student?
This sort of shit interests the fuck out of me.
>>78037031
A single organism
No known process to make a cell from scratch. Even if we could, this only proves that mind is required to make life. But even in controlled conditions at this stage with the best equipment after thousands of years (billions, really from an evolutionary perspective) we can't do this. So how are highly random processes going to achieve this?
>>78037169
I'm pointing out it's entirely implausible that the amount of DNA we have could have been created by mutations in the given time period. How is that retarded?
>>78037317
>One could potentially say we're messing with evolution by allowing people with faulty genomes to reproduce, but I'm not going to go full 14/88 here.
Yes, allowing these people is dysgenic, it's the opposite of evolution which demands that faulty specimens are ruthlessly purged from the gene pool. We have the oppose taking place.
>>78037345
Well yeah senpai, a single organism doing what you're describing is going to take an extremely long fucking time.
Read about exponential growth, apply THAT to your measurements, and it all should fall in line.
>So how are highly random processes going to achieve this?
Lots of chances, lots of time, and a non-zero chance for something to happen mate.
>>78037115
orly? where's the proof?
>>78037169
Some species exist that have been around for billions of years.
Plz die
>>78037184
Believes in "Mother Nature"
Doesn't believe in God
>>78037311
Infinity is both a number and a concept. Eviloonies have used it as part of their theorizing as a 'proof', eg. the infinite monkies, which some in this thread are trying to recreate
![20101021_onijima2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/owOGXgv.jpg "20101021_onijima2[1].jpg")
>>78036065
I didn't know Hamada was Puerto Rican.
>>78037512
sometimes common sense has to trump statistics and probability.
If I empty a box of nails on the ground, they will never all land standing on their head now matter how many times I do it.
>>78034068
Holy shit.
This is. Big deal. A really fucking big deal.
Everyone in this thread and everyone everywhere needs to read this.
It's almost like the opening scene to Prometheus was just proven.
>tl;dr
>how is babby formed
>either God or ayy
>>78037031
>...into the cell bodies of single celled bacteria...
>single celled bacteria
there are no multicellular bacteria
>>78037512
No, Hoyle and others made calculations about the possibility of a *single living cell* to appear abiogenetically. Talking about exponential growth, since we literally do have trillions of reproduction events to observe, surely the amount of significant evolution events observable should skyrocket?
>>78037568
Your postings, for example. Aren't you the guy who wants communism to return? I realize now that /pol is an echo chamber with the same posters all the time
>>78037345
Natural selection. Most mutations kill organisms, the ones that don't though continue to evolve.
Let's say there's a million copies of a single celled organism that have mutated. Only 0.01% of these copies survive the mutation. This leaves 100 copies that have successfully mutated and survived.
These 100 copies then go through cell division, and over the course of a few months, their numbers are in the millions. Then another mutation happens, killing off 99.9% of the population.
It goes on and on forever.
>>78037662
that's why my official stance is that I believe in some sort of creationism (not young earth) and I also believe in regressive evolution that occurred and still occurs after creation.
The evolutionary mechanisms are real, they're just not capable of creating entirely new genes.
>>78033280
>I'm not even a Christian, but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
I'm not sure if you fully comprehend just how long a billion years is.
>>78037627
You can dump a whole heap of building material on a patch of dirt and they'll never arrange into a house. Life is far more complicated than a house, especially self reproducing life. Its more like IT than construction. The earliest life had to have code. Now random code always has errors (good for mutation, probably) but error in code always causes breakdown of systems. Error in code is fatal, always
>>78038021
I'm not sure if you fully understand just how much DNA we have.
>>78037587
>Some species exist that have been around for billions of years.
And so many more are now nonexistent. Are you suggesting that these primordial organisms did not mutate even once?
>>78037470
I'm pointing out it's entirely implausible that the amount of DNA we have could have been created by mutations in the given time period. How is that retarded?
Explain why you think it's not possible within the given time? Do you comprehend how long it has been?
>>78037317
I fucking love studying it, especially Biochemistry. I got hooked on Molecular Biology in Year 12 Bio and enjoy it a lot. Aside from the occasional rote learning, which gets quite tiresome.
Job wise in Australia it's a problem. I'm going into teaching because the reality is that unless I want to go into academia or medical research, which I don't really want to, job prospects aren't amazing in this country.
If you simply want to learn about it, there is an unbelievable amount of info online that I use a lot to supplement Uni material.
This is a great one that I recommend to people when they say they're going to study Biochem:
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCv_PnJwd_q7mAv7nGHw7XHQ/videos
This covers everything I learned in second year Biochemistry, and bits and pieces of Genetics and Molecular Biology.
Khan Academy is also great.
I fucked up when I was younger and had to do VCE as an adult and then Uni. Doing this is a major financial burden and the fact that I won't be financially stable until I'm into my 30s eats away at me. So unless you are really, really keen on learning this stuff and really, really want to go on to do Honours and a PhD and then academia or research, it is a bit risky. Lots of my peers will not get jobs in this area. Being a teacher won't be the greatest job in the world, but I love talking about the content and I want to be the teacher I never had in high school. Plus it's reasonably secure once you get your foot in the door.
>>78037627
>If I empty a box of nails on the ground, they will never all land standing on their head now matter how many times I do it.
Actually yes, if you do it enough it will happen.
If I had hundreds of quadrillions of chances, I could very conceivably put a rock on the ground in Sydney and end up having Donald Trump praising it as the true god on top of the whitehouse by the end of the month. It's just a matter of how many chances you can get.
>>78037729
Sorry senpai, typo. It's 1:37 AM and I'm fucked up from an accident at work yesterday.
>>78037746
>No, Hoyle and others made calculations about the possibility of a *single living cell* to appear abiogenetically.
Throw a link over then senpai. Also, that's one of the one issues in science that hasn't actually been solved yet mate. We don't know how life came to be.
>Talking about exponential growth, since we literally do have trillions of reproduction events to observe, surely the amount of significant evolution events observable should skyrocket?
You have a lot of reproductive events, but you also have a lot of faulty ones and a lot of organisms that straight up die after creation.
Plus, mutations are small things that either end up with the organism dead or slightly different with not much of a change. You're not going to see major changes in short timespans like the human lifespan.
>>78037115
Everyone who unironically believes in evolution should read the bible.
>>78033625
Not according to traditional definitions of what is 'life'.
>>78036671
it's not that nothing exploded, it's that matter was there but crushed into an extremely tiny ball which then rapidly expanded outwards. the cause of this sudden expansion is unknown. it may have been caused by the collision of two branes.
>>78037862
there's not single example of this that involves the creation of new genetic code.
All the so called 'beneficial' mutations involve a mis-copy or a loss of information.
To go from single cells to primates requires millions upon millions of new base pairs that didn't used to exist.
>>78037822
>Aren't you the guy who wants communism to return?
not really, no
>>78038068
OP said it in his post.
2.3 billion base pairs.
3.8 billion years.
That's one new base pair of DNA every 1.6 years.
And most of evolution we're talking about single celled organisms with a life-span measured in days or hours. And there's not just billions of them, there's trillions of them, all over the earth, constantly reproducing DNA non-stop.
Considering that it doesn't seem too much of a stretch that these trillions of single-celled organisms reproducing non-stop could develop, on average, a single new base pair of DNA every 1.6 years.
>>78038346
What are missense, nonsense, frameshift and insertion mutations.
Give up on genetics and biology, you have no fucking clue what you're talking about.
>>78038069
Minor mutations are irrelevant. I'm saying that there is no evidence that things like stromatolites have evolved significantly over eons of time. Just as turtles have remained incredibly stable. Indeed, any one of the basic genera now existing has been incredibly stable over time. They appear fully developed in the fossil record (despite rather dubious 'missing links' which are almost always fallacious) and do not change in their morphology significantly over time. There may be significant variety though in terms of colouring and size.
>>78033759
Go read a Biology Textbook.
In fact, all of you should read a fucking biology textbook. I'm not saying your argument is wrong OP, I'm just saying that this lack of understanding between what is organic and inorganic is pissing me the fuck off.
Organic just means a compound is carbon based. Inorganic means it isn't. Life, to keep it simple, fills a list of criteria that changes when a bunch of eggheads decide so (life needs to adapt, needs to convert energy, etc). Life and death are metaphysical concepts, the makeup (molecules, organelles, etc) are physical. It actually gets really philosophical.
Evolution is just a model we use out of convenience. As soon as a more probable theory comes along it will get rejected like all the rest, but right now it's the most probable and sensible so it's accepted, it doesn't necessarily mean it is so just the most currently.
t. Biochemist
>>78038523
those are all examples of copy errors
>>78038494
The case could potentially be made for single-celled organisms. Not once you get to primates.
>>78038346
>All the so called 'beneficial' mutations involve a mis-copy or a loss of information
Absolutely not, that's the point
You can copy more bases or split a chromosome or duplicate one or invert the order of a sequence or other things
>>78033759
>There also isnt death
>only lost of consciousness
This.
Death is just a meme.
>>78038346
There's different genetic code between dogs and wolves. Albeit a very, very small amount.
In fact all domesticated species have some variation in DNA between them and their wild cousins.
>>78038150
Not really. These are impossible events. Dawkins supposedly 'debunked' this, but how can you achieve abiogenesis in a series of steps? You either have a functioning living organism which can reproduce, or you do not and you are nowhere
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Junkyard_tornado
>>78033280
>I'm not even a Christian
That you would add this irrelevant comment speaks volumes about you.
>>78037941
>I believe in some sort of creationism
the fact that you can believe in magic and you can't believe in evolutionary theory means that you have no business in this thread.
changing the subject slightly, I wish I had enough education to know how one egg cell and one sperm cell can divide a million times and certain cells "know" how to become fingernails at just the right spot. same for the other multitude of things. that one particular hair on your head. does it have a specific part in the dna code that told it to grow in that particular spot?
I wish I hadn't dropped out of Stanford to work at Papa John's, but hey, things happen.
>>78038346
>All the so called 'beneficial' mutations involve a mis-copy or a loss of information.
Yes the miscopy is what we call a mutation, it's not so much a loss of information as an overwrite.
>To go from single cells to primates requires millions upon millions of new base pairs that didn't used to exist.
And they now exist due to mutation.
>>78038710
This is microevolution in action. Trouble is, macroevolution is nowhere observable, not in the fossil record, in realtime, or in the lab
It is unsubstantiated 'science' that is dogmatically asserted, although not being in anyway scientific
descent with modification really improves the odds, e desu ne
>>78038494
This is absolutely not how it works
>>78038693
>You can copy more bases or split a chromosome or duplicate one or invert the order of a sequence or other things
This doesn't really happen naturally
>>78038631
Which result in new information fuckbag.
>>78036464
He means that while the universe might be approximately 14 billion years old, the Earth itself and life's spaghetti code here is only about 4 billion years old.
>>78038583
Typical, trying to redefine terms. Organic has a meaning in chemistry, as well as a meaning in English. It is just the same as when someone says 'you say we came form monkeys' and he gets derided. The fact is that what we are reputed to have evolved from is extremely monkey like. In fact it is certain in my mind that Australopithecus was really just another ape, it just happened to be carbon dated as extremely old. If it was still in existence it would be considered just another simian creature
>>78038881
It takes hundreds of thousands or even millions of years for one species to turn into another.
Through fossil records we have determined that birds are more then likely related to dinosaurs.
It's not a perfect answer but it's the best answer we have.
Not understanding evolution tells me that a person is seriously cognitively impaired. This really is not difficult to understand at all.
>>78039115
the executable was started before earth formed though
>>78038944
How does it work, Mr Bungabunga Ndrangheta
>>78038946
Yes you're right, every specie has the same number of chromosome
Why do you think that an hamster has 34 chromos, a mouse 40, a rat 42 etc
>>78038712
>You either have a functioning living organism which can reproduce, or you do not and you are nowhere
You can have the physical bases for an organism. The transition to "living" is sudden but the creation doesn't have to be.
Also, you're suffering from a selection bias. You're assuming that life shouldn't be possible because it's extremely rare, but you're arguing about this from the point of a lifeform on a planet that was lucky enough to actually sustain life.
It's entirely possible that we're one planet out of a single billion with life in the universe, or some other extremely rare thing like that, and we're assuming that life is "impossible" because it's not very common.
>>78039393
You don't understand evolution and you want someone to try and explain genetics to you? Jesus christ.
>>78038712
The first "life" wasn't a fully functioning lifeform as we think of it today. It was literally just a self-replicating protein molecule. (btw, we CAN make self-replicating protein molecules in a laboratory).
It's just a self-replicating protein molecule that divided and replicated at an exponential rate, until there were trillions of self-replicating proteins, self-replicating non stop, and after a while some of the self-replicating proteins started to replicate other shit too like a simple bubble made out of lipids to protect itself- the first cell membrane.
None of them happened all at once. It literally took millions of years and trillions of self-replicating proteins before one of them started doing that.
>>78033280
The problem is not with science, but with your poor understanding of it. Nobody ever said we evolved from nothing. Evolution does not address the origins of life, only how it developed after that point. You're thinking of abiogenesis but did not even know that term, despite thinking you have a complete enough understanding of biology that you know better than every biologist.
>magnets how do they work the thread
>>78039291
So the evidence isn't there. But really as I said, evolution should be accelerating with more reproduction events happening. Also lower ozone levels should increase mutation rates.
There is no evidence that humanity has changed at all in the last 5000 years. Not at all. Why then should it have changed utterly in the last 100000?
>>78039472
Typical smarm from an ignorant fedoraistic fucknuckle
>>78033280
Everything was made last Thursday including our memories. Prove me wrong.
>>78036065
Litauen bringing the bants
As far as we know the universe is infinite in size. Yes we can only see up to the distance of the observable universe but everything is slowly red shifting away so beyond what we can see it may just be infinite, if not it's still insanely large.
In infinity, if there is a chance, any chance, that something could happen, then it has happened, and will happen an infinite number of times.
So life in its simplest form is bound to happen in an infinitely large universe just from the arrangement of atoms. Not only is it bound to happen but it has and will happen an infinite number of times exactly the same way or every possible variation that it can happen.
Even if we only consider only our observable universe there are a LOT of planets just in our galaxy that could form life. Lab tests were done that formed amino acids in conditions of our early earth. Think about how small amount of space and time that we were able to make amino acids, now exponentially increase that size and time and you can see that eventually just from random chance those amino acids could form into a structure that would self replicate.
>>78039535
Semantic waffle. Dawkins himself said that life did not proceed 'in one step'. This is a form of evolution. Again the smarmy smug feodoras like to own terms and then redefine discussions according to their ownership of those terms.
>>78039691
Would you be worth convincing?
>>78039662
You wouldn't try to explain aerospace engineering to someone who can't understand how a pulley or a lever works either. You are fucking retarded kid. Evolution is real, "macroevoultion" or as actual biologists and edcuated people refer to as speciation is observable and has been done by artificial selection. Have you ever eaten corn before or heard of MRSA? Those are new species created by humans along with many many other domesticated plants and animals.
Evolution is real, stay in school dipshit.
>>78039393
>First thread I ever see with an informative Aussie
>Another Aussie start shitposting
Don't you have some Emus to kill?
>>78039851
I am willing to hear it. If you do good enough I shall be convinced.
>>78039691
How's philosophy 101 going?
>>78040004
We study Kekism next!
>>78039914
Corn is an example of macroevolution you worthless piece of smeared horse faeces? What a fucking retard. All the grasses are clearly related to one another. How to you evolve an amphibian into a horse you worthless dead dog, you chicken brained biological disaster. Macroevolution has never been observed in realtime or in the laboratory, never replicated, and never will
Eviloonies are just brainwashed drones
>>78033280
You don't evolve from "nothing". Everything on this Earth exists because of matter in the universe. We are products of our environment, all facing different challenges for survival, developing different from each other. Everything is still in motion from the big bang. The more we understand about the big bang the more we'll understand about life in the universe.
I studied Genetics and I still think this is science fiction. The actual process is trial and error with no ending because there is no ending to chemical attractions and what formed the first aminoacids, proteins and DNA in the first place. There is a pattern though that screams for an increase in complexity by achieving attraction between different chemicals.
http://pastebin.com/xMQ9wAwW
Resources for Creationists and Christians.
>>78033280
Aliens n shit
>>78039990
Prove to me that you are worth convincing, and I will
>>78040080
My Kek professor taught me how to praise Kek properly but I'm not sure if I passed lol
>>78033280
Life began at the big bang, where I fucked your mom
>>78040134
>why can't we do something that takes 400 million years in a laboratory or take a video of it happen
Man you are fucking retarded.
>>78040251
Who is to say I am not shitposting in order to get Australian Citizenship.
>>78040259
In order to praise kek you need dubs like these.
>>78040332
Proper shitposting is done in a manner that everybody believes you.
>>78038804
If I have 9 base pairs start as
AAAGGGAAA
and then mutate to
AAAGGGAAG
I still only have 9 base pairs. No new additional base pairs are being created.
>>78039607
The evidence is there, you just can't observe it. Also, macro/micro evolution are terms that aren't actually used in scholarly discussions anywhere in the world. No such distinction exists.
All of the finches on Galapagos are clearly related to each other. No doubt you could get them to reproduce in some way or other. This is supposedly speciation and some evidence for macroevolution. They are all fucking finches tou subhuman brain injuries. Lions and tigers can reproduce. All felidae are equally cat, none are more cat than the others.
I am wasting my valuable time talking to some reprobates and degenerates
>>78039393
Dude are you stupid like of course that's not how it works you really think you just get a fucking base pair linearly like that? There are at somewhere in the order of septilions of cells on earth each going through different mutations constantly and not every branch connects with every other branch to affect our DNA.
>>78040387
Looks like we should both drop out of the Kekology department.
>>78040272
Give me one of the processes involved. So it took 400 million years for primates to advance to humans? Recreate a single living cell in the laboratory and describe to me the processes involved. Or give the DNA chemical reactions required to turn a lower primate into a human. Or a fish into an amphibian.
Whatever the reasons, macroevolution is not scientific because it cannot be tested scientifically, despite what brainwashed halfwits tell you
>>78040409
New pairs can be added fuckass. Insertion mutation is one of several possibilities.
>>78040630
no shit
Give me one example of an insertion mutation that has a net positive affect on the organism.
It doesn't happen.
>>78040416
>The evidence is there, you just can't observe it.
HAHAHAHA TOPKEK
>>78040497
The fact is, we don't know how most of those genes work and how we could manipulate them or mutate them in any way in order to create new types of organism
>>78040409
Except there are trillions of DNA strands and just because one mutates and multiplies doesn't always mean that the original base strand just disappears, you're talking like there are only 9 pairs of DNA in existence.
>>78033280
>it's a /pol/ tries to talk about science episode
really? Jesus christ
>>78040674
Polar bears evolved from brown bears and brown bears still exist.
>>78040764
Let's talk about Slovenia. Does it have much potassium?
>>78033280
>>The vast majority of mutations are harmful and lethal to the organism
Wrong.
The vast majority of mutations are instantly repaired. Of those that don't get repaired, the vast majority have no noticeable effect. Those that do have an effect however, those are the ones that kill you.
>>78040799
What's your evidence that polar bears evolved from brown bears? Be specific
>>78040674
A color that better matches the creature's environment. Checkmate, kill yourself tonight.
>>78040611
Genetic populations change over time to reflect the most fit specimens spreading their genes for that environment. This is so fucking simple that children can understand it, and yet here you are.
>>78040875
Exactly. How is this then an engine for evolution?
>>78040843
it has as much as your momma after I feed her my banana
Dr. Peter Gariaev is a Russian scientist who took eggs that were laid by a frog and then zapped those eggs with a laser light that had gone through eggs laid by a salamander. When the 'frog' eggs hatched, salamanders emerged from them - not frogs. The only thing that is necessary to rewrite DNA is wave information, which means that evolution can occur not through millions of years but instantaneously.
The agricultural division of the Ciba-Geigy corporation (now Sygenta) discovered that existing plant seeds could be transformed into extinct varieties, simply by zapping them with a weak electrostatic current. This process generated stronger and faster-growing wheat, extinct fern species, and tulips with thorns. Italian scientist Pier Luigi Ighina energetically transformed a living apricot tree into an apple tree, actually causing the fruits on the branches to metamorphose from apricots into apples in only sixteen days. Ighina also zapped a rat with DNA-wave information from a cat, and this caused the rat to grow a cat-like tail in four days.
>>78040892
Maybe we have sequenced the genome instead of shitposting
>>78040892
Their DNA indicates that they have a recent common ancestor. They're very closely related. Stay in school.
>>78039538
This is pretty much the truth. People who failed biology lean on "muh magic" as an actual counterargument.
>>78040910
>A color that better matches the creature's environment. Checkmate, kill yourself tonight.
you're making shit up. Can you give an example of this actually happening?
>>78040875
yes, I should have clarified was referring to the ones that have noticeable effects
>>78040674
This is the whole thing of random chance you guys don't seem to understand. Most of the time insertion mutation doesn't do anything AT ALL. These can then build up and usually turn out to be a negative effect on the organism but sometimes it may be a neutral or positive change.
>>78033280
Do you have a better theory?
No?
Then shut the fuck up.
Evolution isn't up for debate. Its proven. Its a scientific reality that has been directly and indirectly proven by every piece of evidence we have.
>>78041041
Every single species in any biome outside of the deep ocean. The ones that are born white or albino get eaten much faster than the ones that blend in.
>>78033280
You're right. It's only logical that there's a magic fairy man that nobody ever has seen and he somehow created everything.
>>78040910
>Genetic populations change over time to reflect the most fit specimens spreading their genes for that environment.
This is not a process of evolution. This has been happening to humanity for all its history, and no significant change is observable in the fossil record or in human history. Merely that some populations select for various factors.
Yet we are told (by the SJW infections that run academe) that races do not exist. If races do not exist, not even microevolution is real
>>78041049
yes, I understand the theory.
However this has never happened in reality. Humans today are pretty much exactly the same as humans 50,000 years ago.
>>78040987
>polar bears evolved from brown bears
>they have a common ancestor
pick one
>>78040964
She is quite elderly :)
>>78040674
a positive effect doesn't mean shit. evolution discriminates towards mutations that disadvantage the organism and favors ones that don't, a neutral mutation will stay until something else removes it.
it's entirely possible a new base pair can be mutated out of the blue and do nothing, then after a great amount of time eventually mutate into an advantageous trait.
>>78040892
dna relation
>>78041041
one example is polar bears living in tundra and brown bears living in forests, not the other way around. this is because the colour of their coats helps them survive and not instantly get wrecked and leave the gene pool.
>>78041183
>This is not a process of evolution.
My fucking god.
>>78041183
It's strawman after misunderstanding after failure to understand simple concepts. You're useless and cannot be helped.
>>78041234
Keep track of IDs you mouthbreather.
>>78033280
There are literally trillions of bacteria living in you RIGHT NOW.
Now, considering that a space the size of your sorry ass contains approximately 30-50 trillion bacteria, and that the surface area of the Earth is approximately 196.9 million mi2, and that there's about 7.4 billion people on earth, that means that JUST IN HUMANS there are currently 296000000000000000000000 living, breeding, dying, mutating bacteria.
Now, note that the earth is teeming with life and the entire human population accounts for only a small fraction of the surface area, and that the surface area is miniscule compared to the total habitable volume of the planet and try to understand that there are probably octillions, maybe nonillions of bacteria on the planet.
Suddenly this stuff won't seem nearly as impractical.
>>78040892
https://helda.helsinki.fi/handle/10138/37762?show=full
>>78040965
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pier_Luigi_Ighina
Pier Luigi Ighina (1908 in Milan – 2004 in Imola), was an Italian researcher. His unorthodox theories on electromagnetism are not recognized by the scientific community.
>according to evolutionary theory life began 3.8 billion years ago
With biogenic graphite. And before that, life began on carbon planets orbiting carbon stars.
>the only mechanism for increasing an organism's DNA from nothing is through a copy mutation
Every generation, humans develop 7-70 singular nucleotide polymorphisms, which are single character (ACGUT) changes somewhere among the gene islands.
This is far, far lower than predicted by Darwinists. Horizontal gene transfer is the real mechanism, and involves the exchange of transposable elements (Chunks of DNA that clump around the main chromosome) and SNP's between organisms.
An example are the HOX genes, which are highly conserved among life, meaning the orignal HOX gene emerged in the common ancestor of all life. An SNP causing an extra set of ribs could infect all life, and DNA methylation could prevent it from expressing in most organisms. However, if any descendent organism demethylated the SNP in question, it would express an extra rib in the same place.
There was never a missing link - we jumped from ape to almost-man, and the almost-man became chimps, gorillas and humans. We express the new SNP's, while the apes express the ancestral ones.
>How did we go from non-living inorganic matter to the first living cell?
Lipids have a so-called hydrophobic end, and a hydrophilic end. Two stacks of lipids point their hydrophobic ends towards each other, and their hydrophillic ends point towards the inside and outside of what's called the lipid membrane.
This membrane defines the borders of the cell, and is perforated by receptor molecules. The DNA encodes for all these molecules, and for structures to collect them from the environment.
>This is a feat that not even the best scientists can do in the lab with the most favorable
We've taken empty lipid spheres, stuck under 500 natural genes into them, and gotten the resulting cells to divide. We've also constructed totally orignal genes.
>>78037568
>>78041183
>What's the tax of mutations for generation
>>78040979
So you have sequenced da genome of bears and proveded it, after making lotsa pasta and lasagne
>>78041049
Forgot to add that these things can turn up many many generations ahead. Even some ancient ones may eventually turn into a net positive gene that was useless when the DNA was part the organism when it was completely different and had no use.
>>78041322
if you weren't so autistic you would realize that same point has already been made several times.
Try applying that same concept to primates which have a reproductive cycle measured in years.
>the only mechanism for increasing an organism's DNA from nothing is through a copy mutation
consider this
>>78040722
What the fuck are you laughing at, you asshole? I'm sure a brilliant scientist like yourself believes in all shorts of shit you can't observe, things that are only mathematically demonstrable. See, you're a dipshit. You're too convinced of your own intelligence. Living things change over time and you're a shitter. You can't observe the degree to which living things change over time (speciation), but of course it still happens.
I see op is a fucking moron, which should be evident from is flag.
A virus is a complex chemical compound that is not alive OP. It leverages it's environment (living organisms) in order to copy itself and make more of itself.
However it copies itself badly so most of these copies are fucking worthless, however some of these copies actually do better in the environment and thus end up copying themselves.
This is why a virus exist.
Make sense? Remember the virus is not alive, it's just a chemical reaction that is capable of reproducing itself and thus it is subject to the law of natural selection.
If you can understand this it shouldn't be too hard to wrap your retarded american brain around how life evolved.
>>78040987
Why is it then the brown bear that's the common ancestor? I have no problem with the idea that all bears have a common ancestor, but where's your evidence that the common ancestor is the brown bear? There may be an extinct variety of bears that predate the browns that we aren't currently aware of
>>78041234
>thinking 50000 years is a long time
>>78041015
Evolutionism is magic
>>78041095
I proveded it 'indirectly'
You must believe it
>>78035934
The oldest cells that were ever found, supposedly, were 2.3 billion years old, but it was actually containment. So afair we are down to 2.1 billion years again with the most basic of all bacteria. Unless you could determin the exakt starting point where proto enzymes developed into proto proteins in hot water pools through heat as a catalyst at 3.8.
>>78039607
Jesus, read a book. We have been around for a cosmic millisecond. Some dinosaur species lived for millions of years and didn't change within that period. As humans, we've only been evolving for 6 million years or so. 5000 years is still barely anything, but due to lifestyle changes and advancements the average human has changed significantly - we're taller, for example.
stop being so pejorative to "fedora lords" and quit your damage control. When you die, you stop. Fucking deal with it.
>>78041523
I do not deny the ability of single celled organisms to rapidly mutate.
Getting these cells to mutate into primates is an entirely different concept.
>>78041157
changing goalposts, first signs of utter defeat
>>78033280
Evolution as a process, a phenomena in our world is undoubtedly obvious from the huge amount of proven hypothesizes - and observations.
What I personally don't believe is that the humans and animal kingdom was produced by evolution trough natural selection.
I personally believe God created the world maturely, with infinite wisdom - everything was set on a base of rules - that science studies today - but created as mature - for example humans and animals.
Trough the mechanisms that God left behind - animals can get "better" or" worse" trough complex processes which exist.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080421-lizard-evolution.html
here for example.
>>78033914
plebians first encounter with nihilism
>>78033280
3.8 billion years is a really, really long time you troglodyte.
>>78041739
christfacts have NOTHING to back up their theory. don't be surprised when fedora fags tip you then.
>>78033280
>How did life form
God created it all. This is not bait. It is also true.
>>78041095
I 'believe' in evolution, but it is still theory and forever will be.
Don't make science into your religion. It is the most probable thing until something better comes along.
>>78041276
They might be related, but who's to say it wasn't the reverse or from an entirely different kind of bears? But this isn't fucking evolution you single brain celled mofos, this is just relatively small scale adaptation which can be observed within humans. We have brown people and white people you fucking retards
It is not because if races in humans do not exist then brown bears are not a seperate species from polar bears. They are merely differences in colouration and other minor factors.
Just as Darwins finches are obviously the same kind of bird with slight adaptive differences.
You are just halfwitted brainwashed drones who swallow everything the academic merchant ejaculates at you
>>78042011
it's a theory that's backed by evidence and there isn't much doubt scientifically.
gravity is also a theory.
>>78041314
I'm sure no one would want to help you or associate with you in any way IRL
>>78041988
2.3 billion ordered DNA base pairs is a really, really huge set of data you mongoloid
>>78041715
most people cannot visualize the timescale that has passed from the first insects until today.
How much incremental change there could be is similarily elusive.
>>78041349
Ah, someone wrote about something, it must be truth! And I've answered this in my posts mr weedleaf, try to keep up
>>78041234
>Humans today are pretty much exactly the same as humans 50,000 years ago.
That is definitely not true if you took the average selection of DNA of humans long ago and compared them to how it is today it would definitely be different. Just based on different population growths certain traits are more or less abundant, and there may be some traits that never existed before or some that went completely extinct in humans, or traits that were "sleepers" that had no real use until our lifestyles changed.
Overall the average human DNA is different than thousands of years ago. Humans can have vastly different traits and still can breed so it may be a very long time until you can get one human that simply cannot breed with another one if you somehow revived one from the past.
Look up ring species there are many animals that slowly drift apart from others due to an increasing number of differences.
I'm sorry that you're not smart enough to understand evolution right now but maybe one day it might start to make sense. Then again it's kinda hard to beat "god did it" since it literally is the magic words that solves everything lol
>>78033430
fpbp
>>78038583
Should I stick with a BS in biology or switch to a BA in biology
>>78041234
Polar bears (ursus maritimus) diverged from brown bears (ursus arctos) which evolved from ursus etruscus.
Speciation is easily observed. While "species" can often be an arbitrary or difficult to make distinction, eventually you will end up with offshoots that differ so much from each other they can no longer breed. Look at horses and donkeys, they can still breed but their offspring can be sterile. Domestic cats can't exactly breed with tigers.
>>78041379
>we jumped from ape to almost-man,
No evidence for this whatever. This is just science fiction. Punk-eek makes evolutionism less credible, not more, despite what Shlomo your professor tells you
>>78041248
Ah, that's because you're a fucking retard
A lot of your DNA comes from viruses inserting their bullshit
You also have bits of DNA that form a loop, then pinch themselves off and relocate, sometimes in the middle of other genes (transposons)
Just go fucking Google 'boron rich clay on Mars' and figure out why that's important you simpleton fucking faggot
>>78042262
Blue eyes is an easily notable recent trait.
>>78042146
There is a pine tree with 7x that
>>78041802
You are almost there. The fact remains that after humans appeared we have not seen any true form of speciation. However, before humans, we have a rate of one new species showing up in the fossil record per year. In the beginning, God created the Heaven and the Earth. After the creation of humans, He rested. This is why we don't see new species rising at the rapid rate history shows.
>>78041608
Polar bears are relatively new in the bear family.
See >>78041349
>>78042249
Surely peer reviewed scholarly articles mean nothing! Go fuck an abbo.
>>78035460
>let alone measure it.
Well, you can.
>>78042262
you're referring to different concentrations of different alleles among groups of populations, not entirely unique genes.
I will concede that Neanderthals DO have some genes that modern humans do not have, but this only proves a common ancestor at one point and that humans lost a section of the original DNA
>>78041234
actually there's findings that humans started to have the ability for trade work about 65,000 years ago
>>78042411
Hahaha this bait is out of control. Literally what is your alternative to all of this, and how can you prove it more than what you've been offered from the "wrong side"
>>78042516
>What's corn
>What's wheat
>What's a coywolf
>What's a grolar bear
>>78042101
You should never exclude other possibilities. Or you may just miss out on the next big discovery.
Hey, I think evolution is definitely the way to go. But when it comes to details people tend believe anything a guy in a white coat with glasses tells them. Not saying all of it is false(at all), but that does not mean everything is true either.
>>78041524
>You can't observe the degree to which living things change over time (speciation), but of course it still happens.
This is not an answer fucktard. I'm challenging you and the others for some real evidence.
For something that is considered unassailable in academe, you would think that the evidence was overwhelming (I mean for actual macroevolution not speciation which is hardly more than differentiation of racial characteristics in humans which can be explained by inherent DNA features selected according to environment). But really at best its highly ambiguous and is characterized more by gaps and actual evident contraindications than by positive evidence in favour
>>78042706
Still a wolf, still a bear. Corn and wheat? Been around a long time.
>>78038583
>Evolution is just a model we use out of convenience.
Have you tried thing called "observation" ?
Mr. Biochemist
>>78042262
I also wanted to add that remember populations evolve, not individual organisms.
Populations when separated from each other for a long time begin to drift apart in traits when the environments are different and favor other traits. Over time enough variation between the two populations will decrease fertile birth rate between the two populations and eventually with enough separation they might have 0% chance to make fertile offspring to officially count them as a separate species.
>>78040446
the differences don't arbitrarily stop at species, nobody makes them.
>>78042805
If you think that some hundred thousand years is "long", you're literally at the same level of the WE WUZ niggas.
>>78041537
A virus remains a virus over billions of generations. No one has ever observed a virus reproducing itself into anything that wasn't a virus.
If australopithecines retained that level of stability we would still be australopithecines for another trillion years
>>78042909
>Populations when separated from each other for a long time begin to drift apart in traits when the environments are different and favor other traits.
This is due to inbreeding and concentrations of certain allele groups, not the creation of new genetic code.
>>78033430
don't mind this guy, he's just compensating for his tiny dick
>>78039818
we did not evolve from nothing. you're skipping millions of intermediates. then you insist it looks stupid - which it does, because you refuse to see.
>>78042801
You can observe the birth or the death of a star? It's the same thing, with the difference that we can observe speciation in bacterias and viruses
>>78043023
did you miss the part where viruses aren't alive?
>>78042759
maybe I was misunderstanding you. There's no real justification to give much benefit of the doubt towards creationism.
>>78042994
And you're a filthy dago.
>>78042670
It doesn't matter whether there's an alternative or not. If your best argument is that 'there is no better alternative', you should stop calling evolutionism a fact and honestly say that they idea is a little bit crap but we literally have nothing better at the moment.
Actually, the evidence fits Dentonian typology better than Darwinian evolution
>>78042994
We will never see it happen again. 1.5 million years from now, I'll this shitty theory is still around, you will still be saying, "You think 1.5 million years is a long time!? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?."
I give it no more than 20 years and that is if sheklestein tries everything possible to silence the coming revolution.
>>78033280
>according to evolutionary theory life began 3.8 billion years ago
No, that's according to carbon dating of the fossil record, not evolutionary theory
>human DNA is made up of 2.3 billion base pairs
Yep, the vast majority either are useless, exist only to affect the incidence rate of RNA production or only do organelle production and maintenance, a very small amount actually makes you "human"
>the only mechanism for increasing an organism's DNA from nothing is through a copy mutation
I dont think you understand how DNA works
>The vast majority of mutations are harmful and lethal to the organism
No, the vast majority of mutations do nothing they might increase or decrease the repair rate or production of a single organelle; it's only when you start fucking around with telulose that you really hit the "cancer for everybody" mutations
So yeah, all I'm getting from this is that you dont know shit about what you're talking about
>I'm not even a Christian,
M8 I can see your flag
>but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
No, the probability is very much nonzero; zero probability is reserved for physical impossibilities, an argument that you might want to make is that you consider it to be highly improbable, your appetite for overstatement and hyperbole just makes you look like an idiot.
>>78043069
Why do you think that new genetic code is required for speciation? We have slightly different proteins in comparison of a chimp, not new ones
It's not a program with new lines of code, it's 99% the same
>>78042759
>Hey, I think evolution is definitely the way to go. But when it comes to details people tend believe anything a guy in a white coat with glasses tells them.
How about ten thousand of them working over 50 years in best way humans have to figure out if something is real or not?
You don't need to exclude other possibilities to believe something.
>>78033280
I actually never denies some xeno influence.I think the idea that aliens created people isn't that crazy.Some things about evolution I don't like, there are also many things in history and mythology that would support this.I am still agnostic in this question but it isn't that crazy if aliens created us.
>>78043069
>This is due to inbreeding and concentrations of certain allele groups, not the creation of new genetic code.
Again with enough insertion mutation that adds on neutral genes that one day mutates to become a positive gene. Holy shit now you have added information that's positive on the organism and probably incompatible with the other population.
Seriously what the fuck is so hard to understand with evolution with you guys? I know you don't want to believe it, but saying it's not possible or hard to understand just makes you look stupid.
>>78043164
I'm not saying we did. Even so, in the junkyard tornado the materials which 'make' something are not nothing either. The components of a watch are far more complex than amino acids (which have to be specifically selected and arranged). Yet random assemblage would never create a watch. Much less the tornado creating a house from specifically designed and manufactured construction materials
>>78043261
So what? And what is life exactly, in less than a million words
Why would it be significant as to whether the thing was alive or not? What special capacity to living things have in respect to evolution that virii do not?
>>78033280
>but the probability that our DNA could have selectively come into existence over billions of years is zero.
Because humanity was self conscious about its progression in science, technology, and basically every intellectual field unlike the other animals in this world. We used to be just as dumb as monkeys and niggers.
>>78043660
yeah, you can't create a watch within one tornado. one tornado could maybe build a bridge by letting a tree fall over a river. The key concept about evolution is that this change is easily carried forward and susceptible to more lucky changes, all of which can be easily carried over to the next generation once they appear.
>>78043268
Why because you say so? Because in Merkel's Germany it is now a thought crime?
>>78041802
So you literally believe in magic.
>>78043796
well, what are your reasons?
