 |
Bible-Discussion.com
Private Bible Studies and Christian Fellowship Available - Ask Nobby
|
|
|
| Author |
Message |
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
 Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 12:55 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | ..... perhaps you will explain how the Platypus shares genetic material that evolved in a completely different branch of the evolutionary tree and seems to jump over to mammals without ever passing through the supposed evolutionary processes.
|
You obviously now know that the Platypus has the reptilian traits. But you don't understand how they got there, right?
Since you know they exist, how would you suggest they got there as platypus traits? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 3:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scorp wrote: | | Trinity1 wrote: | Well... I see Bouncer is monitoring.. but not participating.  I ask for the transitional he insists exists... denigrates others for not acknowledging as much… and then refuses too or is incapable of citing it.
Very interesting.  |
Obviously he's looking in on this thread, inspite of the fact that he's at work. He's not on your deadline.  |
He must be working some monster hours then as my previous post has been up there for about week...
| Quote: | | Quote: | | ...............by referring back to this article... does not advance the argument that they shared a common ancestor unless you are prepared to cite which ancestor it is! |
Think of all progeny with the varied traits being passed on genetically as transitional in thier own way. As they become successful survivors of thier environment they lose "transitional" status. |
Perhaps again I failed to explain the problem to you... I am thinking progeny... what I'm asking for is a common ancestor... what would be a common ancestor that has avian, reptilian, and mammalian traits?
Remember... current theory teaches avian and reptilian traits developed separately from the mammalian... so the problem is, how does a mammal posses these traits if the theory is correct? The only answer I get is... they share a common ancestor... Ok... if that is correct... what mammalian ancestor had developed avian and reptilian traits? Bouncer has not responded because he knows there is no answer... not because he has been at work for a week.
| Quote: | | You need to understand the basics of Evolution in order to grasp the various influences and mechanisms that shape new species and have caused extinction of 99% of other species in the past. |
Sir... I've been debating this topic for years and have had the theory explained to me three ways from Sunday... I got it... what I never get though is straight, qualified answers to these seemingly simple questions. Perhaps you might be different... I don't know.
Name the ancestor(s) Sir… and how do they fall does the avian traits develop separately… and then all of a sudden show up in a mammal?
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Scorp wrote: | | Trinity1 wrote: | | ..... perhaps you will explain how the Platypus shares genetic material that evolved in a completely different branch of the evolutionary tree and seems to jump over to mammals without ever passing through the supposed evolutionary processes. |
You obviously now know that the Platypus has the reptilian traits. But you don't understand how they got there, right?
Since you know they exist, how would you suggest they got there as platypus traits? |
An intellignet designer bent on making current evolutionary theory look stupid???
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6096
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 4:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | | An intellignet designer bent on making current evolutionary theory look stupid??? |
How much sense does that make? Why would this hypothetical designer be deceptive?
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
Perhaps again I failed to explain the problem to you... I am thinking progeny... what I'm asking for is a common ancestor... what would be a common ancestor that has avian, reptilian, and mammalian traits? |
You don't have to have the trait to carry the gene. All living organisms share DNA regardless of what traits they display.
| Quote: | | what mammalian ancestor had developed avian and reptilian traits? |
It would depend on what Genes were active and dormant. All we know for sure is that the same genes are present in all three classifications therefore, all living organisms are from the same family tree. This precludes that there would be common ancestry.
| Quote: | | Bouncer has not responded because he knows there is no answer... not because he has been at work for a week. |
I'll let Bouncer field your accusations.
| Quote: |
Sir... I've been debating this topic for years and have had the theory explained to me three ways from Sunday... I got it... what I never get though is straight, qualified answers to these seemingly simple questions. Perhaps you might be different... I don't know.
Name the ancestor(s) Sir…
The names of the ancestors can be found in any book on animal classifications.
[quote...and how do they fall does the avian traits develop separately… and then all of a sudden show up in a mammal? |
Traits are the product of genes. Genes are DNA, all living organisms share DNA.
Maybe this will help you to understand. "Descent with Modification
We’ve defined evolution as descent with modification from a common ancestor, but exactly what has been modified? Evolution only occurs when there is a change in gene frequency within a population over time. These genetic differences are heritable and can be passed on to the next generation—which is what really matters in evolution: long term change."
See it's all about genes.
This excerpt is from a site but I can't give you the link yet. I'm not quite up to seven posts. I'll bookmark it till then. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scorp wrote: | | You don't have to have the trait to carry the gene. All living organisms share DNA regardless of what traits they display. |
OK... then how does an evolved avian gene, descendant from reptiles, end up in a mammal… the platypus?
| Quote: | | Quote: | | what mammalian ancestor had developed avian and reptilian traits? |
It would depend on what Genes were active and dormant. All we know for sure is that the same genes are present in all three classifications therefore, all living organisms are from the same family tree. This precludes that there would be common ancestry. |
What? I ask for a common ancestor... you infer dormant or active genes... appeal to the defunct tree of life.... and that is the answer?
I realize that all three types of genes are present in this critter here... that is why we are having this discussion. the question is... why? If evolution is true... how does a mammal posses both reptilian and avian traits when the family tree forked at the amphibian level of development? You keep side stepping this question... please cite the common ancestor and explain how it makes sense using current theory.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Bouncer has not responded because he knows there is no answer... not because he has been at work for a week. |
I'll let Bouncer field your accusations. |
-k-... I'm patient.... but am not holding my breath...
| Quote: | | Quote: | Sir... I've been debating this topic for years and have had the theory explained to me three ways from Sunday... I got it... what I never get though is straight, qualified answers to these seemingly simple questions. Perhaps you might be different... I don't know.
Name the ancestor(s) Sir… |
The names of the ancestors can be found in any book on animal classifications. |
 WOW! That really doesn’t provide me with much of answer... would please be just a little more specific? I mean… if we have a divergence at the class level of taxonomy… in said classification book… then they must share a common ancestor at the phylum level that posses all of these genes… yes? If that is the case… which one is it?
I do beleive this is the third time I have asked for the citation of a common ancestor... are we going to get to that?
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| FFT wrote: | | Trinity1 wrote: | | An intellignet designer bent on making current evolutionary theory look stupid??? |
How much sense does that make? Why would this hypothetical designer be deceptive? |
You know... I'm asking the same question of science... why would folks, when this piece of evidence clearly debunks that tree of life thingy... continue to try to deceive folks into believing that there is some veracity to it… when there is obviously a divergence of genes where they should no be… but… there they are still clinging to the theory.
Good question.
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 6:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | | Scorp wrote: | | You don't have to have the trait to carry the gene. All living organisms share DNA regardless of what traits they display. |
OK... then how does an evolved avian gene, descendant from reptiles, end up in a mammal… the platypus? |
Same way the genes from a Chimpanzee end up in you and vice versa. Common ancestry.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Quote: | | what mammalian ancestor had developed avian and reptilian traits? |
It would depend on what Genes were active and dormant. All we know for sure is that the same genes are present in all three classifications therefore, all living organisms are from the same family tree. This precludes that there would be common ancestry. |
What? I ask for a common ancestor... you infer dormant or active genes... appeal to the defunct tree of life.... and that is the answer? |
Yes, of course, since genes are inherited. What would be your answer?
| Quote: | | ..... If evolution is true... how does a mammal posses both reptilian and avian traits when the family tree forked at the amphibian level of development? |
It branched (forked, to use your term) from a common ancestor.
| Quote: | | You keep side stepping this question... please cite the common ancestor and explain how it makes sense using current theory. |
Again? You need to study the Theory of Evolution so that you don't have to depend on me for your education.
| Quote: | | Quote: | Sir... I've been debating this topic for years and have had the theory explained to me three ways from Sunday... I got it... what I never get though is straight, qualified answers to these seemingly simple questions. Perhaps you might be different... I don't know.
Name the ancestor(s) Sir… |
The names of the ancestors can be found in any book on animal classifications. |
| Quote: | | WOW! That really doesn’t provide me with much of answer... would please be just a little more specific? I mean… if we have a divergence at the class level of taxonomy… in said classification book… then they must share a common ancestor at the phylum level that posses all of these genes… yes? If that is the case… which one is it? |
Once again, why are you leaning on me to learn this? There are a myriad of scientific publications which give you all the answers. Why do you ignore the results of years of research in this field?
| Quote: | | I do beleive this is the third time I have asked for the citation of a common ancestor... are we going to get to that? |
Let me quote you on something you said in an earlier post: "An intellignet designer bent on making current evolutionary theory look stupid???"
That was your reply when asked how reptilian traits were found in the Platypus. Now you are drilling me for answers that can be found in all the basic Evolution literature that exists. You have only to learn it.
I think after you learn it, and don't have to lean on me to explain the basics to you, we can have a more meaningful discussion.
When I hit the seven post mark, I will give you some links which answers all your questions. But, you have to read them, instead of asking others to do your homework. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
So in other words... you are going to crow that there is a common ancestor without ever citing one, disregard the divergence of the evolutionary genes, and then act as if I’m the one who doesn’t know what he is talking about…
Typical… I don’t know why I expected anything more…
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 9:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | | So in other words... you are going to crow that there is a common ancestor without ever citing one, |
I'm going to say this one more time. If you cannot grasp it, don't get upset with me. All living organisms share the same DNA. DNA can only be inherited. Therefore, when DNA is shared it must come from the same ancestor. That's what a "common" ancestor is.
Having said that, you can give any ancestor a name yourself. Frank, George, Mary...anything you like. However, whether it has a name or not, it remains the ancestor whose DNA is shared genetically by two divergent organisms.
| Quote: | | .....(you are going to)disregard the divergence of the evolutionary genes, and then act as if I’m the one who doesn’t know what he is talking about… |
If you knew what you were talking about, you would not have so many questions.
| Quote: | | Typical… I don’t know why I expected anything more… |
I do. You don't know the subject matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Scorp wrote: | | Trinity1 wrote: | | So in other words... you are going to crow that there is a common ancestor without ever citing one, |
I'm going to say this one more time. If you cannot grasp it, don't get upset with me. All living organisms share the same DNA. DNA can only be inherited. Therefore, when DNA is shared it must come from the same ancestor. That's what a "common" ancestor is. |
OK... the platypus, a mammal... has avian genes... which ancestor would these two organisms share those genes with?
AS AN ASIDE: This is the fourth time I have asked this question of you and the best you can come up with... is 'all organisms share some of the same DNA'.... which is true... but does nothing to solve a very specific... simple... and seemingly simple question. Perhaps it is just my ignorance.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Typical… I don’t know why I expected anything more… |
I do. You don't know the subject matter. |
Well of course I don't... as if I did, I wouldn't be asking you which ancestor this mammal and an Ave shares. If the answer is so obvious... so simple... and I'm making such an obvious blunder by demonstrating this ignorance, you... being exponentially much more intelligent and well read into these topics would have no problem pointing which one it is. Would it help if I said ‘please’? Or, are you going to post again with the same type mantra Bouncer tried by attacking my knowledge of the subject instead of addressing the question?
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | | Scorp wrote: | | Trinity1 wrote: | | So in other words... you are going to crow that there is a common ancestor without ever citing one, |
I'm going to say this one more time. If you cannot grasp it, don't get upset with me. All living organisms share the same DNA. DNA can only be inherited. Therefore, when DNA is shared it must come from the same ancestor. That's what a "common" ancestor is. |
OK... the platypus, a mammal... has avian genes... which ancestor would these two organisms share those genes with? |
There is no one single ancestor that can be pinned but rather a line of ancestors. If you follow the lineage, you will find several common ancestors. I could ask you to give me a name for a common ancestor of you and your cousin's. However, that bloodline will go back a few generations to include many common sources of inherited DNA.
| Quote: | | AS AN ASIDE: This is the fourth time I have asked this question of you and the best you can come up with... is 'all organisms share some of the same DNA'.... which is true... but does nothing to solve a very specific... simple... and seemingly simple question. Perhaps it is just my ignorance. |
No not at all. It is your illogical conclusion that if the Theory of Evolution cannot name each common ancestor on demand, you don't have to believe in common descent. At the same time, do you accept the fact that you and your wife/girlfriend have a common ancestor in the Bible; namely Noah?
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Typical… I don’t know why I expected anything more… |
I do. You don't know the subject matter. |
| Quote: | | Well of course I don't... as if I did, I wouldn't be asking you which ancestor this mammal and an Ave shares. If the answer is so obvious... so simple... and I'm making such an obvious blunder by demonstrating this ignorance, you... being exponentially much more intelligent and well read into these topics would have no problem pointing which one it is. |
And I've explained it isn't just one, it is a lineage of inherited genes.
| Quote: | | Would it help if I said ‘please’? |
I don't think there is a person here who doesn't understand what I've said. They can't all be ahead of you intellectually, could they?
| Quote: | | Or, are you going to post again with the same type mantra Bouncer tried by attacking my knowledge of the subject instead of addressing the question? |
First you have to demonstrate knowledge on the subject for it to be attacked. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FFT
Emperor of the Universe
Joined: 26 Mar 2005
Posts: 6096
Location: Memphis
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 11:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: | You know... I'm asking the same question of science... why would folks, when this piece of evidence clearly debunks that tree of life thingy... continue to try to deceive folks into believing that there is some veracity to it… when there is obviously a divergence of genes where they should no be… but… there they are still clinging to the theory.
Good question. |
What piece of evidence?
| Trinity1 wrote: | | OK... the platypus, a mammal... has avian genes... which ancestor would these two organisms share those genes with? |
Does it actually say it has avian genes, or just similar gene sequences when it comes to sex determination?
_________________
When Science was in its crib, Religion tried to strangle it. When Science was in its infancy, Religion tried to abuse it. Now that Science is grown up, Religion wants to be in its good graces.
Theology is philosophy/ethics for people who already know what conclusion they want to come to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Trinity1
Emperor of the World
Joined: 02 Apr 2006
Posts: 3123
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 11:50 am Post subject: |
|
|
This is for my own self edification here… I am going to start over just so we don’t get confused on terminology… and what the findings of this study imply.
The study finds that the platypus, a mammal, shares some the same unique DNA (genes) as aves and reptiles do.
This much is supposed by current theory:
Reptiles evolved from amphibians.
Aves (birds) evolved from reptiles.
Mammals evolved from amphibians.
During their evolutionary progressions, aves developed completely separate and unique traits that differ from reptiles. During evolutionary progression reptiles developed completely separate and unique traits that differ from amphibians. However, aves and reptiles should share some traits (genes/DNA) with an amphibian ancestor as they developed directly from them.
Mammals also evolved from amphibians. During their evolutionary progression they too developed separate and unique traits that make them mammalian… yet, they should share some of the same traits with the amphibian. They should also share some of the same traits (genes/DNA) as reptiles and aves as all three had a common ancestor… an amphibian. I think we can all agree on this much… if you would like citations I have no problem providing them… but this is the consensus of the theory and if you can not find it… then you obviously are not looking hard enough.
You state that since aves, reptiles, and mammals share some of the same DNA they should have a common ancestor… and I agree… however, this study demonstrates that th platypus has developed unique avian and reptilian DNA… DNA/genes that we find only in aves and reptiles… not in amphibians. These genes were developed through the evolutionary process separate from amphibians… separate from mammals. What is demonstrates that it somehow jumped over to the platypus without evolutionary processes for it to develop. What I’m asking of you is to provide me with the common ancestor that has all of these traits… avian/reptilian/mammalian… or tell me how these traits can somehow develop separately and uniquely in a platypus separate from all other mammals.
You have chosen the low road in trying to infer that I don’t understand the issue… mutations + time + natural selection = new species… the problem for you sir is that I do understand the issue… much better than you presume… I understand the issue enough to know that this is not what evolution would predict… this is an organism that actually debunks the theory in practice. If the platypus does share the same DNA as aves and reptiles, then there must be an ancestor, somewhere, that would lead you to believe this… if you believe it without being able to cite an ancestor, then you are operating outside the constructs of science and entered into a belief systems that permeates virtually every facet of science today.
Cite the ancestor please.
_________________
Exodus 20:11 "For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them..."
‘The German Führer, as I have consistently maintained, is an evolutionist; he has consciously sought to make the practice of Germany conform to the theory of evolution.’ Sir Arthur Keith |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Scorp
Goldfish
Joined: 29 May 2008
Posts: 58
|
| Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 1:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Trinity1 wrote: |
You have chosen the low road in trying to infer that I don’t understand the issue… |
No, Trinity. This last post proves you don't understand Evolution. Anyone who understands Evolution would not ask to know the name of an ancestor of any species, regardless of its traits. It is lineage that produces common ancestors but you can't seem to grasp that. Therefore, you keep asking the same inane question again and again.
| Quote: | ..... If the platypus does share the same DNA as aves and reptiles, then there must be an ancestor, somewhere, that would lead you to believe this… if you believe it without being able to cite an ancestor, then you are operating outside the constructs of science and entered into a belief systems that permeates virtually every facet of science today.
Cite the ancestor please. |
There you go again. If the platypus has the features of mammals, and birds, it obviously has more than one common ancestor with each of the other species and thus has unusual and prominent features of each lineage.
If you don't believe that Evolution is giving you the information you need, where do you suggest we look to find the answer, outside of Evolution? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
FAQ 
Search 
Make a Donation 
Usergroups 
Contact
Register
Submit Articles 
Log in to check your private messages 
