Back to Home

God & Science Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | God and Science | Post

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Re: Evolution

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by bzrd on November 7, 1999 14:10:23 UTC

: AS: : Is there a difference between micro and macro evolution? Is proof of one the proof of the other?

: Greg: : Macro Evolution begins on the micro level with the elemental evolution that drives the Stellar Furnace, Fusion. It progresses through the elements heavier then iron in the expression of the Super Nova, which also distributes all the elements ThroughouT the Universe. On planetary Accumulations of the Elemental Form, electrical discharge through the Primordial Atmosphere causes the formation of organic molecules, the clay from which Life is formed, the foundation upon which Life and Micro Evolution is based.

: Where Micro Evolution and Life actually begins is unknown, but the proof that Evolution IS the means by which Life progresses is found in the chromosomes of the DNA Structure itself, as all Life contains the chain of chromosomes of the entire Evolutionary path that it has taken. So we contain the Same chromosomes as the plant, aquatic, reptilian, animal, and mammalian Life which preceeded us, while where the evolutionary path diverges, the chromosome make-up also diverges, and thus the myrid variety of Life.

: While one is not proof of the other, Macro Evolution(though it begins on the micro level) is a necessary precursor to the Micro Evolution of Life, as the heavier elements formed only in the expression of the Super Nova are a part of our bodily make-up. :o)

: bzrd here: : Micro-evolution can be characterized as variation within a species; it is considered as much a fact of nature as gravity. Macro-evolution (the origin of life from inert matter and origin of species from precursor species) is only a theory. There has NEVER been an observation of macro-evolution. There is not a single universally accepted transformational form known in the fossil record. There is not any known mechanism whereby genetic information can increase in a species over time. If this were any other science, Darwinism would have been discarded 100 yrs ago, but it still persists, more as a dogma than a scientific theory. People don't want to discard evolution. It allows them to do away with God and any semblance of absolute truth. For if Darwin was wrong, then the only other alternative is Creationism.

: Greg: : Excuse my misunderstanding of what was being refered to by Macro Evolution. I assumed that micro and macro were being used in the manner in which I most commonly appreciate them, which is in reference to scale, macro being of astronomical scale.

: Even without the observation of any actual "missing links", the presence of the Same chromosomes in our DNA as are in the plant, aquatic, reptilian, animal, and mammalian aspect of our heritage can only be explained through the Theory of Evolution. I'll be more then happy to listen to any explaination you may have as to why God would have felt I needed the Same chromosome as a plant if I did not have a plant somewhere in my past heritage. Or a fish. Or a reptile. Or any of the other myriad variety of species that I happen to share the Same chromosomes with.

bzrd here: All living things have chromosomes. To some extent all living things share genetic information; for ex. the ability to produce ATP, or the enzyme DNA hydrogenase etc. There is a commonality in nature which is indicative of a common Creator; why would God create a plant that uses chromosomes to pass on genetic information and some other means [of genetics] in animals? It is known for ex. that man and chimpanzees are 98% simular genetically speaking, indeed, we are very simular phenotypically. However, if you consider the mutation rate of the chimp genome, and that the 2% difference represents 22,000 neucleotides [base pairs] then extrapolate back in time, you will find that our common ancester lived about 2,000,000,000 yrs ago. Additionally, there has yet to be observed a single point mutation that results in an increase in information. I am not saying that God could not have used evolution as a means of Creation; but why do we assume that He did, when the evidence is to the contrary?

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2023 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins