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
Login

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

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by William G Melchiorsen Jr on September 13, 1999 03:07:28 UTC

: If I understand your position, you can not provide an example of a mutation that produces an increase in information, yet you maintain that we are here as a result of a random process. It seems to me evolutionary theory would be falsified on the grounds that all mutations either result in a loss of information at best, or at worst, a deleterious effect on the phenotype. The Creationist position maintains that God created "kinds" of life. These kinds have a built in ability to produce an abundant variety of life according to which genes are selected via natural or artificial selection. For example, the ancestor of the domestic dog contained all of the genetic information that is phenotypically displayed by the poodle, Irish Setter etc. Further, it is a well known fact that pure bred canines are genetically weak as a result of having information bred out of them. This is evident by the many congenetal vagarities that beset them. An example would be that Springer Spaniols are prone to hip-joint problems, Dalmations have temperment problems etc. Ironically, Adolph Hitler in his perverted attempt at creating a super-race, would have been better served to encourage inter- racial marriage.

***I may have mistaken your question for a generality when you are in fact interested only in the mutation issue and not the natural aspects of genetic change and variety. What I mean is that in any organism there are many possible courses that the present expression can take, ie. not all springer spanials have hip problems... I do believe that the current volume of information retaining seems to be restricted, and thus lost as new information is gathered, although I do see two possibilities in the long term future. The first is that no information has been lost at all, or very little depending upon when DNA refined itself to be able to "zip" information into packages which we have not discovered yet. Or, we will eventually be able to manipulate genetic material in such a way that we expand it retention capacities like we have done with computer memory. At any rate, even if there was truth to the losing of information, I can see no reason to revert to creationism as a default. I do have to say that no matter what the reality of all this is, that it seems to me that we are a product of the past, and therefore evolution/continuation or whatever it really is seems to have created us, and given us the means to communicate abstact ideas over long distances as we are doing now. This is neato! Of course, there probably is some inteligence that would seem like gods even to us out there in this infinite universe of possibilities.

Follow Ups:

    Login to Post
    Additional Information
    Google
     
    Web www.astronomy.net
    DayNightLine
    About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
    Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2020 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