- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Darwin’s Doubt: the mathematical problem of evolution and DNA
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:23 pm to The Pirate King
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:23 pm to The Pirate King
quote:
Still waiting on your hard proof of alien lifeforms
What
0
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:27 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
huh?
The documentation of the future of the Fertile Crescent was already written in Genesis. From the point where the Ark came to rest, science has now confirmed that civilization came from that spot
Also, the religion that Christ practiced developed for 300 years before the Roman Emperor took control. It was entirely Jewish. And Peter wanted to keep it that way. Remember the guy with the keys, the first ope, and all. Paul rebuked him for that. It is now essentially gentile. Due to the Catholics taking control. The Catholics formed their own version of Christianity
Then the Prots broke away, because they were seeking a different path to return to the way of Christ
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:30 pm to Penrod
quote:
complex systems in the body that are made of things that would be of no use without the other things
Is this the “what good is half an eye” argument?
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:30 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
RobbBobb
What a bunch of gobbledygook. Good lord.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:31 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
Anything born with a genetic anomaly is certainly not viewed as evolving. They are labeled as deformed. Which is why I firmly believe our planet from day 1 has been in decay, not evolving
Man this thread is playing all the hits
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:31 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
From the point where the Ark came to rest, science has now confirmed that civilization came from that spot
I thought you were saying we have evidence that the Ark came to rest in a specific spot now
quote:
Due to the Catholics taking control. The Catholics formed their own version of Christianity
Strongly disagree but we can agree to disagree.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:32 pm to NawlinsTiger9
quote:
Man this thread is playing all the hits
There's a few of the old tropes that haven't been mentioned, which is disappointing
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:32 pm to Salmon
quote:
...what?
I mean, they aint exactly hiding it
quote:
Scientists appeal for global population control
The consequences of climate change and the destruction of global biodiversity are being made increasingly aware. Unfortunately, the issues associated with the rising global population are often ignored, despite the fact that its impacts are highly correlated with an increased demand for resources
It aint the ones that believe in a creative force that are calling for population control
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:35 pm to RobbBobb
quote:
It aint the ones that believe in a creative force that are calling for population control
I haven't talked to all of them. Have you?
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:36 pm to Darth_Vader
Science and Evolution are one of the many tools of Satan he uses to turn us away from God
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:39 pm to deltaland
quote:
Science and Evolution are one of the many tools of Satan he uses to turn us away from God
Solid bait, baw.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:41 pm to Darth_Vader
Spirituality isnt incompatible with evolution. Religion might be, not spirituality.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:46 pm to deltaland
quote:science brings many, many people closer to God - there’s a lot of research out there that discusses this
Science and Evolution are one of the many tools of Satan he uses to turn us away from God
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:47 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
What evidence for you assertion are you pointing to?
That’s a totally fair question. I’m not an expert or even very well studied on the subject. I am only repeating what I have read as a semi-serious student of knowledge in various fields.
I have followed the discussions of Myers and others who are asking critical questions about the evidence especially in light of DNA evidence and I have seen the responses of evolutionary scientists and their back and forths.
Many evolutionary scientists seem uncomfortable to actually consider counter evidence and simply besmirch the “Creationists” as nut jobs a priori.
It’s my assumption that the process for evolution is a material process (scientific) and knowable, but I’m open to the discussion that the process is far from fully understood. I’m also a religious person and a philosopher who thinks that a creator has guided this scientific process.
So I can’t cite the evidence without a process of searching that I’m not willing to do for this internet discussion.
I stand by my defense of Myer, however, and think that his criticism are scientifically valid enough to be taken seriously. The attempts to dismiss him as a religious and unscientific hack are themselves unscientific, imo.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 2:54 pm to Darth_Vader
We were refugees from another planet!
Posted on 12/30/25 at 3:21 pm to Jimbeaux
quote:
I’m not an expert or even very well studied on the subject. I am only repeating what I have read as a semi-serious student of knowledge in various fields.
Yet you made your assertions with such conviction.
I applaud you being able to admit your ignorance on a subject. I would suggest perhaps listening to those that know things.
No serious scientist is making those assertions. Its absolute nonsense packaged to prey on those susceptible to believing such things.
To say that Meyer and his assertions aren't respected would be an understatement. They are all quite easily debunked (and have been extensively). To put it lightly, he is a Discovery Institute wackjob.
Actual mathematicians have excoriated his probability nonsense. He takes evolution's outcomes and treats them as singular, random events instead of incremental in nature. He also treats the Cambrian Explosion as if happened in 10 days instead of millions of years.
He is not a scientist, and readily admits his goals are not in line with the scientific method but to replace "scientific materialism with a theistic understanding"
He is not a serious person, its not even worth debating
This post was edited on 12/30/25 at 3:22 pm
Posted on 12/30/25 at 3:43 pm to Sasquatch Smash
quote:
Is this the “what good is half an eye” argument?
Not that I know of.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 3:56 pm to Darth_Vader
The thing that gets left out of arguments like this is the existing genetic variation that exists in populations. Mutations don’t have to be expressed right away can remain neutral or recessive for long periods of time because they don’t negatively affect survival under normal conditions. However, they’re still there in the organisms DNA.
These mutations of express themselves when strong selective pressure show due to things like changes in environment, new predators, disease, or available resources. Under those conditions, those previously "neutral" mutations can suddenly become important. At that point, selection isn’t waiting on brand-new mutations; it’s acting on variation that already exists. That allows for relatively rapid and large-scale changes without requiring implausible mutation rates. It simply one mechanism for punctuated equilibrium.
It’s also important to note that in a typical genome, only about 1–2% of DNA actually codes for proteins. The rest is non-coding or “silent” DNA, much of which doesn’t affect the organism under normal conditions. This large inactive portion can carry mutations that remain hidden for many generations. When the environment changes, some of these previously silent sequences can become useful, giving natural selection material to act on. When you consider that only 1–2% of DNA is actively coding, the math actually works out and in fact there’s enough genetic diversity and mutations over time to drive significant evolutionary changes without relying solely on brand-new mutations.
These mutations of express themselves when strong selective pressure show due to things like changes in environment, new predators, disease, or available resources. Under those conditions, those previously "neutral" mutations can suddenly become important. At that point, selection isn’t waiting on brand-new mutations; it’s acting on variation that already exists. That allows for relatively rapid and large-scale changes without requiring implausible mutation rates. It simply one mechanism for punctuated equilibrium.
It’s also important to note that in a typical genome, only about 1–2% of DNA actually codes for proteins. The rest is non-coding or “silent” DNA, much of which doesn’t affect the organism under normal conditions. This large inactive portion can carry mutations that remain hidden for many generations. When the environment changes, some of these previously silent sequences can become useful, giving natural selection material to act on. When you consider that only 1–2% of DNA is actively coding, the math actually works out and in fact there’s enough genetic diversity and mutations over time to drive significant evolutionary changes without relying solely on brand-new mutations.
This post was edited on 12/30/25 at 4:03 pm
Posted on 12/30/25 at 4:12 pm to deltadummy
Buncha nuts right here:
Historical Scientists Who Believed
Isaac Newton: Formulated laws of motion and gravity, viewed God as infinite and omnipotent.
Gregor Mendel: Father of modern genetics, an Augustinian friar.
Galileo Galilei: Believed in God and the Bible, but disputed traditional interpretations.
Johannes Kepler: Astronomer who saw God in the mathematical harmony of the universe.
Blaise Pascal: Mathematician and physicist who wrote extensively on faith.
Robert Boyle: Chemist, Bible scholar, and founder of modern chemistry.
Modern Scientists Who Believe
Francis Collins: Led the Human Genome Project, became a Christian, seeing faith as intellectually satisfying.
Michael Guillen: Harvard physicist and former atheist who found faith after a scientific career.
Vera Kistiakowsky: Nuclear physicist who found divine order in the universe.
Arthur Compton: Nobel laureate in physics, devout Christian.
Historical Scientists Who Believed
Isaac Newton: Formulated laws of motion and gravity, viewed God as infinite and omnipotent.
Gregor Mendel: Father of modern genetics, an Augustinian friar.
Galileo Galilei: Believed in God and the Bible, but disputed traditional interpretations.
Johannes Kepler: Astronomer who saw God in the mathematical harmony of the universe.
Blaise Pascal: Mathematician and physicist who wrote extensively on faith.
Robert Boyle: Chemist, Bible scholar, and founder of modern chemistry.
Modern Scientists Who Believe
Francis Collins: Led the Human Genome Project, became a Christian, seeing faith as intellectually satisfying.
Michael Guillen: Harvard physicist and former atheist who found faith after a scientific career.
Vera Kistiakowsky: Nuclear physicist who found divine order in the universe.
Arthur Compton: Nobel laureate in physics, devout Christian.
Posted on 12/30/25 at 4:13 pm to northshorebamaman
quote:
A university hosting a speaker isn’t scientific endorsement. Meyer isn’t regarded as a respected biologist, and his arguments aren’t accepted in evolutionary science. If he were actually “well respected” in the field, that would show up in citations, collaborations, grants, or empirical publications. It doesn’t. He doesn’t hold a research position in biology, doesn’t publish original work in mainstream journals, and his conclusions are wholly rejected by the field.
After covid, I simply can’t trust much of mainstream science anymore.
Remember the science telling us we couldn’t go to church because we could all catch covid from gatherings, and then being okay with the gatherings of people to riot during 2020? Or being silent on the hordes of ‘unvaccinated’ people illegally crossing the border? And I could go on.
Page 10 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News