Message from @tienXtreme

Discord ID: 638186223491481605


2019-10-28 01:20:59 UTC  

@fuguer he also argues that the likelihood of dependent mutations occurring increases exponentially. Theyve shown that just two gene mutations needed could take 100m - 1b generations to occur successfully

2019-10-28 01:21:03 UTC  

aliens are angels
check mate!

2019-10-28 01:21:07 UTC  

@fuguer how would you prove common descent from a few organisms vs descent from dozens or hundreds of organisms created separately though

2019-10-28 01:21:20 UTC  

me vs duck and nerth

https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/634367565304561675/638185499110014986/240.png

2019-10-28 01:21:26 UTC  

<:dab:395562678153904128>

2019-10-28 01:21:57 UTC  

trivially

2019-10-28 01:22:08 UTC  

common descent shows up clearly in the genetics

2019-10-28 01:22:22 UTC  

well, I'll read some rebuttals now, I just finished the book today

2019-10-28 01:22:28 UTC  

How?

2019-10-28 01:22:44 UTC  

it does, not a super straight line as we don't have the dna of extinct shit, but what we have, makes alot of sense @fuguer

2019-10-28 01:22:45 UTC  

There would be a lot of descent from those many common ancestors

2019-10-28 01:22:52 UTC  

like all science, if evolution is true, then we expect to find genetic patterns consistent with it... and every single time we check, we do

2019-10-28 01:23:12 UTC  

well he doesn't deny the progression that has occured

2019-10-28 01:23:16 UTC  

for example, all the organisms might have a broken gene from a past mutation

2019-10-28 01:23:21 UTC  

So how do you know its inconsistent with multiple common ancestors?

2019-10-28 01:23:27 UTC  

he's not saying humans were just created, or that we didn't evolve

2019-10-28 01:23:35 UTC  

if they were all created separately theres no reason to expect them to share the same dysfunctional dna

2019-10-28 01:23:46 UTC  

yes, he doesn't deny we share the same ancestor

2019-10-28 01:23:46 UTC  

but its precisely what we expect with evolution

2019-10-28 01:23:49 UTC  

and we see it time and time again

2019-10-28 01:24:12 UTC  

Are you saying there are super old mutations that 90% of living things have?

2019-10-28 01:24:16 UTC  

yes

2019-10-28 01:24:17 UTC  

all he denies is the way by which new functionality is created

2019-10-28 01:24:34 UTC  

He says it is not through random mutations

2019-10-28 01:24:36 UTC  

again one example just for humans is vitamin C gene

2019-10-28 01:24:55 UTC  

Humans are not 90% of life on earth

2019-10-28 01:24:56 UTC  

we have a PERFECT copy of vitamin c synthesizing gene, but ours is broken, because our primate ancestors had so much fruit they could survive without it

2019-10-28 01:25:16 UTC  

Yes, that's an example of devolution @fuguer

2019-10-28 01:25:17 UTC  

lol

2019-10-28 01:25:20 UTC  

ah yeh, thats true, forgot about that.

2019-10-28 01:25:25 UTC  

sure if you want to talk about 90% of life on earth how about eukaryotes

2019-10-28 01:25:38 UTC  

it was a short term adaptation

2019-10-28 01:25:39 UTC  

Lactose tolerance, another one.

2019-10-28 01:25:41 UTC  

by breaking existing functionality

2019-10-28 01:25:51 UTC  

god just re-used the same template every time,
that's why there are similarities between species..
it's like in programming, God used Class()

2019-10-28 01:26:03 UTC  

prokaryotes do not have a nucleus, eukaryotes do, it was such a successful mutation it is noW the majority of life on earth

2019-10-28 01:26:15 UTC  

What if aliens created apes and we evolved from apes? I'm saying what would be different in that scenario vs the conventional one

2019-10-28 01:26:47 UTC  

aliens probably created tardigrades

2019-10-28 01:26:53 UTC  

@Rody Le Cid god only uses haskell for the matrix