I can has goatcheezburger?
Posted on 02/14/2009 7:52:25 AM PST by GodGunsGuts
I can has goatcheezburger?
[[.....This occurred according to the Creator’s plan, where creatures reproduce after their kinds......
Your response: “Pure tripe”]]
Excellent rebutal- I’ll bet you won your class’ debate team showdown eh? Gold medal and all that I’ll bet?
[[he first extinct animal to be cloned. Unfortunately, the clone died shortly after birth “due to physical defects in its lungs.]]
This just in: Sources tell me that new information is coming to light concenring hte death of htis rare cloned creature- according to witnesses, this clone was seen inhaling from a bong, and sources close to the clone, tell me that sir clone was a heavy marrijuana user and a three pack a day camel unfiltered cigarette smoker. Sorces inform me that they knew hte end was near when they witnessed the Ibex huffing and puffing just trying ot get it’s rockign chair moving. “It was bad- Ibie would pant like a steam engine just walking up three or four steps- It was clear hte old goat wasn’t goign to live long- it comes as no surprise- The government should have upped the price of ciggs to $100 a pack to prevent Ibie from buying htem on his welfare check- But, at least we have fond memories of Ibie winning every swim race he ever entered,, and the olympic gold medals- how many again? somethign liek a gazzilion? Well, that was before the pot and smoking took hold of his life”
Everybody knows that wolves have baby elephants and cows give birth to baby kangaroos. Happens all the time.
[[Wouldn’t this mean that humans today would be greatly inferior to humans from 6000 years ago, and less numerous?]]
Inferior? No- more corrupted? Yep- The Mitochondrial EVE project bears this out perfectly, the further back they went, the less mutations they found, until they cameto what they called ‘the first women’ or hte “EVES” as they’ve dubbed them who showed remarkably pure genetics. so yes, it’s an established fact that species degrade over time, and do not, as claiemd by macroevolutionists, improve improve improve until miraculously, somehow, new morphological features and organs pop out of seemingly nowhere. Deleterious conditions are not conducive to massive gains in new organs and systems- nor do ‘neutral’ mutaitons help the cause any I’m afraid.
Welephants and Kangows went extinct 900 million years ago and a great flood washed hteir bones away- but this great flood was only localized i nthe regions where Welephants and Kangows coexisted together nicely, Kangows being hte primary food source for hte Welephants who hunted in vicious and ruthless packs
Shouldn't we see effects of that on a larger scale. Shouldn't humans be less accomplished and less numerous now than they were then? Creationists have stated over and over again that mutations are a loss of information, and the article that anchors this thread claims that genetic degradation causes species to go extinct over time.
Those look like they’re in west Texas...
“...and cows give birth to baby kangaroos.”
Kangamoos.
[[Shouldn’t we see effects of that on a larger scale. Shouldn’t humans be less accomplished and less numerous now than they were then?]]
Not necessarily because God designed species to deal with mutationas and to adapt to them as needed- that is not to say that we are designed to effectively deal with any and all mutaitons, as some do cause serious problems with which we can not deal, but species are remarkably resilient
[[Creationists have stated over and over again that mutations are a loss of information, and the article that anchors this thread claims that genetic degradation causes species to go extinct over time.]]
Well it can cause species to go extinct. disease due to mutational changes can, and do, overwhelm species from time to time. However, this doesn’t undermine the resiliency of most species to most mutational mistakes. Again, the Mitochondrial EVE project shows that the human species’ genome has actually degraded over time, but it must also be pointed out that we are able to boost our resileiency by learnign abotu nutrition and healthy living, and infact we’ve increased our life’s expectancy as we’ve also learned to control diseases and mistakes due to mutations through our study of science- We are however a long way off fro mthe length of lives in the old testament- those folks were so genetically pure they could itnerbreed without consequences (at least for awhile, until more and more mutaitons came on hte scene which as we know, now causes serious birth defects if close kin produce offspring- hence hte practice is no logner practiced- or shopuld at least no logner be practiced, as well there is enough variety outside family lines to now choose from as well)
[[Kangamoos]]
Lol- good one
[[Creationists have stated over and over again that mutations are a loss of information, and the article that anchors this thread claims that genetic degradation causes species to go extinct over time.]]
As well, we’re learnign about species preservation- intervening to prevent this from happeningin other species as well by learnign about problems and dealing with htem to help them survive and thrive- neutralizing some mistakes, helping to boost hteir immune responses etc. protecting htem from conditions that cause known mutaitons etc- So while yes, we become ‘weaker’ over time, this ‘weakness’ isn’t generally so severe and so rapid that we must hterefore succumb- We do have built in designed information that is precoded to deal with most mutaitons without ever sufferign from them even though they result in a loss- it depends on how severe the loss is, what it affects, whether it be a crucial system, or crucial cells etc or not. Which bring up another good point- that species have code that is PRECODED to deal with mutaitons in the future- this takes intelligent forward looking design knowledge, and a creation of htis code that anticipates changes before they happen- this isn’t accidental accumulations of lower info- this is a precise designed metainfo that anticipated problems and coded the species to deal with problems that hadn;’t even happened yet. Spooky eh?
I guess we can give up on ever having a Jbex around, then.
Good eye!
How do they tell the difference between "pure genetics" and impure genetics?
If the donor was FOUND DEAD—how much had the DNA deteriorated before they froze it?
That could be a large part of the problem, also.
One would think that the lungs would be the first to decompose—no air and blood circulation.
They took samples the year before it died.
[[How do they tell the difference between “pure genetics” and impure genetics?]]
If you don’t know I aint gonna tell ya- from now on it’s up to you fella.
hint- loss of info- As well, you know full well what I mean and am referring to- tired of playing your symantics games-
If you don’t know I aint gonna tell ya- from now on it’s up to you fella.
As you can clearly see, the chromosome on the right is pure while the one on the left is impure.
hint- loss of info-
Fewer chromosomes? Fewer genes? Fewer fingers?
tired of playing your symantics games-
Would spell check kill you? LOL!
Swell picture- but hte pure genetic material is one with no mutation caused mistakes- which is exactly what the Mitochondrial EVE project found when they traced genetic material back to our supposed ‘mothers’- interestingly enough, the closer we got to our own time, the more corrupted via mutaitons results the genetics became- just as one would expect with hte greation of purer species codes which would then degrade over time due to mutaitons
[[Would spell check kill you? LOL!]]
Don’t have time- thnaks fer playin
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.