New Book - The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
- Thread starter Anita Meyer
- Start date
This is the movie version of virology:
2) There is no actual proof that a virus has no effect or is "dormant" in a host, causing no "damage" or genetic changes. Only that there is no detriment to the host--which suggests the host has adapted.
3) In fact there is strong evidence that evolution is directly affected by viral mutation and adaptation of prokaryote and eukaryote genomes to this, by incorporating a mutated but beneficial form of the original pathogen.
4) The first three points above, are supported by the [argument that there is an] industry that has to manufacture new vaccines every time a known virus mutates, and by the science of immunology in general.
1) The virii are not "snippets of DNA from another species", and they are not "waste products".Jack_ said:
2) There is no actual proof that a virus has no effect or is "dormant" in a host, causing no "damage" or genetic changes. Only that there is no detriment to the host--which suggests the host has adapted.
3) In fact there is strong evidence that evolution is directly affected by viral mutation and adaptation of prokaryote and eukaryote genomes to this, by incorporating a mutated but beneficial form of the original pathogen.
4) The first three points above, are supported by the [argument that there is an] industry that has to manufacture new vaccines every time a known virus mutates, and by the science of immunology in general.
Last edited:
Nope, I am claiming logic by itself has limitations.
Wrong context old son.
Anita was using the term information in an evolutionary context - stating that while organisms change and evolve over time, no new "information" is added to the organism - from a biologists point of view the term is so vague and undefined its essentially meaningless.
So in order to impart some meaning to the term I was asking her to clearly define what she means by this, how she actually defines information within this context so that we can subject her claim to scrutinty.
As predicted she has failed to do so
They are?
I did not say they were waste products.
I did say snippets. They do no carry the overhead of a cell and I said that and they are not a full species, hence snippet.
A virus (from the Latin virus meaning toxin or poison) is a small infectious agent that can replicate only inside the cells of other organisms.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus
This is basically what I said.
I did not address whether a virus can alter the mutation of a host.
Trippy, these are only VARIATIONS and nothing more…
synthesizer-patel, Yes, I can explain to you what would be considered “new information”.
Let me first explain to you that no genes have been ADDED. As I said above, these are only VARIATIONS and nothing more. Only ADDING genes can be considered a higher evolutionary step. And just as well the laws of “THERMODYNAMICS” do not allow for mutation by adding new DNA to the genes since the genes have no available energy to endure and undergo adding onto themselves, they conserve what they have by using only existing information. Thermodynamics does not permit for the genes to add additional DNA. It only has enough energy and time to create, to live and to die (in example a seed to plant). Genesis 1:11 - And G-d said, Let the earth bring forth grass, the herb yielding seed, and the fruit tree yielding fruit after his kind, whose seed is in itself, upon the earth: and it was so.
Now there is also another factor that exists in the cells of the DNA which comes into play… and these are chemicals that make up a language system that the makes up the order of molecules “meaningful” in the DNA. So in other words, it is “these chemicals” that read the language to make it meaningful. So you need the language to make the order of molecules and vice versa - you cannot have one without the other.
Thus no new information can be added that is not originally understood. New information would consists of new words and a language which it does not understand. Hence it would not understand and recognize this language and would not be compatible in terms of adding this new information. Thus no evolution can take place.
Now if you still dont understaned this this language analagy... We can use the example of pulling letters out of a hat and they miraculously come out as lets say, C A T spelling CAT which as the evoultionist would call it "CHANCE",
This word can be recogized and understood by you and me as being a CAT. Therefore it is thought by the evolutionists that given enough time we could get sentences… and eventually given enough time we could get a whole information bank - and there it is folks, life (as the evolutionists would say)!
But there is a fatal flaw in this analogy. First of all, who is the word CAT understood by? If it’s a English speaking person they will automatically know that it means CAT. However, if its to a Spanish, French or Chinese person they would have no clue as to the word CAT. So this automatically tells us that it is only acknowledgeable by somebody who already knows the language.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltruthpublisher.com/theprimordiallanguage.html
Uh huh. What about modifying genes by natural variation and selection? Is that a lower evolutionary step?Anita Meyer said:
Really, how does it do that?
How does genetic material from viruses get added to DNA? How do scientists add genes to plants to get GM crops?
You don't seem to have much of a grasp of the subject you're claiming to explain. Isn't that even a little embarrassing?
Total strawman. Read some Dawkins.
Anita:
This is nonsense. Forget genes for a moment and just look at your body. If your body had "no available energy" except its own, you'd be dead. Instead, you eat food every day and from that you get energy. The cells in your body also get energy from food; that's an external energy source. Ultimately, the food can grow because of energy from the Sun, which is an energy source continually flooding the Earth with more energy. All life on Earth draws on the Sun as an external energy source.
Genes are added to DNA. A very common type of copying error involves duplicating a piece of DNA. So, an organism might start with a sequence of genes ABBBAC (this is an analogy) and a copying error changes this to ABBBABAC, for example (with the BA copied an extra time). This piece of additional DNA is then free to mutate further, for instance to ABBBADAC. Information has clearly been added to the original sequence ABBBAC. The energy to do this comes from the same place all the energy comes from to duplicate cells - the food consumed by the organism involved.
That's like saying that nothing new can ever be expressed in English, because English always uses the same alphabet of 26 letters. And yet, this sentence I'm writing right now has never existed before in 1 million years of human history. (You can google it to check. You'll find one match - this post.)
I hope your book doesn't include your erroneous understanding of thermodynamics. That would be embarrassing for you. If it does, make sure you fix the error in future editions (if there are any).
This is nonsense. Forget genes for a moment and just look at your body. If your body had "no available energy" except its own, you'd be dead. Instead, you eat food every day and from that you get energy. The cells in your body also get energy from food; that's an external energy source. Ultimately, the food can grow because of energy from the Sun, which is an energy source continually flooding the Earth with more energy. All life on Earth draws on the Sun as an external energy source.
Genes are added to DNA. A very common type of copying error involves duplicating a piece of DNA. So, an organism might start with a sequence of genes ABBBAC (this is an analogy) and a copying error changes this to ABBBABAC, for example (with the BA copied an extra time). This piece of additional DNA is then free to mutate further, for instance to ABBBADAC. Information has clearly been added to the original sequence ABBBAC. The energy to do this comes from the same place all the energy comes from to duplicate cells - the food consumed by the organism involved.
That's like saying that nothing new can ever be expressed in English, because English always uses the same alphabet of 26 letters. And yet, this sentence I'm writing right now has never existed before in 1 million years of human history. (You can google it to check. You'll find one match - this post.)
I hope your book doesn't include your erroneous understanding of thermodynamics. That would be embarrassing for you. If it does, make sure you fix the error in future editions (if there are any).
If a genetic variation does not constitute a mutation in your opinion (remember, I've already backed my 'opinion' with definitions and peer reviewed literature), then perhaps you should explain to us what you understand a mutation to be, including citations from peer reviewed literature (which, incidentally, excludes the bible if you accept that there is only one god).
Yet one more example of Anita's dishonesty: she claims to have proved the bible is true yet she's quoting it as if it were fact to support her argument that it is true.
Hardly cricket, old bean.
A friend said something a week or two ago in the office while we were talking about hacks online and creationism. I doubt he came up with it himself but it had myself and a few others in stitches.
Could God create an argument so circular even he wouldn't believe it? :shrug:
Noodler, Trippy, James and Alphanumeric…
In this same case modification can fall under the notion of “natural selection"… nevertheless its still VARIATION. And as I’ve expressed earlier “natual selection” is not evolution (again since no new DNA is added).
These are still tandem repeats and rearranging of the same DNA
There is an even exchange of energy transpiring here. For instance, the simple act of just burning the gasoline in our cars gets transformed to other forms of energy/matter and in the process the entropy of our world increases. There is even scientific evidence that the overall amount of gas in the entire Universe is dissipating. Therefore this extra energy that you are fantasizing about is only an illusion. A seed is programmed with the exact amount of energy that it will ever need from the DNA instructions that are in it before it even begins to grow.
A virus is something separate than DNA. It is conflicting information causing malfunction since it is not recognizable by the other DNA. Now in adding genes to plants to get GM crops. Firstly you have to realize here that this is something that is induced by man and not by nature. Nature could never on its own create GM (Genetically Modified) crops. Oh and for your info it can be seen that the original design works best when it comes to ingesting such foods. For instance allergic reactions and allergies come about from GM corn as well as tomatoes and many other GM foods. The reason for this is that the fruits and vegetables (even wheat) were specifically designed by G-d to be ingested by humans, animals and insects in such a way that is to be recognized by their cells in a beneficial way so nutrients can be absorbed. What has happened with genetically modified foods is that the DNA has been altered and therefore not recognizable by the cells of humans, animals and insects - and the body rejects and responds to it like a virus. Deuteronomy 22:9 - Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
It is clear to see that these modified food/genes are indeed a “lower evolutionary” step since they are really no good in terms of valid nutrition.
Thus this should be a witness to us that we should not tamper with G-d’s original design.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltru...llanguage.html
In this same case modification can fall under the notion of “natural selection"… nevertheless its still VARIATION. And as I’ve expressed earlier “natual selection” is not evolution (again since no new DNA is added).
These are still tandem repeats and rearranging of the same DNA
There is an even exchange of energy transpiring here. For instance, the simple act of just burning the gasoline in our cars gets transformed to other forms of energy/matter and in the process the entropy of our world increases. There is even scientific evidence that the overall amount of gas in the entire Universe is dissipating. Therefore this extra energy that you are fantasizing about is only an illusion. A seed is programmed with the exact amount of energy that it will ever need from the DNA instructions that are in it before it even begins to grow.
A virus is something separate than DNA. It is conflicting information causing malfunction since it is not recognizable by the other DNA. Now in adding genes to plants to get GM crops. Firstly you have to realize here that this is something that is induced by man and not by nature. Nature could never on its own create GM (Genetically Modified) crops. Oh and for your info it can be seen that the original design works best when it comes to ingesting such foods. For instance allergic reactions and allergies come about from GM corn as well as tomatoes and many other GM foods. The reason for this is that the fruits and vegetables (even wheat) were specifically designed by G-d to be ingested by humans, animals and insects in such a way that is to be recognized by their cells in a beneficial way so nutrients can be absorbed. What has happened with genetically modified foods is that the DNA has been altered and therefore not recognizable by the cells of humans, animals and insects - and the body rejects and responds to it like a virus. Deuteronomy 22:9 - Thou shalt not sow thy vineyard with divers seeds: lest the fruit of thy seed which thou hast sown, and the fruit of thy vineyard, be defiled.
It is clear to see that these modified food/genes are indeed a “lower evolutionary” step since they are really no good in terms of valid nutrition.
Thus this should be a witness to us that we should not tamper with G-d’s original design.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltru...llanguage.html
Last edited:
What a bunch of circular bullocks.
Every definition of Evolution has to do with incremental changes.
Therefore what you continue to mislable variation is precisely evolution.
Trippy, if indeed evolution occurred slowly creating small changes in living creatures, then logically there would have to be thousands of more “incomplete” transitional forms found in fossil beds than just the complete forms that we find which all have fully functional parts. A true transitional (intermediate) form would have non-functioning (malfunctioning) faulty parts or appendages, such as the nub (root) of a leg, arm or wing. We should at least be finding some fossils that show a deformed fin in the process of halfway changing into a arm, leg or wing. Logically if they were the weak link and unable to swim, walk, fly or feed themselves they would have died. There must be at least a few that fell into water, mud or covered instantly with ice that were rapidly buried. Let me rectify this, we shouldn’t be finding just a few of these incomplete transitional forms, we should be finding abundantly more, since they would logically outnumber fully-formed creatures if transitions occurred from one kind into another new kind. Yet we find none! But the evolutionists continue to persist that they exist.
Author Anita Meyer anitameyer@hotmail.com
The Primordial Language - Confirmation of the Divine Creator
http://www.insearchoftheuniversaltru...llanguage.html
All fossils are transitional because evolution never stops. Even you are transitional! All the ancestors of all living creatures were successful by definition, otherwise they would not have had successive generations.
Secondly, everywhere scientists expect to find a transitional fossil, they do! Now sometimes a species remains superficially stable in form for long periods, but a subset of that species branches off and becomes different. Every variation in body plan that gets passed on is a successful one. They must follow a gradient of increased adaptation, towards more and more efficiency, until some plateau is reached where no more variation will bring any more survivability (as measured in terms of successful reproduction).
The ancestors of the horse weren't on the path to full horseness, being something second best. They were perfectly adapted to their environment, and some scientists have claimed that they were greater in number than modern horses ever were. But really, they are the same creature, part of the tree of life. The definition of species is a human one.
Secondly, everywhere scientists expect to find a transitional fossil, they do! Now sometimes a species remains superficially stable in form for long periods, but a subset of that species branches off and becomes different. Every variation in body plan that gets passed on is a successful one. They must follow a gradient of increased adaptation, towards more and more efficiency, until some plateau is reached where no more variation will bring any more survivability (as measured in terms of successful reproduction).
The ancestors of the horse weren't on the path to full horseness, being something second best. They were perfectly adapted to their environment, and some scientists have claimed that they were greater in number than modern horses ever were. But really, they are the same creature, part of the tree of life. The definition of species is a human one.
What utter tripe.
Since a seed will grow into a fully-formed plant with its own seeds, which then go on to form other fully-formed plants with their own seeds etc that would imply that each seed has infinite energy.
Go away and learn something...
Crap. Insupportable crap.
One more time: you cannot use the bible to support the contention that the bible is factual.
Quite aside from the fact that you're absurdly blatantly wrong.
Here's one example List of Transitional Fossils on Wiki.
Your argument is circular.
On the one hand you claim that Darwin's Finches are just small changes, and don't represent evolution.
Then, on the other hand, you claim that because there's no evidence of small changes in the fossil record, evolution is false.
I'm fairly sure these two stances are also contradictory.
Incidentaly:
Transitional Fossil on Wiki
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UIijwkaqKzY
Really. You're just blowing smoke and wasting everybodies time.
Even when it comes to the eye, we can trace a series of forms that lead from simple single celled light sensitive structures to (for example) the human eye.
Anita, you may have answered this already but 19 pages is daunting... Where did you get your information about how to apply the Qabalah alphabet properly to receive information about nature and God?