Is this proof of intelligent design?

Is this proof of intelligent design?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E
youtube.com/watch?v=6ziB6rG36j4
raredr.com/contributor/ricki-lewis-phd/2016/12/a-good-mutation-seeing-the-world-with-extra-cones
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller–Urey_experiment
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

No, it's proof of evolution.

Beneficial mutations help life propogate and survive whereas nonbeneficial mutations get discarded from the gene pool. As a result, life gets increasingly complex as time passes

Yes

No it's how tasty steaks are made

>Getting calories out of cellulose is easy

That cow is advanced as hell in terms of this particular task.

I'd like to add that the oldest known fossils have been on the planet for approx 3.5 billions years.

Think carefully about that. 3.5 billion years. Just imagine a thousand years. Now take a thousand of those. That's one million. Now take one million of those. That's one billion. Life has been around for AT LEAST 3 and a half of THOSE.

Mutation being the driving force behind evolution is an awful hypothesis, especially considering the fact that the fossil record supports punctuated equilibrium. There had to be a positive force contributing to speciation

Yes
The gods did their job well

>Life has been around for AT LEAST 3 and a half of THOSE.
First off, no. Second off that didn't prove anything. Also it would need to develop all the stuff for multiple stomachs at once other wise it would be useless and would be discarded and it cant mutate that much at once

Macroevolution has never been observed

I'll one up you on that with the hypothesis that the development from a single cell bacteria to the first somewhat functional multicellular organism took 3 times as long as the development from a multicellucar organism to a human.

Probably because it takes thousands of years at least, and people have only cared about evolution for less than 200.

>Evolution caused wasps to have weaponized ovipositors while simultaneously manifesting vaginas so that their species didn't go extinct in a generation.
Full retard.

argumentum ad vaccinus, atheists BTFO

Mutation is not the driving force. The driving force is survival. Life is like a plastic mold that changes to the shape what fits best to survive. It gives the illusion of intelligent design but in reality it makes perfect sense because all those that weren't fit were thrown away, leaving only those that were fit. That's why things such as the eye look intelligently designed.

Is this proof of evolution?

yes
so is this

For an individual species it should take that long, but we've been sequencing near everything for decades, and not once have we ever seen the spontanious emergence of a novel protein or even novel protein fragment in any species.

It's evidence of a common ancestor, but not necessarily proof.

>Also it would need to develop all the stuff for multiple stomachs at once
Why tho?

Macroevolution is just a bunch of microevolution dumbass
If you can observe multiple grains of sand, it's pretty safe to assume a bucket full of sand is possible or what?

So it chews on its own puke?
Gross dude

Belief in a theory is faith

Or because it doesn't happen. And it takes more like thousands

>implying the demiurge is intelligent
fuk u

How can atheists even compete at this point?

You're the retard. You think that propagation of the species was given the same precedence of stingers?

No. You can clearly see a similarity between wasps and other insects (6 legs, head/abdomen/thorax, etc). Clearly, the stinger was developed far later, due to being a common ancestor and as a response to competion with other forms of life, be it insects, arachnids, and mammals.

That's not a driving force of anything. How does the genetic information recode itself? So far the only explanation science can come up with is mutation but this has NEVER BEEN VERIFIED EXPERIMENTALLY.

It's proof they both have a vein in their heart

Microevolution is incremental change to existing function. We've never observed the emergence of novel function. Evolutionarily, piecewise emergence doesn't even make sense, as incomplete features would be selected against for being metabolically wasteful.

Ruminates are a fairly "recent" development in animals IIRC.

Turning cellulose into calories was a particular challenge for evolution. Makes no sense for god to "have difficulty" with such a design.

wasps evolved from ants, many of which have stingers.

We discover new proteins all the time, but we have sequenced so few bacteria that it isn't surprising that we find new protein.
New protein in large animals or plants doesn't make as much sense, because, on a small scale, most large organisms work the same. It's like many machines using the same parts.

You want your mind blown? Look up leaf tail geckos

Because if it only developed part of one atomach that would be pointless and would be discarded

>Meanwhile plenty of wasps actually have ovipositors but lack vaginas.
Does the word wasp just mean yellowjacket to you?

If microevolution, which we already observe with bacteria's increasing resistance to modern-day antibiotics, can be observed, why can't macroevolution?

Survival of the fittest, extinction to the unfit. That's what we saw in the past and it's what we see now.

>Never observed emergence of novel function

Stop repeating this bullshit. Flu vaccine would be unnecessary otherwise.

Our immune systems, and the very fact that we reproduce sexually are because of convolution of parasites and host.

>But but that's microevoltion

Retarded semantics game is the best you've got.

We discover protein that's new to our knowledge, not new to the bacteria. We can use mutagens and stress conditions to induce and then select for micro-evolved populations, but this process has never created novel genes.

Is that your pet?

>hurr durr what is the queen?

Why tho?
A part of an eye is better than no eye
youtube.com/watch?v=Nwew5gHoh3E

The point is that in fish it makes sense for the nerve to go towards the heart like because of their gills.

As animals evolved to breathe air it was simpler to just make the nerve a little longer each time than to reroute the entire nerve.

I dont really buy that the only reason leaf tail geckos can survive is that they look like leafs when MANY slower less intelligent more "normal" looking lizards live in madagascar

>Never been verified experimentally
>Still repeating Kent Hovind arguments a decade later

You're right. We haven't ruled out that it's god's magical pixie dust doing it.

If you had any understanding of the field, you'd recognize how retarded your claims are.

>t. Medfag

That's just it, given that entirely new features do not emerge all at once, natural selection should work AGAINST them, as incomplete features are wasteful.
It's not semantics, the distinction is important. Permutation of existing features is not the emergence of entirely new ones. The flu never expresses new proteins, just different existing ones.

>How does the genetic information recode itself?

Do you know what a mutation is? Or how miosis and mitosis work? Mutations are random. There are mistakes made when new DNA gets made. And this is beneficial. Without it there wouldn't be mutations.

>still believing pathogens are cause disease and aren't just another symptom
How bluepilled are you? Go take your shots goyim

Actually yes.

Modern domestic animals were artificially selected by human beings, so you could say they were designed by intelligent beings.

Because part if an additional stomach wouldn't help anything especially if it cant connect to anything

>only "argument" is ad hominem and worthless argument from authority completely lacking logos

No it's not

Explain punctuated equilibrium with only negative selective pressure. You can't

>can't eat and breathe at the same time without choking
>intelligent design

sure buddy

Taking human a&p does not qualify you to discuss molecular biology

>he doesn't know how to hold his breath

>Missing the point.
>Making another point that is still wrong.
Queen wasps have both vaginas and stingers. They give birth the same way mammals do (although at a much quicker pace). Queen wasps only differ from worker wasps in that their reproductive organs are developed to a much higher standard.
This applies for yellowjackets and various related wasps rather than the more distant wasp species.

Were you thinking of bees instead perhaps?

I'd like to add this:

Proof (or at least very strong evidence) that human and ape share a common ancestor:

youtube.com/watch?v=6ziB6rG36j4

There has been extensive work on the emergence of complex organs
E.g. The eye.

It absolutely is semantics. Your argument relies on blanking out on a trivial inference, and claiming the phenomena are distinct in type.l, not scale.

it was all just random occurrence that built up over time, including the random mutations that killed or rendered the host infertile. those mutations somehow randomly re-occurred and didn't end the lineage, and added mutation on top of mutation until we get a cow from a single celled organism.

riiight

i like cows theyre cute and they lick sometimes

the point went over your head

go back to school kiddo

I'm not even Christian, you guys are just as insufferable as they are with your dogmatic attachment to illogical ideas. Good luck in your quest to disprove biogenesis and explain punctuated equilibrium, you're going to need it. My point is that mutations result in deformities nearly 100% of the time so if it were the driver of speciation than evolution would be gradual instead of punctuated.

...

They are distinct in type. The "work" you allude to is unprovable speculation.

You haven't read shit on the subject. The fact that you know the word logos, and can posture as an intellectual, might impress idiots on plebbit, but it will get you nowhere with someone who works in field where these concepts are essential.

You ignored comments re; co-evolution, instead backing to intellectual grandstanding.

The data against you is insurmountable. No amount of deception on your part will make you look like anything other than a compete retard.

I will use ad hominem, because you're a phony, talking about shit you've no understanding, making you a quite despicable piece of shot.

This is fucking hilarious obvious inference doesn't apply when some NK beard wants to pretend he's knowledgeable.

>if it cant connect to anything
Are you retarded or just pretending?
Why would it not be connected to the rest of the intestines?

Did you even watch the video?

Why do I have to explain something in only the framework you provide instead of the entire picture lad?

>but it will get you nowhere with someone who works in field where these concepts are essential.
t. second year premed kiddie

No. It's proof of incredible evolutionary processes. Which should be far more appreciated.

t. I learned the entire subject from youtube

No

No, I didn't watch the video. Use your words or fuck off

i agree, milk is pretty good for you too.

You're the one that literally posted a youtube video.

Okay then,
There's a clear path from no eye to eye with every step along the way being better than the last

God rarely intervenes directly in the world. He respects the free will of his creations. Most of Jesus' miracles were to make a point. He could have came and ended suffering and healed the entire world if he wanted to.

...

If two different car manufacturers have some of the same parts it's not proof that a ford evolved from a bmw

What if the laws of the universe are such that the most basic building blocks of reality assemble themselves increasingly complex forms just by obey natural laws that hold everything together and given enough time life develops? What if life is just a natural consequence of a universe with rules?

That's exactly why I did it lad lmao are you retarded or what?
If everything you've learned is from youtube why should I post something that isn't a simple video that will give you the gist of the point in under 15 minutes
It's not like you enjoy reading, nigger

Is it so hard to believe?

I want you to think seriously on this one. With 3.5 Billion years, in addition to . It only makes sense that if mutations are beneficial, it'd help the survival of a species. It also helps make sense why males of a species tend to be more disposable than the female, that they are more prone to mutations (especially the Y chromosome), and the fact that females are very picky, only speeds up the picking up of beneficial mutations.

>beneficial
>mutations
Lol okay Stan Lee

could you at least label cow and grass next time. what the fuck, who is this made for?

fuck you nigger

No, your lack of understanding and bewilderment is not argument for intelligent design.

Yeah, no shit, there's still no explanation for how the novel proteins required for each step came to be. Additionally, the functionality of proto-eyes is highly speculative, not rooted in data

This is what I believe. From a quantum point of view, possible events will absolutely always happen. This is because in the quantum world, everything is decided by probability, but it's impossible to capture that probability with exact precision. As long as an unrealized event has a non-zero probability, no matter how low it is, it will occur at some point. Since the universe is built on quantum phenomena, it's not all that unusual that living things roam the Earth.

No hes not asking how mutations in dna got made in humans, he understands its random. Then the ones that die less incedentally allowing them longer to breed, coincidentally making novelty a byproduct of survival. He gets it.

But what made the dna? What made the mitosis process? You keep chimping out like a nigger about 'mutations' and other people are just calling you out because your argument, evolution, HAS NO POSTULATE. You cant scientifically explain how to get to the level of novelty where evolution by mutation can explain the rest of the fossil record.

As for op fibervores eat their shit. The fact that cows shit into their own esophagus just means they dont have to waste time and calories walking around bending down to eat there own shit after the grass is gone from the first pass. The just eat, and walk. It has nothing to do with intelligent design in my personal opinion i believe cows likely mutated these gullets over a million years or more. Who cares. The dna that allowed for those mutations though ... how did that happen?

raredr.com/contributor/ricki-lewis-phd/2016/12/a-good-mutation-seeing-the-world-with-extra-cones

>evolution
>extinction of ugly dumbfucks
Reason why you will be removed from the gene pool and we won't.

Are the thousands of delusional genders that have appeared since 2016 proof of evolution?

Why can't you guys verify abiogenesis or mutant speciation experimentally?

You're right; god and his magic pixies must have done it!

Wait, which god? Zeus? No, Allah! Wait no, the flying spaghetti monster! Cthulu?

Nucleotides and amino acids do not spontaniously polymerize.
I'm no expert, but I am a grad student in cancer research, you presumptuous discount finngolian nigger.

>thinks a million million is one billion
Know how I know you're an atheist?

One million times one million is a trillion, not a billion. But the point stands

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller–Urey_experiment

>ad hominem
we're not on reddit friend

Why niggers not discarded yet?

You guys get one big point totally wrong. DNA replication is faulty and leads to mutation, right, but the thing is ... most mutations of the DNA do not produce deformities or something "new". No, most mutations simply do NOTHING. That is why life can even afford to have faulty replication of its "building plan". Proteins are made based on a three letter DNA code (see pic). Mutation in the third letter ... doesn't matter most of the time.
Also, most mutations that one day may become beneficial happen in genes that have been duplicated beforehand. So if one copy of the gene "breaks" it does not matter, you got another copy hanging around doing shit. Gene duplication is a quite common mistake during DNA replication and sexual reproduction.

So, overall you most of the time got one gene still doing all the important stuff while the other copy is free to mutate and either breaks or turns into something useful.