• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Merged Icebear's Evolution Thread

icebear

Muse
icebear
Joined
Sep 1, 2013
Messages
524
The fruit fly experiments in the early decades of the 1900s should have been the end of it. Fruit flies breed new generations every other day so that running any sort of a decades-long experiment with fruit flies will involve more generations of them than there have ever been of anything even remotely resembling humans on our planet. Those flies were subjected to everything in the world known to cause mutations and the mutants were recombined every possible way; all they ever got were sterile freaks, and fruit flies. The results were unambiguous. Several prominent scientists publicly denounced evolution at that point in time including the famous case of Richard Goldschmidt.

The failure was due to the fact that our entire living world is driven by information and the only information there ever was in the picture was that for a fruit fly. When the DNA/RNA information scheme was discovered, even if the fruit fly thing had never happened, evolution should have been discarded on the spot. But GIVEN the fact of the fruit fly experiments, somebody HAD to have thought to himself "Hey, THAT'S THE REASON THE FRUIT FLY EXPERIMENTS FAILED!!!!!!"

In other words, there is no way in the world anybody should be believing in evolution 40 years after the discovery of DNA.

Evolution is an ideological doctrine masquerading as a science theory.
 
icebear said:
The fruit fly experiments in the early decades of the 1900s should have been the end of it. Fruit flies breed new generations every other day so that running any sort of a decades-long experiment with fruit flies will involve more generations of them than there have ever been of anything even remotely resembling humans on our planet. Those flies were subjected to everything in the world known to cause mutations and the mutants were recombined every possible way; all they ever got were sterile freaks, and fruit flies. The results were unambiguous. Several prominent scientists publicly denounced evolution at that point in time including the famous case of Richard Goldschmidt.

The failure was due to the fact that our entire living world is driven by information and the only information there ever was in the picture was that for a fruit fly. When the DNA/RNA information scheme was discovered, even if the fruit fly thing had never happened, evolution should have been discarded on the spot. But GIVEN the fact of the fruit fly experiments, somebody HAD to have thought to himself "Hey, THAT'S THE REASON THE FRUIT FLY EXPERIMENTS FAILED!!!!!!"

In other words, there is no way in the world anybody should be believing in evolution 40 years after the discovery of DNA.

Evolution is an ideological doctrine masquerading as a science theory.
Click to expand...

Wrong section. I think you meant this for humor (humour if Britishish or related!!).
 
any sort of a decades-long experiment with fruit flies will involve more generations of them than there have ever been of anything even remotely resembling humans on our planet.
Click to expand...

With a new generation every other day, assuming that trend continues perfectly for 20 years, you get 3650.

Modern humans, homo sapiens sapiens are something like 200,000 years old. Since we're pretty certainly sexually mature by the mid teens and for most of that time weren't too shy about expressing that, a rough estimate would give us more than 13,000 generations. Now, since you say, "anything remotely resembling humans", we can include a step back to earlier divergences. Neandrethals were apparently able to breed with modern humans and they diverged something like 500,000 years ago, that's more than 32,000 generations.

So that premise of yours is demonstrably, mathematically false.
 
After all of those generations, all those mutations, they should be Hyenas or Cod by now, surely?

I'm with Icebear on this. Summat Fishy going on here. Well given a bit more time anyway.
 
icebear said:
In other words, there is no way in the world anybody should be believing in evolution 40 years after the discovery of DNA.
Click to expand...

Dude, the discovery of genetic coding was fundamental to a complete understanding of the mechanism of evolution.

You are saying, literally, that we should not believe in cars because someone took one apart and found an engine inside.
 
It also suggests that there is a continuity in the experiments, which is the exact opposite of what the experiments entail.
A wild-type strain is carefully maintained and refreshed as needed. And every time a trait is investigated a new mutant strain is created, which is examined and then culled.
As far as I know there is no analogue in the fruit fly experiments to the long term e.coli experiments, which HAVE shown the emergence of new traits.

That being said, a number of the 'mutant freaks', like the wingless mutation, are perfectly capable of existing and reproducing and show a likely way how wasps changed into ants for instance.
 
Clearly, after this many mutations, the fruit flies should have developed the ability to shoot lasers from their eyes, control the weather, and teleport. Some of them should have a 'healing factor' or super-speed.

Naturally, these mutant fruit flies should join together to form superhero teams and defend the world against the machinations of evil mutant fruit flies that want to exterminate the non-mutant fruit flies.

Since none of this happened... evolution = false.
 
Wait, are you telling me that breeding fruit flies for 40 years didn't change the fruit flies into strawberries?!? Well that throws darwevolushun on its head! :rolleyes:
 
At the very least, you'd think we'd get a good crocoduck out of the deal! :D
 
Barber Shop said:
Clearly, after this many mutations, the fruit flies should have developed the ability to shoot lasers from their eyes, control the weather, and teleport. Some of them should have a 'healing factor' or super-speed.
Click to expand...

You know, I have one simple request. And that is to have Tephritidaes with frickin' laser beams growing from their heads! Now evidently my frozen ursine colleague informs me that that cannot be done. Ah, would you remind me what I pay you people for, honestly? Throw me a bone here! What do we have?
 
icebear said:
Evolution is an ideological doctrine masquerading as a science theory.
Click to expand...

People here are truth-averse. They'll just invent some other fiction, quote wikipedia, and/or call you a "parody character." What cheeses me off is they have the gall to believe we "evolved" from microbes, yet it's "ridiculous" to believe that a virgin gave birth, or that bread fell from heaven, or that Adam lived to be 900 years old, or that a talking serpent tricked Eve into eating the magic fruit.
 
What truly annoys me in the ics article is that they acknowledge that fruitfly research has yielded a lot of results for medicine.
This was/is only possible if there is some link between humans and fruitflies, exactly as predicted by the theory of evolution.
So their basic premise is that because the theory has yielded a lot of direct results it is wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom