Thread: Creation 'Science' Made Easy

Originally Posted by bacon ops

An organism with n chromosomes cannot procreate with an organism with n + x number of chromosomes.
You can only fit so much new information on a single chromosome before it would be too much, and too prone to malfunction.


Now, I agree natural selection is proven, etc... but where in time in the development of new species, and how praytell, is the new chromosome formed?


The probability of a servicable new species of organism (A) randomly being selected for is already slim, correct?

Add to that that another organism(B) must contain a relatively similar "trait" that has to have resulted in the same number as chromosomes as the original, and the probabilities become ridiculously small.




Think of it this way:


Chromosomes are like lego blocks.


The parents each contribute n number of blocks.

If one parent somehow aquires a new trait, which results in n+1 number of chromosomes, as opposed to the species' current n, then it the blocks won't fit, and a viable offspring is highly unlikely.

get it?

(Okay, I thought you were just here to act as a foil to show how we mere lay people shouldn't even think about science, as none of us can understand anything anyway, but now I realize you're a supporter of creationism.)

And an intelligent design proponen's (i.e. your) answer to this is "It's too hard to hard to understand, so it must be impossible, and thus I'm going to simply throw away all the strong evidence that supports evolution and simply say God dun it according to genesis because it's easier for me to believe?"

Originally Posted by bacon ops

"Can't" as in 5 trillion monkeys pounding on typewriters can't write Romeo and Juliet.

So your contention is that new chromosomes found in new species are formed by screw ups in Anaphase?

EDIT: also, meiosis is the word you meant to use.

DOUBLE EDIT: SHIT, I forgot about Robertson.

Hmm, I guess I was wrong.

The point I'm making is that I observed a problem with it, and created a hypothesis on my own.

I didn't google my facts and then defend them like a religious zealout on the internet.

Now what the fuck are you talking about?

You're proud of yourself for asking a question you didn't know the answer to and standing up to someone who wasn't as ignorant as you are about what scientists have discovered? What "religious zealotry" are you talking about? He knew or found the answer and explained it to you.

And what the fuck hypothesis are you fucking talking about here? I didn't read a hypothesis, just a proud declamation of ignorance.

It's good that you admitted you were wrong. It's moronic that you then say that you're the better one here for lacking knowledge.

I'm not scared to admit I was wrong though, because it was a genuine problem that apparently has a solution, albeit still an iffy one. (it's too easy to say A+N is gonna be fine when in reality there's probably 50,000 Kbase pairs in each letter.)

HOWEVER,
I still think the whole, "over huge periods of time" and "millions of generations" is a crutch that proponents need to get off of. If something is ridiculously improbable, but it looks like it happened, say so.

Wish I had a class with that guy.

Jesus Christ. That's a crutch even though there's empirical evidence that these processes did occur over huge periods of times and over millions of generations?

Also, yes, these exceedingly rare ridiculously improbably events did occur and are what drove speciation.


EDIT: Oh, so this was your "hypothesis":

Originally Posted by bacon ops

I'm making up probabilities? How exactly do you calculate the probability of a new species being formed? You can't.

Dude, my hypothesis was that an organism bearing n chromosomes originated at the same time as the organism with n+1 chromosomes. Any idiot can see that. Whether they were planted here by aliens, formed seperately out of proteins and fireworks, I didn't specify.

No you didn't. What you said was that it's "impossible" for an an organism with n chromosomes to evolve from an organism with m chromosomes.

Here's the thing; I was sitting in class one day when I used my understanding of procreation to realize that there was something wrong with it.
I didn't simply parrot out a page I googled like you did. I used my brain, and the information gleaned from words written on paper.

Again, it's good that you admitted you're wrong. I'm just so surprised that you think you're better for

And everything you know you're "parroting" from lectures and textbooks. See we can play this stupid, immature game too.