SurfaceTension: pivazena: SurfaceTension: For those smarter than I, what does it mean when they talk about conserved genes? I've never heard that term before.these are genes whose sequence hasn't changed a lot across very divergent taxa. (Because any mutation that did change it would be strongly selected against.) It implies that their function is very important and central to these organisms. Hox genes are an example of this. They area vital for body plan formation, and their amino acid sequence hasn't changed in millions of years.I think I kinda get that. Thanks!
jso2897: But I don't confuse my metaphysical position with "reality". To say "God doesn't exist" you must believe in "God" - I don't, so I can't say that. Atheism isn't my religion - but it appears to be yours.
Kurmudgeon: Ed Grubermann: Funny thing about science. It says that it does not know how the universe started. It has some theories and hypotheses, but it does not claim to know which, if any, are true. That's not faith.You move the goalposts quite well.".Well THAT'S a big fat "bullshiat"."Really? Then why do they call it, oh my, can you believe it, a "faith"?
rugman11: FloydA: That is very different from what the professional creationist organizations claim, and it's quite a bit different from what the people who want creationism taught in schools say.It seems to me that what you are advocating is different from what the word "creationism" usually refers to. You might want to pick a different word, in order to avoid confusion.It's probably not right to call my version of creationism "real creationism." But it's not a small group. Gallup in 2010, found that 40% of Americans believed (essentially) in Young-Earth creationism, 38% believed in evolution but with God having some undefined role in the process, and only 16% believed in evolution without God having any part. But what happens is that people turn it into a dichotomy, with the 38% who are like me getting lumped in with the 16% as the "evolution side" and the other 40% as the "creation side," despite the fact that there's almost as large a contingent of science-accepting creationists as their is of Young-Earth creationists.
Kurmudgeon: at least creationists admit they are relying on faith.
Kurmudgeon: rpm: We have evidence. You have what exactly?Oh boy, give that boy a cookie! Trot that evidence out then.
jso2897: Arumat: Kurmudgeon: Repo Man: I never see anyone defending creationism here.No point in defending the cartoon definition of creationism that most Fark anti-theists use.Basic fact is the parts about creation in Genesis are a vague outline, not a build your own universe cookbook.God created everything, or you can assume it happened all on it's own.Because everything happens all on it's own, just need enough time, eh?/and to think athiests believe they have no faith.That's the funny thing about astronomical odds in an astronomical set of possibilities. It's actually not all that unlikely that something with a one in a billion chance of happening occurs when you give it hundreds of billions of chances.Either way, that has nothing to do with the Theory of Evolution, which is a scientific theory regarding the origin of different species. It does not address the origins of life itself, or of the Universe. This is one reason why so many deeply religious people accept it as fact, and only morons don't.
Kurmudgeon: rpm: We have evidence. You have what exactly?Oh boy, give that boy a cookie! Trot that evidence out then.Llike the evidence has changed and this is just one example. http://science.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/04/28/17958218-speed-of-light-ma y-not-be-constant-physicists-say?lite"How about, rather than criticizing atheists, you actually tell us what the "real" version of creationism is? How did "creation" happen? By what mechanisms did creation occur?"This thread started out as a creationist bashing thread, then when you get the slightest taste of it back, you want me to answer all your questions for you?I'm holding a mirror up to your face, not my fault if you don't like the reflection.Man does not KNOW how the universe was created, at least creationists admit they are relying on faith.
Mad Tea Party: Bevets is really gone? Wow, it's the end of an era.
The Billdozer: And this is supposed to rock religion how again?
Kurmudgeon: Basic fact is the parts about creation in Genesis are a vague outline, not a build your own universe cookbook.
edmo: It's the usual "you don't have perfect evidence so it's not true" argument (found right here in my perfect Bible).
Repo Man: Has Fark scared off all of the creationists? Since Bevets has gone, I never see anyone defending creationism here. I guess I'll have to go and read YouTube comments to get my fix of creationist derp.
SurfaceTension: For those smarter than I, what does it mean when they talk about conserved genes? I've never heard that term before.
Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.
When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.
Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.
You need to create an account to submit links or post comments.
Click here to submit a link.
Also on Fark
Submit a Link »
Copyright © 1999 - 2017 Fark, Inc | Last updated: Mar 29 2017 03:35:57
Runtime: 0.221 sec (221 ms)