"Science law could set tone for Jindal"

[dawg80]

What does that mean? Do you know how much data can fit into a volume of 58 cubic feet (the volume of the bed of a F-150)? Any idea how much DNA that would be?

Sorry, wasn't clear. Meant square footage wise, not cubic footage wise. My bad for not being clearer.

I am not a genetic scientist, but I do know that not all remains carry usable DNA. You see that even in forensic criminal science. If a body is found that has been in a state of decay for a while, they often have to extract DNA from several points to find some that can be accurately tested. And that is after a few years in comparison to many thousands of years that fossil remains of earlier man have been subjected to nature's decaying forces.

Let me make clear again, in case you might have forgotten my position on this, I am NOT saying that evolution (as defined) is not a real force in nature. I AM saying, that from a purely scientific viewpoint, the evidence to support the theory is VERY thin and shaky.

I do think (I dare say "know") that genetic mutations take place and that in some species, there is more evidence of some genetic alterations that are passed down to subsequent generations. For evolution to be true (as defined) this would have to be true as well. Like why Darwin's hypothesis was accepted and Lamarke's hypothesis was rejected.

[Dawgy Dog]

I do think (I dare say "know") that genetic mutations take place and that in some species, there is more evidence of some genetic alterations that are passed down to subsequent generations. For evolution to be true (as defined) this would have to be true as well.


I think you just described evolution......

As a biologist, I have spent many hours studying evolution. Looks pretty dang cut and dried to me. And I am a Christian.

[dawg80]

I do think (I dare say "know") that genetic mutations take place and that in some species, there is more evidence of some genetic alterations that are passed down to subsequent generations. For evolution to be true (as defined) this would have to be true as well.


I think you just described evolution......

As a biologist, I have spent many hours studying evolution. Looks pretty dang cut and dried to me. And I am a Christian.

Ah, but that is not what the evolution crowd wants us to believe. We (you and I) are talking strictly about alterations in genes that occur randomly? or perhaps due to some external force i.e. environmentally, but that is ALL within a given species. Meaning that the species can/might change OR (and this is what I think) individuals within a species change and that change, now a part of the overall gene pool, can manifest itself again in later generations. Or, maybe not. Just as a mutation appeared, it can also disappear from the gene pool.

But, atheistic evolutionists are not interested in simple genetic alterations within a species, that come and go. Nope! they want us to believe that a species can morph into a totally new and different species. There is no scientific evidence to support such a notion.

Are your ancestors apes? Mine aren't. I descended from Man. Period.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Ah, but that is not what the evolution crowd wants us to believe. We (you and I) are talking strictly about alterations in genes that occur randomly? or perhaps due to some external force i.e. environmentally, but that is ALL within a given species. Meaning that the species can/might change OR (and this is what I think) individuals within a species change and that change, now a part of the overall gene pool, can manifest itself again in later generations. Or, maybe not. Just as a mutation appeared, it can also disappear from the gene pool.

But, atheistic evolutionists are not interested in simple genetic alterations within a species, that come and go. Nope! they want us to believe that a species can morph into a totally new and different species. There is no scientific evidence to support such a notion.

Are your ancestors apes? Mine aren't. I descended from Man. Period.

What??? No from goo to the zoo to you??

[Guisslapp]

But, atheistic evolutionists are not interested in simple genetic alterations within a species, that come and go. Nope! they want us to believe that a species can morph into a totally new and different species. There is no scientific evidence to support such a notion.

Speciation has actually been observed. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

Humans and modern apes have a common ancestor whether you are comfortable believing it or not.

[dawg80]

From the movie Gettysburg....

General Pickett: "Gentlemen, I'm going to settle this argument once and for all. There may be those among you that think you descended from an ape. There may even be those that think I descended from an ape. But I challenge the man to step forward and say that Robert E. Lee descended from an ape!"

General Armistead: "Not likely."

So, guisslapp, how many of your relatives are apes?

[dawg80]

What??? No from goo to the zoo to you??

Know you can appreciate this great song...

Went on down to the Audobon Zoo
and they all asked for you...

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Know you can appreciate this great song...

Went on down to the Audobon Zoo
and they all asked for you...

I still love that tune! Problem is it was one that would stick in your head all day.

I actually heard it played on an E.Texas radio station about 3 months ago. Go figure. It was great!

[Dawgbitten]

Ah, but that is not what the evolution crowd wants us to believe. We (you and I) are talking strictly about alterations in genes that occur randomly? or perhaps due to some external force i.e. environmentally, but that is ALL within a given species. Meaning that the species can/might change OR (and this is what I think) individuals within a species change and that change, now a part of the overall gene pool, can manifest itself again in later generations. Or, maybe not. Just as a mutation appeared, it can also disappear from the gene pool.

But, atheistic evolutionists are not interested in simple genetic alterations within a species, that come and go. Nope! they want us to believe that a species can morph into a totally new and different species. There is no scientific evidence to support such a notion.

Are your ancestors apes? Mine aren't. I descended from Man. Period.

Of course you didn't. That is why your ancestors weren't eaten by Lions and Tigers on the African Savanah. Your family genes were Far too superior.