Encoded information is evidence of Intelligent Design

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: cooperton

The point is, parasites weren't in the garden

Can you point to the evidence of that? Is that just an assumption on your part that parasites are evil?

Good parasites do exist, but they aren’t always very obvious! The nicest parasites are the fungi which you can eat, like mushrooms or food and drinks made using yeast, like bread and soy sauce. Some fungi are also used in medicine, as antibiotics. Other parasites are used in medicine but they are a little yuckier! Leeches and maggots are grown in special laboratories and are used to keep blood flowing or clean up dead tissue after people have had accidents!

The poster has made a number of false claims.

One of them is that viruses don't evolve.

I linked a number of research papers on viral evolution but he is still in a state of denial. Creationism and science are just incompatible.

Dp

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1
a reply to: cooperton

Are you still of the view that viruses don't evolve? Creationism is devoid of science but not every religious person is a creationist. You can believe in a supreme being (creator) and accept the knowledge and advances we have acquired through the scientific method.


www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Great strides have been made in understanding the evolutionary history of simian immunodeficiency virus (SIV) and the zoonoses that gave rise to HIV-1 and HIV-2. What remains unknown is how long these SIVs had been circulating in non-human primates before the transmissions to humans

Another research paper examining the evolution of SIV and the rise of HIV-1 and HIV-2.

There is no basis in the argument you made viruses don't evolve. Not only they do but there is an entire field of research dedicated to virus evolution. There are countless scientific peer reviewed papers and pre-prints examining the various aspects of how viruses evolve and the impact on human pathogenesis or the way vaccines are developed.

Viruses aren't independent organisms. They also have a seldom known property that was discovered in 2009 by Nobel Prize winner Luc Montagnier. Viruses were found to emit particular electromagnetic signals. Dr. Montagnier then emitted that same detected frequency on an vial of water filled with biological matter. Just from the frequency alone, the virus was able to configure from biological matter.

source

Dr. Montagnier's hypothesis is that the electromagnetic signals are causing particular water structures which then orchestrate the assembly of the virus:

"It was further verified that this DNA had a sequence identical or close to identical to the original DNA sequence of the LTR. In fact, it was 98 % identical"

the 2% of unidentical code leaves plenty of room for variability of protein capsids to trick hosts.

Your post is irrelevant. What the late Professor Montagnier thinks is of no relevance to the claim you made that viruses don't evolve. The entire field and study of the evolution of viruses proves you wrong.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

The study of virus evolution has historically been concerned with disease and its emergence and has not been integrated into the general study of evolution. Yet viruses dominate our planet and their evolution is a broad and applied field that can be studied in the real time (such HIV in human disease) and can also be applied to biotechnological problems. Virus evolution is very similar, but not identical, to host evolution

What is that you learn from this paper?
Virus evolution is similar to host evolution and this implies both the host and viruses evolve contrary to the claims made by creationists.

originally posted by: Venkuish1
The poster has made a number of false claims.

One of them is that viruses don't involve.

If viruses can evolve into other viruses, then show an example. Show where an influenza strain has become a polio strain, for example. None of your links document such a thing

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1
The poster has made a number of false claims.

One of them is that viruses don't involve.

If viruses can evolve into other viruses, then show an example. Show where an influenza strain has become a polio strain, for example. None of your links document such a thing

You now make further claims the influenza virus can evolve into an HIV or poliovirus so evolution isn't correct.

That's remarkable!

Keep making these claims. They are similar to the claims made 'if humans descended from monkeys then why monkeys haven't evolved to become human? '

originally posted by: Venkuish1

You now make further claims the influenza virus can evolve into an HIV or poliovirus so evolution isn't correct.

That's remarkable!

Keep making these claims. They are similar to the claims made 'if humans descended from monkeys then why monkeys haven't evolved to become human? '

Lol no it's not. Asking for evidence that evolution can happens is key to demonstrating that evolution is indeed a fact.

You call evolution a fact, yet you can't supply evidence that evolution actually occurs. Since you can't find examples of a population of organisms becoming something else, then that means there's not actual evidence that evolution is responsible for the origin of species.

Come on dude, keep googling, maybe you can find that hidden nobel-prize winning experiment that actually proves evolution happens

I think reality, our existence, etc., is metaphysical. It goes beyond science. I agree there is not a single proof for evolution, except the obvious that species do adapt to their environment. But that is an obvious observation which requires no second thought. You don't need an entire fantasy hypothesis to come up with an obvious conclusion. I have worked in technology for scientific journals and I have had scientists admit to me at cocktail parties that only 40 - 50% of science is actually true and proven empirically. The rest is fantasy, pseudo science camouflaged as real science. They need the fake science to keep getting grants and keep the money coming in and continue to push the globalist agenda. This was years ago when there wasn't that much talk about the globalist agenda, as there is today. Today, it is much worse.

a reply to: cooperton

If viruses can evolve into other viruses, then show an example. Show where an influenza strain has become a polio strain, for example...

That statement clearly show your misunderstanding of even basic biology.

originally posted by: Kurokage

That statement clearly show your misunderstanding of even basic biology.

No no no don't get me wrong, I know there is no example of evolution actually happening, I am asking the question rhetorically.

Evolutionary theory insists that biological organisms can gradually evolve into another organism. Venkuish is saying it is fact, so there must be an observable example that reinforces this alleged "fact". I know there isn't, but I want him to admit it too

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1

You now make further claims the influenza virus can evolve into an HIV or poliovirus so evolution isn't correct.

That's remarkable!

Keep making these claims. They are similar to the claims made 'if humans descended from monkeys then why monkeys haven't evolved to become human? '

Lol no it's not. Asking for evidence that evolution can happens is key to demonstrating that evolution is indeed a fact.

You call evolution a fact, yet you can't supply evidence that evolution actually occurs. Since you can't find examples of a population of organisms becoming something else, then that means there's not actual evidence that evolution is responsible for the origin of species.

Come on dude, keep googling, maybe you can find that hidden nobel-prize winning experiment that actually proves evolution happens

journals.asm.org...

Title: What Does Virus Evolution Tell Us about Virus Origins

Another research paper like the one I linked above. Virus evolution and the origins of viruses.

Take a look at the paper because you can learn something other than postulating your views as facts when they are completely wrong.



www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Virus evolution is very similar, but not identical, to host evolution

These are research/review papers written by scientists. Do you think that they are somehow brainwashed to believe in evolution? That's another ridiculous claim you made earlier.

I don't call evolution a fact. It is a fact. You may have not opened a book yet in biology and chemistry but that a problem you have to solve.

The research that I have linked in various of my posts is about how viruses evolve and there is no question if evolution is true. Only creationists and lazy-lame people who are stuck to their religious beliefs think the opposite.

a reply to: cooperton

Have a look
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Evolution of Viruses

The study of virus evolution has historically been concerned with disease and its emergence and has not been integrated into the general study of evolution. Yet viruses dominate our planet and their evolution is a broad and applied field that can be studied in the real time (such HIV in human disease) and can also be applied to biotechnological problems. Virus evolution is very similar, but not identical, to host evolution. Darwinian principles apply, such as with Fisher population genetics, but other features, such as reticulated and quasispecies-based evolution, distinguish virus evolution. In RNA viruses, high error rates have led to the quasispecies concept in which collective populations are the basis of evolution. These populations provide viruses with high capacities for adaptation. Yet some RNA viruses show remarkable evolutionary stability. With DNA viruses, especially of bacteria, extensive recombination defines vast dynamic and ancient genetic pools. Temperate viruses can directly affect host gene pools by stable colonization. DNA viruses can be genetically complex and have evolved many unique viral genes. The retroviruses show both quasispecies-based rapid evolution and host-linked slow coevolution (e.g., endogenous retroviruses). Thus, virus evolution impacts all life and viral emergence continues to threaten human health.....

The study of virus variation and evolution is an applied science that allows the observation of evolutionary change in real time. For example, human individuals (or populations) infected with either human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) show progressive or geographical evolutionary adaptation associated with the emergence of specific viral clades that affect disease therapy and progression (such as resistance to antiviral drugs). Figure 1 shows HIV variation in an individual human patient whereas Figure 2 shows HCV variation in the human population. Virus evolution is also important for the commercial growth of various organisms, such as the dairy industry (lactose fermenting bacteria), the brewing industry, agriculture, aquaculture, and farming. In all these applied cases major losses can result from virus adaptation to the cultivated species, often from viruses of wild species.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: cooperton

If viruses can evolve into other viruses, then show an example. Show where an influenza strain has become a polio strain, for example...

That statement clearly show your misunderstanding of even basic biology.

The question he asked shows complete lack of understanding of the most basics in how viruses evolve.

It's the same when they argue about monkeys that don't evolve to become human.

originally posted by: Venkuish1

These are research/review papers written by scientists. Do you think that they are somehow brainwashed to believe in evolution? That's another ridiculous claim you made earlier.

I never said they are brainwashed, I think they too would admit there's no empirical example that a viruses can evolve into a different virus over time.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: cooperton

Have a look

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Evolution of Viruses

The study of virus evolution has historically been concerned with disease and its emergence and has not been integrated into the general study of evolution. Yet viruses dominate our planet and their evolution is a broad and applied field that can be studied in the real time (such HIV in human disease) and can also be applied to biotechnological problems. Virus evolution is very similar, but not identical, to host evolution. Darwinian principles apply, such as with Fisher population genetics, but other features, such as reticulated and quasispecies-based evolution, distinguish virus evolution. In RNA viruses, high error rates have led to the quasispecies concept in which collective populations are the basis of evolution. These populations provide viruses with high capacities for adaptation. Yet some RNA viruses show remarkable evolutionary stability. With DNA viruses, especially of bacteria, extensive recombination defines vast dynamic and ancient genetic pools. Temperate viruses can directly affect host gene pools by stable colonization. DNA viruses can be genetically complex and have evolved many unique viral genes. The retroviruses show both quasispecies-based rapid evolution and host-linked slow coevolution (e.g., endogenous retroviruses). Thus, virus evolution impacts all life and viral emergence continues to threaten human health.....

The study of virus variation and evolution is an applied science that allows the observation of evolutionary change in real time. For example, human individuals (or populations) infected with either human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) show progressive or geographical evolutionary adaptation associated with the emergence of specific viral clades that affect disease therapy and progression (such as resistance to antiviral drugs). Figure 1 shows HIV variation in an individual human patient whereas Figure 2 shows HCV variation in the human population. Virus evolution is also important for the commercial growth of various organisms, such as the dairy industry (lactose fermenting bacteria), the brewing industry, agriculture, aquaculture, and farming. In all these applied cases major losses can result from virus adaptation to the cultivated species, often from viruses of wild species.

Wow that's a lot of writing with no example of a viral population evolving into a different virus over time. As I said before, it doesn't even matter anyway, viruses aren't independent lifeforms.

originally posted by: neoholographicpart2

The Odds of a Cell Forming Randomly by Chance Alone

…in nature every amino acid found in proteins…has a distinct mirror image of itself; there is one left-handed version, or L-form, and one right-handed version, or D-form…The probability of attaining, at random, only L-amino acids in a hypothetical peptide chain 150 amino acids long is…again roughly 1 chance in 10^45.

The results of a paper he published in 2004 were particularly telling. Axe performed a mutagenesis experiment using his refined method on a functionally significant 150-amino-acid section of a protein called betalactamase, an enzyme that confers antibiotic resistance uopn bacteria. On the basis of his experiments, Axe was able to make a careful estimate of the ratio of (a) the number of 150-amino-acid-sequences that can perform that particular function to (b) the whole set of possible amino-acid sequences of this length. Axe estimated this ratio to be a 1 to 10^77.

If we assume that a minimally complex cell needs at least 250 proteins of, on average, 150 amino acids and that the probability of producing just one such protein is 1 in 10^164 as calculated above, then the probability of producing all the necessary proteins needed to service a minimally complex cell is 1 in 10^164 multiplied by itself 250 times, or 1 in 10^41,000.
cyberpenance.wordpress.com...

These are similar to the mathematical solutions I found as well. Even to beneficially change a functional group on a protein has been calculated to not be possible even after billions of years. The magic wand of time is not capable to create intelligible structures through random chance. Design is a necessity in the equation.

a reply to: cooperton

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Introduction to virus origins and their role in biological evolution

Viruses are diverse parasites of cells and extremely abundant. They might have arisen during an early phase of the evolution of life on Earth dominated by ribonucleic acid or RNA-like macromolecules, or when a cellular world was already well established. The theories of the origin of life on Earth shed light on the possible origin of primitive viruses or virus-like genetic elements in our biosphere. Some features of present-day viruses, notably error-prone replication, might be a consequence of the selective forces that mediated their ancestral origin. Two views on the role of viruses in our biosphere predominate; viruses considered as opportunistic, selfish elements, and viruses considered as active participants in the construction of the cellular world via the lateral transfer of genes.


To approach the behavior of viruses acting as populations, we must first examine the diversity of the present-day biosphere and the physical and biological context in which primitive viral forms might have arisen. Evolution pervades nature. Thanks to new theories and to the availability of powerful instruments, new experimental procedures, and increasing computing power—which together constitute the very roots of scientific progress—we know that the physical and biological worlds are constantly evolving. Several classes of energy have gradually shaped matter and living entities, basically as the outcome of random events and Darwinian natural selection in its broadest sense. The identification of DNA as the genetic material and the advent of genomics in the second half of the twentieth century unveiled an astonishing degree of diversity within the living world that derives mainly from combinations of four classes of nucleotides. Biodiversity, a term coined by O. Wilson in 1984 and emphasized by T. Lovejoy and others, is a feature of all living beings, be differentiated multicellular organisms, single-cell organisms, or subcellular genetic elements, among them the viruses. Next-generation sequencing methods developed at the beginning of the 21st century allow thousands of sequences from the same biological sample (a microbial community in a soil or ocean sample, a tumor, or an infected host) to be determined. These procedures have documented the presence of myriads of variants in a “single biological entity” or in “communities of biological entities.” Differences extend to individuals that belong to the same biological group, be it Homo sapiens, Drosophila melanogaster, Escherichia coli, or human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1). No exceptions have been described. Diversity is extensive and not restricted to the genotypic level. It also affects phenotypic traits.

a reply to: Kurokage

Organisms can adapt, but there's no evidence that they can accumulate these adaptations to gradually become another organism. A pig can jump, but it can't fly.

a reply to: cooperton

These are similar to the mathematical solutions I found as well. Even to beneficially change a functional group on a protein has been calculated to not be possible even after billions of years.

Again this your misunderstanding of 'chance' and 'random'....

Chance plays a part in evolution (for example, in the random mutations that can give rise to new traits), but evolution does not depend on chance to create organisms, proteins or other entities. Quite the opposite: natural selection, the principal known mechanism of evolution, harnesses nonrandom change by preserving “desirable” (adaptive) features and eliminating “undesirable” (nonadaptive) ones. As long as the forces of selection stay constant, natural selection can push evolution in one direction and produce sophisticated structures in surprisingly short times.

As an analogy, consider the 13-letter sequence “TOBEORNOTTOBE.” A million hypothetical monkeys, each typing out one phrase a second on a keyboard, could take as long as 78,800 years to find it among the 2613 sequences of that length. But in the 1980s Richard Hardison, then at Glendale College, wrote a computer program that generated phrases randomly while preserving the positions of individual letters that happened to be correctly placed (in effect, selecting for phrases more like Hamlet's). On average, the program re-created the phrase in just 336 iterations, less than 90 seconds. Even more amazing, it could reconstruct Shakespeare's entire play in just four and a half days.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Venkuish1

These are research/review papers written by scientists. Do you think that they are somehow brainwashed to believe in evolution? That's another ridiculous claim you made earlier.

I never said they are brainwashed, I think they too would admit there's no empirical example that a viruses can evolve into a different virus over time.

originally posted by: Kurokage
a reply to: cooperton

Have a look

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Evolution of Viruses

The study of virus evolution has historically been concerned with disease and its emergence and has not been integrated into the general study of evolution. Yet viruses dominate our planet and their evolution is a broad and applied field that can be studied in the real time (such HIV in human disease) and can also be applied to biotechnological problems. Virus evolution is very similar, but not identical, to host evolution. Darwinian principles apply, such as with Fisher population genetics, but other features, such as reticulated and quasispecies-based evolution, distinguish virus evolution. In RNA viruses, high error rates have led to the quasispecies concept in which collective populations are the basis of evolution. These populations provide viruses with high capacities for adaptation. Yet some RNA viruses show remarkable evolutionary stability. With DNA viruses, especially of bacteria, extensive recombination defines vast dynamic and ancient genetic pools. Temperate viruses can directly affect host gene pools by stable colonization. DNA viruses can be genetically complex and have evolved many unique viral genes. The retroviruses show both quasispecies-based rapid evolution and host-linked slow coevolution (e.g., endogenous retroviruses). Thus, virus evolution impacts all life and viral emergence continues to threaten human health.....

The study of virus variation and evolution is an applied science that allows the observation of evolutionary change in real time. For example, human individuals (or populations) infected with either human immunodeficiency virus 1 (HIV-1) or hepatitis C virus (HCV) show progressive or geographical evolutionary adaptation associated with the emergence of specific viral clades that affect disease therapy and progression (such as resistance to antiviral drugs). Figure 1 shows HIV variation in an individual human patient whereas Figure 2 shows HCV variation in the human population. Virus evolution is also important for the commercial growth of various organisms, such as the dairy industry (lactose fermenting bacteria), the brewing industry, agriculture, aquaculture, and farming. In all these applied cases major losses can result from virus adaptation to the cultivated species, often from viruses of wild species.

Wow that's a lot of writing with no example of a viral population evolving into a different virus over time. As I said before, it doesn't even matter anyway, viruses aren't independent lifeforms.

You are completely confuse on what virus evolution is. It's better to read the links or open a book before you make there claims.

originally posted by: cooperton
a reply to: Kurokage

Organisms can adapt, but there's no evidence that they can accumulate these adaptations to gradually become another organism. A pig can jump, but it can't fly.

Again, this falls into the same ridiculous notion of if we evolved from apes why are there still apes...

The first mistake is that evolution doesn't teach that humans descended from monkeys; it says that both have a common ancestor.

It's like asking “If children descended from adults, why are there still adults?” New species evolve by splintering off from established ones, when populations of organisms become isolated from the main branch of their family and acquire sufficient differences to remain forever distinct. The parent species may survive indefinitely thereafter, or it may become extinct.

originally posted by: Kurokage
Again, this falls into the same ridiculous notion of if we evolved from apes why are there still apes...

No it doesn't, because if evolution were true there is an explanation for why there are still apes despite them having evolved into humans. On the contrary, there is no empirical example that a population of organisms can evolve into something new. It's that simple. If I am wrong, show an example that proves it. Otherwise just give it a rest... It is based on faith.