Originally Posted by RAZD
Hey CTD,

Quote
The name of the process is Recombination. Errors in recombination are mutations.
This is you playing silly word games to fool yourself -- it is the same process, whichever way the mutation trends (beneficial to deleterious), recombination is just random mixing of genetic material during the reproduction of the genes in sexual reproduction (meiosis), due to the fact that replication is imperfect. We also have point mutations, where single amino acids are replaced with another amino acid, and these too occur randomly.
An outright lie. Recombination is not mutation, not random, and it is absolutely a design feature of life.

The follow-up is a lie of omission. And the source indicates this.
Quote
http://www.accessexcellence.org/RC/AB/BC/Genetic_Recombination.php
Quote
Inside the cells that produce sperm and eggs, chromosomes become paired. While they are pressed together, the chromosomes may break, and each may swap a portion of its genetic material for the matching portion from its mate.
Quote
This form of recombination is called crossing-over.
When the chromosomes glue themselves back together and separate, each has picked up new genetic material from the other. The constellation of physical characteristics it determines is now different than before crossing-over.
That's it in a nutshell: the mix of genes changes during replication, whether that change is beneficial, neutral or deleterious will depend on the ecology and other factors affecting growth, survival and reproduction ... ie - natural selection.
There are at least 3 other forms of recombination. My memory's not the best, but RAZD sure intends to leave a lot out of the picture. Anyone who wants can research this themselves, although some of the sites use a lot of jargon to make things confusing. And few, if any, sites attempt to give a clear picture of the whole topic. Recombination really is a route to immunity from all forms of evosickness.

Quote
Quote
I have elsewhere provided a handful of links about recombination, and those who know what it is will be immunized against your deception.
Which doesn't keep you from being wrong because you misrepresent the material, nor does it keep you from not addressing the issue of skin cells reproducing by mitosis, a process that does not involve recombination.
Duh, what did I say? Did I say skin cells reproduce the same as bacteria? No. You play Bugs Bunny again. But I'm no Daffy Duck, and I don't think you're fooling even your pals. Well, maybe Linear...

Quote
Quote
There is generally no mechanism in the cells of a body which shuffles genetic information in order to ensure variety.
Correct, it is not done "in order to ensure variety" - it ensures variety because it is random, because replication is not perfect. Imperfect replication necessarily result in variety, some of which are beneficial, some of which are neutral and some of which are deleterious. We can actually watch and count and measure these so we do know that they fall across the spectrum from beneficial to deleterious.
No you can't. And you wouldn't do it honestly if you could.

Quote
Quote
An exception is the white blood cells. When needed, they shuffle like mad to try to find a better set-up to fight disease. And the reason immunization works, is because information is stored on every past disease they have ever had to fight. I don't know exactly how many details have been discovered recently about the ingenious workings of the immune system, but everything I do know is just amazing.
They make antibodies for foreign proteins and cells, and there is nothing magical about it. Sometimes they make a "mistake" and make antibodies for parts of the parent organism, and this is part of why organ rejection is a major problem in transplants. When sever enough the white blood cells can cause death by attacking the body rather than a disease.
LOL! The evolutionists have been trying to fool folks into thinking the white blood cells mutate and evolve for some time now. You not only don't follow creation science, you don't even keep up with your own hypemongers. Of course the downside is that no evolution is involved - just wonderful design.

Surprised you posted some of what followed. Perhaps a little review is in order.
Quote
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/109913378/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0
Quote
Bacteria do many things as organized populations. We have recently learned much about the molecular basis of intercellular communication among prokaryotes. Colonies display bacterial capacities for multicellular coordination which can be useful in nature where bacteria predominantly grow as films, chains, mats and colonies. E. coli colonies are organized into differentiated non-clonal populations and undergo complex morphogenesis. Multicellularity regulates many aspects of bacterial physiology, including DNA rearrangement systems. In some bacterial species, colony development involves swarming (active migration of cell groups). Swarm colony development displays precise geometrical controls and periodic phenomena. Motile E. coli cells in semi-solid media form organized patterns due to chemotactic autoaggregation. On poor media, B. subtilis forms branched colonies using group motility and longrange chemical signalling. The significances of bacterial colony patterns thus reside in a deeper understanding of prokaryotic biology and evolution and in experimental systems for studying self-organization and morphogenesis.
Not bad until they threw a bone to the priesthood with that last sentence. Talk about a backwards conclusion! None of those design features are compatible with evomyths.

The evomyth is that these critters can't "try" to do anything, yet they even communicate and work as a team.

Still, they're not integrated at the same level as an organ. But I'll leave that one for folks to figure out.

...for now. It's tempting to see how many absolutely unevolvable counter examples you'd produce.

Quote
Quote
Thanks for demonstrating how evolutinism must distort the truth. Resistance is a design feature. A simple way to figure out if something is the result of random mutation or designed recombination is to see if it regularly repeats. By definition, random mutation doesn't do this. But since resistance is the result of recombination, it will always turn up.
Since we are here talking about bacteria, and in particular bacteria that reproduce by mitosis and not by meiosis (sexual reproduction), and since we know that recombination is a part of meiosis (in particular for the formation of sex cells), we know that you either (1) are telling falsehoods, or (2) you really do not understand what you are talking about. Or both.

We can also test the bacterial colonies to see if the exact same mutation arises in each colony that develops resistance (the ones that die are mute on the subject, except to say that there was no magic there). We see that the mutations are different, and thus are not, cannot be, due to some magic handwaving hypothetical pre-program function.
Funny that you call scientific discoveries "magic". "Mutations" - what a joke. Sad that so many are fooled, but just a few wee drops of education are all one needs. Yes, you can find scores of evosources & decievees who think immunity is the result of mutation. Won't make it so.

The experiments themselves give lie to it! It's been repeated countless times: expose a large enough group of bacteria to antibiotics, and you'll always get a resistant population. They've even tried growing "clonal" groups from non-resistant bacteria; but this fails too, because the bacteria are designed to always produce (think Mendel) a small minority of resistant offspring.

One can find the truth about recombination on the internet, but as I shall explain, even before the internet one could have figured some of it out.
Quote
Quote
Thanks for demonstrating how evolutinism must distort the truth.
And yet you are wrong in your description and wrong in your result. You mix up sexual reproduction with asexual reproduction,
No! I unmix the evohype, that's what I do. It has been known for a long time that bacteria don't produce clones, and that this is by design - not some piddly defects.

God has provided built-in variety for all kinds of creatures - not just those that reproduce sexually.

Quote
You claim there is some magic mechanism that allows these colonies to survive, while ignoring the fact that different colonies, with different mutations to draw from, survive for different reasons.
Actually, I seem to recall 4 "variants" of bacteria which are resistant, and 3 of the 4 are clearly not mutant. The one that (they pray to Darwin) might be mutant was some sort of compounding effect on a resistant type that made it even more resistant. I suspect they'll prefer not to solve the mystery, as evolutionism waxes in ignorance & wanes in the presence of information.

Quote
The reason they survive is evolution, pure and simple: variation due to mutations, natural selection culling the ones not adapted and allowing those that have a beneficial mutation, no matter what it is, to survive.
The reason they survive is that they're resistant. The reason the others die is because they're poisoned. Poisoning a rat isn't 'natural selection' either, and your paintbrush can't make it so. Killing any lifeform in a lab is 'artificial selection', or in plain English, killing.

And who'd bother killing all these bacteria if they didn't already know some were probably going to survive? Shoot, if they just wanted 'em dead, fire works fine. Now they can't know what random mutations may or may not be present, so by simple deduction, we can figure out what they know. Actions always speak louder than words, RAZD. Even clear, simple words like "no new taxes." Where does that leave your gibberish?

Last edited by CTD; 07/15/08 05:59 AM.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth

"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case
http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm

"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson

"And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson