Re: evolution? and faith

john queen (john.queen.ii@mail.utexas.edu)
Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:03:03 -0500

>Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 12:02:34 -0500
>To: "Pim van Meurs" <entheta@eskimo.com>
>From: john queen <john.queen.ii@mail.utexas.edu>
>Subject: Re: evolution? and faith
>In-Reply-To: <865894988-0-entheta@mail.eskimo.com>
>
>At 06:23 PM 6/9/97 -0400, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>JQ: What are the mechanisms behind the evolution of man from primates?
>>
>>Hmm, I wonder if this is a correct way of phrasing it. Unless our common
>>ancestor was considered a primate. I do not believe that evolution
>>requires different mechanism for the different species. So in short,
>>mutation and natural selection.
>
>---100 years ago mutation and natural selection were very big words. Now
we know that theres more to mutation and natural selection than they knew
about. For instance, DNA, RNA, mRNA and etc. A DNA molecule not only has
to be mistakenly modified at hundreds of locations(subject of it's own),
but the body(a host of other mechanisms) has to selectively unfold the DNA
to expose this new DNA for it's conversion into RNA. That's great but
there has to be specific DNA mutations that form a mechanism or need for
this newly mutated DNA to be dealt with in this mannor. In addition, the
cell has to be able to do something with this new information. Let's say
it's a code for a new type of protein for the cell wall. Okay then, the
cell has to not only open up the dna make rna and produce this protein but
also transport this protein to a specific location to be used. How does it
know what to do with the protein? This type of Knowing is also genetic in
nature. So there are also other mechanisms that have to evolve through
'mutations' for the simplest of structures to made. In addition , the
protein has to have primary, secondary and tertiary structures that are
complementary to the body. A protein must have specific folding
properties. I have not even began to roughly talk about the mechanisms
that need to be worked out when dealing with mutations and thier effects on
cells.
> What am I saying? Just giving the answer "mutation followed by "natural
selection" isn't scientific anymore. I think it's well known that
mutations are very hard to come by and have never been known to produce
anything remotely usefull. Mutations translate to cancer. Skin cancer is
a result of DNA modification. A host of other diseases are results of
mutations. The formation of cancers is a far cry from the formation of new
organs and organ systems.
> Most people still think that natural selection explains how a giraffes
neck got longer. Like there is some kind of pressure that causes us to
evolve. I do know what you are saying when refering to natural selection.
It requires that there be these mutations that are in my opinion are not
founded.>
>>JQ: ---I think the darwanistic beliefs require more faith.
>>
>>There is no reason to argue with your belief. If you however consider this
>>belief to be supported by fact then perhaps I could entice you to share
>>these with us.
>>
>>JQ: ----The evolutionist know that thier beliefs are religous. What does
>>Darwin and Jesus have in common? Nothing except what they taught and
>>studied requires faith in things you cannot see or explain.
>>
>>On the contrary Jesus has to be accepted as the son of god without any
>>physical evidence. Darwin however is a mere interpretator of observations
>>and even if Darwin's ideas are found to be erroneous, the fact of
>>evolution remains.
>>But contrary to religious beliefs, Darwin's ideas can be tested,
>>falsified, repeated and observed.
>
>---It seems like this comment is similar to a subject we discussed before.
Somehow evolution is a FACT. "Okay now that that is established lets talk
about our theories".
> This bothers me. I refuse to call something that I have never seen,
read about in a history book or read about a fact. Evolution(cell,
tissue, organ formation and etc) is not something that we experience or
anyone has ever experienced. Why call it a fact? It is not a fact.
> I want to look at the heart of evolution. What would of had to happen if
it did happen. This requires detail. My readings into molecular biology
and chemistry show fundamental problems with evolution.
>
> john w queen ii
>
>>
>>
>>
>>