So I got your invite, and here I am. I would like to approach this a little differently than you may be used to, so that we may be able to have a conversation without devolving into each writing huge responses responding selectively to what the previous one said and obscuring the point.

Therefore, my suggestion is that we start with one specific point, deliberate on that, and then, and then move on if we can come to a conclusion.

I would like to start by calling under question your previous statement: "it would take at least 51% positive mutations for evolution to occur".

As concisely as possible, can you explain your reasoning behind this statement?

bevolve wrote on Oct 23^rd, 2011 at 2:16pm:

So I got your invite, and here I am. I would like to approach this a little differently than you may be used to, so that we may be able to have a conversation without devolving into each writing huge responses responding selectively to what the previous one said and obscuring the point. Therefore, my suggestion is that we start with one specific point, deliberate on that, and then, and then move on if we can come to a conclusion. I would like to start by calling under question your previous statement: "it would take at least 51% positive mutations for evolution to occur". As concisely as possible, can you explain your reasoning behind this statement?

Thank you for coming by.

I never allow anyone to tell me how to respond.  People always want to control the conversation to preserve their beliefs.

I just give the absolute facts and teach people how to get free, literally, how to learn how to learn. 

Here is the reason.  The original definition of evolution was and still is all about ONLY advancement leading to the eventual evolution of complex creatures from less complex and less fit.  This is the fantasy of this mythological religion.

In order to have any advancement with added complexity,added intelligence, increased fitness and more ability to survive. You would need to have 51% positive mutations that would add this  magical evolution to any creature.  You could be more precise, and say 50.0000001% as a start. But 51% means that increase could be possible.

Since the nature of mutations do not ever allow this as a possibility, and only shows genetic losses in complex, meaning multi- cellular creatures, then there is no science of evolution.

The real science of genetics has nothing in common with this religious idea that humans evolved from fish as is the faith and belief of the religion of evolution.

Evolution:  "that theory which sees in the history of all things organic and inorganic a development from simplicity to complexity, a gradual advance from a simple or rudimentary condition to one that is more complex and of a higher character."  Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language.

In every instance of speciation there is genetic loss, less ability to adapt, and less fitness, more finite foods, less ability
to adapt to the environment and the eventual extinction as is seen in all the extinct creatures.

This magical idea of evolution has been destroyed by the evidence in DNA.

For the last 150 years or so, people have believed in this religious myth, and have forced this belief on academia as a pop cultural pseudo science that is accepted as if it was real, because so many believe in it.

They believe because it is indoctrinated into their minds by continual brainwashing. TV, peers, teachers, parents all believe in this magical nonsense, but it is nothing but faith and belief forced on the world as any religious ideology.

The concept of "It must be real, if all the scientists accept it." is one of the oldest piles of human faith and belief forms there is.

I don't know how to be more concise, but DNA is absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that only shows genetic loss, pseudo genes, atavism, and poor cell replication from incorrect DNA codons, that produce incorrect and less functional cells.

The nature of reality is that when a mutation survives it weakens the species.  It has never added any complexity brain capacity, nor health, longevity, nor any of the magical ideas of "evolution".

Once you realize this then all the other evidence fits perfectly with it. 

In real science we wait for the absolutely irrefutable, obvious, clear, physical evidence and then make conclusions. 

In real science we do not just force beliefs on evidence.

This Video is based on evidence that cannot be denied. It is how mutations actually work.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
It is impossible for mutations to lend a net positive result, when they are between 70% according to the beliefs of published accredited PhD's to 99.9% deleterious, based on actual evidence.

You know I have watched the full video and still disagree with you. I cant imagine how keeping your comments a little more concise and too the point would in any way hinder your ability to convince.

As for my question, you said

"In order to have any advancement with added complexity,added intelligence, increased fitness and more ability to survive. You would need to have 51% positive mutations that would add this  magical evolution to any creature.  You could be more precise, and say 50.0000001% as a start. But 51% means that increase could be possible."

I would like an explanation for why you believe this to be so. The reason I disagree with this stems from my education on the process of natural selection. Mutated genes that lead to bad effects on the fitness of an individual will be less likely to be passed on than those genes that are beneficial. Therefore, over time, they will disappear from the gene pool as individuals carrying those genes die without reproducing. The occasional beneficial mutated gene will propagate more successfully and therefore become more common in the gene pool.

Natural selection only results in a gradual, net, loss of gene functions and weakening of cells. Human selection does the same thing with domestic animals. 

DNA is absolutely clear on this.  And the nature of mutations does not allow magical fixes or improvements by any stretch of the imagination.  The mechanics of mutations only shows screwed up genes in thousands of times greater than any believed positive mutation. PERIOD.

This is shown in ALL the evidence we have. If you want to bring up some specific evidence then we can discuss that. I have a deep knowledge of this.

The "odds" of any positive mutation makes evolution a fantasy.  The real science of genetics, the passing of genetic information, is not evolution.

With every mutation that survives it propagates in the species to weaken it by a HUGE margin over any positive mutations.

I don't know how people can be caught into this religious ideology and not know it is nothing but faith and belief projected on evidence. 

Continual repetition of the mantra "evolution is real" over and over does not make it real. 

In every species that I have checked out the oldest as best as we can relatively figure was more fit.

There is no evolution from simple to complex.  The fact that DNA only shows genetic losses and the absolute nature of mutations.

When you drive your car into a tree, then drive into another tree does it fix itself? That is the logic of evolution.

There has never been any observed single celled creature that has shown even the slightest evolution, but people think it is real.

To put it concisely;  Where is your absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that ANY creature has evolved into more complex? 

I would gladly show you how this really works in real science.

Evidence for evolution can be seen quite clearly in the cause for our need to continually create new and different antibiotics and the like. When the drug Azythromycin was first developed, it was a last resort, kill-everything antibiotic. Now it is much less effective. In fact, when I recently had pneumonia, the doctor prescribed it to my as the first option. Bacteria evolution is accelerated so greatly by the addition of such a strong selection pressure, we can see the changes year by year.

bevolve wrote on Oct 24^th, 2011 at 8:03am:

Evidence for evolution can be seen quite clearly in the cause for our need to continually create new and different antibiotics and the like. When the drug Azythromycin was first developed, it was a last resort, kill-everything antibiotic. Now it is much less effective. In fact, when I recently had pneumonia, the doctor prescribed it to my as the first option. Bacteria evolution is accelerated so greatly by the addition of such a strong selection pressure, we can see the changes year by year.

Bacteria does not evolve.  It remains the same exact single celled creature and it is designed to adapt.  Bacteria has complex programming designed in it to adapt to survive. This is obvious by observation.

All bacteria does is eat and make enzymes. It has no complex functions.

In order to show evolution it must gain in cells and these nonexistent new cells must perform new functions.

Bacteria is used as a smoke screen to fill people's minds with delusions and project this idea on the rest of the life forms.

Comparing bacteria to humans is like comparing Hydrogen to Lead and say they are the same thing, because they have electrons.

Bacteria is DESIGNED to adapt to any digestible carbon based "food" it can find in its environment.

It will do things like duplicate genes in order to experiment with the new gene while it is able to eat the existing foods.
Then it can adjust the new genes as soon as they become functional. It places new start and stop codons in this new gene.
It does this in a few generations as well.

None of which is possible by accident, by the way.

If you read my information it is never considering bacteria because bacteria is not a complex, multi cellular creature.

All complex creatures lose genes (lose cells), have atavisms, and screwed up cell production over time.  This is what DNA shows without a doubt.

A single celled creature either lives or dies.

A multiple celled creature can exist with screwed up cells. 

Bacteria cannot exist with screwed up cells, because it only has ONE cell.

The obvious isn't obvious until it is obvious.

Knowing the bacteria adapts to foods and it learns to eat and survive no matter what should be information used to stop making new varieties by human stupidity and activities that promote the death of millions of people eventually from bacteria that at some point will not die from any "medicines".

It is all well and good to assert any given belief that you may have, but in a scientific view, this is meaningless unless it is backed up by concrete evidence.
When I say evidence, I don't mean in the way one might be tempted to misuse the word. To say "DNA is evidence", or "Observation is evidence" is to fall well short of the scientific standard for evidence. Empirical evidence is presented by way of a scientific report of an experiment.

For example, when I explain that bacteria undergo accelerated evolution when under the selection pressure of antibiotics, I can find a multitude of recorded experiments that back this up. I have linked to two particularly relevant papers below.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2839888/?tool=pmcentrez
http://aac.asm.org/cgi/content/full/42/9/2215?view=long&pmid=9736537

These are very worth reading, as they demonstrate concrete, observable evidence for evolution.

bevolve wrote on Oct 25^th, 2011 at 7:04am:

It is all well and good to assert any given belief that you may have, but in a scientific view, this is meaningless unless it is backed up by concrete evidence. When I say evidence, I don't mean in the way one might be tempted to misuse the word. To say "DNA is evidence", or "Observation is evidence" is to fall well short of the scientific standard for evidence. Empirical evidence is presented by way of a scientific report of an experiment. For example, when I explain that bacteria undergo accelerated evolution when under the selection pressure of antibiotics, I can find a multitude of recorded experiments that back this up. I have linked to two particularly relevant papers below. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2839888/?tool=pmcentrez http://aac.asm.org/cgi/content/full/42/9/2215?view=long&pmid=9736537 These are very worth reading, as they demonstrate concrete, observable evidence for evolution.

Just because the word "evolution" is used does not make it evolution. 
Again. The only definition of evolution that counts is this one. This is the original definition of evolution.
There is nothing in bacteria adapting to show any form of evolution. 
I have studied this longer than you have. 





Evolution:  "that theory which sees in the history of all things organic and inorganic a development from simplicity to complexity, a gradual advance from a simple or rudimentary condition to one that is more complex and of a higher character."  Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language.

The Linski experiment shows no evolution either. The bacteria in the test did not gain in cells, did not evolve. It remained as bacteria and does what bacteria does.

Using the term "evolution" by anyone who is promoting this religious idea and then tries to tie into it normal genetic adaptation of bacteria as some form of evolution is not science. It is religious, not based on reality.

It is forcing ideology on evidence.

There is no such science as evolution. There is no evolution in this world.

Repeating religious slogans over and over and over and over, until the "student" thinks it is real IS NOT SCIENCE.

Now where is your experiment that proves evolutionary pressure causing "evolution" in which bacteria gains in cells with independent functions of those "cells".


Where is your experiment proving that simple life can evolve into extremely complex, and show me the exact method by which these or this experiment(s) was/were done?

There has never been any experiment that even suggests that evolution is possible, yet people believe for no other reason than wishful thinking and popular religious beliefs.

There is no evidence for evolution.

Do not use the bacteria again, because we are done with that.

Show me the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence of human evolution, for example.

This evidence cannot contain any inferences, implications, opinions from experts.  It must be obvious.

Your definition of evolution is incorrect. I suggest you consult a textbook on evolutionary biology for one that is more accurate.  Here is the definition from biology-online.org:

Definition

noun, plural: evolutions

(1) The change in genetic composition of a population over successive generations, which may be caused by natural selection, inbreeding, hybridization, or mutation.

(2) The sequence of events depicting the evolutionary development of a species or of a group of related organisms; phylogeny.


As you can see, it says nothing about simple-to-complex. While this is one part of it, it is by no means limited to that. Evolution is a change in genetic composition. I think you are confusing the idea a little bit with speciation, which is certainly forgivable. Science can be confusing.

On that point, in science - especially in biology- it is not always the case that a proof or example of something will be simple and one-dimensional enough for the average layperson to understand. Science builds upon itself, so it often requires significant background knowledge to fully understand a new concept.

I want you to stick with the real, original, definition I gave you.
This is the original definition.  This is ALL we are discussing here.

When a cloud of nonsense is piled together and called science, why do you believe?

I have seen, studied and I don't believe, because there has never been any conclusive evidence that any simple life has ever evolved. Yet, with brainwashing, indoctrination and hanging out with people who claim to be scientists and are perpetrating this nonsense is how you got this way.


The point is: There is no evolution.
There is no bioligical process or mechanism for evolution,
And not one creature has "evolved".

If you were to look at the evidence without the repeated mantras of faith, it is clear as can be, without any doubts PROVEN NOW, as absolutely irrefutable. There is no evolution.

I have watched this religious ideology since the 1960s and have watched every stage of its infiltration of academia.

I have watched as the data was "fixed" to fit the belief and then a new piece of evidence becomes, obviously contrary. Then the new piece of evidence is fixed to fit the religion.

Then these retards changed the definition sometime in the 1960's in text books.  Changing the definition allows natural biological events to be called "evolution".
If you don't know this, you do now.



Changing the foundational scientific definitions is the way that this mythological cult of ignorance operates.  Just like any religion with no value.

Making up words that are repeated over and over and over to little children in school is a form of child mental molestation.

Teaching children that absolute evidence is not required for belief is a religious idea.  It is not scientific at all.

Now where is your absolutely irrefutable evidence for evolution?

Your, "background knowledge" is background of faith and beleif drummed into your head by these retards.

Only a genetically weak person, like a trusting child,  falls for mythology in academia.  It has been going on in academia for thousands of years.

My parents taught me to never believe anyone on anything, but to find out what is really going on. That was the greatest gift they gave me.

It is very difficult to free yourself from human beliefs based on faith. This is especially true when you put your name on them, publish information from the perspective of being an expert or from just declaring your baptism in this religion in public.
When you teach this crap to children, you simply put the nail on your intellectual coffin so to speak.  You will then never admit you were a fool to believe in this HEMG.

Since when is having a large number of believers a form of evidence? 

The need to belong, to get a degree, to get a paycheck, to get prestige, to get a wife, to get anything that you believe requires your surrender to this myth, is how this religious garbage is perpetuated.

Only the very intelligent and free thinkers do not fall for mythological human emotionally driven garbage.

Most just lay down for the "program" and accept it as real, with out ever checking if the data is true or not.  "After all everybody believes in evolution."

Religions use implications, assumptions based on programming, religious slogans that have no experimental data,  faith and belief.  This is why I know this is a type of mythological religion. 

I have checked out every piece of data used to inflict this garbage on humanity and there is no verifiable obvious evidence.  It is a fantasy put together with religious slogans and believed because humans are afraid to realize the truth about themselves, ALWAYS.

They would rather think that humanity is improving, which is a lie, and getting smarter, not true either.  They certainly do not want to realize that what they do is causing our descendants to have short miserable lives, full of fear and ignorance even more so than now.

Right now, humans are born, and humans suffer in ignorance. They put on veils of superstition to hide themselves from the truth. We are in a condition of extreme delusions and horrible suffering on this planet and evolution just helps to make it worse.

Humans are destroying the planet and their own genome by not following any genetic information correctly to stop the constant degradation from modern man made mutagens.

Using genetics as a way to cover up this HEMG and cloud over the intent of this religious garbage is what you need to see.

There is no evolution from simple to complex. There is absolutely no evidence for it and all the real evidence we have shows just the opposite.  DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence of only genetic degradation. 

The ancient parents of any genus was far more fit than the present speciated descendants. 

The reason science works is because it changes with new evidence. When ideas about a given subject change, it doesn't mean that the scientific method is worthless, it just means we aren't finished yet.

Once again, I see no reason to believe what you have written is the original definition, and I contend that it doesn't matter anyways. However, I would appreciate it if you could cite your source for this particular definition, as I have been unable to find it anywhere.

bevolve wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 9:33am:

The reason science works is because it changes with new evidence. When ideas about a given subject change, it doesn't mean that the scientific method is worthless, it just means we aren't finished yet. Once again, I see no reason to believe what you have written is the original definition, and I contend that it doesn't matter anyways. However, I would appreciate it if you could cite your source for this particular definition, as I have been unable to find it anywhere.

Science does not work when it ignores the obvious.

It is a "nice" idea that humans want to believe they are improving, but the evidence is just the opposite.

All creatures are heading towards eventual extinction.  Humans are at the head of the pack along with chimps, bengal tigers, gorillas, orangutans, and many others.

Extinction is the end result of "evolution". That is why there is no evolution.

Science is a bunch of believers who get paid to perpetuate beliefs. They are the guardians of their screwed up idea of truth. And as all guardians of human truths they screw up everything they do.

Protecting their jobs and perpetuating myths is better than the truth.  Most people are afraid of the truth, and so human lives are being destroyed because of this religious crap.

There is no science in delusions.

Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language.  From the 1960's
I have this book at my home in Colorado.

Science does not operate as some objective group of people who are seeking the truth.

It is a group of people protecting their jobs.
They don't give a crap about the truth.

I make my living with real science. This evolution crap is detrimental to the human species.

Humans are continuing to make more and more mutagens that destroy the human genome in the name of freedom, sexual freedom, chemical freedom, and weak lifestyles that use toxic chemicals.

If we don't stop the erosion soon, there will not be any good genetics left to mix up and fix this.  The only thing that will fix this is for the original Genetic Engineer who made us to come and correct all of our screw ups.

We are too stupid, and genetically lacking in the mental ability,  now to fix this. 

The last of the cleaner genetic trail is pretty much gong.  The odds are 1 out of 1 that you have a genetic defect, your children, your wife, your mother, father, cousins, all the people living now are genetically screwed up. 
Go do a study on the genetic diseases we have.  Look at all of them, and you will see yourself in the list.

Evolution is a fantasy that allows humans to screw up their own DNA and pass on more and more diseases, shorter lives and lots of suffering in ignorance from lack of intelligence.

If you  support this crap and teach it, you are supporting the suffering of all our descendants and helping to speed up extinction.

That is what this religious crap produces. Ignorance is no excuse.  Your indoctrination into this crap is not an excuse. 

If you support this crap, you are guilty of major bad karma.  You basically, worship suffering and death in this religion.

Now, where is your absolutely irrefutable evidence that humans are evolving, getting smarter, better, more healthy?

Am I starting to get through?

The Truth is not for weaklings.

You are simply dead wrong as to what the theory of evolution is. Nobody thinks that humans are in any short time frame becoming smarter and more healthy through the process of evolution.
The concept of evolution by natural selection is not a "nice idea". Unfortunately, the entirety of the natural world exists in a constant state of fighting for continued existence. That is natural selection. Those individuals less able to adapt to new circumstance die, while those more able survive and reproduce. Improvement has nothing to do with it. It is survival.

To arbitrarily choose an outdated definition from a random dictionary and hold to it dogmatically regardless of new information is intellectually weak.

bevolve wrote on Oct 26^th, 2011 at 2:23pm:

You are simply dead wrong as to what the theory of evolution is. Nobody thinks that humans are in any short time frame becoming smarter and more healthy through the process of evolution. The concept of evolution by natural selection is not a "nice idea". Unfortunately, the entirety of the natural world exists in a constant state of fighting for continued existence. That is natural selection. Those individuals less able to adapt to new circumstance die, while those more able survive and reproduce. Improvement has nothing to do with it. It is survival. To arbitrarily choose an outdated definition from a random dictionary and hold to it dogmatically regardless of new information is intellectually weak.

It doesn't matter your religious beliefs, and slogans. "fighting for survival".  Creatures need to eat and they have compulsions to breed. That is not "fighting" for survival.
If they don't eat they die. If they can't reproduce they go extinct as is the case with millions of creatures already.
Humans are just in line for extinction as all creatures are.
As soon as the mutations destroy the ability to exist....gone.

There are over 4600 known genetic defects that cause genetic diseases in humans. That does not include those that just have weakened our organs, muscle tissue and brain capacity. There are many really stupid people on this planet and the numbers of morons is rising with each generation.

I see that you are not reading anything I am posting.

It is your ego and evodelusion glasses that interfere with understanding.

There is not such thing as evolution.

This human garbage religious mythology is put in a large basket of faith and belief filled partially with some real science of genetics.

The idea of the Evodelusionists is to put this idea of life evolving from simple to complex in the middle of normal genetics. Then keep slipping this repeated mantra into your brain, with you thinking it is real, because it is so compelling to just lay down disregard your objective reasoning and believe this crap.

By the time you are fully brainwashed, you will believe any crap they teach you.
The end of this is the idea that we are related to fish. That we evolved from fish. ...?? I mean, how stupid do you have to be to believe that human religious garbage?

You really need to listen and watch my videos on how this and all crap religious are brainwashed into people.
The biggest lie people tell themselves is that they are rational.  You are emotionally controlled by your needs. The only reason you believe this is because of your weaknesses and needs to conform, to be accepted and to get your degree, money; all emotional crap reasons, not even close to rational.
Once you declare you baptism in public for some religious garbage, your ego is fully in control of your life, and you are in a prison of ignorance.  If you let this crap control you, you will go all the way to death with your delusions fully in control.

I am sorry for you. Really.  I wish you were free of this crap, but it is your self imposed mental prison. Others have gotten out of this cult of human emotional mental garbage.  So can you.

I can tell you are screwed up because you speak about "science" with "reverence" as if it was your god.
This crap degrades you and the scientific community.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sPPafzd4wGI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bQrkBtnD_UQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZeAzlfNrqKM

I am in fact reading everything that you post. There are two reasons I am not responding to each and every thing you say.
The first reason is to keep the discussion managable. I read other discussions you have had with people, and they quickly became absurd while trying to juggle a million different points at once. The second reason is that most of what you are saying is not argument at all. So I am responding to relevant arguments, and not responding to random assertions and rants.

There is no scientific evidence for your conjecture of genetic degredation. You make it based on the arguments in your videos, but it is nonsensical without the assumption that evolution needs 51% random positive mutations to work. I still hold this as untrue, and you have yet to explain where this idea comes from.

bevolve wrote on Oct 27^th, 2011 at 8:07am:

I am in fact reading everything that you post. There are two reasons I am not responding to each and every thing you say. The first reason is to keep the discussion managable. I read other discussions you have had with people, and they quickly became absurd while trying to juggle a million different points at once. The second reason is that most of what you are saying is not argument at all. So I am responding to relevant arguments, and not responding to random assertions and rants. There is no scientific evidence for your conjecture of genetic degredation. You make it based on the arguments in your videos, but it is nonsensical without the assumption that evolution needs 51% random positive mutations to work. I still hold this as untrue, and you have yet to explain where this idea comes from.

Obviously, you don't have any information on DNA, and that is probably because of the closed mindedness of this religion.

There are over 89,000 thousands of papers on DNA, gene loss, and gene loss as a major part of "evolution" on the pubmed site.

There is the project called the Human Genome Project, in which the US paid over several millions of dollars to get this data.
They have mapped over 4600 genetic defects that cause genetic diseases.

Why don't you know this already, if you are educated?  Could it be that your education is really indoctrination?

Do you know there is a 6.1 million year old human upright fossilized femur? It is identical to modern human in angle, but has more bone mass and is straighter. Indicating superior species to what we have now.

Why don't you know about this? It is public record and pretty easy to find.

Go to the AlanCFA thread and start reading. I posted peer reviewed information there.

I don't juggle a million points at once. Just two or three. I am capable of over digesting over 100 pieces of data and tying them together quickly.

I expect people who are educated to be able to understand two or three points at once.

If you don't start to catch on soon, I will just drop you and you can stay with your religious human emotional mental garbage.

Do you understand how if you want to indoctrinate someone you use truth mixed in with the nonsense? That is an old method used by cults.
Do you understand that religious slogans backed by no data, no use of the scientific method are not real? 

Evolutionary pressure, not real.
Random Mutations, not science. There is nothing random in this universe.
Transitional Fossils do not exist except in the reverse towards less complex and less fit.

If you can't keep track of several pieces of data and use that to test any premise with, then I don't know why you are in science?

That is required for any form of understanding of evidence. 

bevolve wrote on Oct 27^th, 2011 at 8:07am:

I am in fact reading everything that you post. There are two reasons I am not responding to each and every thing you say. The first reason is to keep the discussion managable. I read other discussions you have had with people, and they quickly became absurd while trying to juggle a million different points at once. The second reason is that most of what you are saying is not argument at all. So I am responding to relevant arguments, and not responding to random assertions and rants. There is no scientific evidence for your conjecture of genetic degredation. You make it based on the arguments in your videos, but it is nonsensical without the assumption that evolution needs 51% random positive mutations to work. I still hold this as untrue, and you have yet to explain where this idea comes from.

In order to have any form of "evolution" you must have more positive mutations than negative.  This is so obvious, that I don't even know why I have to say this.

If humans have over 4600 known to cause genetic diseases and only 4 believed to be positive mutation, that is overwhelming negative results in actual evidence.

There is no possible way for you to extract a religious idea from absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that ONLY shows a NET genetic degradation.

If you don't understand this, then you are just not capable of learning anything that is real or obvious.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-spontaneous-mutations-important-mental-retardation.html

This is obviously from mutagens in the environment at the time of conception or in the uterus.

Have a pregnant woman stand in front of a microwave that leaks.

The reason you shouldn't try and talk about too many things at one time is that it makes it too easy to avoid the important points by flooding the conversation with worthless space filler.

I previously stated my reason for disagreeing with your assumption of the necessity of 51% net positive mutations.

" The reason I disagree with this stems from my education on the process of natural selection. Mutated genes that lead to bad effects on the fitness of an individual will be less likely to be passed on than those genes that are beneficial. Therefore, over time, they will disappear from the gene pool as individuals carrying those genes die without reproducing. The occasional beneficial mutated gene will propagate more successfully and therefore become more common in the gene pool."

It is more impressive when one is capable of responding to a specific point in a coherent manner than it is to bring up 20 different unrelated, erroneous points.

" The reason I disagree with this stems from my education on the process of natural selection. Mutated genes that lead to bad effects on the fitness of an individual will be less likely to be passed on than those genes that are beneficial. Therefore, over time, they will disappear from the gene pool as individuals carrying those genes die without reproducing. The occasional beneficial mutated gene will propagate more successfully and therefore become more common in the gene pool."

This is a religious statement that has zero evidence.

It is the crux of your faith and belief.

ONE MORE TIME;  The negative mutations in humans, dogs, sheep, all complex animals are far more than any positive mutations.
If a mutation does not kill the species it will carry on in its negative fashion.  It will diminish fitness in the whole genetic lineage and it shows in all complex species.  Speciation is always from mutations that cause genetic losses. 

This is in absolutely irrefutable physical evidence.

If you don't accept the evidence then you are avoiding it. Most of the ET's avoid evidence like it was a plague.

The Evodelusionists fabricate religious ideas and then teach this crap to young children, just like you.  Then like all forms of child abuse, it gets taught to the next generation out of the "goodness of your heart". 

This is how delusional human emotional mental garbage is propagated.

Now, slogans are not evidence.  Do you understand what I said?  Slogans, religious concepts, are not evidence.

Here is from the book of fantasy:
"Then the merry humans walked along and his bad mutations died out and his good mutations remained.  So, little child you are so much better than your parents...smarter, cuter, etc. The magic good mutation fairy gives you your smartness and cuteness."

This is the human emotional garbage that children eat up, because they want to.

"my education on the process of natural selection"

In other words you are indoctrinated and you think this crap is real.  You think that slogans repeated over and over by "educators" are real. 

Have you ever seen this process?  Have you ever checked with the evidence?

This is the predecessor to the modern cat.

http://library.thinkquest.org/5481/images/SABERTOOTH.gif

http://www.fossil-treasures-of-florida.com/images/sabertoothcat.jpg

This is a modern cat.

http://blogs.smithsonianmag.com/science/files//shared/accounts/s/smithsonianmag/blogs.smithsonianmag.com/htdocs/wp-content/blogs.dir/8/files//2008/11/cat.jpg


Which one is more fit to survive? More complex?

Here is the degenration of the horse from your classic example of the horse fossils.

If you open your eyes you will see much more complex bone structures capable of traveling on much more rugged terrain in the oldest fossils. Much more flexible and able to get footing on many surfaces.

As time goes on the complexity is reduced by mutations and your "natural selection" is towards less fit to survive in multiple environments.

When a creature has anti-evolution and is degrading in its complex functions as is shown in ALL the evidence you will see what I call genetic and physical splits.  This happens when the creatures do what is known as "speciation". They split off from the original family of the parent of the genetic lineage.

You have to go backwards with this in time to realize that the parent of all speciation splits was much stronger, more complex and far more advanced in terms of survival and genetic features for survival.  The horse is another example.

You will notice that the oldest of the "horse" as it is believed to be from paleontology and what they think is the ancient horse, that this creature has far more complex bone structure in its legs. As it goes along to the "modern" horse it has lost many bones and flexibility in the legs. This has cause the horse to be more limited, rather than more complex.

http://evolutionforum.info/yabbfiles/Attachments/Horseevolution__1_.png

Here is the mouse and rodent family.

The predecessors to the rat:

http://evolutionforum.info/yabbfiles/Attachments/800px-Giant-beaver-fieldmuseum.jpg

http://evolutionforum.info/yabbfiles/Attachments/Ceratogaulus_hatcheri_NMNH.jpg

The modern Rat in New York City:

http://evolutionforum.info/yabbfiles/Attachments/800px-NYC_Rat_in_a_Flowerbox_by_David_Shankbone.jpg

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14525925

Gene loss, protein sequence divergence, gene dispensability, expression level, and interactivity are correlated in eukaryotic evolution.
Krylov DM, Wolf YI, Rogozin IB, Koonin EV.

National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20894, USA.
Abstract
Lineage-specific gene loss, to a large extent, accounts for the differences in gene repertoires between genomes, particularly among eukaryotes. We derived a parsimonious scenario of gene losses for eukaryotic orthologous groups (KOGs) from seven complete eukaryotic genomes. The scenario involves substantial gene loss in fungi, nematodes, and insects. Based on this evolutionary scenario and estimates of the divergence times between major eukaryotic phyla, we introduce a numerical measure, the propensity for gene loss (PGL). We explore the connection among the propensity of a gene to be lost in evolution (PGL value), protein sequence divergence, the effect of gene knockout on fitness, the number of protein-protein interactions, and expression level for the genes in KOGs. Significant correlations between PGL and each of these variables were detected. Genes that have a lower propensity to be lost in eukaryotic evolution accumulate fewer substitutions in their protein sequences and tend to be essential for the organism viability, tend to be highly expressed, and have many interaction partners. The dependence between PGL and gene dispensability and interactivity is much stronger than that for sequence evolution rate. Thus, propensity of a gene to be lost during evolution seems to be a direct reflection of its biological importance.

"Genes that have a lower propensity to be lost in eukaryotic evolution accumulate fewer substitutions in their protein sequences and tend to be essential for the organism viability, tend to be highly expressed, and have many interaction partners."

You missed the point

bevolve wrote on Oct 29^th, 2011 at 8:22pm:

"Genes that have a lower propensity to be lost in eukaryotic evolution accumulate fewer substitutions in their protein sequences and tend to be essential for the organism viability, tend to be highly expressed, and have many interaction partners." You missed the point

You are lost.  I am sorry for you.

If after the absolutely irrefutable physical evidence we have you are still promoting religious ideas from believers, you don't understand science at all. 

Your whole statement is nothing but a repetition of magical thinking from some "expert" (high priest of your screwed up religion). 

Even with all the mechanisms built into a species, they cannot overcome eventual mutations that will overtake even the function to fix screwed up DNA/cells. 

This is why cancer is so prevalent today, and we have over 4600 genetic defects from mutations causing diseases.

Only weak minded people accept religious slogans as if they were backed by evidence. They are not.

DNA shows exactly the opposite.  It only shows a gradual weakening of creatures and less and less adaptability until they can only exist in one environment and that leads to extinction.  This is reality.

You are one of the "earth is flat" people. The ones who will eventually have to go extinct for the truth in genetics to be allowed.

Why are you so lost? Why do you believe in magical nonsense, when all the evidence we have only shows a gradual genetic loss that only heads towards extinction.

There is no magical mutations that fix things.
There are no magical mutations.

What you believe in is this idea that you can drive your car into a tree, then your magical thinking tells you to drive it into another tree to fix it.

That is how ignorant you seem to me.

How did you  allow religious slogans from humans who are only perpetuation some myth to control your mind?

Here is the reality. In complex, multicellular creatures the mutations that do not kill, will become part of the species and continually degrade it.

Chimpanzees are direct evidence of this. They are much younger species than humans and are from a human tribe that was separated.
This tribe was exposed to mutagens at a much higher rate than modern humans.

Humans had a fusion of chromosome number 2 after the chimp/human split.
The chimps degenerated in different ways, mostly in spine hips and brain, which can be seen in the DNA between the two species.

Chimpanzees are nearly extinct, so are gorillas, and orangutans.  The weakest genetically will be the first to go extinct, because  it will no longer be able to reproduce.

Chimps are a message to humanity of what "evolution" really is. They came from the same exact genetic super human lineage as we did.

This is clear from the DNA, Chromosomes, ERV's, and from studies of chimps and humans characteristics. 

If you want to see where we are heading, look at our cousins.

The depressed smaller skull is self evident. The HAR-1 genes in Chimps show 18 deleterious mutations that have retarded mental abilities.

ALL of the evidence only points to genetic degradation and extinction if mutations are allowed to take place.

With all the modern mutagens humans have created, we are speeding up the process and this idea of Evolution is helping to destroy humanity, by giving false hope, and promoting a poor lifestyle for humanity.

If you promote this fantasy, mystical nonsense, you are helping to promote much more rapid extinction of humanity.

You are supporting the continual suffering and continually shorter lives with less and less intelligence, less awareness, and ultimately degradation into a complete animal with short lives.

Humanity is your god, and that "god" has made nothing but errors in judgement, errors in understanding science, and errors with mythology imposed on its children as you have been.

Only God can save us. 

The Genetic Engineer that designed us and set us free to screw up, will have to fix us or let us go extinct.

When people lose family members from genetic diseases, cancer etc, they blame God, but it is was humans who disregard the rules of life that promotes any possible form of genetic improvements.

In order to allow any positive mutations to work you  have to stop all the negative ones.  The odds are about 1200 to 1 from data of that ever happening.

However, stopping the cause of mutagens is to also stop the cause of the destruction of the planet.

Those things are directly tied together in absolute scientific evidence, that you  seem to want to ignore in your state of indoctrination and wanting to believe in mythology.

Avoiding reality is what most humans do and that is the cause of our diseases, our weaknesses, and the fact that we humans are so stupid.

Genius people will often tell others how stupid mankind is and how stupid they are. This is because the more you understand the more you realize your limitations.

"The only thing that interferes with my learning is my education."

"We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them."

"Education is what remains after one has forgotten everything he learned in school."

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe."
Albert Einstein

I have given you enough to get free, and you can only come back with "opinions". 

You don't even know that opinions from the high "priests" of this religion are not evidence.

The evidence is that conforming to human emotional mental garbage makes people stupid. And only really stupid people allow themselves to be manipulated into conformity in order to get a degree, get money, sex, or whatever "floats your boat".
Pride of status is a horrible human disease. 
\
When I ask for evidence I don't want you to come back ever again with some religious slogan that you believe. 

If we are going to discuss this, you have to understand the difference between religious slogans and science.
You think that because someone is called a scientist, that they are scientists?  That is your first problem.

There is no science called evolution, and anyone who believes in this crap is religious and not very bright.

Your inability to understand the topic of a scientific paper is probably one of your larger setbacks. The paper you quoted said the opposite of what you think. Read in order to understand, not in order to find things that back up what you already believe.

bevolve wrote on Oct 30^th, 2011 at 8:47pm:

Your inability to understand the topic of a scientific paper is probably one of your larger setbacks. The paper you quoted said the opposite of what you think. Read in order to understand, not in order to find things that back up what you already believe.

I have read over 27,000 papers on this subject.  When they use the word evolution, you have to ignore it and just look a the evidence.  That is how you get past the religious crap.

You need to just read what I am teaching you and see if you can falsify it.  That should be fun.

You are closed minded and are fully indoctrinated.  It is a bad place for a human to be. Sorry about that.

Why would you want to live in this darkness of ignorance imposed on you from others?   Why?

You inability to understand just the evidence without any of the interpretation is your problem.
It is the repeated use of the word "evolution" means nothing to a real scientist.
The faith and belief is like a huge elephant in the room on most if not all of these papers from believers.
It is impossible for them to interpret data, because of the religious beliefs.

So, if you have any objective reason, you would know this already.  The data is what is important not the opinions on the data.
Geeze! The brainwashing in you is a horrible thing for me to deal with. It saddens me to think that you are this lost.  I can't believe that people are so easy to have this crap done to them. 

If you never allowed any faith and belief from another human to sway you. It is the only way to objective intelligence.

"Never believe anyone on anything, not even me, but instead find the truth for yourself."

In order to get unscrewed from the brainwashing, you have to take care of one veil of ignorance at a time.  Apparently, you are not capable of understanding what I am teaching you.

As soon as someone tells you something, you should reject it.  If they have no absolutely irrefutable, physical, OBVIOUS evidence to back up any statement, then they are just repeating religious slogans.

You never did that, because if you had, you would not believe in religious HEMG.

DNA only shows genetic losses in all multi cellular creatures.
There is no NET positive evolution in which creatures gain in complexity nor intelligence.

The way mutations work does not allow for any form of evolution.

Listen to this video again, and tell me how evolution is possible, from the evidence, not from religious slogans?

The data from this video is taught in every school on genetics.  It is clear as can be that negative mutations are far more plausible than any other type.
That  a huge majority of any changes to existing DNA will have negative results. The data is about 5000 to 1 for negative results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI

How do you explain genetic commonalities? For instance,  human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (http://genome.cshlp.org/content/17/11/1675.full), 80% with cows (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/324/5926/522), 75% with mice (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000112), and so on.  This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past.

bevolve wrote on Oct 31^st, 2011 at 2:31pm:

How do you explain genetic commonalities? For instance,  human beings have approximately 96% of genes in common with chimpanzees, about 90% of genes in common with cats (http://genome.cshlp.org/content/17/11/1675.full), 80% with cows (http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/324/5926/522), 75% with mice (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000112), and so on.  This does not prove that we evolved from chimpanzees or cats, though, only that we shared a common ancestor in the past.

You are asking good questions.  I have all the answers for you on this.

This is obvious. There are only 20 or so possible amino acids. There is only very few ways to assemble the minerals and proteins  to make strong bones with calcium etc.

There is only one way to produce many mammal tissues.

IF you just go and look at the definition of mammals and see what they have in common. It is obvious.

In other words having common genes that do similar functions would be normal on creatures that have absolutely no genetic link.

It is faith and belief in this idea that the wishers of this religious faith will look for anything that even slightly implies their faith. This is one of those along with the whole "tree of life" they concocted from this faith.

There is no evidence that cats and humans have a common ancestor.

But you, obviously, did not read my post about the Chimpanzee.  There is overwhelming evidence that Chimps and Humans have a common ancestor.  That ancestor is a superior human, based on the fact that
1/ Chimps are a much younger species than humans.
2/ DNA only shows genetic degradation.
3/ Where chimps are found, is also where humans migrated to.
It is obvious that some tribe got caught up in mutagens, most likely from radioactive minerals in the environment.

The macaque monkey in Japan soaks in hot springs that most likely at one time were extremely toxic with radiation.  Go look at the DNA of that species realizing what I just taught you. Lots of fusions, lots of mutations.

The gene losses in the chimp are much greater in the brain and scull area, in the spine, and other areas.  They maintain the muscle strength that we lost.

If you look at the chimp skull you can see the depression of lost scull and in the DNA you can see the lost HAR-1 genes quickly.
The jaw bone is a bit stronger than ours.

Chimps are excellent evidence of genetic degradation.  They survived some serious mutations.  goto The thread here "This is supposed to be a pro evolution video". Read it. I posted the chromosome charts of primates and some more information  there.

The mutation that caused the Chromosome number 2 in humans that is shown to be two separate chromosomes in chimps is also a genetic defect. That shows well that humans degraded from the predecessor. It is just one of at least 5000 mutations in the human species we have now. There are about 16,000 to 20,000 mutations in the Chimps.

These fools even think that because there is a tiny gene in fish that resembles human DNA,  that we must have evolved from fish.

How far do you take this faith based religious thing?

I have studied this for over 43 years and seen many of the iterations and refinements of the inferences, implications and projection of belief, and the avoidance of obvious evidence.

It is a sad thing that is based on a need for things to have some hope for the future that is magical.  Magical thinking is a human defect.  The belief in "luck" is one of those ignorant beliefs.  The idea that when someone dies of cancer that "god" caused it is relative, because humans were set free on this planet, and were given instructions on how to live to avoid genetic degradation and mutatagens that cause cancer, but they think that is the myth.  That is funny in a sad serious way.

All people wish for this magical positive outcome for humanity. But the reality is humans do so many things to create mutagens that are not only destroying humans and the planet, but other species as well.

The newest god is science, like it is going to save humanity.  That is really sad.  It is the blind leading the blind, into a pit of suffering and more ignorance.

Once the genes are screwed up, they do not magically fix themselves by some magical evolution process.  That is idiotic.

Humans do not have the capacity to fix this problem, because their religious faith based nonsense keeps them from seeing the obvious.

The truth is not for wimps, but for those who want to do something worth while for humanity that is based on reality.

If you want to help humanity then you would dedicate your life to helping humanity to stop destroying their own species.

We know the causes of nearly all the mutations, yet we think they are good for us, by some magical human emotional mental garbage that the ignorant humans want to believe.  That mutagens will fix us? That mutagens (micro evolution) will save us. It is an idiotic human faith based religion.

You can see in the news, all the people struggling to fix the problems of humanity, but all they do when they try fixes is to make it worse, repeat the same nonsense that has been tried and failed many times,  because humans living in denial of the obvious and humans are the problem.

When I see people, most seem to be sick, all afflicted with suffering and ignorance, wanting for some magical cure.

The cure is to stop falling for human faith based nonsense and look at the reality of the evidence we have.

It is obvious what is going on.

Only the Genetic Engineer that put us here can fix this.

   

The point is, we share, letter for letter, long sequences of code in exact order with other species. Not just the same genes, the exact same DNA code in the exact same place in the exact same order. Huge long strings of it. This includes pseudogenes, which are genes that serve no purpose, but continue to be passed on. 99% of our DNA is accumulated psuedogenes, and we share a massive amount of these with cats and cows and every other mammal. We share a significant amount with every vertibrate on the planet. This is evidence of common descent. There is no reason for us to have the same non-coding DNA as other species unless they were passed down to both by a common ancestor.

bevolve wrote on Oct 31^st, 2011 at 5:20pm:

The point is, we share, letter for letter, long sequences of code in exact order with other species. Not just the same genes, the exact same DNA code in the exact same place in the exact same order. Huge long strings of it. This includes pseudogenes, which are genes that serve no purpose, but continue to be passed on. 99% of our DNA is accumulated psuedogenes, and we share a massive amount of these with cats and cows and every other mammal. We share a significant amount with every vertibrate on the planet. This is evidence of common descent. There is no reason for us to have the same non-coding DNA as other species unless they were passed down to both by a common ancestor.

Try reading it again, until you get it.

Your interpretation comes from wishful thinking, not from scientifiic data.

And there are only very finite numbers of exact gene copies.  You make out like there are many of them.  This is the "science" by generalization as if all creatures have exacting duplicate genes with the same number of chromosomes and the DNA chains show up in the same chromosomes. HEMG, man.
In order for a creature to be from the same genetic lineage, it must be clear from many forms of data. And in all cases the ancestors were far more fit.

In real science we find the absolutely irrefutable evidence first. That is what we seek and only what we seek.  Once we have that evidence then the rest fits perfectly with it.

DNA is that absolutely irrefutable evidence along with how it operates with mutations being 99.9% deleterious.  The data shows about 1100 negative mutations to 1 that is assumed to be positive.
It is not even mathematically plausible even for a devout Evodelusionist to be able to refute this evidence, but they sure don't give up the faith easily.

By the way, pseudo genes, atavism, are a signs of degeneration by the way. They do not indicate anything other than genetic losses.  Worthless non functioning genes.

Of course there will be long string of exact duplicate DNA in the "manufacturing" of mammalian body parts, and without any genetic connection at all.  This is much more sane to realize this.

It is your faith and belief that makes the tie, because there is nothing else to support this with cats, rats etc and we have the predecessors of cats that were far superior, and rats, and cows, chickens, goats, horses.. all creatures were superior at one time to what they are now.

The nature of all the mammals is they started out far superior and with much more genetic data. They were far more adaptable, stronger, more fit, better health and had the ability to eat/digest more food types.  They were able to process food better and produce vitamins from whatever foods were available.

The only creature that seems to remain constant is the crock.  It has been much bigger about 110,000,000 years ago (by the ridiculous radiometric dating system).

Unless you have data from all angles to support this as with the chimps, common DNA data strings is not real evidence of any tie. 

Not only the DNA but the ERV's and the number of chromosomes is exacting in Primates showing a superior human comon ancestor.  There is data for this, but nothing to tie rats to humans or fish. That is ridiculous superstition.

DNA only shows degradation over time. There is no mechanism for improvements.

Again here is the absolute data from the medical science.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=emPINOUlfnE

http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html


There is, as far as probability is concerned, an essentially infinite amount of possible base pair combinations in a string of 100,000.  However, there are long segments of non-coding base pairs that are shared exactly between us and other species of animals. The closer we are to them in evolutionary history, the more we share. These are not genes. These are strings of base pairs that don't code anything.
It is as if you found two different books both had the same string of thousands of gibberish characters. To assume the two are not related would be absurd.

On another note, including pictures from textbooks in a video does not make the video absolute data. The videos are comprised of your interpretation and speculation based on some data. I have watched the videos, and I wrote rather extensively on one of them here. You don't have to keep adding them to the end of your post.

I have the dictionary.  It is from a few years back. 

You are not understanding anything I am teaching you.

There is no possible way for any creature to gain in complexity.

There is no evidence of a net increase in any creature.

Your belief in strands of DNA and the fake cladistics chart made up backwards is actually quite sad that you and others fall for that crap.

It is nothing more than belief forced on evidence.

It is the evodelusionists who changed the definition and then they told you what the definition is.
Why don't you know this.  You accept human authority that is based on religious garbage.

If you want to brainwash people into a religion you would want to control the definitions and you would present the information used to brainwash in a specific way, and leave out the important data that is contrary to your religious beliefs.

Evolution:  "that theory which sees in the history of all things organic and inorganic a development from simplicity to complexity, a gradual advance from a simple or rudimentary condition to one that is more complex and of a higher character."  Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language.

I have this book at my home in Colorado. It was the common definition long before you  were born.

One of the most retarded things I have seen in this HEMG is the control of the definitions in science, and wrapping the "new definitions" around this ideology HEMG.  If you want to extend the belief system (BS) then control the "scientific definitions". This is where ignorant "educated"  have really destroyed all logic and reason in science and is the cause of the retarded sciences we have today.
Nothing retards people better than to take foundational scientific terms and give them, Evodelusional, religious meanings.

Evolution:  "that theory which sees in the history of all things organic and inorganic a development from simplicity to complexity, a gradual advance from a simple or rudimentary condition to one that is more complex and of a higher character."  Webster's Encyclopedic Dictionary of the English Language. 

Mutation;   1. A defective creature that cannot reproduce and usually dies (a "mutant") 2.  Basically all the defects found in the genome that are not helpful to survival.  We call them "micro mutations" which has caused all species to degrade.

There has never been a "helpful" nor "progressive" nor "evolutionary" NET positive sets of mutations that has increased information, increased the ability to survive, nor has it cause any added complexity to any organism.  Just look at the human genome and all the defects we have imposed on our selves, by stupidity, compulsion, war, wanting the easy life, making toxins to give our lives less "work". Following normal human tendencies has not been good for our species.

If you  are such a coward as to not post your blog on here for a response, then you are just a coward.

You know in your heart that I am correct in all of what I teach. 

It is because your job, your ego, your life is wrapped up in this crap and you must belong to the Evotard community.

I have studied this far longer than you have and in greater detail.

The cladistics chart is exactly backwards.

Creatures go down in complexity and they eventually go extinct. That is what DNA ONLY shows.

You have not produced a single form of evidence that is absolutely irrefutable as this DNA is.

Only a really brainwashed person would allow others to control how you think. That means they own you. You are a slave to this religious human emotional mental garbage.

If you want to see the end results of "evolution" look at the Chimpanzee.  It is our direct cousin coming from a far superior human ancestor that was more fit, and did not have the genetic losses that we have now.

There are over 4600 genetic defects in humans and estimated 18,000 to 20,000 defective genetic losses in Chimps, and that is why they are retarded, and have short lives.

If you support this religious crap, then that is what you do.  I can accept that, but don't ever insult all the great real scientists who came before you and call this crap "science".

If you support this crap, then you support the continued genetic degradation of humans and the huge medical / drug industry that relies on human defects and the more defects the more money. It is a gold mine for people to get involved in this when all you really need to do is to understand the mutagens that are destroying humanity.

You support that our descendants have short miserable lives with more and more genetic diseases. That is what you are doing, by you religious belief in magical mutations that do not exist.

Now go doctor your blog and stay away from me you ignorant coward.  You are totally afraid of the truth. 

You posted lies about me.  I only use peer reviewed data and absolute evidence.

You post religious slogans.  You don't even know they are religious slogans. That is how brainwashed you are.

From now on, when you state something, you must produce absolutely irrefutable physical evidence to back it.  If you don't I will block you.

Come back when you have something besides faith and belief. 

Do you even understand what DNA is?

Pay attention to this chart that you put up.

http://elephant.elehost.com/About_Elephants/Stories/Evolution/ancestry.gif

Do you understand that there is only faith and belief in this chart. It is not based on any empirical absolute evidence.  It is based on opinions and the ridiculous assumptive dating methods that are always doctored to fit the religion.

Where is your absolute evidence that this chart is real?

bevolve wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 9:36am:

http://www.skepdic.com/confirmbias.html There is, as far as probability is concerned, an essentially infinite amount of possible base pair combinations in a string of 100,000.  However, there are long segments of non-coding base pairs that are shared exactly between us and other species of animals. The closer we are to them in evolutionary history, the more we share. These are not genes. These are strings of base pairs that don't code anything. It is as if you found two different books both had the same string of thousands of gibberish characters. To assume the two are not related would be absurd. On another note, including pictures from textbooks in a video does not make the video absolute data. The videos are comprised of your interpretation and speculation based on some data. I have watched the videos, and I wrote rather extensively on one of them here. You don't have to keep adding them to the end of your post.

You are so stupid. There is nothing about you that is worth my time.

You post the same assumptions based on faith and belief that has been brainwashed into your head.

UNLESS you can prove that there is a physical connection, as well as multiple genetic connections, ERV's, chromosomes exactly the same, and have a physical trail that completes the data, you are only repeating religious slogans of ignorance.

There are ONLY 20 amino acids, so that, of course they are repeated.  There are only so many ways to construct creatures, so mammals have similar DNA. WTF is wrong with your mind?

I want you to show me the exact genetic mechanism that causes simple life to become complex.
You cannot use any religious slogans!
You cannot pull up any opinions!

So far, that is all you have done.  You think that because some believer in your religion teaches this crap in universities that it is real.

That is amazing that people are that gullible.

I know you are a coward, because of your blog.  And you posted lies about me.

I am extremely exacting on my data, and all you do is cut and past the same religious nonsense that you were taught.  You are a parrot, not a free thinker.

Evidence must be irrefutable, obvious, having no other plausibility. Requiring no indoctrination.

DNA is irrefutable in that it only shows genetic losses in all complex creatures as the NET outcome of mutations.

I want you to spend the rest of your life trying to disprove that. Maybe that will wake you from your delusional stupor.

You need to listen to my videos again and again, until you start to understand how mutation work.

There are no magical mystical mutations that fix screwed up DNA. 

There is only designed existing strings of DNA that were put on this earth by extreme intelligence, and all of those parents of the genus of any genetic lineage were far more fit, far more complex.

You are so immature and weak willed.

I did post my blog. Its not really a blog so much as a host for one thing, but here it is again...
http://benevolves.wordpress.com/

You still seem to be having a hard time understanding the difference between genes, amino acids, and base pairs. When i say animals share non-coding base pair sequences, i mean they share ones that DON'T code for amino acids. Its like the difference between words and letters, which is what I tried to allude to in my previous post.

Once again, if you would look back to a previous post of mine, I explained why net mutations do not have to be positive for the species to get positive gains. To be short, this is because of natural selection. Its importance cannot be understated.

Finally, please drop the ad hominems. They add nothing to your argument.

bevolve wrote on Nov 3^rd, 2011 at 2:36pm:

I did post my blog. Its not really a blog so much as a host for one thing, but here it is again... http://benevolves.wordpress.com/ You still seem to be having a hard time understanding the difference between genes, amino acids, and base pairs. When i say animals share non-coding base pair sequences, i mean they share ones that DON'T code for amino acids. Its like the difference between words and letters, which is what I tried to allude to in my previous post. Once again, if you would look back to a previous post of mine, I explained why net mutations do not have to be positive for the species to get positive gains. To be short, this is because of natural selection. Its importance cannot be understated. Finally, please drop the ad hominems. They add nothing to your argument.

You don't even have a clue what DNA is.  You have no understanding of real science.

The data in the video comes from peer reviewed data from the US government site on medical conditions and the causes.
It teaches you about the nature of mutations.

There is no genetic mechanism for evolution.

You are just a parrot of stupid religious beliefs. I pity you, sincerely. But my time is wasted on people like you. You are too brainwashed to even understand basic genetics.

Let me give you  the third grade math, maybe even second grade, because you  can't understand any simple pure logic.

49% would not be a net positive required for evolution.  50% still is not enough positive mutations for a net positive mutations required for your evolution.  That would be a stand still of net nothing.  51% positive helpful mutations that add increased fitness and increased complexity is required for evolution.

Since DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence that only shows a net genetic degradation caused by mutations, there is no evolution.

I want you to stop just repeating the nonsense you were taught and start thinking. I know it is difficult for you to do that, because you  are taught that the Evotard PhD's are your god.  It is possible for you to get free from this delusional human garbage.

Go back and watch my videos again and again until you actually understand that this is based on absolutely irrefutable evidence.

No matter how much you cling to your religious slogans and crap like that, will never change the truth.

The truth will set you free.  But first you have to realize that you are brainwashed in the same way that you professors were brainwashed.

It is difficult for the ego to realize how it has been duped into a religious pile of crap, but that is what you have to do if you  ever want to be free.

Until you get free from your delusions, all those people you gave you mind to have you  in slavery.  They own you.  You are just a pawn in their game of ignorance.

I have given you all that is required for a sane person to understand, but you continue to come back with ignorant slogans of faith and belief.

You don't even know they are just slogans used to brainwash.  You just accept them, because you are compelled to by your  education.

I know more about genetics than you ever will.

Unless you have the ability to show absolute ties between creatures other than DNA patterns, you  have nothing.

It seems to me you are not even trying to defend your assertions anymore. Asserting something over and over does not make it fact. Attacking your opponent personally does not make you right.

You think that over 50% positive mutations are needed because you assume all mutations survive. Due to natural and sexual selection, all do not survive. The ones that are positive are much, much more likely to be passed to offspring, while the ones that are harmful are less likely. While genetic mutation is the base of evolution, it is not the only thing going on.

Here is where you need to start.  Start with the absolute physical evidence that requires no interpretation and cannot be doubted, because it is obvious.  DNA is absolute, and only shows genetic losses in all multicellular creatures.  There is only genetic losses shown PERIOD.  There is no evolution. The rest is easy to unscrew, because it falls apart as being just religious dogma and slogans.

When you  trust those whom you allow to indoctrinate you because of their "respected" position, you are owned by them.  You are their slave as they are the slave of those who brainwashed them.

I am giving you a chance for intellectual freedom, and you can't get past your brainwashing.

You do not need approval to think about what I am teaching you.

There is no authority other than the ones you have made up in your head.

You can get free.

DNA is the place to start.  It is without a doubt absoltely irrefutable as only showing genetic losses.

Therefore, there is no evolution.

If you cannot prove me wrong, because the truth is obvious and not up for interpretation.

For over 150 years science has been plagued with this religious delusions. This is because  it could not be disproved until we had the DNA evidence.  You cannot falsify a religion based on mystical ideas  of magical evolution fairies that produce "magical mutations to improve or add complexity".


DNA has only been really deeply investigated in the last 10 years or so, with faster processing methods.

Long chains of the same patterns in different creatures only shows a basic design used like a canvas to paint life on.

Unless you have absolutely connected data in which all the data concurs with your premise, then you have nothing but faith and belief.

In Chimps and Humans we have exacting Chromosomal connections, thousands of ERV's in the same location, and they have the same physical characteristics .  The other factor is they are located where humans migrated to. Here is more analysis.

" Importantly, Hubert Yockey has done a careful study in which he calculated that there are a minimum of 2.3 x 1093 possible functional cytochrome c protein sequences, based on these genetic mutational analyses (Hampsey et al. 1986; Hampsey et al. 1988; Yockey 1992, Ch. 6, p. 254). For perspective, the number 1093 is about one billion times larger than the number of atoms in the visible universe. Thus, functional cytochrome c sequences are virtually unlimited in number, and there is no a priori reason for two different species to have the same, or even mildly similar, cytochrome c protein sequences.

In terms of a scientific statistical analysis, the "null hypothesis" is that the identity of non-essential amino acids in the cytochrome c proteins from human and chimpanzee should be random with respect to one another. However, from the theory of common descent and our standard phylogenetic tree we know that humans and chimpanzees are quite closely related. We therefore predict, in spite of the odds, that human and chimpanzee cytochrome c sequences should be much more similar than, say, human and yeast cytochrome c - simply due to inheritance.

Confirmation:

Humans and chimpanzees have the exact same cytochrome c protein sequence. The "null hypothesis" given above is false. In the absence of common descent, the chance of this occurrence is conservatively less than 10-93 (1 out of 1093). Thus, the high degree of similarity in these proteins is a spectacular corroboration of the theory of common descent. Furthermore, human and chimpanzee cytochrome c proteins differ by ~10 amino acids from all other mammals. The chance of this occurring in the absence of a hereditary mechanism is less than 10-29. The yeast Candida krusei is one of the most distantly related eukaryotic organisms from humans. Candida has 51 amino acid differences from the human sequence. A conservative estimate of this probability is less than 10-25."

From http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/section4.html

What this means is mathmatically it is impossible for chimps and humans to not be related by genetics.  That cannot be refuted and it follows exactly what the DNA evidence shows towards Anti-Evolution, or de-evolution.  There is no sign shown in DNA that any creature has gained any new features but has only lost features and has more defects. PERIOD.

Chimps are from the same "super human species" as modern humans and both have de-evolved along separated lines.
I think that Chimps lived in a rapid genetic degradation zone of the planet with more toxins and much more natural radioactive isotopes.
When you examine the DNA of Chimps and humans  you see clearly the remnants of humanness in chimp DNA and you can see the losses in brain capacity, and the abilty to speak and very limited reasoning abilty.

This is absolutely clear irrefutable evidence of genetic degradation.

The Chimps HAR-1 section of DNA shows 18 mutations in the brain area that is where they lost brain functions.

This is real evidence.

One religious idea projected on DNA strands is just a reaffirmation of religious slogans, ONLY.

"You think that over 50% positive mutations are needed because you assume all mutations survive. Due to natural and sexual selection, all do not survive. The ones that are positive are much, much more likely to be passed to offspring, while the ones that are harmful are less likely. While genetic mutation is the base of evolution, it is not the only thing going on."


NO, you think that negative mutations do not continue.  This is a religious idea. 

The huge majority of mutations are deleterious. When they don't kill they will continue and become part of the species; to reduce fitness, and reduce the environment, reduce the foods, and eventually cause extinction.

The Chimp is not extinct yet. The Gorilla is not extinct yet. But there are other degraded humans who have gone extinct.

These are shown in the fossil record.  All the hominids are degraded from humans.

The Chimps continued ONLY because the mutations were not bad enough to kill them or stop them from producing offspring.

There are many millions of extinct species and this is why.

Go look at the animals in the New Zealand Islands and see how some of the parrots can't even fly, because of foods and atrophied genes and mutations.

Let me give you  the third grade math, maybe even second grade, because you  can't understand any simple pure logic.

49% would not be a net positive required for evolution.  50% still is not enough positive mutations for a net positive mutations required for your evolution.  That would be a stand still of net nothing.  51% positive helpful mutations that add increased fitness and increased complexity is required for evolution.

Since DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence that only shows a net genetic degradation caused by mutations, there is no evolution.

The problem is your faith and belief, founded by hanging around with and only getting your information from other believers of this religion.

Religious HEMG has been in academia for thousands of years.  It is based on what mythology is popular at the time and what is in vogue.

It is difficult to realize that you have been lied to, but that is exactly what has happened to you.

Others have broken away from this religion.

You can too.

worldofweirdthings.com/2011/05/06/homeopaths-move-on-to-mangle-comp-sci/
This seems oddly relevant.

Does it not concern you at all that exactly zero scientists have come to the same conclusion that you have?

It seems that your decision to reject evolution stems entirely from a complete lack of understanding of natural selection. You have ignored me every time I have tried to explain it. It's hard to talk with someone who is incapable of making any sort of attempt to learn.

People are brainwashed as anyone who goes through the indoctrination.

I am sorry that you want to believe in all those morons.  It is your need that you should address.  Why do you need to belong and believe? Could it be all the trappings of the society you belong to?
Maybe you just want to believe in this idea that humans are getting better?  It seems like a good concept even if it is a scientifically proven lie.

Remember this.  All of the greatest minds of the time back just a few years ago, all believed the earth was flat.

That club is still around and it is called the club of Evodelusionists. Their religion is called Evodelusionism and it is a dying religion. They support short lives and lots of sick people. They promote suffering and ignorance. 

We may be past the point of return to any level of fitness, yet you insist we are getting better by your magical slogans and religious ideas that you think are real. 

It is fantasy.  Your faith in this religion is fantasy.  You are not able to comprehend any data correctly because of the evodelusional glasses you wear.

It is clear from you blog, that you just don't even understand what real scientific methodology is.

When you study a phenomenon you seek to find only real evidence, that cannot be interpreted FIRST.  You put aside all religious ideas of wanting to prove something you believe is real.

In the near future, all the believers in evolution will be mocked as primitive and ignorant. Just like all ridiculous beliefs of the past.

The data we have right now is enough to make any sane person realize it is nonsense.

DNA and Mutation only show a NET negative result with lost complexity to all multicellular creatures, lost health, lost intelligence, and heading towards extinction. 
The only cure is to stop worshiping mutations as if they were the cure.  Mutations are bad for any species.

The only way any form of existing good DNA data can be allowed to overcome these mutations is to get rid of mutagens.  We have created a lifestyle that is so far off the track for the health and intelligence of humans.

When you attach your ego to emotionally driven concepts, you lose your connection to your need for the truth.

If you are not seeking the truth, then you are only seeking to perpetuate beliefs.  Beliefs destroy all credibility and are intellectual suicide for any real scientist.

I have trust in people that when they come across the truth, it will have an affect on them, even when they reject it.

The Truth is not always nice, especially when you realize how bad things really are and they are getting worse much faster.

Your position is your problem. Remove your position in life, and start over fresh and just look at the evidence.

If you can get rid of the religious slogans and your pseudo science meaningless "axioms" then you are in a really difficult place.  The teachers who teach this crap, use slogans and keep repeating them over and over.  Then they put the student in the "special" club of the intellectual and tell them that when someone challenges your religion, they just don't understand "science". What a load of crap and what a bunch of weak people to fall for the oldest indoctrination plan that has been around for centuries. 

Why don't you know this?   I know it from observation of humans and from observation of my own reactions to life. 

You don't even understand that all the ideas of natural selection are religious in nature if you think it is possible for any simple life form to add complexity by magical processes that are never seen, because they don't exist.

The only thing that natural selection does is to cause creatures to lose genetic information to degrade. 

From my perspective of showing you absolutely irrefutable physical evidence and knowing how mutations actually work, I find it very difficult to realize how any intelligent person can't understand what I am teaching you. 

It is more valuable than any information you have ever received, but your religious HEMG is in the way of your understanding. Part of your religion is that you think it is part of science, just like all the "earth is flat" people.

This is just one delusion that is easy to rid yourself of.  The others are far more difficult. However, if you can get past this easy one, then you can realize the process of self awareness and connect with your own objectivity needed to get rid of all of them.

Having millions of believers has never produced one truthful club.  This is the history of the ignorance mankind and why these tribes kill each other in the name of their beliefs, cultures, nationality etc.  It is all made up nonsense.

Just like from space you cannot see boundaries on the earth. From my perspective I have no boundaries on what I am able to understand objectively.

I never accept anything that is taught to me, and I never allow anyone to force beliefs on me.  There are many times when being a follower as most are, would seem to be the easy route but screw that.  My life is more important that some pile of human emotionally driven garbage.

Backing up your faith and belief with a million believers is not going to work out well for anyone.  Large groups of humans are notoriously and historically proven to be stupid.  And large groups of conformists to religious ideas, without absolute proof,  are really stupid people.

The gihadists believe with all their heart that if they kill off all the bad people, there mission for God will be fulfilled and they go to heaven with 50 virgins or some such garbage.

There are over 340,000,000 of those people on this earth.  By your logic that makes them right.  Much more right than a million biologist who believe in Evodelusionism.

You think about it.  Where is your absolutely irrefutable evidence for evolution?  It must be physical, obvious, have no opinions in it and most of all REAL.

All of science is interpretation of evidence. Evidence by itself doesn't mean anything without interpretation. In order for it to be legitimate, however, it must be falsifiable and repeatable. Conclusions drawn from evidence must be able to be used in other experiments.
For example, using an understanding of evolution by natural and sexual selection and of criteria for sexual selection in guppies, researchers predicted that when guppies were moved from a pool with many predators to a pool with no predators, over the course of generations, the guppies would show larger and more colorful spots, since the selection pressures had changed. This prediction was found to be true.

I'm not saying by any means that the majority is always right. I just point out that if I were in the position of being the only person in the entire world with a certain belief about the nature of human existence, I would be very open to the possibility that I could be wrong. I think your confidence in yourself is very high considering the history of fallibility of human beings. Most of the time, when one has a problem with every single other person they talk to, everyone else is not the problem.
I say this not as a reason you are wrong, merely as a reason to let yourself be more open to changing your views.

Here is your homework.

I want you to show me one experiment in which speciation has resulted and proven absolutely to give greater fitness in the new species.

I want you to show me one experiment in which any creature has developed more complexity ever.

I want you to show me one experiment where starving a species makes them smaller?  (Hint: it makes them die.)

I want you to show me one experiment where there is any proof of where the genetic differences from human offspring come from?  (other than faith and belief in the magical random mutation fairy that doesn't kill our offspring)
I have asked at least 100 geneticists to allow me to do an experiment on their DNA in which we scramble 100 or so of their DNA codons and watch to see how long they live.

Prove that the new guppies were more fit from the original not so colored and limited culture?

It doesn't matter about how putting a predator causes the "blossoming" of the odd ball in the group.  What matters is the over all fitness of the group that speciates. 

In all cases the latter generations have lost something that the one who survived did not have.  It is never a positive result.  The inability to mate and produce offspring with the parent group is a bad thing.  It shows genetic malfunctions to the point of not having the proper number of correct chromosomes, and DNA content to match the original culture. It has never shown any improvement towards more complex.

The interpretation is far better when you  understand what is going on in the absolute evidence first, then make interpretation on the rest. 

In real science we look for and see ONLY  the absolutely obvious FIRST and what is irrefutable. We don't concoct a pile of slogans, axioms and religious faith and belief and teach it to children.

Science is never about faith and belief, yet, that is what politically driven academia does to it.

When you actually study DNA it only shows genetic loss as the out come of "evolution".  It never shows any way for any net positive improvement of the species.

All of the evidence ALWAYS fits with the absolutely irrefutable and obvious evidence.

However, when people are brainwashed and the teachers are paid to perpetuate this religions nonsense, all the obvious evidence is overlooked. 

I have watched this for over 43 years. I have seen all the evidence manipulated to fit the faith and belief and some rather obvious evidence was discredited or put in the drawer and never brought up in the classroom.

Why don't you know this?  Could it be because of your education.

" The reason I disagree with this stems from my education on the process of natural selection."

You admitted this was the reason and for and no other. Your education is the reason.  Get it?
I went to classes on this crap too, and when the first statement that they could not back up with absolute evidence was taught, I quit this and went on to functional sciences.

I have an extreme IQ. It does not allow me to process human faith as "science".

The nature of cults is that they are the only ones with the true message.  They teach the cult members that they must never get any information from any other source. They make up their own cool sounding language and jargon to keep the neophyte in the cult.


That they are the only ones qualified to give opinions on the evidence. (and all the crap we see in academia and have seen for thousands of years.)

Why don't you know this? It is obvious.

My wife says that what I do is to teach the obvious.  In order to do this I have objective reasoning that is not tainted by any religion, any indoctrination, and any form of child abuse.

My parents taught me well. They taught me to never believe anyone, and that all people have agendas. They have never been wrong.

They may mean well, but as history teaches:  The "good" do the most damage.  Even Hitler thought that he was the savior of mankind. 

"I just point out that if I were in the position of being the only person in the entire world with a certain belief about the nature of human existence, I would be very open to the possibility that I could be wrong."

First of all, I am not the only one who has presented this idea.  I am the only one who has read over 27000 papers on this and realized what is going on using DNA as the starting point.

I am the only one you have come across so far. There are several others who are on this path but have not seen the whole picture and/or don't want to see it.

Religion of all kinds is a limiting factor in the interpretation of data. Get rid of the religion and you have a pure mind.
First you have to know how to recognize religions indoctrination, even when it comes from academia and is told to you, brainwashed into you that it is "not a religion" or is "science" and "religion" is bad.

I am the first to realize that Chimpanzees are retarded genetically degraded humans. This is something that is so difficult for the religious to accept. But all the evidence shows this.

For over 150 years religious zealots of Evodelusionism have been preaching this religion to our children. Now in the last 20 years we have DNA and in the last 10 the DNA evidence is overwhelming against any form of evolution. It is not possible by any known biological nor genetic function. DNA ONLY shows genetic degradation.
Evolution is a fraud. It is a typical mythological belief used to give some magical reasons to life.
GoodScienceForYou 45 minutes ago
10 of Many/ Mitochondrial disorders may be caused by mutations, acquired or inherited, in mitochondrial DNA (mtDNA) or in nuclear genes that code for mitochondrial components. They may also be the result of acquired mitochondrial dysfunction due to adverse effects of drugs, infections, or other environmental causes (see MeSH).
GoodScienceForYou 12 hours ago
You can see that the cause is often relating to infections from mutated virus or bacteria. If we stop the process of making new infections by our lifestyle, then this process of having new DNA defects with each generation would slow down.
In the last 3 generations Cancer deaths have increased by 12% with billions upon billions of dollars spent on cures. Even with the much higher cure rate, the death rate has increased.
GoodScienceForYou 12 hours ago
A of X How do we as "intelligent" humans stop these genetic mutations in offspring?
If you want sex, get married. Only have proper sex and be conscious about mutation of microorganisms and keeping the birth area clean of abnormal bacteria or virus.
Do not harm the flora of the female reproductive area. That flora is there to stop virus and bacteria from harming the eggs during reproduction.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
B of X Keep the male organ clean, and healthy, before sex.
Have yourself and your mate checked completely for any STD's.
Eat healthy foods that are not toxic the body.
No smoking, drinking, or taking any drugs of any kind during pregnancy. Smoking causes up to 30,000 mutations in a smoker, somatic mutations. This can harm the fetus in the same way.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
C of X Stay away from radiation of any kind. Especially the female to keep all the eggs from any radiation. The female is born with all her eggs, and in order to stop genetic mutations, it is best to avoid all possible ways to harm the genetics of the eggs during the fertile years. I would never advise to stand in front of a microwave ever. Stand far away after you turn it on.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
D of X Anyone who has been radiated by uranium, plutonium, should never attempt pregnancy. Females are born with all their eggs, and those eggs should never be radiated. Old fashioned X-ray machines have caused mutations and cancer. It is best to not be radiated in anyway.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
E of X They, the medical industry, recently realized that mammograms are more harmful than they are helpful. They can actually cause breast cancer. They are now working on ways to do a simple blood test to detect cancer.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
F of X Radiation is one of the standard ways that cancer is caused.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 18 hours ago
G of X Be conscious and be awake. Human life is too precious to continue to degrade as we have been doing for too long.
Pretty soon there will be no "good breeding stock" left and we will head down the extinction trail along with many millions of other species.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
H of X The genetic checks and balances built into and designed into our genomes needs to be understood by everyone. We cannot expect the DNA repair mechanisms to operate correctly if we continue to attack them as well.
Mutations are horrible things and we do not want them at all. We need to maintain what is left of the human genome.
There are no magical mutations that fix or improve humans. Humans are not evolving, not getting better. The absolute evidence in DNA tells us that.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
@GoodScienceForYou "If you want sex, get married" So don't go boinking the 17-year-old babysitter, right?
AlanCFA 18 hours ago
@AlanCFA ""If you want sex, get married" So don't go boinking the 17-year-old babysitter, right?" That is right. I advise you not to boink your 17 year old babysitter.
GoodScienceForYou 37 minutes ago
Clarity of mind can only come from allowing the Truth to control you mind.
Allow humans with their religious ideas about what they want emotionally is not the answer.
God is the answer, but you must find God for yourself. God does not equal Religion ,but God = Truth.
GoodScienceForYou 1 day ago
Most all of the Mosaic law was to protect the tribe of Israel from genetic suicide and to keep the genetic path for Jesus as clean as possible. There were no antibiotics, nor virus medicines. A pandemic would occur easily if they did not follow exactly. Keeping the sexual conduct clean of all mutagens was known about and taught by the Genetic Engineer who designed us. Goto Neutral Evolution Forum and read "objective morality". The deeper you learn real science the more you appreciate God.
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Keeping the sexual conduct clean of all mutagens was known about and taught by the Genetic Engineer who designed us. " More evidence that you are simply a creationist.
"The deeper you learn real science the more you appreciate God." Yes, the Bible is your scientific textbook - that is obvious. You do not understand real science, so you preach the mythology of Bronze Age goat herders and claim that such mythology is science. You are a lying idiot.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Most all of the Mosaic law was to protect the tribe of Israel from genetic suicide..."
"Keeping the sexual conduct clean of all mutagens was known about and taught by the Genetic Engineer who designed us. " So the Genetic Engineer who designed us was the same God who gave Moses the laws of kosher?
AlanCFA 17 hours ago
@AlanCFA Have you ever read the Bible? You don't know anything about it. I have read it many times front to back. Ive read the Hindu Scriptures and Kashmir Shavism, as well as the Upanishads, Bagavad Gita and many others. They all contain scientific genetic information for us to save both the genome and the planet. Kosher means it was inspected by the educated of the time and approved. Today we have bad meats with hormones that the gov is approving by educated retards. Is that "better"?
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
"visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me",
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
“‘The parents eat sour grapes,  and the children’s teeth are set on edge’?
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@atticana
/watch?v=hyErAQn7_HY&feature=r­elated
TheDcac 4 days ago
When we stopped following the rules for genetic preservation, we destroyed our species. I don't think we have a chance to redeem our selves physically from this mess of genetic diseases. If you live today, you have at least one genetic disease and probably two or three.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou I am not disputing that negative mutations happen, or that they vastly outnumber positive ones, but that does not mean that every complex species has a degrading genome.
TheDcac 4 days ago
@TheDcac "I am not disputing that negative mutations happen, or that they vastly outnumber positive ones, but that does not mean that every complex species has a degrading genome." You go find any added complexity to show that this is possible. Mutations do not allow this. It is against all the evidence. Some creatures that are not tainted by humans and have strong constitutions just devolve more slowly. Humans have the ability to screw creatures they mess with; sort of a "black thumb".
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago 2
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
As time goes on they lose fitness and eventually go extinct. Some creatures are much faster at gene loss. Humans are one species of those creatures. The higher level functions of brain, muscles, heart, and immune system have already been degenerated and screwed up.This is why heart disease, cancer, diabetes, and auto immune diseases are growing at epidemic rates.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Recurrent Pregnancy Loss and Its Relation to Combined Parental Thrombophilic Gene Mutations.
Ozdemir O, Yenicesu GI, Silan F, Köksal B, Atik S, Ozen F, Göl M, Cetin A.
Genet Test Mol Biomarkers. 2011 Nov 2. [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22047507 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@atticana fallacy if it is slanderous, untrue, or unrelated to the topic. None of my claims meet those criteria, but of course the 'cry wolf' gambit of creationists is usually to baselessly accuse their detractors of ad hominem. I did not insult his (or your) character in anyway that was not true. You have both been lazy and dishonest in your research and presentation thereof, so my statement is a valid one. And finally, again you fall back to putting the onus on me for your ignorance?
ianman6 3 weeks ago
@attica As for the accusations of 'abuse', my treatment of GoodScienceForYou was accurate, deserved, and rather mild compared to the comments he leaves for other people. His channel name is a misnomer, as it is in fact examplary of very bad science. If that is the insult you accuse me of, I stand by it, and it is true. What I be insulting if I called someone on their lie? I think not.
ianman6 3 weeks ago 5
@ianman6 Your faith and belief in your religion, Evodelusionism, controls your mind. I don't have a religion, making my life one of freedom and intelligence. I learned very young that all people have agendas and that they indoctrinate children into those agendas. It is what my main teaching is about. Lemmings will never be free; never find the truth. Seek the truth for your self. /watch?v=sPPafzd4wGI
If you are not seeking the absolute truth, then you are only seeking to perpetuate lies.
GoodScienceForYou 30 minutes ago
@attica that is already out there, in abundance, which you have willfuly avoided? Your demend that I provide an argument to refute your non-evidence, when aforementioned evidence is ubiquitous in the scientific literature, is shameful and, when it gets to a certain point (after repeatedly being exposed), it can be qualified as dishonest.
ianman6 3 weeks ago
@ianman6 If you really feel like that it puzzles me somewhat that you even bothered to watch my video criticising your hero potholer54, or indeed any similar videos. And if you are so knowledgeable about such matters as you claim to be then SURELY you could manage to present at least a few scraps of this knowledge instead of your usual steady flow of ad hominems.
atticana 3 weeks ago
@atticana I watched your video, as well as others offering supposed rebuttals to potholer54 (more precisely, to established scientific fact) becaue I continuously give the benefit of the doubt that perhaps there might be something valid or original. Time and time again, I am let down. Potholer54 is no hero of mine (why are your type obsessed with the notion of veneration and worship?), but he still is correct. As for the ad hominems, you need to check your definitions. Ad hominem is only a ...
ianman6 3 weeks ago
@atticana SURELY the 'few scraps of knowledge' you seek are to be found in a video like those published by potholer54. Just because you are ill equipped to understand and evaluate it and decide to make arguments which do not in any way adequately contradict those of potholer54's does not make it my responsibility to correct you. You have failed to perform due dilligence, the onus is still on you to provide adequate counter-arguments against established scientific knowledge.
ianman6 3 weeks ago 2
@ianman6 Potholer is a lemming, repeating the religious HEMG of his time.
His data is over 30 years out of date also. He is not even a scientist, but a retired, arrogant, writer of "science" articles.
I have challenged him to a debate many times, but he refuses to debate in public. Most ET's are afraid of me. I use their own data to destroy their faith in the religion of Evodelusionism. There's enough data on this forum for a sane person to realize that DNA only shows genetic degradation.
GoodScienceForYou 25 minutes ago
@atticana due diligence in your 'research'. You must accomplish at least that much, which I expect even of my first years students, before you may benefit from further enlightenment. Reading exclusively anti-science, pseudoscience and religious progaganda on scientific subjects does not count as 'research'. Internet searching on apologetics sites doesn't either. If you can't be bothered to even take an introductory class or look at a 101 textbook on the subject, why should I present evidence...
ianman6 3 weeks ago
@ianman6 I agree that you should stop reading anti science evolution biology.
It is how people become teachers of religious myths. There is no evolution. There is no data that supports it at all. Yet you believe this and teach this to children. That makes you a mental child molester. You degrade your students using the same methods that you were molested with. That makes it much more difficult to get free. You couldn't face yourself if you realize what youre doing. But there's hope for all.
GoodScienceForYou 19 minutes ago
@ianman6 "why should I present evidence..." If you do, I can help you to understand it in terms of real data we have, instead of the religious myths you think are taking place. I have never lost a debate on this. The ET's will start personal attacks and not address the information after a while it is too much for them to realize they have been fooled. I pity anyone who believes in the fantasy of evolution. If you want to debate this in detail goto "Neutral Evolution Forum" and be polite.
GoodScienceForYou 16 minutes ago
@atticana There is little to be gained in attempting to educate and correct very fundamental errors in the mind of one who has predetermined conclusions, let alone to do so on YouTube. He peddles nothing but ignorance and encourages, by example, intellectual laziness and dishonesty. Given that these are his (or her) two most notable traits, why would you ask me to do his homework for him? By the very fact that he (and you) present erronious and misinformed arguments, it is clear you have not...
ianman6 3 weeks ago
@ianman6 "There is little to be gained in attempting to educate and correct very fundamental errors in the mind of one who has predetermined conclusions," The irony is just amazing. You were brainwashed in to a faith and belief in magical mutations that fix screwed up DNA and add complexity where none exists. There is no evidence of evolution. NONE, but you believe? Why? Could it be your "education"?
GoodScienceForYou 13 minutes ago
Here are the typical stages of society as history teaches: 1. From bondage to spiritual faith 2. From spiritual faith to great courage 3. From great courage to liberty 4. From liberty to abundance 5. From abundance to selfishness 6. From selfishness to complacency 7. From complacency to apathy 8. From apathy to moral decay 9. From moral decay to dependence 10. From dependence to bondage
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
It raises many questions for you. f**k don't you know about mutation... f**k go and get a degree in genetics..Just because you don't understand genetics, you make up stupid questions, What are you claiming, f**k you want a minute by minute account of evolution? Do what potholer54 does go and research it, I bet you can't you wouldn't know where to start..
timdnwd 1 month ago
@timdnwd Ho ho ho...genetics is greatly overrated as a guide to being human. According to geneticists hardly anything distinguishes us from the chimpanzees. And yet in reality the differences are profound, as is indicated by the fact that you and I are arguing across cyberspace rather than screeching at each other from the treetops. The fact that neither you nor potholer54 grasp this point shows how desperately limited the scientific perspective really is.
atticana 1 month ago
@timdnwd i agree with most of what you say, except i believe that you do P54 and those that agree with him disservice when using profanity to make our point. please consider that you are representing us in a bad light by stooping to the ignorant creationist level when using this sort of language. as i think it i choose not to say it lol.
transporter78213 1 month ago
@timdnwd I know far more about genetics and mutations than you seem to know. /watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
This video is from experts in DNA and is published word for word as to the results of mutations.
There is no possible way for mutations to cause a net positive increase in complexity. All they do is degrade when the creatures with a mutation survives. Then at some point the last mutations destroy the creature.
This is why we have so many millions of extinct creatures.
GoodScienceForYou 5 days ago 4
@GoodScienceForYou
I really wish i could privately talk to someone like you one time. Off the record. To ask if you really do believe the utter load of $417 that comes out of your mouths and which you claim is scientific.
TheDcac 2 months ago 5
@TheDcac
Why don't you skype me. I am in holland and would love to educate you on real science. I have studied all the evidence and have refuted all of it. PM me and I will give you my skype and when I am available.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou Honestly I am not interested at all in you "educating" me on your "science". I have seen you videos and they demonstrate pretty bloody well that you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about. The only reason I would want to talk to you is the one I stated before; If you didn't really believe this stuff it would restore my faith in humanity's intelligence considerably.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago 2
@TheDcac You are the religious person. I have no religion. Tested IQ of over 180. DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence against any form of evolution. If you don't know this you are an Evotard. I offer to help people all the time to get free from delusional human garbage faith and belief, yet they are so sure about their religion.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou Yes, clearly that is all true. My IQ has been tested as over 200. DNA is absolutely irrefutable evidence for evolution on its own. If you don't know this you are a retard. I have offered to help you to get free from delusional human garbage faith and belief, yet you are so sure about religion.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac "I really wish i could privately talk to someone like you one time. Off the record." DNA only shows a net genetic degradation in all multicellular creatures. On all the creatures we have where we have a living predecessor, the predecessor is more fit to survive and has more genes in tact. There are over 4600 mapped genetic defects in humans that cause disease, this is not possible if evolution were true. Think, but I know that pressure to conform to this HEMG is heavy in your country.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou and that country is?
TheDcac 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac It is very difficult to get free of cultural brainwashing. People leave their religion and take on another, but this religion is called "evolution".
It has nothing redeemable about it. Has no evidence, and is an utterly flawed pseudo science of the tin hat and magic wand variety.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou Unless you are lying about your location, Australia, which is where Potsmoker54 is, as I recall. I have found the most fundamentalist religious Evotards are from the education system in Australia. Next is the UK where they worship Darwin and have a statue of him to bow down to with religious reverence,
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou mmmm yes, Australia happens to be a generally well educated country.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac Australians seem to be conformists with no balls to think for themselves. So, far I have only met a few who have the strength to get free from brainwashing. The adamantly support something that has no evidence.
Do you know that in real science we look for absolutely irrefutable evidence first before we make a theory?
This crap of evolution was a religion and still is a religion that has been pawned off as science. DNA absolutely destroys evolution as a theory.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Australians seem to be conformists with no balls to think for themselves." It is you Jehovah's Witnesses that do not think for yourselves. You let The Watchtower do your thinking for you.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@TheDcac I strongly suggest that you view my videos on 1/ Indoctrination by governments and society, 2/ The real science of Genetics and DNA.
/watch?v=sPPafzd4wGI
/watch?v=bQrkBtnD_UQ
/watch?v=ZeAzlfNrqKM
/watch?v=spuZtAa80qI
/watch?v=emPINOUlfnE
Here is a chance for you to get free and be a free thinker.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou also calling evolution a religion just makes me laugh. Even if it were false, it would still not be a religion.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago 7
@GoodScienceForYou
You see this is what I mean in the first comment I made, surely you must be a troll to act this stupid. It is very sad indeed if you are not.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago 2
@TheDcac GoodScienceForYou puts forward arguments and presents his case. All that you do is throw insults at him. So who deserves the most respect, both in intellectual and personal terms?
atticana 3 weeks ago
@atticana "GoodScienceForYou puts forward arguments and presents his case."
Really? Have you watched his videos or read his comments? He claimed that the fusion of human chromosome #2 never happened. When people showed him that he was wrong, he pretended that he did not hold that view. He then came up with the hypothesis that humans mated with gorillas to produce chimpanzees and that the fusion of #2 stopped it from continuing. I am NOT making this up - he really claimed that.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@TheDcac Now that we have determined that you are a liar and afraid of the truth, Why don't you show us your absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that requires no interpretation, is obvious clear with no opinions and shows evolution...That fish evolved into humans. This otta be good!!
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GoodScienceForYou I don't think I can do that just here, but I would happily give you irrefutable evidence as to man's common ancestry with great apes.
TheDcac 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac I already have discussed this. The Chimp is a genetically degraded human, obviously. It was from a tribe and is a message from God about where we are headed. It has over 160,000 genetic defects along its genetic path of degradation.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac Having a severely genetically degraded cousin, nearly extinct, is pure evidence of only genetic degradation.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac By the way the fusion of #2 human chromosome is a genetic defect another form of genetic degradation that took place after the split from the Chimp. All of this is obvious beyond any possible stupid religious belief in evolution. Wolf far superior to dogs. Ancient horse far more complex bone structure. Ancient elephant way stronger than modern. Every species, every piece of evidence only shows genetic loss. The ancient rat predecessor was huge and much more complex bone structure.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@GSFY "By the way the fusion of #2 human chromosome is a genetic defect another form of genetic degradation that took place after the split from the Chimp. All of this is obvious..."
You claim that this is obvious, but your video "05 Fused Chromosomes, ERVs " claimed that there was no fusion, that scientists who claimed otherwise were engaging in "sideways logic"
At 4:10 you state "First of all, there's no such thing as a fused chromosome..."
watch?v=29e8brRBEVI
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@TheDcac "I really wish i could privately talk to someone like you one time."
PM me and I will give you my skype and you can chat with me. I will set you straight fast on the absolute evidence against any form of evolution.
GoodScienceForYou 3 weeks ago
@TheDcac If you have seen my videos, then unfortunately for you, it takes a degree of intelligence to understand them. Apparently, that is lacking in you skills.
This is common with the "anointed" Evotards. DNA is absolutely irrefutable obvious, clear, concise exacting, not deniable, physical evidence that only shows genetic losses in all complex creatures. So, there is no evolution.
GoodScienceForYou 5 days ago 3
@GoodScienceForYou "If you have

@GoodScienceForYou "DNA is absolutely irrefutable obvious, clear, concise exacting, not deniable, physical evidence that only shows genetic losses in all complex creatures." Citation needed.
TheDcac 4 days ago 2
When I say citation I mean peer reviewed, expert evidence from a well known scientific journal; one such journal might be the International Journal of Biological Sciences.
TheDcac 4 days ago 2
@TheDcac Gene loss, protein sequence divergence, gene dispensability, expression level, and interactivity are correlated in eukaryotic evolution.
Krylov DM, Wolf YI, Rogozin IB, Koonin EV.
Source
National Center for Biotechnology Information, National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20894, USA.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@TheDcac Goto PubMed and look up "gene loss". There are hundreds of articles on the nature of gene loss and "evolution". Over 90,000 of them.
Goto the Human Genome Project and look up the numbers of genetic defects that have been mapped in humans so far. It is over 4600 now.
According to genetic science there are only 4 positive mutations that they "believe" are new.
This has been know about for a long time now, since DNA started to be mapped.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Am J Med Genet A. 2011 Nov 3. doi: 10.1002/ajmg.a.34302. [Epub ahead of print]
Two new cases with microdeletion of 17q23.2 suggest presence of a candidate gene for sensorineural hearing loss within this region.
Schönewolf-Greulich B, Ronan A, Ravn K, Baekgaard P, Lodahl M, Nielsen K, Rendtorff ND, Tranebjaerg L, Brøndum-Nielsen K, Tümer Z.
Source
Genetic Counselling Clinic, Kennedy Center, Glostrup, Denmark.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov 4. [Epub ahead of print]
Identification of copy number alterations associated with the progression of DCIS to invasive ductal carcinoma.
Johnson CE, Gorringe KL, Thompson ER, Opeskin K, Boyle SE, Wang Y, Hill P, Mann GB, Campbell IG.
Source
VBCRC Cancer Genetics Laboratory, Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Locked Bag 1, A'Beckett St, East Melbourne, Victoria, VIC, 8006, Australia.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou None of your spam proves your point. We are all aware of genetic disease. There is a 1 in 200 chance of someone being born with a genetic disease and a 199 in 200 chance that they will not.
You stupid war against a well-established scientific theory shows only how your religion has warped your mind.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@AlanCFA How many times do I have to post all the data on human odds of genetic diseases, until you understand? Do you not read anything. I put of over 40 posts with the disease and the odds of it taking place. It is greater than 1 to 1 that you have genetic disease or two or even three.
You are in denial. It is part of the sickness associated with magical thinking.
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GSFY "How many times do I have to post all the data on human odds of genetic diseases, until you understand?" First of all, for the concept of "odds" to make sense, the concept of random MUST exist. You have claimed that it does not.
"Do you not read anything. I put of over 40 posts with the disease and the odds of it taking place"
Go to the Human Genome website - the odds of someone being born with a single gene disorder 1-in-200. Multiple gene disorders are more rare still.
AlanCFA 3 days ago 2
@AlanCFA 1 in 200 is just one disease. Why are you so stupid? Familial hypercholesterolemia      1 in 500
Polycystic kidney disease      1 in 1250
Neurofibromatosis Type I      1 in 2,500
Hereditary spherocytosis      1 in 5,000
Marfan syndrome      1 in 4,000 [2]
Huntington's disease      1 in 15,000 [3
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
Duchenne muscular dystrophy      1 in 7,000
Hemophilia      1 in 10,000
This list is just the "single gene disorders".
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
There are 173719 papers on human genetic disorders on pubmed site. 
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
1 in 14 have diabetes a genetic disease. 
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
Comment removed
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "1 in 200 is just one disease. " No - it is the odds of getting ANY of the diseases that you mention. 199 of 200 births do NOT have a single-gene disorder. Multiple-gene disorders are even more rare.
Why are you so stupid?
AlanCFA 3 days ago 2
@AlanCFA Sickle cell anemia      1 in 625 (African Americans) Cystic fibrosis      1 in 2,000 (Caucasians) Lysosomal Acid Lipase (LAL) Deficiency      1 in 40,000 Tay-Sachs disease      1 in 3,000 (American Jews) Phenylketonuria      1 in 12,000 Mucopolysaccharidoses      1 in 25,000 Glycogen storage diseases      1 in 50,000 Galactosemia      1 in 57,000
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Sickle cell anemia 1 in 625..."
Yes - you are proving what I said, all of the stats that you show are that the odds of getting a genetic disease are LOW. Or do you think that 1 in 625 means that everybody gets sickle cell?
From the Human Genome site: "There are more than 6,000 known single-gene disorders, which occur in about 1 out of every 200 births. " And the multiple-gene disorders are even more rare.
AlanCFA 3 days ago 2
@AlanCFA You moron! Geeze! You are so stupid! You look at all the numbers and combine them to equal greater than 1 in 1 of you having a genetic defect that will cause you to suffer. You are one dumb person.
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou Out of 100 people 100 people will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 1000 people, 1000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Out of 10000, 10000 will have a genetic disorder(s). Get it. You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100% The odds of you having 2 disorders is just as bad. Three is common. This does not include all the babies who die from genetic defects in the womb. Only covers the live births.
/watch?v=abcsZZ9Duxw
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "You combine all the numbers and your odds of being sick from a genetic defect are 100%"
It is when you "combine all the numbers" that the odds are 1 in 200, NOT 1 in 1. Again, this is from the Human Genome website: "There are more than 6,000 known single-gene disorders, which occur in about 1 out of every 200 births." That is a DIRECT QUOTE. Get it through your head, you are WRONG. You rely on your religious indoctrination to try and disprove science.
AlanCFA 2 days ago 3
@AlanCFA 1 of Many/ The odds of diabetes is 26,000,000 out of 320,000,000 which is easy to calculate and this is just one genetic disease. 1 in 12 persons in the USA. You take a single point disease and call that ALL the disseases? You are a liar as usual. multifactorial inheritance include: heart disease, high blood pressure, Alzheimer's disease, arthritis, diabetes, cancer, and obesity. Next comes: Chromosome abnormalities, Mitochondrial inheritance Mental Disorders
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
2 of Many / Autosomal dominant Familial hypercholesterolemia      1 in 500 Polycystic kidney disease 1 in 1250 Neurofibromatosis Type I      1 in 2,500 Hereditary spherocytosis      1 in 5,000 Marfan syndrome      1 in 4,000 [2] Huntington's disease      1 in 15,000 [3] Autosomal recessive Sickle cell anemia      1 in 625 (African Americans) Cystic fibrosis      1 in 2,000 (Caucasians) Lysosomal Acid Lipase (LAL) Deficiency      1 in 40,000 Tay-Sachs disease      1 in 3,000 (American Jews) Phenylketonuria      1 in 12,000
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
3 of Many/ Mucopolysaccharidoses      1 in 25,000
Glycogen storage diseases      1 in 50,000
Galactosemia      1 in 57,000
X-linked
Duchenne muscular dystrophy      1 in 7,000
Hemophilia      1 in 10,000
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
4 of Many/ Cancer Breast 1 in 7. Prostrate 1 in 150 , In addition to the mitochondrial myopathies, other examples include:
Diabetes mellitus and deafness (DAD)
this combination at an early age can be due to mitochondrial disease
Diabetes mellitus and deafness can also be found together for other reasons
Leber's hereditary optic neuropathy (LHON)
visual loss beginning in young adulthood
eye disorder (cont)
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
5 of Many/ characterized by progressive loss of central vision due to degeneration of the optic nerves and retina
Wolff-Parkinson-White syndrome
multiple sclerosis-type disease
affects 1 in 50,000 people in Finland
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
6 of Many/ Leigh syndrome, subacute sclerosing encephalopathy
after normal development the disease usually begins late in the first year of life, although onset may occur in adulthood
a rapid decline in function occurs and is marked by seizures, altered states of consciousness, dementia, ventilatory failure
Neuropathy, ataxia, retinitis pigmentosa, and ptosis (NARP)
progressive symptoms as described in the acronym
dementia
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
7 of Many/ Myoneurogenic gastrointestinal encephalopathy (MNGIE)
gastrointestinal pseudo-obstruction
neuropathy
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
8 of Many Myoclonic Epilepsy with Ragged Red Fibers (MERRF)
progressive myoclonic epilepsy
"Ragged Red Fibers" – clumps of diseased mitochondria accumulate in the subsarcolemmal region of the muscle fiber and appear as "Ragged Red Fibers" when muscle is stained with modified Gömöri trichrome stain
short stature
hearing loss
lactic acidosis
exercise intolerance
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
9 of Many / Mitochondrial myopathy, encephalomyopathy, lactic acidosis, stroke-like symptoms (MELAS)
mtDNA depletion
mitochondrial neurogastrointestinal encephalomyopathy (MNGIE)
Nota bene: Conditions such as Friedreich's ataxia can affect the mitochondria, but are not associated with mitochondrial proteins.
GoodScienceForYou 13 hours ago
@AlanCFA You don't even understand what statistics are.  What a moron. Statistics are based on data. Random is based on some magical human emotional mental garbage. What is wrong with your brain? Have you had an IQ test?
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "You don't even understand what statistics are. " Yes I do. It is YOU who do not. I have studied the subject, you have not. You invent lies to try and boost your ego and pretend that you are intelligent and have answers when the truth is that you are a delusional moron.
AlanCFA 2 days ago 3
@AlanCFA 1 of 3 will die from cancer. You are really stupid. You need to go study this away from your religious crap.
The data is all over on the government medical sites, cancer sites, CDC, pub med etc. They have all the statistics from real life, not from your religion.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "1 of 3 will die from cancer." The other 2 of 3 will die of something else.
Most cancers are new and not genetically based, so this statement is irrelevant to your claim about genetic degradation.
AlanCFA 2 days ago
@AlanCFA Statistics are based on evidence also called data.
Random mutations are caused by a mental disease called delusions. Delusions are what fuel most people.
Random is not a scientific word. Odds based on statistics is a valid part of science using data and applied math.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@AlanCFA A single gene disorder is only one type of disorder. Go look at the entire human genome chart. You can get a copy from them for free. It was paid for by your tax dollars.
The best thing you could do for your self is to extract yourself from all of your self imposed beliefs not founded in reality. This is just one of those beliefs. Beliefs are based on ideas that give your emotions some sort of relief. The strongest emotion is fear. Those born as C religion are taught fear from birth.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@GSFY "A single gene disorder is only one type of disorder"
True, there are 4 types of genetic disorders
1) Single gene
2) Multifactorial (also called complex or polygenic)
3) Chromosomal
4) Mitochondrial
The odds of getting a single gene disorder are 1-in-200, that is 0.05 of births. The other genetic disorders are
LESS LIKELY. So when you add up 0.05 with three numbers that are SMALLER, you do not even get 1-in-100, much less 1-in-1. Your stupid claim is wrong as is your denial of the TOE
AlanCFA 2 days ago
@AlanCFA "Go to the Human Genome website - the odds of someone being born with a single gene disorder 1-in-200. Multiple gene disorders are more rare still." Yet, every single human I have met has some sickness, some body disorder, or some disease. Have you never talked with anyone? Do you ever pay attention to your own sicknesses? 1 in 14 Now has a form diabetes, which is a genetic weakness. 1 in three die of cancer. 50% of adult Americans are on some form of drug for mental disorders.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Yet, every single human I have met has some sickness, some body disorder, or some disease." Doesn't say much for the crowd your run with. You claimed that the odds were 1-in-1 and the Human Genome website shows that they are 1-in-200. As to diabetes, the American Diabetes Assn says that genetics alone does not cause diabetes, but genetics plus environment. Type 2 diabetes (adult onset) is fairly common, but is primarily caused by eating and exercise habits - not genetics.
AlanCFA 2 days ago
@AlanCFA What type of diabetes is not caused by genetic weaknesses? Why are there people with horrible eating habits and who don't exercise at all without diabetes? Duh? Do you know anything about diabetes at all?
but "genetics plus environment." You post genetics is the cause with environment? And you say it has nothing to do with genetic weaknesses?
You are really living under a rock of ignorance. Try reading what you write instead of being so angry and emotional about your religion.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
Comment removed
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@AlanCFA There are epidemics of diabetes in the US and in Europe. This is because of the genetic weaknesses of "modern" mutations.
Did you know that "diabetes" runs in families? Duh? How is that possible if diabetes is not a genetic disease?
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@AlanCFA Let me teach you some math. In the US there are 26,000,000 people with diabetes. There are 312566000 people in the US. Divide each by 26,000,000 and you get the 1 in 12 odds of having diabetes. That is just one disease. Are you able to comprehend? Is anybody home? Do you know about numbers.. Numbers are like this 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. Can you count?
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@AlanCFA People are looking to stop the pain and suffering from childhood abuses and often that includes the strong sense of guilt from some well known religions. You think that this crap religion of evolution will set you free. What will set you free is you realizing the Truth and nothing else can do that for you.
Jumping from one screwed up religion into another is a common human characteristic.
If you want to be free, seek the truth.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
AlanCFA 2 days ago 2
@AlanCFA Scientists are also realizing that obesity is also caused by genetic causes. So is mental illness, like you have. Over 50% of adults in the US are taking some sort of drug for mental problems. I think most of those believe in evolution, because it is a depression religion. There is a long list of mental diseases caused by mutations/genetics.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
@AlanCFA Cancer is caused by the bodies inability to destroy mutant cells with a fully functioning immune system. Cancer cells are a naturally occuring phenomenon. The odds of you having cancer cells is like 100% according to statistics. If you have a healthy immune system (one that is not messed up from incorrect human behavior that would have preserved your genome) your body will destroy the cancer cells as soon as they show up,
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
As people age 1 in 3 will have their immune system fail from weakness first and cause cancer. Why are there people who live to 100 who smoke tobacco, drink, and eat crap? Could it be genetics of a powerful immune system? HMM? If they have an overly powerful immune system they often suffer from auto immune diseases from overly powerful genetically defective immune system.
GoodScienceForYou 2 days ago
J Cell Mol Med. 2011 Nov 2. doi: 10.1111/j.1582-4934.2011.01483­.x. [Epub ahead of print]
Inhibition of JAK2/STAT3 signaling induces colorectal cancer cell apoptosis via mitochondrial pathway.
Du W, Hong J, Wang YC, Zhang YJ, Wang P, Su WY, Lin YW, Lu R, Zou W, Xiong H, Fang JY.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Source
From GI Division, Shanghai Jiao-Tong University School of Medicine Renji Hospital, Shanghai Institution of Digestive Disease; Key Laboratory of Gastroenterology & Hepatology, Ministry of Health (Shanghai Jiao-Tong University); State Key Laboratory of Oncogene and Related Genes. 145 Middle Shandong Rd, Shanghai 200001, China.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GSFY
"Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol 1998 Apr;18(4):562-567. "PAI-1 plasma levels in a general population without clinical evidence of atherosclerosis: relation to environmental and genetic determinants," by Margaglione M, Cappucci G, et al."
Question - is this one of the "four" mutations that you claim is positive?
What about "Polymorphisms in the coagulation factor VII gene and the risk of myocardial infarction" ?
AlanCFA 3 days ago
Detection and functional characterization of a large genomic deletion resulting in decreased pathogenicity in Ralstonia solanacearum race 3 biovar 2 strains.
González A, Plener L, Restrepo S, Boucher C, Genin S.
Environ Microbiol. 2011 Nov 3. doi: 10.1111/j.1462-2920.2011.02636­.x. [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22050636 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
J Med Genet. 2011 Nov 2. [Epub ahead of print]
Disruption of a long distance regulatory region upstream of SOX9 in isolated disorders of sex development.
Benko S, Gordon CT, Mallet D, Sreenivasan R, Thauvin-Robinet C, Brendehaug A, Thomas S, Bruland O, David M, Nicolino M, Labalme A, Sanlaville D, Callier P, Malan V, Huet F, Molven A, Dijoud F, Munnich A, Faivre L, Amiel J, Harley V, Houge G, Morel Y, Lyonnet S.
Source
1INSERM U-781, Hôpital Necker-Enfants Malades, Paris, France.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Loss of UDP-N-acetylglucosamine 2-epimerase/ N-acetylmannosamine kinase (GNE) induces apoptotic processes in pancreatic carcinoma cells.
Kemmner W, Kessel P, Sanchez-Ruderisch H, Möller H, Hinderlich S, Schlag PM, Detjen K.
FASEB J. 2011 Nov 2. [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22049060 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Basal-like Breast cancer DNA copy number losses identify genes involved in genomic instability, response to therapy, and patient survival.
Weigman VJ, Chao HH, Shabalin AA, He X, Parker JS, Nordgard SH, Grushko T, Huo D, Nwachukwu C, Nobel A, Kristensen VN, Børresen-Dale AL, Olopade OI, Perou CM.
Breast Cancer Res Treat. 2011 Nov 3. [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22048815 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
J Immunol. 2011 Nov 2. [Epub ahead of print]
Human Th1 and Th17 Cells Exhibit Epigenetic Stability at Signature Cytokine and Transcription Factor Loci.
Cohen CJ, Crome SQ, Macdonald KG, Dai EL, Mager DL, Levings MK.
Source
Department of Medical Genetics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia V5Z 4H4, Canada;
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Mol Genet Genomics. 2011 Nov 3. [Epub ahead of print]
Structure of the acyl-glucose-dependent anthocyanin 5-O-glucosyltransferase gene in carnations and its disruption by transposable elements in some varieties.
Nishizaki Y, Matsuba Y, Okamoto E, Okamura M, Ozeki Y, Sasaki N.
Source
Department of Biotechnology and Life Science, Faculty of Engineering, Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology, 2-24-16 Naka-cho, Koganei, Tokyo, 184-8588, Japan.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Chimpanzee_Genome_Project 
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Disruption of Smad4 impairs TGF-β/Smad3 and Smad7 transcriptional regulation during renal inflammation and fibrosis in vivo and in vitro.
Meng XM, Huang XR, Xiao J, Chung AC, Qin W, Chen HY, Lan HY.
Kidney Int. 2011 Nov 2. doi: 10.1038/ki.2011.327. [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22048127 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Micro RNA -214,-150,-146a and-125b target Huntingtin gene.
Sinha M, Ghose J, Bhattarcharyya NP.
RNA Biol. 2011 Nov 1;8(6). [Epub ahead of print]
PMID: 22048026 [PubMed - as supplied by publisher]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
Deletion of exon 20 of the familial dysautonomia gene ikbkap in mice causes developmental delay, cardiovascular defects, and early embryonic lethality.
Dietrich P, Yue J, E S, Dragatsis I.
PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e27015. Epub 2011 Oct 28.
PMID: 22046433 [PubMed - in process]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
This has been flagged as spam   show
TheDcac 4 days ago
Loss of the α2β1 Integrin Alters Human Papilloma Virus-Induced Squamous Carcinoma Progression In Vivo and In Vitro.
Tran T, Barlow B, O'Rear L, Jarvis B, Li Z, Dickeson K, Dupont W, Zutter M.
PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e26858. Epub 2011 Oct 27.
PMID: 22046385 [PubMed - in process]
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
PLoS One. 2011;6(10):e26737. Epub 2011 Oct 26.
The CDKN2A G500 Allele Is More Frequent in GBM Patients with No Defined Telomere Maintenance Mechanism Tumors and Is Associated with Poorer Survival.
Royds JA, Al Nadaf S, Wiles AK, Chen YJ, Ahn A, Shaw A, Bowie S, Lam F, Baguley BC, Braithwaite AW, Macfarlane MR, Hung NA, Slatter TL.
Source
Department of Pathology, Dunedin School of Medicine, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou It's great that you can spam with a whole lot of journals without actually showing me where they prove that research "only shows genetic losses in all complex creatures."
TheDcac 4 days ago 7
@TheDcac Your statement shows you don't have a clue about science. This is my paper on science, backed by over 90,000 papers of DNA research. That is how science works.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou Once again, a quote, with the page number, that distinctly says that research only shows degradation of the genome of all complex creatures.
TheDcac 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "Your statement shows you don't have a clue about science. This is my paper on science, backed by over 90,000 papers of DNA research. That is how science works. "
YOU are the one with no understanding of science. You have not published any peer-reviewed paper and comments on YouTube are not the equivalent. You have NOT read 90,000 papers on DNA research and, if you ever do, it will not take the place of experiment. Learn SOMETHING about science, you ignorant old fool.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
There are over 90,000 articles alone on the PubMed site on genetic losses. There are about 4 known positive mutations. The number of points in DNA that are screwed up in humans shows absolutely there in no possible positive evolution. That means all creatures came from a superior parent of the genetic lineage with designed in completed DNA made to work for many environments, foods, and conditions.
GoodScienceForYou 4 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou "There are about 4 known positive mutations." That is a blatant lie. I have posted many citations to studies showing you that there are many beneficial mutations. You simply LIE and make your ludicrous claims. You ARE a creationist and you advance nonsense arguments to support your religious worldview.
"The number of points in DNA that are screwed up in humans shows absolutely there in no possible positive evolution" Complete supposition with no support from you.
AlanCFA 3 days ago
@AlanCFA There are 4 known positive mutations in humans.
DNA is absolutely irrefutable physical evidence that only shows genetic losses in all complex creatures as the NET outcome of any form of mutations. You cannot refute absolute evidence. I am sorry for you.
There is no evolution. We were designed and were far more fit in the original parent of the human genus. This is what the absolute evidence shows.
GoodScienceForYou 3 days ago
@GoodScienceForYou I've been following this discussion with great interest. Recently some early homo sapiens remains were found in Southern England and in the article I read it stated how early homo sapiens were generally taller than we are today and had larger brains. Which seems to me powerful evidence of how the human species has actually undergone physiological deterioration over the millenia.
atticana 3 days ago
@atticana There is more evidence of this. The Herto and the Orrorin tugenensis has an exact bone alignment to modern humans but a much strong femur; straight and much thicker bone.
The sins of the father are passed on in genetic deterioration, emotional garbage, and in mental delusions.
It takes a special person to get free of this and recognize that when we "fell" it means we started on this path of "sin". If you study the bible it is ALL

Molecular Decay of the Tooth Gene Enamelin (ENAM) Mirrors the Loss of Enamel in the Fossil Record of Placental Mammals

Robert W. Meredith1, John Gatesy1, William J. Murphy2, Oliver A. Ryder3, Mark S. Springer1*
1 Department of Biology, University of California Riverside, Riverside, California, United States of America, 2 Department of Veterinary Integrative Biosciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas, United States of America, 3 San Diego Zoo's Institute for Conservation Research, Escondido, California, United States of America

Less is more hypothesis - gene loss may explain unique human traits

Humans and chimps share most of their genes, yet they differ dramatically in many ways - their walk, the sizes of their brains and their capacities for speech and language, for example.
Scientists would like to know how and when such differences arose, and new research from the University of Michigan shows how one process - gene loss - may have figured in.

The work, by a group led by associate professor of ecology and evolutionary biology Jianzhi Zhang, is reported in the journal PLoS Biology.

Researchers who speculate about human origins have come up with three main scenarios for how we ended up with our unique traits, Zhang said. The first possibility is that we acquired completely new genes that other apes don't have. Another is that some of our genes have taken on different functions through mutation.

It's also possible that we humans lost some genes along the way, and those losses provided opportunities for changes that otherwise could not have occurred. For example, scientists have shown that over the course of evolution, humans lost a gene that produces a particular jaw muscle protein. Perhaps the loss of that gene gave us smaller jaw muscles, making room in our skulls for bigger brains.

That's just speculation, and until now there was no concrete evidence for the "less is more hypothesis" that losing certain genes offered tangible benefits, Zhang said. "So we wanted to know how many genes have been lost and what kinds of genes have been lost in human evolution, and second, whether any of those gene losses was a good thing."

Zhang's group started by scrutinizing a database of human pseudogenes - stretches of DNA that look like known genes but don't function as genes. Then the researchers weeded out pseudogenes that never had been functional in any organism. From those that remained, they further narrowed the field to only those human pseudogenes that had working counterparts in chimpanzees and also had mutations in places that would render the human versions inactive. They ended up with 67 human-specific pseudogenes, to which they added 13 that had been reported in the literature but not included in the original database, bringing the total to 80.

Next, Zhang and his team consulted another database called Gene Ontology, which lists the functions of all genes for which such information is known. That's when things got interesting. Instead of a random assortment of genes with various functions, they found that genes related to the sense of smell and the ability to taste bitterness were overrepresented in the collection of human pseudogenes. So were genes concerned with the immune response. The findings made sense to Zhang.

"We know that humans have reduced olfactory sensitivity, so the finding is consistent with that observation. Also, in a previous paper we showed that bitter taste receptor genes tended to become unimportant in humans, and we put forth a hypothesis to explain why: The ability to taste bitterness is important for detecting toxins in food, and most of those toxins are in plants. About 1 to 2 million years ago, we started eating more meat rather than plants, and also there was use of fire, which can detoxify foods."

Loss of function also is expected in genes related to the immune response. "Immune system genes respond to pathogens, which change rapidly, so the genes also change rapidly," Zhang said. "If the pathogen is no longer there, then you don't need the immune system gene in the host."

Having identified lost genes and their functions, the researchers next wanted to figure out whether losing the genes benefited humans in any way. Studies on mice suggested that loss of a gene called MBL1 - which is present and functional in rhesus monkeys and chimps as well as mice, but has lost its function in humans - might confer protection against severe bacterial infection in the blood (sepsis). But humans lost that gene so long ago, it was hard to pinpoint the evolutionary forces behind the loss.

So the researchers focused their attention on another human-specific pseudogene, CASPASE12. Work by other researchers had shown that the gene has completely lost its function in non-Africans, but a small percentage of Africans and African Americans have a functional copy of the gene. Interestingly, people who lack the gene are better able to resist sepsis than those who have a working copy.

"This is another indication that loss of the gene would be good for the individual, but it doesn't show that the gene became a pseudogene because of that advantage." However, using population genetics techniques, the researchers were able to demonstrate just that. They also determined when the loss occurred - somewhere between 51,000 and 74,000 years ago - which is consistent with the idea that it happened not long before humans began migrating out of Africa 40,000 to 60,000 years ago.

As for exactly how lacking the gene - which appears to be essential in all mammals except humans - became more advantageous than having the gene, Zhang believes he has an answer.

The immune system, he explained, must constantly be turned up or down to give the proper response. "It's a delicate balance - you don't want it too strong or too weak." The normal function of CASPASE12 is to keep the response from being too strong, and that probably served humans well at one time. But then, "during human evolution, either because of an environmental change or because of some other genetic changes in the human genome, the balance was broken, so that having the gene makes the response too low, and you can't fight infection," Zhang said. "If the gene is lost, the response returns to normal, and so does the ability to fight infection."

http://www.umich.edu

This idea of human evolving from fish is the  delusion of Evolution. Evolution is not science, that is where you are mistaken. It is a myth that gives hope for humans that they are evolving.
When the facts are opposite. There are way more than 4600 genetic defects in humans causing disease. There are 4 "positive" mutations that are not verifiable but one. That is the Truth. It is up to you to find your own truth. Objective awareness requires a special mind, trained to not believe.


You need to understand the power of suggestion and faith. The TV is filled with this religious crap on evolution. The minds of children are weak and easy to mold into conformity. They only want to survive and to conform to the culture. Children are not about seeking the truth, but about being molded into conforming. This is why there are 320 million jihadists who want to kill. There are no "good" forms of indoctrination. All that brings false faith and belief is the problem.

Evolution is a religion; Without any doubts. In the last 20 years we have been gathering the data from DNA that only shows genetic losses from mutations in all complex creatures. That is absolute, can't be refuted, obvious, beyond anyone's ability to change by faith and belief. It took nearly 150 years after the evidence showing the earth was not flat, before the paid scientist believers all died out. That is the nature of faith belief and indoctrination.


We know for a fact that there is no biological mechanism shown in any DNA other than genetic loss. 100% of the people on earth have genetic diseases and we are gaining more new diseases constantly.
1 in 12 in the US have diabetes. 1 in 8 women get breast cancer. There are so many diseases from mutations, yet some weak people want to believe in evolution.
Why don't you know this? Who is keeping this from you? Why do they believe in and teach religious nonsense being taught as "science"?

5 of X    "How will we live with each other?" The way we have lived with belief systems and ideology forever, by killing each other in the name of "good". Evolution kills us in the name of ignorance. Avoiding the reality of genetic degradation is not going to promote health. There is nothing that humans can do against their own delusions and ignorance they perpetuate in the name of "being good". Only God can fix this.  There is your answer. The Truth will set you free. Stop believing humans.

6 of X  Maybe you need to get free from the control you give to human faith and beliefs. For the most part all that you have faith and belief in, is not real. There may be 5% truth in it, the rest is the mental modulations of what your emotions do to you. People want to believe their parents, teachers, etc and there is the perfect scenario of blind teaching the blind out of goodness.      

If you really want the Truth, then you will find it. If all you want to do is perpetuate, yours and others beliefs, then that is what you will get. There are many paths towards freedom, but very few actually want it. Organic compulsions, ego, and needs, are the driving force of ignorance.