The reason atheist promote Evolution

Originally posted by RJHinds
So this is not actually an additional chromosome with new information,
but a duplication of a part or all of the 21st chromosome. This would
be similiar to a cow having an extra leg that is useless. In fact this
is not helpful to the person with the Down Syndrome since it reduces
their IQ to about 50 or 60.

It doesn't matter that the extra chromosome is a copy of an existing one, nor does it matter whether or not the extra chromosome benefits people who have it. What you asked for, was an example of a mutation that results in extra information in the genome and Downs Syndrome is such an example.
If you ask for cows with extra legs, you cannot use the fact that the extra leg is useless to reject a 5 legged cow. If you don't like the answer, then change the question. The original question has been answered correctly.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It doesn't matter that the extra chromosome is a copy of an existing one, nor does it matter whether or not the extra chromosome benefits people who have it. What you asked for, was an example of a mutation that results in extra information in the genome and Downs Syndrome is such an example.
If you ask for cows with extra legs, you cannot use the fact ...[text shortened]... like the answer, then change the question. The original question has been answered correctly.

I did point out that she did not word the question in the most accurate
way. But I think Mr. Dawkins must have understood what she meant
because of his failure to answer the question as you did.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Humans are apes. It is true by definition that we evolved from apes, and continue to evolve as apes.

I had understood that evolutionary theory states that humans & apes evolved from a common ancestor, in other words, humans are not apes.

Is there any study / suggested reading that states that humans are apes? Please clarify.

Originally posted by shahenshah
I had understood that evolutionary theory states that humans & apes evolved from a common ancestor, in other words, humans are not apes.

Is there any study / suggested reading that states that humans are apes? Please clarify.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ape

Originally posted by twhitehead
It doesn't matter that the extra chromosome is a copy of an existing one, nor does it matter whether or not the extra chromosome benefits people who have it. What you asked for, was an example of a mutation that results in extra information in the genome and Downs Syndrome is such an example.
If you ask for cows with extra legs, you cannot use the fact like the answer, then change the question. The original question has been answered correctly.

it does matter. according to dawkins in the link googlefudge provided, extra information doesn't mean an extra copy of the existing dna. that is redundancy. extra information is dna that does something new.


it is pointless to argue this as you can't point to a fish and watch it become a lizard. and that is the only evidence rjhinds and others like him will ever accept. nor can you quote too much genetics because you will confuse him and he will shut down automatically to preserve religious brain functions.


dawkins actually did provide an example in the link googlefudge provided. refer to that one

this:http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/the-information-challenge/

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did point out that she did not word the question in the most accurate
way. But I think Mr. Dawkins must have understood what she meant
because of his failure to answer the question as you did.

you didn't read the link googlefudge provided, did you?

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
you didn't read the link googlefudge provided, did you?

I started to. But it seemed rather long and I was not in the mood at the time
to wade throught it to see what would probably be more lies from him.
The answer is NO.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I started to. But it seemed rather long and I was not in the mood at the time
to wade throught it to see what would probably be more lies from him.
The answer is NO.

The answer is NO

What a surprise.

Originally posted by RJHinds
I started to. But it seemed rather long and I was not in the mood at the time
to wade throught it to see what would probably be more lies from him.
The answer is NO.

hahahahahaha

figures.

you provided the video, i watched it. i provided the link, you ignored it. seems like quite a christian attitude of fairness on your part, isn't it rj? did jesus do the same? tell the pharisees "talk to the hand"? did jesus pack up his toys and left?

Originally posted by RJHinds
I did point out that she did not word the question in the most accurate
way. But I think Mr. Dawkins must have understood what she meant
because of his failure to answer the question as you did.

I did not fail to answer the question. I answered it. You just don't like the answer.

Originally posted by shahenshah
Is there any study / suggested reading that states that humans are apes? Please clarify.

It doesn't need 'study'. It is really a matter of definition. Scientists have defined the word 'ape' to include humans. It is a classification term used to describe all species with certain characteristics.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I did not fail to answer the question. I answered it. You just don't like the answer.

I said Dawkins failed to answer the question, not you. You answered
the question just fine. However, you answered the question as she
stated it and not as she intended because you did not understand her
as Dawkins did.

Originally posted by twhitehead
It doesn't need 'study'. It is really a matter of definition. Scientists have defined the word 'ape' to include humans. It is a classification term used to describe all species with certain characteristics.

As Dasa would say, "It is those dishonest scientist again."

Originally posted by Zahlanzi
it does matter. according to dawkins in the link googlefudge provided, extra information doesn't mean an extra copy of the existing dna. that is redundancy. extra information is dna that does something new.


it is pointless to argue this as you can't point to a fish and watch it become a lizard. and that is the only evidence rjhinds and others like him ...[text shortened]... o that one

this:http://www.skeptics.com.au/publications/articles/the-information-challenge/

Okay, I finally had the time to read through the link where Dawkins
explains information theory. But He says we will have to read his books
to get the answer to the creationists question since he would not repeat
it. A nice way to sell some more books, I guess.

Originally posted by RJHinds
Okay, I finally had the time to read through the link where Dawkins
explains information theory. But He says we will have to read his books
to get the answer to the creationists question since he would not repeat
it. A nice way to sell some more books, I guess.

what, you never heard of a library?