This isn't new, but is still a fascinating read.

It looks at genetics and the evidence that supports evolution, for 
creationists.

One interesting section is the fact that primates and guinea pigs 
can't synthesise vitamin C, whilst other mammals can. Because of the 
path that evolution has followed, we can predict that the gene 
involved in synthesising Vitamin C was there but has been broken and 
the broken bits are still likely to be lying around in the genome of 
primates and guinea pigs.

And sure enough...

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/

Interestingly, this is a result of a mutation that has damaged the 
gene - one of creationists' favourite subjects. In this case, as 
both the primates and the guinea pig would have had vitamin C rich 
diets, there was no selection pressure against losing it.

regards, Ian

On Jun 19, 1:33 pm, Ian Smith 
wrote:
> This isn't new, but is still a fascinating read.
>
> It looks at genetics and the evidence that supports evolution, for
> creationists.
>
> One interesting section is the fact that primates and guinea pigs
> can't synthesise vitamin C, whilst other mammals can. Because of the
> path that evolution has followed, we can predict that the gene
> involved in synthesising Vitamin C was there but has been broken and
> the broken bits are still likely to be lying around in the genome of
> primates and guinea pigs.
>
> And sure enough...
>
> http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/molgen/
> Pu
> Interestingly, this is a result of a mutation that has damaged the
> gene - one of creationists' favourite subjects. In this case, as
> both the primates and the guinea pig would have had vitamin C rich
> diets, there was no selection pressure against losing it.
>
> regards, Ian

REPLY:  Ian,  I KNOW you dont look at your human body and conclude
that every centimeter was haphazardly formed by accidental
mutations .  I KNOW you dont truly think that the 60 major systems of
the human anatomy just so happen to work in unison so you can live.
So ,  why are you so adament about macro evolution being real and the
cause for humankind ?  Put another way, why do you want this to be
desperately so ?

On Jun 19, 5:00 pm, "Trolling fuckwit IlBeBa...@gmail.com> wrote:

> REPLY:  Ian,  I KNOW you dont look at your human body and conclude
> that every centimeter was haphazardly formed by accidental
> mutations .  

Dave's typiocal Watchmaker fallacy

I KNOW you dont truly think that the 60 major systems of
> the human anatomy just so happen to work in unison so you can live.

Which shows you DON'T KNOW SHIT

> So ,  why are you so adament about macro evolution being real and the
> cause for humankind ?  

Because it is, FOOL

Put another way, why do you want this to be
> desperately so

Because it is, FOOL


WTF does anything in your reply have to do with Ian's comments?
Oh Oh I know that one-----------NOTHING
Which is what all you (and Palu) ever say.............CreatioNUT
bullcrap

Plus your usual attempt to take over control of the thread, FOOL

IlBeBauck@gmail.com wrote:

> 
> REPLY:  Ian,  I KNOW you dont look at your human body and conclude
> that every centimeter was haphazardly formed by accidental
> mutations .  I KNOW you dont truly think that the 60 major systems of
> the human anatomy just so happen to work in unison so you can live.

You're absolutely correct - I don't. Not only does evolution explain 
it so clearly, but the evidence accumulated though the 1800s and the 
early 1900s showed us the actual path taken in evolutionary 
development for all the species, which was then confirmed by 
multiple branches of science - such as embryology, palaeontology, 
molecular biology, geology, nuclear physics etc etc. For all these 
sciences to confirm the same conclusion is about as certain as 
anything can get. For genetics to come along and to absolutely 
confirm exactly the same conclusion is nothing short of remarkable.

Oh - accidental mutation does play a part, but you can't describe it 
as haphazard. The natural selection process selects *for* beneficial 
change and selects *against* detrimental change.

> So ,  why are you so adament about macro evolution being real and the
> cause for humankind ?

If you had read the information that I'd gone to the trouble of 
posting, you'd see that both micro and macro evolution is now 
established as fact:

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

Now, this has all been established for a long period of time. If you 
simply don't understand it then it really isn't worth wasting all 
our time until you've gone away and tried a little harder. If you'd 
rather just carry on with your fairy belief because you find it 
comporting, then I'm sure that no-one here is the slightest bit 
bothered.

regards, Ian

Ken wrote:
> On Jun 19, 5:00 pm, "Trolling fuckwit IlBeBa...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> REPLY: Ian, I KNOW you dont look at your human body and conclude
>> that every centimeter was haphazardly formed by accidental
>> mutations .
>
> Dave's typiocal Watchmaker fallacy
>
> I KNOW you dont truly think that the 60 major systems of
>> the human anatomy just so happen to work in unison so you can live.
>
> Which shows you DON'T KNOW SHIT
>
>> So , why are you so adament about macro evolution being real and the
>> cause for humankind ?
>
> Because it is, FOOL
>
> Put another way, why do you want this to be
>> desperately so
>
> Because it is, FOOL
>
>
> WTF does anything in your reply have to do with Ian's comments?
> Oh Oh I know that one-----------NOTHING
> Which is what all you (and Palu) ever say.............CreatioNUT
> bullcrap
>
> Plus your usual attempt to take over control of the thread, FOOL

One would imagine by this time that Dimwit would have acknowledged that he's 
wasting everyone's time as well as his own, and that he'd have enough self 
respect; given that his motives and motivations have been exposed as nothing 
more than inadequacies and conveniences born from his own insecurities, to 
bow out while he's well behind. Does he imagine that he's going to go down 
in some blaze of glory if he persists in flogging a dead horse?

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers

On Jun 20, 6:54 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
<fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:

> One would imagine by this time that Dimwit would have acknowledged that he's
> wasting everyone's time as well as his own, and that he'd have enough self
> respect; given that his motives and motivations have been exposed as nothing
> more than inadequacies and conveniences born from his own insecurities, to
> bow out while he's well behind. Does he imagine that he's going to go down
> in some blaze of glory if he persists in flogging a dead horse?
>
> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
> Personalised Desktop Computers

Not to mention flogging a dead (and useless) member

Ken wrote:
> On Jun 20, 6:54 pm, "Dr.Hal0nf1r£$"
> <fem...@nospam.kustomkomputa.co.uk.invalid> wrote:
>
>> One would imagine by this time that Dimwit would have acknowledged
>> that he's wasting everyone's time as well as his own, and that he'd
>> have enough self respect; given that his motives and motivations
>> have been exposed as nothing more than inadequacies and conveniences
>> born from his own insecurities, to bow out while he's well behind.
>> Does he imagine that he's going to go down in some blaze of glory if
>> he persists in flogging a dead horse?
>>
>> --http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
>> Personalised Desktop Computers
>
> Not to mention flogging a dead (and useless) member

Lol; men and their maggots: From infancy to old age they just can't leave it 
alone. Dimwit uses his as a substitute for a boyfriend.

-- 
http://www.kustomkomputa.co.uk
Personalised Desktop Computers