Why do so many people doubt evolution?

For those who failed science and math and many other subjects in elementary schools, science is divided into various field. Evolution is one, it concerns the ways in which existing life changes, and evolves. There are many science fields that deal with the ORIGINS of life, such as Abio-genesis and Bio-genesis.
And you do NOT need to know about evolution to study the origins, nor is it necessary to study the origins of life to work with evolution.

Nor for that matter do you need to study Astronomy to understand Hydrolics. DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

 

Couple points...

First, I didn't need to. The abstract was enough to answer your question. Second, you asked for a peer reviewed scientific article, so I provided one. A wide audience can read it, they just need to click on the "Free PMC Article" link at the bottom. Don't try to change the goalposts again.

And as I've said, this statement shows your ignorance of biology.

The bacteria cannot just somehow magically absorb the carbon and nitrogen from the nylon byproducts. It has to physically break down the molecules/polymers in order to get to the basic chemicals. The nylonase are the enzymes that allows the bacteria to do this.

So, without nylonase to break down the material, bacteria cannot use the carbon and nitrogen in the nylon byproducts.

Sure it does...

"The nucleotide sequence of the nylC gene and the deduced amino acid sequence of EIII had no detectable homology with the sequences of nylA (EI) and nylB (EII)."

In other words, completely new and not derived from the others.

They were comparing identical bacteria, the only difference being the presence of the enzymes. Sounds like good science to me.

I sure see a bunch of lies and deception, all right.

Biodegradable polymers are specifically designed so that bacteria can break them down given their current biology. This is completely different than nylonase, which should be clear from the information that has been provided by myself and several other posters.

I think we're out of irony meters.


EDIT: posted before I noticed that Akhlut addressed this.

 

Exactly. Although, it is really only American conservatives.

 

Eh, many liberals claim that they believe in evolution, but they are utterly terrified at the thought that races differ genetically or that children can't be molded at will by society. So it goes both ways, the religious right, however, is much more annoying about it.

 

If I ever stated that “other people” don’t want to read it, then… But I did not, then you are arguing to your own contempt. Nullity pointed to the link I’d overlooked. Was it difficult?

There are only 3 variants. Your statement is true, it is false, it is absurd. Whichever one you choose it does not address my statement you’ve quoted.

If you wish. For others the appearance of novel enzymes is a very strong indicator of His honourable Noodliness The Flying Spaghetti Monster that He has not been observed or recorded in any way pertaining to the natural world. http://www.politicalforum.com/relig...ny-people-doubt-evolution-11.html#post4707042
I asked not for an indication, but for an observation. Moreover, I have being betting everything I have against just one observation of speciation, not “appearance” of K1725R strain of the same bacteria from the same K1725 strain of the same bacteria due to genetic deletion/manipuation. http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/~sabedon/biol3010.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strain_121

This is what I say. You make delineation marks relatively easy according to your wish to split semantics.

.

Except for generic engineering all bacteria and they strains had came to existence without human intervention

It has been discovered that they are.

“he kept at it, selecting out the most effective strains and interbreeding them. After several weeks of tweaking and optimizing temperatures Burd was achieved a 43 percent degradation of plastic in six weeks, an almost inconceivable accomplishment.”
http://www.mnn.com/green-tech/research-innovations/blogs/boy-discovers-microbe-that-eats-plastic#


Transgenic bacteria are used to produce …..to metabolize petroleum products, or plastics for cleaning up the environment

Read more: Transgenics - Use Of Transgenics - Plants, Transgenes, Scientists, and Engineered - JRank Articles

http://news.discovery.com/tech/more-adventures-with-plastic-eating-bacteria.html

Need more?

There is no observation of novel arising genome through genetic change in the article. A novel genome arising through genetic change is not an observation of speciation.

I am sorry mods have deleted this fine expression of the belief of evolutionists and thus they have denied me the pleasure to respond to it.

I am sorry mods have deleted this fine expression of the belief of evolutionists and thus they have denied me the pleasure to respond to it.

I am sorry mods have deleted this fine expression of the belief of evolutionists and thus they have denied me the pleasure to respond to it.

 

dozens of credible theories about one thing is a proof that there is none worth of reading.

 

beause we cannot tell the truth.

 

It is a true argument of evolutionists. It is simple and convincing. As the result –nobody can raise an objection and it has stayed unanswered. It is a clear demonstration how people have been brainwashed to see the world upside down.

If you see a log, you see the branches cut off, footprints leading to and from the tree, and an axe resting against the fallen log you should you assume that the tree was chopped down, despite not having actual physical record of the chopping, if and only if you had seen
1. the branches
2. cutting off
3. footprints
4. axes
5. fallen logs.
before.

If you in your life had never seen the listed above, you can make nothing out of the picture.

If you see a corpse you can assume it died 24 hours ago if and only if there are numerous records of what happens with dead bodies an hour after an hour.
Since there is no record or observation of appearance of new species the idea of evolutionists that new species have been appearing is not rooted in observed reality softly speaking.

 

Nor for that matter do you need to study evolution to understand Astronomy, Hydrolics, medicine, thermodynamics, chemistry and everything else except for religious belief and ideology of evolutionists. DUHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!

 

I addressed the rest in my reply to Akhlut. Scroll up to see

I overlooked the link inside your link.

The question is answered in the text of the article: - there is evidence, suggestion but no evolution ( speciation) observed.

“These results suggest that the
three nylon oligomer-degradative enzymes evolved independently.”

“ This suggests that the nylB and nylC genes are
expressed from a common promoter.”

Well, it is suggested that fish and turtles evolved independently from a common ancestor. I did not ask for a suggestion or evidence. I have been asking for an observation of speciation as it is represented by evolutionists.

Twist semantics and win an argument. Bacteria cannot just somehow magically absorb the carbon and nitrogen unless they later are in a free state. Period.

Twist semantics and win an arguments I go by what the article says. "The nucleotide sequence of the nylC gene and the deduced amino acid sequence of EIII had no detectable homology with the sequences of nylA (EI) and nylB (EII)."

It does not mean that the deduced amino acid sequence of EIII had not existed in the bacteria before nylon was invented.

“A polyamide is a polymer containing monomers of amides joined by peptide bonds. They can occur both naturally and artificially, examples being proteins, such as wool and silk, and can be made artificially through step-growth polymerization or solid-phase synthesis, examples being nylons, “

1. Artificial polyamide Nylon is not something an existing bacteria must not digest as it does with natural polyamides. There is no credible experiment showing that; none has been conducted. Nylon is the same food in a different can, and it does not mean that if bacteria has a can opener for other foods it must not have one for a new can or it cannot open a new can.

2. A new genome does not mean that it did not exist before the experiments suggesting its existance have been conducted.
2. a. A new specie does not mean that it did not exist before it was discovered: .

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8068540

They were trying to find enzymes resonsible for Nylon eating in different strains of THE SAME bacteria and referencing them to other enzumes or accepted genetics of other existing Bacteria – E.Coli and Pseudomonas sp. They were deleting genomes and manipulating with original strains

“K1725, obtained by mitomycin
C treatment of KI72,”

Understand?

They were not comparing bacteria existing in the water before Nylon with the ones fished out afterwards. There were bacteria in the water. They damped Nylon. Bacteria started eating it, because bacteria were not told that Nylon was man made and they must not eat it.


“In Pseudomonas sp. strain NK87,
the EI gene (P-nyU) and EII-encoding gene (P-nylB) are
located on different plasmids,”

The same nylon eating genes are found in a totally different bacteria Pseudomonas sp. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1388413/pdf/hw1451.pdf Atrazine is a man made chemical.

“It is likely
that the two genes [chemicals]responsible for nylon oligomer metabolism
constitute a single polycistronic unit in E. coli”

The same “new genome” [chemicals] is found in the famous E.Coli bacteria.

There are numbers of bacteria eating man made materials. There is nothing unusual or unexpected in Nylon eating bacteria, except for the unusual name, which is not really the true name, and unusual buzz evolutionists have made out of it. Again and again and again we are talking about another strain of the same bacteria arising due to natural/laboratory genetic recombination and mutations; but never about appearance of new bacteria with added genetic information.

All experiments and observations conducted in nature and laboratories millions of times demonstrate that new species do not arise from existing ones, whatever you do. It is a madness to believe still that they do. When a sufficient amount of experiments shows that heat does not flow spontaneously from a colder body to a warmer body, it is taken as a law of nature (2nd law of thermodynamics). When all experiments show that new species never arise from existing ones (but only go extinct), evolutionists take the contrary to reasults of all experiments belief that they do as a fact and a law of nature. Thus it has been proven experimentally that people who believe in evolution have a some kind of a psychological disorder as a result of being brainwashed by scientists, teachers, professors and intellectuals.

 

You were the one complaining about people giving you links to read.

It is truthful; just because you don't care for it is irrelevant.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/speciation.html

Also, you don't seem to understand how science works; no one ever actually observes gravity, they observe actions occurring that strongly indicate the presence of a force of gravity.

Bacteria are terrible insofar as species definitions go. Because they utilize horizontal gene transfer and asexual reproduction, they don't fit into the standard species model of "if offspring are fertile between each other" because they don't have sex. While that works reasonably well for sexual animals, plants, and fungi, it pretty well sucks for asexual critters. So, we have a bunch of different words for evolutionary significant unit (ESU), which describes distinct populations.

Just because you dislike it doesn't mean it isn't true.

Except this bacteria arose in the wastewater of a nylon production facility. There was not genetic engineering done on those organisms; they naturally evolved to munch on nylon by-products.

Proof of this assertion is required.

Awesome; however, this happened recently, whereas the bacteria that feasts on nylon byproducts occurred naturally in wastewater without human intervention.

Again: that occurred recently, kid.

I'm more than familiar with this stuff; I'm in a biology master's program.

You're apparently unfamiliar with the idea that this stuff wasn't occurring 40 years ago.

You're wrong on both those points. That enzyme is most assuredly novel and it arose through novel genes (because it is a protein, and therefore is produced by genes); and you don't have any idea of what you speak if you don't seriously know that a novel genome is a speciation event.

Reader's digest version: you do the same thing that "evolutionists" do as far as insults go, but you lack the cojones to say it directly.

 

If you really think that, why don't you put your money where you mouth is and go eat a whole bucket full of castor beans? It's the same food, just in a new can, amirite?


Seriously, if you don't understand the significance of being able to digest products that nothing else is able to, then you really have no business talking about evolution.

 

but until the idiots actually understand gravity, idiots should not be ranting on what gravity is. (especially a biology major)

it's the entangled energy between mass

asexual critters evolve based on their environment and intake. That comprehension is about as pure as anything 'darwin' ever wrote.

aint that a fact.

i love making monkeys out of the so called 'community' as most are simply morons to their own and i can be quoted 'they succumb to their limited knowledge' on the subject

there's a cross purposed claim.

how about they 'evolved' from the engineering of the engineered environment?!?!?

kind of like what nano 'growth' is in the nano technology field.

geeze..... You crack me up sometimes dude

i offer proof all over the place. you prefer holding onto your limited scope and if what someone says, dont fit, YOU RANT!

if they feeding on a manmade creation; man intervened (ah dahhh)

evolution is based more on the environment than any single vector of change

then de-program yourself

perhaps get a labotomy!

between the arrogance of your posts and the ignorance of the claims you offer as much assistance to others as a 2 watt light bulb

ie... and the life feeding the nylon; did it exist prior?


why not go back to the science section and take your medicine on THAT "evolution" thread?

 

Physicists don't know what causes gravity yet, so: physician, heal thyself.

Physician, heal thyself.

Physician, heal thyself.

"Lobotomy," because it severs the lobes of the brain.

And: physician, heal thyself.

Physician, heal thyself.

It's hard to argue against barely literate ravings. I don't debate crackheads on the street about their views on aliens, either.

 

at least you have realized something the space benders haven't.

ie.... einsteins thesis is STILL wrong!

you da 1 acknowledging einstein is wrong on one part of your post (unknowingly), then it appears that you are aware of needing to sever your lobes to relinquish what you believe you know.

ie...... from Einstein:

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

 

What's evolution when it reason cannot factor it's origin.

 

I think evolution answers a lot of questions. I do agree with you that it raises more questions than it answers, but that is true of all knowledge and the pursuit thereof. You cannot hope to learn about something, especially something as vastly complex and intricate as how life works, without raising a lot of questions!

For me, evolution provides me with a realistic, provable framework for how I got to be who I am on this planet in this vast universe. Its like the feeling of believing in god, only you're believing in something whose legitimacy can be bolstered by truck loads of solid evidence. I know beyond any reasonable shadow of a doubt that I am related to every living organism on this planet. And I take joy in that fact. I wish those who doubted evolution for reasons of pride and ego would take a step back and look at how amazing it is to be a part of this immense interwoven story, with a character list in the billions, spanning time so incomprehensibly long they defy understanding.

In less emotional terms, evolution has shown how viruses and diseases function, and how to combat them. Its shown us that we are all one human species, that the morphological differences we put so much emphasis on are trivial, passing traits and no match for our deep seeded relationship.

Lastly, you say the working model of evolution starts in the middle. The middle of what? The universe? As far as life on this planet is concerned, that framework covers it all, from the simplest of cells to the most gargantuan of animals and plants, and it does so in a remarkably accurate fashion, considering we are the only species to have compiled the evidence at hand!

 

And you opt for Adam and Eve as a viable alternate?

 

Evolution is a simple concept as a whole. but th details and evidence is harder to evaluate for people who do not have the ability to question authority, or use logical thinking.

In ohter words, they do not teach it at elementary school level because it involves more developed executive cognitive abilities to understand. And that is why it is taught in college.

Remember just because a person is 50 years old does not mean that his brain has developed pass the 8th grade.

There are studies that show cognitive ability can be conditioned to limit cognitive functions.

 

Dead implies having once been alive

 

You are repeating the same insinuation. This is all you do. This is all evolutionists are capable of.

I only demonstrate that reading your reply all believers in evolution think that I don’t care for it, no matter what is “it” and what “care” can mean. They also believe that true and truthful are the same terms. I just demonstrate the mentality of Evolutionists.

It already has been established as a fact that evolutionists believe that talkinsorigin is a source of the same validity as a peer reviewed article. I respect your faith and religious views, but I asked for a peer reviewed article. I only prove that there is no peer reviewed publication claiming observation of appearance of new (genetically isolated) species under any circumstances in nature or in an experiment. I only demonstrate that all observations and experiments prove and demonstrate that there is no evolution happening. Species do not appear but the opposite is true, they go extinct.

I don’t understand what “no one ever actually observes gravity, they observe actions occurring that strongly indicate the presence of a force of gravity” can mean except for another expression of emotions. What equations are you talking about?

I only demonstrate that reading my words you’ve quoted and your reply to them the faithful believe that my words express my likes or dislikes of it, whatever ‘it” may mean for the religious.

I cannot have any proof of anything for evolutionists. I am not going to do it the 3rd time. I quoted and pointed to the claims and “assertions” of the article. You cannot reciprocate staying within the article.

You cannot reciprocate with any observation or experiment contradicting or arguing “this stuff”. You cannot comprehend that it is required. You don’t have to mention your lack of any education, it is obvious.

2 questions, - It's the same as what? What did I say?
I am joking. I do not expect basic comprehension or direct answers from an evolutionist.

Again you are using scientific terms :
strongly
Terrible
Insofar
model
reasonably
well
pretty well
sucks.

They all, like science itself, are meant to express feelings. Can you come down to my level and try to talk simple language, like the one used in the article? Can you address the claims and statements of the article as I have been doing?




I pointed that
Quote:
I have being betting everything I have against just one observation of speciation, not “appearance” of K1725R strain of the same bacteria from the same K1725 strain of the same bacteria due to genetic deletion/manipulation. http://www.mansfield.ohio-state.edu/...n/biol3010.htm http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strain_121


I understand that you do not have even a single observation. I think anyone who has some common sense understands that you don’t. It is the reality.
Another reality is that evolutionists claim that they do http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/faq-speciation.html

I just hope people who are not void of common sense and decency and who are capable of living in reality do not have problems putting these 2 realities together and coming up with the only possible conclusion.

 

Because they are ignorant.

And evolution is intuitive. It is easy to understand.

 

Very good point!!!!
Evolution is no-brainer.
One understands it before one learns multiplication of fractions.
The one who came up with the theory did never learn even that.
Made by a no-brainer for no-brainers, - science.
Watch a cartoon, understand it and know that you are in communion with the scientific community, the overwhelming majority, all rational and educated people.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Tc3TOJzCszk"]Children's Guide to Growing Up: Evolution - YouTube[/ame]