On 2024-04-25 07:35:04 +0000, Martin Harran said:

> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:46:43 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> jillery wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip for focus>
>>>
>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself. It
>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>> decay.
>>>
>>>
>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>
>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>
> Our bodies die but if we have children, our DNA survives.

Up to a point, though not if we consider Y chromosomes or mitochondrial
DNA. My (paternal paternal) greatgrandfather had six sons and six
daughters, and has about 105 descendants alive today. I'm the only one
who has his Y chromosome, and when I die there will be no one. (I have
three daughters but no sons.)
>
>>>
>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's because they died. Apparently you still don't understand the
>>> difference between life and death.
>>>
>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>> living thing will die.
>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>> --
>>> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 10:22:25 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
<me@yahoo.com> wrote:

>On 2024-04-25 07:35:04 +0000, Martin Harran said:
>
>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:46:43 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> jillery wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> <snip for focus>
>>>>
>>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself. It
>>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>>> decay.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>>
>>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>>
>> Our bodies die but if we have children, our DNA survives.
>
>Up to a point, though not if we consider Y chromosomes or mitochondrial
>DNA. My (paternal paternal) greatgrandfather had six sons and six
>daughters, and has about 105 descendants alive today. I'm the only one
>who has his Y chromosome, and when I die there will be no one. (I have
>three daughters but no sons.)

Is it not likely, however, that virtually all your great-grandfather's
DNA is distributed among his descendants?

And now I'm being nosy - how did you find out that you are the only
one with his Y chromosome? If I'm intruding on personal stuff, just
ignore me.

>>
>>>>
>>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's because they died. Apparently you still don't understand the
>>>> difference between life and death.
>>>>
>>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>>> living thing will die.
>>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>>> --
>>>> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

On 2024-04-25 16:19:29 +0000, Martin Harran said:

> On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 10:22:25 +0200, Athel Cornish-Bowden
> <me@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2024-04-25 07:35:04 +0000, Martin Harran said:
>>
>>> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:46:43 -0400, Ron Dean
>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> jillery wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip for focus>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself. It
>>>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>>>> decay.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>>>
>>>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>>>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>>>
>>> Our bodies die but if we have children, our DNA survives.
>>
>> Up to a point, though not if we consider Y chromosomes or mitochondrial
>> DNA. My (paternal paternal) greatgrandfather had six sons and six
>> daughters, and has about 105 descendants alive today. I'm the only one
>> who has his Y chromosome, and when I die there will be no one. (I have
>> three daughters but no sons.)
>
> Is it not likely, however, that virtually all your great-grandfather's
> DNA is distributed among his descendants?

That's true of the overwhelming majority of the DNA, that is to say the
autosomal DNA, but not Y-chromosomal DNA, which passes exclusively down
the male line, and mitochondrial DNA, which passes exclusively down the
femalz line. You got your Y-chromosome from your father, and your
mitochondria from your mother. I have an English Y-chromosome, and
Irish mitochondria.
>
> And now I'm being nosy - how did you find out that you are the only
> one with his Y chromosome?

Because I'm the only one linked to him in the father-to-son line. I'm
the only son of my father. He had a brother who was killed in a
submarine during the War before he had time to father any sons. My
greatgrandfather had six sons, all of whom had children, but all but
one father-to-son line died out. And that one will die out when I die.

> If I'm intruding on personal stuff, just
> ignore me.

No worries.
>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's because they died. Apparently you still don't understand the
>>>>> difference between life and death.
>>>>>
>>>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>>>> living thing will die.
>>>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>>>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>>>> --
>>>>> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

--
athel cb : Biochemical Evolution, Garland Science, 2016

Vincent Maycock wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:03:03 -0400, Ron Dean
> [...]
>>>> From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading and
>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were affected. The
>>>> results we see today.
>>>
>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>
>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done".
>
> Why do you think that happened?
>
Disappointment maybe. Man's inhumanity to man: wars, murders, thief,
rape etc etc. is a possibility. If we were puppets on a string, perhaps
this would not have happens, IOW had we been denied free agency we might
still be in its good graces. I strongly suspect God turned it's back of
this planet and it's inhabitants, due to it's disappointment..
>
>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself.
>
> And how did that turn out for him, given the pervasiveness of
> extinction?
>
I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
deleterious mutations each generation becomes less fit than the
preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
volcano eruptions accounts for extinction of many species for example
in Siberia.
>> It
>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>> decay.
>
> If you believe the Designer is God, perhaps you could fill us in on
> what we should expect to see if that designer was responsible for
> life's diversity. What should we be looking for to prove or disprove
> your "hypothesis"?
>
Falsify the existence of a designer(God)? I've only recently come to
that conclusion. One on the strongest evidence for a God, as far as I'm
concerned, is the infusion of information in this planet I'm convinced
that no one absolutely _knows_ how information arose in via natural
processes in a blind, purposeless, random and mindless universe. But if
you deny the existence of God, then you have no other options: all
that's left for you are educated guesses, hypothesis and theories,
because but no knows how natural processes originated information.
Furthermore high levels of complex information comes from a mind.
>
>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>> is typical. The same will
>> happen to our bodies.
>>>
>

On 4/25/24 6:31 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
> Vincent Maycock wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:03:03 -0400, Ron Dean
>> [...]
>>>>>   From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading
>>>>> and
>>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were
>>>>> affected. The
>>>>> results we see today.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>>
>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done".
>>
>> Why do you think that happened?
> >
> Disappointment maybe. Man's inhumanity to man: wars, murders, thief,
> rape etc etc. is a possibility. If we were puppets on a string, perhaps
> this would not have happens, IOW had we been denied free agency we might
> still be in its good graces. I strongly suspect God turned it's back of
> this planet and it's inhabitants, due to it's disappointment..
>>
>>> left things with the capacity and ability  to take care of itself.
>>
>> And how did that turn out for him, given the pervasiveness of
>> extinction?
> >
> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
> in Siberia.
>>> It
>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>> decay.
>>
>> If you believe the Designer is God, perhaps you could fill us in on
>> what we should expect to see if that designer was responsible for
>> life's diversity. What should we be looking for to prove or disprove
>> your "hypothesis"?
> >
> Falsify the existence of a designer(God)? I've only recently come to
> that conclusion. One on the strongest evidence for a God, as far as I'm
> concerned, is the infusion of information in this planet I'm convinced
> that no one absolutely _knows_ how information arose in via natural
> processes in a blind, purposeless, random and mindless universe. But if
> you deny the existence of God, then you have no other options: all
> that's left for you are educated guesses, hypothesis and theories,
> because but no knows how natural processes originated information.
> Furthermore high levels of complex information comes from a mind.

I don't think you have a coherent hypothesis here. You need some idea of
how new species arise. When? If they're descended from other species how
does the genome quality reset? If not, are they all created
independently throughout earth history, poof? But the average fossil
species lasts from 1-10 million years. Does your genetic deterioration
take that long, and if so, shouldn't we still be in pretty good shape?

jillery wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> <snip for focus>
>
>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself. It
>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>> decay.
>
>
> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>
>
>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>
>
> That's because they died. Apparently you still don't understand the
> difference between life and death.
>
I certainly do. I was in the room and saw my precious 5 year old
granddaughter take her last breath. She was conscience and aware her
last moments. And she saw something none of the rest of us saw. I
question that you know anything about death.
>
I came to most of my conclusions before I ever heard of Intelligent
Design. I didn't call my views ID just design. But I saw deliberate,
purposeful design in much of what I observed. But I did not think there
was any evidence pointing to the identification of the designer.
> --
> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge
>

Martin Harlan wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:03:03 -0400, Ron Dean
>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>> On Sun, 14 Apr 2024 00:25:20 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>>>>>> On Fri, 12 Apr 2024 12:41:29 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Beneficial mutations are rarely observed. The defective mutations are
>>>>>>>> overwhelming the beneficial mutations, as evidenced by the increasing
>>>>>>>> list of genetic disorders. Perhaps, this explains the 99% extinction
>>>>>>>> rate of all life forms that ever lived as observed or recorded in the
>>>>>>>> fossil record, as well as the numbers of the species become extinct
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That doesn't say much for the intelligence of your designer. How long
>>>>>>> would a designer with that failure rate survive in your industry?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Things change, new and better designs things just go downhill because of
>>>>>> the second law. There is in companies a deliberate "fail rate" so new
>>>>>> products to sell.
>>>>>
>>>>> Apparently planned obsolescence is yet another thing of which you have
>>>>> a very poor grasp. To the extent that it exists [1], it is not a
>>>>> process intended to make products go *extinct*, it is one that is
>>>>> intended to encourage consumers to purchase the newest model of the
>>>>> product with some apparent extra features.
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] ISTM, a lot less prevalent than is commonly thought. Somebody buys
>>>>> a new laptop or phone and it seems really fast; two years later, it
>>>>> seems to have slowed down considerably and the user blames this on a
>>>>> deliberate policy of planned obsolescence by the manufacturer - they
>>>>> don't take into account the amount of garbage they have collected on
>>>>> the laptop or phone over the intervening two years.
>>>>>
>>>>> [2] I say "apparent" because some of these claimed features are little
>>>>> more than marketing hype. Increasing the resolution on a phone camera
>>>>> from 12mp to 50mp will make no difference whatsoever to the vast
>>>>> majority of phone users except to make them have to invest in
>>>>> additional storage.
>>>>>
>>>>>> With the DNA coded information due to mutations (which are real) become
>>>>>> increasingly less perfect when passed down to their offspring the
>>>>>> defective genes are always down to the offspring never reversed; with
>>>>>> the passage of time, the genome may just become so overburden with
>>>>>> defective genetics - bad mutations that failure to reproduce becomes
>>>>>> inevitable. Maybe there is a loss of sexual drive, or instinct, all of
>>>>>> which is expressed by genetics. As a species age, perhaps like human
>>>>>> males species reach an age when sex desire dies and offsprings cannot
>>>>>> happen.
>>>>>
>>>>> Where does your intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>>>
>>>> So, you agree - I fell out of my chair I was so shocked!
>>>
>>> If you are accepting planned obsolescence is yet another thing of
>>> which you have a very poor grasp, then yes, we are in agreement about
>>> that.
>>>
>>>> If you go back
>>>> in tine to one's grandparents their genome had fewer deleterious
>>>> mutations than ours: going backwards generation after generation after
>>>> generation, the genome of each preceding generation had ever fewer
>>>> harmful mutations, By going back say to the earliest members of their
>>>> kind (family) their genome must have been far closer to perfect than any
>>>> decedent generations.
>>>
>>> In what way do you think humans millions of years ago were more
>>> "perfect" than we are?
>>>
>> Millions of years ago???! I think each succeeding generation is less
>> perfect due to increasing genetic defects.
>
> Okay, if you don't like looking at millions of years, let's just look
> at some changes in recent generations. Here is life expectancy on this
> side of the Atlantic for 5 consecutive generations[1]:
>
>
> My grandfather b 1865: 41 years
> My father b 1915: 52 years
> Me b 1951: 68 years
> My son b 1973: 72 years
> My grandson b 2016: 81 years
>
With modern medicine, better understanding and availability of
nutrition, vitamins, minerals etc
My family generally enjoys long life. One Of my ggmothers lived to 104
years a great uncle passed on the day of his 100/th birthday.
An several others to 90s and there 80s.
>
> Life expectancy seems like a reasonable barometer of the overall
> efficiency of our bodies and each generation has had an increase in it
> over the previous generation. Would you care to explain how that
> equates to decreasing perfection?
I answered that above.
>
> [1] Source:
> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1040159/life-expectancy-united-kingdom-all-time/
>
>>>
>>>> From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading and
>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were affected. The
>>>> results we see today.
>>>
>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>
>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself.
>
>
>
>> It
>> seems that the designer left the scene.
>
> You have said elsewhere that you are now coming around to thinking
> that the intelligent designer is indeed God. In that case, you
> probably need to look outside your own culture [2] to find a God to
> suit you because what you have been describing here and in another
> post is at complete odds with the Christian God that most religious
> people in the Western world generally subscribe to.
>
> First of all, you have said that the original design is prone to
> errors in successive generations; that inefficiency in design
> contradicts the Christian notion of an *omnipotent* God.
>
> Now, you suggest that the designer has left the scene and just left
> life to its own devices. That contradicts the Christian belief in a
> loving and caring God who continues to be part of everyday life.
>
>
> [2] I realise that the USA is particularly prone to providing a home
> to many weird cults and religious groups so perhaps you might find
> something there to fulfill your idea of a God who wasn't all that
> clever to start with and has abandoned us to devices.
>
>
>
>> Over time and the 2ND law
>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>> decay. I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>> is typical. The same will
>> happen to our bodies.
>>>
>

Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Apr 2024 12:46:43 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> jillery wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip for focus>
>>>
>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself. It
>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>> decay.
>>>
>>>
>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>
>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>
> Our bodies die but if we have children, our DNA survives.
>
True, but DNA copying errors occur and not all are proofread and
repaired, but are passed on.
>>>
>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>
>>>
>>> That's because they died. Apparently you still don't understand the
>>> difference between life and death.
>>>
>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>> living thing will die.
>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>> --
>>> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge
>>>
>

Martin Harran wrote:
> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:28:31 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> erik simpson wrote:
>>> On 4/23/24 9:46 AM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>> jillery wrote:
>>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> <snip for focus>
>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>>>> left things with the capacity and ability  to take care of itself. It
>>>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things
>>>>>> tend
>>>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>>>> decay.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>>>
>>>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>>>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>>>>>
>>>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay.
>>>>>> This
>>>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's because they died.  Apparently you still don't understand the
>>>>> difference between life and death.
>>>>>
>>>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>>>> living thing will die.
>>>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>>>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>>>> --
>>>>> To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge
>>>>>
>>>>
>>> Life on earth began 4+ Gya, and consisted at that time exclusively as
>>> prokaryotes.  Today life of great complexity and disparity is found
>>> almost everywhere.  Why didn't the original population of the past just
>>> fall apart and die?  Your line of thinking would suggest that the
>>> present earth would be barren.
>>>
>> And, of course, that would be the case except if not for reproduction.
>> Which was designed into life for the continuity of living things.
>
> In designing the human reproduction system, why do you think the
> designer went for something costs that is so excruciatingly painful
> for childbirth and extremely risky for both the person giving birth
> and the person being born? It doesn't sound like particularly clever
> design to me.
>
There is nothing in the universe as involved, highly complex and
obviously designed as the drive (desire) the acts leading to conception,
the processes leading to birth and the act of reproduction. There is
_nothing_ else. And the explanation rest on the infusion of massive
amounts of information. As to your question, perhaps this was the best
of all options. In life there's always
options. A few years back I was in a 12 story building and elevator
stopped at the 9th floor. Repair
was likely to take hours a voice came over the speakers. I hate walking
down stairs and a window could be opened. So I had 2 choices. Through
the window or down the stairs. I could not expect
gravity to alter its force because I wanted that to be my choice. So, I
went down stairs. Stairs was
the best of the two options. Maybe the pain and risk is the best of all
other possible options. I don't know the other options, neither do you,
but no doubt the designer did know and chose the best.
>
>> But
>> organisms die, most species that ever lived have become extinct to be
>> replaced by new forms.
>

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 21:31:17 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>Vincent Maycock wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Martin Harran wrote:
>>>> On Thu, 18 Apr 2024 03:03:03 -0400, Ron Dean
>> [...]
>>>>> From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading and
>>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were affected. The
>>>>> results we see today.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>>
>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done".
>>
>> Why do you think that happened?
> >
>Disappointment maybe. Man's inhumanity to man: wars, murders, thief,
>rape etc etc. is a possibility.

Remember that man has only been around for a fraction of the time that
the rest of life has been around. What was there to be disappointed
in before humans were around?

> If we were puppets on a string, perhaps
>this would not have happens, IOW had we been denied free agency we might
>still be in its good graces. I strongly suspect God turned it's back of
>this planet and it's inhabitants, due to it's disappointment..

Do you think we *need* to have wars, murders, thievery, and rape to
achieve "free agency"?

>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself.
>>
>> And how did that turn out for him, given the pervasiveness of
>> extinction?
> >
>I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>deleterious mutations each generation becomes less fit than the
>preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>volcano eruptions accounts for extinction of many species for example
>in Siberia.

So it didn't turn out that well for him. Why?

>>> It
>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>> decay.
>>
>> If you believe the Designer is God, perhaps you could fill us in on
>> what we should expect to see if that designer was responsible for
>> life's diversity. What should we be looking for to prove or disprove
>> your "hypothesis"?
> >
>Falsify the existence of a designer(God)? I've only recently come to
>that conclusion.

How do you propose that we test for the existence of God?

> One on the strongest evidence for a God, as far as I'm
>concerned, is the infusion of information in this planet I'm convinced
>that no one absolutely _knows_ how information arose in via natural
>processes in a blind, purposeless, random and mindless universe.

Would you agree that the sequence 1101100101 is information? If so,
can you explain why you think it couldn't occur naturally?

> But if
>you deny the existence of God, then you have no other options: all
>that's left for you are educated guesses, hypothesis and theories,
>because but no knows how natural processes originated information.
>Furthermore high levels of complex information comes from a mind.

So invoking a Designer changes your idea from being just an educated
guess? You're trying to denigrate non-Designer ideas as being just
hypotheses and theories, but there's nothing wrong with those things,
and in fact, invoking God does not reach the level of being even a
hypothesis itself. It's not specific enough to be anything other than
another way of saying "I don't know."

>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>> is typical. The same will
>>> happen to our bodies.
>>>>
>>

On Thu, 25 Apr 2024 22:08:13 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>Martin Harlan wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

[...]
..
>>>>
>>>>> If you go back
>>>>> in tine to one's grandparents their genome had fewer deleterious
>>>>> mutations than ours: going backwards generation after generation after
>>>>> generation, the genome of each preceding generation had ever fewer
>>>>> harmful mutations, By going back say to the earliest members of their
>>>>> kind (family) their genome must have been far closer to perfect than any
>>>>> decedent generations.
>>>>
>>>> In what way do you think humans millions of years ago were more
>>>> "perfect" than we are?
>>>>
>>> Millions of years ago???! I think each succeeding generation is less
>>> perfect due to increasing genetic defects.
>>
>> Okay, if you don't like looking at millions of years, let's just look
>> at some changes in recent generations. Here is life expectancy on this
>> side of the Atlantic for 5 consecutive generations[1]:
>>
>>
>> My grandfather b 1865: 41 years
>> My father b 1915: 52 years
>> Me b 1951: 68 years
>> My son b 1973: 72 years
>> My grandson b 2016: 81 years
>>
>With modern medicine, better understanding and availability of
>nutrition, vitamins, minerals etc
>My family generally enjoys long life. One Of my ggmothers lived to 104
>years a great uncle passed on the day of his 100/th birthday.
>An several others to 90s and there 80s.

So your hypothesis is that organisms deteriorate over time ... except
when they improve.

>>
>> Life expectancy seems like a reasonable barometer of the overall
>> efficiency of our bodies and each generation has had an increase in it
>> over the previous generation. Would you care to explain how that
>> equates to decreasing perfection?
> I answered that above.
>>
>> [1] Source:
>> https://www.statista.com/statistics/1040159/life-expectancy-united-kingdom-all-time/
>>
>>>>
>>>>> From then, each succeeding generation the
>>>>> deleterious mutations multiplied. I think possibly the proofreading and
>>>>> repair, which was an elegantly and highly sophisticated design set up
>>>>> for the best results, but over the vast spans of time even the P&R
>>>>> mechanisms, which initially were perfect, but with the passage of time
>>>>> even the P&R became less perfect due to bad mutations that slipped
>>>>> passed the P&R mechanisms, consequent the P&R systems were affected. The
>>>>> results we see today.
>>>>
>>>> Again, I wish you would dress my actual question - where does your
>>>> intelligent designer fit into that process?
>>>>
>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>> left things with the capacity and ability to take care of itself.
>>
>>
>>
>>> It
>>> seems that the designer left the scene.
>>
>> You have said elsewhere that you are now coming around to thinking
>> that the intelligent designer is indeed God. In that case, you
>> probably need to look outside your own culture [2] to find a God to
>> suit you because what you have been describing here and in another
>> post is at complete odds with the Christian God that most religious
>> people in the Western world generally subscribe to.
>>
>> First of all, you have said that the original design is prone to
>> errors in successive generations; that inefficiency in design
>> contradicts the Christian notion of an *omnipotent* God.
>>
>> Now, you suggest that the designer has left the scene and just left
>> life to its own devices. That contradicts the Christian belief in a
>> loving and caring God who continues to be part of everyday life.

No response to this bit?

>>
>>
>> [2] I realise that the USA is particularly prone to providing a home
>> to many weird cults and religious groups so perhaps you might find
>> something there to fulfill your idea of a God who wasn't all that
>> clever to start with and has abandoned us to devices.
>>
>>
>>
>>> Over time and the 2ND law
>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things tend
>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>> decay. I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay. This
>>> is typical. The same will
>>> happen to our bodies.
>>>>
>>

On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
> in Siberia.

Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?

For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has been
generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times of
mass extinction).

--
alias Ernest Major

On 4/26/24 7:28 AM, Ernest Major wrote:
> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
>> in Siberia.
>
> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>
> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has been
> generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times of
> mass extinction).
>
I fear that Ron D's lack of knowledge of the fossil record, evolutionary
biology and genetics precludes his having any coherent idea of how the
living world came to be.

On 4/26/24 8:48 AM, erik simpson wrote:
> On 4/26/24 7:28 AM, Ernest Major wrote:
>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>> example in Siberia.
>>
>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>
>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times
>> of mass extinction).
>>
> I fear that Ron D's lack of knowledge of the fossil record, evolutionary
> biology and genetics precludes his having any coherent idea of how the
> living world came to be.
>
It's remotely possible that by attempting to answer questions he can be
led to realize that.

On 2024-04-26 15:48:15 +0000, erik simpson said:

> On 4/26/24 7:28 AM, Ernest Major wrote:
>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
>>> in Siberia.
>>
>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>
>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has been
>> generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times of
>> mass extinction).
>>
> I fear that Ron D's lack of knowledge of the fossil record,
> evolutionary biology and genetics

I think you need an "etc." in there.

> precludes his having any coherent idea of how the living world came to be.

--
Athel -- French and British, living in Marseilles for 37 years; mainly
in England until 1987.

John Harshman wrote:
> On 4/26/24 8:48 AM, erik simpson wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 7:28 AM, Ernest Major wrote:
>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>>> example in Siberia.
>>>
>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>
>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>
>> I fear that Ron D's lack of knowledge of the fossil record,
>> evolutionary biology and genetics precludes his having any coherent
>> idea of how the living world came to be.
>>
> It's remotely possible that by attempting to answer questions he can be
> led to realize that.

If current events are any guide, numerous people will correct him
numerous times. In a week or two he will return and make exactly the
same wrong assertions that were recently corrected. Rinse and repeat, ad
nauseum.

Ernest Major wrote:
> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
>> in Siberia.
>
> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>
> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has been
> generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times of
> mass extinction).
>
This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.

On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
> Ernest Major wrote:
>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>> example in Siberia.
>>
>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>
>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times
>> of mass extinction).
>>
> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>
Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about you,
and it's not good.

On Fri, 26 Apr 2024 21:06:15 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>Ernest Major wrote:
>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate of
>>> deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for example
>>> in Siberia.
>>
>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>
>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has been
>> generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at times of
>> mass extinction).
>>
>This thread is going nowhere

Comes across as more of a case of it disturbing your comfort zone by
going somewhere that doesn't fit in with your existing beliefs.

>and I've some pressing issues I have to
>deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.

On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 14:42:55 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>jillery wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Apr 2024 00:28:31 -0400, Ron Dean
>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> erik simpson wrote:
>>>> On 4/23/24 9:46 AM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>> jillery wrote:
>>>>>> On Mon, 22 Apr 2024 16:16:59 -0400, Ron Dean
>>>>>> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip for focus>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems that after the task was completed it said "It is done". and
>>>>>>> left things with the capacity and ability  to take care of itself. It
>>>>>>> seems that the designer left the scene. Over time and the 2ND law
>>>>>>> everything enters into downward tends, copying errors occur, things
>>>>>>> tend
>>>>>>> to disintegrate and inevitably things move towards dissolution and
>>>>>>> decay.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That doesn't fit into an ID paradigm, to go through the trouble to
>>>>>> start life and then leave it to inevitably disintegrate.
>>>>>>
>>>>> That's the way it is. You observe it everywhere you look. Everything
>>>>> grows, matures, then starts to decline til death. Including you and me.
>>
>>
>> Once again you ignore the point; "the way it is" doesn't fit the ID
>> paradigm. It makes no distinction between ID and unguided natural
>> processes; a mindless argument.
>>
>>
>>>>>>> I had some beautiful pine trees in my
>>>>>>> acreage. But a patch died, collapsed and are in a process of decay.
>>>>>>> This
>>>>>>> is typical. The same will happen to our bodies.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That's because they died.  Apparently you still don't understand the
>>>>>> difference between life and death.
>>>>>>
>>>>> As I stated a patch died. That's just the way it is. In fact every
>>>>> living thing will die.
>>>>> As far as knowing the difference between life and death. That's a
>>>>> idiotic charge. I've lost some very special family members through death.
>>
>>
>> That's an idiotic reply. It's almost certain everyone on this froup
>> have lost people special to them. Your loss doesn't inform your
>> understanding of the differences between life, death, and non-life.
>>
>>
>>>> Life on earth began 4+ Gya, and consisted at that time exclusively as
>>>> prokaryotes.  Today life of great complexity and disparity is found
>>>> almost everywhere.  Why didn't the original population of the past just
>>>> fall apart and die?  Your line of thinking would suggest that the
>>>> present earth would be barren.
>>>>
>>> And, of course, that would be the case except if not for reproduction.
>>> Which was designed into life for the continuity of living things. But
>>> organisms die, most species that ever lived have become extinct to be
>>> replaced by new forms.
>>
>>
>> Instead of claiming without basis that reproduction was "designed into
>> life", you could have just as mindlessly said "that's the way it is".
>> Did you ever stop to wonder why immortality isn't "the way it is"?
>> From a design standpoint, immortality is infinitely more efficient
>> than wasteful reproduction and extinction.
>>
> Over time everything declines due to wear, tear and decimation of
>energy. Consequently, immortality is impossibility.
>
>The universe is under-girted and controlled by laws, order and
>constants, consequently it can be understood and described via
>mathematics. This fact, eliminates an accidental, aimless, blind
>mindless random origin for the universe. Even stars run out of energy
>and cease over time, the Universe, itself is destined to become a dead
>cold mass--
>
>There is no cause for a universe, and no explanation for the result we
>observe. - What brought about the big bang and from what- from nothing"
> From nothing, nothing comes. The fact is - no one knows. And to answer
>your question, immortality would violate the laws of physics.

What you describe above is an explanation using unguided natural
processes. What is your explanation for the impossibility of
immortality using ID? How do the laws of physics infer ID more than
they infer unguided natural processes?

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge

John Harshman wrote:
> On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
>> Ernest Major wrote:
>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>>> example in Siberia.
>>>
>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>
>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>
>> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
>> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>>
> Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
> somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about you,
> and it's not good.
>
I'm back. I got some bad news from my 6 months physical examine, and
spent a few days in the hospital. I've had some health issues, but this
latest diagnoses is the same condition that took my father's life. It's
very concerning an depressing.

On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 07:27:09 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> Ernest Major wrote:
>>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>>>> example in Siberia.
>>>>
>>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>>>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>>>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>>
>>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>>
>>> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
>>> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>>>
>> Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
>> somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about you,
>> and it's not good.
>>
>I'm back. I got some bad news from my 6 months physical examine, and
>spent a few days in the hospital. I've had some health issues, but this
>latest diagnoses is the same condition that took my father's life. It's
>very concerning an depressing.

I'm sorry to hear that and hope things turn out better than you fear.
You must be pretty stressed out about this and, if TO is causing you
additional stress, you might be better to take a longer break from it.
If it's any comfort to you, I will include you in my prayers.

>

Martin Harran wrote:
> On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 07:27:09 -0400, Ron Dean
> <rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> John Harshman wrote:
>>> On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>> Ernest Major wrote:
>>>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of a
>>>>>> species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species that
>>>>>> ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs became
>>>>>> extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth. Also
>>>>>> changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well massive
>>>>>> volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species for
>>>>>> example in Siberia.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or are
>>>>> you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species biota is
>>>>> the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>>>
>>>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>>>
>>>> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
>>>> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>>>>
>>> Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
>>> somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about you,
>>> and it's not good.
>>>
>> I'm back. I got some bad news from my 6 months physical examine, and
>> spent a few days in the hospital. I've had some health issues, but this
>> latest diagnoses is the same condition that took my father's life. It's
>> very concerning an depressing.
>
> I'm sorry to hear that and hope things turn out better than you fear.
> You must be pretty stressed out about this and, if TO is causing you
> additional stress, you might be better to take a longer break from it.
> If it's any comfort to you, I will include you in my prayers.
>
Thank You, Martin

I have to give up certain foods because or the high potassium such as
bananas, potatoes etc. - there's a list. Hopefully, by doing this I
won't have to go on dialysis.
>
>>
>

On 4/30/24 4:27 AM, Ron Dean wrote:
> John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> Ernest Major wrote:
>>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of
>>>>> a species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species
>>>>> that ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs
>>>>> became extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth.
>>>>> Also changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well
>>>>> massive volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species
>>>>> for example in Siberia.
>>>>
>>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or
>>>> are you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species
>>>> biota is the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>>
>>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>>
>>> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
>>> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>>>
>> Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
>> somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about
>> you, and it's not good.
>>
> I'm back. I got some bad news from my 6 months physical examine, and
> spent a few days in the hospital. I've had some health issues, but this
> latest diagnoses is the same condition that took my father's life. It's
> very concerning an depressing.
>
>
My sympathies. But now that you're back would you like to address any of
the points you dismissed earlier?

On 4/30/24 4:27 AM, Ron Dean wrote:
> John Harshman wrote:
>> On 4/26/24 6:06 PM, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> Ernest Major wrote:
>>>> On 26/04/2024 02:31, Ron Dean wrote:
>>>>> I think due to gradual increasing genetic errors and increase rate
>>>>> of deleterious mutations each generation becomes  less fit than the
>>>>> preceding generation, so in the passing spans of time the genes of
>>>>> a species become less and less incapable of reproduction or species
>>>>> survival. This could account for many of 99%+ of of all species
>>>>> that ever lived that have gone extinct. Of course the dinosaurs
>>>>> became extinct due to a 6 mile diameter meteor striking the Earth.
>>>>> Also changing weather the coming and going of ice ages; as well
>>>>> massive volcano eruptions  accounts for extinction of many species
>>>>> for example in Siberia.
>>>>
>>>> Are you taking a progressive creationist position, in which your
>>>> Intelligent Designer is continuously creating species de novo? Or
>>>> are you claiming that the current 10 million (+/- a lot) species
>>>> biota is the remnant of a much richer biota of a billion species?
>>>>
>>>> For your information, the conclusion drawn from the fossil record is
>>>> that (for multicellular eukaryotes at least) species diversity has
>>>> been generally increasing over time (though with big setbacks at
>>>> times of mass extinction).
>>>>
>>> This thread is going nowhere and I've some pressing issues I have to
>>> deal with. So, hopefully I'll be back soon.
>>>
>> Ernest had just made an attempt, above, to get the thread going
>> somewhere, and your response is to bail? This says something about
>> you, and it's not good.
>>
> I'm back. I got some bad news from my 6 months physical examine, and
> spent a few days in the hospital. I've had some health issues, but this
> latest diagnoses is the same condition that took my father's life. It's
> very concerning an depressing.
>
>
Sorry to hear this. Don't do or say anything that would make you feel
worse. Best wishes for your health.