sammy7

At least someone may see a correlation between Revelation 17 and 18 and what i believe to be NYC/USA.

Its standard terminology in genetics. The foundation of information science is source--->channel--->receiver. Source (DNA)--->channel (mRNA/codons)--->receiver (polypeptide/ribosome). So genetic drift, speciation, gene flow, change in allele frequency all generate NO new genetic information (no NEW nucleotides coming into being coding for NEW proteins-no new genetic information). Teachers omit this. The official myth says prokaryote--->every living thing on the planet. There is no source of BULK amounts of NEW genetic information. Such a claim is purely religious in nature and has NO foundation in science. Mutations=MISTAKES. Again John Sanford has a number of good talks on youtube about it. Natural selection REDUCES genetic information/variation in that the selected out phenotype is gone forever from the earth and the genetic information and variation of its genotype is gone, FOREVER.

Racemic. What configuration are proteins in living things? Not a single dipeptide. What is the average polypeptide length in mankind?

OMG READ WHAT I WROTE WORD FOR WORD AND USE SOME COMMON SENSE. Sickle cell trait- NO NEW GENETIC INFORMATION IS ADDED. A protein gets DESTROYED A LITTLE. There is a REDUCTION in genetic information. As witnessed by someone homozygous for it. Sickle cell trait IS a showcase of 'evolution' in action IF 'evolution' means mutation, change in allele frequency and the mechanism by which that may happen (natural selection). Bait and switch. I put an advertisement in the newspaper showing a brand new Mercedes Benz 2012 model and say $1,000. Someone gets to my house to buy the car and i present them with a matchbox Mercedes Benz. I have 'baited' with one thing and then 'switched' to another. It is an ILLEGAL advertising scam. Again teachers KNOWINGLY (and you fell for it) use the bait and switch. Bait with change in allele frequency, genetic drift, descent with modification, gene flow definitions of the word 'evolution' (sickle cell trait, Darwins finches, speciation, antibiotic resistance caused by mutation-all of which generate no new genetic information)and then later switch the context of the word 'evolution' to meaning all life on earth shares a common ancestor with a prokaryote 3.5 bya. Harold Ureys and Stanley Millers racemic, not a single dipeptide monumental failure of amino acids experiment. Another good example of intentional indoctrination. And you fell for it. Again.

Ah k, yeh was thinking things like blue shift/red shift. Will go again.

If every deleterious mutation was 'selected' out....mankind would be extinct! Selection can only act on the phenotype as a whole. Either or, 0 or 1. It stays or it goes. It CANT go round sleuthing out individual nucleotides. John Cuthber yes exactly, all those guys are evolutionary population geneticists, even though they have shown mutations are building up, they still believe mankind shares a common ancestor with chimpanzees and that mutations (mistakes) built billions of functionally sequenced nucleotides. I(obv) do not subscribe to the same faith as them. Sanford has another lecture on youtube which is 1 hour 40 min long or so where he goes into more detail.

One of them is just an analysis of neodarwinian theory by a surgeon that i liked. Again John Sanford in his book has looked at all of these and more and put them into a model with very conservative estimates and the outcome is the same both times. He has a 6 min talk on youtube on it titled ' Numerical simulation predicts human extinction!'. mutation rate Haldane.pdf Kandarhov mUtations.pdf Kandrashov mutations.pdf 25_1_Kuhn.pdf

Hey So 5 people, 5 different colours, but someone may be able to see 3 blue marks????

Well some of the verses i have underlined signify the city/nation being described is a city/nation of seemingly significant commerce. Pay close attention to them, then the stats on country/cities. Revelation 17:9 'And here is the mind which hath wisdom. The seven heads are seven mountains, on which the woman sitteth.' What is the capital of the world essentially? It is underlined. What is the symbol of the capital of the world? Hmmm. Anymore and it makes it too easy for someone. Its all there if someone wants to go through it.

I am constantly disappointed at the complete lack of scientific intelligence and ability to think critically/utter gullibility/retardedness of atheists. Strawman? Your an IDIOT. I mean selection can do nothing to curb decay, hence why it follows that sentence. Buy one of those books if you want to unbrainwash. Sanfords model is on YouTube if anyone cares. This forum is retarded. Am awaiting any INTELLIGENT responses

I mean biology teachers at universities. They (and all other evolutionary biology evangelists) use the word 'evolution' to describe gene flow, genetic drift, speciation, descent with modification (all of which generate no new genetic information) but they all so use it in the context of prokaryote-->every living thing on the planet. They bait and switch and dont tell the students. The students then may be indoctrinated that those above mechansims are sufficient for the alleged prokaryote-->every living thing on the planet process. Sickle cell trait and other similar mutations that are LOSS of functionality have nothing to do with the prokaryote-->every living thing on the planet process other than teachers INTENTIONALLY omitting that those mutations do NOT ADD genetic information. Along with a number of other books like Lee Spetners above John Sanford wrote a book 'Genetic Entropy and the mystery of the genome'. I found 2-3 literatures today by evolutionary population geneticists showing mankind is accumulating 100-300 NEW mutations a generation. Sanford modelled it. Mankind is DECAYING. Selection can do NOTHING. PROOF of INTENTIONAL indoctrination. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Teleology Apparent teleology is a recurring issue in evolutionary biology,much to the consternation of some writers. Statements which imply that nature has goals, for example where a species is said to do something "in order to" achieve survival, appear teleological, and therefore invalid. Usually, it is possible to rewrite such sentences to avoid the apparent teleology. Some biology courses have incorporated exercises requiring students to rephrase such sentences so that they do not read teleologically. Nevertheless, biologists still frequently write in a way which can be read as implying teleology even if that is not the intention.

Thanks for your reply on A.T.P. Heterozygotes for sickle cell- there is a REDUCTION in functionality and then yes, depending on the environment is said to be 'beneficial' yields a selective advantage (Africa, Malaria). One cant gain something by losing/destroying something a little bit a little but at a time, so it has nothing to do with the putative origin of a genome from non living matter, through natural processes. Teachers omit this. Re that book, i will add an addendum, i recommend it for those interested in science and NOT clinging to religious dogma (atheism).

If one reads it word for word (even atheists *maybe*) 2-3 times i believe they may what i see. A clear correlation between scripture and real world data.

Take tons of lipids, phosphatidyl choline/inositol to restore the myelin sheath of nervous system cells.

"HIV" is a myth. Thabo Mbeki knew it, he knew his people were/are being targeted so to speak. Kary Mullis has a good 18:32 interview on youtube about it. Beri beri, pellagra, scurvy, once upon a time these were infectious diseases. Peter Duesbergs 'Inventing the Aids virus' covers it. He was approached with a paper with a slot for him to sign saying Koch's postulates has been met for it. The guy was having dinner with the editor of the journal 'Nature' that evening and said the paper would be published within the week if he signed it. He didnt sign it.

http://www.icr.org/i...etic-Fields.pdf In 1983, on the basis of Scriptures implying the original created material of the earth was water, I proposed that God created the water with the spins of its hydrogen nuclei initially aligned in one direction (Humphreys, 1983). That would produce a strong magnetic field. After 6,000 years of decay, including energy losses from magnetic reversals during the Genesis Flood, (Humphreys, 1986a, 1990c) the strength of the earth's magnetic field would be what we observe today. In 1984 I extended the theory to the other planets of the solar system, the Sun, and the Moon (Humphreys, 1984). The theory explained the observed magnetic field strengths of those bodies very well. It also correctly predicted the field strengths of Uranus and Neptune measured by the Voyager 2 spacecraft several years later, (Humphreys, 1986b, 1990a, b) as well as magnetizations of surface rocks on Mars (Humphreys, 1999). In this paper I improve the theory and apply it to updated solar system data, meteorites, and the larger moons of Jupiter and Saturn. Then in a brief survey I apply it beyond our solar system to ordinary stars, magnetic stars, white dwarf stars, pulsars, "magnetars," galaxies, and the cosmos itself. The theory appears to be able to explain the magnetic fields of all heavenly bodies for which we have magnetic data. In contrast, the origin of cosmic magnetic fields is still a great mystery to uniformitarian theorists (Langer, Puget, & Aghanim, 2003).

Natural selection, genetic drift, speciation, change in allele frequency over time , these mechanisms/processes generate NO new genetic information, on the contrary selection and speciation thin genetic variation. They have NOTHING to do with the alleged origin of all life on earth being a single organism BILLIONS of years ago other than university teachers INTENTIONALLY omitting that they are NOT sufficient for alleged process. There is no source of bulk amounts of NEW genetic information. Neofunctionalization for the most part is delusional (look at someone with trisomy). CF, PKU, sickle cell anemia- ONE base substitutions. Teachers INTENTIONALLY omit that sickle cell trait- a 'beneficial' mutation- is a LOSS of function mutation. The beta globin protein gets WRECKED a little. IT IS THE GREATEST MYTH IN DOCUMENTED HISTORY (6,000 years). I wouldnt want to be a biology/genetics university teacher facing God when they die, my goodness, they will have HELL to pay. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Spetner We see then that the mutation reduces the specificity of the ribosome protein and that means a loss of genetic information. ... Rather than saying the bacterium gained resistance to the antibiotic, it is more correct to say that is lost sensitivity to it. ... All point mutations that have been studied on the molecular level turn out to reduce the genetic information and not increase it. —Lee Spetner, Not by Chance, Shattering the Modern Theory of Evolution Highly recommend his book.

My expose of Revelation 17 and 18. Sam. Newest pdf Revelation 17 and 18..pdf

k please comment on the "control" in the first literature imatfaal...

hay also someone anyone at all please read the first literature and please comment on the "control" group.....

please start a new thread were i can demolish your delusion that the god of the bible used evolution (contains amusement) to get us here thanks (not personal) thanks ok please answer did you read the literature? and if yes please say what you feel it "shows" screw it its not even necessary: Fossil records show the emergence of leaf-eating and foregut fermentation in colobines no later than 10 Myr ago, We also note the temporal proximity of the gene duplication and the radiation of Asian colobines about 3.5 Myr ago, we estimated that the duplication of RNASE1 to RNASE1B occurred 4.2 Myr ago, with a 95% bootstrap confidence interval of 2.4–6.4 Myr ago. The duplication occurred about 4 million years ago, after colobines split off from the other Old World monkeys, (from the overview) ok at the risk of repeating myself ah screw it you figure it out lol

please refute the actual data thanks. (the chart and that literature yes you will have to read it) and you believe in hell do you? thanks . it should be noted too that no words i ever typed were linking autism to vaccines. i post literature people go spastic science fails to get done

the literature you cited was "we found no link between the two" ok sure ill just read that one literature article put 100% of my faith in it (rofl) and stop looking for actual evidence.......thanks for citation though not everyone does. (not personal johnny).please someone read that data (the whole literature and the graph) and comment

hay thanks will read them and comment, also i thought you said you were a believer? what you doing putting faith in this evolution bs?

hi immunologists. my goal is to expose the myth of vaccination (or the myth that it is some robust method of granting someone immunity from "disease") please in laymans terms (or with as much nomenclature/jargon as you want) lay out the vaccination "scheme" if you will, like the logic or thought process behind it. thank you for your time and your explanation.