6
   

Gerbils not rats caused bubonic plague

 
 
Ionus
 
  1  
Reply Tue 17 Mar, 2015 08:55 am
@carloslebaron,
Are you saying influenza spread at the same time as the plague or was influenza the big killer ?
carloslebaron
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 09:14 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
...And you know this how?

You should call the Max Planck institute and make your best argument for "Non evolution of bacteria'.
I'm sure they'd invite you to the next symposium re population genetics and etymology of disease.


If they believe in any evolution of bacteria, then those dudes in the Max Planck Institute are a herd of ignorant scientists.

There is no evolution but always degeneration of species.

Give me their contact number, I can make them eat dirt if they come with such a silly argument of "evolution".

The whole species -without exception- when suffer changes, they lose and gain characteristics, physical and functional. Period.

This is to say, there is not a "gain gain" scenario, but always a "lose gain" scenario.

The out coming of the changes is always unfavorable to the species at the end. The species might adapt to a new environment at the price of losing characteristics more than gaining new ones.

The horse is the best example of degenerate steps, which show that has lost several characteristics -from digits in feet, number of teeth, misalignment of teeth, etc.- instead of being an example of evolution.

Bacteria which survived a bad treatment of antibiotics in humans, used to absorb the plasmids of the human body, but after the change caused by the survival of the antibiotics, the bacteria LOST its capability to absorb plasmids and became to feed themselves with human DNA. An example is the case of the 19A strain in South Africa.

Losing and gaining, this is the only rule. And "losing" wins when bacteria and viruses change their "diet" and cause the extinction of the host, and by consequence causes their own extinction.

Between "evolution" and "degeneration", "degeneration" rules in the living world, and decay rules in the entire universe. Both, the decay of elements and the degenerate steps of species walk together.

By principle, it can't be true that while the elements of the universe are in a continued decay, that the living species can evolve by any chance.

With this principle of decay as the rule, it is known by fact, to find first bacteria as more complex than our current existing bacteria.

From complex to simpler is the best example of how degeneration has worked in living organisms since their appearance in the world.

Yes, those dudes of the Max Planck Institute are ignorant if they believe in any evolution of bacteria.





carloslebaron
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 09:22 am
@Ionus,
Quote:
Are you saying influenza spread at the same time as the plague or was influenza the big killer ?


Did you misunderstand what I said or, perhaps you are just deviating the words from my message?

I said that weakness in the human body was the most prominent cause of the fast spreading of the plague.

The change in climate affected the human resistance to the bacterial attack.

By comparing chronologically the short "ice age" which happened in the 14th century and the centuries which followed it, with the plagues, one can find out that it is not coincidence but a factor which causes the fast epidemic.



0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 09:29 am
@carloslebaron,
Quote:

If they believe in any evolution of bacteria, then those dudes in the Max Planck Institute are a herd of ignorant scientists
gain I repeat, you know this how? Do you hve any training, education, or experience in anything of which you are lambasting?


Quote:
This is to say, there is not a "gain gain" scenario, but always a "lose gain" scenario.
How do you account for NEW genes?


Quote:
By principle, it can't be true that while the elements of the universe are in a continued decay, that the living species can evolve by any chance?
are you familiar with energy gradients in biochemistry?

Youre out of any league into which you wish to comment. When you can understand energy transfer (eg Krebbs cycle, peptide bonding et) then you probably reach different conclusions. Right now you seem controlled by a non-scientific worldview .
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 11:23 am
Talking to Carlos is like wrestling with a pig. You get covered in mud and sh*t, and the pig enjoys it.
carloslebaron
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 04:20 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
gain I repeat, you know this how? Do you hve any training, education, or experience in anything of which you are lambasting?


What do you mean by that? Right now there are lots of physicists who believe and swear that time dilates, even when time is nothing but a concept, and all their training, education and experience is crap to the square because their knowledge is mere fantasies.

For this reason, I put my statement over the table. Let those guys to put theirs, I can tell you that they are dead wrong in front of the fact: degeneration rules.

Quote:
How do you account for NEW genes?


Oh, yeah? those "new genes", where they come from? From God?

This is the typical misunderstanding of reality. You can't mix a Chihuahua with a Saint Bernard, and you can't decide which one is the "new species", because if they can't reproduce when mating they are considered "different species" according to evolutionists.

Quote:
are you familiar with energy gradients in biochemistry?

Youre out of any league into which you wish to comment. When you can understand energy transfer (eg Krebbs cycle, peptide bonding et) then you probably reach different conclusions. Right now you seem controlled by a non-scientific worldview .


Talk layman English, your technical language confuses you.

I will make you the scenario very simple, so you can understand it.

The elements are the ten gallons of gasoline in a container. The car motor is the cells/molecules. The motor uses the gasoline to transformed it into force or energy.

What happens when gasoline started to degrade because it was left for months to the outside environment? Gasoline is volatile, and its quality degrades. After a few months, that gasoline won't make the motor to start.

So, you want to target an scenario where energy transfer occurs lets say in photosynthetic model. Now, take in consideration that as everything decays, even solar rays are affected by this degenerate process. Then, plants will transform a more weaker status of energy, and by consequence, the chances of "evolution are lesser while the path of decay is more prominent.

Do you get it?

The transformation of energy will always be weaker, lesser, diminished, and so forth due to the quality of the elements in continued decay.

You are referring to a process of transformation of energy, but you forgot to start with the status of the primary source of energy which will be degraded due to the decay of the elements.

There is no escape to this fact: decay rules.

carloslebaron
 
  0  
Reply Wed 18 Mar, 2015 04:23 pm
@Setanta,
Quote:
Talking to Carlos is like wrestling with a pig. You get covered in mud and sh*t, and the pig enjoys it.


In other words, you ignore completely what is going on here. On the other hand, I'm Kosher.
Setanta
 
  2  
Reply Thu 19 Mar, 2015 04:09 am
@carloslebaron,
Liar . . . you hate Jews . . . there's nothing in the least kosher about you. You're basically a crypto-nazi, but you don't even have the courage to admit it.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Thu 19 Mar, 2015 04:46 am
@carloslebaron,
Quote:

For this reason, I put my statement over the table. Let those guys to put theirs, I can tell you that they are dead wrong in front of the fact: degeneration rules
"Those guy" have amassed a growing body of evidence that clearly demonstrates that you re quite wrong in your "beliefs".

carloslebaron
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2015 07:26 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
"Those guy" have amassed a growing body of evidence that clearly demonstrates that you re quite wrong in your "beliefs".


I gave you my explanation.

Find a more accurate explanation of yours capable to challenge mine.

(many readers -like Setanta- won't understand anything if you abuse using technical terms, please be gentle with readers like him and try to discuss here and in other topics of these forums using layman language.)

My regards.
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2015 07:39 am
@carloslebaron,
Quote:
Find a more accurate explanation of yours capable to challenge mine.
You have nothing but your opinion. That's not worthy of comment because you've presented no evidence t all. Ive asked you, and Ill repeat where do all these "new" genes comefrom?.(I think youeven deny that biological fact). Jut saying that something does not exist isn't good enough. I love evidence and often change my mind when its compelling
You can have all your opinions you wish, but you cannot make up FACTS.
So quit patting yourself on the back, your argument is(to this point) evidence-free.


When setanta and I disagree its never for want of either of us NOT understanding the terminology. So I reject your request as being merely a poorly disguised attempt at childish insult.
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Fri 20 Mar, 2015 07:55 am
@carloslebaron,
Quote:
discuss here and in other topics of these forums using layman language
Either read the subject a bit more in detail or just bail. I will not water down a subject that has specific terminology. (Words are generally precise instruments of communication).
I often publish a clip aside of my comments (like I did on the basic haplogroup of human populations)

Everyone has satisfactory understanding of mitochondrial DN, and now Ive merely introduced "Y-chromosomal_ DNA to trace human population. The concept is easily understood unless you wish to deny then one will use whatever means to scramble the meaning of a post..
0 Replies
 
carloslebaron
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 21 Mar, 2015 09:06 am
@farmerman,
Quote:
You have nothing but your opinion. That's not worthy of comment because you've presented no evidence t all. Ive asked you, and Ill repeat where do all these "new" genes comefrom?.(I think youeven deny that biological fact). Jut saying that something does not exist isn't good enough. I love evidence and often change my mind when its compelling
You can have all your opinions you wish, but you cannot make up FACTS.
So quit patting yourself on the back, your argument is(to this point) evidence-free.


You have no facts at all to insinuate any evolution process with living organisms.

On the contrary, the facts I have presented with the horse and the mutation of bacteria support my "opinion" with 100% accuracy.

Count the characteristics of the ancient horse -physical and functional- compared with the characteristics of the current horse, and this animal has indeed passed thru degenerate steps.

Same with bacteria showing a lose-gain scenario, same with viruses and every living species in the world.

These are FACTS.

I asked you to present your facts, and so far, you have not any.

Be sure to verify if any one of your assumed facts you might try to post here will pass a scrutiny checking if the species gained only new characteristics without losing others.

I will give a great example: the T-Rex, is the best example of birth defect., not so an example of evolutionary steps.

Any scrutiny will back up this statement, because atrophied digits and disproportioned small arms is considered as birth defect. And birth defects can pass from one generation into another, specially if the environment causing it still present. You can't argue against this fact.

Coming back to the topic, any study about the cause of the fast propagation of the plague which is not considering the human status at that moment because the change of climate, all those studies are incomplete and are not enough to obtain a solid conclusion.

farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Sat 21 Mar, 2015 10:18 am
@carloslebaron,
Quote:
You have no facts at all to insinuate any evolution process with living organisms.
Facts an evidence is so densely available regarding the evolutionary process and history of this planet that to deny its existence is almost a psychosis.

Denial of this evidence is living in a fantsy world that just doesn't comport with reality


Quote:

On the contrary, the facts I have presented with the horse and the mutation of bacteria support my "opinion" with 100% accuracy
You have presented no facts or evidence. You've only preented opinions and "made up" baseless assertions that you call "facts" .SHOW ME A REAL SCIENTIST WHO HAS ANY EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT YOUR BS


Quote:
Count the characteristics of the ancient horse -physical and functional- compared with the characteristics of the current horse, and this animal has indeed passed thru degenerate steps.
This is totally wacky. In what fashion have the modern varieties of horse "degenerated">. Do you consider the evolution of the horses hoof as a degeneracy?

Wanna buy a bridge to the Bahamas? Seems your reality os full of very large holes of reason and fact.

What you believe is degeneracy is what pleontologists cll "hypsodonty' which I the development of a phylogenetic trait that , together with others, serves the organism with an increased adaptational success for a particular lifestyle in given environment. Horses were first seen as forest dwelling hoofless animals, As the environment went from forest to Savannah due to climate changes, the several hypsodontal features (together with Cope's "Law") resulted in an animal; adapted to running in an open grassland.
Evolution has always been about
"Tking something you already have and doing something different with it". Not all birds became "TERRORBIRDS", many of the bord clade evolved better and better solutions to flight rather than running.
In the same fashion, the genetic relationships among the modern perissodactyls(includes tapirs, horse, and rhinos) the varied solutions to their adaptational challenges certainly do not show "degeneration" but , on the contrry, they show unique structures .(PS the "fossil genes " of a rhino, are many of those that are "turned on" in a horse.

If youre not willing to discuss something from a position of knowledge, Just quit "making up bullshit" and trying to convince the world that you know of what you speak, Ive been in this business for almot 40 years and I run into people like you every day (Except most of these douche bags are trying to , by power of their offices, convince voters to begin a silly war on Science that is based upon a half baked fact-free story from a minority view of a book of moral tales that has been based on its usurpation by one small group ofFundamental "Scholars""

.
Sofar, in the real world of US juris Prudence, EVERY court- case in which Evolution had been challenged against ID or Creationism, it has been shown in the court records that the Creationists /IDers had lied about their positions and their facts. So, of these liars, where do you draw your information??
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

HAPPY ANNIVERSARY, EVERYONE! - Discussion by OmSigDAVID
WIND AND WATER - Discussion by Setanta
Who ordered the construction of the Berlin Wall? - Discussion by Walter Hinteler
True version of Vlad Dracula, 15'th century - Discussion by gungasnake
ONE SMALL STEP . . . - Discussion by Setanta
History of Gun Control - Discussion by gungasnake
Where did our notion of a 'scholar' come from? - Discussion by TuringEquivalent
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 07/29/2021 at 05:15:19