Smarter, but older.
Topic: Are humans not changing naturally? - page 3. (Read 698 times)
Are humans not changing naturally?
Smarter, but older.
Smarter, but older.
It's inevitable for people to start using CRISPR/CAS9 extensively and when that happens we will be watching how rich people under the radar are genetically engineering babies, and that will be the end of humanity as we know it.
they call it theory, which means it might not be what actually happen but likely what happened that led to the existence of something
That might be what the word "theory" means in layman's terms, but it is not what it means in scientific terms. A scientific theory is established knowledge which is supported by all the facts, observations, and evidence available.The germ theory of disease describes how microorganisms cause diseases, but no one, not even crazy anti-vaxxers, argue that the existence of germs is "just a theory" or a best guess.
Your reply shows you do not believe that man was created by God from the Bible perspective? That contradicts my position because I do not take any other theory of the creation of man other than that from the Bible. It makes me want to ask you this question if you actually believe in the existence of God?
I serve God, but that does not mean I should literarily believe all what humans are saying. I perfectly believe in evolution and scientific researches. I have read a lot about scientists, they call it theory, which means it might not be what actually happen but likely what happened that led to the existence of something, is that not perfect enough after also giving some factual understanding about how the world evolved. If you say you do not believe in scientists, you need to start reading the reasons they make certain conclusions which are valid reasons. I am not a man that someone will tell something and I will just believe, I make reading researches too. And also, where in religion was evolution emphasised about? Why the argument then? 
Was that before the creation of the earth? Because that is the only time I read no humans and animals were on the surface of the earth before God made them all.
It was evolution that led to the creation of humans, it is not possible men will be existing the moment he Earth was created, it will take millions of years or billions of years, even the earth will be structured, plants evolved, animals also evolved before humans will evolve. The oldest human fossil record and from researches of the scientists, humans are said to evolve after the jurassic world after the exinction of the dinosaur age which was less than 50 millions years ago, while the earth was estimated to be 400 million or billions of years of existence.Your reply shows you do not believe that man was created by God from the Bible perspective? That contradicts my position because I do not take any other theory of the creation of man other than that from the Bible. It makes me want to ask you this question if you actually believe in the existence of God?
When a certain proportion of consensus is formed, organisms can collectively mutate. Living things can reverse transcription and rewrite their genes. At a certain moment.
Was that before the creation of the earth? Because that is the only time I read no humans and animals were on the surface of the earth before God made them all.
It was evolution that led to the creation of humans, it is not possible men will be existing the moment he Earth was created, it will take millions of years or billions of years, even the earth will be structured, plants evolved, animals also evolved before humans will evolve. The oldest human fossil record and from researches of the scientists, humans are said to evolve after the jurassic world after the exinction of the dinosaur age which was less than 50 millions years ago, while the earth was estimated to be 400 million or billions of years of existence.The earth is roughly 4.6 billion years old. The evolution of life is certainly a fascinating subject, and we know a surprisingly large amount. Below are simplified (and extremely simplified) examples of the tree of life.
https://i0.wp.com/flowingdata.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/tree-of-life_2000.png?w=2000&ssl=1
https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tree_of_life_(biology)#/media/File:Simplified_tree.png
And the study of how humans evolved is particularly interesting. Below is an image of the evolutionary history of hominins (scale is millions of years, so starting 10 million years ago). Obviously we don't have the full detail, but you will note that in the genus homo, the pattern is somewhat more convoluted than is commonly represented, notably the fact that divergence is not simple branching, but a lot messier and with elements of convergence. Most notable perhaps for those of us with European ancestry is the interbreeding between 'modern' humans and Neanderthals in the last few tens of thousands of years, which bequeathed us modern Europeans a couple of percentage points of Neanderthal DNA.
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3e/Hominini_lineage.svg/1280px-Hominini_lineage.svg.png
organic food can be grown with lack of plant nutrition and can still be called organic..hence the quality of taste can be affected.
So you agree that organic doesn't taste better despite your statement in literally your very last post in this thread. Ok, time to move the goalposts I guess...it is not as black and white as you portray, organic foods are mainly chosen because you want to avoid pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers.
You do realize that organic farming uses pesticides too, right? In fact, often more pesticides than conventional farming because they are not as effective. Just because a pesticide is derived from a natural source and is therefore "organic" doesn't mean it is safe. Rotenone was used for decades as an organic pesticide despite being a potent neurotoxin in humans. Copper sulfate causes liver failure. Pyrethin causes cancer. And despite all this, these pesticides/herbicides/fungicides are still not as good as conventional ones, which is why organic food has been linked to deadly outbreaks of things such as E. coli.the answer should be not "agree" or "disagree", should be "it depends".
as for your organic pesticides that can harm humans..are they limited to those two?, there are a lot of alternatives out there...so the answer will also become "it depends"
you can point out negative parts but the question is did the organic industry learned or progressed?
another thing, sometimes the best produce like tea for example doesn't even bother getting the organic "certification", the ones that are labeled as organic is the one they wanted to sell and use the "organic" label to prop up the product (cases with large scale farming). the best ones are always sold out with no organic certification needed (an unnecessary expense).
so just like i said up thread, some are just getting scammed.
Was that before the creation of the earth? Because that is the only time I read no humans and animals were on the surface of the earth before God made them all.
It was evolution that led to the creation of humans, it is not possible men will be existing the moment he Earth was created, it will take millions of years or billions of years, even the earth will be structured, plants evolved, animals also evolved before humans will evolve. The oldest human fossil record and from researches of the scientists, humans are said to evolve after the jurassic world after the exinction of the dinosaur age which was less than 50 millions years ago, while the earth was estimated to be 400 million or billions of years of existence. organic food can be grown with lack of plant nutrition and can still be called organic..hence the quality of taste can be affected.
So you agree that organic doesn't taste better despite your statement in literally your very last post in this thread. Ok, time to move the goalposts I guess...it is not as black and white as you portray, organic foods are mainly chosen because you want to avoid pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers.
You do realize that organic farming uses pesticides too, right? In fact, often more pesticides than conventional farming because they are not as effective. Just because a pesticide is derived from a natural source and is therefore "organic" doesn't mean it is safe. Rotenone was used for decades as an organic pesticide despite being a potent neurotoxin in humans. Copper sulfate causes liver failure. Pyrethin causes cancer. And despite all this, these pesticides/herbicides/fungicides are still not as good as conventional ones, which is why organic food has been linked to deadly outbreaks of things such as E. coli. there were time when there was no single human on Earth,
Was that before the creation of the earth? Because that is the only time I read no humans and animals were on the surface of the earth before God made them all.
Some mutations are beneficial to survival, some are detrimental, some are neither. People who have a mutation that is beneficial is more likely to survive and have children than someone who has a mutation that is detrimental.
May be that was what those who support the conspiracy that coronavirus is not an illness but a laboratory exercise in China gone bad are pointing at. May be coronavirus is actually one example of bad mutation. The virus has gone out of control now and no one can put an end to this anymore.
LOL not surprised this pro vaxx dude can't taste the difference between organic foods and non organic
Neither can anybody else. If you think you can, then you have simply fallen to their marketing gimmicks.Quote from: Bourn D, Prescott J. A Comparison of the Nutritional Value, Sensory Qualities, and Food Safety of Organically and Conventionally Produced Foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2002;42(1):1-34.
There is yet to be convincing evidence that organic produce differs in sensory terms from conventional produce, let alone that there is some taste advantage.
Quote from: Basker D. Comparison of taste quality between organically and conventionally grown fruits and vegetables. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture. 1992;7:129-36.
For grapefruit, grapes, carrots, spinach, sweet corn and tomatoes, the differences in hedonic ratings and scores between the two types of produce were not significant. For mangoes and orange juice, the conventional type was preferred.
Quote from: Porretta S. Qualitative comparison between commercial, “traditional” and “organic” tomato products using multivariate statistical analysis. Acta Horticulturae. 1994;376:259-70.
The traditional products have better sensory properties, in particular those related with color, natural taste and acceptability.
Bold added. So either no difference, or the non-organic food was rated more highly. Lol.
organic food can be grown with lack of plant nutrition and can still be called organic..hence the quality of taste can be affected.
it is not as black and white as you portray, organic foods are mainly chosen because you want to avoid pesticides, herbicides and chemical fertilizers.
it is very clear that you do not have proper experience growing plants for food, same with meat. no amount of books can teach you that.
LOL not surprised this pro vaxx dude can't taste the difference between organic foods and non organic
Neither can anybody else. If you think you can, then you have simply fallen to their marketing gimmicks.Quote from: Bourn D, Prescott J. A Comparison of the Nutritional Value, Sensory Qualities, and Food Safety of Organically and Conventionally Produced Foods. Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition. 2002;42(1):1-34.
There is yet to be convincing evidence that organic produce differs in sensory terms from conventional produce, let alone that there is some taste advantage.
Quote from: Basker D. Comparison of taste quality between organically and conventionally grown fruits and vegetables. American Journal of Alternative Agriculture. 1992;7:129-36.
For grapefruit, grapes, carrots, spinach, sweet corn and tomatoes, the differences in hedonic ratings and scores between the two types of produce were not significant. For mangoes and orange juice, the conventional type was preferred.
Quote from: Porretta S. Qualitative comparison between commercial, “traditional” and “organic” tomato products using multivariate statistical analysis. Acta Horticulturae. 1994;376:259-70.
The traditional products have better sensory properties, in particular those related with color, natural taste and acceptability.
Bold added. So either no difference, or the non-organic food was rated more highly. Lol.
I am only just thinking about this, I did not see it from any website, that is why I take it to here to hear people's opinions about it
Opinions are irrelevant. All scientific evidence is that both genetically modified and non-organic foods are just as safe, healthy, and nutritious, as non-GM or organic foods.LOL not surprised this pro vaxx dude can't taste the difference between organic foods and non organic...best case scenario, you are just scammed
die in your 30s
That's a common misconception; it was never that bad. These low life expectancy figures are merely skewed by the incredibly high infant mortality rates of the time, which were often over 50%. Those who survived childhood typically lived to be over 60. Many even lived long enough to watch their grandchildren die horribly of now-preventable diseases (okay, I lied when I said it wasn't that bad). It baffles me that some people apparently want to go back to such conditions. 
I am only just thinking about this, I did not see it from any website, that is why I take it to here to hear people's opinions about it
Opinions are irrelevant. All scientific evidence is that both genetically modified and non-organic foods are just as safe, healthy, and nutritious, as non-GM or organic foods.this makes me to think if all genetically and inorganically mordified food can lead people to artificially evolution over long period of time.
No, it can't. Your body doesn't know if a string of DNA in a piece of fruit you eat has been shaped by natural selection, artificial selection, or genetic modification. It breaks them all down just the same and the DNA from the food you eat is in not incorporated in to your own DNA, regardless of the source of that DNA. Citation needed. There is no evidence organic food is better/healthier/more nutritious than its non-organic equivalent.
I am only just thinking about this, I did not see it from any website, that is why I take it to here to hear people's opinions about it, we learn everyday, bringing it here is just to know what others will post about it because this forum is helpful in everyway. I am very concerned that the vegitable I am eating today has never again be like the old ones, the water content has increased, it changed differently not like the old ones when little heat is applied, this is not the only reason, I have noticed this much in crops, this makes me to think if all genetically and inorganically mordified food can lead people to artificially evolution over long period of time. I am not saying I am right and neither did I say I am wrong, that is why I ask it as a question. 
Ergo, you can't really be modified (EVOLVED by what you mentioned) just by eating this GMO.
How did you know? If we like it or not, evolution will surely occur, as the primitive humans are not 100% the same as the modern time humans according to fossil records, existence of mutation and other scientific researches. The scientists manipulation can make the natural evolution path to be different from what should have happened naturally with what I am talking about. The artificial manipulation can result to the natural evolution path to be different.Nooo, the GMO you mentioned can't really be a factor of the natural evolution you mention as it not interferes with the genetic identity of the patient.
Only organic fertilizers were used by the old farmers, but now they are using inorganic which we see difference in foods that inorganic fertilizers is not good like organic.
Citation needed. There is no evidence organic food is better/healthier/more nutritious than its non-organic equivalent.I have been reading about genetic modified crops also.
As Cnut237 has correctly pointed out, everything in our world is already genetically modified, from crops to pets to working animals. Go and Google "wild banana". The banana we have now is thanks to hundreds of years of genetic selection by humans.The scientists manipulation can make the natural evolution path to be different from what should have happened naturally with what I am talking about. The artificial manipulation can result to the natural evolution path to be different.
If you want natural, then I would invite you to go live in the jungle, forage for your own food, and die in your 30s from being eaten by predators or by catching some vaccine preventable disease like tetanus. The fact that artificial manipulation of our environment means that we no longer live like that is a triumph of science. 
mRNA vacines do not enter the nucleus (part our DNA sit in)
mRNA doesnt have the coding to alter the dna
mRNA goes to the ribosome. to make proteins. not new dna sequences
mRNA breaks down in days.
mRNA doesnt have the tRNA or rRNA or any other microRNA types to replicate
the fastest way to evolve a species would have been hitlers model of only wanting blodhair blue eyes to produce offspring and then kill off the ginger, none pal, dark haired population.
but even with tanks on the streets and guns in hand.. even he couldnt speed up a change of human kind to a single direction
the only thing left is the neo-nazi fear of the lineage of 'pureblood' being diluted into mix-race offspring..
as for science intervening into natural evolution
well chemical usage.. if you call sugars chemicals. have been added by the cupfuls into foods that didnt have them 100 years ago.
this has caused people who usually get diabetes at 60 average. to now be 40average. where by their kids become diabetic by teen years.
but with that science has actually helped those that usually died at around 50yo 100 years ago. to now have it where the average age is 85
basically giving 65% extra live expectancy
chimps live for about 40 years..
so millions of years only added 10 years naturally
since added 35 years on top of that in just 100 years
this is not any genetic manipulation. or dna altering. or evolution change.
this is just finding cures/medicine for a disease or ailment that people would have got in their 40's/50's that would have killed them without the cure/medicine.
even things like organ transplant and operations. save lives and keep people alive longer
mRNA doesnt have the coding to alter the dna
mRNA goes to the ribosome. to make proteins. not new dna sequences
mRNA breaks down in days.
mRNA doesnt have the tRNA or rRNA or any other microRNA types to replicate
the fastest way to evolve a species would have been hitlers model of only wanting blodhair blue eyes to produce offspring and then kill off the ginger, none pal, dark haired population.
but even with tanks on the streets and guns in hand.. even he couldnt speed up a change of human kind to a single direction
the only thing left is the neo-nazi fear of the lineage of 'pureblood' being diluted into mix-race offspring..
as for science intervening into natural evolution
well chemical usage.. if you call sugars chemicals. have been added by the cupfuls into foods that didnt have them 100 years ago.
this has caused people who usually get diabetes at 60 average. to now be 40average. where by their kids become diabetic by teen years.
but with that science has actually helped those that usually died at around 50yo 100 years ago. to now have it where the average age is 85
basically giving 65% extra live expectancy
chimps live for about 40 years..
so millions of years only added 10 years naturally
since added 35 years on top of that in just 100 years
this is not any genetic manipulation. or dna altering. or evolution change.
this is just finding cures/medicine for a disease or ailment that people would have got in their 40's/50's that would have killed them without the cure/medicine.
even things like organ transplant and operations. save lives and keep people alive longer
Jump to: