Abiogenesis is very much connected to Evolution. With such knowledge, it would go without saying that it is the 4th of 6 categories of Evolution.
1. Chemical evolution - the origin of higher elements from hydrogen
2. Cosmic evolution - the origin of time, space, and matter
3. Stellar and planetary evolution - the origin of stars and planets
4. Organic evolution - origin of life from inanimate matter
5. Macro-evolution - origin of major kinds
6. Micro-evolution - variations with kinds.
However, it wasn't meant as an argument against, it was in support of creationism.
I was interested by your CCR5 arguement, as it is similar to the Malaria argument. However, I was impressed by the Nylon argument, however found it odd listed amongst the others... until I found the site you cut and paste from. I have posted the link of where I must assume your list came from, as it is word for word.
Beneficial mutations are commonly observed. They are common enough to be problems in the cases of antibiotic resistance in disease-causing organisms and pesticide resistance in agricultural pests (e.g., Newcomb et al. 1997; these are not merely selection of pre-existing variation.) They can be repeatedly observed in laboratory populations (Wichman et al. 1999). Other examples include the following:
Mutations have given bacteria the ability to degrade nylon (Prijambada et al. 1995).
Plant breeders have used mutation breeding to induce mutations and select the beneficial ones (FAO/IAEA 1977).
Certain mutations in humans confer resistance to AIDS (Dean et al. 1996; Sullivan et al. 2001) or to heart disease (Long 1994; Weisgraber et al. 1983).
A mutation in humans makes bones strong (Boyden et al. 2002).
Transposons are common, especially in plants, and help to provide beneficial diversity (Moffat 2000).
In vitro mutation and selection can be used to evolve substantially improved function of RNA molecules, such as a ribozyme (Wright and Joyce 1997).
-
CB101: Most mutations harmful?
All (except the first one) are example of of a re-aranging of Alleles. The problem with Evolutionists is that they use the word 'Mutation' for an Allele that could have existed before, and in fact, is admitted in the link to having existed before.
"It is true that much microevolution selects from preexisting variation. In animals, that kind of microevolution occurs much faster than waiting for certain mutations to occur, so we often see artificial selection programs stall when they have selected among all the variation that was there to begin with. However, if the selection is maintained, change should continue, albeit at a much slower rate."
This accounts for the CCR5 "mutation" also.
I said this once in this thread and I'll say it again. There really are no laws of science, it must ALWAYS be open to revision or it loses its magnificence. - xentar
A scientific Law needs no further revision. It will always hold true. My point was that after many revisions, scientists have often been proven 'wrong'. My argument isn't that science is wrong, or should be ignored, and my statement was not an Oxymoron. Many have argued in previous postings that "Scientists" know it to be true, so it must be true. My point is simply, even Scientists can disagree sometimes, and sometimes 'theories' become replaced, revised, or even proved wrong.
First, Relax. Debate regarding an issue should never be a personal attack. Each of us hear on AD are at different stages of learning. Should I be mocked because I know less than you? Simply correct my mistakes, help me learn, let me question, or dispute, but there is no need for hostility.
Second, understand the difference between Theory, and Law. (However, let me first point out that because there is a difference, does not make a theory less valid than a law.)
Any Scientific law has a predictable outcome, and is reproducable.
There are REALLY several Scientific laws.
Law of conservation of Energy
Law of gravitation
Even in Biology - Mendelian Inheritance and Hardy-Weinburg principle.
Theories can be just as valid, and can often be used interchangably with the word 'law'.
A scientific law concerns the physical or social world, it therefore must have empirical content and therefore be capable of testing and potentially falsifiable. Analytic statements that are true or false by logic alone are not scientific laws, though may feature as part of scientific theories. - Wikepedia - Scientific Law
Evolution is an observed phenomenon. The Theory of Evolution is an attempt to explain the said observed phenomenon. Biological evolution is the product of mutation, heredity, and competition in living things. Those are the observed events, no one can deny them. - Xentar
Heredity, competition does not lead to Macro Evolution.
Ok... simple example, please explain my Eye.
My eye has different parts, connects to my brain to see, has rods and cones... how many different mutations randomly occured to enusre that my eye would work properly. Or did one mutiation create the eye ball... then a second mutation created the connection... then a third mutaton made sure my brain could interpret pictures?
