NationStates Jolt Archive

It is so easy to be against the evolution theory, for a house and kitchen theologian, it’s a free ideological game and something for debates and postings on this (and other) forums. But for those who are infected with a multi-resistant hospital bacteria, which represent evolution and has adapted itself to an environment full of antibiotics, or among the members who has HIV, with an AIDS virus in their bodies which is rapidly mutating and evolving, evolution is a matter of life or death.

The viruses and bacteria, which evolve, do not respect the sophism of Intelligent Design

Take malaria mosquitoes. It’s better to fight them with a 'soft' insecticide that kills mosquitoes not too fast, instead of the usual fast-acting horse resources. This is one of the implications of the research by Andrew Read of the Pennsylvania State University and his colleagues, published in the journal Public Library of Science Biology (http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.1000058) (Biology Plose for the friends).

The difficulty with insecticides to control malaria mosquitoes is that the creatures are always soon resistant. Like that happens with bacteria and antibiotics. The reason for the rapidly emerging resistance is not that the mosquitoes are intelligently redesigned, but simply that whenever there are sprays, those mosquitoes that survive these are the ones with the best resistance against the chemical attack. And the surviving mosquitoes will then multiply to the next generation - their competitors, the more sensitive types are by us, humans, removed. After a few generations in this way spraying and cultivation, you have a mosquito population that hardly notice any insecticide.

Darwin would be excited.

Lies put forth by evil, satan-worshipping atheists. Never mind that I'm contradicting myself, GOD HATES SCIENCE! Also, he hates vaccines and modern luxuries such as 'clean water'. :p

Actually heard an interesting thing from Scientific American about a team that wants to spread genes resistant to the malaria parasite through mosquito populations. I don't know, exactly, how they plan on doing it, though.

Darwin would be excited.

Why? I don't think he was enough of a dick to relish the thought of people dying of malaria, and it's not as if evolutionary theory particularly needed more supporting evidence.

I know a guy who would say that's "adaptation" and does not preclude intelligent design.

I know a guy who would say that's "adaptation" and does not preclude intelligent design.

It is not adaptation. Adaptation that's when you go to your fitness centre and are rewarded with 'new' and more muscles after hours of exercises. These mosquitoes do not train to deserve their resistance. They already are and pass it to the next generation.

You and your partner can do zillion hours of fitness time, you'll not give birth to a baby which is born as a bodybuilder. Not even a small one.

God intelligently made his holy design look like unintelligent evolution to fool the weak-minded into atheism.

D. D. T.

I have yet to hear of a mosquito population adapting to it.

D. D. T.

I have yet to hear of a mosquito population adapt to it. :P

Well, they're a bit small to learn how to combat wrestling moves.

D. D. T.

I have yet to hear of a mosquito population adapting to it.

Yes, they actual do.

The evolution of resistance to DDT in mosquitos has greatly reduced its effectiveness in many parts of the world, and current WHO guidelines require that before the chemical is used in an area, susceptibility of local mosquitos to DDT must be confirmed.[85] The appearance of DDT-resistance is largely due to its use in agriculture, where it was used in much greater amounts than the relatively small quantities used for disease prevention. According to one study that attempted to quantify the lives saved by banning agricultural uses of DDT and thereby slowing the spread of resistance, "it can be estimated that at current rates each kilo of insecticide added to the environment will generate 105 new cases of malaria."[19]
Resistance was noted early in spray campaigns, with Paul Russell, a former head of the Allied Anti-Malaria campaign, observing in 1956 that eradication programs had to be wary of relying on DDT for too long as "resistance has appeared [after] six or seven years."[17] DDT has lost much of its effectiveness in many parts of the world including Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Turkey and Central America, and it has largely been replaced by organophosphate or carbamate insecticides, e.g. malathion or bendiocarb.[86]
In many parts of India, DDT has largely lost its effectiveness.[87] Agricultural uses were banned in 1989, and its use for anti-malarial purposes has been declining. Its use in urban areas has been halted completely.[88] Nevertheless, DDT is still manufactured and used in the country,[89] and one study had concluded that "DDT is still a viable insecticide in indoor residual spraying owing to its effectivity in well supervised spray operation and high excito-repellency factor."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DDT#Mosquito_resistance_to_DDT

Actually heard an interesting thing from Scientific American about a team that wants to spread genes resistant to the malaria parasite through mosquito populations. I don't know, exactly, how they plan on doing it, though.

Enemas. The whole plan is being held up at the moment by a lack of really small tubes.

Yes, they actual do.

Wow, very good. You've taught me something I wasn't aware of. I wasn't aware that DDT was still in use anywhere.

Okay, this means we may only have one shot... we need a new insecticide and a campaign of genocide against mosquitoes!

Who's With Me!!!!!

Wow, very good. You've taught me something I wasn't aware of. I wasn't aware that DDT was still in use anywhere.

Okay, this means we may only have one shot... we need a new insecticide and a campaign of genocide against mosquitoes!

Who's With Me!!!!!

/e sprays You-Gi-Owe with D.D.T.
:p

I know a guy who would say that's "adaptation" and does not preclude intelligent design.

Individuals adapt to poison?
Or an adaption of the species as such?

Lies put forth by evil, Nittany Lions. Never mind that I'm contradicting myself, Felines HATES SCIENCE! Also, they hates vaccines and modern luxuries such as 'the far superior Ohio State University'. :p

Minor corrections bolded.

I know a guy who would say that's "adaptation" and does not preclude intelligent design.

Yeah, I remember some IDers saying that its not evolution until a dog gives birth to a lobster or something.

Wow, very good. You've taught me something I wasn't aware of. I wasn't aware that DDT was still in use anywhere.

Okay, this means we may only have one shot... we need a new insecticide and a campaign of genocide against mosquitoes!

Who's With Me!!!!!

The problem is that in the population of mosquitoes there probably will be some that already are resistant to the insecticide you want to use due to natural variation.

You can't really develop a resistance to DDT, since it is such a powerful insecticide, instead there already was some mosquitoes that was resistant. Before the use of DDT it did not give any advantage, but after the usage of DDT it gave a heck of an advantage since pretty much the only ones that survived was the ones that already had the resistance to it. And hence more mosquitoes have resistance to it.

Yeah, I remember some IDers saying that its not evolution until a dog gives birth to a lobster or something.

Heh yeah or my personal fave.

'Ohh yeah but that is micro evolution, we have not yet seem macro evolution in action':D

It is not adaptation. Adaptation that's when you go to your fitness centre and are rewarded with 'new' and more muscles after hours of exercises. These mosquitoes do not train to deserve their resistance. They already are and pass it to the next generation.

You and your partner can do zillion hours of fitness time, you'll not give birth to a baby which is born as a bodybuilder. Not even a small one.

So, it's a survival of the fittest situation? How does that negate intelligent design exactly?

So, it's a survival of the fittest situation? How does that negate intelligent design exactly?

Survival of the fittest doesn't negate Intelligent Design, it's just a handy way to describe how evolution works.

ID is negated by its inability to make predictions that are supported by evidence. Evolution predicts that we should see the creatures who are best adapted to their environments come to dominate those environments (it's very late & I'm tired, so could screw this up).

The basis of ID is a denial of evolution, not a positive assertion of anything about the development of life over the ages. One of its basic tenets, irreducible complexity, says that there are biological structures so complex that they could not have evolved naturally and so must have been designed by some agency working outside the natural processes. This comes down to an argument from incredulity: I don't understand it so it must be the work of a Designer.

ID was invented as a way to get around a SCOTUS ruling that Creation Science could not be taught in public schools because it violated the separation of church and state. There is a textbook, Of Pandas and People, that exists in one version with the words "creator" and "creation" and another version where those are replaced by "designer" and "intelligent design." Indeed, there's one place where the person doing the "replace all" missed an instance where "intelligent design" was inserted into the middle of a phrase like "creation science" or something.

Hope that makes sense.

So, it's a survival of the fittest situation? How does that negate intelligent design exactly?

ID is an evolution (ha!) from creationism. ID doesn't recognize evolution. ID is not recognized by the biological scientist as serious. ID is not accepted by science as a science. It's pseudo-science. ID is more or less a little successful in the famous bible belt among a few christian sects. Outside USA it isn't having a lot of fans. Intelligent Design has no content and if something doesn't hold content then is it not possible to create some controversy about.

How do they look at Mensa to your (or your friends) Intelligent Design ideas? Just curious.

Well, they're a bit small to learn how to combat wrestling moves.

:p Now that really takes me back.