Did Adam and Eve Have...

[ToriJ]

I don't believe in Adam & Eve but I guess if they weren't born they would need no belly buttons.

[Freya]

This line of discussion sounds like all the more reason to believe the amino acids came first and the people (with belly buttons!) evolved in due course much later ^^ .

[Charles Stover]

Oct 21, 2008 14:46:51 GMT -8 Owlstar said:

Oct 21, 2008 14:41:14 GMT -8 ~»tobi«~ said:

So Adam and Eve one day came from a big " poof" and there they were? Sounds like a fairy tale to me.

Sorry to butt in, but no, they did not come from one big "poof." God created the Earth, then created Adam out of the dust. Then He put Adam to sleep, and took one of his hips to make Eve.

Hips? lolwut. You mean ribs.

Based on the Creation, which I know you don't believe but just humor me a bit, Adam and Eve would have been perfect humans with perfect DNA. No recessive genes, no dominant genes: just genes. As they began having children, and their children had children, and so on and so forth, some genes would have shown dominance while other genes would have became recessive. So as the generations went on, the inbreeding coefficient would have gotten higher until the Roman Empire passed a law against it.

No dominant or recessive genes? Shows how little you know about DNA.
btw, if there were no dominant or recessive genes, that means that none would have ever come into existance, no matter how many offspring occur. Let's say brown is a hair color that's neither dominant or recessive (ha!), then both Adam and Eve had this hair color. Meaning they had two brown-hair alleles each. That means that when they reproduced, the odds of the child having two brown-hair alleles is 100%. And the same goes for that child's reproduction and all children to come. Since the black and blonde alleles were non-existant, no child would have ever been born with them.
It's not possible that they had no dominant nor recessive genes, since we can see so many dominant and recessive genes today.

Assuming that humans walked out of a pool of sludge or evolved from primates, wouldn't the first human's DNA have been as perfect for a human at the beginning of humanity as Christians believe it was at the Creation? Wouldn't dominant and recessive genes for humans form over time?

No, not at all. We had dominant and recessive genes before we became human. Every animal has them. And we were far from perfect, hence why evolution occurs in the first place. We're still not perfect. No animal has ever been "perfect." How could you even define such a term? Especially in terms of DNA.
All dominant/recessive genes means is if you get a brown-hair allele from your dad and a blonde-hair allele from your mom, you're going to have brown hair. One gene overrides another. That's all it means. I don't see why you'd think it's a sign of imperfection.

I don't believe in Adam & Eve but I guess if they weren't born they would need no belly buttons.

They would need them in order to reproduce, because their children would need the DNA for a belly button in order to survive in the womb.

[thepublicjoke]

Oct 22, 2008 10:56:13 GMT -8 Charles Stover said:

Oct 21, 2008 14:46:51 GMT -8 Owlstar said:

Sorry to butt in, but no, they did not come from one big "poof." God created the Earth, then created Adam out of the dust. Then He put Adam to sleep, and took one of his hips to make Eve.

Hips? lolwut. You mean ribs.

No dominant or recessive genes? Shows how little you know about DNA.
btw, if there were no dominant or recessive genes, that means that none would have ever come into existance, no matter how many offspring occur. Let's say brown is a hair color that's neither dominant or recessive (ha!), then both Adam and Eve had this hair color. Meaning they had two brown-hair alleles each. That means that when they reproduced, the odds of the child having two brown-hair alleles is 100%. And the same goes for that child's reproduction and all children to come. Since the black and blonde alleles were non-existant, no child would have ever been born with them.
It's not possible that they had no dominant nor recessive genes, since we can see so many dominant and recessive genes today.

No, not at all. We had dominant and recessive genes before we became human. Every animal has them. And we were far from perfect, hence why evolution occurs in the first place. We're still not perfect. No animal has ever been "perfect." How could you even define such a term? Especially in terms of DNA.
All dominant/recessive genes means is if you get a brown-hair allele from your dad and a blonde-hair allele from your mom, you're going to have brown hair. One gene overrides another. That's all it means. I don't see why you'd think it's a sign of imperfection.

I don't believe in Adam & Eve but I guess if they weren't born they would need no belly buttons.

They would need them in order to reproduce, because their children would need the DNA for a belly button in order to survive in the womb.

Nah God would just poof a belly button onto Cain. [/sarcasm]

[ToriJ]

Oct 22, 2008 10:56:13 GMT -8 Charles Stover said:

Oct 21, 2008 14:46:51 GMT -8 Owlstar said:

Sorry to butt in, but no, they did not come from one big "poof." God created the Earth, then created Adam out of the dust. Then He put Adam to sleep, and took one of his hips to make Eve.

Hips? lolwut. You mean ribs.

No dominant or recessive genes? Shows how little you know about DNA.
btw, if there were no dominant or recessive genes, that means that none would have ever come into existance, no matter how many offspring occur. Let's say brown is a hair color that's neither dominant or recessive (ha!), then both Adam and Eve had this hair color. Meaning they had two brown-hair alleles each. That means that when they reproduced, the odds of the child having two brown-hair alleles is 100%. And the same goes for that child's reproduction and all children to come. Since the black and blonde alleles were non-existant, no child would have ever been born with them.
It's not possible that they had no dominant nor recessive genes, since we can see so many dominant and recessive genes today.

No, not at all. We had dominant and recessive genes before we became human. Every animal has them. And we were far from perfect, hence why evolution occurs in the first place. We're still not perfect. No animal has ever been "perfect." How could you even define such a term? Especially in terms of DNA.
All dominant/recessive genes means is if you get a brown-hair allele from your dad and a blonde-hair allele from your mom, you're going to have brown hair. One gene overrides another. That's all it means. I don't see why you'd think it's a sign of imperfection.

I don't believe in Adam & Eve but I guess if they weren't born they would need no belly buttons.

They would need them in order to reproduce, because their children would need the DNA for a belly button in order to survive in the womb.

Oh easy as that? Then why are we having this discussing? >.<

[sasquatch]

Be practical and debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (sarcasm).....

[~»tobi«~]

Oct 23, 2008 8:38:09 GMT -8 sasquatch said:

Be practical and debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (sarcasm).....

That is just plain silly Everyone knows that 6 can..

[thepublicjoke]

Oct 23, 2008 8:40:18 GMT -8 ~»tobi«~ said:

Oct 23, 2008 8:38:09 GMT -8 sasquatch said:

Be practical and debate how many angels can dance on the head of a pin (sarcasm).....

That is just plain silly Everyone knows that 6 can..

Everything he posts is silly...

[Will]

Oct 21, 2008 9:58:41 GMT -8 @andy2 said:

How do you know it was a man and women, may have been Adam and Steve?

You wouldnt be here >.>

[Gamoc]

I believe that they did, God probably knew that people would have belly buttons, so gave them one.