Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

LUCA is LOCO!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • LUCA is LOCO!

    * just in case you didn't know: "LOCO" is Spanish for "crazy".
    .
    .
    .
    For the "scientist" wannabes here on TWeb - namely, those that accept the edicts of the "scientific" establishment as if coming from a "Supreme Power" - consider a few recent articles on LUCA (last universal common ancestor).

    http://theweek.com/speedreads/638809...l-earthly-life

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/sc...stor.html?_r=0
    .
    .
    .
    I wasn't going to waste too much time thinking about this nonsense so I have just ONE question for the wannabes (first, a bit of background):

    A quote found in one of the above articles: "The 355 genes ascribable to Luca include some that metabolize hydrogen as a source of energy as well as a gene for an enzyme called reverse gyrase, found only in microbes that live at extremely high temperatures."

    Like I said, I wasn't going to waste too much time on this so I considered only one point: reverse gyrase.

    Reverse gyrase (RG) is an enzyme (a protein) which, if you're going to accept their story, had to be genetically transmitted to the next generation. This means that it has to be coded. With limited time I could not find the precise length for RG but from what I was able to find (in limited time) it appears to be a chain of amino acids at least 400 units long. Fine, let's use that (it's probably longer than 400 but it won't matter).

    RG has been "found" in LUCA. This means that, as per these "scientists", RG appeared just 560 million years after the Earth was formed.

    Now, using a 400-long amino acid chain yields 20400 or about 10520 possible amino acid combinations for a chain of that length. In the 560 million years that the RG in LUCA had to form, and at 100 trillion combinations per second, this would result in less than 1030 combinations.

    That number, 1030, is an infinitesimal amount compared to 10520. This doesn't even take into account all of the other proteins in LUCA. But let's be gracious and just grant that those others somehow "popped" into existence - let's just consider RG.

    Okay, so the question is this: barring "magic", how do YOU account for reverse gyrase? Have fun ...

    As for my take, it's quite simple:
    LUCA is LOCO - just another one of modern "science's" Alice in Wonderland fantasies for the gullible.


    Let's have some SCIENCE here, okay? Anything else shall be called out / booted out immediately.

    Jorge
    Last edited by Jorge; 07-27-2016, 06:02 AM.

  • #2
    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher View Post
    Like I said, I wasn't going to waste too much time on this so I considered only one point: reverse gyrase.

    Reverse gyrase (RG) is an enzyme (a protein) which, if you're going to accept their story, had to be genetically transmitted to the next generation. This means that it has to be coded. With limited time I could not find the precise length for RG ...
    Then you're incompetent. It took me less than a minute to find this.
    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher
    ... but from what I was able to find (in limited time) it appears to be a chain of amino acids at least 400 units long. Fine, let's use that (it's probably longer than 400 but it won't matter).

    RG has been "found" in LUCA. This means that, as per these "scientists", RG appeared just 560 million years after the Earth was formed.

    Now, using a 400-long amino acid chain yields 20400 or about 10520 possible amino acid combinations for a chain of that length. In the 560 million years that the RG in LUCA had to form, and at 100 trillion combinations per second, this would result in less than 1030 combinations.

    That number, 1030, is an infinitesimal amount compared to 10520. This doesn't even take into account all of the other proteins in LUCA. But let's be gracious and just grant that those others somehow "popped" into existence - let's just consider RG.

    Okay, so the question is this: barring "magic", how do YOU account for reverse gyrase? Have fun ...
    By noting that nothing you've written prevents a 400-acid protein or even a 1500-acid protein from evolving. Evolution does not require every single possible protein sequence be synthesised.
    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

    MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
    MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

    seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Roy View Post
      Then you're incompetent. It took me less than a minute to find this.
      Congratulations on being the first (and only) attempt (so far). Now, on to your feedback...

      It also took me less than a minute to find several images like the one you found but that didn't help. Specifically, the actual number of amino acids in the chain does not jump out (not to me - is it 1050? 740? other?). Read the text below the image and tell me that it's "obvious" --- (errr, you DID read the text below the image, right?).


      By noting that nothing you've written prevents a 400-acid protein or even a 1500-acid protein from evolving. Evolution does not require every single possible protein sequence be synthesised.
      And you DARE call me "incompetent"? WOW!!!

      I will be generous and grant you that "Evolution does not require every single protein sequence be synthesized." Fine. Now kindly provide a plausible, non-magical mechanism by which reverse gyrase EVOLVED given that THERE WAS NOTHING EVOLVING BEFORE LUCA?

      Let that question sink in before you open your mouth and make a fool out of yourself AGAIN.

      In addition, should you somehow concoct an answer to the previous question then try this: "Evolution does not require every single protein sequence be synthesized." Fine. Then, was it by chance that Evolution fortuitously hit upon reverse gyrase, a "chance" event with a probability of 10-530 ? Is that what you expect rational people to believe? Don't forget, I allowed 10 trillion trials per second for 560 million years - that still yielded a probability of 10-490. Venturing into Fantasy Land isn't allowed.

      Jorge

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jorge the welsher View Post
        Now, using a 400-long amino acid chain yields 20400 or about 10520 possible amino acid combinations for a chain of that length. In the 560 million years that the RG in LUCA had to form, and at 100 trillion combinations per second, this would result in less than 1030 combinations.

        That number, 1030, is an infinitesimal amount compared to 10520. This doesn't even take into account all of the other proteins in LUCA. But let's be gracious and just grant that those others somehow "popped" into existence - let's just consider RG.

        Here's some science for you . No one except the most ignorant Creationists think amino acids or AA chains had to fall together all at once or try every possible combination in the probability space. Extant chains slowly evolved by making small modifications to existing, simpler versions going all the way back to the first self replicators. As per usual Creationist idiots think the process is purely random instead of having a non-random feedback part.

        The other point to make is the LUCA doesn't represent the first life form. It's the first population of organisms that diverged into at least two other populations. Life existed for up to a hundred million years before this LUCA lived.
        Last edited by HMS_Beagle; 07-27-2016, 08:40 AM.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Jorge the welsher View Post

          In addition, should you somehow concoct an answer to the previous question then try this: "Evolution does not require every single protein sequence be synthesized." Fine. Then, was it by chance that Evolution fortuitously hit upon reverse gyrase, a "chance" event with a probability of 10-530 ? Is that what you expect rational people to believe? Don't forget, I allowed 10 trillion trials per second for 560 million years - that still yielded a probability of 10-490. Venturing into Fantasy Land isn't allowed.

          Why are Creationists still so ignorant and still think evolutionary processes work by just chance? They always omit the feedback from selection in their "gotcha" stupid probability calculations, always.

          Comment


          • #6
            There's a fundamental misunderstanding here. We don't know precisely when LUCA existed. It is not the first life on earth; rather, it's the last common ancestor of bacteria and archaea. LUCA and its relatives may have been around for quite some time prior to the split between those two domains.

            Incidentally, we have identified over 250 different reverse gyrases; many are different sizes, but most seem to be somewhere between 1000 and 1200 amino acids.

            And, finally, the paper that all the news is based on:
            http://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol2016116
            "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
              Now, using a 400-long amino acid chain yields 20400 or about 10520 possible amino acid combinations for a chain of that length. In the 560 million years that the RG in LUCA had to form, and at 100 trillion combinations per second, this would result in less than 1030 combinations.
              I'm not going to get into the question of how reverse gyrase actually evolved (or not, in Jorge's view). I'm just going to take a moment to explain why the 10^520 figure is bogus.

              As i just mentioned in my previous post, reverse gyrase tolerates a LOT of variability - plus or minus on the order of 200 amino acids in length, and lots of individual amino acid differences internally. And that's just from a small sampling of the present-day reverse gyrases, which are presumably all highly efficient at what they do. It's likely that lots of these organisms could get by with a much shorter, far less efficient enzyme (though it would undoubtedly rapidly evolve to something more efficient).

              Calculating probabilities involves both a numerator and a denominator. I'll assume Jorge's calculation of the denominator is right. But he just put a 1 for the numerator, presumably because he hadn't taken time to think about it at all. The fact is, we have no idea what the numerator should be - we have no idea what percentage of the entire population of proteins could act as a reverse gyrase. But we do know for certain that it isn't 1.
              "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                Calculating probabilities involves both a numerator and a denominator. I'll assume Jorge's calculation of the denominator is right. But he just put a 1 for the numerator, presumably because he hadn't taken time to think about it at all. The fact is, we have no idea what the numerator should be - we have no idea what percentage of the entire population of proteins could act as a reverse gyrase. But we do know for certain that it isn't 1.
                You also can't calculate the probability of a result of a feedback process by taking a one-time snapshot of that result. You have to factor in the effects of the feedback at each step in the process, something ID/Creationists have never done.

                The probability of being dealt a five card royal straight flush in a one time poker hand deal is 1 in 649,740. However if you add the feedback of being able to discard / redraw the probability increases considerably. If you are allowed an unlimited number of discard / redraw attempts the probability will approach 1.0

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                  * just in case you didn't know: "LOCO" is Spanish for "crazy".
                  .
                  .
                  .
                  For the "scientist" wannabes here on TWeb - namely, those that accept the edicts of the "scientific" establishment as if coming from a "Supreme Power" - consider a few recent articles on LUCA (last universal common ancestor).

                  http://theweek.com/speedreads/638809...l-earthly-life

                  http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/26/sc...stor.html?_r=0
                  .
                  .
                  .
                  I wasn't going to waste too much time thinking about this nonsense so I have just ONE question for the wannabes (first, a bit of background):

                  A quote found in one of the above articles: "The 355 genes ascribable to Luca include some that metabolize hydrogen as a source of energy as well as a gene for an enzyme called reverse gyrase, found only in microbes that live at extremely high temperatures."

                  Like I said, I wasn't going to waste too much time on this so I considered only one point: reverse gyrase.

                  Reverse gyrase (RG) is an enzyme (a protein) which, if you're going to accept their story, had to be genetically transmitted to the next generation. This means that it has to be coded. With limited time I could not find the precise length for RG but from what I was able to find (in limited time) it appears to be a chain of amino acids at least 400 units long. Fine, let's use that (it's probably longer than 400 but it won't matter).

                  RG has been "found" in LUCA. This means that, as per these "scientists", RG appeared just 560 million years after the Earth was formed.

                  Now, using a 400-long amino acid chain yields 20400 or about 10520 possible amino acid combinations for a chain of that length. In the 560 million years that the RG in LUCA had to form, and at 100 trillion combinations per second, this would result in less than 1030 combinations.

                  That number, 1030, is an infinitesimal amount compared to 10520. This doesn't even take into account all of the other proteins in LUCA. But let's be gracious and just grant that those others somehow "popped" into existence - let's just consider RG.

                  Okay, so the question is this: barring "magic", how do YOU account for reverse gyrase? Have fun ...

                  As for my take, it's quite simple:
                  LUCA is LOCO - just another one of modern "science's" Alice in Wonderland fantasies for the gullible.


                  Let's have some SCIENCE here, okay? Anything else shall be called out / booted out immediately.

                  Jorge
                  As has been pointed out, you are leaving out

                  (1) the (unknown) number of similarly functioning genes which serve as a denominator for the raw probabiliyt calculation
                  (2) the influence of natural selection on the process, which filters each step along the way, trimming away many orders of magnitude the number of potential sequences which must be tried.

                  How to calculate the reduction in the 'trial space' of these to your probability space is essentially unknown, but simulations of natural selection have clearly shown the single most powerful element is #2. Natural selection has been shown over and over to be capable of bringing these kinds of 'impossible' probability values well into the 'probable' range. You are better off to focus on how the original replicators came to be. Once they are here, the principles of mutation and natural selection God built into the universe, into this planets system, are more than sufficient to get us from there to here.


                  Jim
                  My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with an attitude of personal favoritism. James 2:1

                  If anyone thinks himself to be religious, and yet does not  bridle his tongue but deceives his own heart, this man’s religion is worthless James 1:26

                  This you know, my beloved brethren. But everyone must be quick to hear, slow to speak and slow to anger; James 1:19

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher View Post
                    Congratulations on being the first (and only) attempt (so far). Now, on to your feedback...

                    It also took me less than a minute to find several images like the one you found but that didn't help. Specifically, the actual number of amino acids in the chain does not jump out (not to me - is it 1050? 740? other?). Read the text below the image and tell me that it's "obvious" --- (errr, you DID read the text below the image, right?).
                    I think it's obvious. The text says "On the left is the amino acid sequence of reverse gyrase matched to its secondary structure as determined by crystallography". The left side shows a sequence of 1050 amino acids.
                    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher
                    And you DARE call me "incompetent"? WOW!!!

                    I will be generous and grant you that "Evolution does not require every single protein sequence be synthesized." Fine. Now kindly provide a plausible, non-magical mechanism by which reverse gyrase EVOLVED given that THERE WAS NOTHING EVOLVING BEFORE LUCA?
                    Yes, you're incompetent. Of course there was stuff evolving before LUCA. LUCA evolved from predecessors. The only remarkable thing about LUCA is that nothing else contemporaneous to it has any surviving descendants.
                    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher
                    Let that question sink in before you open your mouth and make a fool out of yourself AGAIN.
                    I'll stick to watching you a fool of yourself, thanks.
                    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher
                    In addition, should you somehow concoct an answer to the previous question then try this: "Evolution does not require every single protein sequence be synthesized." Fine. Then, was it by chance that Evolution fortuitously hit upon reverse gyrase, a "chance" event with a probability of 10-530 ?
                    That so-called 'probability' is utter nonsense. Evolution doesn't and never has proceed by generating random sequences of proteins. It modifies what is already present, so the probability of a particular amino-acid sequence occurring is heavily dependent on its similarity to other sequences that already exist - and as the source I provided shows, reverse gyrase has homologies to other shorter proteins, so probably evolved from a chance mutation that resulted in those precursors being expressed as a single long amino-acid chain rather than two shorter chains.
                    Originally posted by Jorge the welcher
                    Is that what you expect rational people to believe? Don't forget, I allowed 10 trillion trials per second for 560 million years - that still yielded a probability of 10-490. Venturing into Fantasy Land isn't allowed.
                    You actually allowed 100 trillion trials per second, which is a ridiculous underestimate given current estimates of the Earths bacterial population of five million trillion trillion. You've used the wrong inputs to the wrong calculation and so your entire post is garbage-in-to-garbage-out.

                    Since you're asking questions, here's one back: Why haven't you paid TWeb $150?
                    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                    MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                    MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                    seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Jorge the welsher View Post
                      And you DARE call me "incompetent"? WOW!!!
                      You are scientifically incompetent. You just demonstrated that fact yet again with your two dumb boners on this thread - that this LUCA must represent the first life form and that proteins must fall together spontaneously so evolution must search the entire sequence space.

                      Three people have given concrete examples of your incompetence. The question is, will you learn from your blunders or try to hide them with more bluster?
                      Last edited by HMS_Beagle; 07-27-2016, 02:03 PM.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I'll try to keep it civil until you depart from civility (which shouldn't take long).
                        Bluntly, try thinking before writing. I've inserted some common sense below:


                        Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View Post
                        Here's some science for you. Strike one.

                        No one except the most ignorant Creationists think amino acids or AA chains had to fall together all at once or try every possible combination in the probability space. And no one except the most ignorant of all ignoramuses believes that I think as you claim.

                        Extant chains slowly evolved Hold on a cotton picking minute! To "evolve" means that the chain transferred from entity A in generation X to entity B in generation X+1. But why would it do that? There was no "advantage", no "increased fitness" due to any single modification. There was also no guidance - the process was "blind".

                        by making small modifications to existing, simpler versions going all the way back to the first self replicators. Fine, I will generously grant you this just to keep moving along. To specifically and blindly get to RG you needed on the order of 10530 such modifications to occur. It is "blind" because teleology is not allowed. Regardless, even if you allow teleology, you "only" had 560 million years. Sorry kiddo, not nearly enough time to get all of those modifications to occur. And what "feedback" are you talking about? Is this another 'Dawkins flop' moment? See below ...

                        As per usual Creationist idiots think the process is purely random instead of having a non-random feedback part. "Non-random feedback"? And I'M the "idiot"? Really? How can you have ANY feedback if there is zero - ZERO!!! - advantage conferred by a modification. Don't forget the number 10520 of potential targets. There is NO GUIDANCE. Or are you doing like your pal Dawkins - inserting the answer into the program?

                        The other point to make is the LUCA doesn't represent the first life form. WOW - you really do want to have your cake and eat it to, don't you. It's the first population of organisms that diverged into at least two other populations. Life existed for up to a hundred million years before this LUCA lived.
                        Fine, since LUCA is dated at 560 million years after Earth you are now allowing "only" 460 mega-years for EARLIER life to have formed. You DO realize that are painting yourself straight into a coffin, right? The "simplest" life imaginable requires many proteins, not just (not even necessarily) RG. So your problem is now compounded a thousand-fold. What are you going to do now, Beagle Boy? Are you going to invoke a pre-biotic entity to come to your rescue? And after that, maybe space aliens did it?

                        Jorge

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View Post
                          Why are Creationists still so ignorant and still think evolutionary processes work by just chance? They always omit the feedback from selection in their "gotcha" stupid probability calculations, always.
                          You ought not use the word "ignorant" against people while displaying truckloads of it yourself.
                          "Feedback" is a very big concept which clearly by far exceeds your pay scale.

                          Check out my previous post and try again.

                          Jorge

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                            There's a fundamental misunderstanding here. We don't know precisely when LUCA existed. It is not the first life on earth; rather, it's the last common ancestor of bacteria and archaea. LUCA and its relatives may have been around for quite some time prior to the split between those two domains.

                            Incidentally, we have identified over 250 different reverse gyrases; many are different sizes, but most seem to be somewhere between 1000 and 1200 amino acids.

                            And, finally, the paper that all the news is based on:
                            http://www.nature.com/articles/nmicrobiol2016116
                            Okay.......... good info but doesn't answer the question, does it.

                            So, between 1,000 and 1,200 amino acids in the RG chain.
                            So my numbers were "off" by hundreds of orders of magnitude.
                            Hmmm, the picture for the wannabes just good a heck-of-a-lot
                            dimmer - dimmer by several hundred orders of magnitude.

                            Ouch - that had to hurt!

                            Jorge

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Jorge the welsher View Post
                              I'll try to keep it civil until you depart from civility (which shouldn't take long).
                              Bluntly, try thinking before writing. I've inserted some common sense below:
                              So the answer is you're going to double down on your scientific incompetence.

                              And no one except the most ignorant of all ignoramuses believes that I think as you claim.
                              Three different people read it and commented on your misunderstanding Clucky. Of course it couldn't possibly be you who is wrong.

                              Extant chains slowly evolved Hold on a cotton picking minute! To "evolve" means that the chain transferred from entity A in generation X to entity B in generation X+1. But why would it do that? There was no "advantage", no "increased fitness" due to any single modification. There was also no guidance - the process was "blind".
                              Read up on genetic drift. Also let's see your evidence none of the genetic changes were beneficial.

                              by making small modifications to existing, simpler versions going all the way back to the first self replicators. Fine, I will generously grant you this just to keep moving along. To specifically and blindly get to RG you needed on the order of 10530 such modifications to occur. It is "blind" because teleology is not allowed. Regardless, even if you allow teleology, you "only" had 560 million years. Sorry kiddo, not nearly enough time to get all of those modifications to occur. And what "feedback" are you talking about? Is this another 'Dawkins flop' moment? See below ...
                              Still with the stupid claim evolution had to search the entire sequence space instead of modifying a simpler working precursor. Is that concept just too much for your simple mind to grasp?

                              As per usual Creationist idiots think the process is purely random instead of having a non-random feedback part. "Non-random feedback"? And I'M the "idiot"? Really?
                              Really.

                              How can you have ANY feedback if there is zero - ZERO!!! - advantage conferred by a modification. Don't forget the number 10520 of potential targets. There is NO GUIDANCE. Or are you doing like your pal Dawkins - inserting the answer into the program?
                              But some changes in individuals do provide an advantage. Those with the advantage reproduce more and their beneficial genetic variations come to be the norm for the population.

                              Fine, since LUCA is dated at 560 million years after Earth you are now allowing "only" 460 mega-years for EARLIER life to have formed. You DO realize that are painting yourself straight into a coffin, right? The "simplest" life imaginable requires many proteins, not just (not even necessarily) RG.
                              How many Clucky? Let's see your calculations for the simplest self-replicators.

                              You just never miss a chance to demonstrate how little you understand about evolutionary sciences.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                              48 responses
                              135 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Sparko
                              by Sparko
                               
                              Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                              16 responses
                              74 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                              6 responses
                              47 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Working...
                              X