Originally posted by TheLurch
View Post
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
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The book Darwin Devolves
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostAll right, I didn't realize they were looking at genomes, not just mutations.
And there was a whole-genome duplication event, which as implied above, skews the dichotomy.
And I'll ask anyway: please explain what you think the dichotomy is in "skews the dichotomy"."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostHow, exactly, do you think we can detect a whole genome duplication without looking at genomes?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
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostHemoglobin is a protein, however.
Blessings,
Lee
Hemoglobin is globular protein with an embedded hemi group and not simply a protein.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostMy emphasis:So the authors say whole-genome duplication relaxes the dichotomy, i.e. decreases the difference - and (since "skew" means bias or distort) Dory seems to think they mean the difference increases.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostSorry, but that one was pure gold! I suggest creationism has now outclassed all its competitors! NeoDarwinism can't get a hold on it! LMAO
The contemporary science of abiogenesis and evolution are not based on Neo-Darwinism, whatever that is.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Behe has the first part of a response out, to his Lehigh colleagues:
He does say that the sickle-cell mutation is non-degrative, which I still find a little puzzling.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostIf this is over the top sarcasm, than nice shot.
The contemporary science of abiogenesis and evolution are not based on Neo-Darwinism, whatever that is.
Comment
-
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostStill waiting for you to explain what the dichotomy at issue here is.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostBehe has the first part of a response out, to his Lehigh colleagues.
In other words, no, the spectrum of mutations picked up in these experiments is not the same as you see in naturally evolving populations."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Seeker View PostSo they're based on what? I always thought they were based on the Modern Synthesis (formed in the 1950's).
The biggest change is the old beliefs in randomness in nature and evolution no longer apply except in outcome of individual events. It is the Laws of Nature and the changing environment that determine ultimate outcome of chains of cause and effect events are constrained by the Laws, like those involved in evolution and Nature in general. The morphological genesis self-determination was described in terms of fractal math was described in detail in a paper by Alan Turing.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNo, we have come along way since the 1950's. The science of evolution has advanced in many areas particularly genetics. In the modern concept evolution 'natural selection still acts on genetic mutations and genetic diversity for evolution to take place in adaptation to changing environments, but this evolution takes place in populations, and not individuals.
The biggest change is the old beliefs in randomness in nature and evolution no longer apply except in outcome of individual events. It is the Laws of Nature and the changing environment that determine ultimate outcome of chains of cause and effect events are constrained by the Laws, like those involved in evolution and Nature in general. The morphological genesis self-determination was described in terms of fractal math was described in detail in a paper by Alan Turing.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostI gather that they meant the dichotomy between mutations that degrade or disable genes and those that add to the genome.
In particular, stress-related genes exhibit many duplications and losses, whereas growth-related genes show selection against such changes. Whole-genome duplication circumvents this constraint and relaxes the dichotomy, resulting in an expanded functional scope of gene duplication.
Once you're done with that, take a moment to consider what the rest of us had to deal with when we're trying to have a discussion about mutation frequencies, and you're making a big deal out of a phrase that refers to growth vs. stress responses. By being careless about things like this, you're forcing everyone else in this discussion to try to figure out what you actually mean using the seemingly incoherent things you write.
Do you feel bad about any of that? I know i sure would.
EDITS: added quote to make it clear to everyone."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
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
by Sparko
03-20-2024, 09:13 AM
|
||
Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
|
16 responses
74 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:12 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
|
6 responses
48 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
03-08-2024, 03:25 PM
|
Comment