Page 2 of 14 FirstFirst 123412 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 133

Thread: Designer enzymes

  1. #11
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,091
    Amen (Given)
    318
    Amen (Received)
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    The problem with the quote from Dr. Baker, when taken into context of the 'whole' article is that it is a frivolous rhetorical devise statement, and when Marcos Eberlin uses the quote he takes it seriously how nature actually works from the scientific perspective.
    No, Dr. Baker is saying we should be able to do much better than evolution.

    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)

  2. #12
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,012
    Amen (Given)
    1490
    Amen (Received)
    953
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    No, Dr. Baker is saying we should be able to do much better than evolution.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    No, not in terms of how you and Marcos Eberlin misrepresent Dr. Baker's article. Marcos Eberlin and your intent is supporting Intelligent Design, and that is not remotely the intent of Dr. Baker.

    I also believe your ignoring the post by TheLurch addressing this. Part of the problem is the difference in the intent of designing enzymes is different from the natural selection processes of evolution.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 06-14-2019 at 02:00 PM.
    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.

  3. #13
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,091
    Amen (Given)
    318
    Amen (Received)
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    No, not in terms of how you and Marcos Eberlin misrepresent Dr. Baker's article. Marcos Eberlin and your intent is supporting Intelligent Design, and that is not remotely the intent of Dr. Baker.
    No one here is arguing that Dr. Baker is a supporter of ID. If however, his prediction fails, that would be some evidence for design.

    Part of the problem is the difference in the intent of designing enzymes is different from the natural selection processes of evolution.
    Certainly they are different.

    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)

  4. #14
    tWebber TheLurch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northeast USA
    Faith
    MYOB
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,287
    Amen (Given)
    85
    Amen (Received)
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    No one here is arguing that Dr. Baker is a supporter of ID. If however, his prediction fails, that would be some evidence for design.
    His prediction is that we humans can design better enzymes than evolution produced. How, precisely, would the failure of this be evidence for design?

    Or are you not paying careful attention to yourself again.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

  5. #15
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,012
    Amen (Given)
    1490
    Amen (Received)
    953
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    No one here is arguing that Dr. Baker is a supporter of ID. If however, his prediction fails, that would be some evidence for design.
    It is only evidence for whether his particular prediction fails or succeeds, and nothing else.


    Certainly they are different.
    Therefore absolutely no relationship to whether enzymes naturally evolve or not.
    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.

  6. #16
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,091
    Amen (Given)
    318
    Amen (Received)
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLurch View Post
    His prediction is that we humans can design better enzymes than evolution produced. How, precisely, would the failure of this be evidence for design?
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon
    It is only evidence for whether his particular prediction fails or succeeds, and nothing else.
    If humans are unable to improve substantially on bumbling nature, then we have reason to believe that nature did not stumble around and find its enzymes, i.e. something outside of nature produced them.

    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)

  7. #17
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,012
    Amen (Given)
    1490
    Amen (Received)
    953
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    If humans are unable to improve substantially on bumbling nature, then we have reason to believe that nature did not stumble around and find its enzymes, i.e. something outside of nature produced them.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    You are making big IF assumptions here that are not related to the research cited. You cannot make the assumption that science cannot produce 'designer enzymes at best that your usual ploy of 'arguing from ignorance' to justify your agenda instead of making an honest effort to understand Dr. Baker's research. Citing scientists 'out of context' is another of your unethical misuse of science to justify your agenda.

    I also described the issue of you unethically misrepresenting Dr. Baker's statement concerning 'bumbling nature,' and you failed to respond. which in reality has no meaningful context to his research.

    Again and again and again there is no relationship between Dr. Baker's research concerning 'designer enzymes' and the natural evolution of enzymes. TheLurch made that clear and you failed to respond to his detailed description.
    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.

  8. #18
    tWebber TheLurch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northeast USA
    Faith
    MYOB
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,287
    Amen (Given)
    85
    Amen (Received)
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    If humans are unable to improve substantially on bumbling nature, then we have reason to believe that nature did not stumble around and find its enzymes, i.e. something outside of nature produced them.
    Maybe you've got reason to believe that, but scientists don't. Given that we have multiple examples of nature creating, repurposing, and optimizing enzymes through evolution.

    I also find it highly amusing that for years, ID backers were saying "if we can design enzymes, it's evidence in favor of them having originally been designed." Now, suddenly, you're arguing the exact opposite.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

  9. Amen shunyadragon amen'd this post.
  10. #19
    tWebber TheLurch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northeast USA
    Faith
    MYOB
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,287
    Amen (Given)
    85
    Amen (Received)
    491
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    If humans are unable to improve substantially on bumbling nature, then we have reason to believe that nature did not stumble around and find its enzymes, i.e. something outside of nature produced them.
    The more i think about this, the more i'm stunned by the lack of logic in this argument. There's two ways to highlight this:

    We have no evidence of design, and plenty of evidence for evolution. In a hypothetical, we consider design failing to improve significantly on evolution in most cases. Lee would like to use a failure to conclude that a process must have occurred.

    The other way to view this is that Lee is essentially arguing that if nature has near-optimal solutions, it's evidence for design — which indicates that he thinks the only way to arrive at a near-optimal solution is through design. Which is something there's no evidence for, and evidence against (see, for example, the success of evolutionary algorithms outside of biology).

    The only conclusion that i reach is that Lee will twist anything at all in order to fit his preconceived notion that things must be designed. He's certainly not following evidence.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

  11. #20
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,091
    Amen (Given)
    318
    Amen (Received)
    159
    Quote Originally Posted by TheLurch View Post
    Lee is essentially arguing that if nature has near-optimal solutions, it's evidence for design — which indicates that he thinks the only way to arrive at a near-optimal solution is through design. Which is something there's no evidence for, and evidence against (see, for example, the success of evolutionary algorithms outside of biology).
    Well, what I'm saying is a bit different, Baker is confident that human intelligence can exceed what bumbling nature can do. I would agree with him, and if it turns out that evolution is near-optimal, then we have to consider that more than bumbling nature is at work. And evolutionary algorithms have their place, just as evolution has what it can do, but designing enzymes much better than naturally-occurring enzymes, I would say, is not part of what evolution can do.

    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)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •