Page 8 of 11 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 106

Thread: Nice defense of Evolution

  1. #71
    tWebber lee_merrill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Durham, NC
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,259
    Amen (Given)
    435
    Amen (Received)
    233
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy View Post
    But you didn't read the refutations, right?.
    I read Kenneth Miller's book, "Finding Darwin's God".

    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. #72
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,380
    Amen (Given)
    1575
    Amen (Received)
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    I read Kenneth Miller's book, "Finding Darwin's God".

    Blessings,
    Lee
    So?!?!?! This is not science.
    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. #73
    tWebber Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,745
    Amen (Given)
    696
    Amen (Received)
    1489
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Well, I find that the arguments hold up pretty well when I try them out. A little back history, I heard that Behe had been refuted, and I believed them, until I read his book. I found his arguments convincing.
    But you didn't read the refutations, right?.
    I read Kenneth Miller's book, "Finding Darwin's God"
    So you heard Behe had been refuted, but didn't bother to read the refutations.
    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

    mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

    Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.

  4. #74
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    53,971
    Amen (Given)
    1148
    Amen (Received)
    19885
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy View Post
    So you heard Behe had been refuted, but didn't bother to read the refutations.
    Miller's FDG was written largely as a refutation to Behe, specifically his Darwin's Black Box

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  5. #75
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,380
    Amen (Given)
    1575
    Amen (Received)
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Let's take this quote, which seems to me to be hand waving. How does this demonstrate evolution of enzymes?

    Blessings,
    Lee
    It would help that you would document your objections to the science of enzymes in evolution despite the many peer reviewed articles presented by The Lurch and others that gave a more than adequate explanation for the role of enzymes in evolution refuting every point you made with the vague assertions that it is "difficult?" without the supporting science,
    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. #76
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,380
    Amen (Given)
    1575
    Amen (Received)
    978
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    I read Kenneth Miller's book, "Finding Darwin's God".

    Blessings,
    Lee
    OK you read the book. Now what??
    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.

  7. #77
    tWebber Roy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    5,745
    Amen (Given)
    696
    Amen (Received)
    1489
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    Miller's FDG was written largely as a refutation to Behe, specifically his Darwin's Black Box
    I've read Miller's book - that's not what I remember. My impression was that Miller wrote about how to reconcile evolution with the assumption of a deity.

    I may be wrong though - and I can't find my copy to check
    Last edited by Roy; 11-17-2019 at 08:18 AM.
    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

    mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

    Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.

  8. #78
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    53,971
    Amen (Given)
    1148
    Amen (Received)
    19885
    Quote Originally Posted by Roy View Post
    I've read Miller's book - that's not what I remember. My impression was that Miller wrote about how to reconcile evolution with the assumption of a deity.

    I may be wrong though - and I can't find my copy to check
    It is a Christian response to Behe.

    Personally I think his Only A Theory was better.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  9. #79
    tWebber TheLurch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northeast USA
    Faith
    MYOB
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,410
    Amen (Given)
    91
    Amen (Received)
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    "He who throws mud is losing ground."

    When you're ready to answer my points, I'm ready to reply some more.
    I'm honestly interested in an answer to the question: given how often you get things wrong or are unaware of key information when it comes to biology, why do you think this is not a Dunning-Kruger situation?

    Saying "you don't seem to know much about biology" shouldn't be an insult. BIology's an incredibly complicated topic, and has been the subject of intensive research for well over a century. I have a PhD in a field within biology, and i'll readily admit there's lots of other fields that i don't know well, and need to read up on before i understand at all. I'm in no way saying that you have some general knowledge deficiency.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

  10. #80
    tWebber TheLurch's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Northeast USA
    Faith
    MYOB
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    1,410
    Amen (Given)
    91
    Amen (Received)
    584
    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Well, interesting. Yet in the case of the protein Axe worked with, function and folds do seem related.

    Source: Douglas Axe

    ... given the importance of hydrophobic interactions to protein folding, it seems likely that the sample space can be restricted to sequences carrying the hydropathic signature of a known fold.

    © Copyright Original Source



    Though as far as I can see, Axe was attempting to measure one function to get an idea how other functions would respond to mutations.
    And how, precisely, would that work? If he's not testing for any functions beyond the one enzymatic activity, or testing for folding, how could he possibly tell anything else? How are these results any more informative than the other protein he looked at where a similar approach left a functional protein?

    The answer comes back to the two points i mentioned above - you need to show both of my statements are wrong. You haven't.

    Quote Originally Posted by lee_merrill View Post
    Though I think these results may be consistent, given that a number of mutations are generally required to disable function, as you yourself say: "So, you have to have massive mutational damage before it starts becoming sensitive to additional mutations..."

    Yet the conclusion still stands, that "the deleterious effects of mutations, and especially their tendency to undermine the thermodynamic and kinetic stability of protein, is a major constraint on protein evolvability..."
    Nobody is arguing that thermodynamics doesn't matter. The issue is one of whether thermodynamics plays such a large role that proteins end up locked in place, unable to vary enough to reach new functions. The fact that it takes massive mutational change in order to disable them indicates the answer is no.

    Let's look at this case in Axe's other paper in particular: a situation where any hydrophobic amino acid will do, and you have to mutate 10 of them to kill this one function. So, that means for 9 of the 10, any of the 20 amino acids will do. For the 10th, it's got to be hydrophobic, which means 9 of the 20 amino acids will work. That means there are 4.6 * 10^12 possible amino acid configurations that can be tolerated just at these 10 amino acids alone. For most of the rest of the proteins, any amino acid will do, which gives you an absolutely vast expansion of the configurations that are compatible with the protein's original function.

    So, thermodynamics creates a constraint on this one particular function, but it's an extremely loose one. Nobody has ever tested whether these mutations create additional or entirely new functions, either, so we can't generalize and determine if it creates any sort of barrier to new functions.


    Incidentally, did you notice that Axe had to assume evolutionary relatedness among versions of this protein in different species in order to even do this work?
    An alignment of homologous domain sequences is used to deduce the pattern of hydropathic constraints along chains that form the domain fold.
    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

Posting Permissions

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