|
Author
|
Topic: Darwin- would he have changed his theory?
|
SirPimpsalot 
Inactive Member
|
There's no such thing as thought, remember? Only checmical reactions...
"Behold My signifigance!" said SirPimpsalot, and all was right. "I am the Lambda and the Kappa, the Second and the Runner-Up."
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
I repeat, "why make new ones"? What would make them?
|
SirPimpsalot
Inactive Member
|
Take existing ones that are found in living things......
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 182 by crashfrog, posted 10-23-2004 6:16 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
SirPimpsalot
Inactive Member
|
The obvious answer is because there's a very precise combination these protein molecules must form.......so precise that we couldn't possibly hope to stumble onto it through a process of trial and error......
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 187 by crashfrog, posted 10-23-2004 7:30 PM | | SirPimpsalot has not replied |
|
sidelined
Member (Idle past 5929 days) Posts: 3435 From: Edmonton Alberta Canada Joined: 08-30-2003
|
Re: Nothing to do with evolutionary theory
SPAL
How does this make sense? Well for one the cells are now specialized.This allows for greater capabilities and hence a survival advantage.Since cells are specialized the organism can now devote those specialized cells to specific tasks and now the evolution of further cell specialization is greatly enhanced.
[W]hen people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
Take existing ones that are found in living things...... Take them from what? And when the organism wants to reproduce, where do those new proteins come from? You don't seem to get it, yet. It's not a matter of Shake and Bake proteins, not the least of which is because organisms are made out of more than protein. Also, there's potentially a billion billion protiens. So, exactly which ones to you suggest we use?
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
The obvious answer is because there's a very precise combination these protein molecules must form...... Proteins don't really "combine." See, its statements like these that betray your staggering ignorance of the fundamentals of biology. Biologists don't just make shit up, SP. Why do you think you can? Take a class, for god's sake, if you want to talk about this subject.
|
Dr Jack
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: 07-14-2003 Member Rating: 8.4
|
What? No, it's been decoded for, I dunno, 50 years or more. Here it is: Just a pedant's note, but the genetic code to amino acid conversion is not exactly the same for all life on earth.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 130 by crashfrog, posted 10-23-2004 4:29 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
Message 189 of 195 (152791)
10-25-2004 12:08 PM
|
Reply to: Message 188 by Dr Jack
10-25-2004 5:55 AM
|
|
Just a pedant's note, but the genetic code to amino acid conversion is not exactly the same for all life on earth. Indeed. I understand mitochondria have a slightly different code, which substantiates endosymbiosis as the explanation of their origin. But the fact that the standard code is shared by almost every organism is a pretty powerful argument for common descent.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 188 by Dr Jack, posted 10-25-2004 5:55 AM | | Dr Jack has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 190 by Dr Jack, posted 10-25-2004 12:16 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
Dr Jack
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: 07-14-2003 Member Rating: 8.4
|
|
|
Message 190 of 195 (152792)
10-25-2004 12:16 PM
|
Reply to: Message 189 by crashfrog
10-25-2004 12:08 PM
|
|
Indeed. I understand mitochondria have a slightly different code, which substantiates endosymbiosis as the explanation of their origin. It's not just mitochondria, there are about sixteen known varients.
But the fact that the standard code is shared by almost every organism is a pretty powerful argument for common descent. Not only that but the coding pattern itself seems to have been shaped by natural selection - in that of the possible codings the ones which are used have a high 'fault tolerance' in that errors will tend to produce either the same amino acid or a similar one.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 189 by crashfrog, posted 10-25-2004 12:08 PM | | crashfrog has replied |
|
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1488 days) Posts: 19762 From: Silver Spring, MD Joined: 03-20-2003
|
|
|
Message 191 of 195 (152834)
10-25-2004 4:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 190 by Dr Jack
10-25-2004 12:16 PM
|
|
It's not just mitochondria Ok, you can turn down the pedantism, a bit. I never said it was just mitochondria, and I never said that every single organism uses the Standard Code. I understand a need to be precise, or to prevent misunderstanding, but you seem to be taking a fairly strident tone against assertions I'm not making.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 190 by Dr Jack, posted 10-25-2004 12:16 PM | | Dr Jack has replied |
|
Dr Jack
Member Posts: 3514 From: Immigrant in the land of Deutsch Joined: 07-14-2003 Member Rating: 8.4
|
Chill, man, I meant no offence.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 191 by crashfrog, posted 10-25-2004 4:59 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
NosyNed
Member Posts: 9003 From: Canada Joined: 04-04-2003
|
|
|
Message 193 of 195 (153037)
10-26-2004 10:50 AM
|
Reply to: Message 191 by crashfrog
10-25-2004 4:59 PM
|
|
Precision?
Crash, you did somewhat imply that the code was universal and more strongly that the mitrochondria were the exception (with no hint there were others). You're getting a bit cranky sounding over simple nit pick where you did leave the wrong impression.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 191 by crashfrog, posted 10-25-2004 4:59 PM | | crashfrog has not replied |
|
The Unknown
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 194 of 195 (154766)
11-01-2004 4:07 AM
|
|
|
Yodela folks Just wanted to say hello c('-'c)
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 195 by AdminJar, posted 11-01-2004 9:49 AM | | The Unknown has not replied |
|
AdminJar
Inactive Member
|
Welcome Unknown. How are things at the Parkside School. Did the recent MacBeth rendition come off well? You might want to check our Discussion Guidelines before posting. Looking forward to your contributions.
How pierceful grows the hazy yon! How myrtle petaled thou! For spring hath sprung the cyclotron How high browse thou, brown cow? -- Churchy LaFemme, 1950
|
™ Version 4.2