Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 50 (9179 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,204 Year: 5,461/9,624 Month: 486/323 Week: 126/204 Day: 0/26 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolution Logic
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 78 of 302 (318644)
06-07-2006 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by crashfrog
06-07-2006 8:39 AM


To be fair the codon table is not really adequate. Simply having this table wouldn't be sufficient to let you predict an ORF from a genomic sequence except in the very simplest of cases. This doesn't give the neccesary information to identify splice sites for differing isoforms for instance.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by crashfrog, posted 06-07-2006 8:39 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by crashfrog, posted 06-07-2006 8:58 AM Wounded King has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 82 of 302 (318664)
06-07-2006 9:14 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by Rob
06-07-2006 12:54 AM


We can test and find over and over in the lab that mutations cause a loss of information.
*snip*
When the occasional accident or 'error' does occur, it almost exclusively results in death or an inability to procreate. Statistically irrelevant exceptions due occur.
Would you care to furnish any evidence to support these contentions?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Rob, posted 06-07-2006 12:54 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Rob, posted 06-07-2006 9:20 AM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 100 by Rob, posted 06-08-2006 11:02 AM Wounded King has replied
 Message 296 by Rob, posted 06-18-2006 1:10 AM Wounded King has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 89 of 302 (318689)
06-07-2006 10:17 AM
Reply to: Message 88 by Percy
06-07-2006 10:03 AM


What a silly question! How do you think the replication process is studied if not by observing live DNA? I just pulled a genetics book off my shelf and found a picture of DNA replicating in a live E. coli.
I think Rob was commenting on the neccessity of many accessory proteins for DNA replication, i.e. DNA alone in solution will not replicate and therefore is not, in and of itself, 'alive'.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by Percy, posted 06-07-2006 10:03 AM Percy has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 101 of 302 (319059)
06-08-2006 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 100 by Rob
06-08-2006 11:02 AM


OK, so your 'evidence' is that people are saying this on AIG. As evidence goes that is pretty much non-existent.
AIG making claims is no more convincing than you making claims.
You could have saved yourself typing all that in by just by saying 'no'.
If you think there are specific references in these links which provide actual evidence, say a study from the primary literature, then please provide those.
TTFN,
WK
Edited by Wounded King, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 100 by Rob, posted 06-08-2006 11:02 AM Rob has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 167 of 302 (319437)
06-09-2006 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Rob
06-09-2006 2:13 AM


Re: on pairs and tells
The actual reactions happened entirely without human agency. If you want to argue that all god did was provide the right materials and the right conditions then there are many on these boards who will agree with you. But what you can't argue is that Urey-Miller doesn't show the formation of organic molecules important in life from inorganic precursors, which is all anyone has ever claimed it has done.
The point of Urey-Miller is that abiogenesis can occur with the right conditions, and that is all. It isn't meant to be an argument against creationism or intelligent design. It does however put the lie to those who claim that abiogenesis itself cannot happen except by magical acts of special creation where whole animals just spring fully formed from the air or the earth.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Rob, posted 06-09-2006 2:13 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Rob, posted 06-09-2006 9:27 AM Wounded King has replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 168 of 302 (319438)
06-09-2006 5:03 AM
Reply to: Message 142 by Someone who cares
06-08-2006 10:43 PM


Re: AIG vs TO
But when someone makes this claim about AIG they are prepared to back it up with examples when asked. If you looked at the many AIG links Rob posted you would find very few references in most of them, and the majority of those to other pages on AIG itself or other creationist sources. On TO on the other hand the references are to the primary scientific literature and are generally fairly extensive.
So while you can make the claim just as well you would be hard put to back it up, as indeed you appear to be.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 142 by Someone who cares, posted 06-08-2006 10:43 PM Someone who cares has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 175 of 302 (319493)
06-09-2006 10:20 AM
Reply to: Message 172 by Rob
06-09-2006 9:27 AM


Re: on pairs and tells
Well, I know that what I was asking was whether anyone had a reference for an increase in genetic info durring mutations or cell division. All I got was a guy telling me I was mutating (not evolving) and people talking about how the first amino acids may have formed simple and biologically meaningless subcomponents.
Several people have asked for a specific definition of information, because without that they can't provide a reference which will accord with your views on what information is. There are a number of papers, not to mention simple maths, which can show that Shannon information can increase through a number of processes including duplication at various genomic level up to an including full genome duplications.
My definition of information comes from Phillip Johnson, professor of law at the University of California at Berkeley.
Well you don't really seem to have given us that definition clearly anywhere in this thread, the closest you have got is saying...
It would be nice to see ACT evolve to TGCA. Just a litle is all I'm looking for. Got any references?
Which is not really very helpful, if all you want are mutations which increases the number of base pairs and/or substitute some bases then you can have references in abundance.
After much testing, including a period of time at NASA Aims Reasearch center, we know know that amino acids do not have the ability to organize themselves into any biologically meaningful sequences. So we haven't the slightest chance for a chemical origin for life.
The fact that amino acids do not spontaneously organise themselves into 'biologically meaningful' sequences does not mean that abiogenesis could not occur, protein first theories of abiogenesis are not those most commonly put forward because proteins do not, with some possible exceptions, exhibit the capacity for self replication.
If all these researchers are doing science then why are you unable to provide a reference from the scientific literature? The most recent citation from Pubmed for Dean Kenyon seems to be from 1976 ( (Kenyon and Nissenbaum, 1976) the only more recent thing I can find is an article in Origins and Design from 1996 (Mills and Kenyon, 1996). Is this the cutting edge of ID/creationist research?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 172 by Rob, posted 06-09-2006 9:27 AM Rob has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by Rob, posted 06-09-2006 10:32 AM Wounded King has replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 181 of 302 (319512)
06-09-2006 11:01 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by Rob
06-09-2006 10:32 AM


Re: on pairs and tells
I want to see additional info in the genome.
This certainly is a complete waste of time. At the moment the converstion is going like this...
Rob:- Where's the new information?
Chorus:-What do you mean by information?
Rob:- Where's the new information?
Chorus:-What do you mean by information?
...
continue ad nauseam
Your question simply can't be answered without knowing what you would consider an increase in genetic information. We could spend months guessing what definition you are using and not get it right, it would expedite matters considerably if you just told us.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by Rob, posted 06-09-2006 10:32 AM Rob has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by rgb, posted 06-09-2006 12:37 PM Wounded King has not replied

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 145 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 240 of 302 (320272)
06-10-2006 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 234 by Someone who cares
06-10-2006 9:00 PM


Re: Allow me to defend myself
Really? Could you show me a plant evolution chart with all of the plant types in it? I haven't come across one yet.
I'm not sure if this
The Green Tree of Life - Hyperbolic Tree
is the sort of thing you are looking for, it is a hyperbolic phylogenetic tree, it doesn't give any timescale information though. The different nodes also offer links to the Tree of life website which is a fantastic resource if you are interested in phylogenies.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Someone who cares, posted 06-10-2006 9:00 PM Someone who cares has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by RAZD, posted 06-10-2006 10:11 PM Wounded King has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024