Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-20-2019 7:19 AM
134 online now:
PaulK, Percy (Admin) (2 members, 132 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,478 Year: 3,515/19,786 Month: 510/1,087 Week: 100/212 Day: 16/14 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
313233
34
3536Next
Author Topic:   TOE and the Reasons for Doubt
Peg
Member (Idle past 3004 days)
Posts: 2703
From: melbourne, australia
Joined: 11-22-2008


Message 496 of 530 (537759)
11-30-2009 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 493 by DevilsAdvocate
11-29-2009 6:51 AM


Re: cell reproduction
DevilsAdvocate writes:

What an uneducated and ignorant claim. And what 'parts' would those be?

i'm sure i dont need to explain to you or anyone else here that there are many parts to the cell that rely on each other in order for the cell to function.

centrioles & mircrotubules are linked, Chromosomes,DNA & histones rely on each other to function. And ribosomes contain 55 separate protein molecules all of which are required for the cell to function properly. Im not even scraping the surface here obviously, but if you think its ignorant of me to claim that a cell cannot live without all the parts that make it function, then i'm happy to be ignorant.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 493 by DevilsAdvocate, posted 11-29-2009 6:51 AM DevilsAdvocate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 497 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 11-30-2009 10:00 PM Peg has not yet responded
 Message 498 by Wounded King, posted 12-01-2009 5:40 AM Peg has not yet responded

    
Teapots&unicorns
Member (Idle past 2962 days)
Posts: 178
Joined: 06-23-2009


Message 497 of 530 (537783)
11-30-2009 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 496 by Peg
11-30-2009 6:56 PM


Re: cell reproduction
Hi Peg,

i'm sure i dont need to explain to you or anyone else here that there are many parts to the cell that rely on each other in order for the cell to function.

centrioles & mircrotubules are linked, Chromosomes,DNA & histones rely on each other to function. And ribosomes contain 55 separate protein molecules all of which are required for the cell to function properly. Im not even scraping the surface here obviously, but if you think its ignorant of me to claim that a cell cannot live without all the parts that make it function, then i'm happy to be ignorant.


I've seen this argument many times; however, that just makes it all the easier to rebut.

Imagine a cell as a skyscraper. There are windows, walls, doors. The doors must, obviously, have a wall to open through; the same is true for the windows; but what about the walls? It seems that there are just too many parts for them to have come together on their own. Wires, plumbing, heating, and, above all, framework: all are needed to give the wall shape and purpose. However, suppose that the generator and furnace can only go on the third floor (for reasons unknown). The first floor could be laid out with preliminary walls and such, as would the second floor directly following that. However, once you get to the third floor, you have to start making changes to the floors below. However, if you change anything below, you run the risk of having the third floor collapse in your face. So, while the preliminary design is being remodeled, scaffolds are put into place in order to keep the building upright. When the time comes when the new system is put into place, the scaffolds are removed and it looks to us impossible for them to have put into place a later system that involved changes to earlier systems. It is much the same with evolution.
What we are missing is the scaffolding.

T&U


I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts

I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes

"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams


This message is a reply to:
 Message 496 by Peg, posted 11-30-2009 6:56 PM Peg has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 501 by barbara, posted 07-22-2010 1:01 PM Teapots&unicorns has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 498 of 530 (537830)
12-01-2009 5:40 AM
Reply to: Message 496 by Peg
11-30-2009 6:56 PM


Re: cell reproduction
but if you think its ignorant of me to claim that a cell cannot live without all the parts that make it function, then i'm happy to be ignorant.

If not ignorant then at the very least redundant. You seem to have reduced the concept of Irreducible Complexity down to a tautologous core, 'a cell cannot live without all the parts it needs to live.'

Of course you used function rather than live, and that raises a question. Cells can have many functions besides the simple one of allowing the cell to reproduce, and a number of these functions can be removed without impairing the cell's ability to reproduce. So the question becomes, what is a cell's function? Is it simply to reproduce or does it encompass all the other accessory functions that cell may have? If we take the wider view then your tautology becomes, 'a cell cannot properly function without the parts that allow it to function properly'.

Either way, neither of these formulations says anything meaningful about evolution. As has been pointed out repeatedly the existence of an IC system, in the straightforward sense of a system which is rendered non-functional by the removal of any one of several contributing elements, is not a barrier to evolution and there are many evolutionary frameworks for the evolution of IC systems.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 496 by Peg, posted 11-30-2009 6:56 PM Peg has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 508 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 7:59 AM Wounded King has responded

    
Asking
Junior Member (Idle past 3112 days)
Posts: 19
Joined: 05-19-2010


Message 499 of 530 (561296)
05-19-2010 7:38 PM


You might want to read up on this experiment thats been running for the last 20 years demonstrating evolution in E. Coli

- http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/

In particular you might want to read into E.Coli evolving (Via mutation) the ability to utilise citrate

- http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/citrate2008/
- http://www.newscientist.com/...tionary-shift-in-the-lab.html

As for claims that the fossil record doesn't support evolution that is a simple lie.

Edited by Asking, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 500 by killinghurts, posted 05-24-2010 10:49 PM Asking has not yet responded

    
killinghurts
Member (Idle past 3068 days)
Posts: 150
Joined: 04-23-2008


Message 500 of 530 (561985)
05-24-2010 10:49 PM
Reply to: Message 499 by Asking
05-19-2010 7:38 PM


Then, of course, there's the nylon eating bacteria
This message is a reply to:
 Message 499 by Asking, posted 05-19-2010 7:38 PM Asking has not yet responded

  
barbara
Member (Idle past 2876 days)
Posts: 167
Joined: 07-19-2010


Message 501 of 530 (569614)
07-22-2010 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 497 by Teapots&unicorns
11-30-2009 10:00 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
Has anyone built a tree based on a new feature never previously used in its history.
EX. Feathers - all species that have feathers. Was it a dinosaur that feathers developed for the first time or another bird during its origin of feathers.
Skin origin from water to land and every other new variation that ends with human skin currently.
internal specialized organs - We certainly have a wide range of species that do not have all of the specialized organs but still able to perform the same functions. We do have a pattern where many of them still live in the ocean while all land species have all the specialized organs.

If a tree is done in this fashion, I think one could understand how all of the different varieties of species are connected.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 497 by Teapots&unicorns, posted 11-30-2009 10:00 PM Teapots&unicorns has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 502 by Theodoric, posted 07-22-2010 1:32 PM barbara has not yet responded
 Message 503 by Wounded King, posted 07-23-2010 7:09 AM barbara has responded

    
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 5953
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 502 of 530 (569621)
07-22-2010 1:32 PM
Reply to: Message 501 by barbara
07-22-2010 1:01 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
If a tree is done in this fashion, I think one could understand how all of the different varieties of species are connected.

Or not.

How would you determine what features we are to organize them by? Oh thats right there is Bariminists that are willing to make that determination

Do you think all the egg layers are closely connected?


Facts don\'t lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
This message is a reply to:
 Message 501 by barbara, posted 07-22-2010 1:01 PM barbara has not yet responded

    
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 503 of 530 (569682)
07-23-2010 7:09 AM
Reply to: Message 501 by barbara
07-22-2010 1:01 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
Has anyone built a tree based on a new feature never previously used in its history.

That's pretty much the basis of all modern cladistic taxonomic trees, looking for shared derived features or as they are technically known synapomorphies.

A synapomorphy is a novel feature, feathers in your example, which is shared by 2 or more taxa and their common ancestor but which was absent in that ancestors own ancestors. The current evidence still points to the first feathers arising in dinosaurs before the diversification of the aves. So all feathered dinosaurs and birds are considered part of a clade which has feathers as a synapomorphic feature.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 501 by barbara, posted 07-22-2010 1:01 PM barbara has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 504 by barbara, posted 07-28-2010 6:32 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

    
barbara
Member (Idle past 2876 days)
Posts: 167
Joined: 07-19-2010


Message 504 of 530 (570764)
07-28-2010 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 503 by Wounded King
07-23-2010 7:09 AM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
I will wait patiently for a new theory that explains life. Evolution and Creation don't explain anything. Science has not learned enough yet to state that what defines evolution now will not change in the future.

This unbelievable notion that one must choose sides in this debate of religion/evolution with no other alternatives to choose from simply because no other theories will be accepted is corrupt and self motivated.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 503 by Wounded King, posted 07-23-2010 7:09 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 505 by jar, posted 07-28-2010 6:39 PM barbara has not yet responded
 Message 506 by crashfrog, posted 07-28-2010 6:53 PM barbara has not yet responded
 Message 507 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 1:42 AM barbara has not yet responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 505 of 530 (570765)
07-28-2010 6:39 PM
Reply to: Message 504 by barbara
07-28-2010 6:32 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
barbara writes:

I will wait patiently for a new theory that explains life. Evolution and Creation don't explain anything. Science has not learned enough yet to state that what defines evolution now will not change in the future.

HUH? That does not even make any sense. What defines evolution? Do you mean change in a population over time?

barbara writes:

This unbelievable notion that one must choose sides in this debate of religion/evolution with no other alternatives to choose from simply because no other theories will be accepted is corrupt and self motivated.

There is no religious theory of evolution. The ONLY model that is available is the Theory of Evolution.

So far there is no other option.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by barbara, posted 07-28-2010 6:32 PM barbara has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 506 of 530 (570770)
07-28-2010 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 504 by barbara
07-28-2010 6:32 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
Science has not learned enough yet to state that what defines evolution now will not change in the future.

Yes, it has. Evolution will always proceed on primarily the basis of random mutation and natural selection, just as it always has.

This unbelievable notion that one must choose sides in this debate of religion/evolution with no other alternatives to choose from simply because no other theories will be accepted is corrupt and self motivated.

I guess you don't have to "choose sides", but one side is supported by an incredible weight of scientific evidence - more than for any other theory - and the other is supported only because it's consistent with one narrow view of Christianity.

The decision doesn't seem all that hard, I guess. There are no scientific alternatives to evolution because there don't need to be - the theory is robust, well-substantiated, and capable of explaining all biological observations that have ever been made. Why do you need an alternative?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by barbara, posted 07-28-2010 6:32 PM barbara has not yet responded

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1704 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 507 of 530 (570830)
07-29-2010 1:42 AM
Reply to: Message 504 by barbara
07-28-2010 6:32 PM


Re: cell reproduction- New Tree
Here, here..I second that!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 504 by barbara, posted 07-28-2010 6:32 PM barbara has not yet responded

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1704 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 508 of 530 (570854)
07-29-2010 7:59 AM
Reply to: Message 498 by Wounded King
12-01-2009 5:40 AM


Re: cell reproduction
Are there more than one thing (two) that are necessary for a cell to reproduce and continue to exist? If so, how can you remove one of them, and still have a cell?

Would those two things not have to have developed simultaneously? Wouldn't that be impossible?

Of course I think you already realize there are many more than two necessary for a cells existence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 498 by Wounded King, posted 12-01-2009 5:40 AM Wounded King has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 509 by Wounded King, posted 07-29-2010 9:17 AM Bolder-dash has responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2169 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 509 of 530 (570862)
07-29-2010 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 508 by Bolder-dash
07-29-2010 7:59 AM


Re: cell reproduction
Would those two things not have to have developed simultaneously? Wouldn't that be impossible?

They would if what you wanted was the instantaneous de novo creation of reproduction capable cellular life. But that isn't how most origin of life scenarios proceed. If you can start with acellular or proto-cellular genetic reproduction then building cellular architecture around that does not require passing through impossible intermediate stages.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 508 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 7:59 AM Bolder-dash has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 510 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 9:22 AM Wounded King has not yet responded
 Message 511 by Bolder-dash, posted 07-29-2010 9:26 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

    
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 1704 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


Message 510 of 530 (570867)
07-29-2010 9:22 AM
Reply to: Message 509 by Wounded King
07-29-2010 9:17 AM


Re: cell reproduction
But doesn't that require you to then hypothesize the use of thousands of functioning parts of the cell, BEFORE they came into being a part of their final systematic use?

Isn't that just sherking the responsibility of explanation?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 509 by Wounded King, posted 07-29-2010 9:17 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 512 by ramoss, posted 07-29-2010 2:06 PM Bolder-dash has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
313233
34
3536Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019