Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9077 total)
85 online now:
CosmicChimp, nwr, PaulK, Tangle, vimesey (5 members, 80 visitors)
Newest Member: Contrarian
Post Volume: Total: 894,071 Year: 5,183/6,534 Month: 26/577 Week: 14/80 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Questions about the living cell
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 5 of 182 (527506)
10-01-2009 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 12:50 PM


Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

Questions for evolutionists about the living cell.

1. What was the origin of the information now utilized in the transcription/translation/replication to produce protiens?

My opinion: a slow build-up of increasingly complex chemical evolution, the nature of which we don't understand yet, and may never know for certain.

Fact: the facts are not in yet, but scientists are working on it.

2. Since the helicase (protein) is required to open the double helix for the process mentioned above in order to produce other helicase proteins then what is the origin of the first helicase?

My opinion: enzymes like helicase are catalysts, which means that they speed up chemical and physico-chemical processes. The double helix might have opened up via a different pathway before the advent of helicase, or the helicase might have been built from an RNA sequence instead of a DNA sequence, in an RNA world.

Fact: the facts are not in yet, same thing.

3. Where does nature develop chromatin outside of already existing living organisms?

My opinion: probably nowhere. It may have evolved inside living cells before they started organising their DNA in nuclei and started utilising certain proteins that happened to be of some help in it.

Fact: it wouldn't surprise me if my "probably nowhere" happened to be a fact, but I'm not sure. So, better safe than sorry: the facts are not in yet.

Thank you. This will be appreciated.

You're welcome. We're not all rotters, you see.
Nice picture, by the way.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 12:50 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Dr Jack, posted 10-01-2009 4:33 PM Parasomnium has replied
 Message 9 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 4:35 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 12 of 182 (527521)
10-01-2009 4:42 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 4:33 PM


Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

Answers to questions to 1-3 are I don't know.

Can you answer them based on the same format you expect us to?

Yes, with no problem.

1. All genetic information was created by Almighty God within living organisms at creation. Nature did not develop it. Nature is incapable of developing it outside of already existing living organisms. Nature can only do what it is programed to do by the one who programed it; the Lord.

2. The machinery of nature was created 'as is' and almost none of it would function were the working parts not assembled and the power switched on by another force. Again, that is the Lord.

3. See the above. Nature doesn't create/make chromatin anywhere outside of existing DNA coded living organisms.

That's not quite what mark24 asked. He asked you to answer in the same format you expect of us. It seems you only gave us your opinions. Can you also provide some facts?


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 4:33 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 19 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 4:57 PM Parasomnium has taken no action

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 17 of 182 (527527)
10-01-2009 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by Dr Jack
10-01-2009 4:33 PM


Re: Some answers
Mr Jack writes:

Well, in fact [...]

I appreciate your comment, but I don't quite follow how it connects with what I said. Could you explain?


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Dr Jack, posted 10-01-2009 4:33 PM Dr Jack has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Dr Jack, posted 10-01-2009 5:04 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 18 of 182 (527528)
10-01-2009 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 4:35 PM


Re: Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

scientists are working on it; but why isn't nature doing it?

Why isn't nature doing what?


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 4:35 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 5:30 PM Parasomnium has taken no action

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 24 of 182 (527535)
10-01-2009 5:13 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by Dr Jack
10-01-2009 5:04 PM


Re: Some answers
Mr Jack writes:

I presume your point was that chromatin didn't form seperately to living things but evolved in already living things. This suggestion is, it seems to me, supported by [etc.]

Crystal clear, thank you. I couldn't have said it better.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by Dr Jack, posted 10-01-2009 5:04 PM Dr Jack has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:05 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 31 of 182 (527551)
10-01-2009 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 30 by slevesque
10-01-2009 5:53 PM


Re: Facts?
slevesque writes:

You should use the word energy instead of matter I think

Better still, you should talk about cells...

Edited by Parasomnium, : No reason given.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by slevesque, posted 10-01-2009 5:53 PM slevesque has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:01 PM Parasomnium has taken no action

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 36 of 182 (527557)
10-01-2009 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 5:59 PM


Re: Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

Matter can neither be created nor destroyed.

To cut a long story short: the first law of thermodynamics says that God could not have created everything ex nihilo. Fine.

Now back to cells?


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 5:59 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:33 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 42 of 182 (527564)
10-01-2009 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:05 PM


Re: Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

What is its origin and how did it assemble into DNA to generate life?

You may be putting the cart before the horse. You assume it is vital for life to start. But maybe first life was simpler than that and didn't need it. Maybe it only evolved after life became a little more complex. Cavediver's film already hinted at such a process.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:05 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:15 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 44 of 182 (527566)
10-01-2009 6:14 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:07 PM


Re: Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

The 'Big Bang' was not observed. It is not testable, repeatable, nor verifiable. The 1st Law of Thermodynamics is.

You need to concede this point, friend.

He doesn't, for two reasons.
(1) He's right. For your information, Cavediver is our resident physicist/cosmologist. He's a professional, he really knows what he's talking about here. (Hint: engage him about cells, you might stand a chance.)
(2) It's off-topic.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:07 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:19 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 47 of 182 (527570)
10-01-2009 6:20 PM
Reply to: Message 45 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:15 PM


Re: Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

Give us an example of a living organism without it.

I'm afraid that's no longer possible. Life has progressed and the first primitive life-forms have been superceded without leaving a trace long ago.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 45 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:15 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:23 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 48 of 182 (527571)
10-01-2009 6:22 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:19 PM


Re: Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

Forget that.

Good idea. Let's forget about the whole thing, because IT'S OFF-TOPIC.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:19 PM Calypsis4 has taken no action

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 51 of 182 (527574)
10-01-2009 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:23 PM


Re: Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

Prove that early life was primitive/non-complex (in comparison to living cells).

Absolute proof is impossible, but some evidential support can be gleaned from the fact that, for example, mitochondria have their own genetic material and are likely to be descendants of simple free living cells that were captured by other cells, thus creating a more complex combination.

Now do me a favour and prove that God created cells.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:23 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:43 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 55 of 182 (527578)
10-01-2009 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:33 PM


Re: Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

Nature cannot make cells outside of already existing cells and no scientist has been able to produce the effect in the lab. Therefore the only option left is a supernatural creation of the cell in operable order.

Or a natural creation of simpler cell-like structure that do not yet operate like modern cell, but have the capacity to evolve to such more complex cells. Like in Cavediver's film.

You shouldn't give up so soon, only to reach for the supernatural gambit. Nature is so much more interesting than the parochial God-story.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:33 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:48 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 60 of 182 (527585)
10-01-2009 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:43 PM


Re: Some answers
Calypsis4 writes:

If you document that I am willing to read it

Google or wiki "Lynn Margulis". Fascinating stuff.

God [...] has a written account of who He is, what He did [etc.]

Is that sufficient?

I'm afraid not. Because God has some contenders. They're called Zeus, Wodan, Jupiter, Krishna, etc. They all have written accounts and witnesses. Moreover, the diverse accounts tell conflicting stories. Why, God himself has two conflicting accounts of his creation of the world. If a book constitutes proof, then my bookcase if full of proof of evolution.


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:43 PM Calypsis4 has taken no action

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2201
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 62 of 182 (527587)
10-01-2009 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Calypsis4
10-01-2009 6:48 PM


Re: Facts?
Calypsis4 writes:

The You Tube production was guesswork. No one knows what the supposed first living cell was like or even if it was a eukaryote or a prokaryote.

So? It's a model. No one says it's the absolute truth. But this model is a lot more plausible than "poof".


"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 6:48 PM Calypsis4 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Calypsis4, posted 10-01-2009 7:02 PM Parasomnium has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022