Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."

An atheist fairy tale.

Do you know what that quote says? It doesn't say what you think it says. Think of a whole world of life all made from the same physical makeup. That is what we have. All of life, with few exceptions, none significant, is chemically compatible because this system was the one that prospered and diversified on this planet.

quote:

---

A living system usually deals with two enantiomers of the same compound in drastically different ways.

---

And that is why we don't grow or eat the other. It is not available as sustenance for this total misuse of the chemistry that is involved.Just like your Dr. Turd's explanation of chirality being a manifestation of election spin and his glaring insistence that viable red blood cells were found in fossils, your continued objections are forced, of no effect and is nothing more than repetition of way old creationist lies debunked ages ago.And it appears from this study that pre-biotic life didn't have much of an option which chirality was available. New evidence against a popular theory about life's preference for chiralityAs with your misunderstandings on genetics you have equal problems with chemistry.

Kleinman:

---

Does AZPaul3 need a quote?

AZPaul3:

---

Do you know what that quote says? It doesn't say what you think it says. Think of a whole world of life all made from the same physical makeup. That is what we have. All of life, with few exceptions, none significant, is chemically compatible because this system was the one that prospered and diversified on this planet.

---

---

AZPaul3 needs another quote.
Enantiomer - Wikipedia

quote:

---

In chemical synthesis of enantiomeric substances, non-enantiomeric precursors inevitably produce racemic mixtures. In the absence of an effective enantiomeric environment (precursor, chiral catalyst, or kinetic resolution), separation of a racemic mixture into its enantiomeric components is impossible, although certain racemic mixtures spontaneously crystallize in the form of a racemic conglomerate, in which crystals of the enantiomers are physically segregated and may be separated mechanically (e.g., the enantiomers of tartaric acid, whose crystallized enantiomers were separated with tweezers by Pasteur). However, most racemates will crystallize in crystals containing both enantiomers in a 1:1 ratio, arranged in a regular lattice.

---

quote:

---

In the absence of an effective enantiomeric environment (precursor, chiral catalyst, or kinetic resolution), separation of a racemic mixture into its enantiomeric components is impossible,...

---

Before you quote at me be sure you understand the topic.You missed this part in your comprehension. We have an effective enantiomeric environment. Our internal chemistry. The inner workings of all life on this planet.Your fear that our bodies could not make molecules of proper chirality is bogus. Your fear that life systems on this planet all make equal amounts of both enantiomers is bogus.Your insistence that an abiogenic event could not happen because both enantiomers would be present and halt any viable reaction is bogus.Do you have an alternative explanation of the chirality issue? One that you could evidence to the extent we have on our side?

Wikipedia:

---

In the absence of an effective enantiomeric environment (precursor, chiral catalyst, or kinetic resolution), separation of a racemic mixture into its enantiomeric components is impossible,...

AZPaul3:

---

Before you quote at me be sure you understand the topic.
​
You missed this part in your comprehension. We have an effective enantiomeric environment. Our internal chemistry. The inner workings of all life on this planet.

---

---

Oh, now I get your argument. Abiogenesis occurs by "our internal chemistry", "the inner workings of all life on this planet".This is why I have no interest in starting a new topic on abiogenesis. Does any other of the C- team want to try and explain why it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutational step in the Kishony and Lenski experiments?

Why? It's been done to death and you lost, again.

There is that reading comprehension problem of yours again.In place of repeating myself yet again I'll leave this for you and your heartache on chirality.Life's 'Left-Handed' Amino Acids Still A Puzzle

quote:

---

“The problem with "chirality” is not so much "How could it possibly have happened?" but more "Which of many possible routes actually led to chirality?" says astrobiologist Steven Benner, a distinguished fellow at the Foundation for Applied Molecular Evolution (FFAME) and The Westheimer Institute for Science and Technology, in Gainesville.

​

Even so, Donna Blackmond, a chemist at The Scripps Research Institute in La Jolla, California, and colleagues have successfully modeled four viable ways to get from a small chiral imbalance to where we are today. But she doesn’t pretend to solve the conundrum of what started the imbalance.

---

There are still holes in our knowledge but we're not as dumb as you are on this issue.

Kleinman:

---

Does any other of the C- team want to try and explain why it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutational step in the Kishony and Lenski experiments?

AZPaul3:

---

Why? It's been done to death and you lost, again.

---

---

Tell that to Taq and Tany. The difference between you and them is that they know enough about the subject to know they are wrong. You don't.

You really are that egotistical.They ended their discussions with you because they became repetitive due to your abject stupidity. You lost and you don't even know it. Not a surprise.

AZPaul3:

---

Why? It's been done to death and you lost, again.

Kleinman:

---

Tell that to Taq and Tany.

AZPaul3:

---

You really are that egotistical.
​
They ended their discussions with you because they became repetitive due to your abject stupidity. You lost and you don't even know it. Not a surprise.

---

---

---

So you believe Taq's claim that multiple alleles can fix simultaneously and Tany's claim that DNA evolution of bacteria, viruses, and yeasts have nothing to do with the DNA evolution of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing organisms? They are wrong and that is the reason they stopped posting and they know it. And the reason it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation in the Kishony and Lenski experiments is the multiplication rule of probabilities. This a mathematical and experimental fact of life that you are unwilling to accept because it doesn't fit with your worldview.

The facts of the experiment were not in question. Your interpretation, that other vital function of peer reviewed science, was bogus. Your mathematical models were brilliantly bent to provide the results you wanted. Like any other ego-driven Nobel-wannabe who misrepresents his analysis, especially after your peers refused your views, you, Kleinman, are just another religious nutjob on this board. Your views on genetics, mutations, chirality and so many other topics, are of no intellect and of no scientific interest. You do have entertainment value here so you've got that going for you.We know religious nutjobs. We've seen sooo many of you in this forum. A lot of us have degrees in Religious Nutjobery.You're another religious nutjob. That is not opinion. That is hard scientific fact based on the evidence of 755+- posts.

Kleinman:

---

This a mathematical and experimental fact of life that you are unwilling to accept because it doesn't fit with your worldview.

AZPaul3:

---

The facts of the experiment were not in question.

---

---

Let's hear your layman's interpretation of why it takes a billion replication for each adaptive mutational step in the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments. Perhaps your explanation is "it is the inner workings of all life on the planet". AZPaul3, you need to face the fact that you don't even understand the inner workings of the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments and neither do biologists.

That's your response? Again? Really? You sure are dense as they come.

We don't believe you.

Kleinman:

---

AZPaul3, you need to face the fact that you don't even understand the inner workings of the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments and neither do biologists.

AZPaul3:

---

We don't believe you.

---

---

I know that. I started this discussion by claiming that biologists don't understand the physics and mathematics of biological evolution. The physics and mathematics aren't that difficult when it is explained properly if you can overcome your biases. You can't overcome your biases but Taq and Tany have. Rather than admit it, they abandon the discussion. Whatever reason you have for believing in universal common descent, you will have to find another explanation because universal common descent is not true.