All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-09-2015, 04:06 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 10:15 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 04:46 AM)Chas Wrote:  No wonder you spout such nonsense - you have no understanding of basic principles.

You don't understand the difference between open and closed systems, you have a basic misunderstanding of what 'information' even means, and have a muddy, even incoherent, dichotomy between 'micro' and 'macro' evolution.

You can't even comprehend the science you so apishly quote. Facepalm

you are good at dodging my question, and phenomenal in strawman criticism. Congrats.

Might to answer my question ? i dont see the connection between a open thermodynamic system, and coded information. Please elucidate me. Give me some observed examples where this happened.

Angelo, for a smart guy, you're such a fucking dingbat. Tongue

What do you get out of this? Do think one day you'll be up in heaven kicking it Jesus when he goes "Angelo, my man, you really gave to those atheists on that forum one time?" Do you really think you're doing god any favors by promoting this IDiot nonsense?

It doesn't fucking track, Angelo. When you people promote this nonsense the only god you are inserting into the gaps is your own egos.

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like houseofcantor's post
17-09-2015, 06:36 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 10:07 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 06:26 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  Well GE, since you refuse to answer the question I am going to do it for you. It has already been brought to your attention that length can be added to the genome by doubling events. Length can also be added via horizontal transfer from other organisms. But maybe just adding length isn’t enough for you so I’m going to answer the question with a definition that applies to the way you would like to see an increase in information in the genome defined as part of your argument. An increase in information in the genome is any change that results in new form or function. Here is a graphic example of a mutation leading to an increase of information in the human genome.

[Image: 518px-Polydactyly_01_Rhand_AP.jpg]

This type of mutation is usually caused by changes to hox clusters. Hox clusters are genes that control when, where and how other genes, in this case the genes for fingers, are expressed. It simply adds the same protein to an extra spot during embryonic development and presto. Someone is born with an additional fully functional finger. This type of mutation is all it took to slowly one small step over time to transform fish fins into legs with feet, arms with hands or wings. They all have the same basic bone structure as building blocks. The changes required to get from a fish fin to your arm are well documented in the fossil record. No god required.

[Image: tetrapod_evo.jpg]

So now you know you can add information to the genome. You know you can add the type of information to the genome that is required for macro evolution. Now that you know these things the next time you post some drivel about no evidence for macro evolution or you can’t add useful information to the genome you will be a liar and a fraud.

poppycock. In that way, you are just duplicating pre existing genome information, you are not creating NEW one. Drinking Beverage

Sorry but no. Information was added via mutation that told the existing genes to add another finger. You really need to read up on embryonic development. Your ignorance on the subject is really quite embarrassing for you, and it cripples your ability to intelligently discuss how things evolve. You really need to know how and why things develop the way they do before you can argue they don't.

But let's talk about the other method I mentioned for adding information to the genome. Let's talk about horizontal transfer. Bacteria easily exchange pieces of DNA between different species. When you take a piece of DNA from one species and add it to another you add information. Sometimes this process is detrimental to the host. Sometimes it has no effect one way or another. Sometimes it is advantageous to the host. It can give it the ability to produce new proteins or use existing proteins in new ways. In any case it adds information to the genome, and is considered an important part of evolution.

Then there are viral insertions. When a virus copies itself into the genome of a host it adds information. It is the same process we use today to produce GMOs, and nature has been doing it for long long time. So long that a significant portion of your DNA is viral in origin, GE. We have even identified viral insertions that are important to your existence. One example is a viral insertion that produces some of the proteins present in human placenta.

The distribution of these viral insertions in your DNA is perfectly explained by evolution. Can you explain them without evolution? Why would your god need to use viral insertions if not for evolution?

Save a life. Adopt a greyhound.

[Image: anigrey.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Popeye's Pappy's post
17-09-2015, 06:46 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 10:07 PM)Godexists Wrote:  poppycock. In that way, you are just duplicating pre existing genome information, you are not creating NEW one. Drinking Beverage


Read up the neutral gene theory.

The duplication has to be neutral in that it does not decrease the fitness of the agent. Then in future generations further mutations can take place to start altering the duplicated part to perform a specialised role.

Being technical about it, the duplication opens up a new part of the search space in which mutations can take place.

Say all members of a species had 4 fingers and a member of the population is born that had one too many fingers. Over many, many generations, mutations changes this 5th finger to be twisting one way and others have it opposable to the other fingers.

Over time the descendants of the one that had the mutation making it twist opposable to the other fingers develop opposable thumbs and are significantly fitter. But this would have never happened if the neutral duplication hadn't first taken place. New information is added through mutation of duplicated parts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
17-09-2015, 06:50 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 10:12 PM)Godexists Wrote:  Paul Davies puts it more graphically: ‘Making a protein simply by injecting energy is rather like exploding a stick of dynamite under a pile of bricks and expecting it to form a house. You may liberate enough energy to raise the bricks, but without coupling the energy to the bricks in a controlled and ordered way, there is little hope of producing anything other than a chaotic mess.’

Who is Paul Davies? If he knew anything then he would discuss the edge of chaos.

A stick of dynamite is too much energy. If you popped a fire cracker then that wouldn't cause any change at all. What you need is a persistent thermodynamic pressure of just enough energy to cause dynamic action but not too much that stable states cannot form.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2015, 06:52 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 10:15 PM)Godexists Wrote:  you are good at dodging my question

Not as good as you. How many times have I asked this now???

What mechanism is in place to stop small changes from accumulating over many generations?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2015, 06:54 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(16-09-2015 11:07 PM)Godexists Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 07:34 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  how do you tell the difference between microevolution and macroevolution.


Micro evolution (intraspecies adaptions- changes/deletions to existing DNA genes) is a fact.

Macro evolution (jumps to new species- via vastly more complex genes added to DNA) is a myth.


What mechanism is in place to stop small changes from accumulating over many generations?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-09-2015, 06:55 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(17-09-2015 06:50 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 10:12 PM)Godexists Wrote:  Paul Davies puts it more graphically: ‘Making a protein simply by injecting energy is rather like exploding a stick of dynamite under a pile of bricks and expecting it to form a house. You may liberate enough energy to raise the bricks, but without coupling the energy to the bricks in a controlled and ordered way, there is little hope of producing anything other than a chaotic mess.’

Who is Paul Davies?

Quote:Davies wrote an article in the Wall Street Journal where he described the background to the 2 December 2010 arsenic bacteria press conference and stated that he supported the 'arsenic can replace phosphorus' idea of Felisa Wolfe-Simon because "I had the advantage of being unencumbered by knowledge."

Laugh out load

Bolding, mine, for the lolz. Quote from wiki.

[Image: ZF1ZJ4M.jpg]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like houseofcantor's post
17-09-2015, 07:13 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(17-09-2015 06:50 AM)Mathilda Wrote:  Who is Paul Davies? If he knew anything then he would discuss the edge of chaos.

As I posted up thread. He's a Physicist not a Biologist.

I'm also sadly sure he's an Ozzie as well...

Must be the summer heat drives 'em all nuts... Confused
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Peebothuhul's post
17-09-2015, 07:15 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(17-09-2015 07:13 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  As I posted up thread. He's a Physicist not a Biologist.

Not a very good one by the looks of it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Mathilda's post
17-09-2015, 09:12 AM
RE: All cellular functions are  irreducibly complex
(17-09-2015 06:36 AM)Popeyes Pappy Wrote:  
(16-09-2015 10:07 PM)Godexists Wrote:  poppycock. In that way, you are just duplicating pre existing genome information, you are not creating NEW one. Drinking Beverage

Sorry but no. Information was added via mutation that told the existing genes to add another finger. You really need to read up on embryonic development. Your ignorance on the subject is really quite embarrassing for you, and it cripples your ability to intelligently discuss how things evolve. You really need to know how and why things develop the way they do before you can argue they don't.

But let's talk about the other method I mentioned for adding information to the genome. Let's talk about horizontal transfer. Bacteria easily exchange pieces of DNA between different species. When you take a piece of DNA from one species and add it to another you add information. Sometimes this process is detrimental to the host. Sometimes it has no effect one way or another. Sometimes it is advantageous to the host. It can give it the ability to produce new proteins or use existing proteins in new ways. In any case it adds information to the genome, and is considered an important part of evolution.

Then there are viral insertions. When a virus copies itself into the genome of a host it adds information. It is the same process we use today to produce GMOs, and nature has been doing it for long long time. So long that a significant portion of your DNA is viral in origin, GE. We have even identified viral insertions that are important to your existence. One example is a viral insertion that produces some of the proteins present in human placenta.

The distribution of these viral insertions in your DNA is perfectly explained by evolution. Can you explain them without evolution? Why would your god need to use viral insertions if not for evolution?

Dunning Kruger much ?

Information was added via mutation that told the existing genes to add another finger.

is the standard nonsense that atheists assert without even know what they are talking about.

Boring.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: