Any biologist in here?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
04-09-2012, 07:50 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(04-09-2012 07:42 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(04-09-2012 07:37 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  And ad hominem after ad hominem.

look who's talkin'?

Name something, on thread topic, that you wrote?

My very first post, number 8.

And I don't think you understand what an ad hominem is.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 07:58 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(03-09-2012 07:35 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Evolution in general does not have memory. The past evolutionary trajectory of any organism has no bearing on its subsequent evolution. A good example would be turtles. They went from water to land to water to land and some have gone back to water again.

dna is the 'memory' of a living system.


That post of yours is about as ignorant as chas is, with comprehending energy.



That is not ad hominem, that is comparing the fruits of the vines. You posted what is actually stupid, versus anything to do with a living process or evolution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 09:59 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
Definition of MEMORY

1
a : the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms
b : the store of things learned and retained from an organism's activity or experience as indicated by modification of structure or behavior or by recall and recognition
2
: a capacity for showing effects as the result of past treatment or for returning to a former condition—used especially of a material (as metal or plastic)

Memory as it relates to statistics would be definition 2. Ergo, the future development of any species is not related to its past evolutionary history. The last series of ice ages that caused evolutionary responses in the organisms at the time, has no impact on the current evolution of any living species.

And insulting someone or their argument as a means by which to refute it is an ad hominem.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 11:00 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(04-09-2012 09:59 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Definition of MEMORY

1
a : the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms

and my comment was: "dna is the 'memory' of a living system"

what's the problem?

Quote:And insulting someone or their argument as a means by which to refute it is an ad hominem.

not add....

answer the question
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 11:07 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(04-09-2012 11:00 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  
(04-09-2012 09:59 AM)TheBeardedDude Wrote:  Definition of MEMORY

1
a : the power or process of reproducing or recalling what has been learned and retained especially through associative mechanisms

and my comment was: "dna is the 'memory' of a living system"

what's the problem?

Quote:And insulting someone or their argument as a means by which to refute it is an ad hominem.

not add....

answer the question

Ad hominem is a type of lie. It is where you say because of a persons character they cannot know x or y

Member of the Cult of Reason

The atheist is a man who destroys the imaginary things which afflict the human race, and so leads men back to nature, to experience and to reason.
-Baron d'Holbach-
Bitcion:1DNeQMswMdvx4xLPP6qNE7RkeTwXGC7Bzp
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 12:03 PM
RE: Any biologist in here?
Then you used 'memory' incorrectly.

“Science is simply common sense at its best, that is, rigidly accurate in observation, and merciless to fallacy in logic.”
—Thomas Henry Huxley
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
04-09-2012, 11:52 PM
RE: Any biologist in here?
OK, so lets say that Mr. Track star has 4 mcl tears in his life. Of course those tears all healed up with the help of the DNA/recipe of how to do it.

He marries another track star who her herself has had some mcl tears.

Now if they reproduce. Is there anything in biology that suggest that the offspring would need to necessitate maybe making the MC Ligaments stronger?

The DNA knows it had to repair those particular cells. And a numerous amount of times.

For all it knows, nature requires stronger ligaments there. You see what I'm saying?

Forget Jesus. Stars died so you could live.-Lawrence Krauss

For god loved the world so much he tortured his only begotten son, gave him a 3 day nap only to wake up in ultimate awesomeness and called it a sacrifice.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-09-2012, 12:01 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
Nope. DNA doesn't remember "how to repair it". Your brain, hormones, lymphatic system, circulatory system, and the cells in the injured area work together, coordinated by chemical signals. DNA plays no direct role in this except during mitosis where new cells are made to replace damaged ones. The new cells have the same DNA as the old ones. No information is added to the DNA at any point during this process. Even if there were, it wouldn't matter unless that information was added to the sperm or eggs, since those are the only parts of the body with DNA passed directly to offspring.

The healing process evolved because organisms that can heal their injuries and live to die another day have a greater probability of passing along their genes. And a more efficient healing process confers greater advantage. However, DNA does not remember specific injuries in any way shape or form.

What you're talking about is similar to Lamarckian Evolution: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lamarckism A long discredited idea.

E 2 = (mc 2)2 + (pc )2
614C → 714N + e + ̅νe
2 K(s) + 2 H2O(l) → 2 KOH(aq) + H2 (g) + 196 kJ/mol
It works, bitches.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Phaedrus's post
05-09-2012, 06:31 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(04-09-2012 11:52 PM)Atheist Chiefs fan! Wrote:  The DNA knows it had to repair those particular cells. And a numerous amount of times.

No, the DNA doesn't 'know' and can't remember.

The injuries and healing don't change any DNA.

The way evolution works is if in a population of track stars reproductive success is determined by the strength of ACLs or the ability to heal torn ACLs [call these 'good ACLs'], then the genes for good ACLs will be more numerous in succeeding generations than the genes for not so good ACLs.
A mutation that improves ACLs will tend to be copied more often due to the reproductive success of the individual with the mutated gene.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-09-2012, 08:13 AM
RE: Any biologist in here?
(04-09-2012 11:07 AM)fstratzero Wrote:  
(04-09-2012 11:00 AM)Bishadi Wrote:  and my comment was: "dna is the 'memory' of a living system"

what's the problem?


not add....

answer the question

Ad hominem is a type of lie.
Most often, that's right. But what if an "I" is found to be correct?

each 'idea' had to have once combined the information/evidence to spark that first, and I bet each idea came from an 'I', just like you and I.


Quote: It is where you say because of a persons character they cannot know x or y
but to lie, is the trait, with evidence, to sustain zzzzzzzzzzz truth.

arrrrrrrrrrr mate,

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