Irreducible Complexity

[PHIL121]

Uh...a diamond is not a biological machine-it is a pile of carbon shaped by heat and pressure. It has no parts. It's not organic. It has nothing to do with IR, get a grip.

Errr...technically a diamond is "organic" since it is composed of carbon, but you're correct in that it is not a bilogical machine. Carbon-carbon bonding in chemistry is WELL understood. As opposed to the complexities of DNA, which the more one studies, the more evident it becomes that mutation is not "random".

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Uh...a diamond is not a biological machine-it is a pile of carbon shaped by heat and pressure. It has no parts. It's not organic. It has nothing to do with IR, get a grip.

Errr...technically a diamond is "organic" since it is composed of carbon, but you're correct in that it is not a bilogical machine. Carbon-carbon bonding in chemistry is WELL understood. As opposed to the complexities of DNA, which the more one studies, the more evident it becomes that mutation is not "random".

Explain.

There are harmful mutations, neutral and beneficial. The changes in DNA sequence leades to the formation of new proteins, sometimes depending on the location of the mutation. So where is the evidence that it is not random?

[PHIL121]

Uh...a diamond is not a biological machine-it is a pile of carbon shaped by heat and pressure. It has no parts. It's not organic. It has nothing to do with IR, get a grip.

Errr...technically a diamond is "organic" since it is composed of carbon, but you're correct in that it is not a bilogical machine. Carbon-carbon bonding in chemistry is WELL understood. As opposed to the complexities of DNA, which the more one studies, the more evident it becomes that mutation is not "random".

Explain.

There are harmful mutations, neutral and beneficial. The changes in DNA sequence leades to the formation of new proteins, sometimes depending on the location of the mutation. So where is the evidence that it is not random?

WOW! such quick responses to my posts!

Fortunately I'm used to being grilled

Mutations in DNA are not random. Certain Aminos are more likely to replace damaged genes than others. Also certain parts of the genes (hot spots) are more likely to mutate than others.

To find the complexity we see today would take far more than 10 or even 100 billion years if it were all due to "random" chance.

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Uh...a diamond is not a biological machine-it is a pile of carbon shaped by heat and pressure. It has no parts. It's not organic. It has nothing to do with IR, get a grip.

Errr...technically a diamond is "organic" since it is composed of carbon, but you're correct in that it is not a bilogical machine. Carbon-carbon bonding in chemistry is WELL understood. As opposed to the complexities of DNA, which the more one studies, the more evident it becomes that mutation is not "random".

Explain.

There are harmful mutations, neutral and beneficial. The changes in DNA sequence leades to the formation of new proteins, sometimes depending on the location of the mutation. So where is the evidence that it is not random?

WOW! such quick responses to my posts!

Fortunately I'm used to being grilled

I am not trying to grill you, I am just trying to make sure that misinformation is discontinued. In an effort to inform the general public the contents of a study are usually put in a way that the average non-scientist can understand it. Unfortunately, this sometimes leads to misinterpretations.

Mutations in DNA are not random. Certain Aminos are more likely to replace damaged genes than others.

By aminos I am guessing you are talking about amino acids which is really encoded in DNA as three nucleic acids in sequence then yes and no because...
There are six combination which code for Leucine while there is only two combinations for Cysteine. So while a change in the genetic code will possibly change the amino acid for which it encodes there is only a probable likelyhood of a specific amino acid being selected. Look at the code and how it encodes for specific amino acids.
http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultran ... odons.html
http://psyche.uthct.edu/shaun/SBlack/geneticd.html

Also certain parts of the genes (hot spots) are more likely to mutate than others.

This shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the science. The likelyhood of a mutation in a "hot spot" is just as likely as anywhere else. These so called "hot spots" are areas of the DNA chain which are "corrected" because they result in the death of an organism. Therefore the mutations which survive is the rate which is used in the calculation.

To find the complexity we see today would take far more than 10 or even 100 billion years if it were all due to "random" chance.

Well thats strange because mutation rates are calculated by taking the genetic difference between two samples and dividing it by the estimated time of genetic isolation. Why would multiplying it again by the difference in material result in a larger timeframe?

This is because you are using successful mutations in determining the mutation rate. And then in determining the plausibility you are factoring out the unsuccessful mutations. This can not be done because the original count only counted the successful mutations.

Mutation rates calculated by taking a known method of mutation and extrapolating only accounts for the mutation rates of the method described.

Mutation rates reached by using a mathematical model to infer the mutations per a specific span of time depend on an accurate model which of course is still being determined.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Those…don't look like legs-include muscles-what muscles attach? The same joke has been used with whales-“pelvis” bones actually needed for reproduction

Explain how the appendix is part of the immune system? Is it because it is more easily infected? Being in the location it is in is perhaps a result of its location in related species? However perhaps the human organism has compensated for the delicate position of the appendix by adding lymphatic and blood supply to an oft infected organ. It is better to remove this organ altogether.

http://www.mnwelldir.org/docs/immune/immune1.htm

“Did you know that the appendix is part of your immune system? Did you know there are natural ways of reversing an appendicitis attack? Did you know that an appendicitis attack is actually a warning of something even bigger amiss? Removing inflamed tonsils or an inflamed appendix is equivalent to tossing out your smoke detector because it's making too much noise. Immunologists tell us that the tonsils are not to be removed under any circumstance, yet this year there will be over a million tonsillectomies performed in America, and in some states, removing the appendix is required by law if the lower abdomen is opened. Fortunately our bodies know more than doctors and 20% of the time we actually grow back tonsils and appendices (the plural of appendix) after they've been removed.”

I'm just continuing the conversation as noone has explained an example of irreducible complexity yet.

I'm waiting for you to stop raising strawmen.

What is the blood clotting mechanism, and how does it work exactly. And How is it imperfect.

Well lets take a close look at a cut site and see what is going on. When a cell is damaged it spills all of its contents into the blood stream. When this happens the muscles around the cut start to contract reducing blood flow. Why? Well it turns out that an internal signaling protein within a cell is actually also used to make blood vessels contract as well!

Well the blood clotting mechinism aside from the platelets and the muscle spasms also involves the actual coagulation of the blood itself.

Lets take crabs for an example. When a crabs arm is ripped off in a crabby battle why doesn't the losing crab bleed to death? Well it turns out that there are enzymes located in the tissue of a crab, there for other processes. But when coming into contact with the blood will chop up the proteins in the blood and make it all glob up thus sealing the wound.

These enzymes (proteases) cut up protein even protiens it was never intended to cut.

Many invertebrates have only this system to prevent fluid loss and don't have the complex clotting system of humans yet they get by with their simple no-step process.

Crabs have in addition to this a simple system analagous to ours. Theyir blood contains fibrinogens which are like little cans of sticky stuff. When a cell is damaged it will cause the release of Thrombin which will go around and open these cans causing the area to clot and seal.

Now in humans the Thrombin actually exists in a faulty mishaped form. Think of it as thrombin in a can. Another enzyme has to come by and activate (open and release) this "pre" thrombin. Can you see an advantage to this? Well first of all the prethrombin is now free to flow in the blood, this makes the response faster. And second it allows the blood clotting process to be more local as the "factor" which activates the prethrombin can now be released and used up locally. But you might say this still does not near the complexity of the human clotting system. And I would tell you that is a great observation. But for another time.

Point Dexter, your ignorance amuses me-the thrombin is in its inactive form-if it were in its active form, you'd die-it's not “misshaped” or “faulty”-it's like saying your headlights are faulty when they're turned off in the middle of the day-they're not supposed to be on unless it's dark-in the same way, thrombin is supposed to be on only when you're bleeding to death. If it were found in its active form throughout your body…your circulatory system would solidify, and you'd die.

If I asked you to spot a mouse from a helicopter, you would turn to me and say that it's impossible. But an eagle can do this. If I asked you to be able to see into the ultraviolet or infrared ends of the light spectrum you would probably ask what in the world are you talking about, but insects and snakes respectively do this on a regular bases. There are many eye designs, with many approaches to detecting electromagnetic radiation. Lets take a look at the eye of a squid. It is as equally as effective at collecting as a human beings but there is a major difference. Instead of the blood vessels (which supply the retinal cells) being behind the light collecting components they are in front of them. And the nerves which leave the components also exit them components in front and so the nerves converge inside the eye and exit through the blind spot. But in the squid the nerves and the blood vessels are actually behind the light collecting components and thusly there are no blind spots. Why is this?

http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/ ... nebad.html

First, the blind spot is minimal, second, two eyes removes the problem. Then, you have the rest of that article. It's not bad design-you have to look at several factors, not just one. It'd be like you going through a range of laptops, and not finding an 82 inch screen, you label it a bad design…but wait a minute, there are other parameters to a laptop-it has to be mobile, and it needs to have good battery life…now, if you had an 82 inch monitor…you couldn't fit it in anything except a van, or SUV with the seats lowered/removed. Plus, once that screen turns on, you'll have maybe 3 seconds until your screen dies.

“Dawkins doesn't know why the vertebrate retina is designed this way because he doesn't really understand how the eye works. In fact, the retina is designed with slightly suboptimal light gathering abilities so that it will be functional for at least several decades. If it were designed according to Dawkins' "tidy-minded engineer," it would not work at all, as we shall see.” (You're regurgitating Dawkins ain't ya')

Errr...technically a diamond is "organic" since it is composed of carbon, but you're correct in that it is not a biological machine. Carbon-carbon bonding in chemistry is WELL understood. As opposed to the complexities of DNA, which the more one studies, the more evident it becomes that mutation is not "random".

If you knew that a diamond was not a biological machine-then why did you bring it up?

[BGoodForGoodSake]

Point Dexter, your ignorance amuses me-the thrombin is in its inactive form-if it were in its active form, you'd die-it's not “misshaped” or “faulty”-it's like saying your headlights are faulty when they're turned off in the middle of the day-they're not supposed to be on unless it's dark-in the same way, thrombin is supposed to be on only when you're bleeding to death. If it were found in its active form throughout your body…your circulatory system would solidify, and you'd die.

If you read in context you would be able to tell I meant in comparison to the lobsters Thrombin.

As for the rest of your comments
Aah!
Beleive what you will. But that battleship would not last against Robotech defence forces.

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Deus Ex Machina? No no no, Machina Ex Deus

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

Tra la la la la

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]

[AttentionKMartShoppers]