Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
The lungfish genome, tetrapods, and junk DNA
Collapse
X
-
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostYes, it was a proteasome in archaea, and it remains one today. And we know duplications take place in every single generation of humans, so it doesn't matter whether they're selectable.
Blessings,
Lee
"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostYet one proteasome isoform has an unknown function, so protein complexes built off a proteasome need not have a proteasome's functionality, and thus might not even be selectable: "Although the precise function of these proteasome isoforms is still largely unknown, cells expressing these proteasomes show enhanced resistance to toxicity induced by metallic ions such as cadmium." (Wikipedia).
Your argument would be stupid even if it were factually correct. But it's not even factually correct. Those isoforms exist in addition to the usual proteasome, as the Wikipedia entry you cite makes clear just a couple of sentences before the part you quote.
It's quite clear that you care far more about making an argument than you do about understanding anything. Maybe try reversing the priorities? You'd come across as less clueless.
"Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
Just saying howdy with no attempt whatsoever to derail the thread in any way, shape or form."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostPlease, read before you latch on to the first thing that you think makes for an argument.
Your argument would be stupid even if it were factually correct. But it's not even factually correct. Those isoforms exist in addition to the usual proteasome, as the Wikipedia entry you cite makes clear just a couple of sentences before the part you quote.
It's quite clear that you care far more about making an argument than you do about understanding anything. Maybe try reversing the priorities? You'd come across as less clueless.
It's like Ken Ham's response during his debate with Bill Nye a few years back when asked if there was anything that could change his mind concerning his views and Ham replied that nothing would.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostThose isoforms exist in addition to the usual proteasome, as the Wikipedia entry you cite makes clear just a couple of sentences before the part you quote
Blessings,
Lee
"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostYes, but they demonstrate that a modified proteasome can have a different function. But this won't support your scenario, where it's (selectable!) proteasomes all the way up.
Blessings,
LeeGlendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostYes, but they demonstrate that a modified proteasome can have a different function. But this won't support your scenario, where it's (selectable!) proteasomes all the way up.
That in no way means that some cells types in a human (or some other organism) either don't need the proteasome (although i don't think this is the case), or need the proteasome plus a more specialized version of it. In fact, the latter is the case for immune cells.
So, you can have variant versions without it meaning that the primary version is not under selection.
This would all be so much easier if you'd just accept that you don't know much biology and ask questions, instead of triumphantly thinking you have a killer argument every time you read something you don't fully understand."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
- 3 likes
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostYou're not getting it. Proteasome null mutations are lethal in every organism we've looked at, including humans. The proteasome in humans is still under purifying selection against loss of function.
That in no way means that some cells types in a human (or some other organism) either don't need the proteasome (although i don't think this is the case), or need the proteasome plus a more specialized version of it. In fact, the latter is the case for immune cells.
So, you can have variant versions without it meaning that the primary version is not under selection.
This would all be so much easier if you'd just accept that you don't know much biology and ask questions, instead of triumphantly thinking you have a killer argument every time you read something you don't fully understand.Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:
go with the flow the river knows . . .
Frank
I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostProteasome null mutations are lethal in every organism we've looked at, including humans. The proteasome in humans is still under purifying selection against loss of function.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostSo it's even more difficult for the proteasome to evolve, which makes your scenario less likely.
Blessings,
Lee
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostSo it's even more difficult for the proteasome to evolve, which makes your scenario less likely.
Michael? Michael Behe, is that you?
Or is Lee actually a troll? I've tended to apply Hanlon's razor to Lee ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), assuming he genuinely believed what he was saying, but just had some Dunning-Kruger issues. But this reply and the one in the other thread are causing me to reassess that."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
- 1 like
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostSo, faced with obvious evidence that Behe's argument is ignoring known examples in biology, Lee retreats to the following: if it can't be selected for, then it's impossible; if it can be selected for, then it's impossible.
Or is Lee actually a troll? I've tended to apply Hanlon's razor to Lee ("never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity"), assuming he genuinely believed what he was saying, but just had some Dunning-Kruger issues. But this reply and the one in the other thread are causing me to reassess that.
Blessings,
Lee"What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostNo, a sequence of unselected mutations makes a path unlikely (not impossible). If the path is selectable at each step, then it is likely.
Which is it?
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostYou can tell who has the better argument, oftentimes, by checking who feels the need to resort to insults."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
Forcing us to explain basic biology to you over and over while you confidently call us wrong is insulting.
I really don't know why Lee keeps posting in NatSci since it is evident that he has no interest in actual science.
I'm always still in trouble again
"You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
"Overall I would rate the withdrawal from Afghanistan as by far the best thing Biden's done" --Starlight
"Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman
Comment
Comment