Originally posted by lee_merrill
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 book Darwin Devolves
Collapse
X
-
Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View PostSorry Dory but a mutation which increases survival potential is beneficial, not deleterious no matter what the effect is on the old genetic configuration.
Behe's latest cherry-picked dishonesty has already been refuted by the scientific community. Why do you keep falling for the DI's anti-science propaganda?
Comment
-
Originally posted by HMS_Beagle View PostBehe's latest cherry-picked dishonesty has already been refuted by the scientific community.
Here's one of Behe's responses to his critics. Note the table at the bottom:
The actual table was shown here:
cherry_table.jpg
Behe has stripped out all the lines that show non-damaging mutations and the columns that show that some of the lines he's included may not be damaging after all.
He has also skipped over the fact that "damaging" in this context merely means "affecting function", without any regard to whether the change is deleterious or beneficial.
Behe thus gives the impression that all mutations are damaging, when this is known not to be the case.
Why do you keep falling for the DI's anti-science propaganda?Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Roy View PostCherry-picking is right.
Here's one of Behe's responses to his critics. Note the table at the bottom:
The actual table was shown here:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]35593[/ATTACH]
Behe has stripped out all the lines that show non-damaging mutations and the columns that show that some of the lines he's included may not be damaging after all.
He has also skipped over the fact that "damaging" in this context merely means "affecting function", without any regard to whether the change is deleterious or beneficial.
Behe thus gives the impression that all mutations are damaging, when this is known not to be the case.
Because he wants to.
Comment
-
There's a couple of publications out today that seem very relevant to the thread. The first is on the origin of completely new genes from non-coding DNA. Using a variety of rice strains and their wild relatives, researchers estimate that this lineage adds genes at a rate of over 50 every million years.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0822-5
Were the polar bear to have a similar rate of gene addition, it would have generated more than double the number of genes Behe lists as being potentially disabled by mutations since its split with brown bears a million years ago. So, that's an indication that Behe is cherry picking on an additional level, by only focusing on one mechanism of evolution.
The second paper's a re-evaluation of the Cambrian explosion. And, rather than viewing it as its own thing, it places it in a larger context, suggesting that it was one of a series of major radiations of different groups of animals. The first of this series date back to the Ediacaran, and other radiations took place after the Cambrian. The reason we focus on the one in the Cambrian is it involved the bilaterians, which is the group that includes us and most of the animals we care about.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0821-6
So, rather than "OMG, those evolutionists can't explain this!", it's more of a "well, this happened before and it happened after, so this is nothing unusual.""Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Originally posted by TheLurch View PostThere's a couple of publications out today that seem very relevant to the thread. The first is on the origin of completely new genes from non-coding DNA. Using a variety of rice strains and their wild relatives, researchers estimate that this lineage adds genes at a rate of over 50 every million years.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0822-5
Were the polar bear to have a similar rate of gene addition, it would have generated more than double the number of genes Behe lists as being potentially disabled by mutations since its split with brown bears a million years ago. So, that's an indication that Behe is cherry picking on an additional level, by only focusing on one mechanism of evolution.
The second paper's a re-evaluation of the Cambrian explosion. And, rather than viewing it as its own thing, it places it in a larger context, suggesting that it was one of a series of major radiations of different groups of animals. The first of this series date back to the Ediacaran, and other radiations took place after the Cambrian. The reason we focus on the one in the Cambrian is it involved the bilaterians, which is the group that includes us and most of the animals we care about.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0821-6
So, rather than "OMG, those evolutionists can't explain this!", it's more of a "well, this happened before and it happened after, so this is nothing unusual."
1. IIRC Behe did at one time very briefly discuss other evolutionary mechanisms (such as genetic drift, horizontal gene transfer, Epigenetics and developmental evolution -- evo-devo) only to dismiss them as unimportant.
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 Roy View PostBehe thus gives the impression that all mutations are damaging, when this is known not to be the case.
So Behe is not making an absolute claim that harming genes is the only way that unguided mutations can ever help an organism.
Blessings,
LeeLast edited by lee_merrill; 03-11-2019, 07:51 PM."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 rogue06 View PostIIRC Behe did at one time very briefly discuss other evolutionary mechanisms (such as genetic drift, horizontal gene transfer, Epigenetics and developmental evolution -- evo-devo) only to dismiss them as unimportant.
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 TheLurch View PostThe second paper's a re-evaluation of the Cambrian explosion. And, rather than viewing it as its own thing, it places it in a larger context, suggesting that it was one of a series of major radiations of different groups of animals. The first of this series date back to the Ediacaran, and other radiations took place after the Cambrian. The reason we focus on the one in the Cambrian is it involved the bilaterians, which is the group that includes us and most of the animals we care about.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41559-019-0821-6
So, rather than "OMG, those evolutionists can't explain this!", it's more of a "well, this happened before and it happened after, so this is nothing unusual."
Yet they are not showing us a lineage of Ediacaran animals to Cambrian animals.
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 this all seems rather vague:
Yet they are not showing us a lineage of Ediacaran animals to Cambrian animals.
Blessings,
Lee
I'll also guess that, based on your performances in other recent threads, even if we provided you a copy, you wouldn't read it."Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."
Comment
-
Last edited by Roy; 03-12-2019, 04:42 AM.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostWell, in the book Behe acknowledges some beneficial / benign mutations in the polar bear, and says this in the article:
So Behe is not making an absolute claim that harming genes is the only way that unguided mutations can ever help an organism.
Blessings,
Lee
He exaggerated here too: Only one of the mutations of LYST was listed as not being benign by either analysis method. Most were evaluated as benign by both. And again, Behe is ignoring that "damaging" here means only that a change affects the chemical properties of the protein, it doesn't necessarily mean that the change is deleterious - it could have negligible effect on the protein's use, or even be beneficial.
You pointing out that he says some genes weren't damaged doesn't excuse his butchering of the data table.Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by lee_merrill View PostYes, and an entire chapter of Darwin Devolves is devoted to other-than-natural-selection scenarios. Let's read the book first and then analyze his arguments!
Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.
MM: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
MM on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.
seer: I believe that so called 'compassion' [for starving Palestinian kids] maybe a cover for anti Semitism, ...
Comment
-
Originally posted by Tassman View PostAnd "God did it" isn't vague?
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
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 02:47 PM
|
3 responses
33 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
05-07-2024, 08:07 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 12:33 PM
|
9 responses
84 views
2 likes
|
Last Post Yesterday, 05:48 AM |
Comment