P
PaladinSword
Guest
Also(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
- Status
T
Techno2000
Guest
R
rossum
Guest
No we are not. Your post said “information”. If you want to talk about FSCI then you will need to give me an objective, not subjective, way to measure FCSI. Specifically the “Specified” and “Functional” part.
For example, all non-coding DNA has a function, it reduces the mutation rate in coding part of the genome. If the genome is 20% coding and 80% non-coding, then only 20% of mutations will affect the coding part of the genome. Does that count as a “function” by your definition? If so why? If no why not?
rossum
R
rossum
Guest
Yes. If I followed the wager I would be worshipping in a Hindu temple. Christianity only has one God; Hinduism has 100,000 gods. Much better odds in the Hindu temple: “Worship one, get 99,999 free!”
And you do attend a Mosque on Fridays and a Synagogue on Saturdays, just in case, don’t you?
rossum
P
PaladinSword
Guest
I thought Hindus were still technically monotheistic even though they have multiple avatars or deities.
Edit:
I still don’t understand how Buddhism can claim no God if they still have deities in tradition. My understanding is it’s similar to Gnostic idea of demiurge.
Maybe from the point of like Musashi but he doesn’t deny them either.
Rossum can you elaborate? I’m actually interested. From a comparative point.
I’m reading Dharma punx right now and have dabbled in some Thai buddhism in the past.
Second edit: ok I get the Hindu joke now.
Third edit: I think a lot of stuff has things in common though about universal truth than we might notice at first glance.
(Updated post reply for spelling)
Edit:
I still don’t understand how Buddhism can claim no God if they still have deities in tradition. My understanding is it’s similar to Gnostic idea of demiurge.
Maybe from the point of like Musashi but he doesn’t deny them either.
Rossum can you elaborate? I’m actually interested. From a comparative point.
I’m reading Dharma punx right now and have dabbled in some Thai buddhism in the past.
Second edit: ok I get the Hindu joke now.
Third edit: I think a lot of stuff has things in common though about universal truth than we might notice at first glance.
(Updated post reply for spelling)
Last edited:
R
rossum
Guest
Buddhism has gods (small g). They are born, live very long lives, die and are reborn. They can be reborn as humans and humans can be reborn as gods. What they cannot do is to attain enlightenment for you. Enlightenment is something you have to do for yourself.
The gods can help in small things; like winning the lottery. The gods cannot help in big things; like attaining nirvana.
HTH
rossum
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Because evolution (“my explanation”) does provide an explanation for the outcome of the experiment. Although you have elaborated to great length on “your explanation” of life, the universe, and everything, you have not offered an explanation for the outcome of this specific experiment - namely, why the same colonies (X and Y) on plate #1 and plate #2 survived, even though plate #1 and plate #2 were separated before any contact with penicillin. Whatever it was that helped colonies X and Y to survive on plate #1 had to have been established before contact with penicillin, since those same two colonies, and no others, also survived on plate #2. Just try to explain using the idea of latent capabilities, which is the ID premise.
A
Aloysium
Guest
The resistance to penicillin pre-exists and in those cases is not caused by contact with penicillin. That said those bacteria that survive could potentially transfer the resistance via plasmids containing DNA to bacteria that do not share the resistance. The capacity to counter molds’ defended against bacteria must go back to the beginnings of interaction between these different organisms. That is why it was found in bacteria that were closed off to the rest of the world for 4 million years, as described in the article linked above.
While I may be accused of a Gid-of-the-gaps explanation, it does position a cause, whereas evolution simply says it happened because it happened somehow on the basis of processes of which we are aware and classify as matter. Getting older, I am well aware of what random changes do to the body. That level of being - the atomic and molecular seeks equilibrium and the structures that are organized by life, break down when it is gone. There is no way that the vast diversity we find in nature is the result of random molecular change at the level of the genome. There may be a few glitches in the genetic program that may give some benefit to the offspring, but these are few and far between. In terms of mankind, I can’t think of more than a handful. You may prefer a chaos-of-the-gaps explanation, but for me the probability is zero.
There are other failings to Darwinism like the lack of appreciation of life itself and the total disregard of how traits like mathematics and story-telling would have evolved. It’s when we being ourselves into the equation that it falls apart and realise how living organisms at each level of complexity are a new creation. The hierarchy of being from the subatomic upwards to us exists here and now, and was brought into existence temporally as it is here and nowontologically .
While I may be accused of a Gid-of-the-gaps explanation, it does position a cause, whereas evolution simply says it happened because it happened somehow on the basis of processes of which we are aware and classify as matter. Getting older, I am well aware of what random changes do to the body. That level of being - the atomic and molecular seeks equilibrium and the structures that are organized by life, break down when it is gone. There is no way that the vast diversity we find in nature is the result of random molecular change at the level of the genome. There may be a few glitches in the genetic program that may give some benefit to the offspring, but these are few and far between. In terms of mankind, I can’t think of more than a handful. You may prefer a chaos-of-the-gaps explanation, but for me the probability is zero.
There are other failings to Darwinism like the lack of appreciation of life itself and the total disregard of how traits like mathematics and story-telling would have evolved. It’s when we being ourselves into the equation that it falls apart and realise how living organisms at each level of complexity are a new creation. The hierarchy of being from the subatomic upwards to us exists here and now, and was brought into existence temporally as it is here and nowontologically .
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Then what is the reason some colonies had resistance and some didn’t?
E
edwest211
Guest
Scientists who don’t believe are higher in number than the general population.
https://www.nature.com/articles/28478
https://www.nature.com/articles/28478
A
Aloysium
Guest
Because that’s how they were made.
I think it’s porins that allow for the entry of molecules such as penicillin through the cell wall into the interior where it does it’s damage interfering with cell wall production. There would be different aspects of cellular metabolism that are involved in their production. These would differ between cells. Those cells that produce smaller or fewer porins would be better able to handle a penicillin attack.
Penicillin is a beta-lactam, and another important capacity of a bacterium is the production of beta-lactamase, an enzyme which grabs the penicillin molecule and, by adding a water molecule to it, breaks it down, thereby inactivating it. The DNA required and the associated metabolism did not occur through some serendipidous event.
Just as when we think, we shuffle potassium and sodium back and forth through neuron cell membranes and release neurotransmitters, because our brain and mind are one in the living person, so too Gods angels act through matter to assist in adaptations.
When we are dealing with the hierarchy of living forms, it seems reasonable that each is a new creation. We most definitely are.
Although I would think that there is general agreement about the actual facts of the earth’s age and of changes in organisms that populate the earth, when it come to Darwinusm, it just doesn’t cut it. It is not really science, but rather a philosophical framework that tries to explain how all this could have happened without God, as He is revealed through His Church.
I think it’s porins that allow for the entry of molecules such as penicillin through the cell wall into the interior where it does it’s damage interfering with cell wall production. There would be different aspects of cellular metabolism that are involved in their production. These would differ between cells. Those cells that produce smaller or fewer porins would be better able to handle a penicillin attack.
Penicillin is a beta-lactam, and another important capacity of a bacterium is the production of beta-lactamase, an enzyme which grabs the penicillin molecule and, by adding a water molecule to it, breaks it down, thereby inactivating it. The DNA required and the associated metabolism did not occur through some serendipidous event.
Just as when we think, we shuffle potassium and sodium back and forth through neuron cell membranes and release neurotransmitters, because our brain and mind are one in the living person, so too Gods angels act through matter to assist in adaptations.
When we are dealing with the hierarchy of living forms, it seems reasonable that each is a new creation. We most definitely are.
Although I would think that there is general agreement about the actual facts of the earth’s age and of changes in organisms that populate the earth, when it come to Darwinusm, it just doesn’t cut it. It is not really science, but rather a philosophical framework that tries to explain how all this could have happened without God, as He is revealed through His Church.
Last edited:
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You are still not answering the question of why some bacteria have this mutation and some do not have it.
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
You know who else has a greater proportion of unbelievers than the general population? Wealthy people. If you are going to denigrate science and scientists because of the statistic you quoted, you will also have to denigrate wealthy people and wealth-generating activities, like investing.
B
buffalo
Guest
“Since it is not possible to unambiguously identify useless structures, and since the structure of the argument used is not scientifically valid, I conclude that ‘vestigial organs’ provide no special evidence for the theory of evolution.”
312 S. R. Scadding, “Do ‘Vestigial Organs’ Provide Evidence for Evolution?,” Evolutionary Theory, vol. 5, May 1981, p. 173
Another point, as an organism adapts features can be de-emphaized.
312 S. R. Scadding, “Do ‘Vestigial Organs’ Provide Evidence for Evolution?,” Evolutionary Theory, vol. 5, May 1981, p. 173
Another point, as an organism adapts features can be de-emphaized.
B
buffalo
Guest
I am always using information as functional specified complex information, which is found in design for a purpose.
It is time for the Programming of Life Video once again.
It is time for the Programming of Life Video once again.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
??? C’mon!
The uncaused cause, there is only one, we call God.
The uncaused cause, there is only one, we call God.
B
buffalo
Guest
Who is the top god?
A
Aloysium
Guest
There are three known types of resistance against penicillin.
Of the three, the two preventing entry of the penicillin molecule into the cell are likely due to differences in the expression of the gene that codes for the porins through which the molecule enters. Those that produce more and/or larger porins are more susceptible to the toxic effects of penicillin. The gene for porins production is part and parcel of being a bacterium; without them the organism could not survive.
While it has been revealed that we are the offspring of one first human being, it is not stated how other living things came into being. But, it is easy to imagine bacteria being all descended from one first cell.
So, let’s assume that first cell contained all that was needed to produce offspring that could interact with their environment in homeostasis. This is where glitches in the information come in. As mentioned in this thread, it was reported in a Nature Reviews Genetics article that speciation appears to be driven predominantly by gene deletion. So, what happened was that bacteria developed with fewer and/or smaller porins. This would have upset that balance of nature at the time, as it is doing so now, and while evolutionary thinking sees this as a plus plus, in the grand scheme of things it is not good for nature as a whole. The same goes for beta-lactamase; while it was there to protect the bacteria from molds, again to keep a balance in nature; it was lost. While some bacteria still contain it, it is certainly not universal, and that is good for us.
Again, God brought forth all creatures from the earth. In the same way that when we think, sodium and potassium ions are exchanged through neuronal cell walls and neurotransmitters are released because we are one body-spirit, in an analogous fashion God’s angels brought together simple matter constructing the bacteria to which He gave life - their individual existence, as simple as it is.
Similarly, we are brought into existence, each a new creation and a manifestation of one mankind.
Of the three, the two preventing entry of the penicillin molecule into the cell are likely due to differences in the expression of the gene that codes for the porins through which the molecule enters. Those that produce more and/or larger porins are more susceptible to the toxic effects of penicillin. The gene for porins production is part and parcel of being a bacterium; without them the organism could not survive.
While it has been revealed that we are the offspring of one first human being, it is not stated how other living things came into being. But, it is easy to imagine bacteria being all descended from one first cell.
So, let’s assume that first cell contained all that was needed to produce offspring that could interact with their environment in homeostasis. This is where glitches in the information come in. As mentioned in this thread, it was reported in a Nature Reviews Genetics article that speciation appears to be driven predominantly by gene deletion. So, what happened was that bacteria developed with fewer and/or smaller porins. This would have upset that balance of nature at the time, as it is doing so now, and while evolutionary thinking sees this as a plus plus, in the grand scheme of things it is not good for nature as a whole. The same goes for beta-lactamase; while it was there to protect the bacteria from molds, again to keep a balance in nature; it was lost. While some bacteria still contain it, it is certainly not universal, and that is good for us.
Again, God brought forth all creatures from the earth. In the same way that when we think, sodium and potassium ions are exchanged through neuronal cell walls and neurotransmitters are released because we are one body-spirit, in an analogous fashion God’s angels brought together simple matter constructing the bacteria to which He gave life - their individual existence, as simple as it is.
Similarly, we are brought into existence, each a new creation and a manifestation of one mankind.
Last edited:
T
Techno2000
Guest
Excellent… part two is good also, thanks
LeafByNiggle
Well-known member
Please limit yourself to answering the one question that I keep asking. What caused some of the bacteria and not others to have a mutation that protected against penicillin? You have already admitted that it wasn’t from contact with penicillin. So what was it that made them different? The answer that evolution gives is random mutations. The answer that ID gives is from experiences in the environment, which obviously does not work in this experiment.
Last edited:
- Status