[_ Old Earth _] Intelligent Design

[Milk-Drops]

Intelligent design model predicts specified-complexity, and irreducible-complexity. Observing these models in the world is extremely helpful to microbiology.

Stop, those aren't models. Those are 2 new undefined words being introduced. I already know where this is going and my original point still stands. Intelligent design has no model and is just an elaborate way of saying you don't understand so God did it.

Take a look at my previous post. ATP generates energy for the cell similar to a generator. Knowing how an electric generator works, knowing the weaknesses and strenghts in the design, is extremely helpful to anyone wanting to understand ATP synthase. Take a look at the rotary motor on a flagellum. Knowing how an electric motor works, knowing the strengths and weaknesses of the design, is extremely helpful to anyone wanting to understand the rotary motor driving a flagellum.

The problem here is that a flagellum is not a motor. It only works similarly to a motor. Also irreducible complexity suffers the exact problem as ID. There is no model to use to figure out IC.

I'm gonna make a macro for this quote:

ENCODE did the research and providedthis data analysis:

These analyses portray a COMPLEXLANDSCAPE OF LONG-RANGE GENE–ELEMENT CONNECTIVITY across ranges ofhundreds of kilobases to several megabases, including interactionsamong unrelated genes. Furthermore, in the 5C results, 50–60%of long-range interactions occurred in only one of the four celllines, indicative of ahigh degree of tissue SPECIFICITY FOR GENE-ELEMENT CONNECTIVITY.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal...ture11247.html

ENCODE's analysis was there exists specified-complexityin the gene element connectivity. This was the work of 594scientists, which was submitted to an academic journal for peerreview, and then reprinted in the National Institute of Health whichassures the credibility of the research and data analysis.

As you see, ENCODE's ANALYSIS was specified-complexity. My pants aren't on fire.:naughty

You are still at fault because nowhere is ID or IC refrenced. The researchers are making comments about the complexity. However, the researchers never say its IC. You are reading into what isn't there.

 

[Barbarian]

Hi everyone! I just thought I'd give a few examples of design:

View attachment 4403
This is a flagellum. It has many similarities with an electric motor and works pretty much the same.

Except that it's evolved from simpler structures in the cell. And there are a variety of different bacterial flagella, each a bit more complicated than the previous one. And the simplest one isn't even a flagellum. The Type III secretory apparatus has many of the structures of a flagellum, but does something a bit different.

This is ATP synthase. It provides energy to the cells, works very much like a generator.

The modular evolution theory for the origin of ATP synthase suggests that two subunits with independent function, a DNA helicase with ATPase activity and a H+ motor, were able to bind, and the rotation of the motor drive the ATPase activity of the helicase in reverse. This would then evolve to become more efficient, and eventually develop into the complex ATP synthases seen today. Alternatively the DNA helicase/H+ motor complex may have had H+ pump activity, the ATPase activity of the helicase driving the H+ motor in reverse. This could later evolve to carry out the reverse reaction and act as an ATP synthase.
http://human.freescience.org/htmx/ATP_synthase.php

So even there, smaller functional subunit analogues for the parts of this enzyme exist.

 

[Vaccine]

Hi everyone! I just thought I'd give a few examples of design:

View attachment 4403
This is a flagellum. It has many similarities with an electric motor and works pretty much the same.

Except that it's evolved from simpler structures in the cell.

Good evening Barbarian! Got any evidence they evolved? What I read in your post were suggestions.

 

[Barbarian]

Apply ID to the human body:
Is the human body designed? Yes, according to analysis by ENCODE.

As you learned, ENCODE analyses did not conclude that the human body was designed. As we discussed earlier, the Institute for Creation Research made that false claim.

Can we fix the human body? Only if we know how it works.
Darwin's theory has taught medicine vestigal organs

There are many vestigial organs. Hint: you probably don't know what the word means.

It means a structure that no longer serves the original purpose. It does not mean "has no purpose." And it's been that way since Darwin.

vestigal DNA (aka junk DNA),

Never heard of "vestigial DNA." That's a creationist term.

and species improve with mutations.

No. Species tend to become more fit by mutations and natural selection. Again, people tend to be down on things they aren't up on.

If medical research thinks people are evolving, why should they bother? Let nature take its course.

Darwin discussed that in The Descent of Man.

The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil.
Chapter III p. 169

Medical research is just beginning to learn from ID. Knowing a body has an optimal design is HUGE in identifying problems and cures.

Show us a checkable case of ID making a medical breakthrough.

 

[Vaccine]

Intelligent design model predicts specified-complexity, and irreducible-complexity. Observing these models in the world is extremely helpful to microbiology.

Stop, those aren't models. Those are 2 new undefined words being introduced. I already know where this is going and my original point still stands. Intelligent design has no model and is just an elaborate way of saying you don't understand so God did it.

Good evening Meatballsub! From what I learned specific, irreducable, complex have no special meaning for ID. ID is a scientific theory. Science is what is observable, testable, and repeatable. God is none of those things and I wouldn't even suggest otherwise. Science has nothing whatever to say about God.
Philosophy on the other hand has a lot to say on the matter. If you want to discuss any philosophy spawned from ID we whould establish out points of view. I believe in God, that he sent his son Jesus, that he died for my sins, that he rose again, so that I may have eternal life. Do you believe in God? Or Jesus?

These analyses.....

You are reading into what isn't there.

My daughter totally loves MLP. I enjoyed the episode with Discord too.

 

[Vaccine]

HI everyone!

This video is just awesome. I thought I'd repost it here:

http://www.hhmi.org/biointeractive/media/DNAi_replication_vo1-sm.wmv

It reminds me of some automated production machine.

In general, DNA polymerases are highly accurate, with an intrinsic error rate of less than one mistake for every 10 to the 7th power nucleotides added.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_replication