• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

In Louisana The Government Teaches Your Kid Religion

Page 7 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
buckshot24 said:
Quibbling is hardly interesting nor instructive. There are fibrils acting as gears within that system. Something is keeping those 7 whips in synchronization.

Call them whatever you want but that doesn't do anything to help explain them.
Click to expand...
It's not quibbling to point out they aren't gears. It's a fact fundamental to your misrepresentation. If you bothered to actually read and understand the paper you linked, you'll learn its authors don't refer to them as gears, or even insinuate they act as gears. That's all you, jumping to the wrong conclusion. Their schematic diagram merely shows they rotate in opposite directions to reduce friction, a point the authors state explicitly.
 
Bowfinger said:
It's not quibbling to point out they aren't gears. It's a fact fundamental to your misrepresentation. If you bothered to actually read and understand the paper you linked, you'll learn its authors don't refer to them as gears, or even insinuate they act as gears. That's all you, jumping to the wrong conclusion. Their schematic diagram merely shows they rotate in opposite directions to reduce friction, a point the authors state explicitly.
Click to expand...
Quibble on.
 
http://www.pnas.org/content/109/50/20643.full.pdf

From the article.

"Our present cryoEM study
revealed a highly organized architecture of the flagellar apparatus
of MO-1. Instead of being a simple helically wound propeller
driven by a rotary motor, it is a complex organelle consisting of 7
flagella and 24 fibrils that form a tight bundle enveloped by a glycoprotein
sheath"

"The synchronized
rotation of seven flagella in a tight bundle must allow
a rapid rotation of a propeller of larger diameter that can increase
swimming speed. The 24 fibrils packed together with the 7 flagella
and the surrounding sheath also increase the diameter of the
propeller to further amplify thrust"

We have 7 whips being synchronized by something. I think the implication is quite clear that the 24 fibrils have something to do with it. How? By acting as gears within the base of this motor.
 
Last edited:
Since you are a creationist, then please explain why the human body is mess. Why does our optic nerve connect where it does? Why are our knees bad? What is up with having a tailbone?
 
buckshot24 said:
To be fair, I said it once. Basically all that was is me saying I don't believe that it evolved. Nothing more than an assertion of belief and not meant for persuasion in any sense.
Click to expand...

Here's the whole crux of the problem - you seem to believe you're entitled to an opinion when your opinion flies in the face of all evidence. Evolution is accepted as fact - it's better understood than gravity. That does not mean that which beneficial mutation occurred when for every single trait of every single species - but the whole process of evolution has been observed, it's been experimented with, experiments match predictions, etc. A "belief" that the flagellum didn't evolve is no different than me believing that if I drop a book during the next minute, it will quickly rise to the ceiling.


So, it's known - it's fact - the flagellum did evolve. However, at the present time, exactly what steps led to it is uncertain. Though, possible steps have been suggested - and people here are trying to explain that to you.
 
Last edited:
DrPizza said:
Here's the whole crux of the problem - you seem to believe you're entitled to an opinion when your opinion flies in the face of all evidence. Evolution is accepted as fact - it's better understood than gravity. That does not mean that which beneficial mutation occurred when for every single trait of every single species - but the whole process of evolution has been observed, it's been experimented with, experiments match predictions, etc. A "belief" that the flagellum didn't evolve is no different than me believing that if I drop a book during the next minute, it will quickly rise to the ceiling.


So, it's known - it's fact - the flagellum did evolve. However, at the present time, exactly what steps led to it is uncertain. Though, possible steps have been suggested - and people here are trying to explain that to you.
Click to expand...
This sounds like a statement of faith to me.
 
DrPizza said:
A "belief" that the flagellum didn't evolve is no different than me believing that if I drop a book during the next minute, it will quickly rise to the ceiling.
Click to expand...
The fact that you believe this is sad. I don't deny gravity or anything that can be tested like it can. The fact of the matter is you're telling me something happened millions if not billions of years ago and you equate that to dropping a book? Really? Absolutely ridiculous.

A 50 protein machine being put together by nature picking the lucky genetic copying mistakes is absurd. The only reason this absurdity is so widely accepted is because the alternative is so unpalatable.
 
There are two types of states. High value add states that seek to increase their added value in excess of their high costs, and low cost states that seek to decrease their costs below their low added value. Louisiana is a low added value, low cost state.
It doesn't particularly matter what they teach their kids, if they can get their dumb labor cost below China, maybe they will be OK. Of course paying someone to teach religion is a cost, so maybe they'd be better off teaching nothing.
 
buckshot24 said:
The fact that you believe this is sad. I don't deny gravity or anything that can be tested like it can. The fact of the matter is you're telling me something happened millions if not billions of years ago and you equate that to dropping a book? Really? Absolutely ridiculous.

A 50 protein machine being put together by nature picking the lucky genetic copying mistakes is absurd. The only reason this absurdity is so widely accepted is because the alternative is so unpalatable.
Click to expand...

Why is it absurd? I'll refer you back to the video I linked to you again. Every step changes a single protein and every step confers a competitive advantage.

The reason it is so widely accepted is that the scientific evidence in support of evolution is so overwhelming. At it's core we don't actually understand how gravity works, as we don't know by what means the gravitational force is transmitted. We understand evolution much better, in fact.
 
buckshot24 said:
A 50 protein machine being put together by nature picking the lucky genetic copying mistakes is absurd. The only reason this absurdity is so widely accepted is because the alternative is so unpalatable.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand how long a billion years really is.
It's not 50 proteins magically coming together. Nature is piecemeal. Something happens that gives one organism an advantage. Something happens later that makes it better. And so on and so on and in tens, hundreds, thousands, or millions of generations later, the process of evolution has driven the refinement of a protein system from something simplistic and rudimentary to something more complicated and functional.

And gene duplication is a fairly common event. A replication error leads to 2 copies of a gene - now instead of making a homodimer protein from the one copy, it makes a homodimer from two copies. Maybe one copy starts to accumulate mutations, giving you a heterodimer that might function better than the homodimer. Over time, enough mutations accumulate and maybe there is a gain of function (and/or loss of original function). Maybe other proteins mutate and start to modify its activity, etc.

Just look at the long-term E. coli evolution experiment http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/

Over 50,000 generations, they observed one line develop the ability to metabolize citrate, something that E. coli can't do. But enough mutations developed in which a gain of function was observed.
----------------

As for the actual thread topic: the story is absurd.It's obviously okay in their book, because they're pushing the "right" religion. 🙄
 
Brainonska511 said:
Just look at the long-term E. coli evolution experiment http://myxo.css.msu.edu/ecoli/

Over 50,000 generations, they observed one line develop the ability to metabolize citrate, something that E. coli can't do. But enough mutations developed in which a gain of function was observed.
Click to expand...
I mentioned this in an earlier post. E. coli can metabolize citrate so your statement is factually incorrect. It can't do so normally under aerobic conditions. It had a complete citric acid cycle already extant. The gene that stopped citrate from entering the cell wall became broken.
 
buckshot24 said:
The fact that you believe this is sad. I don't deny gravity or anything that can be tested like it can. The fact of the matter is you're telling me something happened millions if not billions of years ago and you equate that to dropping a book? Really? Absolutely ridiculous.

A 50 protein machine being put together by nature picking the lucky genetic copying mistakes is absurd. The only reason this absurdity is so widely accepted is because the alternative is so unpalatable.
Click to expand...


http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/158203.stm

There are 5000000000000000000000000000000 bacteria in the world at any given time.

Life is 4000000000 years old. If bacteria reproduces (copies) once a day on average (conservative), we are talking about order of

7000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 copies.

So unless the mutation rate is zero, pretty much everything that can happen will happen over that many experiments.
 
buckshot24 said:
I mentioned this in an earlier post. E. coli can metabolize citrate so your statement is factually incorrect. It can't do so normally under aerobic conditions. It had a complete citric acid cycle already extant. The gene that stopped citrate from entering the cell wall became broken.
Click to expand...

And at this point, dna is so complex that most of the mutations you are going to see are different expressions of genes. Look at all the genes in a fruit fly that seem to do nothing. If you were to change the dormant genes you can get different effects.

Are you saying evolution can only be when an organism gains an ability by creation of new gene?
 
buckshot24 said:
If you want to be deliberately offensive I'll put you on the block list. I don't need your crap.
Click to expand...

If you call stating facts deliberately offensive then yes, you probably should go ahead and do that because I really like facts.

Furthermore your theory needs to stand on its own merits, attacking something else does nothing to make it more true.
Click to expand...

It does stand on it's own merit. Obviously it will be modified over time as we learn more because that's what science does. With that said, there is overwhelming evidence that the Theory of Evolution is fact.
 
senseamp said:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/158203.stm

There are 5000000000000000000000000000000 bacteria in the world at any given time.

Life is 4000000000 years old. If bacteria reproduces (copies) once a day on average (conservative), we are talking about order of

7000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 copies.

So unless the mutation rate is zero, pretty much everything that can happen will happen over that many experiments.
Click to expand...
How many variations can 574 amino acids be lined up? 20^574 If every particle (10^80) in the universe ran an experiment a million times per second for 1 trillion years you would only get 3.15x10^99 variations made. A few billion years is really not that significant.
 
buckshot24 said:
How many variations can 574 amino acids be lined up? 20^574 If every particle (10^80) in the universe ran an experiment a million times per second for 1 trillion years you would only get 3.15x10^99 variations made. A few billion years is really not that significant.
Click to expand...

So what? Do you know what the odds are that the air particles in your room would be in exactly their positions at any given moment? The figures would dwarf the ones you made up above, yet there they are. Only idiots that do not understand probability try to use it to refute evolution.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top