ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 8th February 2014, 06:11 AM   #1
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t150...r-biology#2192

Thanks to Philip Cunningham


Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?
Biochemical Pathway Maps

http://web.expasy.org/cgi-bin/pathwa..._thumbnails.pl

I showed that particular biochemical pathway chart to a Darwinist once when he asked me for ANY evidence of intelligent design in biology. His response upon seeing it was something along the lines of, ‘Just because it is horrendously complex does not prove it was designed.’. ,,, Well maybe so, but such ‘horrendous complexity’ certainly does not give comfort to the notion that such ‘horrendous complexity’ can be the accumulation of random genetic accidents either!
Here is a ‘horrendously complex’ metabolic pathway chart:

Map Of Major Metabolic Pathways In A Cell – Diagram
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/img/asse...s_6_17_04_.pdf

Part of the ‘horrendous complexity’ inherent in metabolic pathways is gone over here:

The 10 Step Glycolysis Pathway In ATP Production: An Overview – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kn6BVGqKd8

At the 6:00 minute mark of the following video, Chris Ashcraft, PhD – molecular biology, gives us an overview of the Citric Acid Cycle, which is, after the 10 step Glycolysis Pathway, also involved in ATP production:

Evolution vs ATP Synthase – Molecular Machine – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4012706

Glycolysis and the Citric Acid Cycle: The Control of Proteins and Pathways – Cornelius Hunter – July 2011
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011...cid-cycle.html

Moreover, the ATP molecular machine (which is found at the bottom of the metabolic pathway chart) is found to be 100% efficient:

Thermodynamic efficiency and mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase – 2011
Excerpt:F1-ATPase is a nanosized biological energy transducer working as part of FoF1-ATP synthase. Its rotary machinery transduces energy between chemical free energy and mechanical work and plays a central role in the cellular energy transduction by synthesizing most ATP in virtually all organisms.,,
Our results suggested a 100% free-energy transduction efficiency and a tight mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20...08.short?rss=1

As well, metabolic pathways in general are found to be ‘optimal’:

Metabolism: A Cascade of Design
Excerpt: A team of biological and chemical engineers wanted to understand just how robust metabolic pathways are. To gain this insight, the researchers compared how far the errors cascade in pathways found in a variety of single-celled organisms with errors in randomly generated metabolic pathways. They learned that when defects occur in the cell’s metabolic pathways, they cascade much shorter distances than when errors occur in random metabolic routes. Thus, it appears that metabolic pathways in nature are highly optimized and unusually robust, demonstrating that metabolic networks in the protoplasm are not haphazardly arranged but highly organized.
http://www.reasons.org/metabolism-cascade-design

Making the Case for Intelligent Design More Robust
Excerpt: ,,, In other words, metabolic pathways are optimized to withstand inevitable concentration changes of metabolites.
http://www.reasons.org/making-case-i...gn-more-robust

Such 100% efficiency and optimality being found in molecular biology is hard (impossible?) to explain on Darwinism given what was revealed in a paper that came out yesterday:

Study demonstrates evolutionary ‘fitness’ not the most important determinant of success – February 7, 2014 – with illustration
An illustration of the possible mutations available to an RNA molecule. The blue lines represent mutations that will not change its function (phenotype), the grey are mutations to an alternative phenotype with slightly higher fitness and the red are the ‘fittest’ mutations. As there are so few possible mutations resulting in the fittest phenotype in red, the odds of this mutation are a mere 0.15%. The odds for the slightly fitter mutation in grey are 6.7% and so this is far more likely to fix, and thus to be found and survive, even though it is much less fit than the red phenotype.,,,
By modelling populations over long timescales, the study showed that the ‘fitness’ of their traits was not the most important determinant of success. Instead, the most genetically available mutations dominated the changes in traits. The researchers found that the ‘fittest’ simply did not have time to be found, or to fix in the population over evolutionary timescales.
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-evoluti...t-success.html

This headline sums up the preceding finding very nicely:

Fittest Can’t Survive If They Never Arrive – February 7, 2014
http://crev.info/2014/02/fittest-can...-never-arrive/

Moreover, as if that were not ‘horrendously’ bad enough for Darwinists, metabolic pathways are found to operate on ‘Quarter Power Scaling’. i.e. Metabolic Pathways operate as if they were ‘four-dimensional’

Kleiber’s law
Excerpt: Kleiber’s law,[1] named after Max Kleiber’s biological work in the early 1930s, is the observation that, for the vast majority of animals, an animal’s metabolic rate scales to the 3/4 power of the animal’s mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleiber%27s_law

4-Dimensional Quarter Power Scaling In Biology – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5964041/

Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini put the problem that Quarter Power Scaling presents to Darwinism this way:

“Although living things occupy a three-dimensional space, their internal physiology and anatomy operate as if they were four-dimensional. Quarter-power scaling laws are perhaps as universal and as uniquely biological as the biochemical pathways of metabolism, the structure and function of the genetic code and the process of natural selection.,,, The conclusion here is inescapable, that the driving force for these invariant scaling laws cannot have been natural selection.”
Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, What Darwin Got Wrong (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 78-79

The reason why ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are impossible for Darwinism to explain is that Natural Selection operates on the 3-Dimensional phenotypes. ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are simply ‘invisible’ to natural selection. The fact that 4-Dimensional things are completely invisible to 3-Dimensional things is best illustrate by ‘flatland’:

Flatland – 3D to 4D shift – Carl Sagan – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

Quote, Verse and Music:

“Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God.”
– Johannes Kepler

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Unto The King Eternal – music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLPYRhOQcCU
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:31 AM   #2
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,433
If you don't believe without evidence then you fail. Why do you keep trying to science?
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:36 AM   #3
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Originally Posted by Donn View Post
If you don't believe without evidence then you fail. Why do you keep trying to science?
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:38 AM   #4
devnull
Philosopher
 
devnull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 6,056
He doesnt - he posted it in Religion and Philosophy.

This all reminds me of the bacterial flagellum. So many creationists were sure it was the ultimate "gotchya!". They were sure it was the smoking gun.

Somebody remarked (it may have been Dawkins) that once the path had been solved, theyd simply move onto something else.

And here we are.

What say you Gibhor? If I simply give you the benefit of the doubt and grant you that science cannot explain these things, what will you do when and if science *does* explain it? Will you merely shift to the next "gotchya"?

At what point will science fulfill your demands? How many individual cases will it take? Or will you merely continue to cut-n-paste the next "gotchya" you find online?
__________________
"Here we go again.... semantic and syntactic chicanery and sophistic sleight of tongue and pen.... the bedazzling magic of appearing to be saying something when in fact all that is happening is diverting attention from the attempts at shoving god through the trapdoor of illogic and wishful thinking." - Leumas
devnull is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:39 AM   #5
devnull
Philosopher
 
devnull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 6,056
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
Laughable, considering you have already claimed that nothing could ever change your mind.

Does your god honour dishonesty Gibhor?
__________________
"Here we go again.... semantic and syntactic chicanery and sophistic sleight of tongue and pen.... the bedazzling magic of appearing to be saying something when in fact all that is happening is diverting attention from the attempts at shoving god through the trapdoor of illogic and wishful thinking." - Leumas
devnull is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:49 AM   #6
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,746
If you are interested in horrendous complexity, I recommend clay chemistry.
Of course, you may say clay was designed, too; but why should the designs of an infinitely skilled and infinitely powerful designer be complex anyway ?
Should we not expect elegant simplicity?
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 06:58 AM   #7
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Originally Posted by devnull View Post
He doesnt - he posted it in Religion and Philosophy.

This all reminds me of the bacterial flagellum. So many creationists were sure it was the ultimate "gotchya!". They were sure it was the smoking gun.

Somebody remarked (it may have been Dawkins) that once the path had been solved, theyd simply move onto something else.

And here we are.

What say you Gibhor?
I say, only who doesn't understand anything, just parrots what naturalist and darwinist popes like Dawkins, Pzmyers, etc. assert, as if it would be the ultimate truth.

Fact is, the flagellum argument has NOT been debunked. And there are MANY other examples of irreducible complexity in nature, which are not that much propagated.

For example :

Quote:
What is irreducible complexity ?

A single system which is composed of several interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, and where the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning. (Darwin's Black Box p39 in the 2006 edition)

Intelligent design advocate William Dembski gives this definition:

A system performing a given basic function is irreducibly complex if it includes a set of well-matched, mutually interacting, nonarbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is indispensable to maintaining the system's basic, and therefore original, function. The set of these indispensable parts is known as the irreducible core of the system.[9]

Now lets see the nitrogenase enzyme :

http://www.ebi.ac.uk/interpro/entry/IPR000392

Nitrogen fixing bacteria possess a nitrogenase enzyme complex that catalyses the reduction of molecular nitrogen to ammonia [PMID: 2672439, PMID: 6327620, ]. The nitrogenase enzyme complex consists of two components:

Component I is nitrogenase MoFe protein or dinitrogenase, which contains 2 molecules each of 2 non-identical subunits.

Component II is nitrogenase Fe protein or dinitrogenase reductase, which is a homodimer. The monomer is encoded by the nifH gene [PMID: 6327620].

the subunits are unique , and cannot be used in other proteins :

http://www.biologie.uni-halle.de/mic...s/basem_soboh/

The active site of [NiFe]-hydrogenase has one carbon monoxide and two cyanide ligands coordinated to the iron atom, a feature that is to date unique in biology.

Since the Nitrongenase enzyme is composed of two subunits, set of well-matched, mutually interacting, nonarbitrarily individuated parts such that each part in the set is indispensable to maintaining the system's basic it can be considered irreducible complex :
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:00 AM   #8
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Originally Posted by devnull View Post
Laughable, considering you have already claimed that nothing could ever change your mind.

Does your god honour dishonesty Gibhor?
reason brought me to conclusive positions. whats wrong with that ?
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:03 AM   #9
devnull
Philosopher
 
devnull's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Perth, Western Australia
Posts: 6,056
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
reason brought me to conclusive positions. whats wrong with that ?
"conclusive" and "reason" are not compatible.

You should always be open to more evidence.

Again, as has been explained to you, it shuts down inquiry.
__________________
"Here we go again.... semantic and syntactic chicanery and sophistic sleight of tongue and pen.... the bedazzling magic of appearing to be saying something when in fact all that is happening is diverting attention from the attempts at shoving god through the trapdoor of illogic and wishful thinking." - Leumas
devnull is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:06 AM   #10
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,433
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
reason brought me to conclusive positions.
You think that, but it's not true.
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:14 AM   #11
Donn
Philosopher
 
Donn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: In my head.
Posts: 7,433
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
How do you know?
__________________
"If I hadn't believed it with my own mind, I would never have seen it." - thanks sackett
"If you stand on a piece of paper, you are indeed closer to the moon." - MRC_Hans
"I was a believer. Until I saw it." - Magrat
Donn is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:27 AM   #12
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,104
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t150...r-biology#2192

Thanks to Philip Cunningham


Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?
Biochemical Pathway Maps

http://web.expasy.org/cgi-bin/pathwa..._thumbnails.pl

I showed that particular biochemical pathway chart to a Darwinist once when he asked me for ANY evidence of intelligent design in biology. His response upon seeing it was something along the lines of, ‘Just because it is horrendously complex does not prove it was designed.’. ,,, Well maybe so, but such ‘horrendous complexity’ certainly does not give comfort to the notion that such ‘horrendous complexity’ can be the accumulation of random genetic accidents either!
Here is a ‘horrendously complex’ metabolic pathway chart:

Map Of Major Metabolic Pathways In A Cell – Diagram
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/img/asse...s_6_17_04_.pdf

Part of the ‘horrendous complexity’ inherent in metabolic pathways is gone over here:

The 10 Step Glycolysis Pathway In ATP Production: An Overview – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kn6BVGqKd8

At the 6:00 minute mark of the following video, Chris Ashcraft, PhD – molecular biology, gives us an overview of the Citric Acid Cycle, which is, after the 10 step Glycolysis Pathway, also involved in ATP production:

Evolution vs ATP Synthase – Molecular Machine – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4012706

Glycolysis and the Citric Acid Cycle: The Control of Proteins and Pathways – Cornelius Hunter – July 2011
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011...cid-cycle.html

Moreover, the ATP molecular machine (which is found at the bottom of the metabolic pathway chart) is found to be 100% efficient:

Thermodynamic efficiency and mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase – 2011
Excerpt:F1-ATPase is a nanosized biological energy transducer working as part of FoF1-ATP synthase. Its rotary machinery transduces energy between chemical free energy and mechanical work and plays a central role in the cellular energy transduction by synthesizing most ATP in virtually all organisms.,,
Our results suggested a 100% free-energy transduction efficiency and a tight mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20...08.short?rss=1

As well, metabolic pathways in general are found to be ‘optimal’:

Metabolism: A Cascade of Design
Excerpt: A team of biological and chemical engineers wanted to understand just how robust metabolic pathways are. To gain this insight, the researchers compared how far the errors cascade in pathways found in a variety of single-celled organisms with errors in randomly generated metabolic pathways. They learned that when defects occur in the cell’s metabolic pathways, they cascade much shorter distances than when errors occur in random metabolic routes. Thus, it appears that metabolic pathways in nature are highly optimized and unusually robust, demonstrating that metabolic networks in the protoplasm are not haphazardly arranged but highly organized.
http://www.reasons.org/metabolism-cascade-design

Making the Case for Intelligent Design More Robust
Excerpt: ,,, In other words, metabolic pathways are optimized to withstand inevitable concentration changes of metabolites.
http://www.reasons.org/making-case-i...gn-more-robust

Such 100% efficiency and optimality being found in molecular biology is hard (impossible?) to explain on Darwinism given what was revealed in a paper that came out yesterday:

Study demonstrates evolutionary ‘fitness’ not the most important determinant of success – February 7, 2014 – with illustration
An illustration of the possible mutations available to an RNA molecule. The blue lines represent mutations that will not change its function (phenotype), the grey are mutations to an alternative phenotype with slightly higher fitness and the red are the ‘fittest’ mutations. As there are so few possible mutations resulting in the fittest phenotype in red, the odds of this mutation are a mere 0.15%. The odds for the slightly fitter mutation in grey are 6.7% and so this is far more likely to fix, and thus to be found and survive, even though it is much less fit than the red phenotype.,,,
By modelling populations over long timescales, the study showed that the ‘fitness’ of their traits was not the most important determinant of success. Instead, the most genetically available mutations dominated the changes in traits. The researchers found that the ‘fittest’ simply did not have time to be found, or to fix in the population over evolutionary timescales.
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-evoluti...t-success.html

This headline sums up the preceding finding very nicely:

Fittest Can’t Survive If They Never Arrive – February 7, 2014
http://crev.info/2014/02/fittest-can...-never-arrive/

Moreover, as if that were not ‘horrendously’ bad enough for Darwinists, metabolic pathways are found to operate on ‘Quarter Power Scaling’. i.e. Metabolic Pathways operate as if they were ‘four-dimensional’

Kleiber’s law
Excerpt: Kleiber’s law,[1] named after Max Kleiber’s biological work in the early 1930s, is the observation that, for the vast majority of animals, an animal’s metabolic rate scales to the 3/4 power of the animal’s mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleiber%27s_law

4-Dimensional Quarter Power Scaling In Biology – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5964041/

Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini put the problem that Quarter Power Scaling presents to Darwinism this way:

“Although living things occupy a three-dimensional space, their internal physiology and anatomy operate as if they were four-dimensional. Quarter-power scaling laws are perhaps as universal and as uniquely biological as the biochemical pathways of metabolism, the structure and function of the genetic code and the process of natural selection.,,, The conclusion here is inescapable, that the driving force for these invariant scaling laws cannot have been natural selection.”
Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, What Darwin Got Wrong (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 78-79

The reason why ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are impossible for Darwinism to explain is that Natural Selection operates on the 3-Dimensional phenotypes. ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are simply ‘invisible’ to natural selection. The fact that 4-Dimensional things are completely invisible to 3-Dimensional things is best illustrate by ‘flatland’:

Flatland – 3D to 4D shift – Carl Sagan – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

Quote, Verse and Music:

“Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God.”
– Johannes Kepler

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Unto The King Eternal – music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLPYRhOQcCU

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argumen...of_imagination
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:28 AM   #13
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,746
Originally Posted by GIBHOR
Moreover, the ATP molecular machine (which is found at the bottom of the metabolic pathway chart) is found to be 100% efficient:
Can you explain the definition of "100% efficient" as used here?
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:29 AM   #14
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 29,104
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
reason brought me to conclusive positions. whats wrong with that ?

The blatant fallacies in your reasoning.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:39 AM   #15
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t150...r-biology#2192

Thanks to Philip Cunningham


Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?
Biochemical Pathway Maps

http://web.expasy.org/cgi-bin/pathwa..._thumbnails.pl

I showed that particular biochemical pathway chart to a Darwinist once when he asked me for ANY evidence of intelligent design in biology. His response upon seeing it was something along the lines of, ‘Just because it is horrendously complex does not prove it was designed.’. ,,, Well maybe so, but such ‘horrendous complexity’ certainly does not give comfort to the notion that such ‘horrendous complexity’ can be the accumulation of random genetic accidents either!
Here is a ‘horrendously complex’ metabolic pathway chart:

Map Of Major Metabolic Pathways In A Cell – Diagram
http://www.sigmaaldrich.com/img/asse...s_6_17_04_.pdf

Part of the ‘horrendous complexity’ inherent in metabolic pathways is gone over here:

The 10 Step Glycolysis Pathway In ATP Production: An Overview – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8Kn6BVGqKd8

At the 6:00 minute mark of the following video, Chris Ashcraft, PhD – molecular biology, gives us an overview of the Citric Acid Cycle, which is, after the 10 step Glycolysis Pathway, also involved in ATP production:

Evolution vs ATP Synthase – Molecular Machine – video
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4012706

Glycolysis and the Citric Acid Cycle: The Control of Proteins and Pathways – Cornelius Hunter – July 2011
http://darwins-god.blogspot.com/2011...cid-cycle.html

Moreover, the ATP molecular machine (which is found at the bottom of the metabolic pathway chart) is found to be 100% efficient:

Thermodynamic efficiency and mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase – 2011
Excerpt:F1-ATPase is a nanosized biological energy transducer working as part of FoF1-ATP synthase. Its rotary machinery transduces energy between chemical free energy and mechanical work and plays a central role in the cellular energy transduction by synthesizing most ATP in virtually all organisms.,,
Our results suggested a 100% free-energy transduction efficiency and a tight mechanochemical coupling of F1-ATPase.
http://www.pnas.org/content/early/20...08.short?rss=1

As well, metabolic pathways in general are found to be ‘optimal’:

Metabolism: A Cascade of Design
Excerpt: A team of biological and chemical engineers wanted to understand just how robust metabolic pathways are. To gain this insight, the researchers compared how far the errors cascade in pathways found in a variety of single-celled organisms with errors in randomly generated metabolic pathways. They learned that when defects occur in the cell’s metabolic pathways, they cascade much shorter distances than when errors occur in random metabolic routes. Thus, it appears that metabolic pathways in nature are highly optimized and unusually robust, demonstrating that metabolic networks in the protoplasm are not haphazardly arranged but highly organized.
http://www.reasons.org/metabolism-cascade-design

Making the Case for Intelligent Design More Robust
Excerpt: ,,, In other words, metabolic pathways are optimized to withstand inevitable concentration changes of metabolites.
http://www.reasons.org/making-case-i...gn-more-robust

Such 100% efficiency and optimality being found in molecular biology is hard (impossible?) to explain on Darwinism given what was revealed in a paper that came out yesterday:

Study demonstrates evolutionary ‘fitness’ not the most important determinant of success – February 7, 2014 – with illustration
An illustration of the possible mutations available to an RNA molecule. The blue lines represent mutations that will not change its function (phenotype), the grey are mutations to an alternative phenotype with slightly higher fitness and the red are the ‘fittest’ mutations. As there are so few possible mutations resulting in the fittest phenotype in red, the odds of this mutation are a mere 0.15%. The odds for the slightly fitter mutation in grey are 6.7% and so this is far more likely to fix, and thus to be found and survive, even though it is much less fit than the red phenotype.,,,
By modelling populations over long timescales, the study showed that the ‘fitness’ of their traits was not the most important determinant of success. Instead, the most genetically available mutations dominated the changes in traits. The researchers found that the ‘fittest’ simply did not have time to be found, or to fix in the population over evolutionary timescales.
http://phys.org/news/2014-02-evoluti...t-success.html

This headline sums up the preceding finding very nicely:

Fittest Can’t Survive If They Never Arrive – February 7, 2014
http://crev.info/2014/02/fittest-can...-never-arrive/

Moreover, as if that were not ‘horrendously’ bad enough for Darwinists, metabolic pathways are found to operate on ‘Quarter Power Scaling’. i.e. Metabolic Pathways operate as if they were ‘four-dimensional’

Kleiber’s law
Excerpt: Kleiber’s law,[1] named after Max Kleiber’s biological work in the early 1930s, is the observation that, for the vast majority of animals, an animal’s metabolic rate scales to the 3/4 power of the animal’s mass.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kleiber%27s_law

4-Dimensional Quarter Power Scaling In Biology – video
http://www.metacafe.com/w/5964041/

Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini put the problem that Quarter Power Scaling presents to Darwinism this way:

“Although living things occupy a three-dimensional space, their internal physiology and anatomy operate as if they were four-dimensional. Quarter-power scaling laws are perhaps as universal and as uniquely biological as the biochemical pathways of metabolism, the structure and function of the genetic code and the process of natural selection.,,, The conclusion here is inescapable, that the driving force for these invariant scaling laws cannot have been natural selection.”
Jerry Fodor and Massimo Piatelli-Palmarini, What Darwin Got Wrong (London: Profile Books, 2010), p. 78-79

The reason why ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are impossible for Darwinism to explain is that Natural Selection operates on the 3-Dimensional phenotypes. ’4-Dimensional’ metabolic pathways are simply ‘invisible’ to natural selection. The fact that 4-Dimensional things are completely invisible to 3-Dimensional things is best illustrate by ‘flatland’:

Flatland – 3D to 4D shift – Carl Sagan – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UnURElCzGc0

Quote, Verse and Music:

“Geometry is unique and eternal, a reflection from the mind of God. That mankind shares in it is because man is an image of God.”
– Johannes Kepler

Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Unto The King Eternal – music
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mLPYRhOQcCU
So you believe in the Intelligent Tinkerer and not an Intelligent Designer?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 07:42 AM   #16
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
If you are interested in horrendous complexity, I recommend clay chemistry.
Of course, you may say clay was designed, too; but why should the designs of an infinitely skilled and infinitely powerful designer be complex anyway ?
Should we not expect elegant simplicity?
If any part of the world is designed then it all had to be designed, otherwise where did the non designed parts come from?
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 08:12 AM   #17
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,126
And the Gish gallop continues. Abandon one thread when his ideas have been destroyed and start another.

Quote:
Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?
By Betteridge's Law you are wrong.

Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
If you are interested in horrendous complexity, I recommend clay chemistry.
Of course, you may say clay was designed, too; but why should the designs of an infinitely skilled and infinitely powerful designer be complex anyway ?
Should we not expect elegant simplicity?
Maybe a committee was involved?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 08:34 AM   #18
Soapy Sam
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 28,746
Originally Posted by catsmate1 View Post
Maybe a committee was involved?
This could explain much...
Soapy Sam is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 08:57 AM   #19
wrs
Graduate Poster
 
wrs's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,901
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,
Without excuse for what? To believe that God is like what some man says about him? All you do with the stuff you link is suggest that it's less likely that biological systems are random and that they started from nothing. I have no problem with that but it doesn't mean that what some other person claims about "god" is justified by the facts you presented.

Suppose instead that the designers of humanity are sociopaths that use humanity like sheep as sources of energy? What then? Does the design imply benevolence and good will toward the implementation? How much do you love your car? What do you do with it when it breaks down? You get rid of it and it's recycled.

This is far more likely to be the way the world runs than some benevolent dictatorship that the silly christian religion is always promoting.
__________________
In search of meaning and purpose for life.

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php...postcount=2026
wrs is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 10:42 AM   #20
Lord Emsworth
Je ne suis pas une de vos élèves
 
Lord Emsworth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,996
As soon as you explain stuff ...
Lord Emsworth is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 11:02 AM   #21
Gawdzilla Sama
121.92-meter mutant fire-breathing lizard-thingy
 
Gawdzilla Sama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Northern St. Louis County, Missouri.
Posts: 42,180
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
Well maybe so, but such ‘horrendous complexity’ certainly does not give comfort to the notion that such ‘horrendous complexity’ can be the accumulation of random genetic accidents either!
You're right. Magic is obviously the better choice here.
__________________
Guns that are instantly available for use are instantly available for misuse.
World War II Diplomatic and Political Resources
Hyperwar, WWII Military History
Buying conspiracy books is a voluntary tax on stupid.
Gawdzilla Sama is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 8th February 2014, 11:32 AM   #22
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
irreducible complexity was debunked a long time ago

http://www.millerandlevine.com/km/ev...2/article.html

http://www.newscientist.com/article/...y-complex.html

Last edited by Dcdrac; 8th February 2014 at 11:55 AM.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 09:55 AM   #23
Frozenwolf150
Formerly SilentKnight
 
Frozenwolf150's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 4,134
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t150...r-biology#2192

Thanks to Philip Cunningham


Overwhelming evidence of Design in Molecular Biology?
(snipped for space)
That's nice, now can you demonstrate the intelligent designer in the actual process of creating any of these things you mention? POIDH as they say.
__________________
We'll meet again, Don't know where, Don't know when
But I know we'll meet again some sunny day
Keep smiling through, Just like you always do
Till the blue skies drive the dark clouds far away
Frozenwolf150 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:01 AM   #24
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 66,178
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
If that were true, you would have abandoned your faith.

Quote:
Fact is, the flagellum argument has NOT been debunked.
Correction: YOU don't accept the debunking. Not our problem.

Quote:
What is irreducible complexity ?
Poorly defined, is what it is.
__________________
<Roar!>
Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:02 AM   #25
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by tsig View Post
If any part of the world is designed then it all had to be designed, otherwise where did the non designed parts come from?
Very good. It makes me wonder just what the OP is claiming was designed. Is it the chemical reactions? The structure of the atoms? The properties of space and time involved?

Did God make the universe and stars so that we might get the goodies needed in the periodic table for the recipe?

Perhaps the argument from incredulity doesn't go far enough here. Believers aren't incredulous enough, nor in the right spots.
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:07 AM   #26
Lukraak_Sisser
Master Poster
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,929
Why do mitochondria and chloroplasts have a genetic code that differs from the cells they are present in?
Why do... ah, why would I even bother. Anyone working in biology or genetics can clearly see there is no design, as not even a drunk skunk would make the inept designs present in nature.
Just because it works doesn't mean it's well designed.
Lukraak_Sisser is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:17 AM   #27
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Originally Posted by Dcdrac View Post
please quote the part in the article that debunks IC.
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:20 AM   #28
Aepervius
Non credunt, semper verificare
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Sigil, the city of doors
Posts: 14,581
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Jeu, set et match. Gibhor lose.

/ thread
Aepervius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:25 AM   #29
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 15,501
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
please quote the part in the article that debunks IC.
Try this on for size.
http://ncse.com/book/export/html/890
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:38 AM   #30
Crossbow
Seeking Honesty and Sanity
 
Crossbow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Charleston, WV
Posts: 11,171
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
Well, ...

If one chooses to believe in reasons that are quite unsound, then that person is quite blind to the actual facts of the situation.
__________________
On 16 MAY 2017 Paul Bethke discussed some of the sexual prohibitions of his god regarding man-to-man sex acts and woman-to-woman sex acts: "So not only lesbian acts but also anal sex.."
http://www.internationalskeptics.com...0#post11840580

A man's best friend is his dogma.

Last edited by Crossbow; 10th February 2014 at 10:40 AM.
Crossbow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:38 AM   #31
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
<wall-o'-copy-pasta-with proselytization snip>
Perhaps words work differently in your world, but would not "evidence" that was, in fact, "overwhelming" bring about consensus in those who confront, encounter, and interact with, that "evidence"?
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:53 AM   #32
GIBHOR
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 2,626
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
Can you explain the definition of "100% efficient" as used here?
A rotary molecular motor that can work at near 100% efficiency.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1692765/

Quote:
A single molecule of F1-ATPase is by itself a rotary motor in which a central gamma-subunit rotates against a surrounding cylinder made of alpha3beta3-subunits. Driven by the three betas that sequentially hydrolyse ATP, the motor rotates in discrete 120 degree steps, as demonstrated in video images of the movement of an actin filament bound, as a marker, to the central gamma-subunit. Over a broad range of load (hydrodynamic friction against the rotating actin filament) and speed, the F1 motor produces a constant torque of ca. 40 pN nm. The work done in a 120 degree step, or the work per ATP molecule, is thus ca. 80 pN nm. In cells, the free energy of ATP hydrolysis is ca. 90 pN nm per ATP molecule, suggesting that the F1 motor can work at near 100% efficiency. We confirmed in vitro that F1 indeed does ca. 80 pN nm of work under the condition where the free energy per ATP is 90 pN nm. The high efficiency may be related to the fully reversible nature of the F1 motor: the ATP synthase, of which F1 is a part, is considered to synthesize ATP from ADP and phosphate by reverse rotation of the F1 motor. Possible mechanisms of F1 rotation are discussed.

and there is more :

http://elshamah.heavenforum.org/t1439-atp-synthase#2208

Quote:
How could ATP synthase “evolve” from something that needs ATP, manufactured by ATP synthase, to function? Absurd “chicken-egg” paradox! Also, consider that ATP synthase is made by processes that all need ATP—such as the unwinding of the DNA helix with helicase to allow transcription and then translation of the coded information into the proteins that make up ATP synthase. And manufacture of the 100 enzymes/machines needed to achieve this needs ATP! And making the membranes in which ATP synthase sits needs ATP, but without the membranes it would not work. This is a really vicious circle for evolutionists to explain.

Last edited by GIBHOR; 10th February 2014 at 10:58 AM.
GIBHOR is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 10:58 AM   #33
phunk
Illuminator
 
phunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,530
Perhaps you missed the word "near" right there in the bolded part of your post?
phunk is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 11:07 AM   #34
Argumemnon
World Maker
 
Argumemnon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: In the thick of things
Posts: 66,178
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
A rotary molecular motor that can work at near 100% efficiency.
"Near", then. So it's just very efficient ? Is that supposed to be impressive ?
__________________
<Roar!>
Argumemnon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 11:19 AM   #35
I Am The Scum
Illuminator
 
I Am The Scum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 3,057
Originally Posted by Soapy Sam View Post
... but why should the designs of an infinitely skilled and infinitely powerful designer be complex anyway ?
Should we not expect elegant simplicity?
This is what I was going to say. Even conceding that biology is mind-bogglingly complex, so what? Why, exactly, should that be taken as evidence for a designer?

And this is the most basic problem with the intelligent design argument - it is inherently circular. How do we know that this thing is designed? Because it is complex. How do we know that a designer would make things complex? Because we can see complexity in the things he has made. Round and round it goes.
I Am The Scum is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 11:28 AM   #36
Mudcat
Man of a Thousand Memes
 
Mudcat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 6,474
I would like to be upfront in saying I did not read the original post. With that out of the way, here is your answer:

__________________
"There is no special treatment for guns." ~WildCat, confirmed gun owner.
Mudcat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 12:15 PM   #37
tsig
a carbon based life-form
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 39,049
Originally Posted by I Am The Scum View Post
This is what I was going to say. Even conceding that biology is mind-bogglingly complex, so what? Why, exactly, should that be taken as evidence for a designer?

And this is the most basic problem with the intelligent design argument - it is inherently circular. How do we know that this thing is designed? Because it is complex. How do we know that a designer would make things complex? Because we can see complexity in the things he has made. Round and round it goes.
The circle is tighter than that. How do we know it's designed, well humans design complex stuff so when we see complex designed stuff we know something like a human designed it.

How do we know something is complex and designed? If the IDer doesn't understand it it's complex and designed.
tsig is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 12:29 PM   #38
Shalamar
Dark Lord of the JREF
 
Shalamar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,962
Gibhor, two things.

One: 'We don't know' does not equal 'goddidit'.

Two: Having your conclusion (Goddidit), and then looking for evidence is not 'reason'.
__________________

"The truth is out there. But the lies are inside your head."
Shalamar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 12:30 PM   #39
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
 
aggle-rithm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
Everything designed by humans was built by natural processes, since we are part of nature.

The progression from horse-drawn cart to Corvette was just evolution going all meta.

Given that, it's trivial to say that it all looks like it was designed.
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
aggle-rithm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 10th February 2014, 12:32 PM   #40
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
 
aggle-rithm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
Originally Posted by GIBHOR View Post
bcause my faith is reason driven, not blind.
That would imply that you started with reason and arrived at faith. Somehow, I doubt that's the case.

I don't know for sure that you started with a foregone conclusion, but I would bet my last nickel on it.
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
aggle-rithm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Religion and Philosophy

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 04:13 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.