because it does not matter how we got here, its just that we are here.

So what if your right, then what? wtf are you gonna do? pull an Al Gore and win a prize? So what? If thats all you live for… your not living for much

And on the other hand, we have someone saying OMG IT TOTALLY CAN’T HAPPEN THAT WAY CAUSE I READ IT ON THE INTERNETS.

I’m going to have to go with the hard science.

The Hard-On Science(nsfw link) that is.

“you can not have just 25 chromosomes and expect a human to come out of them. you have to have 26. ”
“you cannot offer up any experiments that can show an incomplete, but viable, human.”
This happens all the time. Sometimes its a problem, sometimes it goes undetected. Your whole machine argument is a total disaster, because we have many, many cases of living things with some of the “missing pieces”.

“Intensely complicated molecular machines can evolve on their own, but simple prefabricated machine parts in a junkyard have no chance. of course.”
I gave 3 mechanisms that show these are fundamentally different, go back and read.

“if any of these steps is missing, THEN THE WHOLE SYSTEM FAILS.”
Then how do you account for so-called microevolution which is demonstrated to happen?

“most people thing that cells are a homogenous globule of protoplasm, but that is wrong and ignorant.”
I never said anything like that.

“EACH OF THESE COMPARTMENTS IS SEALED OFF FROM THE REST OF THE CELL BY IT’S OWN MEMBRANE.”
Only in eukaryotes. So study prokaryotes. Then study some of the transitional species.

“so at what point in the ‘evolution of man’ did this cargo delivery system evolve? ”
Somewhere from the transition from prokaryotes to eukaryotes. After large proteins, but before organelles.

“LIKE I SAID, LOOK AT THE MECHANICS OF IT AND YOU WILL SEE EVOLUTION-OR ANY OTHER STEP BY STEP PROCESS-IS DEAD IN THE WATER…”
Once again, you are saying that the biochemical mechanisms cannot change step by step. That would mean that even micro-evolution is impossible. Micro-evolution has been demonstrated, therefore your argument is wrong.

I’ve asked you two questions: what books or other sources are you getting your information on biochemistry from? what alternative to evolution to propose and why? can you answer either of those?

DNA and RNA are much more than sugar and phosphate residues. you are totally leaving out the all important ENCODED INFORMATION carried by the nucleic acids. it is not like the amino acids can just arrange themselves all willy nilly. they have to be in a certian order.

if you untangle the chromosomes in the DNA from just one of your cells, you would have a string 6 feet long. IN EACH OF YOUR HUNDREDS OF TRILLIONS OF CELLS. there are 3 billion chemical base pairs that make up human DNA, all encoded in a specific way. DNA is a language. But you’re totally right. it blindly wandered its way throughout the ages to become me and you here today.

Intensely complicated molecular machines can evolve on their own, but simple prefabricated machine parts in a junkyard have no chance. of course.

i call shenanigans.

and the reason i keep repeating that you have to have the whole organism (all the vital parts, at least) in order for it to work. you can not have half of an engine and expect it to work. you can not have just 25 chromosomes and expect a human to come out of them. you have to have 26.

so did we just evolve with 26 simple little prechromosomes that eventually evolved to the ones we have today? or did we start with one, and then gradually added another and another and another?

you fail to grasp this simple concept. you cannot offer up any experiments that can show an incomplete, but viable, human.

you also fail to address it at a mechanical level.

The cell could not have evolved to be what it is in a peice-meal fashion. just look at the MECHANICS of it all. take the way the cell delivers its goods to the various parts of itself.

all cargo delivery systems face common problems: the cargo must be labeled with a correct delivery address; the transporter must recognize the address and put the cargo in the correct delivery vehicle; the vehicle must recognize when it has arrived at the right destination; and the cargo must be unloaded. if any of these steps is missing, THEN THE WHOLE SYSTEM FAILS.

if the package is mislabeled or no label is present, it doesnt get delivered. if the package is delivered to the wrong address or the container cannot be opened once it arrives, then it may as well have never been sent. THE ENTIRE SYSTEM MUST BE IN PLACE BEFORE IT WORKS.

most people thing that cells are a homogenous globule of protoplasm, but that is wrong and ignorant. In particular, eukaryotic cells (cells of all organisms except bacteria) have many different specialized compartments in which many different discrete tasks are performed; such as the nucleus (the blueprints/info), the endoplasmic reticulum (processes protiens), the lysosome (garbage disposal), the mitochondria (produces energy the cell uses), etc… EACH OF THESE COMPARTMENTS IS SEALED OFF FROM THE REST OF THE CELL BY IT’S OWN MEMBRANE. if you count the membranes and interior spaces, there are more than 20 separate sections in a cell!(which brings us back to the problem of delivering cargo).

the cell is a dynamic system and it continually manufactures new structures and gets rid of old material. and although some compartments make some materials for themselves, the great majority of proteins are centrally made and shipped to the other compartments. the shipping of proteins between compartments is an intricate and complex process.

so at what point in the ‘evolution of man’ did this cargo delivery system evolve? because if you dont have even this one part of the whole, then the organism will die.

LIKE I SAID, LOOK AT THE MECHANICS OF IT AND YOU WILL SEE EVOLUTION-OR ANY OTHER STEP BY STEP PROCESS-IS DEAD IN THE WATER…

“how do you get a photosensitive cell in the first place”
Even single-celled organisms like bacteria are light sensitive. So its not a complicated property.
Lots of long chain conjugated molecule are responsive to light in the UV-vis spectrum. So you have a cell that mutates to have some such molecules. Since light sensitivity is based almost entirely on the length of the molecule, this is just a variation in the statical distribution. Light changes the chemistry of the cell, but not enough to kill it. After many generations other biochemical mechanisms have changed in response the light-activated chemical changes and you have a photosensitive cell. In other words, the light-sensitive molecules become an environmental factor and the evolution of single celled organisms to new environmental factors is documented. QED.
I’m not going to write a page for each step, but its not because I can’t. Look up the references, the research is there if you want it.

“none of it will work without the rest”
You keep repeating that, but its wrong. If changing one part caused the whole thing to die, then even so-called micro-evolution would be impossible. Even hardcore Creationists don’t try to claim that anymore.

“1) what possible competition-or specialized life- is there in a junk drawer?”
That’s easy: bateria, fungi, microscopic animals, etc.
“2) my point here is that there are already formed mechanical parts in a junk yard. there are many machines that are really not too far off from being complete and in working order. would it not be easier for life to evolve out of a landfill-with all the ready formed available parts-than it would for life to form itself from scratch”
Because biochemistry works on a molecular level and those machines are in the junkyard are only machines on a macroscopic level. There are no chemical mechanisms for the junkyard machines to diffuse, reproduce or mutate.

“and evolution can do nothing to bridge the gap from the non-living to the living.”
That is a tricky gap and a subject of a lot of research. One theory this that early life was a form of microscope crystal. The crystal became embedded in a a medium (like clay or sand). When the crystal was finally washed free from the medium a new crystal formed in the hole. A new crystal could form in the same recess and have similar structure. This has some merit because DNA and RNA are made of sugar and phosphate residues and of course sugar forms a crystals. But like I said, that’s still ongoing research.

How do you think life was formed and why? What’s your alternative theory that has no logic holes?

1) “so why isn’t life pooping up in junk drawers around the country?”
Because there is already competition from specialized life for available nutrients and resources.

2)“why don’t we see transformers ‘evolving’ out of junk yards or land fills?”
Really? WTF?

1) what possible competition-or specialized life- is there in a junk drawer?

2) my point here is that there are already formed mechanical parts in a junk yard. there are many machines that are really not too far off from being complete and in working order. would it not be easier for life to evolve out of a landfill-with all the ready formed available parts-than it would for life to form itself from scratch?

and evolution can do nothing to bridge the gap from the non-living to the living.

either ADDRESS THE MECHANICS OF HOW IT HAPPENED or admit you’ve been owned.

how many times do i have to ask the question?

you give no mechanism on how this could happen!
here are the steps that link gives for the way that the eye ‘might have evolved’:

* photosensitive cell
* aggregates of pigment cells without a nerve
* an optic nerve surrounded by pigment cells and covered by translucent skin
* pigment cells forming a small depression
* pigment cells forming a deeper depression
* the skin over the depression taking a lens shape
* muscles allowing the lens to adjust

but this is all just flawed logic. and so is just putting me into a box labeled “argument from incredulity”. i never said that life was so complex that i cant understand how it could have evolved, therefore it must be created. i said that the mechanics involved in biochemistry cannot come about by a step by step method.

your steps above dont show or prove anything.

first of all, how do you get a photosensitive cell in the first place? and dont try to gloss it over like it is some simple little gooey thing that can just form itself; it is quite complex. your link doesnt address how the photosensitive cell evolved in the first place. it just includes it as a convenient starting point. and then we add more cells, these are pigmented, right? oh, and then we’ll just throw in an optic nerve. oh, next we need some more pigment cells to make a ‘deeper depression’. and the skin covering the cell can simply form a lens…

also from your linked article:

“Nilsson and Pelger (1994) calculated that if each step were a 1 percent change, the evolution of the eye would take 1,829 steps, which could happen in 364,000 generations.”

so you take some loaded ’steps’ that just conveniently start with cells, then add more cells, then more and more cells, until your simple photosensitive cell (which is not at all a simple thing) becomes the vastly complex human eyeball? and it only took 364,000 generations? now add all the other systems and vital parts of the systems, and how many generations would you need?

but still, none of it will work without the rest, EVEN IN ONE GENERATION!

you simply must address the mechanics of it all if evolution is right.

another quote from your article:

“Since eyes do not fossilize well, we do not know that the development of the eye followed exactly that path, but we certainly cannot claim that no path exists.”

you don’t know the path the eye followed; you can’t even point to a path. the path doesnt even show up on any maps.

“you would have to ‘mutate’ the system whole and intact. and then you’re still screwed unless you mutate many other systems at the same time.”
Check out this description of the evolution of the eye. When you done with that, click on the link about argument for incredulity. Ponder how this applies to you.

“molecular machines (the basis of life)”
That’s wrong. Prokaryotes don’t have an “molecular machines” Everything is free floating in the cell and transported by diffusion. Motor proteins are needed mainly to transport of larger structure such as organelle.

“the fossil record has nothing to tell us about whether the interactions of 11-cis-retinal with rhodopsin, transducin, and phosphodiesterase could have developed step by step.”
Don’t need the fossil record, we have living examples of all the transitional phases of eye development. See previous link.

I’m curious about what books you’ve read to get your information. What specific books and authors have you read about molecular biology? You obviously copied the whole eye mechanism sequence from somewhere, where did you copy it from?

“so why isn’t life pooping up in junk drawers around the country?”
Because there is already competition from specialized life for available nutrients and resources.
“why don’t we see transformers ‘evolving’ out of junk yards or land fills?”
Really? WTF?

just saying that the parts of the body developed co-dependantly is rubbish. you say it can happen, but you cannot show how it happens. you can say ‘mutation’ and ‘natural selection’ but you cannot show the way. you just point to a path and say that we came down it.

having more or less webbing between fingers and toes has nothing to do with how a system like a circulatory or respiratory can come to be in a step by step method. you say these systems evolved together, but that really is asinine.

you would have to ‘mutate’ the system whole and intact. and then you’re still screwed unless you mutate many other systems at the same time.

that is where evolution trips up; on the physical part, on the mechanics of the process. it’s a nice little happy story that sounds good, but it fails when you look at it closely.

life is clearly based on machines-machines made of molecules. molecular machines haul cargo from one place in the cell to another along ‘highways’ made up of other molecules, while still others act as cables, ropes, and pulleys to hold the cell in shape. machines turn cellular switches on and off, sometimes killing the cell or causing it to grow. solar powered machines capture the energy of photons and store it in chemicals. electrical machines allow current to flow through nerves. manufacturing machines build other molecular machines, as well as themselves. cells swim using machines, copy themselves with machinery, and even ingest food with machinery. Highly sophisticated molecular machines control every cellular process. the details of life are finely calibrated, and the machinery of life is enormously complex.

it is obvious that molecular machines are vastly more complex than the machines we, as humans, make and use in our everyday lives, like cars or toasters or calculators or telephones.

so why isn’t life pooping up in junk drawers around the country? why don’t we see transformers ‘evolving’ out of junk yards or land fills?

you can search the scientific literature out there, but you will be very hard pressed to find any papers on the question of how molecular machines (the basis of life) developed. the complexity of life has paralyzed science’s attempt to account for it.

Darwinism can explain many things, but it doesn’t explain molecular machinery. each of the anatomical steps and structures that Darwin thought were so simple actually involves staggeringly complicated biological chemical processes that cannot just be papered over with rhetoric.

Anatomy is simply irrelevant to the question of whether evolution could take place on the molecular level. so is the fossil record. it doesnt matter whether there are huge gaps in the fossil record or even whether the record is continuous.

the fossil record has nothing to tell us about whether the interactions of 11-cis-retinal with rhodopsin, transducin, and phosphodiesterase could have developed step by step.

Darwinism, on this anniversary of Darwin setting off on his voyage aboard the USS Beagle, must be reconsidered in light of advances in biochemistry. For Darwin and his theory to be right, it has to account for the molecular machinery of life.

http://denise.nichel.org/calvinhobbes/snowart/blackandwhite/evolution.gif

I’m off. Whatever your persuasion, Natty Dread wish you an irie christmas and a dancehall new year.

brb2rock

All that other stuff you said is fine, though I have my suspicions and all, but this? This? This is some bullshit created by a pop-sci writer, and virtually every legitimate scientist specialing in that sort of thing strongly disagrees. I forget the name of the fella, and but he was the dude who took the second look at those fossils they found up in the BC mountains a while back. I could look up the name if you’d like.

i’m not talking about slime. i am talking about your body. the HUMAN body. evolution says that it happened in sooo many successive steps, a, b, c, d, e, f……..w, x, y, z (’a’ being your single celled organisms and ‘z’ being the body we have today) but you can’t reverse the process and start taking parts out of the body…

please address this specifically with the human body, not some ’slime mold colonies’. i mean really.

and you cannot even show how a fish evolves into an amphibian or how you get a worm from a jelly fish. you can have a cute little story about how everything just ‘evolves’, but you cannot address the actual, physical mechanisms of the change.

most every major plant and animal body type had ‘evolved’ shortly after the cambrian explosion at the beginning of the fossil record anyway.

and crack a book? i am soooo glad you gave me that idea, because i have never done that. i’m totally unread. in fact, i’m illiterate.

to call a motor protein, or any protein, ’simple’ is totally lame. cells are not simple. and neither are any of their parts. people play it off like life began as some simple goo or whatever; when the chasm between nonlife and life is staggering and profoundly different.

It’s not simple, but its not an impossible task, either. Lookup some stuff about ATP synthase, which is your basic rotary motor protein. All the parts work together beautifully, but there are also examples each of the individual components serving a purpose on their own.
There are intermediate transition examples of almost all of your gaps. Start with single celled organisms -> cooperative slime molds colonies -> specialized cells in sponges -> development of organs in jelly-fish -> worms -> fish -> amphibians. Once you get to frogs its just a matter of some further organ specialization and development. Didn’t you dissect stuff, in jr. high? Did you miss the point? This is elementary stuff, crack a book.
I linked to a paper on the evolution of myosin. Did you read it? Did you read the link on kinesin? If you’re not going to the read the material that I refer you to, you’re being deliberately ignorant and this conversation is pointless.

if you simply go to google images and google “bacterial flagellum motor” you will see thousands of pictures of the things. it is a motor in the literal sense and all the other senses.

and also, if you read that “lot of research on the specific evolution of motor proteins” that you linked to (http://www.pnas.org/cgi/content/full/103/10/3681) you will not find research on how it actually happened on a mechanical level.

to call a motor protein, or any protein, ’simple’ is totally lame. cells are not simple. and neither are any of their parts. people play it off like life began as some simple goo or whatever; when the chasm between nonlife and life is staggering and profoundly different.

you’re totally missing my point, which is that machines ~even simple ones~ cannot just come about mindlessly in a step by step manner. the human body, as it exists now, could not have come to be what it currently is in such a way.

you have to have all the many many vital parts working together in balance and harmony. and even then, it’s a daily struggle just to live.

and you can’t just ignore the mechanics of it all.

you have all these different systems working together; ALL of which you need to live. the circulatory, digestive, endocrine, nervous, skeletal, reproductive, respiratory, muscular, etc… take away one, & you’re done, son. you have to have them all to even have them at all.

if you take ANY step by step progressive path, you will not arrive at the human body.

your blood is made in the bones. riddle me this, batman: which came first?

your blood only carries stuff it gets from the other systems, like the respiratory and digestive and endocrine and immune system. without these systems, the circulatory is pointless. and with out a circulatory, the other systems have no way to move their goods around the body. which came first?

most people would think that the nervous system came first? nope. the only purpose of a nervous system is to run other systems. if there are no other systems, then it’s pointless. and you can’t have any of the other systems without a nervous system.

the human brain alone is the most complex thing in the known universe. and it is just one part of a larger thing with many parts, most every one of which is needed in order for any of the others to work.

what if you had all the systems except for the reproductive? where would you be then?

what if you had everything but no bones? besides being screwed because we’d have no blood, we’d be equally screwed because we couldn’t move.

no muscles? well think about that one. the heart is a muscle. but it is part of the circulatory and muscular, which is so bound to the skeletal system that it is often referred to as the musculoskeletal system. and since the blood is made in the bones, i guess it’s just one big system. but teeth are bones, and they’re part of the digestive system, right? and wait, the blood carries oxygen from the respiratory-

oh my, it does seem to all be tangled together, no?

you gotta have it all in ONE step, not many over so many years…

but it doesnt stop there. nooooo. look at the systems themselves; say the circulatory. you have a pump, some pipes, and the blood, which is all the stuff from all the different systems (food, air, waste, hormones, antibodies, etc.)

take out the pump, and you die.
take out the pipes, and you die.
take out the blood and you die.

look at the DNA/protein relationship as far as information is concerned. all the genetic info is in the nucleic acids, right? the proteins and enzymes take the info and make all the cellular doodads, right?

you can’t have the one without the other.

(and encoded information itself is quite a hurdle for evolution.)

anyway, evolution does not even try to tackle the actual facts of how life has evolved-let alone how it made the jump from nonlife.