(8 votes, average: 4.13 out of 5)
Loading ...
I wonder what a Type III secretion system is.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Picture_of_the_day
Flagellum
A flagellum is a long, slender projection from the cell body, whose function is to propel an organism. The depicted type is found in bacteria such as E. coli and Salmonella, and rotates like a propeller when the bacterium swims.
Processing your request, Please wait....
October 2, 2008 at 10:14 pm
First!
October 2, 2008 at 10:30 pm
I swear to all different deities diabeetus… I’m going to find you, kill you, revive you, lock you in a house, burn the house down, revive you again, then throw you into a frozen lake.
October 2, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Make sure you submit the pics to mcs!
It’s a nice diagram; all engineered-looking-like. A sperm would be another example, right?
October 2, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Puts his PhD cap in Microbio on: A type three secretion system is a way for bacteria to inject small proteins and other molecules into a eukaryotic host cell (think of all the cell membranes that have to be crossed). These small molecules then disrupt the normal workings of the host cell, causing membrane ruffling, phagocytosis, cell death, or a number of other phenotypes.
Basically, think of it as a molecular syringe, and this structure, with many of its subunits, has been adapted for use as a flagella.
October 2, 2008 at 11:01 pm
As for the sperm’s flagella and bacteria flagella, they’re similar in function, but not molecular makeup. Kind of like how birds and bats both have wings, but they come from different evolutionary pathways.
October 2, 2008 at 11:04 pm
Bicoid: So I take it you believe in Creationism?
October 2, 2008 at 11:04 pm
And if you want to see what one of Salmonella’s Type Three Secretion system does to the cell, look for the Salmonella movie at this site: cmgm.stanford.edu/theriot/movies.htm#Hits
October 2, 2008 at 11:07 pm
Nope, not at all diabeetus. I do molecular research on bacteria and there’s no need for that hypothesis. As a bumpersticker says: Don’t Believe in Evolution? Ask your Doctor about MRSA”
October 2, 2008 at 11:12 pm
www.conservapedia.com/MRSA
So the MRSA is the new gay plague? What does that have anything to do with evolution?
October 2, 2008 at 11:12 pm
I agree bat wings are fucked up.
October 2, 2008 at 11:18 pm
oh oh oh Rex Morgan. “HOW ARE YOU GOING TO KILL IT?â€Â
October 2, 2008 at 11:42 pm
No, MRSA is an antibiotic-resistant strain of staph. It spread because we were killing off all of the non-resistant strains.
October 3, 2008 at 12:22 am
www.conservapedia.com/Natural_selection
October 3, 2008 at 12:35 am
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservapedia#Reactions_and_criticisms
October 3, 2008 at 12:41 am
www.conservapedia.com/Wikipedia
October 3, 2008 at 12:48 am
Wiki war? Holy crap, libertarian schizo nerd manifesto vs. conservative schizo nerd manifesto?
Jesus Mary motherfucker the Internet just gets worse and worse.
October 3, 2008 at 12:49 am
Support the anti-Wikipedia movement.
www.wikipedia-watch.org/
andrewkeen.typepad.com/
nowikipedia.com/
October 3, 2008 at 12:58 am
Diabeetus, if it were up to me I would have Wikipedia burnt and have the ashes scattered to the four corners of the fucking earth.
But seriously don’t pretend that it’s any better than Geocities or Conservapedia. Or that there’s any point protesting it. Even wikipedia knows how stupid wikipedia is:
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_failing
Anyone who takes wikipedia seriously is already a fucking retard and no amount of destroying wikipedia will change that. The internet is a steaming turdhole and will always be a steaming turdhole.
October 3, 2008 at 1:34 am
Wikipedia gives us insight to the general public’s ability to do even basic and nominal research. It shows us that we think we know everything but under scrutiny, well we suck. Do students even know how to go into a library, find pertinent research through books, newspapers, microfiche etc…anymore? Obviously I check out wiki on a regular basis, many of my posts come from wiki. I do not however, consider it a research tool that I use for anything that I publish or use in a educational setting.
October 3, 2008 at 1:38 am
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..criticisms
“fredgiblet on October 3rd, 2008 12:35 am
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C…..criticisms”
Seriously?
October 3, 2008 at 1:39 am
” Initially, Schlafly[25] and other Conservapedia editors[6] considered Wikipedia’s policy allowing British English spelling to be anti-American bias”
Seriously?
My copypasta skills is FAIL tonite.
October 3, 2008 at 1:39 am
I’ll concede that wikipedia is useful for two things:
1) Births and deaths. They always seem to get those right except for early modern British Julian Calendar but they’re getting better. Also dates of battles are always right. However, if it’s for something important I’ll still go with oxford reference to check those dates.
2) Who directed that movie? Who produced that album? Again, with fanboy stuff wikipedia is always right. So long as you don’t want to hear, I don’t know, a critical opinion.
And yes Wikipedia commons has some awesome pictures.
But aside from that it’s crap. They should focus on more specific projects like ‘wiki cook books’ and ‘wiktionary’ which are easier to mod. Wikipedia should be disbanded and replaced with ‘wiki chronology’ and ‘who was that dude in that movie Wiki’.
October 3, 2008 at 1:55 am
BIOLOGICAL MACHINES
my biggest problem with evolutionists is that they think people are batshit crazy for seeing something like this and attributing it to a creator.
they make it seem like it’s totally irrational to believe an intelligence is behind the existence of Life.
clearly, this is faggotry.
October 3, 2008 at 2:10 am
Not really man. In Canada (or at least Alberta) we learn about how that works in grade 12 biology, along with every other mind-numbing fact about cell-level chemistry you could imagine. It seems a lot more mundane if you understand the chemical reactions behind it.
I could see an intelligence in the creation of Galaxies and Nebulae and time and space and the universe as a whole, but then again those things are outside of my mesoworld and I don’t know much of the scholarship. Maybe if I did it wouldn’t impress me as much.
October 3, 2008 at 2:52 am
Free online databases edited by the general public may be fine for general knowledge, but they’re certainly not material you would cite as a definitive source. I think the links in this thread bears that out.
As a source of easy-to-find facts from a safe website for irrelevant conversation, there is really no substitute.
October 3, 2008 at 2:53 am
“Links in this thread bear that out.”
Verb tense. Always proofread.
October 3, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Conservapedia? That’s the best you could pull out as a counter-argument? Holy crud, that’s weak.
Try quoting something from a science journal, and then we’ll talk. Otherwise, you’ve got nothing.
February 8, 2012 at 3:33 pm
GOD will get ALL you guys. After he gets through evolving cancer into something totally untreatable. And resurrecting a polio epidemic. And creating more Republicans.