No Intelligence in evolutionary branches?

originally posted by: Tranceopticalinclined
a reply to: NoConspiracy

ETs didn't mess with the DNA of other species, they just messed with apes, and here we are...

I've wondered the samething,

I mean, there's a missing link, and it isn't bigfoot, it's the one thing we don't have a firm grasp on, as a society...

when and where should we be looking for this missing link and what exactly does the phrase mean to you when you say "missing link"?

a reply to: peter vlar

Thanks for the honest answer.
When i first read about that experiment, it was mind boggling. And i am still trying to find someone in the scientific field of evolution that has a better grasp on it. I also find it very strange that the experiment has been patented and shelfed away, never to be investigated further. I think i read that the patend is expired by now, so who knows what the future will bring concerning this topic.
But maybe it is just not meant to be public knowledge...

a reply to: NoConspiracy

You're quite welcome. I enjoy having the opportunity to talk about these topics when the other party is genuinely looking for answers instead of just pushing their narrative and belittling anyone who disagrees with them. One thing I always am though, especially considering how much crossover between multiple disciplines of science exist regarding the MES, is honest. I won't pretend to know something that I'm unfamiliar with. I remember reading about this and finding it interesting at the time but got sidetracked with other discoveries more closely related to my area like finding Denisovan's or Homo Naledi.

I don't know anything pertaining to patents on the research but you've got me curious enough to look now. Have you seen the genetic studies where chickens were bred so that some modern genes were shut off and archaic genes were amplified which made them a lot more dinosaur like than most people would be comfortable with! Best advice I can give you is keep an open mind, always ask questions and don't be afraid of the answers you may find.

a reply to: peter vlar

No haven't heard of that chicken study, or i did but never took it to heart, i find the field of genetic modification rather uninteresting and pretentious. At least when it comes to understand the mechanisms behind evolution. It sort of validates creationism... If we can do it someone in the past could have done it too, but that would make us godlike which is even more against the narrative, creationist like to belive in.


Wait now i remeber the chicken... it was on an island and they wanted to make an attraction park, but it all went out of hand

originally posted by: Phantom423
Your chicken and egg crap about cascades shows once again that you know absolutely nothing about thermodynamics and Michaelis-Menten signal transmission. There are millions of biochemical cascade events which have occurred since the first organism appeared on this planet until today. These are stochastic processes. They don't require a chicken or an egg.

It requires not just the chicken and the egg, but also the hen house, the hay, the farmer, the water supply, chicken feed, and so on. That still is nothing compared to the number of components required to run some of the more intricate biochemical cascades. You're attempt to say it is all 'stochastic' (meaning 'random') is very silly considering the precise amino acid sequence required to make the proper chain which folds into the relevant functioning enzyme. A single enzyme is not enough, because biochemical cascades require a symphony of functioning enzymes that are folded with a high degree of precision by chaperone proteins. This is why evolutionary mechanisms could never create biochemical cascades, because evolution is theorized to be a step-by-step mutation process, whereas biochemical cascades need all the pieces to be in place for it to function.

For example: knock-out ATP synthase, and the entire electron transport chain is ruined.

You're an uneducated idiot who doesn't have a clue about how science is really done. Go away. You annoy me.

Given that you are resorting to personal insults again, I will assume you are admitting defeat?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423
Your chicken and egg crap about cascades shows once again that you know absolutely nothing about thermodynamics and Michaelis-Menten signal transmission. There are millions of biochemical cascade events which have occurred since the first organism appeared on this planet until today. These are stochastic processes. They don't require a chicken or an egg.

It requires not just the chicken and the egg, but also the hen house, the hay, the farmer, the water supply, chicken feed, and so on. That still is nothing compared to the number of components required to run some of the more intricate biochemical cascades. You're attempt to say it is all 'stochastic' (meaning 'random') is very silly considering the precise amino acid sequence required to make the proper chain which folds into the relevant functioning enzyme. A single enzyme is not enough, because biochemical cascades require a symphony of functioning enzymes that are folded with a high degree of precision by chaperone proteins. This is why evolutionary mechanisms could never create biochemical cascades, because evolution is theorized to be a step-by-step mutation process, whereas biochemical cascades need all the pieces to be in place for it to function.

For example: knock-out ATP synthase, and the entire electron transport chain is ruined.

You're an uneducated idiot who doesn't have a clue about how science is really done. Go away. You annoy me.

Given that you are resorting to personal insults again, I will assume you are admitting defeat?

This is all according to YOUR corrupted scenario. Cite 3 research papers that support your claim. I won't hold my breath.

This thread bores the # out of me.

originally posted by: Phantom423

This is all according to YOUR corrupted scenario. Cite 3 research papers that support your claim. I won't hold my breath.

Look, if you need a research paper to tell you that ATP synthase is a required enzyme in the electron transport chain, then you simply are not qualified to be debating any of this.

originally posted by: Out6of9Balance
This thread bores the # out of me.

That's typical when one has no longer has anything to add to the conversation.

a reply to: peter vlar

Sounds like it ended in #.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

This is all according to YOUR corrupted scenario. Cite 3 research papers that support your claim. I won't hold my breath.

Look, if you need a research paper to tell you that ATP synthase is a required enzyme in the electron transport chain, then you simply are not qualified to be debating any of this.

I dare you to dig into your own scientific knowledge and explain to me how biochemical cascades could have formed by evolutionary mechanisms given the fact that all cascades require a multitude of interdependent proteins working in synchrony. You'll also have to explain how the homeostatic control mechanisms were generated simultaneously alongside the protein itself. You'd also have to explain how the chaperone proteins and other necessary co-enzymes which assemble the proteins to prepare them for proper functioning in the cascade. How did all of this form in synchrony given the limitations of the mechanisms described in evolution theory?

Three citations - citations that support your chicken/egg "cascade" claim.

originally posted by: Phantom423

Three citations - citations that support your chicken/egg "cascade" claim.

There are countless experiments that demonstrate the necessity of various proteins in their respective biochemical cascades.

WNK1 Protein Kinase
-mice died in the womb around embryonic day 11 when oxidative stress-responsive kinase-1 (Osr1), a key embryonic development protein, was knocked-out from the genome.

IKK2
-mice with a knock-out of the IKK2 kinase enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis due to liver failures.
-mice with a knock-out of the NEMO enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis
-mice with a knock-out of the RELA gene were unable to survive embryogenesis

p53
-mice with a knock-out of the p53 gene are highly susceptible to cancer.


and so on and so on. Time for you to answer the question: How could these components have evolved sequentially when they are needed for the organism to function?

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Three citations - citations that support your chicken/egg "cascade" claim.

There are countless experiments that demonstrate the necessity of various proteins in their respective biochemical cascades.

WNK1 Protein Kinase
-mice died in the womb around embryonic day 11 when oxidative stress-responsive kinase-1 (Osr1), a key embryonic development protein, was knocked-out from the genome.

IKK2
-mice with a knock-out of the IKK2 kinase enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis due to liver failures.
-mice with a knock-out of the NEMO enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis
-mice with a knock-out of the RELA gene were unable to survive embryogenesis

p53
-mice with a knock-out of the p53 gene are highly susceptible to cancer.


and so on and so on. Time for you to answer the question: How could these components have evolved sequentially when they are needed for the organism to function?

None of those articles describe the IMPOSSIBILITY of these reactions occurring. You have stated ad infinitum the IMPOSSIBILITY of reactions occurring without precursors. Where are those articles?
Your excuse is always "it's impossible". Where are the research articles that say it's impossible?
In fact, your entire premise is that evolution is impossible.
Post 3 citations which support your claim. And the articles have to be RESEARCH articles with experimental data demonstrating that evolution is impossible.

This is why evolutionary mechanisms could never create biochemical cascades, because evolution is theorized to be a step-by-step mutation process, whereas biochemical cascades need all the pieces to be in place for it to function.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Three citations - citations that support your chicken/egg "cascade" claim.

There are countless experiments that demonstrate the necessity of various proteins in their respective biochemical cascades.

WNK1 Protein Kinase
-mice died in the womb around embryonic day 11 when oxidative stress-responsive kinase-1 (Osr1), a key embryonic development protein, was knocked-out from the genome.

IKK2
-mice with a knock-out of the IKK2 kinase enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis due to liver failures.
-mice with a knock-out of the NEMO enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis
-mice with a knock-out of the RELA gene were unable to survive embryogenesis

p53
-mice with a knock-out of the p53 gene are highly susceptible to cancer.


and so on and so on. Time for you to answer the question: How could these components have evolved sequentially when they are needed for the organism to function?

And by the way, where exactly in those three articles does it say that "it's impossible" to generate a biochemical cascade? The articles clearly demonstrate biochemical cascades under various conditions.
Your chicken/egg scenario is a failure. No chicken, no egg, no hen house is required for a cascade event.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

Three citations - citations that support your chicken/egg "cascade" claim.

There are countless experiments that demonstrate the necessity of various proteins in their respective biochemical cascades.

WNK1 Protein Kinase
-mice died in the womb around embryonic day 11 when oxidative stress-responsive kinase-1 (Osr1), a key embryonic development protein, was knocked-out from the genome.

IKK2
-mice with a knock-out of the IKK2 kinase enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis due to liver failures.
-mice with a knock-out of the NEMO enzyme were unable to survive embryogenesis
-mice with a knock-out of the RELA gene were unable to survive embryogenesis

p53
-mice with a knock-out of the p53 gene are highly susceptible to cancer.


and so on and so on. Time for you to answer the question: How could these components have evolved sequentially when they are needed for the organism to function?

Single-molecule enzymology: stochastic Michaelis–Menten kinetics
Hong Qiana, Elliot L. Elsonb,*
Department of Applied Mathematics, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, USA
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics, Washington University School of Medicine,
660 South Euclid Ave. Box 8231, St. Louis, MO 63110, USA

Abstract
We provide a stochastic analysis of single-molecule enzymatic reactions that follow Michaelis–Menten kinetics. We show that this system can exhibit oscillatory behavior in the non-equilibrium steady-state at appropriate substrate concentrations. The stochastic model includes both enzyme dynamics and substrate turnover kinetics. The relationship between the probability of substrate survival and the time-correlation of enzyme conformation trajectories is discussed. Deterministic kinetics at large substrate concentrations are obtained as a limit of the stochastic model. We suggest that in addition to fluctuating enzyme conformation, the stochastic nature of substrate concentration fluctuations is another possible source of the complex behavior of single-molecule enzyme kinetics.

www.sciencedirect.com...

In summary, we have provided a basis in stochastic
modeling for quantitative kinetic analysis
in single-molecule enzymology. Measurements on
stochastic protein conformational dynamics and
the stochastic substrateyproduct kinetics are interpreted
within a single mathematical treatment.
Oscillatory kinetics is shown to be expected in the
stochastic, Markovian models for non-linear biochemical
kinetics. This analysis suggests an alternative
but complementary mechanism to the
fluctuating enzyme model for analyzing complex
kinetics of single-molecule enzymology.

Your chicken/egg theory just crashed and burned. As I mentioned previously, thermodynamics and Michaelis-Menten kinetics are the only requirements to prove the ridiculousness of your "impossible" scenario. Everything is impossible to YOU because you're not a scientist, you have never been in a lab, you have never conducted independent experiments and you know nothing of basic physics and chemistry. All you know is that it's IMPOSSIBLE.

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

This is all according to YOUR corrupted scenario. Cite 3 research papers that support your claim. I won't hold my breath.

Look, if you need a research paper to tell you that ATP synthase is a required enzyme in the electron transport chain, then you simply are not qualified to be debating any of this.

Since you don't have a clue, here's a simple Basic 101 course in enzyme kinetics:

originally posted by: Phantom423

None of those articles describe the IMPOSSIBILITY of these reactions occurring.

Phantom you need to take a breather. I was showing the importance of individual enzymes in biochemical cascades as it relates to human biochemistry, which is what you were asking for.

You have stated ad infinitum the IMPOSSIBILITY of reactions occurring without precursors. Where are those articles?

Did you not read those articles? Many enzymes when they are knocked out of the mice's genome cause it to die in the womb. Other cases like a p53 knock-out dramatically increase the likelihood of cancer. This shows the danger of missing even one of the many enzymes involved in mammalian biochemistry.

Post 3 citations which support your claim. And the articles have to be RESEARCH articles with experimental data demonstrating that evolution is impossible.

It is not my responsibility to prove a negative, although I have shown with countless examples why evolution is not feasible. You are never able to respond to any of them with actual data that shows its possible. If evolution were actually happening and possible, it would be demonstrable in a lab.

No chicken, no egg, no hen house is required for a cascade event.

You will deny basic science just to argue against me. Look at this cascade. many interdependent proteins involved:



and also here:

We provide a stochastic analysis of single-molecule enzymatic reactions that follow Michaelis–Menten kinetics.

Ahh this is rich. You have no idea what you're reading. You just search for things and can't parse through to comprehend what is being said. They are showing the kinetic rate for a single enzymatic reaction. Among all enzymes within a biochemical cascade, there is a predictable rate law that determines the efficiency of each enzymatic step. They use this to help determine what is known as the "limiting enzyme", i.e. the enzyme that limits the entirety of the biochemical cascade due to it being the slowest reaction.

Phantom you are the prime example of a blind believer in evolutionary theory. You don't have the scientific background to hold your self in a mature discussion of scientific laws. It is your type of blind belief that allows this perverse backwards theory to remain in the mainstream ideology. You resort to insult and ridicule because you have no other response

originally posted by: cooperton

originally posted by: Phantom423

None of those articles describe the IMPOSSIBILITY of these reactions occurring.

Phantom you need to take a breather. I was showing the importance of individual enzymes in biochemical cascades as it relates to human biochemistry, which is what you were asking for.

You have stated ad infinitum the IMPOSSIBILITY of reactions occurring without precursors. Where are those articles?

Did you not read those articles? Many enzymes when they are knocked out of the mice's genome cause it to die in the womb. Other cases like a p53 knock-out dramatically increase the likelihood of cancer. This shows the danger of missing even one of the many enzymes involved in mammalian biochemistry.

Post 3 citations which support your claim. And the articles have to be RESEARCH articles with experimental data demonstrating that evolution is impossible.

It is not my responsibility to prove a negative, although I have shown with countless examples why evolution is not feasible. You are never able to respond to any of them with actual data that shows its possible. If evolution were actually happening and possible, it would be demonstrable in a lab.

No chicken, no egg, no hen house is required for a cascade event.

You will deny basic science just to argue against me. Look at this cascade. many interdependent proteins involved:

and also here:

We provide a stochastic analysis of single-molecule enzymatic reactions that follow Michaelis–Menten kinetics.

Ahh this is rich. You have no idea what you're reading. You just search for things and can't parse through to comprehend what is being said. They are showing the kinetic rate for a single enzymatic reaction. Among all enzymes within a biochemical cascade, there is a predictable rate law that determines the efficiency of each enzymatic step. They use this to help determine what is known as the "limiting enzyme", i.e. the enzyme that limits the entirety of the biochemical cascade due to it being the slowest reaction.

Phantom you are the prime example of a blind believer in evolutionary theory. You don't have the scientific background to hold your self in a mature discussion of scientific laws. It is your type of blind belief that allows this perverse backwards theory to remain in the mainstream ideology. You resort to insult and ridicule because you have no other response

The end. Go back to your Big Foot cave.