It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
What's the difference between the process of evolution in a computer and the process of evolution outside the computer? The entities that are being evolved are made of different stuff, but the process is identical.... These abstract computer processes make it possible to pose and answer questions about evolution that are not answerable if all one has to work with is the fossil record and fruit flies.
To make a case for or against a trend in the evolution of complexity in biological evolution, complexity needs to be both rigorously defined and measurable. A recent information-theoretic (but intuitively evident) definition identifies genomic complexity with the amount of information a sequence stores about its environment. We investigate the evolution of genomic complexity in populations of digital organisms and monitor in detail the evolutionary transitions that increase complexity. We show that, because natural selection forces genomes to behave as a natural "Maxwell Demon," within a fixed environment, genomic complexity is forced to increase.
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Oct;4(10):784-90. Epub 2006 Sep 5. Related Articles, Links
From The Origin of Species to the origin of bacterial flagella.
Pallen MJ, Matzke NJ.
Division of Immunity & Infection, Medical School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT UK. [email protected]
In the recent Dover trial, and elsewhere, the 'Intelligent Design' movement has championed the bacterial flagellum as an irreducibly complex system that, it is claimed, could not have evolved through natural selection. Here we explore the arguments in favour of viewing bacterial flagella as evolved, rather than designed, entities. We dismiss the need for any great conceptual leaps in creating a model of flagellar evolution and speculate as to how an experimental programme focused on this topic might look.
Originally posted by melatonin
As for Flagella, unless you're playing place the god in the gap, I would, perhaps, think twice about such an approach.
Nat Rev Microbiol. 2006 Oct;4(10):784-90. Epub 2006 Sep 5. Related Articles, Links
From The Origin of Species to the origin of bacterial flagella.
Pallen MJ, Matzke NJ.
Division of Immunity & Infection, Medical School, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, B15 2TT UK. [email protected]
In the recent Dover trial, and elsewhere, the 'Intelligent Design' movement has championed the bacterial flagellum as an irreducibly complex system that, it is claimed, could not have evolved through natural selection. Here we explore the arguments in favour of viewing bacterial flagella as evolved, rather than designed, entities. We dismiss the need for any great conceptual leaps in creating a model of flagellar evolution and speculate as to how an experimental programme focused on this topic might look.
Muller, 1918, p.463-464
thus a complicated machine was gradually built up whose effective working was dependent upon the interlocking action of very numerous different elementary parts or factors, and many of the characters and factors which, when new, were originally merely an asset finally became necessary because other necessary characters and factors had subsequently become changed so as to be dependent on the former. It must result, in consequence, that a dropping out of, or even a slight change in any one of these parts is very likely to disturb fatally the whole machinery; for this reason we should expect very many, if not most, mutations to result in lethal factors
Originally posted by Amenti
And secondly and what is never even addressed by the opponents of the IC argument is that even if you, for some reason. Conceded that all the parts were already present you still have the problem of the complex “assembly instructions” and where they came from.
Studies of the BFM have revealed not only that it requires specific parts but also a precise sequence of assembly as per not wasting energy building a machine that does not work. This problem leads us into the second deal breaker, and the one that is the most loathsome to opponents of Intelligent design, it is the origin of information.
How did the Life appear in the first place?
Darwin’s “On the Origin of Species” is silent on the matter.
Originally posted by Amenti
The BIG problem is:
By definition Natural selection could not have existed before the existence of the first living cell. For it can only act upon organisms capable of reproducing themselves, cells equipped with DNA that pass on their genetic changes to future generations.
Or to say it another way.
Without DNA there can be no self replication, but without self replication there can be no natural selection.
With regards to the flagellum, there is dispute as to whether many flagellar genes can even be said to be homologous to genes outside of the flagellum. This dispute is witnessed in the conclusion of pro-ID biologist Mike Gene who writes when critiquing Nick Matzke’s model attempting to evolve a flagellum: “The various dissimilarities (some very profound) listed above, along with the weakness of the criteria for inferring homology, is only rendered more problematic by the seemingly arbitrary nature of the chosen matches.” Matzke’s model may be found at www.talkdesign.org... Mike Gene’s critique may be found at www.idthink.net... Obviously there are different types of flagella, but Matzke admits that least ¼ of flagellar proteins have no known homology, and also acknowledges that “the flagellar research community has scarcely begun to consider how these systems have evolved.” See Mark J. Pallen and Nicholas J. Matzke, "From The Origin of Species to the origin of bacterial flagella," Nature Reviews Microbiology, AOP, published online 5 September 2006; doi:10.1038/nrmicro1493
Originally posted by Karilla
My biggest issue with Intelligent Design as a concept is that for there to be an intelligent designer, surely there must have been a super-intelligent designer that created Him, and an ultra-super-intelligent designer before Her, and on and on ad infintum. If God created Man then who created God, surely a vastly more difficult feat?
Originally posted by melatoninAs for IJs diatribe above, there was virtual institutional racism in victorian times, so it is not surprising that Darwin was just as guilty as the rest.
Originally posted by Amenti
However, If, as I postulate in my second post here that extralterrestrial beings ever claim they were in effect our creator I would like very much to ask them who their creator was, and a host of questions concerning such paradoxes because I have a Chertoffian "gut feeing" that their explanations will leave us at square one, and the questions posed in this thread will still have no answers. yet we will at that point not care as much after all they would tell us we didnt have to believe in God and science would embrace them for it.
Originally posted by Karilla
Sorry, just let me make sure I understand you correctly. If God spoke to you and told you that he was your creator, would you not ask him who his creator was? Or would you just take his word for it? What would the substantive difference be if extraterrestrials said the same thing?
Originally posted by melatonin
I think we can apply Godwin's law now.
Originally posted by Amenti
Matter can not be created nor destroyed, but we know that initially it did in fact appear out of nothing.
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Originally posted by melatoninAs for IJs diatribe above, there was virtual institutional racism in victorian times, so it is not surprising that Darwin was just as guilty as the rest.
Oh so we will keep the THEORY about why others that whites are inferior we just won't SAY OUTLOUD they are... OR we will pretend he didn't say it... OR we still think it but won't say it..
Intereting you call mine a diatribe, when mine was factual and actual, The theory of evolution from it's inception has taught whites are superior but all you cowards won't admit your RACISTS.
The Columbine killers wrote in a letter about that Black stufdent they shot...
"He doesn't deserve the jaw EVOLUTION gave him", but that's okay that had nothing to do with Darwin's theory, RIGHT?
Evoluton is used to this very day to give excuses for harming, maiming, discriminating and every other thing man can think to do to each otehr, but its BEST if e don't TALK ABOUT THAT..
As I figured, lots of excuses, lot's of people believing in Evolution. and lots of racist to coward to say they think they are SUPERIOR to BLACK, JEWS, AND OTHERS..
I made my point, and thatnks for all of you WHO PROVED IT!!!
EDIT - Do you nderstand waht hitler was doing according to his own writing? He stated that if he could wipe the jews, Blacks, Asians, and Gypsies out he could speed up EVOLUTION. Hitler surmised that with those races in the gene pool they were slowing the evolution of the Aryan races. But that's OK right, it has only cost inmeasureable LIVES in it's name but thats ok. It is still being used by many groups as a reason others are inferior but thats OK. IT IS NOT OK, AND PEOPLE MUST WAKE UP!!!
[edit on 7/19/2007 by theindependentjournal]
Originally posted by theindependentjournal
Originally posted by melatoninAs for IJs diatribe above, there was virtual institutional racism in victorian times, so it is not surprising that Darwin was just as guilty as the rest.
Oh so we will keep the THEORY about why others that whites are inferior we just won't SAY OUTLOUD they are... OR we will pretend he didn't say it... OR we still think it but won't say it..
Intereting you call mine a diatribe, when mine was factual and actual, The theory of evolution from it's inception has taught whites are superior but all you cowards won't admit your RACISTS.
The Columbine killers wrote in a letter about that Black stufdent they shot...
"He doesn't deserve the jaw EVOLUTION gave him", but that's okay that had nothing to do with Darwin's theory, RIGHT?
Evoluton is used to this very day to give excuses for harming, maiming, discriminating and every other thing man can think to do to each otehr, but its BEST if e don't TALK ABOUT THAT..
As I figured, lots of excuses, lot's of people believing in Evolution. and lots of racist to coward to say they think they are SUPERIOR to BLACK, JEWS, AND OTHERS..
I made my point, and thatnks for all of you WHO PROVED IT!!!
EDIT - Do you nderstand waht hitler was doing according to his own writing? He stated that if he could wipe the jews, Blacks, Asians, and Gypsies out he could speed up EVOLUTION. Hitler surmised that with those races in the gene pool they were slowing the evolution of the Aryan races. But that's OK right, it has only cost inmeasureable LIVES in it's name but thats ok. It is still being used by many groups as a reason others are inferior but thats OK. IT IS NOT OK, AND PEOPLE MUST WAKE UP!!!
[edit on 7/19/2007 by theindependentjournal]