tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post6384249024864949140..comments2024-01-23T02:32:28.567-08:00Comments on Darwin's God: Do You Believe in Magic? How Evolution Creates EvolutionUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger23125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-7801211051567466972010-09-18T14:23:32.300-07:002010-09-18T14:23:32.300-07:002010 Update Of Concept Of Life Evolution
On Life&...2010 Update Of Concept Of Life Evolution<br /><br />On Life's Twist<br /><br /><br />Di Mauro's RNA formation concept is great. But, a step further, how had the RNA become alive, i.e. how did it (1) uptake the sun's radiation and how did it (2) catalytically use it to perform work, to keep augmenting its constrained energy by keeping augmenting its self-propagation, which is the essence of Life ? <br /><br />THIS IS THE STILL MISSING TWIST IN THE BRANCHING OF LIFE FROM OTHER SURVIVING, ENERGY DIGESTING, MATTER SUCH AS BLACK HOLE. THIS TWIST IS THE BIOLOGICAL ENTITY "CULTURE", LEARNING-ADAPTING, THE ESSENCE OF DARWINIAN EVOLUTION SINCE LIFE'S DAY ONE. THIS MUST HAVE BEEN THE CRUCIAL PROCESS TWIST, EVEN WITHOUT YET KNOWING ITS MECHANISM.<br /><br />Or, is the mechanism of this twist known now?<br />It is now known how the RNAs, Earth's primal organisms, adopt an enhanced energy event's DNA conformation. But what is the mechanism of its recognizing the enhanced energy event? <br /><br /><br />Dov Henis <br />(Comments From The 22nd Century) <br />http://www.the-scientist.com/community/user/profile/1655.page<br /><br />03.2010 Updated Life Manifest <br />http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/54.page#5065 <br />Evolution, Natural Selection, Derive From Cosmic Expansion<br />http://darwiniana.com/2010/09/05/the-question-reductionists-fear/Dov Henishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06487907863785174174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-24183434466446889862010-06-03T06:42:47.037-07:002010-06-03T06:42:47.037-07:00I recently tweeted and stumbled upon your post. Re...I recently tweeted and stumbled upon your post. Really your post is very informative and I enjoyed your opinions. Do you use twitter or stumbleupon? So I can follow you there. I am hoping you post again soon.<br /><br />Here you can pay attention to my site.<br />Thank you for coming<br /><a href="http://www.imgenex.com/" rel="nofollow">DNA Methyl transferase 1</a>Imgenexhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10042237812536700574noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-16393202255985526232010-02-09T08:24:38.411-08:002010-02-09T08:24:38.411-08:00Life IS INDEED An RNA World
Genomes Are RNAs'...Life IS INDEED An RNA World<br /><br />Genomes Are RNAs'-Made Patterns-Manuals <br /><br />"Repeats protect DNA"<br />http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/57135/<br /><br />"More On Evolution In The Still RNA World"<br />http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4818<br /><br />Fitting together the pieces of the "still an RNA world" puzzle ?<br /><br />- Rational probability and possibility that the initial, independent pre-biometabolism direct sunlight-fueled genes (life) were RNAs, who evolved their DNA-images as operational patterns-manuals libraries, and celled and genomed them. They most probably synthesized (and nucleusized) their DNAs manual libraries as their functional organs, to serve as their environmentally stabler than RNA, than themselves, works memory cores.<br /><br />- Rational possibility that ALL RNAs represent the original archae-genes that since their (life) genesis have been and still are the primary actors, assessors, messengers, operators of all life processes.<br /><br />- Rational possibility that the RNAs are the environmental feedback communicators to, and modifiers of, the genomes, that the RNAs are the effectors of the desirable biased genes expressions modifications, of enhanced energy constraining for survival.<br /><br />Dov Henis<br />(Comments From The 22nd Century)<br />28Dec09 Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)] <br />http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/184.page#4587<br />Cosmic Evolution Simplified<br />http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427Dov Henishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06487907863785174174noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-33316497024118237172010-02-08T12:50:33.149-08:002010-02-08T12:50:33.149-08:00Cornelius Hunter: That sure was fortunate. Too bad...<b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>That sure was fortunate. Too bad we can't find those functions.</i><br /><br />Casadesus & Low, <i>Epigenetic Gene Regulation in the Bacterial World</i>, Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews 2006. <br /><br /><b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>In fact, we have evidence *against* evolution.</i><br /><br />The reason for repeating it is that you continue to take isolated bits of evidence, but ignore the overall patterns—even when there have been attempts to engage those patterns on the appropriate threads. We have to start with what we can establish with some certainty, and that includes Common Descent as it applies to most taxa.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-46181798231034984312010-02-08T12:42:15.815-08:002010-02-08T12:42:15.815-08:00Zach:
======
No, they have a function in the prim...Zach:<br /><br />======<br />No, they have a function in the primitive organism, just like they do in extant prokaryotes. <br />======<br /><br />That sure was fortunate. Too bad we can't find those functions.<br /><br /><br />======<br />We have strong evidence of Common Descent and mechanisms of descent with modification, including the evolution of complex structures. <br />======<br /><br />Is that your F5 or F6 key? In fact, we have evidence *against* evolution.<br /><br /><br />======<br />You can suppose whatever you want, but the evidence supports evolution of epigenetics.<br />======<br /><br />Yes, I know, I'm the one who is supposing whatever I want. Barbara Herrnstein Smith calls this "projection."Cornelius Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12283098537456505707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-70639823801980697682010-02-08T09:08:45.865-08:002010-02-08T09:08:45.865-08:00Cornelius Hunter: Sure, these complicated machines...<b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>Sure, these complicated machines and processes might be needed in the far future--so they evolve. That's just how evolution works. </i><br /><br />No, they have a function in the primitive organism, just like they do in extant prokaryotes. Again, you can't look at each datum in isolation. We have strong evidence of Common Descent and mechanisms of descent with modification, including the evolution of complex structures. You can suppose whatever you want, but the evidence supports evolution of epigenetics.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-10380036341778473102010-02-08T00:29:20.295-08:002010-02-08T00:29:20.295-08:00Zach:
"We have every reason to believe epige...Zach:<br /><br />"We have every reason to believe epigenetic gene control is ancient, and that it evolves like everything else."<br /><br />Sure, these complicated machines and processes might be needed in the far future--so they evolve. That's just how evolution works. What's really strange is that evolutionists were in denial of epigenetics for so long. Strange, it fits their theory so well.Cornelius Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12283098537456505707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-69593270819494394332010-02-07T12:22:15.871-08:002010-02-07T12:22:15.871-08:00Hi Tim,
Mike Gene's blog:
http://designmat...Hi Tim, <br /><br />Mike Gene's blog: <br /><br /><a href="http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/" rel="nofollow">http://designmatrix.wordpress.com/</a><br /><br />He hasn't been very productive for the last couple of weeks. Maybe taking a break. He's also written a book, which I recommend highly: <i>The Design Matrix; a Consilience of Clues</i>.Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-37997455938755167412010-02-07T10:17:21.950-08:002010-02-07T10:17:21.950-08:00Bilbo said: "s it OK if I just call you Tim?...Bilbo said: "s it OK if I just call you Tim? I prefer Mike Gene's approach for testing design hypotheses: How Discontinuous is its origin with natural processes? How analagous to Design processes? How Rational is it? How much Foresight does it exhibit?"<br /><br />You can call me TIm. It's not actually my real name anyway! Sorry, but who is Mike Gene? Do you have a link to his testing design approach?TrevorDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06650660580820963962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-64700384280563723852010-02-07T07:17:05.700-08:002010-02-07T07:17:05.700-08:00"The adaptation of species to environmental p..."The adaptation of species to environmental pressures would seem like obvious evidence for evolution."<br /><br />It is.<br /><br />"But in recent years we have begun to understand the enormous complexity of adaptation. It is not a story of natural selection acting on undirected biological variations (that is, variations that are blind to environmental pressures)."<br /><br />Random variation causes differential survival and reproductive success among the individuals of a population. Those whose variation makes them fitter than others leaving a greater genetic legacy. Consequently, the population becomes more adapted to its environment over time.<br /><br />"In what was known as the Modern Synthesis, biological adaptation was described as resulting from blind variations resulting, for instance, from genetic rearrangements or unguided mutations."<br /><br />In what is still known as the modern synthesis, biological adaptation occurs as I described above. The variations are random, but the differential fitness they cause leads to non-random natural selection.<br /><br />"No thanks to evolution we are now beginning to understand the real version of biological adaptation. What we are seeing is an incredibly complex adaptation machine that tweaks the designs of organisms in response to environmental pressures."<br /><br />Yes, as I have just explained.<br /><br />Evolution can create complexity from simple beginnings, given enough time (no, 6000 years is not long enough). No one has said that epigenetics is a prerequisite for evolution--only that once established it can, like any character, evolve to be more adaptive and/or efficient.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-54386424150578723652010-02-06T14:53:44.416-08:002010-02-06T14:53:44.416-08:00Bilbo: who is the picture of?
Bismark.<b>Bilbo</b>: <i>who is the picture of?</i><br /><br /><a href="http://www.zachriel.com/gotm.asp" rel="nofollow">Bismark</a>.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-41366162109461943492010-02-06T14:28:23.890-08:002010-02-06T14:28:23.890-08:00BTW, Zach, who is the picture of?BTW, Zach, who is the picture of?Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-5732923276301416532010-02-06T13:39:40.735-08:002010-02-06T13:39:40.735-08:00Bilbo: Really cool.
Quite.<b>Bilbo</b>: <i>Really cool.</i><br /><br />Quite.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-32838709926400588552010-02-06T13:34:25.456-08:002010-02-06T13:34:25.456-08:00Zach: We have every reason to believe epigenetic ...<b>Zach</b>: <i>We have every reason to believe epigenetic gene control is ancient, and that it evolves like everything else. And if it was already functional in primitive organisms, along with intracellular and intercellular signaling, that lends support to the theory that metazoa has deep roots.</i><br /><br /><i>Really</i> cool.Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-78627734564895482802010-02-06T13:03:34.039-08:002010-02-06T13:03:34.039-08:00Bilbo: epigenetic processes in prokaryotes? This w...<b>Bilbo</b>: <i>epigenetic processes in prokaryotes? This would make Mike so happy.</i><br /><br />We have every reason to believe epigenetic gene control is ancient, and that it evolves like everything else. And if it was already functional in primitive organisms, along with intracellular and intercellular signaling, that lends support to the theory that metazoa has deep roots.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-24932547155159086272010-02-06T12:48:34.231-08:002010-02-06T12:48:34.231-08:00Hi Timcol62,
Is it OK if I just call you Tim? I ...Hi Timcol62,<br /><br />Is it OK if I just call you Tim? I prefer Mike Gene's approach for testing design hypotheses: How Discontinuous is its origin with natural processes? How analagous to Design processes? How Rational is it? How much Foresight does it exhibit?<br /><br />Zach, epigenetic processes in prokaryotes? This would make Mike so happy.Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-18700942140095739692010-02-06T12:03:14.955-08:002010-02-06T12:03:14.955-08:00Cornelius Hunter: There you go again, another exam...<b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>There you go again, another example of how evolution is at war with science.</i><br /><br />Gee whiz. The use of the term "genotype" was meant broadly, that is, the heredity of an organism. Unless the facility can be shown to be transmitted reliably to future generations, it can be considered as part of the phenotype from a theoretical perspective. <br /><br /><b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>Of course epigenetics can cause permanent change, but evolutionists are in denial about it.</i><br /><br />Possibly. But that may just mean something like Lamarckian evolution, and even then it may only work primarily on certain traits, e.g. evolution in response to rapidly evolving pathogens. <br /><br /><b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>There is no scientific evidence evolution can create epigenetic mechanisms. </i><br /><br />Of course there is. <br /><br /><b>Cornelius Hunter</b>: <i>And not only did evolution doesn't predict them, it predicts they would not evolve since they convey no fitness improvement for eons. </i><br /><br />Epigenetic gene regulation is functional in prokaryotes.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-10002911503358696382010-02-06T11:10:54.969-08:002010-02-06T11:10:54.969-08:00Zach:
There you go again, another example of how ...Zach:<br /><br />There you go again, another example of how evolution is at war with science.<br /><br />" unless it can be shown to lead to a permanent change in genotype."<br /><br />There's evolutions fixation on genes. Of course epigenetics can cause permanent change, but evolutionists are in denial about it.<br /><br />"It's not as if evolution can't create complex mechanisms."<br /><br />There is no scientific evidence evolution can create epigenetic mechanisms. And not only did evolution doesn't predict them, it predicts they would not evolve since they convey no fitness improvement for eons. Nothing makes sense in biology in light of evolution.Cornelius Hunterhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12283098537456505707noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-25759595687813846282010-02-06T10:14:32.122-08:002010-02-06T10:14:32.122-08:00Bibo: "...and would seem to fit more easily i...Bibo: "...and would seem to fit more easily into a design hypothesis."<br /><br />If there is a design <i>hypothesis</i>, then by definition it should be testable, shouldn't it? How would you go about doing that?TrevorDhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06650660580820963962noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-46624178498770791562010-02-06T09:56:00.888-08:002010-02-06T09:56:00.888-08:00Bilbo: Whether epigenetic inheritance is only temp...<b>Bilbo</b>: <i>Whether epigenetic inheritance is only temporary or whether it leads to permanent change, the complex mechanisms involved would seem to be a huge challenge to neo-Darwinian theory, and would seem to fit more easily into a design hypothesis.</i><br /><br />Why? It's not as if evolution can't create complex mechanisms. We already have a huge amount of data supporting evolution, and nothing supporting design, so supposing design would require some very specific entailment.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-7619121080638790612010-02-06T09:50:16.607-08:002010-02-06T09:50:16.607-08:00Hi Zach,
Whether epigenetic inheritance is only ...Hi Zach, <br /><br />Whether epigenetic inheritance is only temporary or whether it leads to permanent change, the complex mechanisms involved would seem to be a huge challenge to neo-Darwinian theory, and would seem to fit more easily into a design hypothesis.Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-8675078576705893842010-02-06T06:38:22.606-08:002010-02-06T06:38:22.606-08:00Cell differentiation is due to epigenetic factors,...Cell differentiation is due to epigenetic factors, and even epigenetic inheritance apparently only lasts a few generations. All of this can be considered as part of the phenotype from a theoretical perspective—unless it can be shown to lead to a permanent change in genotype. In which case, as it would be a form of Lamarckian inheritance, it might still be consistent with evolution, though not neodarwinism.Zachrielhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11268229653808829377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3855268335402896473.post-57293207803034541912010-02-06T06:17:39.403-08:002010-02-06T06:17:39.403-08:00Thank you for a very informative post, Dr. Hunter....Thank you for a very informative post, Dr. Hunter. It looks like livivg things were designed to evolve. The question would be, how far?Bilbohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06231440026059820600noreply@blogger.com