FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > IIDB ARCHIVE: 200X-2003, PD 2007 > IIDB Philosophical Forums (PRIOR TO JUN-2003)
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 06-17-2003, 04:56 PM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: US east coast. And www.theroyalforums.com
Posts: 2,829
Default

Perhaps someboy could point us to the original of the Eldredge quote from Disciple's C&P from GodandScience, becaue the only place where some of the keywords are showing up is as a secondary quote from a creationist source.
Albion is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 05:26 PM   #22
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Corpus Christi, TX
Posts: 37
Default

Ok Disciple... given the scientific age of the earth if 4.5 billion... how do you explain why there were no birds or mammals more than 250 million years ago? mammals would have to be created by non-mammals, and birds from non-birds...
(which came first, the chicken or the egg? the egg, but the egg did not come from a chicken)
goat37 is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 05:43 PM   #23
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 957
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by NumberTenOx
Jinto,

Come on, you know it's 10E26 nanoseconds ( 10E9 (nanoseconds/second) * ~3E7 (seconds/year) * 2E10 years ~= 10E26 nanoseconds). Of course, I thought the Earth was only about 4.5 billion years old, but oh well.

And 10E141 / 10E26 is about 10E115.

Of course, it's the old 747 - tornado argument.
That would be 10^26. 10E26 is 10*10^26 or 10^27. And yeah, I knew what he was trying to say, but I'm trying to get him to read the stuff he copies and pastes before submitting it, and hopefully learn binary as well.
Jinto is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 07:33 PM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Denver, CO, USA
Posts: 9,747
Default

Quote:
Originally posted by Disciple
combination of a 40-chain amino acid is 1 in 10141
I assume you mean 1 in 10^141. (That's what happens when you cut and paste -- superscripts get lost.) At any rate, as has been pointed out already, this is wrong. The number of possible proteins with 40 amino acids is slightly less than 1.1^52. (There are twenty amino acids, so you simply raise 20 to the power of the number of amino acids.) I can't figure out how the source you cut and pasted from came up with your number, but this should tell you something about the competence of your source given that he screwed up such an extremely simple calculation.

Nonetheless, the number is only meaningful if you make a fatal assumption: that every amino acid in a given protein is invariant (i.e., can't be substituted with another). This is flat out false; in general, only a handful of amino acids in most proteins are invariant. There are others that are conserved, and can be substituted only with similar amino acids, and then there are others whose ability to be substituted depends entirely on other amino acids that it might interact with. But in general, a large fraction of amino acids can be substituted with any other amino acid without altering function. (Of course which amino acids can be mutated depends on the "context" that the mutation takes place in -- mutating one amino acid can alter which changes are allowed at other positions.) It is very common to find closely related proteins with 50, 60, or even 70% or more of their amino acids different, and yet they still have identical (or highly similar) structure, and identical (or highly similar) function. There are differences that go even beyond that, but it's hard to know if such proteins are related by divergence or convergence. The fact is, proteins are highly evolvable.

theyeti
theyeti is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 08:02 PM   #25
Junior Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: 7th circle of hell
Posts: 12
Default

NumberTenOx,

Master Li says hello!
Passant is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 08:15 PM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: WI
Posts: 4,357
Default

Originally posted by Disciple
L. E. Orgel

I have a very nice e-mail from Dr. Orgel stating his broad position on just about everything you have posted in this thread. Since I never asked his permission to reproduce it anywhere, I'll just have to open it now and enjoy a little chuckle all by myself.
hezekiah jones is offline  
Old 06-17-2003, 08:59 PM   #27
Regular Member
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Bellevue, WA
Posts: 284
Default

Quote:
10E26 is 10*10^26 or 10^27.
Um, yeah, that's it.

Quote:
Master Li says hello!
I would be most humbled if you would say hello to the sweet old man for me, sir.
NumberTenOx is offline  
Old 06-18-2003, 04:53 AM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: philadelphia
Posts: 1,844
Default spelling?

"broad position"

should that read "broad opposition"?
hyzer is offline  
Old 06-18-2003, 04:56 AM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Posts: 1,302
Thumbs down another cut-and-paste debater

Quote:
Originally posted by Disciple
[The following material was copied from
I thouhgt you said in your opening post that YOU wanted to debate?

It would appear that you are content to, instead of actually debating anything, simply post things that you have copied form creationist websites.


That is not debate.

That is basically spamming.


Care to actually debate something?
pangloss is offline  
Old 06-18-2003, 04:57 AM   #30
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Adelaide, Australia
Posts: 1,202
Default

Quote:
and hopefully learn binary as well. -Jinto
ROFL!!!! Let's see if he even reads your post. What's the bet he never even notices.

I notice that all of his arguments have [copied from ....] in numerous places in them. Someone should tell him the traditional way of arguing is to think of the arguments yourself and then quote evidence to back it up, not quote the arguments and think of the evidence to back it up yourself.

Oh, well it's good to see he's mastered copy and paste, even if he hasn't quite got the hang of reading arguments he's copying and thinking critically about them himself.

Somehow I think this will be a disappointing argument. Oh, well at least Jinto is making it amusing. I salute you.
Goober is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:59 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.