Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Silent Dave · 03-10-2002, 11:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:
Esoll, how old are you?
Did you not see where I responded to the AIG question?

You haven't. I've looked.

For someone who can't be on the forum 24/7, you've racked up more posts in less than a week than I've racked up since October of 2000.

Why do you persist in projecting your own character flaws onto us? You're not fooling anyone.

Dave

Daggah · 03-11-2002, 12:00 AM

Oh but Silent Dave, the moron's been posting from some EZBoard where he calls us a cult because we haven't acknowledged his erroneous, out-of-date and out-of-context quotes. He expressed frustration at talking to a brick wall...now he knows how we feel when talking to HIM!

(I know first-hand...good lord, how much time have I spent only to be ignored?)

Vorkosigan · 03-11-2002, 02:05 AM

ESTRAGON:
Charming spot. (He turns, advances to front, halts facing auditorium.) Inspiring prospects. (He turns to Vladimir.) Let's go.
VLADIMIR:
We can't.
ESTRAGON:
Why not?
VLADIMIR:
We're waiting for randman.

lpetrich · 03-11-2002, 02:16 AM

I had posted a thread on the RNA world a couple months ago; use the "Search" link on this page to find it.

Basically, the RNA-world hypothesis states that the DNA->RNA->protein system started out as an all-RNA system; this is a much less complex system to account for, though there is still a gap between the RNA world and the more straightforward prebiotic chemistry. While nucleic-acid bases and amino acids can be formed in prebiotic-chemistry experiments without much trouble, that is much more difficult for sugars, like ribose. So RNA may be a replacement of some earlier molecule that had done double duty as information storage and enzyme.

Much of the discussion of the RNA world has focused on the catalytic abilities of some RNA molecules; however, I think that the strongest case for the RNA world is the fact that some enzyme cofactors contain RNA nucleotides without those cofactors being related to information storage. According to this reasoning, this RNA is a vestigial feature of the RNA world, and legions of vestigial features are known from elsewhere in the world of life.

Oolon Colluphid · 03-11-2002, 03:03 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by randman:

Cult is the word I would use.

Personally, I'd point-mutate the word 'cult'.

Quote:

I will be away either for awhile or for good

Ahh, what a shame. Your contributions were so insightful and evolution-smashing.

You'll be as sorely missed as a dose of the clap. Which reminds me, why might your loving creator create Neisseria gonorrhoeae?

TTFN, Oolon

[ March 11, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]

Do not wish to be associated w/ II · 03-11-2002, 03:11 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Oolon Colluphid:


Ahh, what a shame. Your contributions were so insightful and evolution-smashing.

You'll be as sorely missed as a dose of the clap. Which reminds me, why might your loving creator create Neisseria gonorrhoeae?

TTFN, Oolon

[ March 11, 2002: Message edited by: Oolon Colluphid ]

Silly! As punishment for unnatural 'urges' of course! He also created Neiserria meningitidis, Haemophilus influenzae, Listeria monocytogenes, Streptococcus pneumoniae and various other dastardly bugs to punish the offspring resulting from such evil unnatural urges. To you and I they might look like innocent kiddies- but they are riddled with sin to their rotten core!

Oolon Colluphid · 03-11-2002, 03:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thomas McPhee:

To you and I they might look like innocent kiddies- but they are riddled with sin to their rotten core!

D'oh! Silly me indeed. I was supposing that eg children blinded by neonatal gonococcal ophthalmia were an example of the sins of the fathers being visited upon the sons. I forgot that babies are themselves such wanton sinners

Oolon

Coragyps · 03-11-2002, 04:16 AM

Too little, too late is the story of much of my life, but I did have a thought last night: Isn't Randman's insistence on seeing "all the fossils" that led up to some species about the same as me asking him for names, height and weight at age 25, and eye color for each of his 16 great-great-grandparents? Otherwise, can we be sure he exists?

Oolon Colluphid · 03-11-2002, 04:39 AM

Good thought Coragyps

. Slight modification: I’d say it’s like us insisting that unless he can provide such details for, say, each maternal parent back to the fourteenth century, then he doesn’t exist.

The point, randman, is that we know that every fossilised creature had ancestors. From evolution, we can predict some features its ancestors should possess. Oddly enough, older rocks have been known from time to time to contain such creatures. You’ve been given this link before, but do please read this article about the <a href="http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm" target="_blank">Synapsida</a>. Here there is a series of creatures showing gradual change from purely reptile to creatures with a host of mammalian features.

Oolon

scigirl · 03-11-2002, 08:36 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thomas McPhee:
Silly! As punishment for unnatural 'urges' of course! He also created Neiserria meningitidis, Haemophilus influenzae, Listeria monocytogenes, Streptococcus pneumoniae and various other dastardly bugs to punish the offspring resulting from such evil unnatural urges.

Yeah, if you consider breathing and/or drinking water an evil unnatural urge!

My personal favorite creation of the judeo-christian war god: rotavirus. Every time one of those homophobe jackasses uses HIV as proof that god hates fags, I remind them about rotavirus, proof that god hates little babies. Kills a million kids a year, and all they did was drink the water in Africa.

Intelligent design theory may be correct (I have my doubts), but it sure as hell does not reveal a caring and loving designer. <img src="graemlins/banghead.gif" border="0" alt="[Bang Head]" />

scigirl

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-11-2002, 12:00 AM	#22
Daggah Banned Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: Deployed to Kosovo Posts: 4,314	Oh but Silent Dave, the moron's been posting from some EZBoard where he calls us a cult because we haven't acknowledged his erroneous, out-of-date and out-of-context quotes. He expressed frustration at talking to a brick wall...now he knows how we feel when talking to HIM! (I know first-hand...good lord, how much time have I spent only to be ignored?)

03-11-2002, 02:05 AM	#23
Vorkosigan Contributor Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Barrayar Posts: 11,866	ESTRAGON: Charming spot. (He turns, advances to front, halts facing auditorium.) Inspiring prospects. (He turns to Vladimir.) Let's go. VLADIMIR: We can't. ESTRAGON: Why not? VLADIMIR: We're waiting for randman.

03-11-2002, 02:16 AM	#24
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	I had posted a thread on the RNA world a couple months ago; use the "Search" link on this page to find it. Basically, the RNA-world hypothesis states that the DNA->RNA->protein system started out as an all-RNA system; this is a much less complex system to account for, though there is still a gap between the RNA world and the more straightforward prebiotic chemistry. While nucleic-acid bases and amino acids can be formed in prebiotic-chemistry experiments without much trouble, that is much more difficult for sugars, like ribose. So RNA may be a replacement of some earlier molecule that had done double duty as information storage and enzyme. Much of the discussion of the RNA world has focused on the catalytic abilities of some RNA molecules; however, I think that the strongest case for the RNA world is the fact that some enzyme cofactors contain RNA nucleotides without those cofactors being related to information storage. According to this reasoning, this RNA is a vestigial feature of the RNA world, and legions of vestigial features are known from elsewhere in the world of life.

03-11-2002, 04:16 AM	#28
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	Too little, too late is the story of much of my life, but I did have a thought last night: Isn't Randman's insistence on seeing "all the fossils" that led up to some species about the same as me asking him for names, height and weight at age 25, and eye color for each of his 16 great-great-grandparents? Otherwise, can we be sure he exists?

03-11-2002, 04:39 AM	#29
Oolon Colluphid Contributor Join Date: Sep 2000 Location: Alibi: ego ipse hinc extermino Posts: 12,591	Good thought Coragyps . Slight modification: I’d say it’s like us insisting that unless he can provide such details for, say, each maternal parent back to the fourteenth century, then he doesn’t exist. The point, randman, is that we know that every fossilised creature had ancestors. From evolution, we can predict some features its ancestors should possess. Oddly enough, older rocks have been known from time to time to contain such creatures. You’ve been given this link before, but do please read this article about the <a href="http://www.gcssepm.org/special/cuffey_05.htm" target="_blank">Synapsida</a>. Here there is a series of creatures showing gradual change from purely reptile to creatures with a host of mammalian features. Oolon

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.