Freethought & Rationalism Archive

RufusAtticus · 01-22-2003, 10:38 PM

Noob learning curve

Sean Pitman responding to me:

Quote:

You [Rufus] evidently do not understand how mutations are inherited. I would suggest that you go and look up the estimated average inherited DNA mutation rate for humans. This is a basic concept. So, to get it as wrong as you have really hurts your position.

Doubting Didymus · 01-22-2003, 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by fieldsofwind
How many of those "mutations" do you think are advancements?

Rufus replies:
N > 0

You endearing smartarse, you!

RufusAtticus · 01-23-2003, 12:29 PM

Thank you. I try hard.

Jobar · 01-23-2003, 06:22 PM

It is funny how you can make such accusations about incompetency, when you think that an ABCnews article is an adequate rebuttal to a working scientist talking about his own field. It's like bringing a rubber chicken to a cock fight.

From now on, when I see some IDiot or cretinist strut in here with "scientific arguments" I'm going to shout a warning about incoming rubber chickens, and alert Rufus to put on his spikes!

seesaw · 01-24-2003, 11:45 AM

lol

rafe gutman · 01-24-2003, 03:10 PM

wow, this sean pittman guy has a wonderful collection of essays at his webpage. have you guys been reading these? i particularly loved his essay on the immune system, where he argues that the immune system is not an example of evolution in action, as many have suggested. he provides a short background on the immune system, which has a few minor errors (and 1 major one, which isn't relevant to this discussion). overall though, it shows that at some point he probably took a class on the immune system, most likely in the course of his M.D. studies. however, he concludes that the immune system is not an example of evolution in action:

Quote:

This antibody [molecules that recognize foreign invaders]has now been selected by nature to make more of its exact self� NOT mutated or changed in any way. In fact, if the antibody were changed after cloning, it would not be helpful to the body. Therefore, the antibody (animal) does not change in its succeeding generations or �evolve.� In the immune system there is no evolution at all

he must have dropped out of the class after the first midterm, because if he bothered to look a little further into his immunology textbook, he would have noticed that antibody genes DO mutate in the course of an immune response, and THAT is why people consider the immune response to be "evolution in action".

maybe he should check out the free online edition of Janeway's Immunobiology. in particular, this section:
Rearranged V genes are further diversified by somatic hypermutation:

Quote:

The mechanisms for generating diversity described so far all take place during the rearrangement of gene segments in the initial development of B cells in the central lymphoid organs. There is an additional mechanism that generates diversity throughout the V region and that operates on B cells in peripheral lymphoid organs after functional immunoglobulin genes have been assembled. This process, known as somatic hypermutation, introduces point mutations into the V regions of the rearranged heavy- and light-chain genes at a very high rate, giving rise to mutant B-cell receptors on the surface of the B cells (Fig. 4.9). Some of the mutant immunoglobulin molecules bind antigen better than the original B-cell receptors, and B cells expressing them are preferentially selected to mature into antibody-secreting cells. This gives rise to a phenomenon called affinity maturation of the antibody population.

(emphasis mine)

so either this guy wrote the article midway through his immunology course, or he's flat out lying. either way, his article is WRONG, WRONG, WRONG. i'd say that's a pretty embarrassing mistake to make for a doctor of medicine. i sure hope his patients don't ask him how vaccines work.

Mageth · 01-24-2003, 03:30 PM

Posted by fieldsofwind on that thread:

Rufus, furus, rufus--it is not what I know, but what I believe and will believe in spite of whatever the amount of or type of knowledge comes knocking on my door.

I honestly don't know what to say to something like that, other than :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: .

Principia · 01-24-2003, 04:04 PM

Makes you kinda wish that there were more Michael Dini's out there, eh?

EDIT: Sean Pitman already had his debut at talk.origins.

01-23-2003, 06:22 PM	#4
Jobar Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: secularcafe.org Posts: 9,525	LOL! It is funny how you can make such accusations about incompetency, when you think that an ABCnews article is an adequate rebuttal to a working scientist talking about his own field. It's like bringing a rubber chicken to a cock fight. From now on, when I see some IDiot or cretinist strut in here with "scientific arguments" I'm going to shout a warning about incoming rubber chickens, and alert Rufus to put on his spikes!

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

01-23-2003, 12:29 PM	#3
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	Thank you. I try hard.

01-24-2003, 11:45 AM	#5
seesaw Regular Member Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: USA Posts: 136	lol

01-24-2003, 03:30 PM	#7
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Posted by fieldsofwind on that thread: Rufus, furus, rufus--it is not what I know, but what I believe and will believe in spite of whatever the amount of or type of knowledge comes knocking on my door. I honestly don't know what to say to something like that, other than :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: .

01-24-2003, 04:04 PM	#8
Principia Veteran Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: anywhere Posts: 1,976	Makes you kinda wish that there were more Michael Dini's out there, eh? EDIT: Sean Pitman already had his debut at talk.origins.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.