Friday, December 18, 2015

New class of DNA repair enzyme discovered

Over and over we are finding repair mechanisms that fight mutations and copying errors. Complex language that has meaning forward, backward and with layering.  Where is the evidence leading?

Life is super complex and has purpose. The information to direct it came from a mind.
-------


New class of DNA repair enzyme discovered October 29, 2015

A new class of DNA repair enzyme has been discovered which demonstrates that a much broader range of damage can be removed from the double helix in ways that biologists did not think were possible.

According to the researchers, the AlkD mechanism has some remarkable properties:
  • It can recognize damaged bases indirectly. AlkD identifies lesions by interacting with the DNA backbone without contacting the damaged base itself.
  • It can repair many different types of lesions as long as they are positively charged. By contrast, the base-flipping mechanism used by other glycosylases relies on a relatively tight binding pocket in the enzyme, so each glycosylase is designed to work with a limited number of lesions. AlkD doesn't have the same type of pocket so it isn't restricted in the same way. Instead, the catalytic mechanism that AlkD uses is limited to removing positively charged lesions.
  • It can excise much bulkier lesions than other glycosylases. Base excision repair is generally limited to relatively small lesions. A different pathway, called nucleotide excision repair, handles larger lesions like those caused by UV radiation damage. However, Eichman's team discovered that AlkD could excise extremely bulky lesions, such as the one caused by the antibiotic yatakemycin, which is beyond the capability of other glycosylases.


Front Loading? Genetic Entropy? Complexity to simplicity? 

Phys.org)—The view that animals have become more complex over time could be a thing of the past, according to the latest research.

The new evidence, from scientists at the University of St Andrews, suggests that some modern day animals may have evolved instead by becoming less complex. 
-and-

Our Fragile Intellect

"Taken together, the large number of genes required for intellectual and emotional function, and the unique susceptibility of these genes to loss of heterozygosity, lead me to conclude that we, as a species, are surprisingly intellectually fragile and perhaps reached a peak 2000–6000 years ago. But if we are losing our intellectual abilities, how did we acquire them in the first place? This will be the topic of the next section [15]. "

 

You do the math......... 


Tuesday, December 15, 2015

The death of NeoDarwinism, No Selfish Gene


"The genome... is best described as a database used by organisms to generate the functions that you and I and others study as physiology."

"We inherit much more than DNA"

"The number of possible interactions , the number of possible circuits you could form 25,000 genes is 10^70,000. There wouldn't be enough time over the whole billions of years of the evolution of life on earth for nature to have explored but more than a tiny fraction of those."


On Dawkins and the selfish gene - "He is totally confused."    "He has misused a metaphor"  "He [Dawkins] is philosophically naive and  I am afraid he has misled many people for a very considerable period of  time."  40 minutes in

"There are no good or bad genes"

"There are reasons those genes are there"

"The great majority of people we are talking to were educated in biology 30 or 40 years ago and they really have no idea of the sea change that has occurred."


"the house of cards, the citadel if you like  is empty, but many people still do not know that."  54 min

(more in comments below...)



Tuesday, August 18, 2015

Is nature mostly a tinkerer or an inventor? or was it all front loaded? by Who?

Who did the front loading?  

IDvolution - God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act.


This accounts for the diversity of life we see. The core makeup shared by all living things have the necessary complex information built in that facilitates rapid and responsive adaptation of features and variation while being able to preserve the “kind” that they began as. Life has been created with the creativity built in ready to respond to triggering events.

Phys.org August 18, 2015 published the following.

Is nature mostly a tinkerer or an inventor?  

The Krüppel-like factor and specificity protein (KLF/SP) genes are found across many species, ranging from single cell organisms to humans. This gene family has been conserved during evolution, because it plays a vital role in regulating the expression of other genes.


"Our study paints a picture of nature innovating largely through sharing the functional bits of —tinkering with molecular genetic material that already exists," said William E. Browne, assistant professor of Biology at UM's College of Arts & Sciences and principal investigator of the study.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-nature-tinkerer-inventor.html#jCp
"Our study paints a picture of nature innovating largely through sharing the functional bits of genes—tinkering with molecular genetic material that already exists," said William E. Browne, assistant professor of Biology at UM's College of Arts & Sciences and principal investigator of the study.

"This is interesting because it supports the idea that the appearance of new types of cells in a lineage of organisms as they evolve may be, more commonly, a consequence of turning off genes in unique temporal and spatial combinations," Browne said. "Large numbers of unique cell types are required to support the development of complex tissues and organs."


A prior finding

Front Loading? Genetic Entropy? Complexity to simplicity? 

Phys.org)—The view that animals have become more complex over time could be a thing of the past, according to the latest research.

The new evidence, from scientists at the University of St Andrews, suggests that some modern day animals may have evolved instead by becoming less complex. 
-and-

Our Fragile Intellect

"Taken together, the large number of genes required for intellectual and emotional function, and the unique susceptibility of these genes to loss of heterozygosity, lead me to conclude that we, as a species, are surprisingly intellectually fragile and perhaps reached a peak 2000–6000 years ago. But if we are losing our intellectual abilities, how did we acquire them in the first place? This will be the topic of
the next section [15]. "

 

You do the math......... 

 

"Our study paints a picture of nature innovating largely through sharing the functional bits of —tinkering with molecular genetic material that already exists," said William E. Browne, assistant professor of Biology at UM's College of Arts & Sciences and principal investigator of the study.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-nature-tinkerer-inventor.html#jCp
"This is interesting because it supports the idea that the appearance of new types of cells in a lineage of organisms as they evolve may be, more commonly, a consequence of turning off genes in unique temporal and spatial combinations," Browne said. "Large numbers of unique cell types are required to support the development of complex tissues and organs."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-nature-tinkerer-inventor.html#jCp
"This is interesting because it supports the idea that the appearance of new types of cells in a lineage of organisms as they evolve may be, more commonly, a consequence of turning off genes in unique temporal and spatial combinations," Browne said. "Large numbers of unique cell types are required to support the development of complex tissues and organs."

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2015-08-nature-tinkerer-inventor.html#jCp

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Monday, August 3, 2015

Rationality of Belief in God

At around 1:00 Dr Kreeft explains faith and reason and the intersection where both are true. (see illustration below)

Wednesday, July 8, 2015

How Could God Interact with the World? (William Dembski)

Closer to Truth

   

How Could God Interact with the World? (William Dembski)