Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome".
....and....
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Evolution is a Natural Process Running Backwards
This video makes a lot of sense. Additional posts:
Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome".
....and....
Dr. John Sanford "Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome".
....and....
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Programming of Life video
Recommended! More good material. Denying design is most difficult nowadays.
Thanks to the Programming of Life folks the full video is available online. Teachers, look it over and ask the tough questions.
--------------------
"Programming of Life is a 45 minute documentary created to engage our scientific community in order to encourage forward thinking. It looks into scientific theories “scientifically”. It examines the heavy weight theory of origins, the chemical and biological theory of evolution, and asks the extremely difficult questions in order to reveal undirected natural process for what it is – a hindrance to true science.
This video and the book it was inspired by Joe Miano (Programming of Life) is about science and it is our hope that it will be evaluated based on scientific principals and not philosophical beliefs." (courtesy of PofL website)
Thanks to the Programming of Life folks the full video is available online. Teachers, look it over and ask the tough questions.
--------------------
"Programming of Life is a 45 minute documentary created to engage our scientific community in order to encourage forward thinking. It looks into scientific theories “scientifically”. It examines the heavy weight theory of origins, the chemical and biological theory of evolution, and asks the extremely difficult questions in order to reveal undirected natural process for what it is – a hindrance to true science.
This video and the book it was inspired by Joe Miano (Programming of Life) is about science and it is our hope that it will be evaluated based on scientific principals and not philosophical beliefs." (courtesy of PofL website)
Friday, March 2, 2012
Epigenetics, Epigenetics and more epigenetics.
For some time I have been claiming that epigenetic inheritance is a problem for evolution. Here we have Science Daily agreeing.This rapid ability to produce variation is in agreement with IDvolution.
From the article: "The results suggest that domestication has led to epigenetic changes. For more than 70 % of the genes, domesticated chickens retained a higher degree of methylation. Since methylation is a much faster process than random mutations, and may occur as a result of stress and other experiences, this may explain how variation within a species can increase so dramatically in just a short time."
From the article: "The results suggest that domestication has led to epigenetic changes. For more than 70 % of the genes, domesticated chickens retained a higher degree of methylation. Since methylation is a much faster process than random mutations, and may occur as a result of stress and other experiences, this may explain how variation within a species can increase so dramatically in just a short time."
Inherited Epigenetics Produced Record Fast Evolution
Heritable genome-wide variation of gene expression and promoter methylation between wild and domesticated chickens
Friday, February 3, 2012
The First Gene
More support for IDvolution! 
God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act.
The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control
God “breathed” the super language of DNA into the “kinds” in the creative act. The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control
“The First Gene: The Birth of Programming, Messaging and Formal Control”
is a peer-reviewed anthology of papers that focuses, for the first
time, entirely on the following difficult scientific questions:.....
Abstract: Could a composome, chemoton, or RNA vesicular protocell come to life in the absence of formal instructions, controls and regulation? Redundant, low-informational selfordering is not organization. Organization must be programmed. Intertwined circular constraints (e.g. complex hypercylces), even with negative and positive feedback, do not steer physicochemical reactions toward formal function or metabolic success. Complex hypercycles quickly and selfishly exhaust sequence and other phase spaces of potential metabolic resources.
"Chance and necessity are completely inadequate to describe the most important elements of what we repeatedly observe in intra-cellular life, especially. Science must acknowledge the reality and validity not only of a very indirect, post facto natural selection, but of purposeful selection for potential function as a fundamental category of reality. To disallow purposeful selection renders the practice of mathematics and science impossible."
A new technical book, The First Gene, edited by Gene Emergence Project director David L. Abel, ....." Materialists will not like this book because its arguments are 100% scientific, devoid of religious, political, or cultural concerns, and most importantly, compelling.
From reading The First Gene, a number of minimal theoretical and material requirements for life emerge:
*High levels of prescriptive information -
*Programming -
*Symbol systems and language -
*Molecules which can carry this information and programming
*Highly unlikely sequences of functional information -
*Formal function -
*An "agent" capable of making "intentional choices of mind" which can "choose" between various options, select for future function, and instantiate these requirements for life. -
Anti-ID conspiracy theorists love to say that those pesky creationists are always changing their terminology to get around the First Amendment. ID's intellectual pedigree refutes that charge, but The First Gene adds more reasons why that charge should not be taken seriously. The book offers highly technical, strictly scientific arguments about the nature of information, information processing, and biological functionality. Even a cursory read of this book shows that its contributors are just thinking about doing good science. And this science leads them to the conclusion that blind and unguided material causes cannot produce the complexity we observe in life. Some agent capable of making choices is required to produce the first life.
Abstract: Could a composome, chemoton, or RNA vesicular protocell come to life in the absence of formal instructions, controls and regulation? Redundant, low-informational selfordering is not organization. Organization must be programmed. Intertwined circular constraints (e.g. complex hypercylces), even with negative and positive feedback, do not steer physicochemical reactions toward formal function or metabolic success. Complex hypercycles quickly and selfishly exhaust sequence and other phase spaces of potential metabolic resources.
"Chance and necessity are completely inadequate to describe the most important elements of what we repeatedly observe in intra-cellular life, especially. Science must acknowledge the reality and validity not only of a very indirect, post facto natural selection, but of purposeful selection for potential function as a fundamental category of reality. To disallow purposeful selection renders the practice of mathematics and science impossible."
A new technical book, The First Gene, edited by Gene Emergence Project director David L. Abel, ....." Materialists will not like this book because its arguments are 100% scientific, devoid of religious, political, or cultural concerns, and most importantly, compelling.
From reading The First Gene, a number of minimal theoretical and material requirements for life emerge:
*High levels of prescriptive information -
*Programming -
*Symbol systems and language -
*Molecules which can carry this information and programming
*Highly unlikely sequences of functional information -
*Formal function -
*An "agent" capable of making "intentional choices of mind" which can "choose" between various options, select for future function, and instantiate these requirements for life. -
Anti-ID conspiracy theorists love to say that those pesky creationists are always changing their terminology to get around the First Amendment. ID's intellectual pedigree refutes that charge, but The First Gene adds more reasons why that charge should not be taken seriously. The book offers highly technical, strictly scientific arguments about the nature of information, information processing, and biological functionality. Even a cursory read of this book shows that its contributors are just thinking about doing good science. And this science leads them to the conclusion that blind and unguided material causes cannot produce the complexity we observe in life. Some agent capable of making choices is required to produce the first life.
Tuesday, January 24, 2012
The Origin of Life - Professor John Walton demonstates the odds against a random start
Professor Walton takes us through the chemistry and shows us the RNA world scenario is impossible. Life was complex at the earliest times.
The Origin of Life
Conclusions:
The Origin of Life
Conclusions:
- Statistically, the chance of forming even one “useful” RNA sequence can be shown to be essentially zero in the lifetime of the earth.
- The complexity of the first self-replicating system, and the information needed to build it, imply intelligent design.
- Hope of beating the colossal odds against random formation of replicating RNA is based on ideology rather than science.
- As lab experiments on model replicators become more complex they demonstrate the need for input from intelligent mind(s).
- Acceptance of an early earth atmosphere free of oxygen atoms strains belief beyond breaking point!
- No chemically or geologically plausible routes to nucleotides or RNA strands have been developed.
- Geological field work shows no support for a “prebiotic soup.” It favors little change in the atmosphere over time. Living things have been present since the first crustal rocks.
- After over 50 years of sterile origin of life research it is time to give intelligent design a fair hearing.
Thursday, January 12, 2012
Experimentally Confirming the Limits to Darwinian Evolution
Over at Evolution News this article dated 1/11/12 shows empirically that the Darwinian process degrades rather than constructing new functional systems. The article also states " It seems like some
notable workers are converging on the idea that the information for life
was all present at the beginning, and life diversifies by losing pieces
of that information. That concept is quite compatible with intelligent
design. Not so much with Darwinism."
So, we have more support for IDvolution.
"The work of Finnegan et al. (2012) strikes me as quite thorough and elegant. I have no reason to doubt that events could have unfolded that way. However, the implications of the work for unguided evolution appear very different to me than they've been spun in media reports. The most glaringly obvious point is that, like the results of Lenski's work, this is evolution by degradation. All of the functional parts of the system were already in place before random mutation began to degrade them. Thus it is of no help to Darwinists, who require a mechanism that will construct new, functional systems. What's more, unlike Lenski's results, the mutated system of Thornton and colleagues is not even advantageous; it is neutral, according to the authors. Perhaps sensing the disappointment for Darwinism in the results, the title of the paper and news reports emphasize that the "complexity" of the system has increased. But increased complexity by itself is no help to life -- rather, life requires functional complexity. One can say, if one wishes, that a congenitally blind man teaming up with a congenitally legless man to safely move around the environment is an increase in "complexity" over a sighted, ambulatory person. But it certainly is no improvement, nor does it give the slightest clue how vision and locomotion arose."
"Finnegan et al.'s (2012) work intersects with several other concepts. First, their work is a perfect example of Michael Lynch's idea of "subfunctionalization," where a gene with several functions duplicates, and each duplicate loses a separate function of the original. (Force et al., 1999) Again, however, the question of how the multiple functions arose in the first place is begged. Second, it intersects somewhat with the recent paper by Austin Hughes (2011) in which he proposes a non-selective mechanism of evolution abbreviated "PRM" (plasticity-relaxation-mutation), where a "plastic" organism able to survive in many environments settles down in one and loses by degradative mutation and drift the primordial plasticity. But again, where did those primordial functions come from? It seems like some notable workers are converging on the idea that the information for life was all present at the beginning, and life diversifies by losing pieces of that information. That concept is quite compatible with intelligent design. Not so much with Darwinism."
So, we have more support for IDvolution.
Evolution of increased complexity in a molecular machine
"The work of Finnegan et al. (2012) strikes me as quite thorough and elegant. I have no reason to doubt that events could have unfolded that way. However, the implications of the work for unguided evolution appear very different to me than they've been spun in media reports. The most glaringly obvious point is that, like the results of Lenski's work, this is evolution by degradation. All of the functional parts of the system were already in place before random mutation began to degrade them. Thus it is of no help to Darwinists, who require a mechanism that will construct new, functional systems. What's more, unlike Lenski's results, the mutated system of Thornton and colleagues is not even advantageous; it is neutral, according to the authors. Perhaps sensing the disappointment for Darwinism in the results, the title of the paper and news reports emphasize that the "complexity" of the system has increased. But increased complexity by itself is no help to life -- rather, life requires functional complexity. One can say, if one wishes, that a congenitally blind man teaming up with a congenitally legless man to safely move around the environment is an increase in "complexity" over a sighted, ambulatory person. But it certainly is no improvement, nor does it give the slightest clue how vision and locomotion arose."
"Finnegan et al.'s (2012) work intersects with several other concepts. First, their work is a perfect example of Michael Lynch's idea of "subfunctionalization," where a gene with several functions duplicates, and each duplicate loses a separate function of the original. (Force et al., 1999) Again, however, the question of how the multiple functions arose in the first place is begged. Second, it intersects somewhat with the recent paper by Austin Hughes (2011) in which he proposes a non-selective mechanism of evolution abbreviated "PRM" (plasticity-relaxation-mutation), where a "plastic" organism able to survive in many environments settles down in one and loses by degradative mutation and drift the primordial plasticity. But again, where did those primordial functions come from? It seems like some notable workers are converging on the idea that the information for life was all present at the beginning, and life diversifies by losing pieces of that information. That concept is quite compatible with intelligent design. Not so much with Darwinism."
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Molecular Animation - from genomic information to protein synthesis
A video on the inner workings of the cell. See the molecular machinery in action.
The movie "The Central Dogma: From Genomic Information to Protein Synthesis" is made by RIKEN Omics Science Center (RIKEN OSC) for the exhibition titled "Beyond DNA" held at National Science Museum of Japan. We tried to illustrate how molecular machines interact each other in the central dogma by giving "Japanese robot-anime" style representation to the molecules. By using this approach, people (especially kids) can easily distinguish between those molecules and understand how they function in our body.
The movie "The Central Dogma: From Genomic Information to Protein Synthesis" is made by RIKEN Omics Science Center (RIKEN OSC) for the exhibition titled "Beyond DNA" held at National Science Museum of Japan. We tried to illustrate how molecular machines interact each other in the central dogma by giving "Japanese robot-anime" style representation to the molecules. By using this approach, people (especially kids) can easily distinguish between those molecules and understand how they function in our body.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)