Posted on 08/21/2005 8:17:20 PM PDT by DaveLoneRanger
Evolutionary biologist Richard Sternberg made a fateful decision a year ago.
As editor of the hitherto obscure Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington, Sternberg decided to publish a paper making the case for "intelligent design," a controversial theory that holds that the machinery of life is so complex as to require the hand -- subtle or not -- of an intelligent creator.
Within hours of publication, senior scientists at the Smithsonian Institution -- which has helped fund and run the journal -- lashed out at Sternberg as a shoddy scientist and a closet Bible thumper.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
There is a difference between science being practiced (medicine, research to learn about sickness, disease, etc.) and theorizing about origins. Let's keep the borders clear, shall we? Evolution is a belief, just like Creation, except with less evidence and more proclaimers.
Since when has the WP become a friend of Christians?
"Within hours of publication, senior scientists at the Smithsonian Institution -- which has helped fund and run the journal -- lashed out at Sternberg as a shoddy scientist and a closet Bible thumper."
Probably called him a snaker handler as well, maybe even trailer trash. Could be the same bunch has set up shop right here on FR.
Sound familiar????
Somebody sure pulled your leg real good if you're naive enough to believe that!
Yep. I consider doctors to simply be mechanics, except the machinery is a little more complex.
ID ALERT
Evolution is the belief of the mathematically challenged.
The higher you make the odds, the more excited and sure they get.
More to the point, the Supreme Court has found that secular humanism is a religion. The theory of evolution is a cornerstone of that religion.
No less an expert than ardent Darwinian atheist and philosopher of science Michael Ruse has asserted that evolution is the religion of dogmatic evolutioniary atheists, having written that;
"Evolution is promoted by its practitioners as more than mere science. Evolution is promulgated as an ideology, a secular religion --- a full-fledged alternative to Christianity, with meaning and morality. . . . Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."
From "Saving Darwinism from the Darwinians," National Post (May 13, 2000).
That's interesting. Do you have a link to that quote?
I find the scientific establishment's insecurity and intolerance to be embarrassing. I don't know about ID but the reaction to it is illuminating.
>More to the point, the Supreme Court has found that secular humanism is a religion. The theory of evolution is a cornerstone of that religion.
And their little hearts are faint because all their core beliefs depend on the fact that there isn't a God, but the deeper they dig into things, the more sure it is that there has to be a God.
Harvard is opening up a multimillion-dollar research to try and prove that life could have happened without God.
( "My expectation is that we will be able to reduce this to a very simple series of logical events that could have taken place with no divine intervention," said David R. Liu, a professor of chemistry and chemical biology at Harvard. )
http://www.cnn.com/2005/TECH/science/08/15/harvard.evolution.ap/index.html
"could have taken place with no divine intervention"
They don't like to even use the word God.
So, after all these years and after all the books, Evo's top scientists are desperately trying to prove the possibility of evolution in their "multimillion-dollar facilities".
In the words of one of Evo's top scientist, Steven Benner, they are "going for a solution to a problem".
What is the problem?
From the article:
"The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must have had a hand in creation."
I find it very telling that most IDers (of whatever variety) don't mind living in a world where everyone doesn't believe exactly the way they do*; whereas evolution believers can't STAND it that somewhere, someone, may disagree with them. They are the most intolerant bunch I've ever seen, besides promoters of the "gay" agenda.
*We just wouldn't mind if we were let out of the closet a little.
Thank you for revealing your almost complete ignorance of a vast, well-supported field of science.
Just because you're unaware of the mountains of evidence for evolution, don't mistake your ignorance for reality.
Wow, more lack of understanding mistaken for reality... There is far more math in the research papers of evolutionary biology than you can possibly handle, kid.
Run back to your creationist playground, if you're just going to post falsehoods and use it as a cheap excuse for unfounded sarcasm.
You're full of crap, son.
Feel free to believe anything you want, including fairies and unicorns. We don't mind at all.
What we *do* mind is people lying about evolutionary biology (examples can be seen on this very thread). We mind people pushing propaganda and pseudoscience as science, and trying to shoehorn it into science classrooms.
In short, believe whatever you want, but expect opposition when you try to undermine science with lies and propaganda.
That deserves the same response which Michael Moore and his ilk deserve, and for exactly the same reason.
They are the most intolerant bunch I've ever seen, besides promoters of the "gay" agenda.
Yeah, silly us, we insist that creationists actually be honest about the subject, instead of bearing false witness, and spewing disinformation. How intolerant of us.
Everyone's entitled to their own opinion, but everyone is not entitled to their own "facts". Lie about science, and expect to get called on it. Poor baby.
I make no apologies for being intolerant of lies, deceit, and propaganda.
If you want to defend them, that's your choice.
More to the topic of the thread, anyone who did, or sympathizes with, what was done to Sternberg has no authority to argue in this matter of Scientific Politics. And that's all it is.
"I make no apologies for being intolerant of lies, deceit, and propaganda.
If you want to defend them, that's your choice."
One man's lie is another man's truth, been that way since the beginning. (Of course I am referring to two different body types)
Going by ID arguement and assuming the Designer is at least as complex as what he designed, the Designer could not have come about 'by itself' and must have been designed by a super-Designer, and so on...I don't see how ID solves anything at all.
A scientific theory is judged on its usefulness at prediction, not its 'truth'. ID predicts nothing and so is useless as a theory, no matter how 'true' it may be. Just thought I'd get my two cents worth in.
Yet another lie. The majority of Americans who support evolution are *Christians*. Sorry if that makes your head explode, and shatters your paranoid conspiracy theory.
So, after all these years and after all the books, Evo's top scientists are desperately trying to prove the possibility of evolution in their "multimillion-dollar facilities".
Abiogenesis is not evolution. Try to learn ninth-grade science before you attempt to critique it.
In the words of one of Evo's top scientist, Steven Benner, they are "going for a solution to a problem". What is the problem? From the article: "The theory of intelligent design says life on earth is too complex to have developed through evolution, implying that a higher power must have had a hand in creation."
Yeah, so?
You should be happy about this -- if you're right, they'll discover the impossibility of natural processes. Why your panic? Afraid they'll uncover findings which instead undermine your untested belief? Afraid of what the research and evidence will actually show?
I wouldn't have pegged you as a relativist.
If you want to believe something as bizarre as the proposition that truth is relative, that there is no such thing as "the" truth, well, I have nothing further to say that can penetrate your "we could all be right" worldview.
Some of the attacks were inexcusably personal.
However, anyone who thinks that Sternberg should bear no *professional* repercussions for his failure to follow the proper standards of his *profession*, then you really don't understand the situation.
Try f***ing up at work and then whining about how it doesn't enhance your career, and see how far that gets you.
Do you find the conservative establishment's "insecurity and intolerance" to Michael Moore and his ilk to be embarassing? It's an extremely apt parallel.
I don't know about ID but the reaction to it is illuminating.
"I don't know about Michael Moore but the reaction to him is illuminating". Discuss.
> Wow, more lack of understanding mistaken for reality... There is far more math in the research papers of evolutionary biology than you can possibly handle, kid.
Try me Bubba! Let’s see what you got.
Show me the equation – from rock to man – I’ll prove it’s mathematically impossible.
If you have trouble with the equation, I can help you out.
I lived through Clintonism and you want to convince me that truth is not relative???
Wow, you really *did* swallow the left's propaganda...
Words mean things to different people on different levels,
And yet truth remains truth, and falsehood remains falsehood.
evolution is not the path to truth.
And you know this... how? And do you really think that this view of yours justifies lying about evolution, science, and its adherents?
From what I understand it's a good journal. That's means reviewers should actually flag rubbish and send it back to the author(s) for revision, or refuse it outright. The paper he passed over as "science" was not science and it contained errors and hand waiving. It should not have been published.
Big time screw ups tend to cause commotion.
>However, anyone who thinks that Sternberg should bear no *professional* repercussions for his failure to follow the proper standards of his *profession*, then you really don't understand the situation.
And you really don't understand Sternberg. Yup. It's a situation you don't really understand. There's no *however* and there's no, as you admit, *excuse* for it. Some Scientists are very tired of arrogant prigs running Scientific Politics. Let's see who wins this one.
There's no way you can possibly be this naive. What kind of bizarre religion are you into anyway?
>Afraid of what the research and evidence will actually show?
No, I just get a laugh that all Evo’s top scientist know that there are serious holes in the religion of evolution and are desperately trying to shore up the walls before they cave in.
All the little Evo faithful are in sweet bliss not realizing they’re standing on quicksand.
Wow, you just proved my point, thanks!
And I am not a Biblical young earth creationist by any stretch of the imagination.
Funny how your comments illustrated the comments you were replying to.
I don't mind you having your opinion, interesting that you and your ilk can't stand me having mine. And I "know" that you are wrong just as much if not more so than you "know" that I am wrong.
Have a nice night!
(BTW, you don't hurt my feelings at all, I find you kind of interesting and I hope that you don't get high blood pressure or a stroke from all that strong emotion.)
Try me Bubba! Let’s see what you got.
Tiny taste:
P A S T
PAlaeontological STatistics
Documentation and case studies (HTML)
PAST is a free, easy-to-use data analysis package aimed at paleontology. Inspired by PALSTAT, it includes common statistical, plotting and modelling functions:
Included in the distribution are real data sets for educational use, together with extensive documentation and case studies.
- A spreadsheet-type data entry form
- Graph, scatter, 3D scatter, histogram, box, ternary, survivorship, spindle, matrix and normal probability plots
- Curve fitting: Linear (Standard and Reduced Major Axis) with bootstrapping, lin-log (exponential), log-log (allometric), logistic, von Bertalanffy, sum-of-sines, B-splines.
- F, t, permutation t, Chi-squared w. permutation test, Kolmogorov-Smirnov, Mann-Whitney, Shapiro-Wilk, Spearman's Rho and Kendall's Tau tests, correlation, covariance, contingency tables, one-way ANOVA, Kruskal-Wallis test, mixture analysis.
- Diversity indices with bootstrapping and permutation, rarefaction. Capture-recapture richness estimators. Dice, Jaccard, Simpson and Raup-Crick similarity indices, Renyi diversity profiles.
- Abundance model fitting: Geometric, log-series and log-normal.
- Multivariate statistics: Principal Components (with Minimal Spanning Tree), Principal Coordinates (14 distance measures), Non-metric Multidimensional Scaling (14 distance measures), Detrended Correspondence Analysis, Cluster analysis (three algorithms, 13 distance measures, two-way clustering), k-means clustering, seriation, discriminant analysis, one-way MANOVA, one-way ANOSIM, one-way NPMANOVA, Hotelling's T2, paired Hotelling's T2, Mahalanobis-distance permutation, Box's M, Canonical Variates Analysis, multivariate allometry with bootstrapping.
- Time series analysis: Spectral analysis, autocorrelation, cross-correlation, wavelet transform, Walsh transform, runs test.
- Geometrical analysis: Directional statistics, rose plots, point distribution statistics, Fourier shape analysis, elliptic Fourier shape analysis, eigenshapes, landmark analysis with Procrustes fitting (2D and 3D), thin-plate spline transformation grids with expansions and principal strains, partial warps and scores, relative warps and scores, centroid size from landmarks, size removal by Burnaby's method.
- Parsimony analysis (cladistics): Exhaustive, branch-and-bound and heuristic algorithms, Wagner, Fitch and Dollo characters. Bootstrap, strict and majority rule consensus trees. Consistency and retention indices. Three stratigraphic congruency indices with permutation tests.
- Biostratigraphy with the methods of Unitary Associations, Ranking-Scaling (RASC) and Constrained Optimization (CONOP). Confidence intervals on stratigraphic ranges.
- Gridding (spatial interpolation): Moving average, thin-plate spline and kriging with three semivariogram models.
PAST has been tested under Windows 95, 98, 2000, NT 4 and XP.
PAST - because your data deserve itTM
Show me the equation – from rock to man –
What are you babbling about here? Sorry, but I'm not stupid enough to think that anyone can model such an open-ended process, since that would require complete knowledge of, well, just about everything, to such a degree that one would be able to, for example, predict the exact odds of a hurricane in March of 45,000 BC, since weather, among other things, affects evolutionary events.
You're not very clear on how science is actually done, are you?
I’ll prove it’s mathematically impossible.
Go right ahead. This should be... amusing.
If you have trouble with the equation,
Only because its non-linearly intractable, and NP-complete.
I can help you out.
ROFL! Okay, sure, go for it! Show us whatcha got. Teach grandpa how to suck eggs, sonny. Be sure to show your work, state all of your premises, and provide support for your choice of boundary conditions, as well as your reasons for leaving out the things not included in your model, and why these do not affect the validity of your results.
If you're going to do one of the usual brain-dead creationist "protein string probability" calculations, be sure to avoid the more common pitfalls and don't leave out the analysis of the redundancies of amino acid functionality. We'll wait.
I'm sure it looks that way to someone who gets his information from creationist pamphlets, but the actual field is quite stable.
Which is why it comes packaged with all the ifs maybes, perhaps, possibilities, probabilities, etc.
Yes, heaven forbid, science is aware the fact that all human knowledge is always necessarily incomplete.
Too bad you completely fail to understand the reasons for such cautious language in science. Typical.
Just like you claiming that most evolutionists in America are Christians?????
And you want to talk about "truth"? Christ set the standard and HE uttered NOT one word about evolution being His method of placement upon this earth.
Are you a Christian????
And you really don't understand Sternberg. Yup.
Since you are unable to provide any actual rebuttal, or produce any manner in which my understanding of Sternberg is actuall flawed, it appears that you don't have any actual rebuttal other than "is not!"
It's a situation you don't really understand.
Sure, kid, sure.
Some Scientists are very tired of arrogant prigs running Scientific Politics.
This is about the science and scientific standards, not "politics". Or at least it is to the evolutionary biologists. To the creationists, of course, it's *always* a matter of politics.
Let's see who wins this one.
Hopefully, proper standards will be upheld, and shoddy hand-waving and misrepresentation like the Meyer article won't become too common.
ID says the laws of physics are insufficient to govern nature. It's as simple as that.
Proof:
ID uses the laws of physics to make some calculation. The ID guy swears his logic is OK and his math likewise. The output of his calculation says, "the result of the calculation can't explain the observaitons."
There are then 2 remaining possibilities, because he swears his model is good:
1) The model is missing some -knowledge and understanding(of physics)
2) The model is right, the physics are 100% correct, that's all the physics there is, and there's an intelligent force
Take your choice:
The laws of physics are not sufficient and you abandon science and hire a shaman, else they are and you stick with science, admit ignorance and work some more.
In any event if you go for the shaman, he stays out of the science class.
>There's no way you can possibly be this naive.
Are you just talk?
I said, “Show me the equation – from rock to man – I’ll prove it’s mathematically impossible.”
Now, I knew you’d panic at that.
There isn’t one Evo that would dare consider all the odds.
They know it would evaluate to zero – impossible.
Pick any stage of the religion of evolution and let’s consider the odds.
If you’re having trouble, I’ll help you out.
We all start out as one cell and turn into 100 trillion cells, capable of reproducing the same.
Let’s consider the odds of that.
>This is about the science and scientific standards, not "politics". Or at least it is to the evolutionary biologists
Again, there is no excuse for what was done to Sternberg, none, and it is behavior unbefitting those with *scientific* integrity. It was pure politics, or you don't understand the situation. By the way, the word 'proper' in the English language is subjective. Subject to distortion by arrogant prigs.
Keep writing and prove my point. Kid.
No, I just get a laugh that all Evo’s top scientist know that there are serious holes in the religion of evolution
Evolutionary biology is not a "religion", although I suppose it may look that way to the person to whom *everything* needs to be viewed through a filter of religion (*cough*creationists*cough*).
and are desperately trying to shore up the walls before they cave in.
Wow, you really *HAVE* made the mistake of believing all that goofy creationists propaganda, haven't you? Sorry, but evolutionary biology is on even firmer footing today, than it ever has been, and that's really saying something, since it has been on a rock-solid mountain of evidence for at least 75 years now, and the mountain has just kept growing since then. The advent of large-scale DNA sequencing starting 20 years ago has resulting in an *explosion* of new evidence supporting evolution, and has settled the issue so thoroughly for anyone who actually bothers to examine and understand the evidence that for all practical purposes, the debate is *over*, and evolution has won hands down. Except, of course, to the sort of "I don't need to look at no stinking evidence" folks who favor conspiracy theories about faked moon landings, and anti-evolution creationist fantasies. Like it or not, you're close intellectual cousins to the Michael Moore followers.
All the little Evo faithful are in sweet bliss not realizing they’re standing on quicksand.
And you arrived at this conclusion due to your vast decades-long study of the primary scientific literature, right? Of course you didn't. You read a few creationist propaganda pieces and suddenly "you are a expert", who now "knows" more about a complex, vast subject like evolutionary biology than those poor simpletons who have spent their lives acquiring knowledge about it and doing intensive research on it, right?
The arrogance of know-knothing creationists never ceases to amaze me.
But hey, since you're so familiar with this field that you "know" that it's really nothing but an empty shell, resting on "quicksand", surely you wouldn't have any problem explaining what's wrong with the specific findings of the following studies, each of which certainly *appears* to support evolution, but only *you* know where they've actually made their mistakes:
(Note, a recent change at NCBI has broken a lot of these links, but you can still find those papers by Googling for their titles)I await your insights as to where the "mistakes" are in each of these papers, and why they are only actually "quicksand". Go for it.Banyai, L., Varadi, A. and Patthy, L. (1983). “Common evolutionary origin of the fibrin-binding structures of fibronectin and tissue-type plasminogen activator.” FEBS Letters, 163(1): 37-41.
Bazan, J. F. (1990). “Structural design and molecular evolution of a cytokine receptor superfamily.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 87(18): 6934-6938.
Blake, C. C. F., Harlos, K. and Holland, S. K. (1987). “Exon and Domain Evolution in the Proenzymes of Blood Coagulation and Fibrinolysis.” Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology: The Evolution of Catalytic Function, LII: 925-932.
Fornace AJ Jr, Cummings DE, Comeau CM, Kant JA, Crabtree GR. “The Structure of the human gamma-fibrinogen gene. Alternate mRNA splicing near the 3' end of the gene produces gamma A and gamma B forms of gamma-fibrinogen.” J Biol Chem. 1984 Oct 25;259(20):12826-30.
Crabtree, G. R., Comeau, C. M., Fowlkes, D. M., Fornace, A. J., Jr., Malley, J. D. and Kant, J. A. (1985). “Evolution and structure of the fibrinogen genes: Random insertion of introns or selective loss?” Journal of Molecular Biology, 185(1): 1-20.
Di Cera, E., Dang, Q. D. and Ayala, Y. M. (1997). “Molecular mechanisms of thrombin function.” Cell Mol Life Sci, 53(9): 701-730.
Doolittle, R. F. (1985). “More homologies among the vertebrate plasma proteins.” Biosci Rep, 5(10-11): 877-884.
Doolittle, R. F. (1990). “The Structure and Evolution of Vertebrate Fibrinogen A Comparison of the Lamprey and Mammalian Proteins,” in ADVANCES IN EXPERIMENTAL MEDICINE AND BIOLOGY: FIBRINOGEN, THROMBOSIS, COAGULATION, AND FIBRINOLYSIS. C. Y. Liu and Chien, S. New York, Plenum Press. 281.
Doolittle, R. F. (1992). “A detailed consideration of a principal domain of vertebrate fibrinogen and its relatives.” Protein Science, 1(12): 1563-1577.
Doolittle, R. F. (1992). “Early Evolution of the Vertebrate Fibrinogen Molecule.” Biophysical Journal, 61(2 PART 2): A410.
Doolittle, R. F. (1992). “Stein and Moore Award address. Reconstructing history with amino acid sequences.” Protein Science, 1(2): 191-200.
Doolittle, R. F. (1993). “The Evolution of Vertebrate Blood Coagulation - a Case of Yin and Yang.” Thrombosis and Haemostasis, V70(N1): 24-28.
Doolittle, R. F. and Feng, D. F. (1987). “Reconstructing the Evolution of Vertebrate Blood Coagulation from a Consideration of the Amino Acid Sequences of Clotting Proteins.” Cold Spring Harbor Symposia on Quantitative Biology: The Evolution of Catalytic Function, LII: 869-874.
Doolittle, R. F., G., Spraggon and J., Everse S. (1997). “Evolution of vertebrate fibrin formation and the process of its dissolution.” Ciba Found Symp, 212: 4-17; discussion 17-23.
Doolittle, R. F. and Riley, M. (1990). “The amino-terminal sequence of lobster fibrinogen reveals common ancestry with vitellogenins.” Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, 167(1): 16-19.
Edgington, T. S., Curtiss, L. K. and Plow, E. F. (1985). “A linkage between the hemostatic and immune systems embodied in the fibrinolytic release of lymphocyte suppressive peptides.” Journal of Immunology, 134(1): 471-477.
Ghidalia, W., Vendrely, R., Montmory, C., Coirault, Y., Samama, M., Lucet, B., Bellay, A. M. and Vergoz, D. (1989). “Overall study of the in vitro plasma clotting system in an invertebrate, Liocarcinus puber (Crustacea Decapoda): Considerations on the structure of the Crustacea plasma fibrinogen in relation to evolution.” Journal of Invertebrate Pathology, 53(2): 197-205.
Hervio, L. S., Coombs, G. S., Bergstrom, R. C., Trivedi, K., Corey, D. R. and Madison, E. L. (2000). “Negative selectivity and the evolution of protease cascades: the specificity of plasmin for peptide and protein substrates.” Chemistry & Biology, V7(N6): 443-452.
Hewett-Emmett, D., Czelusniak, J. and Goodman, M. (1981). “The evolutionary relationship of the enzymes involved in blood coagulation and hemostasis.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 370(20): 511-527.
Holland, S. K., Harlos, K. and Blake, C. C. F. (1987). “Deriving the generic structure of the fibronectin type II domain from the prothrombin Kringle 1 crystal structure.” EMBO (European Molecular Biology Organization) Journal, 6(7): 1875-1880.
Jordan, R. E. (1983). “Antithrombin in vertebrate species: conservation of the heparin-dependent anticoagulant mechanism.” Archives of Biochemistry and Biophysics, 227(2): 587-595.
Kant, J. A., Fornace, A. J., Jr., Saxe, D., Simon, M. J., McBride, O. W. and Crabtree, G. R. (1985). “Evolution and organization of the fibrinogen locus on chromosome 4: Gene duplication accompanied by transposition and inversion.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 82(8): 2344-2348.
Kornblihtt, A. R., Pesce, C. G., Alonso, C. R., Cramer, P., Srebrow, A., Werbajh, S. and Muro, A. F. (1996). “The fibronectin gene as a model for splicing and transcription studies.” FASEB Journal, 10(2): 248-257.
Laki, K. (1972). “Our ancient heritage in blood clotting and some of its consequences.” Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 202(4): 297-307.
Neurath, H. (1984). “Evolution of proteolytic enzymes.” Science, 224(4647): 350-357.
Neurath, H. (1986). “The Versatility of Proteolytic Enzymes.” Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, 32(1): 35-50.
Oldberg, A. and Ruoslahti, E. (1986). “Evolution of the fibronectin gene: Exon structure of cell attachment domain.” Journal of Biological Chemistry, 261(5): 2113-2116.
Opal, S. M. (2000). “Phylogenetic and functional relationships between coagulation and the innate immune response.” Critical Care Medicine, V28(N9 SUPPS): S77-S80.
Pan, Y. and Doolittle, R. F. (1991). “Distribution of Introns in Lamprey Fibrinogen Genes.” Journal of Cellular Biochemistry Supplement(15 PART D): 75.
Pan, Y. and Doolittle, R. F. (1992). “cDNA sequence of a second fibrinogen alpha chain in lamprey: an archetypal version alignable with full-length beta and gamma chains.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 89(6): 2066-2070.
Patthy, L. (1985). “Evolution of the Proteases of Blood Coagulation and Fibrinolysis by Assembly from Modules.” Cell, 41(3): 657-664.
Patthy, L. (1990). “Evolution of blood coagulation and fibrinolysis.” Blood Coagulation and Fibrinolysis, 1(2): 153-166.
Patthy, L. (1990). “Evolutionary Assembly of Blood Coagulation Proteins.” Seminars in Thrombosis and Hemostasis, 16(3): 245-259.
Patthy, L. (1999). “Genome evolution and the evolution of exon-shuffling—a review.” Gene, 238(1): 103-114.
Roberts, Lewis R., Nichols, Lanita A. and Holland, Lene J. (1995). “CDNA and amino-acid sequences and organization of the gene encoding the B-beta subunit of fibrinogen from Xenopus laevis.” Gene (Amsterdam), 160(2): 223-228.
Sosnoski, D. M., Emanuel, B. S., Hawkins, A. L., Van Tuinen, P., Ledbetter, D. H., Nussbaum, R. L., Kaos, F. T., Schwartz, E., Phillips, D. and et al. (1988). “Chromosomal localization of the genes for the vitronectin and fibronectin receptors .alpha. subunits and for platelet glycoproteins IIb and IIIa.” Journal of Clinical Investigation, 81(6): 1993-1998.
Wang, Y. Z., Patterson, J., Gray, J. E., Yu, C., Cottrell, B. A., Shimizu, A., Graham, D., Riley, M. and Doolittle, R. F. (1989). “Complete sequence of the lamprey fibrinogen .alpha. chain.” Biochemistry, 28(25): 9801-9806.
Xu, X. and Doolittle, R. F. (1990). “Presence of a vertebrate fibrinogen-like sequence in an echinoderm.” Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 87(6): 2097-2101.
Zhang, Y. L., Hervio, L., Strandberg, L. and Madison, E. L. (1999). “Distinct contributions of residue 192 to the specificity of coagulation and fibrinolytic serine proteases.” Journal of Biological Chemistry, V274(N11): 7153-7156.
Zimmermann, E. (1983). “[The evolution of the coagulation system from primitive defense mechanisms].” Behring Institute Mitteilungen, 82(73): 1-12.
The 2.0-Å crystal structure of tachylectin 5A provides evidence for the common origin of the innate immunity and the blood coagulation systems
Davidson CJ, Tuddenham EG, McVey JH. 450 million years of hemostasis J Thromb Haemost. 2003 Jul;1(7):1487-94.
Transposition mediated by RAG1 and RAG2 and its implications for the evolution of the immune system
New insights into V(D)J recombination and its role in the evolution of the immune system
Evolution and developmental regulation of the major histocompatibility complex
Evolution of the IL-6/class IB cytokine receptor family in the immune and nervous systems
Development of an immune system
The ancestor of the adaptive immune system was the CAM system for organogenesis
The evolutionary origins of immunoglobulins and T-cell receptors: possibilities and probabilities
Evolutionary perspectives on amyloid and inflammatory features of Alzheimer disease
Organization of the human RH50A gene (RHAG) and evolution of base composition of the RH gene family.
Molecular evolution of the vertebrate immune system.
Morphostasis: an evolving perspective.
Rapid evolution of immunoglobulin superfamily C2 domains expressed in immune system cells.
Evolutionary assembly of blood coagulation proteins
Exon and domain evolution in the proenzymes of blood coagulation and fibrinolysis
Evolution of proteolytic enzymes
Evolution of vertebrate fibrin formation and the process of its dissolution.
Common Parasite Overturns Traditional Beliefs About The Evolution And Role Of Hemoglobin
Scientists Discover How Bacteria Protect Themselves Against Immune System
Reduction of two functional gamma-globin genes to one: an evolutionary trend in New World monkeys
Evolutionary history of introns in a multidomain globin gene
Hemoglobin A2: origin, evolution, and aftermath
Early evolution of microtubules and undulipodia
Flagellar beat patterns and their possible evolution
The evolutionary origin and phylogeny of eukaryote flagella
Dynein family of motor proteins: present status and future questions
Origins of the nucleate organisms
The evolutionary origin and phylogeny of microtubules, mitotic spindles and eukaryote flagella
The evolution of cellular movement in eukaryotes: the role of microfilaments and microtubules
Kinesin Motor Phylogenetic Tree
Evolution of a dynamic cytoskeleton
Isolation, characterization and evolution of nine pufferfish (Fugu rubripes) actin genes
Evolution of chordate actin genes: evidence from genomic organization and amino acid sequences
Co-evolution of ligand-receptor pairs in the vasopressin/oxytocin superfamily of bioactive peptides
The evolution of the synapses in the vertebrate central nervous system
Evolutionary origins of multidrug and drug-specific efflux pumps in bacteria.
The evolution of metabolic cycles
Evolution of the first metabolic cycles
Speculations on the origin and evolution of metabolism
The Molecular Anatomy of an Ancient Adaptive Event
Biochemical pathways in prokaryotes can be traced backward through evolutionary time
Enzyme specialization during the evolution of amino acid biosynthetic pathways
Enzyme recruitment in evolution of new function
Bioenergetics: the evolution of molecular mechanisms and the development of bioenergetic concepts
Theoretical approaches to the evolutionary optimization of glycolysis--chemical analysis
The evolution of kinetoplastid glycosomes
Stepwise molecular evolution of bacterial photosynthetic energy conversion
Evolution of photosynthetic reaction centers and light harvesting chlorophyll proteins
Evolution of photosynthetic reaction centers
Early evolution of photosynthesis: clues from nitrogenase and chlorophyll iron proteins
Evolution of the control of pigment and plastid development in photosynthetic organisms
Chemical evolution of photosynthesis
Molecular evolution of ruminant lysozymes
Evolution of stomach lysozyme: the pig lysozyme gene
Molecular basis for tetrachromatic color vision
Molecular evolution of the Rh3 gene in Drosophila
The evolution of rhodopsins and neurotransmitter receptors
Optimization, constraint, and history in the evolution of eyes
A pessimistic estimate of the time required for an eye to evolve
The eye of the blind mole rat (Spalax ehrenbergi): regressive evolution at the molecular level
Programming the Drosophila embryo
Evolution of chordate hox gene clusters
Hox genes in brachiopods and priapulids and protostome evolution.
Radical evolutionary change possible in a few generations
Evolution Re-Sculpted Animal Limbs By Genetic Switches Once Thought Too Drastic For Survival
The origin and evolution of animal appendages
Hox genes in evolution: protein surfaces and paralog groups
Evolution of the insect body plan as revealed by the Sex combs reduced expression pattern
Sea urchin Hox genes: insights into the ancestral Hox cluster
Theoretical approaches to the analysis of homeobox gene evolution
Teleost HoxD and HoxA genes: comparison with tetrapods and functional evolution of the HOXD complex
Evolutionary origin of insect wings from ancestral gills
Tracing backbone evolution through a tunicate's lost tail
The ParaHox gene cluster is an evolutionary sister of the Hox gene cluster.
Gene duplications in evolution of archaeal family B DNA polymerases
Adaptive amino acid replacements accompanied by domain fusion in reverse transcriptase
Molecular evolution of genes encoding ribonucleases in ruminant species
Studies on the sites expressing evolutionary changes in the structure of eukaryotic 5S ribosomal RNA
Evolution of a Transfer RNA Gene Through a Point Mutation in the Anticodon
Universally conserved translation initiation factors
Genetic code in evolution: switching species-specific aminoacylation with a peptide transplant
Evolution of transcriptional regulatory elements within the promoter of a mammalian gene.
Codon reassignment and amino acid composition in hemichordate mitochondria.
Determining divergence times of the major kingdoms of living organisms with a protein clock
The multiplicity of domains in proteins
Characterization, primary structure, and evolution of lamprey plasma albumin
The origins and evolution of eukaryotic proteins
Evolution of vertebrate fibrin formation and the process of its dissolution.
Vastly Different Virus Families May Be Related
Selective sweep of a newly evolved sperm-specific gene in Drosophila
Activated acetic acid by carbon fixation on (Fe,Ni)S under primordial conditions
Molecular evolution of the histidine biosynthetic pathway
Accelerated evolution in inhibitor domains of porcine elafin family members
Convergent evolution of antifreeze glycoproteins in Antarctic notothenioid fish and Arctic cod
Evolution of antifreeze glycoprotein gene from a trypsinogen gene in Antarctic notothenioid fish
Evolution of an antifreeze glycoprotein
A model for the evolution of the plastid sec apparatus inferred from secY gene phylogeny
The evolutionary history of the amylase multigene family in Drosophila pseudoobscura
The evolution of an allosteric site in phosphorylase
Molecular evolution of fish neurohypophysial hormones: neutral and selective evolutionary mechanisms
Pseudogenes in ribonuclease evolution: a source of new biomacromolecular function?
Evolutionary relationships of the carbamoylphosphate synthetase genes
The molecular evolution of the small heat-shock proteins in plants
Evolutionary history of the 11p15 human mucin gene family.
Molecular evolution of the aldo-keto reductase gene superfamily.
A Classification of Possible Routes of Darwinian Evolution
Generation of evolutionary novelty by functional shift
Mobile DNA Sequences Could Be The Cause Of Chromosomal Mutations During The Evolution Of Species
Minor Shuffle Makes Protein Fold
Genetic Stowaways May Contribute To Evolutionary Change
Evolutionary Molecular Mechanism In Mammals Found
Cases of ancient mobile element DNA insertions that now affect gene regulation
Punctuated evolution caused by selection of rare beneficial mutations
The origin of programmed cell death
The origin and early development of biological catalysts
DNA secondary structures and the evolution of hypervariable tandem arrays
Episodic adaptive evolution of primate lysozymes
Genome plasticity as a paradigm of eubacteria evolution
Evolutionary motif and its biological and structural significance
Exon shuffling and other ways of module exchange
New Drosophila introns originate by duplication.
Evolution and the structural domains of proteins
The role of constrained self-organization in genome structural evolution
The coevolution of gene family trees
The evolution of metabolic cycles
The emergence of major cellular processes in evolution
A hardware interpretation of the evolution of the genetic code
Speculations on the origin and evolution of metabolism
Probabilistic reconstruction of ancestral protein sequences
The contribution of slippage-like processes to genome evolution
Molecular evolution in bacteria
The structural basis of molecular adaptation.
Mitochondrial DNA: molecular fossils in the nucleus
Cases of ancient mobile element DNA insertions that now affect gene regulation
Tiggers and DNA transposon fossils in the human genome
The eye of the blind mole rat (Spalax ehrenbergi): regressive evolution at the molecular level
Tiggers and DNA transposon fossils in the human genome
Gene competition and the possible evolutionary role of tumours
New Scientist Planet Science: Replaying life
Molecular evolution of an arsenate detoxification pathway by DNA shuffling
UB Researcher Developing Method That Employs Evolution To Develop New Drug Leads
Exploring the functional robustness of an enzyme by in vitro evolution
Evolutionary algorithms in computer-aided molecular design
Evolution of Amino Acid Metabolism Inferred through Cladistic Analysis
Integrating the Universal Metabolism into a Phylogenetic Analysis
Serial segmental duplications during primate evolution result in complex human genome architecture
Phylogeny determined by protein domain content
Diversity, taxonomy and evolution of medium-chain dehydrogenase/reductase superfamily
Molecular archaeology of the Escherichia coli genome
Comparative Genomics of the Eukaryotes
Asymmetric Sequence Divergence of Duplicate Genes
The Genetic Core of the Universal Ancestor
Evolutionary History of Chromosome 20
Reconstructing large regions of an ancestral mammalian genome in silico
Occurrence and Consequences of Coding Sequence Insertions and Deletions in Mammalian Genomes
The Origin of Human Chromosome 1 and Its Homologs in Placental Mammals
On the RNA World: Evidence in Favor of an Early Ribonucleopeptide World
Inhibition of Ribozymes by Deoxyribonucleotides and the Origin of DNA
>If you're going to do one of the usual brain-dead creationist "protein string probability" calculations, be sure to avoid the more common pitfalls and don't leave out the analysis of the redundancies of amino acid functionality. We'll wait.
Ok, now we know you can post a link and resort to name-calling.
Moving on, I'm going to help you with the formula.
1/A x 1/B x 1/C = odds
Where on *earth* did you get the bizarre -- and incorrect -- notion that I "can't stand" you having an opinion?
Learn to read for comprehension, please.
Yes, because they are.
And you want to talk about "truth"?
That is the truth. Deal with it.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
