Posted on 10/01/2006 4:18:53 PM PDT by RussP
Now you're just babbling. Pathetic.
I have become slightly intoxicated over the past hour. As such, I will be retiring for the evening.
If you are unable to respond to my statements, then the appropriate response is to admit as much. If I am "babbling", then it should be trivial for you to explain how my statements are unrelated to the current discussion.
Round and round we go.
They are trying to create something that does not exist and argue from there.
This is of course not scientific.
To argue scientifically, with scientific illiterates is a waste of time.
Abandon thread, luddite alert, abandon thread.
Circular reasoning at it's best.
Abandon thread, abandon thread, let the luddites and their ridiculously stupid arguments argue with each other.
To speak science with such, is a waste, a complete and total waste.
They are ignorant, and wish to remain that way.
Abandon thread
I hate to say it, but you are going to have an intellectual coyote morning tomorrow when you re-read your last few posts.
Ah, one of the 3 Evolutionist panic moves:
#1 attempt ridicule
#2 attack
#3 flee (or feign disinterest)
No, just stating facts, when you continue to argue from fallacie, and when corrected, continue to argue from such fallacie, it is time to leave.
Fanatics cannot be dealt with in a rational manner, therefore I will not waste my time in trying to do so.
Dear Child,
I'm arguing *from* facts. Computer programs replicate. Fact.
Deal with it.
Regards,
Southack
Evolution is all speculation and zero speciation.
Only intelligence can create intelligence, randomness does not.
Network biology characterizes and describes quantitatively the networks of molecular interactions that operate in biological systems.Click on "pathways" then click on links embedded in the diagram.There is considerable interest in the processes underlying evolution of networks, especially evolution of metabolism. Cellular metabolism represents a collection of enzyme reactions and transport processes that convert metabolites into molecules capable of supporting cellular life.
Our aim is to find evolutionary patterns and processes embedded in the architecture and function of modern metabolic networks, using information derived from structural genomics.
The Molecular Ancestry Network (MANET) database project traces evolution of protein architecture onto biomolecular networks. We have constucted a metabolic MANET database with the objective of investigating the ancestry of individual metabolic enzymes and the evolution of metabolism with bioinformatic, phylogenetic, and statistical methods.
MANET currently links information in the Structural Classification of Proteins (SCOP) database, the metabolic pathways database of the Kyoto Encyclopedia of Genes and Genomes (KEGG), and phylogenetic reconstructions describing the evolution of protein fold architecture at a universal level.
MANET literally "paints" the ancestries of enzymes derived from rooted phylogenetic trees directly onto metabolic subnetwork representation. It also provides numerous functionalities that enable searching specific protein folds with defined ancestry values, displaying the distribution of enzymes that are painted, and exploring quantitative details describing individual protein folds.
Our database traces the evolution of enzymes that belong to every one of over one hundred metabolic pathways. This permits the study of global and local metabolic network architectures, and the extraction of evolutionary patterns at global and local levels. A preliminary statistical analysis of the data shows a patchy distribution of ancestry values assigned to protein folds in each subnetwork. This suggests that evolution of metabolism occurred globally by wide spread recruitment of enzymes.
To our knowledge, MANET represents the first attempt to map evolutionary relationships directly onto biological networks.
"How, exactly, did it constitute evidence of ID?"
Now *there's* the old Dimensio I'm familiar with!
Let me make a suggestion. Get a copy of Grey's anatomy and flip through a few pages. Read the text too. Then get back to me and tell me if you see any evidence of design.
If you don't, then I submit that you don't know what "design" is. Or you don't know what "evidence" is. One or the other. Or both.
"I'm arguing *from* facts. Computer programs replicate. Fact."
Hey, I haven't been following this debate, so I'm not taking sides here, but I would just like to make one point. When you say "computer programs replicate," that could be considered a bit misleading. Yes, they replicate, but not autonomously. They make a computer reproduce them. Without a computer, they cannot replicate. Then again, without a computer, they really can't do much of anything, so maybe its a moot point.
Thanks for the link. Will read later (going to bed now). Looks like a rational attempt to solve the question I raised about evolution of enzymes which produce metabolites for which there is no use unless the next enzyme in pathway is already present. But if the next enzyme is already present, but had no substrate until the prior one (with respect to place in pathway, not chronologically) came along, then what selective pressure formed it in the first place?
Just making trouble, that's all.....
[When cornered with this undeniable fact, evolutionists usually claim that abiogenesis is "separate" from evolution. But that's not quite true: evolution depends on abiogenesis. Evolution obviously could not have occurred if the first living cell had never come into existence!]
Indeed!
"In the beginning, GOD created the Heavens and the Earth.
"After that HE put a CELL in the water, leaving it there for a Loooooooong time, while HE vacationed in the Bahamas.
"The rest is history..."
We are DOOMED!!!!
Therefore GOD created LIFE???
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.