Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Tribune7; DallasMike; PatrickHenry; gobucks; bvw
And according to the theory of evolution the TTSS came long AFTER the flagellum.

I know that's what all the creationists keep saying, but they "forget" to mention that they're wrong. From a previous post of mine covering a creationist "paper" which made the same claim:

Finally, phylogenetic analyses of the gene sequences [20] suggest that flagellar motor proteins arose first and those of the pump came later. In other words, if anything, the pump evolved from the motor, not the motor from the pump.

Wow, a citation finally! But if they ever attempt to publish this "paper", they're going to have to correct their error in the title of their citation...

In any case, Minnich et al "forgot" to mention that newer research has superceded their citation. That's a *BIG* no-no in *real* peer-reviewed scientific papers (seriously -- as in evidence of incompetence and/or dishonesty), but I see that it's no impediment to the sort of unreviewed "conference papers" that IDers put out in order to try to keep the dream alive.

See for example:

Bacterial type III secretion systems are ancient and evolved by multiple horizontal-transfer events, U. Gophna et al. / Gene 312 (2003) 151–163
Abstract: Type III secretion systems (TTSS) are unique bacterial mechanisms that mediate elaborate interactions with their hosts. The fact that several of the TTSS proteins are closely related to flagellar export proteins has led to the suggestion that TTSS had evolved from flagella. Here we reconstruct the evolutionary history of four conserved type III secretion proteins and their phylogenetic relationships with flagellar paralogs. Our analysis indicates that the TTSS and the flagellar export mechanism share a common ancestor, but have evolved independently from one another. The suggestion that TTSS genes have evolved from genes encoding flagellar proteins is effectively refuted. A comparison of the species tree, as deduced from 16S rDNA sequences, to the protein phylogenetic trees has led to the identification of several major lateral transfer events involving clusters of TTSS genes. It is hypothesized that horizontal gene transfer has occurred much earlier and more frequently than previously inferred for TTSS genes and is, consequently, a major force shaping the evolution of species that harbor type III secretion systems.
This was published in APRIL *2003* -- what excuse to Minnich et al have for not being aware of it while preparing a paper in LATE 2004? A publication keyword search for either "Type III secretion systems" or "Flagella" (and even more importantly, *both*) would have turned up this paper without a problem. Hell, *I* found it in three minutes with Google *without* using a keyword search, just by Googling for the (correct) title of citation#20 -- it turned up this paper, which cites the Nguyen paper, something that Minnich et all should have done at a *MINIMUM* as due dilegence to find subsequent related research (pro *or* con)... Did Minnich et al not *bother* to research anyone else's findings before they sat down to put together their "paper"?

(Also note the passage about "lateral transfer" -- this is YET ANOTHER evolutionary mechanism which Behe's cartoon scenarios of evolution COMPLETELY OVERLOOK.)

This is, unfortunately, all too typical of "papers" by IDers/creationists. Unlike real *scientists*, they're not interested in gathering the best available findings and then seeing the best "big picture" the evidence suggests. Instead they're *starting* with their desired conclusion, and then searching out and presenting *only* the "findings" which would *seem* to support their position when considered IN ISOLATION.

And then you wonder why we claim that ID/creationism isn't real science (at least the way it is invariably performed)?


199 posted on 02/13/2005 5:35:49 PM PST by Ichneumon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 179 | View Replies ]


To: longshadow

200?


200 posted on 02/13/2005 5:37:27 PM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]

To: Ichneumon
In any case, Minnich et al "forgot" to mention that newer research has superceded their citation. That's a *BIG* no-no in *real* peer-reviewed scientific papers

This would be like a laywer going to court and citing the Dred Scott case as a precedent for his position.

204 posted on 02/13/2005 5:45:35 PM PST by PatrickHenry (<-- Click on my name. The List-O-Links for evolution threads is at my freeper homepage.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]

To: Ichneumon
This was published in APRIL *2003* -- what excuse to Minnich et al have for not being aware of it while preparing a paper in LATE 2004?

Well, it ain't my field, but I wasn't aware of it. Of course, I should have been. Thanks for the pointer.

Well, gawsh, I guess that means at least one part of the flagellar system has an evolutionary precursor. So much for irreducibility.

The mousetrap is gone, the flagellum is gone, the blood clotting system is gone, has Behe got anything left?

249 posted on 02/13/2005 8:59:14 PM PST by Right Wing Professor (Evolve or die!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]

To: Ichneumon
Finally, phylogenetic analyses of the gene sequences [20] suggest that flagellar motor proteins arose first and those of the pump came later. In other words, if anything, the pump evolved from the motor, not the motor from the pump.

Wow, a citation finally! But if they ever attempt to publish this "paper", they're going to have to correct their error in the title of their citation...

In any case, Minnich et al "forgot" to mention that newer research has superceded their citation. That's a *BIG* no-no in *real* peer-reviewed scientific papers (seriously -- as in evidence of incompetence and/or dishonesty), but I see that it's no impediment to the sort of unreviewed "conference papers" that IDers put out in order to try to keep the dream alive.

Yikes! I didn't know that claim had been refuted. Granted, if the TTSS had come after the flagellum it still would have proven that a major part of the flagellum was indeed useful on its own. But still, wow.
364 posted on 02/14/2005 1:29:24 PM PST by jennyp (WHAT I'M READING NOW: Professional NT Services by Miller)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 199 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson