[snarks_when_bored]

Anybody who reads this article and feels no astonishment is either stupid or not paying attention.

As an aside, note that the RNA polymerase, once brought into contact with the DNA strand, simply begins its replicative journey, moving along the strand one base pair at a time (as the experiment apparently demonstrates for the very first time). Now why does the RNA do this? Nobody (in their right mind) would suggest that it has a will and is acting intentionally, or that some unseen deity's hand is continually pushing it along, so it must be acting as its chemical structure compels it to act. This base-pair by base-pair copying motion must simply be what the chemical structure of RNA does. So why this chemical structure and not some other? This is a question that doesn't appear to lend itself to a scientific answer. Perhaps an ID'er would suggest that a higher intelligence designed the chemical structure of RNA to do just what it does. That may or may not be, but, clearly, it's not an hypothesis of empirical science. As a consequence, prolonged examination of such a hypothesis—as if it were a scientific hypothesis—has absolutely no place in a science classroom.

The more we learn about the microscopic world, the less likely it seems that non-physical (or non-mathematical) principles are needed to explain its behavior.

[snarks_when_bored]

Wake-up ping...

[Junior]

The CrevoSci Archive Just one of the many services of Darwin Central "The Conspiracy that Cares"

• PatrickHenry's famous List-O-Links
• Webster's On-Line Dictionary:  Creationist

CrevoSci threads for the past week:

1. 2005-11-16 Ultra-sensitive microscope reveals DNA processes
2. 2005-11-15 Early Humans Settled India Before Europe, Study Suggests
3. 2005-11-15 'Perception' gene tracked humanity's evolution, scientists say
4. 2005-11-15 'Perception' gene tracked humanity's evolution, scientists say [Locked]
5. 2005-11-15 Stanford Scientists' Discovery of Hormone Offers Hope For Obesity Drug
6. 2005-11-15 The Intrinsic Evil of Evolutionary Humanism
7. 2005-11-14 A column about Kansas Science Standards
8. 2005-11-14 Darwin And The Origin Of ….The Racist?
9. 2005-11-14 For Republicans, a debate over the party's design
10. 2005-11-14 THE CATHOLIC CHURCH EMBRACES EVOLUTION!!!!
11. 2005-11-13 Intelligent Design Grounded in Science
12. 2005-11-13 Intelligent Design, Part 1
13. 2005-11-13 Pope states the universe is a product of an 'intelligent project'
14. 2005-11-13 Santorum: Don't put intelligent design in classroom
15. 2005-11-13 Vietnam study shows bird flu virus mutating - media
16. 2005-11-12 [Kansas Gov. Kathleen] Sebelius criticizes State Board of Education's move [new science standards]
17. 2005-11-12 ID [Intelligent Design] Opens Astronomer’s Mind to Universe’s Surprises
18. 2005-11-11 A revolution for evolution - Intelligent design must not replace hard science in classrooms.
19. 2005-11-11 Dover results disputed: School board candidate says machine was faulty
20. 2005-11-11 FR Debate: Intelligent Design vs. Birth Defects, Can They Be Reconciled?
21. 2005-11-11 Potential Origins of Europeans Found
22. 2005-11-11 The Real Evil of Evolutionary Humanism
23. 2005-11-10 Culture War Briefing, weekday news guide
24. 2005-11-10 Fossils of fierce-looking dinosaur found in Argentina (Godzilla)
25. 2005-11-10 Is Intelligent Design a Bad Scientific Theory or a Non-Scientific Theory?
26. 2005-11-10 Kansas educators clear way for evolution criticism
27. 2005-11-10 Pat Robertson has a message for Dover, PA: Don't ask God to help.
28. 2005-11-10 Pat Robertson Warns Pa. Town of Disaster
29. 2005-11-10 US states divide over creationism [the view from the UK]
30. 2005-11-10 Why the conspiracy theorizing about theories? (Freeper op-ed)

CrevoSci Thread Count, 2005 YTD:  1103

---

CrevoSci Warrior Freepdays for the month of November:
 

2000-11-29 An.American.Expatriate 2000-11-10 AncientAirs 2000-11-21 AndrewC 1998-11-18 angelo 2000-11-10 beavus 1999-11-22 Blood of Tyrants 2003-11-26 blowfish 2004-11-08 CarolinaGuitarman 1997-11-28 cd jones 2001-11-30 claptrap 2001-11-16 CobaltBlue 2005-11-10 culturewars 2002-11-21 DannyTN 2004-11-16 DaveLoneRanger 1997-11-30 Ditto 2001-11-16 dmz 2000-11-11 Ernest_at_the_Beach 2000-11-02 Exigence

2000-11-02 Exit 109 2004-11-05 FeeinTennessee 2000-11-22 FFIGHTER 2000-11-12 ForGod'sSake 2001-11-07 FourtySeven 2000-11-15 freespirited 2000-11-10 Godel 2004-11-06 GreenOgre 2004-11-03 Grey Rabbit 2000-11-04 harbinger of doom 2000-11-28 HiTech RedNeck 1999-11-05 Ichneumon 1998-11-13 jennyp 2005-11-10 jodiluvshoes 1998-11-25 Junior_G 2002-11-17 Just mythoughts 2004-11-11 kaotic133

2005-11-14 knowseverything 2003-11-18 little jeremiah 1998-11-18 malakhi 2000-11-19 Mike Fieschko 2004-11-24 mista science 2003-11-09 MplsSteve 2000-11-06 mrjeff 1999-11-05 muleskinner 2003-11-17 Nathan Zachary 2002-11-12 NCLaw441 1999-11-25 Nebullis 2000-11-13 NYer 2000-11-24 old-ager 2004-11-03 PajamaHadin 2000-11-10 Patriotic Teen 1998-11-01 Pharmboy 2000-11-11 P-Marlowe

2000-11-16 presidio9 1999-11-08 Pyro7480 2002-11-14 Remedy 2000-11-30 Right Wing Professor 2004-11-18 rightwinggoth 1998-11-15 rob777 1998-11-04 RobRoy 2004-11-01 SeasideSparrow 2004-11-05 shadowfighter 1999-11-16 TerP26 2004-11-13 This Just In 2000-11-04 TigerTale 2004-11-11 untrained skeptic 2004-11-21 VictoryGal 2001-11-25 Vote 4 Nixon 2000-11-05 will of the people 2003-11-29 woodb01

---

In Memoriam
Fallen CrevoSci Warriors:

---

1LongTimeLurker ALS angelo Area Freeper Aric2000 Askel5 Asphalt biblewonk bluepistolero churchillbuff claptrap codebreaker Con X-Poser ConservababeJen DittoJed2 dob

Ed Current f.Christian followerofchrist general_re goodseedhomeschool gopwinsin04 gore3000 IllumiNOTi JediGirl JesseShurun JethroHathaway jlogajan Justice Avenger Kevin Curry kharaku knowquest

Land of the Irish Le-Roy malakhi Marathon medved metacognative mikeharris65 missyme Modernman n4sir NoKinToMonkeys Ogmios peg the prophet Phaedrus Phoroneus pickemuphere

ReasonedThought ret_medic RickyJ SeaLion Selkie Shubi SplashDog The Loan Arranger Tomax tpaine Truth666 twittle Unalienable WaveThatFlag xm177e2

---

Bring back Modernman and SeaLion!

---

Lost CrevoSci Battlefields (Pulled Threads)

• 2004-04-27 Stop Teaching Our Kids this Evolution Claptrap!
• 2003-10-29 The Mystery of the Missing Links (Intelligent Design vs. Evolution)
• 2003-10-27 Physics Nobelist Takes Stand on Evolution
• 2003-10-23 Gene Found for Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
• 2003-10-21 Artificial Proteins Assembled from Scratch
• 2003-09-23 Solar System Formation Questions
• 2003-07-18 Unlikely Group May Revive Darwin Debate [Evolution v. Creationism]
• 2003-07-02 "Unlocking the Mystery of ""Unlocking the Mystery of Life"""
• 2003-06-26 Darwin Faces a New Rival
• 2003-06-06 Amazing Creatures
• 2002-09-13 Oldest Known Penis Is 100 Million Years Old
• 2002-04-10 (Creationists) CRSC Correction
• 2001-08-28 The Ultimate Creation vs. Evolution Resource [6th Revision]
• 2001-08-26 A Scientific Account of the Origin of Life on Earth [Thread I]
• 2001-01-13 A Christian Understanding of Intelligent Design
• 2000-10-10 Another Lost Generation?
• 2000-08-30 Evil-Ution
• 1999-11-14 Creationism's Success Past 5 Years: (Gallup: 1 in 10 hold secular evolutionist perspective)

---

Longest CrevoSci Thread Ever

• 2002-12-11 Evolution Disclaimer Supported (6,879 replies)

---

Glossary of Terms

Assumption: Premise: a statement that is assumed to be true and from which a conclusion can be drawn; "on the assumption that he has been injured we can infer that he will not to play"
Belief: Any cognitive content (perception) held as true; religious faith
Crevo:  Creation vs. evolution
CrevoSci:  Creation vs. evolution/Science
CrevoSci Warriors:  Those who take part on CrevoSci threads
Data: factual information, especially information organized for analysis or used to reason or make decisions
Dogma: a religious doctrine that is proclaimed as true without proof
Fact: When an observation is confirmed repeatedly and by many independent and competent observers, it can become a fact
Freepday:  The day a Freeper joined Free Republic
Hypothesis: A tentative theory about the natural world; a concept that is not yet verified but that if true would explain certain facts or phenomena; "a scientific hypothesis that survives experimental testing becomes a scientific theory"; "he proposed a fresh theory of alkalis that later was accepted in chemical practices"
Impression: A vague idea in which some confidence is placed; "his impression of her was favorable"; "what are your feelings about the crisis?"; "it strengthened my belief in his sincerity"; "I had a feeling that she was lying"
Law: A generalization that describes recurring facts or events in nature; "the laws of thermodynamics"
Observation: Any information collected with the senses
Theory: A well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"

---

The
official beer
of Darwin Central

[agere_contra]

God built the RNA-DNA engine. A very beautiful thing.

[Adder]

Holy Cow! That is awesome!

[nmh]

Amazing!

Do I see cloning as a common reality coming?

Me thinks so ... .

I'm not convinced knowing how this works will lead to good things considering the mindset of MANY in the field of science.

[Mark was here]

It is almost like they were able to watch it's shadow as it moved along. Pretty slick.

[Gritty]

What an ingenious and elegant process!

For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. (Romans 1:20)

[Elsie]

So why this chemical structure and not some other? This is a question that doesn't appear to lend itself to a scientific answer.

It DOESN'T???

Why not?

---

Perhaps an ID'er would suggest that a higher intelligence designed the chemical structure of RNA to do just what it does.

Perhaps a scientist will be able to show how something OTHER than a copy manages to get into the strand.

Since this is the very essence of Evolution, THAT is what is needed now to blast the IDer's out of the water.

[aruanan]

Nobody (in their right mind) would suggest that it has a will and is acting intentionally, or that some unseen deity's hand is continually pushing it along, so it must be acting as its chemical structure compels it to act. This base-pair by base-pair copying motion must simply be what the chemical structure of RNA does. So why this chemical structure and not some other? This is a question that doesn't appear to lend itself to a scientific answer. Perhaps an ID'er would suggest that a higher intelligence designed the chemical structure of RNA to do just what it does. That may or may not be, but, clearly, it's not an hypothesis of empirical science. As a consequence, prolonged examination of such a hypothesis—as if it were a scientific hypothesis—has absolutely no place in a science classroom.

The more we learn about the microscopic world, the less likely it seems that non-physical (or non-mathematical) principles are needed to explain its behavior.

You sound like a 19-year-old who's just started college and is new to the wonders of both science and philosophy. Your conclusion is a perfect example of a non-sequitur and reveals gigantic gaps in your knowledge of both science and philosophy.

[Kelly_2000]

"Now why does the RNA do this? Nobody (in their right mind) would suggest that it has a will and is acting intentionally"

Actually the molecular transactions have been hypothesized, this IS the empirical data that was required to validate said hypothesis. I am digging the paper out form our faculty archive.

[manwiththehands]

"Anybody who reads this article and feels no astonishment is either stupid or not paying attention."

And anybody who reads your post and is not offended is either stupid or not paying attention. Maybe I haven't had my coffee yet. Arrogant twerp.

[Cboldt]

-bump-

Neat stuff.

[Cold Heart]

I'm impressed. I have trouble with with tiny screws on glasses.

[r9etb]

It's a fascinating approach, and the technical accomplishments needed to achieve it are really outstanding.

Still, given that both molecules were attached to big glass beads, one has to wonder whether the results were affected by that fact. It sorta sounds like asking somebody to enter a race dragging a ball and chain -- would you expect him to compete differently?

Would an unencumbered RNAP behave the same way? Or would it be able to leap up the ladder in chunks?

[b_sharp]

Very good post.

I'm eager to see how the ID crowd tries to disassociate themselves from the supernatural with this one. Either they acknowledge the fascinating capabilities of nature or they admit a supernatural agent.

[highball]

Anybody who reads this article and feels no astonishment is either stupid or not paying attention.

It is possible to feel a sense of awe at the workings of the natural world and not then start looking for supernatural explanations.

Science isn't immune to wonder. In fact, amazement is essential to the process. Science just doesn't let that wonder cloud its thinking.

[mtntop3]

The only thing we know is that we don't know - and that complete knowledge comes only through Faith .

Seeing into intricacies of creation appropriately brings about natural feelings of wonder and astonishment.

It also frequently brings about profound arrogance through erroneously assuming that the act of seeing is akin to the act of creation, thereby making the viewer the creator and maker of the universe.

"..no man can find out the work that God maketh from the beginning to the end." Ecclesiastes 3:11.

"The Lord knows the thoughts of men, that they are but a puff of wind." Psalm 94:11.

[hawkaw]

BTTT

[tallhappy]

As an aside, note that the RNA polymerase, once brought into contact with the DNA strand, simply begins its replicative journey, moving along the strand one base pair at a time (as the experiment apparently demonstrates for the very first time). Now why does the RNA do this? Nobody (in their right mind) would suggest that it has a will and is acting intentionally, or that some unseen deity's hand is continually pushing it along, so it must be acting as its chemical structure compels it to act. This base-pair by base-pair copying motion must simply be what the chemical structure of RNA does.

This is not written correctly at all.

You really don't know what DNA, RNA or a polymerase are, do you?

[furball4paws]

Absolutely fantastic. I never though I'd see such a thing in my lifetime.