Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Biology textbook hearings prompt science disputes [Texas]
Knight Ridder Newspapers ^ | 08 July 2003 | MATT FRAZIER

Posted on 07/09/2003 12:08:32 PM PDT by PatrickHenry

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 4,381-4,387 next last
To: AndrewC
You are just too good sometimes!! LOL

My daughters though, seem to think so, I hate Barbie, the B#$# HAS EVERYTHING!!!
221 posted on 07/09/2003 3:29:21 PM PDT by Aric2000 (If the history of science shows us anything, it is that we get nowhere by labeling our ignorance god)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 180 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Again you use the word living as part of the definition of life.

Name me a person that does not agree that a cell is living.

222 posted on 07/09/2003 3:31:33 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: js1138
You have simply cut the baby in half.

And you apparently are trying to recreate Zeno's paradox.

223 posted on 07/09/2003 3:33:29 PM PDT by AndrewC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 218 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
organic chemicals are fairly common in the universe.

and they just appeared out of nowhere too ...

like hyper - hypothesis w / o cause - effect (( reality )) too !

ether science where evolution resonates in a vaccuum ...

just beleve - click your boots - heels ...

march or die too !

224 posted on 07/09/2003 3:33:43 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Name me a person that does not agree that a cell is living.

I could, given some time, cite biologists who argue that viruses are living. That is what we have been disputing.

225 posted on 07/09/2003 3:34:50 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
hog-wash...evolution has never been observed.

New thread, same old errors

Predicting evolutionary potential: In vitro evolution accurately reproduces natural evolution of the TEM b-lactamase. Barlow, Miriam; Hall, Barry G. Biology Department, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA. Genetics (2002), 160(3), 823-832. CODEN: GENTAE ISSN: 0016-6731. Journal written in English. CAN 136:337024 AN 2002:310125 CAPLUS

Abstract: To evaluate the validity of the authors' in vitro evolution method as a model for natural evolutionary processes, the TEM-1 b-lactamase gene was evolved in vitro and was selected for increased resistance to cefotaxime, cefuroxime, ceftazadime, and aztreonam, i.e., the "extended-spectrum" phenotype. The amino acid substitutions recovered in 10 independent in vitro evolvants were compared with the amino acid substitutions in the naturally occurring extended-spectrum TEM alleles. Of the 9 substitutions that have arisen multiple times in naturally occurring extended-spectrum TEM alleles, 7 were recovered multiple times in vitro. The authors take this result as evidence that their in vitro evolution technique accurately mimics natural evolution and can therefore be used to predict the results of natural evolutionary processes. Addnl., the results predict that a phenotype not yet obsd. among TEM b-lactamases in nature, resistance to cefepime, is likely to arise in nature.

226 posted on 07/09/2003 3:35:30 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: CobaltBlue
Most atheists are content to say that they don't believe that God exists.

This begs the question: what is "God"?

Thousands of different religions across the millenia have proposed varying and often mutually exclusive "Gods". A monotheist, such as a Christian, lacks belief in all but one of these "Gods". An atheist lacks belief in one more than that.
227 posted on 07/09/2003 3:35:59 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 128 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Name me a person that does not agree that a cell is living

Everyone agrees. The replicating cell is the basic unit of life, however, that does not preclude various extentions in the definition either up or down the complexity axis.

228 posted on 07/09/2003 3:37:49 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
likewise saying, "we don't know how it happend, so evolution must be true" is not science.

If any credible scientist made such a claim, then you might have a point.-
229 posted on 07/09/2003 3:38:22 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 208 | View Replies]

To: Lurking Libertarian
One can believe in God and in the Big Bang theory. I do; C.S. Lewis did [not that I put myself in his league.] :-)

Yes, you are right about that, many noted people do, in fact. But I don't. The reason is that the Big Bang theory is the product of naturalistic thinking, like mixing oil and water. Genesis is enough for me.

230 posted on 07/09/2003 3:38:49 PM PDT by exmarine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 214 | View Replies]

To: js1138
Typical slag // skag science ...

evolution --- one grain of diamond - gold !

(( at the recovery cost - rate ... it is damaging - worthless ))

pure 14 kt gold ... designeduniverse.com !
231 posted on 07/09/2003 3:39:00 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 225 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
CobaltBlue said:
"Most atheists are content to say that they don't believe that God exists."

You said:
"This begs the question: what is "God"?

I say:
This only begs the question as to what you believe God is, not others. Those who believe in God have already settled that question sufficiently to believe, you haven't.

So what's the answer?
232 posted on 07/09/2003 3:39:09 PM PDT by ALS (http://designeduniverse.com Featuring original works by FR's best. contact me to add yours!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 227 | View Replies]

To: balrog666
Which gives significant credence to the panspermia hypothesis for the origin of life on Earth.

While sidestepping the question.

233 posted on 07/09/2003 3:39:56 PM PDT by RightWhale (gazing at shadows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 219 | View Replies]

To: Junior
So, the mutation and selection of antibiotic-resistant bacteria or pesticide-resistant pests does not count as observed evolution?

Hey, just because a new trait shows up in a genome doesn't mean you actually observed the mutation occurring at the molecular level. Come back when you have some evidence.

234 posted on 07/09/2003 3:40:35 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Right Wing Professor
Another one (if you push me, my search came up with over 100 similar hits in the last 10 years)

Rapid in vivo evolution of a b-lactamase using phagemids. Long-McGie, Jeffrey; Liu, Amy D.; Schellenberger, Volker. Genencor International, Inc., Palo Alto, CA, USA. Biotechnology and Bioengineering (2000), 68(1), 121-125. CODEN: BIBIAU ISSN: 0006-3592. Journal written in English. CAN 132:292807 AN 2000:207909 CAPLUS

Abstract: RNA viruses are capable of undergoing extremely rapid evolution due to their high rates of reprodn., small genome size, and a high frequency of spontaneous mutagenesis. Here we demonstrate that a virus-like, evolutionary state can be created by propagating a phagemid population in a hypermutator strain of Escherichia coli in the presence of a helper phage. This enables one to subject individual phagemid-encoded genes to rapid in vivo evolution. We applied this approach to TEM-1 b-lactamase which confers resistance to 0.05 mg/L of the antibiotic cefotaxime. After 3 wk of in vivo evolution we were able to isolate a double mutant, E104K/G238S, of the enzyme which confers a 500-fold increased level of resistance to cefotaxime compared to the starting enzyme. In two independent expts. we obtained a triple mutant, E104K/G238S/T263M, which confers a 1000-fold increase in resistance compared to the wild type enzyme. The same three mutations have been previously obsd. in TEM-4 b-lactamase which was discovered in a highly cefotaxime-resistant clin. isolate. The probability of randomly obtaining a b-lactamase carrying three identical point mutations is less than 10-10. This indicates that phagemid evolution can rapidly reproduce evolution occurring in nature.

235 posted on 07/09/2003 3:40:57 PM PDT by Right Wing Professor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 226 | View Replies]

To: Dimensio
If any credible scientist made such a claim, then you might have a point

The looney circle jerk ... tautology --- w / o a reality check !

236 posted on 07/09/2003 3:41:13 PM PDT by f.Christian (( bring it on ... crybabies // bullies - wimps - camp guards for darwin - marx - satan ))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 229 | View Replies]

To: AndrewC
Viruses have genes. Please explain how something which does not live has genes. They also mutate to better fit their host. Please explain how something which is not alive mutates.
237 posted on 07/09/2003 3:41:50 PM PDT by CobaltBlue (Never voted for a Democrat in my life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 222 | View Replies]

To: HalfFull
How do you define species in single celled organisms?
238 posted on 07/09/2003 3:41:52 PM PDT by js1138
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 213 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
Teaching principles consistent with a religion is tantamount to teaching the relion.

What principles consistent with the "religion of atheism" are being taught?

Second, atheism most certainly is a religion - it's a belief system wherein one chooses to believe that there is no God.

It's a lack of belief in all gods, not just a choice to not believe in a specific God. If you could actually look at it from outside of the perspective of assuming your own religion as truth, then you might be able to understand this.

Atheism (word comes from theos) cannot exist without theism,

Yes it can. There just wouldn't be a word for it, because there would be nothing from which to differentiate it.

and it's adherents spend endless hours arging against theism which is prima facie evidence that there is no absence of belief, but vehement belief AGAINST theism.

And it has nothing to do with followers of various theologies insisting that their theology is truth with a minimal (if any) amount of evidence and attempts to shift the burden of proof onto the atheists (even though they're the ones who proposed the gods)?

If atheism is total lack of belief, then a true atheist can only remain silent on the subject of God and theism.

Again, you use the term "God" like it is a fully defined quantity for an atheist. This is not the case, and it shows that you have no understanding of atheism.
239 posted on 07/09/2003 3:42:10 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 173 | View Replies]

To: exmarine
The reason is that the Big Bang theory is the product of naturalistic thinking, like mixing oil and water.

This would imply that religion states that the natural world does not exist at all. You've not thought your position through very carefully.
240 posted on 07/09/2003 3:43:33 PM PDT by Dimensio (Sometimes I doubt your committment to Sparkle Motion!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 230 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 201-220221-240241-260 ... 4,381-4,387 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

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