Posted on 01/08/2008 7:28:22 PM PST by GodGunsGuts
It is now clear that genetics won’t be able to answer all of our questions about human development and disease. These basic biological processes rely heavily on epigenetics – the ability to ‘fine-tune’ the expression of specific genes.
This regulation of gene expression is essential for defining cellular identity and the dysregulation of these processes results in a variety of human diseases. Therefore, understanding these mechanisms will not only enhance our basic knowledge but will also lead to the improved detection, therapy and prognoses of several human diseases.
...
The histone code hypothesis predicts that the post-translational modifications of histones, alone or in combination, function to direct specific and distinct DNA-templated programs.
(Excerpt) Read more at histonecode.com ...
Everything is driven by angels until we figure out it isn't.
I fail to see why we’re expected to believe that something can happen by accident that we can’t even make happen on purpose.
There are a number of things we can't make happen on purpose. Hurricanes, volcanoes, earthquakes, plate tectonics.
I can't make your lotto number come up, but people do win lotto.
If iput you and your husband (asuming you have one) in a box and shake you up together, chances are pretty good you will not become pregnant as a result. why do you propose such stupid experiments?
By the way, the self-replicating RNA was assembled by an experimenter, "on purpose," so do you have any point at all?
“It will not help creationism one bit.” If you’re referring to young earth creationism, I would agree whole-heartedly. Old Earth creation is a different kettle of fish, however.
Wow. You're saying that if we can't do it, it can't be done, except by God?
Your line of reasoning would eliminate nearly all the products of the chemical industry.
Complicating the complex...
Is ALGORE taking credit again for something he had nothing to do with(like the Internet)?
Do we REALLY know they weren't?
Statements like this just serve to reduce your credibility, to the extent that is possible.
Tens of thousands of people just in the US do archaeology, and hundreds of thousands more are digging for one reason or another. Are you seriously suggesting that all of those folks are part of some grand conspiracy to hide the co-mingling of human and dinosaur bones?
Do we REALLY know they weren't?
Statements like this just serve to reduce your credibility, to the extent that is possible.
Tens of thousands of people just in the US do archaeology, and hundreds of thousands more are digging for one reason or another. Are you seriously suggesting that all of those folks are part of some grand conspiracy to hide the co-mingling of human and dinosaur bones?
(Sorry about the double post)
The discovery that strata could be reliably identified by their fossil inclusions was made by William Smith while working for companies digging canals. At the time there was no attempt to use this information to build a theory of biology or geology.
His discovery has stood the test of two hundred years, however.
Vast scientific conspiracy: no evidence.
Intelligent Design: no evidence.
Where would the creationist movement be without no evidence? ;?)
==Your line of reasoning would eliminate nearly all the products of the chemical industry.
Are you saying that even much simpler chemical compounds need an intelligent designer?
Chemistry is chemistry. If crystals need and intelligent designer to form, then RNA, which has a crystalline structure and stable crystalline forms, needs an intelligent designer.
simple Self-Organization examples in nauture can in no way account for the massive organizations actually found in nature itself- the ‘self-oranization’ that evos love to cite include controlled INTELLIGENCE INDUCED experimentations:
“Second, Patterson’s acknowledgment of the “challenging question” as to how spontaneous generation is possible in the face of the second law is neither denied nor effectually diminished elsewhere in his text, which I “conveniently neglect” to cite (indeed, a concession that “we must leave the realm of classical thermodynamics to seek explanation” speaks for itself). His venture into the realm of statistical physics and instability principles and their purely theoretical application to self-organization (read: spontaneous generation), holds little relevancy, despite his reference to an “overwhelming majority” of evolutionists (who else?) who buy into Prigogine’s hopeful—and still very theoretical—ideas.
I readily apologize if my citation of Patterson appears to misrepresent his views, for it was not my intention to do so (or I wouldn’t have pointed out that he is an evolutionist to begin with). In any case, all things considered, it is quite a stretch for you to accuse me of “the old creationist trick of quoting out of context.”
>>“...These [dissipative] structures can be induced merely by imposing strong temperature, pressure, or composition gradients. Indeed, those formed in certain laboratory-simulated, prebiotic broths have caused a rat deal of excitement because of their remarkable similarity to the simplest know forms of life.”<<
Patterson’s inference that a laboratory-induced “dissipative structure” might reflect a “remarkable similarity to the simplest know[n] forms of life” is an exaggeration of the highest order. What little resemblance such a product might have to a scrap of biological material furthermore qualifies only as certain evidence of what is possible when intelligence is applied to a goal-oriented project in a controlled environment.”
http://www.trueorigin.org/9801.asp
Also Behe responds to critics who cite ‘sefl-organization’ as proof that evolution could produce specified complexity:
“Although it produces some complexity, the self-organizing behavior so far observed in the physical world has not produced complexity and specificity comparable to irreducibly complex biochemical systems. There is currently little reason to think that self-organizing behavior can explain biochemical systems such as the bacterial flagellum or blood clotting cascade.”
http://www.trueorigin.org/behe06.asp
Those posting about the spaghetti monster it seems would rather deny the obvious design features and beleive a lie and cast all their hopes in a hopeless broken hypothesis of Random mutations and simple self-organizations as the vehicles through which the marvelously somplex, irreducibly complex biological marvels came from.
Crystals follow basic simple geometric patterns and ‘laws’ Cell structures, information, and htings like RNA+protien helpers need a designer as they are FAR more complex than simple crystaline structures.
==Chemistry is chemistry. If crystals need and intelligent designer to form, then RNA, which has a crystalline structure and stable crystalline forms, needs an intelligent designer.
Thought you guys might find the following synopsis of a paper in the Journal of Creation on the subject of autopoiesis (self organization). I actually purchased the issue the synopsis is referring to ($14) and the paper is nothing short of fascinating. It will probably be up for free on their website in a few months. The paper is entitled “Life’s irreducible structure” and the synopsis can be found here:
http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/5168/
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.