Posted on 06/08/2009 4:41:47 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
Biomimicry: why the world is full of intelligent design
Forget human ingenuity - the best source of ideas for cutting-edge technology might be in nature, according to experts in 'biomimicry'
We humans like to think we're pretty good at design and technology – but we often forget that Mother Nature had a head start of 3.6 million years. Now, the way that geckoes climb walls, or hummingbirds hover, is at the centre of a burgeoning industry: biomimicry, the science of "reverse-engineering" clever ideas from the natural world....
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
in what sense?
Not on this coin. Stop trolling.
But, then they many think you insane. Your opinion on this subject does not matter to those that think you insane. Best not to use that argument.
Sorry. I didn't realize that you made up the rules.
So? I consider the source. Like you as a source. You are a trolling toad. Trolling toads are no threat to me. And keep your advice where the sun doesn't shine. That is where it belongs.
So you admit trolling.
In that particular case, sure.
But in general we see the overall trend whereby mutations can improve the catalytic efficiency of enzymes. Check out “directed evolution”.
And indeed there is tight control on the mechanisms that increase or decrease the mutation rate during the SOS response to stress. That control is control over the expression of error prone DNA polymerase, DNA mutation repair enzymes, etc. Control doesn’t imply that each mutation is part of some programmed response, the control is over the mechanisms that act over the entire genome increasing the RATE of mutation.
So now that we are deep into a discussion over how an organism controls its mutation rate; why do you suppose there might be ANY advantage to responses that INCREASE the mutation rate over the entire genome?
Is that how you treat someone that deals with facts which you seem so to so easily dismiss?
So bet that way on snake-eyes at a crap table. And again, I did not post odds. I posted the number of unique sequences not odds. Odds depend on the method used to access the universe discussed which consists of shuffling then examining for a specific item. If you don't shuffle....
But then you are a troll, so never mind.
Same thing.
Yes, when they are trolls by action and admission. Especially when the "facts" are not relevant to the specific conditions outlined.
Nope.
If they were not relevant, why did you post them?
Control implies what then? (in light of "an organism controls its mutation rate"). The mutations I have mentioned in the cited paper are specific to ebgA in locations 92 and 599. Second part has been answered.
I can play that game.
If they were not relevant, why did you post them?
“So what is the constraint on EITHER a mouse or a human’s DNA that would keep them from changing their genetic DNA by a few % into another perfectly functional gene?” [excerpt]What constraint is there on binary data to keep Windblowz from changing its bits by a few percent?
“Your entire premise is that somehow mutation is constrained and that would prevent different species being descended from a common ancestor.” [excerpt]Species canard.
“What is the nature of the constraint?” [excerpt]I think the real question is, what is the nature of Gatömgfnua.
As I said, control involves control over the mechanisms that control the mutation rate genome wide.
And yes, increasing mutation rates under stress is an advantageous response for a bacterial population because it increases the rate of evolution.
If you are basing your argument on the impossibility of common descent on some sort of “constraint”, it might be of assistance to your argument to describe the nature of this constraint you propose.
So what constraint would prevent a mouse from changing its DNA a few % to evolve into a rat like creature?
But the mutations are at specific locations in this genome wide endeavor. In any case, the mutations which do occur are part of a programmed response. If the locations are prone to exactly the same mutations, then those locations should by their very existence hit upon the same mutations produced during the induced hypermutation. So the ability to metabolize lactulose or lactose should be routinely "rediscovered" in the strain lacking the ability after a "few" more divisions.
“So what constraint would prevent a mouse from changing its DNA a few % to evolve into a rat like creature?” [excerpt]Uh, a mouse is a rat like creature.
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.