Skip to comments.
"Binary" Enzyme Created By Scripps Scientists Demonstrates Darwinian Evolution At Its Simplest
Scripps Research Institute / ScienceDaily News ^
| 12/19/2002
| John S. Reader, D.Phil, and Professor Gerald F. Joyce, M.D., Ph.D
Posted on 12/19/2002 5:57:50 AM PST by forsnax5
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 next last
To: forsnax5
This research, described in the latest issue of the journal Nature, demonstrates that Darwinian evolution can occur in a genetic system with only two bases, and it also supports a theory in the field that an early form of life on earth may have been restricted to two bases.
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel! The research simply shows that one can synthesize a protein using a nucleotide constructed of only two bases. All the rest is hand-waving.
61
posted on
12/19/2002 10:29:10 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: jlogajan
As these possible structures are proven to work, the creationists strawman gets more laughable by the minute.
Please, come back from the world of fantasy before you get stuck there.
62
posted on
12/19/2002 10:31:05 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: jlogajan; AndrewC
DNA and other life forms [sic] are really just an ongoing crystalization process, if you will.
I guess this just demonstrates what you know about DNA and molecular biology.
63
posted on
12/19/2002 10:34:53 PM PST
by
aruanan
To: forsnax5
In the current study, Reader and Joyce first created a three-base enzyme (A, U, G) and then performed chemical manipulations to convert all the A to D (diaminopurine, a modified form of A) and biochemical manipulations to remove all the G. They were left with an enzyme based on a two-letter code (D and U). Let's see what has been 'proven' here. That if you manipulate chemicals in the laboratory you can get an enzyme out of two chemical bases - one of which is not one of the bases on which all life is based. Now this research does not tell us where they got the RNA strand, but I am sure that they 'borrowed' it. Of course, they created an enxyme which they refuse to name and may not even occur in any living thing. Of course even if you get an enzyme you will not get a living thing. You need the whole structure of some half million DNA bases and you certainly cannot have a working living thing with only two DNA bases one of which does not appear in any living thing. There are also lots of questions as to how the transcription took place and how much intervention was necessary to accomplish it - the article does not bother to say that either. You certainly need the cell itself for a living organism because the transcription needs material to form the enzyme, protein, or whatever it is producing. The so called scientists that did this so called research also did not even try to simulate natural conditions. They were trying to prove a point and used all the scientific knowledge we have to try to prove it and ended up proving nothing. Another example of our tax dollars at work!
64
posted on
12/19/2002 10:47:36 PM PST
by
gore3000
To: gore3000
The so called scientists that did this so called research also did not even try to simulate natural conditions. Sorry, we already anticipated your call for a 300 million year experiment in a posting above.
65
posted on
12/19/2002 10:50:04 PM PST
by
jlogajan
To: jlogajan
DNA and other life forms are really just an ongoing crystalization process, if you will.
51 posted on 12/19/2002 6:20 PM PST by jlogajan
classic...brain damage!
To: Physicist
Putting to rest all "tornado in a junkyard" arguments.Well, you just wait until a tornado rips through your junk yard.
To: aruanan
"DNA and other life forms are really just an ongoing crystalization process, if you will." I guess this just demonstrates what you know about DNA and molecular biology.
Unless you are asserting DNA structures are formed and controlled by magic rather than electron configurations, then it's not clear what your objection is.
The point is that just as snowflakes can acquire complex and macroscale structures without an "intelligent designer" so too can other chemical structures arise.
Since we know DNA exists, you have a long haul to prove impossibility of natural events. Begin.
68
posted on
12/19/2002 10:59:55 PM PST
by
jlogajan
To: f.Christian
classic...brain damage! Coming from you that's like a certificate of sanity!
69
posted on
12/19/2002 11:01:54 PM PST
by
jlogajan
To: jlogajan
brain flakes---evolution!
To: jlogajan
Unless you are asserting DNA structures are formed and controlled by magic rather than electron configurations, then it's not clear what your objection is.The linear sequence of bases in DNA is not determined by the chemical bonds. That is why it can code.
AAAA |
ACAA |
AGAA |
ATAA |
CAAA |
CCAA |
CGAA |
CTAA |
GAAA |
GCAA |
GGAA |
GTAA |
TAAA |
TCAA |
TGAA |
TTAA |
AAAC |
ACAC |
AGAC |
ATAC |
CAAC |
CCAC |
CGAC |
CTAC |
GAAC |
GCAC |
GGAC |
GTAC |
TAAC |
TCAC |
TGAC |
TTAC |
AAAG |
ACAG |
AGAG |
ATAG |
CAAG |
CCAG |
CGAG |
CTAG |
GAAG |
GCAG |
GGAG |
GTAG |
TAAG |
TCAG |
TGAG |
TTAG |
AAAT |
ACAT |
AGAT |
ATAT |
CAAT |
CCAT |
CGAT |
CTAT |
GAAT |
GCAT |
GGAT |
GTAT |
TAAT |
TCAT |
TGAT |
TTAT |
AACA |
ACCA |
AGCA |
ATCA |
CACA |
CCCA |
CGCA |
CTCA |
GACA |
GCCA |
GGCA |
GTCA |
TACA |
TCCA |
TGCA |
TTCA |
AACC |
ACCC |
AGCC |
ATCC |
CACC |
CCCC |
CGCC |
CTCC |
GACC |
GCCC |
GGCC |
GTCC |
TACC |
TCCC |
TGCC |
TTCC |
AACG |
ACCG |
AGCG |
ATCG |
CACG |
CCCG |
CGCG |
CTCG |
GACG |
GCCG |
GGCG |
GTCG |
TACG |
TCCG |
TGCG |
TTCG |
AACT |
ACCT |
AGCT |
ATCT |
CACT |
CCCT |
CGCT |
CTCT |
GACT |
GCCT |
GGCT |
GTCT |
TACT |
TCCT |
TGCT |
TTCT |
AAGA |
ACGA |
AGGA |
ATGA |
CAGA |
CCGA |
CGGA |
CTGA |
GAGA |
GCGA |
GGGA |
GTGA |
TAGA |
TCGA |
TGGA |
TTGA |
AAGC |
ACGC |
AGGC |
ATGC |
CAGC |
CCGC |
CGGC |
CTGC |
GAGC |
GCGC |
GGGC |
GTGC |
TAGC |
TCGC |
TGGC |
TTGC |
AAGG |
ACGG |
AGGG |
ATGG |
CAGG |
CCGG |
CGGG |
CTGG |
GAGG |
GCGG |
GGGG |
GTGG |
TAGG |
TCGG |
TGGG |
TTGG |
AAGT |
ACGT |
AGGT |
ATGT |
CAGT |
CCGT |
CGGT |
CTGT |
GAGT |
GCGT |
GGGT |
GTGT |
TAGT |
TCGT |
TGGT |
TTGT |
AATA |
ACTA |
AGTA |
ATTA |
CATA |
CCTA |
CGTA |
CTTA |
GATA |
GCTA |
GGTA |
GTTA |
TATA |
TCTA |
TGTA |
TTTA |
AATC |
ACTC |
AGTC |
ATTC |
CATC |
CCTC |
CGTC |
CTTC |
GATC |
GCTC |
GGTC |
GTTC |
TATC |
TCTC |
TGTC |
TTTC |
AATG |
ACTG |
AGTG |
ATTG |
CATG |
CCTG |
CGTG |
CTTG |
GATG |
GCTG |
GGTG |
GTTG |
TATG |
TCTG |
TGTG |
TTTG |
AATT |
ACTT |
AGTT |
ATTT |
CATT |
CCTT |
CGTT |
CTTT |
GATT |
GCTT |
GGTT |
GTTT |
TATT |
TCTT |
TGTT |
TTTT |
|
All of those sequences are allowed and apparently in any order and number. Try to code with ice.
71
posted on
12/20/2002 1:15:15 AM PST
by
AndrewC
To: jlogajan; AndrewC
Unless you are asserting DNA structures are formed and controlled by magic rather than electron configurations, then it's not clear what your objection is.
DNA sequences are maintained by chemical interactions. The information encoded into the sequences relies on the chemical interactions for maintaining its integrity, but neither the information nor the structures that the cell uses the DNA to generate is determined by them. Though G pairs with C, and A with T, there is nothing in the chemical interactions in a sequence of DNA that determines what the sequence can or must be.
The information in a sequence of DNA is no more determined by the chemical interactions in the DNA than is the content of an AM radio message by the frequency of the carrier wave. While both rely on the nature of their particular medium for their propagation, neither is determined by it. This is wholly unlike crystal formation.
72
posted on
12/20/2002 1:46:29 AM PST
by
aruanan
To: forsnax5; AndrewC
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel! The research simply shows that one can synthesize a protein using a nucleotide constructed of only two bases. All the rest is hand-waving.
This should read:
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha. Talk about straining at a gnat and swallowing a camel! The research simply shows that one can synthesize an enzyme using a nucleotide constructed of only two bases. All the rest is hand-waving.
73
posted on
12/20/2002 1:49:30 AM PST
by
aruanan
To: Junior
Placemarker.
74
posted on
12/20/2002 2:57:02 AM PST
by
Junior
To: PatrickHenry
As I've stated before, Evolution and the Bible are not mutually exclusive. If God created the world, He created everything that works, then He might as easily have created evolution. What the Creationalists fear is a destruction of their own narcocism...they can't stand the idea that they evolved, by God's will, from something lesser.
75
posted on
12/20/2002 3:15:10 AM PST
by
Stavka2
To: pepsi_junkie
Carp and gold fish...gold fish were bred from carp 1,000 years ago by humans, they are no longer breeding compatible and most aren't within various subgroups. NEXT!
76
posted on
12/20/2002 3:30:52 AM PST
by
Stavka2
To: Stavka2
What the Creationalists fear is a destruction of their own narcocism...they can't stand the idea that they evolved, by God's will, from something lesser. They fear that their well-settled worldview may require some re-thinking, and that's something they're so ill-equipped to do that it terrifies them.
To: pepsi_junkie
HIV is a retrovirus that has no DNA. Only RNA. Your comment was that the researcher was speculating about RNA being used for replication. HIV is an existing example of an organism with no DNA that uses RNA for replication.
To: jlogajan
Sir, with all due respect, if you cannot see the qualitative difference between a snowflake and a cell..let's not waste time pretending to talk 'science'. Merry Christmas
To: Stavka2
The only way to believe evolution could happen is if God did it!
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-120 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson