tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post1467581017926983342..comments2024-03-27T14:50:47.345-04:00Comments on <center>Sandwalk</center>: Andyjones RepliesLarry Moranhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05756598746605455848noreply@blogger.comBlogger33125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-30196260121424497382013-05-14T03:22:16.737-04:002013-05-14T03:22:16.737-04:00Good points.
Of course, to IDiots, there is no s...Good points. <br /><br />Of course, to IDiots, there is no such thing as true randomness. To them, sexual recombination isn't <i>really</i> random. That's because they don't <i>just</i> believe in "intelligent design", they believe in a supernatural destiny. They believe they're the direct and intended products of an incomprehensible mind that can engineer the future at it's will. <br /><br />One wonders how they square their "divine foresight" with quantum physics. Simply put, they can't. Supernaturalists <i>have</i> to reject quantum physics at bottom. Mikkel Rumraket Rasmussenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07670550711237457368noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-23737130447815388802013-05-14T02:30:30.340-04:002013-05-14T02:30:30.340-04:00@Claudiu,
I'm guessing you did not read the ...@Claudiu, <br /><br />I'm guessing you did not read the bladderwort genome paper, then. (see below). There appears to be a plant that gets along fine in the absence of all of this protection (despite the presence of a few hundred TEs, where some appear active). TheOtherJimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01727633779107067250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-80725581152823326262013-05-13T21:47:50.148-04:002013-05-13T21:47:50.148-04:00You're welcome, Jim.You're welcome, Jim. <br /><br />The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-19446426071099480762013-05-13T17:51:55.221-04:002013-05-13T17:51:55.221-04:00Clay tablets with a reed.
The short drying time h...Clay tablets with a reed.<br /><br />The short drying time help focus one's thoughts.<br />steve oberskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14067724166134333068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-547097743523881122013-05-13T17:39:57.047-04:002013-05-13T17:39:57.047-04:00Christ you must've written code on stone table...Christ you must've written code on stone tablets with a chisel. Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-11317750739027889912013-05-13T17:13:03.720-04:002013-05-13T17:13:03.720-04:00No while loops in FORTRAN, at least the last versi...No while loops in FORTRAN, at least the last version I worked with, FORTRAN 66.<br /><br />It does have the 3 way arithmetic IF statement and the computed GOTO statement, for those occasions when normal GOTOs and IF statements just won't suffice in making your code suitably cryptic.steve oberskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14067724166134333068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-68487847525037577572013-05-13T12:50:03.962-04:002013-05-13T12:50:03.962-04:00If we treat them as colleagues, and pretend as if ...If we treat them as colleagues, and pretend as if their arguments are within the bounds of ordinary, real scientific controversies, they'll use that to claim they're real scientists and there really is a scientific controversy.<br /><br />We have to make it clear that their arguments are below the lower limit of what's acceptable in scientific arguments-- below in terms of factual accuracy (they constantly make things up), and use of induction and the scientific method.<br /><br />In real scientific controversies, it is not acceptable to make things up, and when caught, to make up some more things. <br /><br />So if we don't call them 'IDiots'-- OK, then how do we convey the fact that their claims are based on 'facts' they made up wholecloth? <br /><br />If you have a better way than that to get across to John Q. Public that their arguments are below the lower limit of what's standard in real scientific controversies, I'd like to know what way you would suggest.Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-6215454375668099392013-05-13T12:42:32.054-04:002013-05-13T12:42:32.054-04:00Not only is FORTRAN not a human language, it's...Not only is FORTRAN not a human language, it's not even a programming language. It's BASIC with a while loop.Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-69239116833391078452013-05-13T11:34:17.106-04:002013-05-13T11:34:17.106-04:00Mutations come in all shapes and forms, and indeed...Mutations come in all shapes and forms, and indeed junk DNA (jDNA) protects against some types of mutations, such insertion mutagenesis, which in humans can lead to insertional oncogenic transformation (<a href="http://comments.sciencemag.org/content/10.1126/science.337.6099.1159" rel="nofollow">http://comments.sciencemag.org/content/10.1126/science.337.6099.1159</a>). <br /><br />For whatever reason, however, this is a difficult hypothesis to understand. But there are other well documented theories, such as the ‘nucleo-skeletal hypothesis’ proposed by Thomas Cavalier-Smith, and the ‘nucleotypic hypothesis’ proposed by Michael Bennett and developed by Ryan Gregory, which propose that *all* jDNA has a biological role.<br /> <br />For mysterious reasons, the bloggers here at Sandwalk, including Ryan Gregory, pretend that these theories, which have been discussed in dozens of articles and books, do not exist. Even more enigmatic is the fact that the people referred as ID-ots, who preach a biological role for jDNA, do not bring these theories into discussion. Aren’t they aware of these theories?<br />Claudiu Bandeahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04987489537796352657noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-64509014658629186842013-05-13T08:40:08.245-04:002013-05-13T08:40:08.245-04:00The purpose of junk DNA, then, is to provide a vas...The purpose of junk DNA, then, is to provide a vast number of targets in which mutations can occur without causing any effect, thereby sparing the functional DNA from the harmful effects of mutations. And the Designer, in his infinite wisdom, did that deliberately.<br /><br />Checkmate, atheists!Faizal Alihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00937075798809265805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-43836571157733352002013-05-13T02:17:58.631-04:002013-05-13T02:17:58.631-04:00Thanks twt!
The original paper is open access (N...Thanks twt! <br /><br />The original paper is open access (Nature (2013) doi:10.1038/nature12132)<br />http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12132.html<br /><br />TheOtherJimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01727633779107067250noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-80011243932803021762013-05-12T20:54:05.292-04:002013-05-12T20:54:05.292-04:00But wait: if there are mutations that don't af...But wait: if there are mutations that don't affect the organism, and if in fact most mutations don't affect the organism, isn't that an argument for junk DNA? If almost all DNA is functional, most mutations should have effects.John Harshmanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06705501480675917237noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-84926463624507462072013-05-12T17:29:25.220-04:002013-05-12T17:29:25.220-04:00
http://news.yahoo.com/junk-dna-mystery-solved-not...<br />http://news.yahoo.com/junk-dna-mystery-solved-not-needed-182525539.html<br />The whole truthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07219999357041824471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-1315691523796834732013-05-12T15:03:13.684-04:002013-05-12T15:03:13.684-04:00I disagree. Insulting and ridiculing them at ever...I disagree. Insulting and ridiculing them at every opportunity (while still rigorously debunking their claims) is a necessary countermeasure to one of their chief tactics, which is to give the uninformed the impression that there is genuine scientific controversy over the status of the truth of evolutionary theory, and that creationists are serious and competent scientists touting a controversial but reasonable alternative. True, insulting them does leave them the option of claiming that they are victtims of a conspiracy against their views. However, that is a much weaker position from which to argue.<br /><br />Respect is not a given. It must be earned. IDiots and other creationists have not earned it. Faizal Alihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00937075798809265805noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-47040756459074007922013-05-12T12:27:11.431-04:002013-05-12T12:27:11.431-04:00You know, I'm politically conservative and sti...You know, I'm politically conservative and still believe in evolution, and although I consider myself agnostic (while strongly suspecting the atheists are right) almost all of my friends are both Christians and conservative, and yet every one of them believes in evolution as well.<br /><br />Slapping labels on people is seldom useful. Yes, the ID proponents are hard to fathom, but calling them names isn't helpful.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06870938296072625231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-70194403257695093732013-05-12T01:38:49.556-04:002013-05-12T01:38:49.556-04:00Dammit, we will be rumbled!
M. Lungfish
ArcturusDammit, we will be rumbled!<br /><br />M. Lungfish<br />ArcturusChris Nedinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06978886926715669724noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-43901609263994387542013-05-11T20:46:44.538-04:002013-05-11T20:46:44.538-04:00sez srm: "…you might as well imagine Yosemite...sez srm: "…you might as well imagine Yosemite Sam up on the cross."<br />Naah, iIt's Bugs Bunny on the cross. Yosemite Sam is playing the role of "Gethsemane Sam—the rootin'est, tootin'est, shootin'est Legionnaire this side o' the Eu-<i>phra</i>-tes River!"Cubisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18112097625072217558noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-14913233672149117832013-05-11T19:58:53.976-04:002013-05-11T19:58:53.976-04:00then why don't all babies die?
Jesus<i>then why don't all babies die?</i><br /><br />JesusSRMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07299706694667706149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-64470116593991447682013-05-11T19:54:44.403-04:002013-05-11T19:54:44.403-04:00Look at the Discovery Institute website, that will...Look at the Discovery Institute website, that will tell you what you need to know. They are religious and are politically conservative. A generally toxic combination that has so perverted the concept of Jesus that you might as well imagine Yosemite Sam up on the cross.SRMhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07299706694667706149noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-59282347694411582013-05-11T19:41:16.878-04:002013-05-11T19:41:16.878-04:00I though it had been rather positively in Kitzmill...I though it had been rather positively in Kitzmiller vs Dover demonstrated that ID is nothing more than creationism repackaged. So why does anyone waste time trying to convince religious zealots of anything outside those zealots' tiny little vision of God? And just how does their outright lying to accomplish their goals jive with their religious faith? Isn't bearing false witness one of the Ten Commandments?<br /><br />I know lots of people of faith who believe in evolution, so what is it with these people? Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06870938296072625231noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-45676469637737874422013-05-11T19:13:28.689-04:002013-05-11T19:13:28.689-04:00Dio writes,
"I'm sorry if I seem hard on ...Dio writes,<br />"I'm sorry if I seem hard on IT professionals."<br /><br />Darn it, I was getting ready to accuse you of 'scurrilous lies'.<br />;)andyboergerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11159573123843322700noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-87536489084328944662013-05-11T17:59:20.350-04:002013-05-11T17:59:20.350-04:00When I did my doctorate one had to demonstrate com...When I did my doctorate one had to demonstrate competence in two foreign languages. Mine were German and Fortan. :)RBHhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13562135000111792590noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-4256825542902015672013-05-11T17:40:24.427-04:002013-05-11T17:40:24.427-04:00I'm sorry if I seem hard on IT professionals.
...I'm sorry if I seem hard on IT professionals.<br /><br />However, the IDiots bring it on themselves, because they constantly, constantly invoke their incredible genius (they can write code-- and not just in Basic!) as proof they're right about intelligent design.<br /><br />They don't need to know no stinkin' biology-- they've heard about this here DNA, and they know it's the same thing as the computer code that they're the *only* experts at writing. Because they can write code, that means they know that life is too complex to be the result of blind chance. (In fact most physicists and molecular biologists can write code, and I imagine geneticists and others-- but they don't invoke that as an argument from authority-- only IDers brag about 'I can write code, so I understand how complex functional things are'). Diogeneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15551943619872944637noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-53162838736312032152013-05-10T20:22:35.426-04:002013-05-10T20:22:35.426-04:00Hey, I Resemble That Remark.Hey, I Resemble That Remark.steve oberskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14067724166134333068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-37148773.post-1386030163743432642013-05-10T19:06:52.725-04:002013-05-10T19:06:52.725-04:00Ba dum bum. *cymbal crash*Ba dum bum. *cymbal crash*Nullifidianhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15207390447020990907noreply@blogger.com