Mutations do not produce real change

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

For anyone other than Valorian who's interested in my response to the yeast research, the long and the short of it is that they used a brewer's yeast which is a single celled organism and cultivated it in batches of broth. They found that there was a survival advantage to being heavy, as heavy material sank to the bottom quicker, and it turned out that the yeast had been clustering when under pressure.

When the single cells were isolated the new cells continued to cluster on the parent cells until they formed a snowflake pattern. These patterns are know in other stains of yeast but to date had not been observed in this particular cell.

Once the branches of the snowflakes grew they broke off the new supposed parent and supposedly continued to ‘mature’.

So, the assumption is that even though other yeasts are known to do this clustering, it’s supposed to have evolved this capacity in 60 days under centrifugal force, and further, that these cell clusters had actaully become a multicellular organism, instead of a cluster of single celled organisms, because the cells are supposedly working together instead of singularly.

It’s interesting to note that it doesn’t seem like those conducting the research are making the kind of bold claims about this being a new organism as the sensationalists:

“This is a really interesting and important study,” said Richard Lenski, a biologist at Michigan State University and the editor of the paper. “It shows that a major transition in evolution — going from unicellular to multicellular life forms — might not be as hard to achieve as most biologists have long thought.”

“Dr. Ratcliff suspects that the transformation of the yeast in his lab may offer hints about how animals and other lineages became multicellular hundreds of millions of years ago.” (Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/17/science/yeast-reveals-how-fast-a-cell-can-form-a-body.html).

A few immediate challenges to this research can be seen here: http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/multicellular_evolution.html

But it sounds like just another incident of sensationalism preceding the results, just like we saw with Ida the monkey, the nylon-eating bug, the supposed abiogenesis experiment, and all the other hype-or-the-week finds that recommend themselves far higher than the actual data supports. Just more cells loosing information.

[Guest]

.... But it sounds like just another incident of sensationalism preceding the results, just like we saw with Ida the monkey, the nylon-eating bug, the supposed abiogenesis experiment, and all the other hype-or-the-week finds that recommend themselves far higher than the actual data supports. Just more cells loosing information.....

The Logic Of The Religious Atheist

Surely your turning of things upside down shall be esteemed as the potter's clay: for shall the work say of him that made it, He made me not? or shall the thing framed say of him that framed it, He had no understanding? Isaiah 29:16

Versus Science

Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,

And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as they were from the beginning of the creation.

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:

Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished: 2 Peter 3:3-6

And Truth

The heavens declare the glory of God; and the firmament sheweth his handywork.

Day unto day uttereth speech, and night unto night sheweth knowledge.

There is no speech nor language, where their voice is not heard. Psalms 19:1-3

~

Sad Little Men Raging Against The Light

For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. John 3:17-20

Just More Souls Burning Time

And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. Mark 1:15

Faithlessly

~

Believe

For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16

And Be Blessed Beloved

Love, Joe

[Valoran]

A few immediate challenges to this research can be seen here: http://www.godandscience.org/evolution/multicellular_evolution.html

Let's inspect the main arguments made by that article.

There is more than one way in which cells within such "snowflakes" can become stressed and die. You will recall that all these cultures were shaking during their growth. Usually, this is done using an orbital shaker that "spins" the media in the cultures at speeds of at least 200 rpm. The supplemental methods3 say that the cultures were "shaking at 250 × g" (Obviously, this is an error, most likely meaning 250 rpm). Such shaking results in sheer forces, which will damage cells near the middle of the "snowflake" as it is contorted by the forces of the rapidly moving culture medium. The larger the colonies become, the stronger the sheering forces that will act on it. The damaged cells will die, resulting in the release of a "juvenile snowflake."

If this assertion is true, then larger yeast clusters should consistently exhibit higher rates of cell death, since centripetal force is directly proportional to mass. What we see, on the other hand, is that there is little to no correlation between cluster size and cell death rates during the early generations of snowflake yeast. This correlation, however, grows gradually until there is a strong correlation by the 60th generation of snowflake yeast, showing that this cell death was not caused by mechanical factors (otherwise the correlation would be present in every generation since the mechanical factors are constant), but that it evolved over time. I'm afraid you'll have to come up with a better explanation that actually fits the facts.

Without any kind of genetic analysis, it is impossible to conclude that any genetic changes were responsible for the phenotypic changes observed.

How do you expect epigenetics or or RNA expression changes to account for such a chasm between unicellularity and multicellularity? First you argue how difficult and impossible it is for multicellular organisms to evolve, and now you claim that such a change can occur without any change in the genome? Incredible. Even if it is true, does it really matter? As long as the changes are heritable and can be acted upon by selection forces, then evolution can occur. Quibbling on this point is simply a red herring that does nothing to change the significance of the experiment.

Authors of the study were so blinded by their belief in macroevolution that they failed to consider the most obvious explanation for the results they observed. Wildtype Saccharomyces cerevisiae already have the ability to grow in a clumped manner by forming pseudohyphae. Granted, the morphology of the "snowflakes" is quite unlike that observed in pseudohyphae. However, this does not mean that Saccharomyces cerevisiae could not have appropriated at least some of the genes involved in pseudohyphae formation to form "snowflakes." Numerous studies are available in the literature that describe the genes involved in pseudohyphae formation in Saccharomyces cerevisiae.4 To conclude that Saccharomyces cerevisiae evolved new genes in a few days of selection in the laboratory is beyond credulity.

What is really beyond credulity is that you expect us to accept the alternative explanation that every single generation evolved all the same characteristics of the parent generation and more, all from scratch, all within a single generation, and that every successive generation did the same. (Or perhaps you're trying to posit the one-size-fits-all excuse of "God did it!" to cover the far-fetched alternative?)

The author of the article admits that pseudohyphae is quite unlike the morphology of snowflake yeast. That's an understatement, considering how pseudohyphae are little more than mitotic daughter cells with no cytoplasmic connection whatsoever failing to completely break off from the parent cell, while snowflake yeast are true multicellular organisms which react as a whole to selection pressures instead of just having individual cells exhibit such reactions. I suspect the author of the article knows this very well. And yet he comes up with the ridiculous proposition that multicellularity can be hand-waved away by yeast pseudohyphae.

Even for the rare few creationists who are intelligent enough to know that the data is squarely against their delusions, the only option they have is to come up with all sorts of absurd assertions and pretend that it's good science, so as to shore up their own faith as well as that of the ignorant, gullible public who looks up to them as stalwart defenders against the satanic influence of scientific research. Admit the facts, and all that will happen is that they get vilified as "traitors" and face rejection from friends, leaders, and even family - their own parents, spouse, children. Which is why you just can't help but pity creationists, especially the smart ones who knows what's really going on but are trapped by their circumstances and forced to deny the truth.

I'm still waiting for a link to Behe's work, by the way. I'm really curious now what sort of sham Behe is cooking up this time when even creationists are afraid to show his work to shore up their arguments.

Edited February 8, 2012 by Valoran

[MorningGlory]

Even for the rare few creationists who are intelligent enough to know that the data is squarely against their delusions, the only option they have is to come up with all sorts of absurd assertions and pretend that it's good science, so as to shore up their own faith as well as that of the ignorant, gullible public who looks up to them as stalwart defenders against the satanic influence of scientific research. Admit the facts, and all that will happen is that they get vilified as "traitors" and face rejection from friends, leaders, and even family - their own parents, spouse, children. Which is why you just can't help but pity creationists, especially the smart ones who knows what's really going on but are trapped by their circumstances and forced to deny the truth.

As believers we know that nothing you posted above is true so....I'm praying for His help to bring you to the Truth.

[enoob57]

Even for the rare few creationists who are intelligent enough to know that the data is squarely against their delusions, the only option they have is to come up with all sorts of absurd assertions and pretend that it's good science, so as to shore up their own faith as well as that of the ignorant, gullible public who looks up to them as stalwart defenders against the satanic influence of scientific research. Admit the facts, and all that will happen is that they get vilified as "traitors" and face rejection from friends, leaders, and even family - their own parents, spouse, children. Which is why you just can't help but pity creationists, especially the smart ones who knows what's really going on but are trapped by their circumstances and forced to deny the truth.

We are really impressed with the superb being you have become! Coming from nothing only to return to nothing and what else can be said but nothing.... Love, Steven

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

So Valoran, you just skipped right over the part where I said, "For anyone other than Valoran..."?

I told you I'm not going to bother to discuss this with you. Everyone can see that your little attempt at face saving doesn't establish your integrity and I'm not going to waste my time with your dishonest games.

But I'd like you to answer MorningGlory's question: Why are you here?

We don't care about your insults. We've been through others just like you before. You're not blowing our minds.

So if you think we're all just deluded then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no santa clause, or that the moon landing was real... but here you are, dedicating your time and energy to talking incessently at us, even after we've told you flat out that we don't want to hear from you and don't care about your opinion.

So that begs the question, if this life is all you have why are you wasting it talking to deluded, superstitious half-wits? Who cares if we believe nonsense if that's how we want to spend our days?

What is it that you think you're doing here and why?

[Valoran]

So Valoran, you just skipped right over the part where I said, "For anyone other than Valoran..."?

Ah, I see you've stumbled across the obvious, well done. Thanks for pointing it out as well, some of us here might not have your keen analytical mind and Holmes-esque powers of observation needed to notice that.

I told you I'm not going to bother to discuss this with you. Everyone can see that your little attempt at face saving doesn't establish your integrity and I'm not going to waste my time with your dishonest games.

But I'd like you to answer MorningGlory's question: Why are you here?

We don't care about your insults. We've been through others just like you before. You're not blowing our minds.

So if you think we're all just deluded then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no santa clause, or that the moon landing was real... but here you are, dedicating your time and energy to talking incessently at us, even after we've told you flat out that we don't want to hear from you and don't care about your opinion.

So that begs the question, if this life is all you have why are you wasting it talking to deluded, superstitious half-wits? Who cares if we believe nonsense if that's how we want to spend our days?

What is it that you think you're doing here and why?

If you don't believe in evolution, then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no Santa Claus, or that the moon landing was real. Why do you dedicate all this time and energy talking incessantly about evolution?

If you don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion, why are you replying to me and saying that you want me to answer questions? Besides the obvious answer, of course: you just want to make absolutely sure other people here know how much you supposedly don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion.

Personally, I think it'd be great if you're going to engage in the discussion and defend your arguments with honest debate instead of playing meaningless word games and/or running away all the time. But if you're going to simply turn tail - hey, it's your choice, and truth be told it's just going to make debunking your nonsense that much easier for me.

[MorningGlory]

Even for the rare few creationists who are intelligent enough to know that the data is squarely against their delusions, the only option they have is to come up with all sorts of absurd assertions and pretend that it's good science, so as to shore up their own faith as well as that of the ignorant, gullible public who looks up to them as stalwart defenders against the satanic influence of scientific research. Admit the facts, and all that will happen is that they get vilified as "traitors" and face rejection from friends, leaders, and even family - their own parents, spouse, children. Which is why you just can't help but pity creationists, especially the smart ones who knows what's really going on but are trapped by their circumstances and forced to deny the truth.

We are really impressed with the superb being you have become! Coming from nothing only to return to nothing and what else can be said but nothing.... Love, Steven

[OldEnglishSheepdog]

So Valoran, you just skipped right over the part where I said, "For anyone other than Valoran..."?

Ah, I see you've stumbled across the obvious, well done. Thanks for pointing it out as well, some of us here might not have your keen analytical mind and Holmes-esque powers of observation needed to notice that.

Valoran, that doesn't even make sense. It makes you look crazy.

First you pretend that you're too stupid to understand the point I made by having you affirm for me that sedimentary layers can be laid down rapidly, and now you're pretending... whatever it is that you're going for here. I don't get it - how is it that you figure that pretending that you're stupid and crazy make you feel like you're appearing to be correct?

If you don't believe in evolution, then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no Santa Claus, or that the moon landing was real. Why do you dedicate all this time and energy talking incessantly about evolution?

I'm a Christian who believes in eternal salvation based on doctrine and evolution has an impact on doctrine, so I'm participating on a Christian forum about shared beliefs with other Christians.

That's so obvious that it demonstrates that the question used as a diversion from actually answering the question I asked is another pretence of being stupid. Again, why pretend you don't understand very simple things to try to look smart?

If you don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion, why are you replying to me and saying that you want me to answer questions? Besides the obvious answer, of course: you just want to make absolutely sure other people here know how much you supposedly don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion.

Personally, I think it'd be great if you're going to engage in the discussion and defend your arguments with honest debate instead of playing meaningless word games and/or running away all the time. But if you're going to simply turn tail - hey, it's your choice, and truth be told it's just going to make debunking your nonsense that much easier for me.

So... no answer to my question?

Interesting.

OK. You want to parade around pretending to be stupid and craze that's fine by me.

I'm interested in whether or not you're getting a good return for our effort, so I'd appreciate it if you keep me updated on how many converts you get from among us.

[MorningGlory]

So Valoran, you just skipped right over the part where I said, "For anyone other than Valoran..."?

Ah, I see you've stumbled across the obvious, well done. Thanks for pointing it out as well, some of us here might not have your keen analytical mind and Holmes-esque powers of observation needed to notice that.

I told you I'm not going to bother to discuss this with you. Everyone can see that your little attempt at face saving doesn't establish your integrity and I'm not going to waste my time with your dishonest games.

But I'd like you to answer MorningGlory's question: Why are you here?

We don't care about your insults. We've been through others just like you before. You're not blowing our minds.

So if you think we're all just deluded then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no santa clause, or that the moon landing was real... but here you are, dedicating your time and energy to talking incessently at us, even after we've told you flat out that we don't want to hear from you and don't care about your opinion.

So that begs the question, if this life is all you have why are you wasting it talking to deluded, superstitious half-wits? Who cares if we believe nonsense if that's how we want to spend our days?

What is it that you think you're doing here and why?

If you don't believe in evolution, then why waste your time? I don't go around trying to convince people there's no Santa Claus, or that the moon landing was real. Why do you dedicate all this time and energy talking incessantly about evolution?

If you don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion, why are you replying to me and saying that you want me to answer questions? Besides the obvious answer, of course: you just want to make absolutely sure other people here know how much you supposedly don't want to hear from me and don't care about my opinion.

Personally, I think it'd be great if you're going to engage in the discussion and defend your arguments with honest debate instead of playing meaningless word games and/or running away all the time. But if you're going to simply turn tail - hey, it's your choice, and truth be told it's just going to make debunking your nonsense that much easier for me.

Just once.....repeat ONCE....will you answer the questions put to you? You try to deflect questions and go on to some other topic and no one wants to play that game anymore. I will pray for the Lord to help you see that honesty and straightforwardness are the best approach to those with whom you disagree.