|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 51 (9221 total) |
| |
danieljones0094 | |
Total: 920,791 Year: 1,113/6,935 Month: 394/719 Week: 36/146 Day: 9/8 Hour: 1/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
lawdog Guest |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: hey evos | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Probably. You'll have to help us out here, tho'.
1. Could you provide an operational definition of "complex specified information" so I know what I'm trying to provide? It's not a term used in biology (and that's the discipline from which I assume you're looking for an example - correct me if I'm wrong). 2. Could you let me know in which category you're placing natural selection: chance or natural law? The problem being, you know, that ns doesn't really come under either one. Thanks.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
In other words, he's using Dembski's definition of CSI: a pre-defined meaningful pattern that is highly improbable under an ad hoc chance hypothesis developed after the fact. Is this going to be another circular argument using the EF - which automatically defaults to "intelligence" if the causal history of a given phenomenon is unknown - to prove design? In that case, I'm outta here. Someone pass the popcorn.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Be delighted to discuss this further. As soon as you register and open a topic. This has gone about as far as a "Welcome Visitors" topic should. You asked for an example, I gave you one, and referenced the primary research from which the example was derived. A good local library should allow you access to back issues of Nature, so if you're interested, you should probably look it up.
Toodles.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
I’ll do better: here are three related articles you can read yourself on-line. Hopefully this will satisfy your apparent intimation that I refuse to get into a detailed discussion of the subject with some internet troll who can’t be bothered to register. BTW: Where did this little cheap shot come from, Nosy? Have I EVER referenced something I can’t back up?
Chen L, DeVries AL, Cheng C-CH, 1997, Evolution of antifreeze glycoprotein gene from a trypsinogen gene in Antarctic notothenioid fish PNAS 94: 3811—3816 Chen L, DeVries AL, Cheng C-CH, 1997 Convergent evolution of antifreeze glycoproteins in Antarctic notothenioid fish and Arctic cod, PNAS 94: 3817—3822 Hsiao K, Cheng C-CH, Fernandes IE, Detrich HW, and DeVries AL, 1990, An antifreeze glycopeptide gene from the antarctic cod Notothenia coriiceps neglecta encodes a polyprotein of high peptide copy number PNAS 87: 9265—9269 Here’s a few additional abstracts that bolster the trypsinogen => AFGP transition which examine related notothenioid fishes in near-Antarctic and Antarctic waters: Cheng CH, Chen L, Near TJ, Jin Y, 2003, Functional antifreeze glycoprotein genes in temperate-water New Zealand nototheniid fish infer an Antarctic evolutionary origin, MolBioEvo 20: 1897-1908
quote: Bargelloni L, Ritchie PA, Patarnello T, Battaglia B, Lambert DM, Meyer A, 1994, Molecular evolution at subzero temperatures: mitochondrial and nuclear phylogenies of fishes from Antarctica (suborder Notothenioidei), and the evolution of antifreeze glycopeptides MolBioEvo 11:854-863
quote: What a waste of time on a Welcome Visitor’s thread, especially posting all this to someone who’s apparently unwilling to even register on the site. Satisfied, Nosy, or do you want me to buy you a subscription to Nature so you can get the original article yourself instead of "trotting off to the library for a specific point"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Bollocks. Our friend lawdog issued a fairly typical one-line "evo challenge" - exactly like 95% of the post-and-run creationists that appear then vanish on this board. I provided a one-line response: exactly what the question merited, in context. And since s/he was nice enough to clarify his/her question when asked, I was nice enough to reference the source material from which my answer was derived. And THAT is all I intend to do from now on with these drive-by evilution slayers - unless they register. Your little potshot about being "polite" and backing up my reference, especially in the face of how many substantive posts I've made on this forum that do precisely that, was both unwelcome and insulting. I will assume that you weren't being intentionally insulting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Hey Navy,
Welcome aboard. We haven't had an active duty cephalopod on the board before (or at least none who would admit it). In any case, we won't hold it against you. ![]() "Gunny" Quetzal
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Umm, I think you replied to the wrong person. I have only addressed you once - offering to discuss why you considered that folks who think evolutionary theory is valid are idiots. Since you didn't bother to either support your assertion, argue that you were taken out of context, or open a thread discussing the "glaring problems" with the theory, I've pretty much ignored your subsequent posts. Feel free to either take me up on my offer or continue to ignore me. Makes absolutely no difference to me one way or the other. However, no matter your decision here, I would appreciate it if you wouldn't accuse me of anything I haven't done. Thanks.
added by edit: Oh yeah, I for one would LOVE to have you recruit additional creationists to debate here. The more the merrier. After all, that's what most of us are here for... [This message has been edited by Quetzal, 03-26-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Quetzal Member (Idle past 6199 days) Posts: 3228 Joined: |
Apology accepted.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025