Comments on: James Watson — Why does he say the things he does?

By: EJ Klone

EJ Klone — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:14:06 +0000

It seems to me that with the concept of Genetic entropy that we might expect certain groups of people to have important genes for say, intelligence, decay over time. That’s what we should expect if mutations accumulate from a common ancestor that was designed. Perhaps some populations decay faster than others?

By: Janice

Janice — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 09:44:58 +0000

Yeah. I knew it was more complex than what I wrote but I thought that fellow was getting confused by the talk of paint and light etc.

Of course I didn’t know it was quite as complex as you have described. One of these days I must read that book about genetic entropy.

By: bornagain77

bornagain77 — Fri, 19 Oct 2007 00:46:25 +0000

Janice: Its not quite as simple as you think:

Melanin comes in two types: pheomelanin (red) and eumelanin (dark brown to nearly black). Both amount and type are determined by four to six genes which operate under incomplete nce. One copy of each of those genes is inherited from the father and one from the mother. Each gene comes in several alleles, resulting in a great variety of different skin tones.

Even if it was just a simple case of the efficiency of one melanin in the skin of people, I would still hold that it demonstrated less information for the younger descended races from Africans,and thus still conformed to genetic entropy…But as the case stands my inference to subtractive color mixing is strong and my case for the Genetic Entropy of skin color in younger human races is bolstered all the more!

By: Janice

Janice — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 23:55:14 +0000

Re skin colour:

The skin contains specialised cells that produce melanin which is a black pigment. People who produce it very efficiently have black skin. European, Asian and Indo-American folk, produce it less efficiently. Albinos produce next to none.

So all skin, hair and eye colours depend on how much melanin you produce. The information dictating how much melanin you are able to produce is in your DNA.

By: professorsmith

professorsmith — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 20:10:41 +0000

Alas, lotf is no longer with us, so this reply is rather belated, but in case he comes back:

I have no idea what you mean by Darwinista but how can you seriously say ID science advocates are being denied their say writing on a blog that advocates ID science?

That independent blogs have arisen to support ID does not mean the scientific establishment is not suppressing it. Look no further than the cases of Sternberg or Gonzalez for pertinent examples.

By: bornagain77

bornagain77 — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 19:30:38 +0000

rrf,
No sir, I write on my own time. But my job doesn’t chew up that much of my time, so I have time to research, read and write on ID. A subject that has captured my interest, to put it mildly.

By: rrf

rrf — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 17:04:30 +0000

I could probably get a lot more technical with the subject

Bornagain77, you have a gift for cranking out the prose. Please tell me you work the night shift. Because, I’d hate to think we are benefiting from your detailed treatises while you are on the clock!

By: Borne

Borne — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 16:34:16 +0000

DaveScot: “lotf is no longer with us”

thanks, it becomes nauseating trying to reason against arrogant ignorance and poor logic.

By: The post in which I get all un-PC. (But in good faith, really!) « The Tiger in Somerville

Thu, 18 Oct 2007 15:43:59 +0000

[...] Here’s a post criticizing him from the religious perspective, which I found rather [...]

By: Atom

Atom — Thu, 18 Oct 2007 14:35:11 +0000

(Atom, I just may got you beat . . .)

Obviously his cup of blessing doesn’t run dry…he can bless all and still have more to give.