http://www.isteve.com/2001_ken.....urture.htm

To be honest, I don’t remember the content exactly. I read a lot of comments, and the normal criteria applies to all of them, so I recollect that it was offensive or vilifying or rude in some manner.

I didn’t miss David’s point. This absurdness has been covered several times before in the last couple years and I am quite familiar with the arguments. By pointing to one instance or a set of instances does not mean that there isn’t a direction going on for a lot of life.

If someone disagrees then they should ponder that as they type a response in their computer. You represent a direction. And just because the road of life has a lot of dead ends or cul de sacs it does not mean there are not a lot of long winding roads that are still heading off into the sunset.

Many controversial questions still need to be answered, e.g., how signaling molecules and other proteomics candidates, with relative low abundance, precisely translocate from or to mitochondria in a matter of milliseconds while crossing a huge ocean of soluble and insoluble barriers. And more importantly, how such molecules further selectively bind their targets to provoke their tidy streaming cascades. The answer could be the contribution of cytoskeleton proteins or the presence of specific carriers or even pH changes etc. This might be true, but we still need to know the secret behind this disciplined organized wisdom.

They conclude

We realize so far that mitochondria could be the link between the body and this preserved wisdom of the soul devoted to guaranteeing life.

Alternatively, instead of sinking in a swamp of endless debates about the evolution of mitochondria, it is better to come up with a unified assumption that all living cells undergo a certain degree of convergence or divergence to or from each other to meet their survival in specific habitats. Proteomics data greatly assist this realistic assumption that connects all kinds of life. More logically, the points that show proteomics overlapping between different forms of life are more likely to be interpreted as a reflection of a single common fingerprint initiated by a mighty creator than relying on a single cell that is, in a doubtful way, surprisingly originating all other kinds of life.

Anything that describes things on the bodily level is bound to separate into races if one wants to see it that way, even on a genetic level as Lewontin shows, which is why I prefer a qualitative measurement, like the soul endowed by their Creator, (which cannot be a quantitative measurement), to dispel the notion of race. Quantitative measurements won’t do it.

Then you may be interested in interested in Warda and Hans recent paper “Mitochondria, the missing link between body and soul: Proteomic prospective evidence”.

Modern day phrenology isn’t going to dispel racism.

What does Intelligent Design have to say about race and racism?

Anything at all?

Clive, again: suppose a group (say, Australian aborigines) has a strong susceptibility to a disease. Does noticing that make you racist?

And of course, I hope it’s not a case where you’re intentionally taking me too seriously to continue the parody and I’m taking you too seriously in return.

Yeah, that one. Maybe the W3C can standardize a tag for parody/satire, or sites can make good use of javascript’s rollover event so we can just keep these things running indefinitely.