Comments on: Just say NO to Darwinian just-so stories http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/ Serving The Intelligent Design Community Mon, 13 Feb 2012 06:37:05 +0000 hourly 1 By: irees http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-46256 irees Mon, 03 Jul 2006 12:14:51 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-46256 <p>Found this page randomly, but couldn't help but reply after reading the comments. <b>I helped you. The rest of your troll was deleted. -ds </b> </p> Found this page randomly, but couldn’t help but reply after reading the comments.

I helped you. The rest of your troll was deleted. -ds

]]> By: John Davison http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23794 John Davison Mon, 13 Feb 2006 02:47:45 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23794 Giuseppe Sermonti is a wonderful man who has been kind enough to publish several of my papers even though I am sure he does not agree with everything I say. Such editors are rare birds and I will always be indebted to him. His little book is charming and I recommend all read it. It constitutes one more devastating commentary on the Darwinian fairy tale from a kind and gentle spirit. Giuseppe Sermonti is a wonderful man who has been kind enough to publish several of my papers even though I am sure he does not agree with everything I say. Such editors are rare birds and I will always be indebted to him. His little book is charming and I recommend all read it. It constitutes one more devastating commentary on the Darwinian fairy tale from a kind and gentle spirit.

]]> By: Joseph http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23757 Joseph Sun, 12 Feb 2006 19:44:55 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23757 Once we understand what makes an organism what it is* we will have a better grasp on the number John D now has @ "at least a half dozen". And John's "predetermined" status is akin to: John R. Koza, Keane M A, Streeter MJ; "Evolving Inventions", <i>Scientific American</i> 52-59 Feb 2003, in which previously determined "inventions" were allowed to "evolve". (<i>allowed</i> meaning everything was set up- the program, the resources, etc., for success.) *What makes a fly a fly? In his book (English title) “Why is a Fly not a Horse?”, the prominent Italian geneticist Giuseppe Sermonti, tells us the following : Chapter VI “Why is a Fly not a horse?” (same as the book’s title) <blockquote>”The scientist enjoys a privilege denied the theologian. To any question, even one central to his theories, he may reply “I’m sorry but I do not know.” This is the only honest answer to the question posed by the title of this chapter. We are fully aware of what makes a flower red rather than white, what it is that prevents a dwarf from growing taller, or what goes wrong in a paraplegic or a thalassemic. But the mystery of species eludes us, and we have made no progress beyond what we already have long known, namely, that a kitty is born because its mother was a she-cat that mated with a tom, and that a fly emerges as a fly larva from a fly egg.”</blockquote> Once we understand what makes an organism what it is* we will have a better grasp on the number John D now has @ “at least a half dozen”.

And John’s “predetermined” status is akin to: John R. Koza, Keane M A, Streeter MJ; “Evolving Inventions”, Scientific American 52-59 Feb 2003, in which previously determined “inventions” were allowed to “evolve”. (allowed meaning everything was set up- the program, the resources, etc., for success.)

*What makes a fly a fly? In his book (English title) “Why is a Fly not a Horse?”, the prominent Italian geneticist Giuseppe Sermonti, tells us the following :

Chapter VI “Why is a Fly not a horse?” (same as the book’s title)

”The scientist enjoys a privilege denied the theologian. To any question, even one central to his theories, he may reply “I’m sorry but I do not know.” This is the only honest answer to the question posed by the title of this chapter. We are fully aware of what makes a flower red rather than white, what it is that prevents a dwarf from growing taller, or what goes wrong in a paraplegic or a thalassemic. But the mystery of species eludes us, and we have made no progress beyond what we already have long known, namely, that a kitty is born because its mother was a she-cat that mated with a tom, and that a fly emerges as a fly larva from a fly egg.”

]]> By: John Davison http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23690 John Davison Sun, 12 Feb 2006 01:26:32 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23690 Common ancestry is an appealing idea with very little to support it. Nevertheless, whenever life was created and no matter how many times that was done, its subsequent history was predetermined from that point on. Currently I see at least a half dozen separate creations but what do I know? Common ancestry is an appealing idea with very little to support it. Nevertheless, whenever life was created and no matter how many times that was done, its subsequent history was predetermined from that point on. Currently I see at least a half dozen separate creations but what do I know?

]]> By: Red Reader http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23681 Red Reader Sat, 11 Feb 2006 21:56:55 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23681 From the post of Dr. Dembski's colleague: "I guess that’s what happens when you assume that sequence similarity automatically means a common ancestry (of the gene)." Assumption. Extrapolation. Flat earth. "The earth I see is flat. Therefore the earth I don't see is flat." Scientific...NOT. From the post of Dr. Dembski’s colleague:
“I guess that’s what happens when you assume that sequence similarity automatically means a common ancestry (of the gene).”

Assumption. Extrapolation. Flat earth.
“The earth I see is flat. Therefore the earth I don’t see is flat.”

Scientific…NOT.

]]> By: hugh williams http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23643 hugh williams Sat, 11 Feb 2006 12:17:42 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23643 Hello everyone, this morning I received an email from "Medical News Today", that may be of some interest here. The title, "Drug Resitance May Travel The Same Path As Quorum Sensing". This pertains to a Baylor College of Medicine study, on the mechanism of drug resistance in bacteria. http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=37257 Hello everyone, this morning I received an email from “Medical News Today”, that may be of some interest here. The title, “Drug Resitance May Travel The Same Path As Quorum Sensing”. This pertains to a Baylor College of Medicine study, on the mechanism of drug resistance in bacteria.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.co.....wsid=37257

]]> By: John Davison http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23634 John Davison Sat, 11 Feb 2006 09:02:25 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23634 Of course common templates are the answer just as the PEH predicts. I thought everybody knew that by now. (ha ha). Of course common templates are the answer just as the PEH predicts. I thought everybody knew that by now. (ha ha).

]]> By: DaveScot http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/804/comment-page-1/#comment-23614 DaveScot Sat, 11 Feb 2006 07:18:11 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/804#comment-23614 What's more amazing than horizontal gene transfer under mysterious circumstances is the fact that the DNA in the yeast cell and the human stomach cell both use a compatible codebook and protein factory which makes horizontal gene transfer possible in the first place. These similartities in protein manufacturing machinery and the program code that runs the factory aren't just 19% identical between yeast and human. They are so close to 100% identical it boggles the mind. The core components of every living cell are virtually identical. Sometimes you can't just say no to the implications. Human and yeast cells either have a common ancestor or a common template was used to design both of them. The deep relationship is the same either way so I'm not sure it makes much difference how the relationship was established. The two cell types are still deeply related. What’s more amazing than horizontal gene transfer under mysterious circumstances is the fact that the DNA in the yeast cell and the human stomach cell both use a compatible codebook and protein factory which makes horizontal gene transfer possible in the first place. These similartities in protein manufacturing machinery and the program code that runs the factory aren’t just 19% identical between yeast and human. They are so close to 100% identical it boggles the mind. The core components of every living cell are virtually identical. Sometimes you can’t just say no to the implications. Human and yeast cells either have a common ancestor or a common template was used to design both of them. The deep relationship is the same either way so I’m not sure it makes much difference how the relationship was established. The two cell types are still deeply related.

]]>