Fair representation of ID theorist Michael Behe … from a typical legacy media source?

_{Denyse O'Leary

August 19, 2013

Irreducible Complexity}

Share: Facebook; Twitter; LinkedIn; Flipboard; Print; Email

Friends are talking about a remarkably fair vid produced by MSN on ID theorist Mike Behe.

The vid, believe it or not, discusses what he actually says about the likelihood that random mutations just get naturally selected to produce the complex machinery in living cells.

It’s not without flaws; one friend notes that the narration implies that all components of a bacterial cell’s flagular assembly (paddles for getting around) are essential; in fact, some are probably dispensable.

But the machine as a whole is not the product of a Darwinian process (natural selection acting on random mutation). However inconvenient that fact may be to the chief ideologues of biology today.

Can’t see where the comments box is, but no doubt it will soon be chock full of vituperation from the friends of Darwin. Tomorrow is Tuesday, after all.

Comments

Michael Behe: In Biological Information: New Perspectives, finds Loss of Function Mutations Challenge the Darwinian Model - August 24, 2013 Excerpt: Behe's work helps make sense of this situation: "The work presented in this paper helps show why this should be the case. Functional genetic elements such as genes and regulatory regions are built of multiple nucleotides, and a substantial fraction of mutations to these elements will cause them to lose their function. Thus the LOF mutation rate can be orders of magnitude greater than the nucleotide substitution rate. On the other hand, GOF mutations tend to be quite specific. So the rate for adaptive GOF mutations tends to be equal or very similar to the nucleotide mutation rate. As shown here, for some population size regions and for some values for the ratio of selection coefficients, the greater rate of mutation to the adaptive state for LOF versus GOF gives adaptive LOF mutations an intrinsic edge over adaptive GOF mutations." This is an interesting result. It suggests that when Darwinian evolution is at work, it tends to diminish or destroy molecular functions rather than creating them. Behe closes with a quote from two biologists who observe that "there clearly are complex structures that are gained during evolution ... and we currently know little about how this process takes place." The implication, of course, is that a process like Darwinian evolution, which tends to break or diminish functional molecular elements, is not a viable explanation for how these complex structures arose in the first place. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/in_biological_i_1075591.htmlbornagain77_{August 24, 2013
August
08
Aug
24
24
2013
06:39 AM
6
06
39
AM
PDT}

Journey Inside The Cell – Stephen Meyer http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fiJupfbSpg 'Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.' - Francis Crick - co-discoverer of the structure of the DNA molecule in 1953. - atheist Through the Virtual Cell – video http://www.youtube.com/user/ndsuvirtualcell#p/u/4/YM2X1c4K1x0 Whole Cell Imaging at High Resolution using Electron Tomography - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-OI6QILPDlo The Central Dogma (English version) – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ygpqVr7_xs Molecular Biology Animations – Demo Reel http://www.metacafe.com/w/5915291/
The following impressive videos highlight some of the innovative techniques that are being employed to visualize, in 3D, some of these very complex interactions happening in a cell:
SPARKYT3DHD - video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UsoQNq1kadc (3D representation of) YEAST PROTEIN INTERACTION NETWORK HD - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=iO0XqEslL7Q#t=206s ExPASy - Biochemical Pathways - interactive schematic http://web.expasy.org/cgi-bin/pathways/show_thumbnails.pl No, Scientists in Darwin's Day Did Not Grasp the Complexity of the Cell; Not Even Close - Casey Luskin - June 6, 2013 http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06/did_scientists_072871.html
bornagain77_{August 24, 2013
August
08
Aug
24
24
2013
05:21 AM
5
05
21
AM
PDT}

The following article has a list of 40 different irreducibly complex molecular machines in the cell:
Molecular Machines in the Cell - http://www.discovery.org/a/14791
And that is certainly not a complete list of the molecular machines in the cell:
Venter: Life Is Robotic Software - July 15, 2012 Excerpt: “All living cells that we know of on this planet are ‘DNA software’-driven biological machines comprised of hundreds of thousands of protein robots, coded for by the DNA, that carry out precise functions,” said (Craig) Venter. http://crev.info/2012/07/life-is-robotic-software/ Problems with the Metaphor of a Cell as "Machine" - July 2012 Excerpt: Too often, we envision the cell as a "factory" containing a fixed complement of "machinery" operating according to "instructions" (or "software" or "blueprints") contained in the genome and spitting out the "gene products" (proteins) that sustain life. Many things are wrong with this picture, but one of the problems that needs to be discussed more openly is the fact that in this "factory," many if not most of the "machines" are themselves constantly turning over -- being assembled when and where they are needed, and disassembled afterwards. The mitotic spindle...is one of the best-known examples, but there are many others. Funny sort of "factory" that, with the "machinery" itself popping in and out of existence as needed!,,, - James Barham http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/07/problems_with_t062691.html
In spite of the fact of finding molecular motors permeating the simplest of bacterial life, there are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of even one such motor or system.
"There are no detailed Darwinian accounts for the evolution of any fundamental biochemical or cellular system only a variety of wishful speculations. It is remarkable that Darwinism is accepted as a satisfactory explanation of such a vast subject." James Shapiro - Molecular Biologist Michael Behe - No Scientific Literature For Evolution of Any Irreducibly Complex Molecular Machines http://www.metacafe.com/watch/5302950/
Also of note, Dr. James Tour, who 'intelligently designs' the most sophisticated man-made molecular machines in the world,,,
Science & Faith — Dr. James Tour – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CdU5ojTpyzg
,,will buy lunch for anyone who can explain to him exactly how Darwinian evolution works:
Top Ten Most Cited Chemist in the World Knows That Evolution Doesn’t Work – James Tour, Phd. – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WCyAOCesHv0
here are some videos which give a overview of the cell:
The inner life of a cell – Harvard University – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wJyUtbn0O5Y Programming of Life – Eukaryotic Cell – video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVCwDOMCpXY Ben Stein – EXPELLED – The Staggering Complexity Of The Cell – video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4227700
bornagain77_{August 24, 2013
August
08
Aug
24
24
2013
05:16 AM
5
05
16
AM
PDT}

Here are a few collected videos on molecular machines:
Molecular Power Plant: ATP Synthase - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XI8m6o0gXDY Powering the Cell: Mitochondria - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RrS2uROUjK4 Molecular Machine - Nuclear Pore Complex - Stephen C. Meyer - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4261990 Protein Synthesis - Vuk Nikolic 3-D artist - Protein Translation - video http://vimeo.com/31830891 Kinesin protein walking on microtubule - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y-uuk4Pr2i8 DNA helicase - molecular machine - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzNuLsqMqyE&list=UUf-rOtnjk_MiJNwrsMs-pbQ&index=40 DNA replication - video with description of process http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OnuspQG0Jd0 DNA - Replication, Wrapping & Mitosis http://vimeo.com/33882804 The Virus - Assembly Of A Molecular "Lunar Landing" Machine - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/4023122
bornagain77_{August 24, 2013
August
08
Aug
24
24
2013
05:09 AM
5
05
09
AM
PDT}

The impression created by such a video, entitled "The Theory of Intelligent Design", on uncommitted and uninformed viewers is not to be underestimated. Everybody gets that sticks don't arrange themselves into messages. Then there's the high-detail computer model of a flagellum. That all looks very complicated! It doesn't use the "G" word. Behe openly says he has no problem with common descent. That and it's by Discovery Channel. On MSN. With Morgan Freeman. It's a bit of a "perception management" setback for the other side I'd say.englishmaninistanbul_{August 22, 2013
August
08
Aug
22
22
2013
05:12 AM
5
05
12
AM
PDT}

Congratulations, and thanks, to Dr. Behe: notes: Bacterial Flagellum - A Sheer Wonder Of Intelligent Design - video http://www.metacafe.com/watch/3994630 Electron Microscope Photograph of Flagellum Hook-Basal Body http://www.skeptic.com/eskeptic/08-08-20images/figure03.jpg Bacterial Flagellum: Visualizing the Complete Machine In Situ Excerpt: Electron tomography of frozen-hydrated bacteria, combined with single particle averaging, has produced stunning images of the intact bacterial flagellum, revealing features of the rotor, stator and export apparatus. http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S096098220602286X The Flagellar Filament Cap: Up close micro-photograph and animations of cap - Jonathan M. - August 2013 Excerpt: We are so used to thinking about biological machines at a macroscopic level that it is all too easy to overlook the molecular structure of their individual components. The closer we inspect biochemical systems, such as flagella, the more the elegant design -- as well as the magnitude of the challenge to Darwinism -- becomes apparent. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/the_flagellar_f075101.html The Bacterial Flagellum: A Paradigm for Design - Jonathan M. - Sept. 2012 Excerpt: Indeed, so striking is the appearance of intelligent design that researchers have modelled the assembly process (of the bacterial flagellum) in view of finding inspiration for enhancing industrial operations (McAuley et al.). Not only does the flagellum manifestly exhibit engineering principles, but the engineering involved is far superior to humanity’s best achievements. The flagellum exhibits irreducible complexity in spades. In all of our experience of cause-and-effect, we know that phenomena of this kind are uniformly associated with only one type of cause – one category of explanation – and that is intelligent mind. Intelligent design succeeds at precisely the point at which evolutionary explanations break down. http://www.scribd.com/doc/106728402/The-Bacterial-Flagellum Souped-Up Hyper-Drive Flagellum Discovered - December 3, 2012 Excerpt: Get a load of this -- a bacterium that packs a gear-driven, seven-engine, magnetic-guided flagellar bundle that gets 0 to 300 micrometers in one second, ten times faster than E. coli. If you thought the standard bacterial flagellum made the case for intelligent design, wait till you hear the specs on MO-1,,, Harvard's mastermind of flagellum reverse engineering, this paper describes the Ferrari of flagella. "Instead of being a simple helically wound propeller driven by a rotary motor, it is a complex organelle consisting of 7 flagella and 24 fibrils that form a tight bundle enveloped by a glycoprotein sheath.... the flagella of MO-1 must rotate individually, and yet the entire bundle functions as a unit to comprise a motility organelle." To feel the Wow! factor, jump ahead to Figure 6 in the paper. It shows seven engines in one, arranged in a hexagonal array, stylized by the authors in a cross-sectional model that shows them all as gears interacting with 24 smaller gears between them. The flagella rotate one way, and the smaller gears rotate the opposite way to maximize torque while minimizing friction. Download the movie from the Supplemental Information page to see the gears in action. http://www.evolutionnews.org/2012/12/souped-up_flage066921.html Michael Behe on Falsifying Intelligent Design - video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8jXXJN4o_A Orr maintains that the theory of intelligent design is not falsifiable. He’s wrong. To falsify design theory a scientist need only experimentally demonstrate that a bacterial flagellum, or any other comparably complex system, could arise by natural selection. If that happened I would conclude that neither flagella nor any system of similar or lesser complexity had to have been designed. In short, biochemical design would be neatly disproved.- Dr Behe in 1997bornagain77_{August 19, 2013
August
08
Aug
19
19
2013
07:08 AM
7
07
08
AM
PDT}

You must be logged in to post a comment.

Leave a Reply