Complexity and evolution of the cell

[steve7150]

We see today the exercise of life principle, but can neither understand it fully nor produce it. The reproduction of living organisms (both animal and vegetable) is a common thing, yet it exceeds our limited intelligence and is beyond our power to duplicate from scratch. Arguably, its everyday ordinary occurrence leads people to not see reproduction as “miraculous.







Good thoughts. How about the human body healing itself? Did that evolve or is it designed in? What if our bodies didn't heal , would we have survived?

[TheEditor]

Good point Steve7150.

Regards, Brenden.

[SteveF]

Interestingly, variation and selection can be simulated in a computer: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avida

Hi Jon,

I appreciate your scientific insight.

I’ve heard about this computer model before and you mentioning it again got me thinking about the predictability of evolution.
Given specific parameters set within the computer program you mentioned, I’m assuming one would begin to notice tendencies in the evolutionary process. If someone worked with the program enough I’m thinking that if they changed the parameters they could possibly make some predictions on the evolutionary outcome.

I coincidently came across this quote by Francis Collins:

“We emphasize that there is nothing random about an organism that is better adapted to its environment having greater reproductive success. This is an orderly and predictable trajectory in the direction of better adaptation.”

Then I read webpages like these:

http://link.springer.com/article/10.100 ... 009-0607-9

http://phys.org/news/2013-02-evolution.html

What are your thoughts about the predictability of evolution? Could God possibly be the smartest computer programmer ever, having taken into consideration every possible scenario? In other words, is it conceivable that God knew we would be the inevitable result of the evolutionary process even without Him intervening at all once the process started?

[kenblogton]

Reply to jonperry on Tue Aug 06, 2013 8:43 pm.
Check out this incredible video which gives an amazing look at the protein machines inside the cell. I recommend watching full screen with HD turned on.
http://youtu.be/Cz7agFqI7iE
The video is no longer available. I gather you're a Christian evolution believer. Based on Science, evolution is impossible. Read on.
Bryson, W. 2010. A Short History of Nearly Everything. Toronto: Anchor Canada documents the scientific gaps regarding both the origins of life (361) and the evolution of species due to the absence of intermediate species (487-489).
Thaxton, C.B., W.L. Bradley and R.L. Olsen. 1984. The Mystery of Life’s Origins. New York: Philosophical Library – who are biological researchers – document the impossibility of the natural origin of life from the primordial soup of earth’s early oceans.
Johnson, P.E. 1991. Darwin on Trial. Downers Grove, IL: Intervarsity documents the origins of species in an abrupt, and not an evolutionary, manner. He also notes the virtually complete absence of intermediate species, seen as essential by Darwin to the Theory of Evolution.
Cann, R.L., M. Stoneking, and A.C. Wilson. 1987. “Mitochondrial DNA and human evolution.” Nature, 31-36 conclude all human females are descended from a single female, referred to as Mitochondrial Eve.
Dorit, R.L., H. Akashi, and W. Gilbert. 1995. “Absence of polymorphism at the ZFY locus on the human Y chromosome.” Science 268: 1183-1185 conclude all human males are descended from a single male, referred to as Y Chromosomal Adam.
Researchers who attempt to simulate the primordial soup of earth’s early oceans and create life find that it is impossible to obtain in the lab only the natural laevo- or left molecular forms of the amino acid building blocks of life because, in the lab, equal amounts of the synthetic dextra- or right molecular forms of the amino acids also occur.
Logic also tells us of the impossibility of evolution because the intermediate species will not be fit enough to survive.
Scientifically, life and species origins would be best referred to as the life and species big bangs, one big bang for each life form or species.
I too was a believer in primordial soup life origin and evolution of species until I studied the data carefully after I became a believer. Evolution within a species is not controversial; evolution across species is impossible!
kenblogton

[MMathis]

When I think of evolution, I think of the idea that we slithered out of the ocean and morphed into humans. That's nuts people.

When I think of adaptation, I think of the people that live at altitude in South America, with the barrel chest, so they can breathe. They didn't used to be high-flying eagles. Although there are those weird runways made by aliens up there, but that's a different discussion.

I still like this: The people from SETI scan the sky for any coded message from outer space. After all, no coded message happens by accident, so we would know there is intelligent life out there. Our libraries are full of books about the coded structure of everything including human cells. But the same scientific community will tell you that all of that just happened on its own without intelligence.

[morbo3000]

MMathis said:

But the same scientific community will tell you that all of that just happened on its own without intelligence.

Actually, they wouldn't say that all. They would say "we don't know."

https://www.google.com/#q=how+did+life+begin

[MMathis]

I'm sorry but the prevailing theory of evolution is taught to our kids and any mention of Creationism is met with a court case. I went to college late in life and graduated in 2001. I studied astronomy as my science. I attended a number of lectures. I can tell you that the prevailing answer is not "We don't know."

[Paidion]

Lately, I have been wondering why the only form of life on earth that has language is the human being.
Our collie dogs understand everything we want them to do; indeed they understand much of human language. So why cannot they not speak? Some dogs "ask out" by whining. But why can they not say the word "out"?

Chimpanzees have been able to learn language to the extent that they can form sentences with language cards, including such minor parts of speech as prepositions. So why can they not be taught to speak a human language? I cannot see why not, if they, together with humans, have evolved from a common ancestor.

[morbo3000]

MMathis said:

I'm sorry but the prevailing theory of evolution is taught to our kids and any mention of Creationism is met with a court case. I went to college late in life and graduated in 2001. I studied astronomy as my science. I attended a number of lectures. I can tell you that the prevailing answer is not "We don't know."

Those are two different things. The theory of evolution is not the same thing as how did life start on the planet. We can debate the merits of evolution and science's certainty about it. But science is unanimous in its ignorance about how life started on the planet. Similarly how consciousness achieved. Nor the cause of the big bang. Science does not have answers to those questions. Stephen Hawking doesn't believe he knows what was before the Big Bang. Bill Nye, who is an educator more than a scientist, admitted this in his debate. When asked how life came to be, he said "We don't know! That's what keeps us going to work." To which Ken Ham replied: "We have a book that answers that question."

That's the reason "Creationism" isn't taught alongside evolution. It may very well be the most reasonable answer. But it is not a scientific one. It is a religious one. Science is as much about what we don't know as it is what we do know. Science is willing to answer the question: "How did life start on earth," with a resounding: "We don't know," and then go looking for answers. Creationism's answer is (rightly so) "We know!" and thus the search for answers ends.

It is not the role of secular schools to give religious answers. If we want our schools to give religious answers, then the debate should be started one step back with "Should our schools be secular?" Or for the Christian, "Should our children be in secular schools." I think a big reason Christians are so against evolution in schools and want creationism taught alongside it is that they want their tax dollars to teach their worldview. And they don't want to spend the time and/or money educating their children themselves, or choosing a religious education over a state education.

[MMathis]

You are correct. I should have said the prevailing answer is "we don't know, but we're pretty sure creation is not it."

I did have one prof that said "let there be" was as good as any trigger to the Big Bang that she had.