Viruses intentionally choose how they infect


(Marshall Janzen) #181

I wouldn’t call them engineers. How many of their tools were controlled by electrical signal?

</non-sequitur>


(Martin R) #182

??? artists??? why is that? a stone age handaxe is some kind of art?


(Martin R) #183

of course i am not, i was just wondering if you could provide an example of a ‘natural’ pump controlled by electrical signal … as i have mentioned before, you guys a perfect to see design in things i can’t …
Also, i gave you a homework… to find the ‘twins’… what is the status on this? Or you just ignore it ?


(Martin R) #184

how would you call them?


(Martin R) #185

none, that is why i was talking about 2.6 million of years of knowledge.


#186

From Wikipedia

The first users were just making use of found materials, much as an artist does.

Not that I can think of, but there are many other examples of natural pumps that are controlled by fluid flow amount other things. The problem is in the way you defined pump. If I asked you for an example of a natural pump composed of stainless steel I am sure you would be unable to provide one. But so what. What is the point?


(Phil) #187

Of course, an EKG is a tracing of the electrical signals that control the heart (and its activity). Electophysiologists work with the various problems that the heart can develop.

However, not sure how this all relates to decisive viruses, or really what that really means. However, I was reading a article in the ASA journal on God’s love and purpose, which brought up how randomness of molecular motion is necessary for live (needed for diffusion, bringing molecules into the various ion pumps etc in the cell, linking it to the pump thought.

That does not give you the full text, but here is a YouTube of the same title:


(Martin R) #188

okay Bill, i have quoted this resource:

Early Stone Age Tools. The earliest stone toolmaking developed by at least 2.6 million years ago. The Early Stone Age began with the most basic stone implements made by early humans. These Oldowan toolkits include hammerstones, stone cores, and sharp stone flakes.

http://humanorigins.si.edu/evidence/behavior/stone-tools

Now, Bill, WHO IS RIGHT?


(Martin R) #189

again, a stone age handaxe is some kind of art? What are you talking about Bill?

The stone age guy ENGINEERED a handaxe… to use it as a handaxe… or what do you mean Bill? The more i talk to you the more i am getting lost…[content removed by moderator]


(Martin R) #190

Bill, so now you are using my arguments? this is so funny…

Bill, if the only problem would be some pump…this is so embarrassing…

Bill, forget the pump. Look at the list i have provided the other day - your homework, to find a ‘natural’ twins for the items on that list… so how does it look, have you find some?


(George Brooks) #191

@T_aquaticus, nice analysis…

The ONLY answer!


#192

The evidence is extremely compelling. As for me, I’m not ashamed that I share 99% of my ERVs with my ~240,000th “cousins,” the chimps. I’m just thankful I got a fused chromosome 2 and some other genetic goodies. :grin:


#193

Do you mean this list?

Sorry but I don’t understand what you are asking for. You provided a list of what I assume you mean to be examples of design in nature so how am I supposed to find a ‘natural’ twin?

Question for you. If I give you a piece of wood how could you tell the difference between a naturally occurring chunk of wood and a piece that had been crafted by a human?


#194

We do have explanations for those observations. That explanation is common descent and evolutionary mechanisms.


#195

What you seem to miss is that convergent evolution does not involve the same adaptations. For example, the bird and bat wings are convergent evolution but the wings are very different:


#196

I would agree that the only way to reach a conclusion that something is designed is to assume without evidence that it is designed.


(Martin R) #197

you did it before … the geyser… remember ?


(Martin R) #198

you think you have… you have like millions of species and cladograms, but you have never seen A SINGLE common ancestor … never… genetic evidence points to an common ancestor, i agree, i can see it too, but there is definitely some issue, and sooner or later you guys will find out… i can assure you …


(Martin R) #199

not so with these two butterflies

it is not easy to find a difference (for a layman)

or the flightless birds, on all continents… to a layman appear like one species. And, the best thing is, they supposed to lost their wings independently… on all continents…

By the way, these gain / loss examples… this is a funny thing… it is not easy to understand, why a plant would lose its photosynthesis ability, and, of course, not once, but many plants, many times, independently… it is a very crazy stuff…

Whatever…

I am very familiar with convergent evolution examples. Most probably, i am more familiar with it than you… I told you, i have collected like 100 articles on convergent evolution, and counting.

To sum up, you missed the point… it was you guys who have invented the term “CONVERGENT EVOLUTION”, because you don’t know how is this possible, so you have invented this new term… … …

but that is the point… you got it all wrong… that is why i think the whole theory of evolution is completely flawed… because of such things like convergent evolution (or stasis)… something is definitely very wrong… unless you believe in miracles…

Wings - i as an engineer have no problem with various types of wings. Moreover, you forgot to mention insect wings… to be honest, insect wings look to me more like rotors… “Male mosquitoes beat their wings 450 to 600 times per second.” !!!

https://hypertextbook.com/facts/2000/DianaLeung.shtml

Now imagine, how perfectly synchronized the both wings need to be, in order to fly straight forward… it is not easy to believe that these things were made by unguided natural process… not in 21st century…

p.s.

i will open a new thread on convergent evolution…i hope you will comment on this … there are not many people with your education, willing to comment on me. I am glad you are here.


(Martin R) #200

Jason, how do you know, that the fused chromosomes fused in chimps and not in humans?

Perhaps humans had 24 chromosomes too (because human / chimp is a very similar design), and then 2 chromosomes fused, in humans…