The Elshamah mega-thread

[Rumraket]

Greetings,

Here's another article/paper for you, Elshamah:

Looking back 3.8 billion years into the root of the 'Tree of Life'

Have you read the other article/paper that I linked above? Are you going to let us know what you think of its implications for your claims?

Kindest regards,

James

Pure conjecture. From the article,

" Like rings in the trunk of a tree, the ribosome contains components that functioned early on in its history. The center of the trunk records the tree's youth, and successive rings represent each year of the tree's life, with the outermost layer recording the present. Just as the core of a tree's trunk remains unchanged over time, all modern ribosomes contain a common core dating back 3.8 billion years. This common core is the same in all living organisms, including humans.

"The ribosome recorded its history," said Williams. "It accreted and got bigger and bigger over time. But the older parts were continually frozen after they accreted, just like the rings of a tree. As long as that tree lives, the inner rings will not change. The very core of the ribosome is older than biology, produced by evolutionary processes that we still don't understand very well."

^^^=conjecture

"By taking ribosomes from a number of species - humans, yeast, various bacteria and archaea - and looking at the outer portions that are variable, we saw that there were very specific rules governing how they change," said Williams. "We took those rules and applied them to the common core, which allowed us to see all the way back to the first pieces of RNA.

Dragan Glas, You are giving links to articles which assume the very ideas which Eishamah is disputing.

Explain why it is conjecture. You've now made a claim, now it's time to back it up. You dismiss the findings of the paper as pure conjecture on what basis?

 

[Rumraket]

Nice mindless copy-paste.

Call it however you want. Do you think i would suck my premises from my finger ?

No, not your fingers. Your ass however.

You are correct...... i did not. I took it from mainstream scientific papers. Thats how i make sure the premise, the evidence of the scientific facts, are correct.

Which premise would that be? The only premise you will find in the papers you mindlessly copy-paste from is that "this object is complex". But that does not entail or even imply the conclusion you seek to reach, that DNA replication systems "defies naturalistic explanations".

Simply put it is an obvious fallacy of logic. The non-sequitur fallacy. In english: It does not follow. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

 

[Elshamah]

Which premise would that be? The only premise you will find in the papers you mindlessly copy-paste from is that "this object is complex". But that does not entail or even imply the conclusion you seek to reach, that DNA replication systems "defies naturalistic explanations".

Simply put it is an obvious fallacy of logic. The non-sequitur fallacy. In english: It does not follow. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Well, thats the kind of answers i would expect from someone that puts reason aside, and blindly believes in a fairy tale wishful scenario based of wishful thinking.

What about this do you not understand ??

According to mainstream scientific papers, the following twenty protein and protein complexes are essential for prokaryotic DNA replication. Each one mentioned below. They cannot be reduced. If one is missing, DNA replication cannot occur:

Pre-replication complex Formation of the pre-RC is required for DNA replication to occur
DnaA The crucial component in the initiation process is the DnaA protein
DiaA this novel protein plays an important role in regulating the initiation of chromosomal replication via direct interactions with the DnaA initiator.
DAM methylase It’s gene expression requires full methylation of GATC at its promoter region.
DnaB helicase Helicases are essential enzymes for DNA replication, a fundamental process in all living organisms.
DnaC Loading of the DnaB helicase is the key step in replication initiation. DnaC is essential for replication in vitro and in vivo.
HU-proteins HU protein is required for proper synchrony of replication initiation
SSB Single-stranded binding proteins Single-stranded DNA binding proteins are essential for the sequestration and processing of single-stranded DNA. 6
SSBs from the OB domain family play an essential role in the maintenance of genome stability, functioning in DNA replication, the repair of damaged DNA, the activation of cell cycle checkpoints, and in telomere maintenance. SSB proteins play an essential role in DNA metabolism by protecting single-stranded DNA and by mediating several important protein–protein interactions. 7
Hexameric DNA helicases DNA helicases are essential during DNA replication because they separate double-stranded DNA into single strands allowing each strand to be copied.
DNA polymerase I and III DNA polymerase 3 is essential for the replication of the leading and the lagging strands whereas DNA polymerase 1 is essential for removing of the RNA primers from the fragments and replacing it with the required nucleotides.
DnaG Primases They are essential for the initiation of such phenomena because DNA polymerases are incapable of de novo synthesis and can only elongate existing strands
Topoisomerases are essential in the separation of entangled daughter strands during replication. This function is believed to be performed by topoisomerase II in eukaryotes and by topoisomerase IV in prokaryotes. Failure to separate these strands leads to cell death.
Sliding clamp and clamp loader the clamp loader is a crucial aspect of the DNA replication machinery. Sliding clamps are DNA-tracking platforms that are essential for processive DNA replication in all living organisms
Primase (DnaG) Primases are essential RNA polymerases required for the initiation of DNA replication, lagging strand synthesis and replication restart. They are essential for the initiation of such phenomena because DNA polymerases are incapable of de novo synthesis and can only elongate existing strands.
RTP-Ter complex Ter sequences would not seem to be essential, but they may prevent overreplication by one fork in the event that the other is delayed or halted by an encounter with DNA damage or some other obstacle
Ribonuclease H RNase H1 plays essential roles in generating and clearing RNAs that act as primers of DNA replication.
Replication restart primosome Replication restart primosome is a complex dynamic system that is essential for bacterial survival.
DNA repair:
RecQ helicase In prokaryotes RecQ is necessary for plasmid recombination and DNA repair from UV-light, free radicals, and alkylating agents.
RecJ nuclease the repair machinery must be designed to act on a variety of heterogeneous DNA break sites.

I do not know of any scientific paper that explains in a detailed manner how DNA replication de novo or any of its parts might have emerged in a naturalistic manner, without involving intelligence. The systems responsible for DNA replication are well beyond the explanatory power of unguided natural processes without guiding intelligence involved. Indeed, machinery of the complexity and sophistication of that described above is, is in my view best explained through a intelligent designer.

Precisely BECAUSE WE KNOW that each of the described and mentioned parts is indispensable, it had to arise all at once. We know of intelligence being able to project, plan and make such a motor-like system based on lots of information , and it could not have emerged through evolution ( even less so because evolution depends on dna replication being in place ) we can infer rationally design as the best explanation. Chance is no reasonable option to explain the origin of DNA replication since the individual parts would have no function by their own, and there is no reason why matter aleatory-like would group itself in such highly organized and complex machine-like system.

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Completely ignoring my earlier post, particularly the first linked article.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[SpecialFrog]

I remain unconvinced that Elshamah understands what an argument from ignorance is. Is there such a thing as an argument from ignorance of the argument from ignorance fallacy?

 

[Rumraket]

Which premise would that be? The only premise you will find in the papers you mindlessly copy-paste from is that "this object is complex". But that does not entail or even imply the conclusion you seek to reach, that DNA replication systems "defies naturalistic explanations".

Simply put it is an obvious fallacy of logic. The non-sequitur fallacy. In english: It does not follow. The conclusion does not follow from the premise.

Well, thats the kind of answers i would expect from someone that puts reason aside, and blindly believes in a fairy tale wishful scenario based of wishful thinking.

What about this do you not understand ??

According to mainstream scientific papers, the following twenty protein and protein complexes are essential for prokaryotic DNA replication. Each one mentioned below. They cannot be reduced. If one is missing, DNA replication cannot occur:

Pre-replication complex Formation of the pre-RC is required for DNA replication to occur
DnaA The crucial component in the initiation process is the DnaA protein
DiaA this novel protein plays an important role in regulating the initiation of chromosomal replication via direct interactions with the DnaA initiator.
DAM methylase It’s gene expression requires full methylation of GATC at its promoter region.
DnaB helicase Helicases are essential enzymes for DNA replication, a fundamental process in all living organisms.
DnaC Loading of the DnaB helicase is the key step in replication initiation. DnaC is essential for replication in vitro and in vivo.
HU-proteins HU protein is required for proper synchrony of replication initiation
SSB Single-stranded binding proteins Single-stranded DNA binding proteins are essential for the sequestration and processing of single-stranded DNA. 6
SSBs from the OB domain family play an essential role in the maintenance of genome stability, functioning in DNA replication, the repair of damaged DNA, the activation of cell cycle checkpoints, and in telomere maintenance. SSB proteins play an essential role in DNA metabolism by protecting single-stranded DNA and by mediating several important protein–protein interactions. 7
Hexameric DNA helicases DNA helicases are essential during DNA replication because they separate double-stranded DNA into single strands allowing each strand to be copied.
DNA polymerase I and III DNA polymerase 3 is essential for the replication of the leading and the lagging strands whereas DNA polymerase 1 is essential for removing of the RNA primers from the fragments and replacing it with the required nucleotides.
DnaG Primases They are essential for the initiation of such phenomena because DNA polymerases are incapable of de novo synthesis and can only elongate existing strands
Topoisomerases are essential in the separation of entangled daughter strands during replication. This function is believed to be performed by topoisomerase II in eukaryotes and by topoisomerase IV in prokaryotes. Failure to separate these strands leads to cell death.
Sliding clamp and clamp loader the clamp loader is a crucial aspect of the DNA replication machinery. Sliding clamps are DNA-tracking platforms that are essential for processive DNA replication in all living organisms
Primase (DnaG) Primases are essential RNA polymerases required for the initiation of DNA replication, lagging strand synthesis and replication restart. They are essential for the initiation of such phenomena because DNA polymerases are incapable of de novo synthesis and can only elongate existing strands.
RTP-Ter complex Ter sequences would not seem to be essential, but they may prevent overreplication by one fork in the event that the other is delayed or halted by an encounter with DNA damage or some other obstacle
Ribonuclease H RNase H1 plays essential roles in generating and clearing RNAs that act as primers of DNA replication.
Replication restart primosome Replication restart primosome is a complex dynamic system that is essential for bacterial survival.
DNA repair:
RecQ helicase In prokaryotes RecQ is necessary for plasmid recombination and DNA repair from UV-light, free radicals, and alkylating agents.
RecJ nuclease the repair machinery must be designed to act on a variety of heterogeneous DNA break sites.

I do not know of any scientific paper that explains in a detailed manner how DNA replication de novo or any of its parts might have emerged in a naturalistic manner, without involving intelligence. The systems responsible for DNA replication are well beyond the explanatory power of unguided natural processes without guiding intelligence involved. Indeed, machinery of the complexity and sophistication of that described above is, is in my view best explained through a intelligent designer.

Precisely BECAUSE WE KNOW that each of the described and mentioned parts is indispensable, it had to arise all at once. We know of intelligence being able to project, plan and make such a motor-like system based on lots of information , and it could not have emerged through evolution ( even less so because evolution depends on dna replication being in place ) we can infer rationally design as the best explanation. Chance is no reasonable option to explain the origin of DNA replication since the individual parts would have no function by their own, and there is no reason why matter aleatory-like would group itself in such highly organized and complex machine-like system.

If your list of required enzymes was correct, running PCR would be impossible. In labs all over the world, DNA is routinely replicated with a single enzyme: DNA polymerase.

Everything you say is false. You know nothing of what you speak and your religion is preventing you from understanding the subject. You have given exactly zero references wherein it is demonstrated that DNA replication cannot occur if any of these enzymes are missing.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

I remain unconvinced that Elshamah understands what an argument from ignorance is. Is there such a thing as an argument from ignorance of the argument from ignorance fallacy?

I remain unconvinced that Elshamah is a person. I am positive it is a chat-bot.

 

[Elshamah]

If your list of required enzymes was correct, running PCR would be impossible. In labs all over the world, DNA is routinely replicated with a single enzyme: DNA polymerase.

Everything you say is false. You know nothing of what you speak and your religion is preventing you from understanding the subject. You have given exactly zero references wherein it is demonstrated that DNA replication cannot occur if any of these enzymes are missing.

Cool. If it happens in the lab, it means it happens also in a primordial earth. And all the additions of proteins to help in the process have come just for fun.... they are not required, after all LOL....

Congrats, Rumraket, you are getting better and better..... :lol: :lol:

 

[Gnug215]

If your list of required enzymes was correct, running PCR would be impossible. In labs all over the world, DNA is routinely replicated with a single enzyme: DNA polymerase.

Everything you say is false. You know nothing of what you speak and your religion is preventing you from understanding the subject. You have given exactly zero references wherein it is demonstrated that DNA replication cannot occur if any of these enzymes are missing.

Cool. If it happens in the lab, it means it happens also in a primordial earth. And all the additions of proteins to help in the process have come just for fun.... they are not required, after all LOL....

Congrats, Rumraket, you are getting better and better..... :lol: :lol:

You can try to make fun of him all you want. You're still the one with no evidence for your magic solution, and no sign of your magic man.

He's demonstrated what can occur, something which science has done more and more, and keeps doing. I remember the good old days when Creationists would argue against evolution with stuff like missing links and the lack of various genetic and molecular mechanisms. I guess now we've mostly moved into abiogenesis territory, with missing proteins and whatnot.

Your God keeps losing gaps to hide in.

The evolution of Creationists and their desperation is pretty hilarious to observe.

 

[he_who_is_nobody]

Cool. If it happens in the lab, it means it happens also in a primordial earth.

Do you honestly think this is a good argument? Do you think scientists are performing magic in the lab, thus what they discover in a lab cannot happen in nature? Beyond that, you are now admitting that something you were arguing so hard against has been observed in a lab. When have we ever seen your alternative of a disembodied mind creating anything ever?

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

Cool. If it happens in the lab, it means it happens also in a primordial earth. And all the additions of proteins to help in the process have come just for fun.... they are not required, after all LOL....

Congrats, Rumraket, you are getting better and better..... :lol: :lol:

You can try to make fun of him all you want. You're still the one with no evidence for your magic solution, and no sign of your magic man.

He's demonstrated what can occur, something which science has done more and more, and keeps doing. I remember the good old days when Creationists would argue against evolution with stuff like missing links and the lack of various genetic and molecular mechanisms. I guess now we've mostly moved into abiogenesis territory, with missing proteins and whatnot.

Your God keeps losing gaps to hide in.

The evolution of Creationists and their desperation is pretty hilarious to observe.

More accurately, Creationists are losing gaps in which to hide their gods.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Gnug215]

Greetings,

You can try to make fun of him all you want. You're still the one with no evidence for your magic solution, and no sign of your magic man.

He's demonstrated what can occur, something which science has done more and more, and keeps doing. I remember the good old days when Creationists would argue against evolution with stuff like missing links and the lack of various genetic and molecular mechanisms. I guess now we've mostly moved into abiogenesis territory, with missing proteins and whatnot.

Your God keeps losing gaps to hide in.

The evolution of Creationists and their desperation is pretty hilarious to observe.

More accurately, Creationists are losing gaps in which to hide their gods.

Kindest regards,

James

Lol, yes. That's gotta be the best correction I've ever gotten.

 

[WarK]

Lol, yes. That's gotta be the best correction I've ever gotten.

There's one gap that seems to be always increasing for creationists. The one between their ears.

 

[Elshamah]

More accurately, Creationists are losing gaps in which to hide their gods.

Kindest regards,

James

thats funny. The more i study molecular biology and the mechanisms, and once i understand given mechanism how it works, and then search for scientific papers to explain how given phenomena could have emerged, i am confronted with generalized ignorance, guess work, just so stories, and superficial pseudo science. The oposit is the case. the more science understands how molecular machines work, the more it becomes untenable to explain their complexity with natural mechanisms. I am collecting these pearls in scientific papers.....

http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1584-outstanding-and-open-questions-and-problems-in-science

and there is no light on the end of the tunnel to solve these issues.

Now. If you formulate design hypotheses , and test them, the picture changes drammatically.......

strange, isnt it ?? LOL....

 

[DutchLiam84]

That is so weird. Actual molecular biologists on my university who are either Christian (both Catholic and Protestant), Muslim, Hindu or atheist don't come to the same conclusions as you do. Where do you think the problem lies, with you or with them? And please don't pick the conspiracy card!

 

[Gnug215]

More accurately, Creationists are losing gaps in which to hide their gods.

Kindest regards,

James

thats funny. The more i study molecular biology and the mechanisms, and once i understand given mechanism how it works, and then search for scientific papers to explain how given phenomena could have emerged, i am confronted with generalized ignorance, guess work, just so stories, and superficial pseudo science. The oposit is the case. the more science understands how molecular machines work, the more it becomes untenable to explain their complexity with natural mechanisms. I am collecting these pearls in scientific papers.....

http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1584-outstanding-and-open-questions-and-problems-in-science

and there is no light on the end of the tunnel to solve these issues.

Now. If you formulate design hypotheses , and test them, the picture changes drammatically.......

strange, isnt it ?? LOL....

Yes, because science is going backwards. And yeah, no light in the tunnel. Just like years ago, there were all these impossible probl.. oh wait, no. We solved those!

Wow. It's almost as if there is some kid of pattern here: We don't know something, and there's a problem that seems insurmountable. But then it's surmounted, and then it's not an insurmountable problem anymore! So strange...


Now, please do tell... how do you formulate design hypotheses? And test them?

I mean, I can only imagine, but my guess is that for someone like you, it goes something like: "So, I can't really figure out how this is supposed to work. Must have been God! (My God, specifically. Screw your God! He's clearly imaginary!)

 

[Dragan Glas]

Greetings,

More accurately, Creationists are losing gaps in which to hide their gods.

Kindest regards,

James

thats funny. The more i study molecular biology and the mechanisms, and once i understand given mechanism how it works, and then search for scientific papers to explain how given phenomena could have emerged, i am confronted with generalized ignorance, guess work, just so stories, and superficial pseudo science. The oposit is the case. the more science understands how molecular machines work, the more it becomes untenable to explain their complexity with natural mechanisms. I am collecting these pearls in scientific papers.....

http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1584-outstanding-and-open-questions-and-problems-in-science

and there is no light on the end of the tunnel to solve these issues.

Now. If you formulate design hypotheses , and test them, the picture changes drammatically.......

strange, isnt it ?? LOL....

Which god?

That's the question you're not able to answer.

No-one in the history of humanity across many thousands of religions has been able to prove that a creator entity - whether one or many gods - exists.

Citing religious texts as evidence doesn't count. And the various philosophical arguments for gods don't count either - they're just arguments, not proof.

Kindest regards,

James

 

[Steelmage99]

Yep, any argument that supposedly "proves" the necessity of the existence of (their personal) god should always be followed by the question; "That's nice. Now...where is your god?".

 

[SpecialFrog]

Now. If you formulate design hypotheses , and test them, the picture changes drammatically.......

Have you finally formulated a testable design hypothesis? Thus far you've only proposed arguments from ignorance.

If you have something testable, spell it out.

 

[Elshamah]

Now, please do tell... how do you formulate design hypotheses? And test them?
y!)

http://reasonandscience.heavenforum.org/t1659-confirmation-of-intelligent-design-predictions?highlight=predictions