This Is How Science Should Be Conducted

Biophysicists are discovering amazing things about the cells. Our bodies contain trillions of these cells, here are some remarkable things happening in the human body!

New insights on the ribosome as reported by Science Daily

“Ribosomes are factories inside cells where messages coming from genes are decoded and new proteins pieced together on an assembly line. For the first time, scientists have a detailed picture of the ribosome trapped together with elongation factor G (EF-G), one of the enzymes that nudges the assembly line to move forward.”

University of Michigan discovered how certain cells can regenerate after damage.  For instance, visual neurons damaged by intense light in Zebrafish. These regenerative cells come from Muller glia.  Research on 953 genes in a Muller glia cell revealed two genes that get activated in the process and these same genes have been linked to other regeneration activity.

“This suggests,” said Pamela Raymond, “that, although we don’t fully understand it yet, there might be a bigger molecular program, involving not just these two genes but a number of cooperating genes that are required for injury-triggered regeneration.”

On another front, nanoscopic rotary engines is what keeps our cells going but have a problem with cell division. So how do they maintain their activity while reproducing all their parts? Rak and Tzagaloff at Columbia University tried to figure that out and published their results in PNAS

“The preservation of functional mitochondria and chloroplasts during cell growth and division depends on a large pool of genetic information resident in the nucleus and of a more limited set of genes present in the genomes of the organelles themselves.”

“The proteins encoded by the chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes interact with partner proteins derived from nuclear genes to form hetero-oligomeric complexes that function, respectively, in photosynthesis and oxidative phosphorylation.  This circumstance has necessitated the evolution of mechanisms for insuring a balanced output of the two spatially separate sets of genes.”

Isn’t this awesome? Unlike evolution, these discoveries are based on careful and detailed research which draws on collective facts gleaned from experiments around the world. As a result, it’s bringing incredible knowledge of the molecular machine world. The research papers mention very little about evolution because quite frankly, when studying things on how they work, evolution is useless.

The vagueness of the references to evolution stand in sharp contrast to the detailed descriptions of the machines and their parts. Does this mean one can actually perform a scientific method and come up with scientific conclusions without evolution…Yes, and this is how science should be conducted!

Advertisements

7 thoughts on “This Is How Science Should Be Conducted

  1. Science Daily: “The proteins encoded by the chloroplast and mitochondrial genomes interact with partner proteins derived from nuclear genes to form hetero-oligomeric complexes that function, respectively, in photosynthesis and oxidative phosphorylation. This circumstance has necessitated the evolution of mechanisms for insuring a balanced output of the two spatially separate sets of genes.”

    Michael’s Halloween Mask: “Isn’t this awesome? Unlike evolution, these discoveries are based on careful and detailed research which draws on collective facts gleaned from experiments around the world.

    Flunked reading comprehension again! Try to concentrate on what Science Daily said (hint: “necessitated the evolution of”) and then on what your source said (hint: “unlike evolution”) So the point apparently is that discoveries that necessitate evolution are not like evolution? You don’t habe to know anything about hetero-oligomeric complexes to spot that one. I.m—somewhat—surprised—you couldn’t spot it yourself when it spattered into your mailbox.

    This is really graaping at straws, Michael. Despearate grasping at straws. For now the fourth posat in the row, the quoted article is damaging to creationism, but not to evolution.

    One interesting tidbit from the second science Daily article: “Where do those new cells come from? The U-M researchers suspected they develop from cells in the retina called Müller glia, known to have the ability to give rise to nerve cells,”

    Why did they suspect cells in the retina can give rise to nerve cells? Answer: Becuase evolution informs them that the vertebrate retina evolved from the brain. (Whereas octopus retinas evolved from epithelial (skin) tissue.) So… what would creationists suspect? Why, nothing. They have no basis for thinking anything at all. So they tend not to think at all.

  2. Michael’s Halloween mask seems to think that the more complicated something is, the more likely it is to be created (or designed) rather than natural.

    Let’s take an example: Consider a simple rectangular brick, and an irregular rock. Which has a more complex shape? The rock, obviously. Which one is designed? The simpler brick, just as obviously. Which is a better design for a car: One where the lights have their own circuit and switch, the fuel line feeds directly from the tank into the injection system, the door lock operates with a single button push. OR, a car where you have to flip four switches in the correct sequence and hit the brake pedal to turn on the lights; the fuel line loops through the door frame, then across the roof, and then goes to bothe the injection system and the radio controls; where you have to unlock the door with both hands and one foot applied simultaneously to four different buttons on the door. steering wheel, and two heater vents.

    No, Michael, complexity is not the hallmark of design. I worked with a medical-device designer once who said that if God had been on his design team, he fire him.

    The Intelligent Design crowd like to misuse complexity theory to advance their cause. They know (or at least William Dembski knows) about the Kolmogorov Theorem, a basic result of complexity theory. This mathematical theorem tells us that a system in its maximum state of complexity is completely random. Random. Not designed, random. It”s actually a rather intuitive result when you know a little bit about information theory. Oh, sorry, I forgot…..

    Just take home this message: Evolution is complex because it’s partly random.

  3. @Olorin:

    Michael won’t understand the word ‘partly’ in your last sentence …

    @Michael:
    “Does this mean one can actually perform a scientific method and come up with scientific conclusions without evolution…Yes, and this is how science should be conducted!”

    So you only conduct science properly if you come up with scientific conclusions without evolution ? This is a requirement for good science ? That you rule out something (whatever it is) beforehand ?!? That is not how science should be done, Michael.

  4. Eelco: “That you rule out something (whatever it is) beforehand ?!? That is not how science should be done, Michael.”

    Eelco, you do not understand that Michael is not doing science, but apologetics. Look it up–apologetics starts with a given theory and defends it to the death.

    Creationists simply do not understand that science is different. I think they are hard-wired this way. It’s more than denial. It preceded denial. It cannot even enter tehir thinking that one might modify or overturn a theory (read “doctrine”) of any kind based upon evidence.

    Remember that creationists held on to a flat earth until well into the 20th Century (one spokesman until after the moon landings!), even offering “experiments” to prove them right.

    Now, of course, they just ignore what the Bible syas about the “four corners” of the earth, the “waters below,” and other biblical references to a flat earth. They don’t even remember how hard they fought for the flat earth.

    Maybe the same will happen with evolution. Someday. Sigh. Dum spiro spero.

  5. @Olorin:

    Don’t worry, I perfectly know well that Michael is not doing science at all (I am a scientist myself, and I know how science works, in theory and in practice). I still am surprised sometimes at the blatantly ignorant statements that Michael makes – I should expect this, I know, but his mindset is so alien to me that I can’t always hide my surprise at yet another complete and utter misconception on how science works.

  6. Michael’s mask: “Does this mean one can actually perform a scientific method and come up with scientific conclusions without evolution…Yes, and this is how science should be conducted!”

    NOT ONLY THAT! Astronomers can calculate planetary orbits and come up with conclusions about the timing of eclipses thousands of years into the past or future, without even mentioning Einstein’s relativity theory. Chemists can synthesize complex molecules without ever once mentioning quantum mechanics. Hydrologists can modify the courses of rivers without plate tectonics.

    Now that’s how science should be done. Leave out the part thet is irrelevant to the problem at hand.

    Of course, when you want to design a GPS satellite, then you need to consider Einstein. When ytou want to synthesize a superconducting material, then quantum mechanics must be nearby. When you’d like to map undersea oil fields, then you’re blind without tectonics.

    And, when you want to cure defects in the development of the heart septum in children, recent results in the evolution of the reptilian 3-chambered heart into the mammalian 4 chambers have revealed the key.

    (In case your source missed it, study of the evolution of the fourth chamber revealed that the growth of the septum to divide the repitilian ventricle into the mammalian laeft/ight ventricles is controlled by mutated regulation of a single gene.)

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s