Discovery may lead to a review of the theory of evolution

[RiaX]

I'm lost. That does not seem to answer the question

It shows how genetics change resulting in a different organism. Not a really hard concept to grasp. Intelligent design, god isnt intelligent enough to design the human body

 

[Chevron]

Skip to 5:59

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQDjILTly3s&feature=g-u-u

 

[RiaX]

I wonder about that, very naive to say that an element doesnt exist in the natural world. Scientists often say natural world but they omit the universe in that "natural" order.

Im not saying he is wrong but a diatomic element like flouride doesnt seem reactive on paper because its achieved a noble gas state. Its different from the halogen atom thats on its own. Though in the natural world on earth its rare to find things naturally in a elemental state unless they tranissional elements. My inorganic chemistry is rusty so its just a thought

 

[Swa]

It shows how genetics change resulting in a different organism. Not a really hard concept to grasp. Intelligent design, god isnt intelligent enough to design the human body

That wasn't the question. The question was what if evolution is shown to be incorrect and intelligent design is shown to be correct for some biological structures? What then? What are the implications?

Skip to 5:59

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TQDjILTly3s&feature=g-u-u

Classic mad scientist stereotype there

 

[OrbitalDawn]

...intelligent design is shown to be correct for some biological structures?

How would that be done? How would we know if something was 'designed'?

 

[Techne]

Plant extracts are very difficult to work with. To get these "medicinal herbs" the sangomas charge more than western medication LOL. Then you gotta pound the hell out of the thing. Then you gotta disolve the plants isoflavanones in a special solvent that you have to purify (I used methanol) and then you got to do chemical fractionation into oil and water based molecules. Pain in the @$$

Hexane:water fraction, then ethyl acetate:water fractions then butanol then hydrolysis etc. yeah, had a little bit of experience with hose. Problem with plant extracts is the variation from season to season. Can't standardize it.

A friend told me the other day about a case where they had to pump a guy's stomach because he took some muti from a "witchdoctor" or sangoma and got very sick. They did an HPLC-MS on the sample and discovered that most of it was just over-the-counter painkillers, anti-inflammatory substance and stimulants mixed together. I tell you, these sangomas are moving with the times .

Though now a days we dont need to do all this lab testing (somewhat sad about it though), we do computational chemistry now.

Computanional chemistry? Elaborate please. I think there will always be scope for lab testing though.

I dont know hippies dislike us testing it on mice with their similar genetic patterns as humans, yet when their mothers, fathers are dying in ICU they turn to science and go "where is the cure?". What a thing if you let me use some stems cells I couldve grown you a new heart.... too bad

Yeah, these greany beanies and bleeding hearts moaning about testing on animals are irritating.

 

[Techne]

How would that be done? How would we know if something was 'designed'?

Ask SETI or IDers. They have similar methods when they can't identify the designer.

Otherwise, ask archaeologists, forensic scientists, anthropologists etc.

 

[RiaX]

That wasn't the question. The question was what if evolution is shown to be incorrect and intelligent design is shown to be correct for some biological structures? What then? What are the implications?

Its not. Intelligent design is a synonym for creationism. Evolution is a change on a genetic level to result in a change in the future generations, this happens everywhere. The faster the generations proceed the easier you can see the results. Human generations take 70 years to go through one, bacteria go through 1000s of generations in a couple of hours. Hence why you can see their genetic change in hours and people tend to claim its adaptation, in a sense it is adapatation but you cannot seperate the fact that that adaptation arises from a change in the DNA therefores its evolved that adaptation. An adaptation to an intrinsic or extrinsic factor is evolution. On a grander scale it results in a new life form.

As I said there is more evidence for evolution than evidence validating ALL of Newton's laws. If you look for it abandon silly bias and read objectively you will see it.

Oh if its correct, then ok i'd say science is wrong and start trying to find god or the designer. Then i'd probably move on and go have lunch I dont know but you think scientists care if their wrong?

@techne

oh ya that happens. One sangoma was claiming to have treatment for HIV up in mungusi region it was just ARVs rofl. They cons and rogues, but people will defend them. Our politians took a potatoe for a conference rofl.

Computational chemistry allows you to create molecules virtually and run virtual testing for bioavailble compounds then you can synthesize only the viable compounds later in the lab. Very complex very new. Doesnt eliminate lab work but cuts it down drastically.

You have no idea how I hate those hippie hypocrites.

 

[porchrat]

Ask SETI or IDers. They have similar methods when they can't identify the designer.

Otherwise, ask archaeologists, forensic scientists, anthropologists etc.

With the exception of ID, the things you have mentioned all have standards against which they compare something to establish "designeyness". (EDIT: wait... to the best of my knowledge I can't think how forensic scientists have anything to do with establishing "designeyness" so that would be another exception albeit for a different reason than that seen in ID)

As far as I am aware there is no reliable standard for designeyness in organisms.

 

[CoolBug]

With the exception of ID, the things you have mentioned all have standards against which they compare something to establish "designeyness". (EDIT: wait... to the best of my knowledge I can't think how forensic scientists have anything to do with establishing "designeyness" so that would be another exception albeit for a different reason than that seen in ID)

As far as I am aware there is no reliable standard for designeyness in organisms.

Sorry, a bit off topic but just wanted to mention something fascinating, that forensics is not a science, saw a BS episode on it.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/_mobile/science/health/forensics/4325774

 

[Techne]

With the exception of ID, the things you have mentioned all have standards against which they compare something to establish "designeyness". (EDIT: wait... to the best of my knowledge I can't think how forensic scientists have anything to do with establishing "designeyness" so that would be another exception albeit for a different reason than that seen in ID)

As far as I am aware there is no reliable standard for designeyness in organisms.

I'd love to know how SETI or anyone else for that matter determines "designeyness", whatever that is supposed to be LOL.

Anyway, this sequence was "designed" and is present in a few organisms so it must have some "designeyness" :
attatcacaa aatggtgtga tcttatcaat agcactactt gcttaactag ctaatgtcgt gcaattggag tagagaacac agaacgatta actagctaat ttttttagtt ggatggcaat tgttggaatt cacagctttt tagttggaat tttagttaat catcaaacac ttaaaataag taaaaagtat gttattttag gttcgatttt tccaattatg gcattaacaa atactcttgt

This challenge from a few years back is still open if you want to see how your skills are at determining "designeyness" in biological organisms.
Detect Design
Let's see how good your scientific skills are.

Also, check this thread from pandasthumb
http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2008/01/take-the-intell.html#more

 

[porchrat]

I'd love to know how SETI or anyone else for that matter determines "designeyness", whatever that is supposed to be LOL.

designeyness is a word I invented for when people try to claim they have a standard for determining whether or not biological stuff is designed and when it isn't.

As to SETI they are looking for repeating patterns in radio transmissions if I am not mistaken (could be wrong I don't follow their investigation very closely). Mankind also has from experience a pretty good idea of what generic background noise looks like. So they have a basis for the standard upon which they narrow results down. ID doesn't have that as far as I can see.

If ID does have such a standard then please link to it because I think it would be pretty relevant to the science section (for a change).

 

[Techne]

designeyness is a word I invented for when people try to claim they have a standard for determining whether or not biological stuff is designed and when it isn't.

As to SETI they are looking for repeating patterns in radio transmissions if I am not mistaken (could be wrong I don't follow their investigation very closely). Mankind also has from experience a pretty good idea of what generic background noise looks like. So they have a basis for the standard upon which they narrow results down. ID doesn't have that as far as I can see.

If ID does have such a standard then please link to it because I think it would be pretty relevant to the science section (for a change).

Huh, what is this "standard upon which they narrow results down" and "generic background noise" you are talking about for SETI and all the other "designeyness" detection endeavors? You are making stuff up, it's funny though.

 

[CoolBug]

SETI The science institution for the search of extra terrestrials?..

 

[cyghost]

Oh those were the days eh, techne?

Look! rwenzori was there too!

ETA: come to think of it, you posted it across various fora including this very one here > http://mybroadband.co.za/vb/showthread.php/211255-Is-SETI-science?highlight=seti

never mind me, I'm just reminicing...

 

[Swa]

Continuing this here

 

[CoolBug]

As far as I know, SETI is science and they are taking an honest, scientific approach in the search for ETs.

They just haven't found anything yet.

 

[Geriatrix]

As far as I know, SETI is science and they are taking an honest, scientific approach in the search for ETs.

They just haven't found anything yet.

Maybe they have the wrong number.

 

[Techne]

As far as I know, SETI is science and they are taking an honest, scientific approach in the search for ETs.

They just haven't found anything yet.

What, as far as you know is their "scientific approach"?

Iders might as well make the same claim for ""ID science".

 

[CoolBug]

What, as far as you know is their "scientific approach"?

Iders might as well make the same claim for ""ID science".

Sorry I was talking about SETI Institute

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/SETI_Institute

The search for extraterrestrial intelligence (SETI) is the collective name for a number of activities people undertake to search for intelligent extraterrestrial life. Some of the most well known projects are run by Harvard University, the University of California, Berkeley and the SETI Institute. SETI projects use scientific methods to search for intelligent life on other planets. For example, electromagnetic radiation is monitored for signs of transmissions from civilizations on other worlds. [1][2] The United States government contributed to early SETI projects, but recent work has been primarily funded by private sources.

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Search_for_extraterrestrial_intelligence

The SETI Institute’s public outreach efforts include working with teachers and students in promoting science education and the teaching of evolution, working with NASA on exploration missions such as Kepler and SOFIA

Seems like science to me but then again you're the genius around these parts so you tell me.