Zachriel and the Lederberg Experiment

-
Decades ago the Lederbergs conducted an experiment using bacteria.

This experiment demonstrated that the resitance to anti-biotics was already in the population when the anti-biotics were introduced (put on the plate).

IOW the resistance did not come in response to the exposure.

This was supposed to demonstrate that mutations are random with respect to fitness.

However that "conclusion" was reached before we knew that bacteria communicate:

Communicating bacteria

More communicating bacteria

Quorum sensing


The point is the Lederbergs didn't know about this communication.

IOW as far as they knew the bacteria were communicating with each other and that communication sparked the variation that affrded the anti-biotic resistance.

That woudl mean the mutations are nit genetic accidents but part of some "built-in response to environmental cues".

However Zachriel cannot grasp that and instead blathers on and on about "random with respect to fitness".

Thank you Taxachusetts!

-
Did hell freeze over?

Yesterday Massachusetts (Taxachusetts) elected a Republican to take the seat of the late Senator Ted Kennedy.

A Republican US Senator from Massachusetts, just when the President didn't want one.

A Blue-State going against the wishes of a Democratic President who, only some 14 months ago took that State by a whopping 26 points.


There may be hope for the USA after-all...

"Accumulating Genetic Accidents" and selection

-
Many times, for many years I have been saying the mechanism proposed by the theory of evolution is nothing more than an accumulation of genetic accidents.

My reasoning is as follows:

In the evolutionary scenario all mutations are genetic accidents. And those accidents have to accumulate- they do so by various selection processes as well as sheer dumb luck.

But if they do not accumulate then evolution wouldn't go very far.

Richard Dawkins calls it "cumulative selection"-

What is the point?

Jeffrey Shallit doesn't seem to understand that mutations accumulate.

Also the best he can do is provide evidence for Common Descent- evidence for Common Descent is not evidence for accumulating genetic accidents.

The point of my query was to test the MECHANISM.

However it is obvious that testing the proposed mechanism is just a pipe-dream.

Just TOOOOO Funny!!!

-
The anti-IDists are getting banned from pro-ID blogs because they spew nonsense and never substantiate their claims.

I recognize their nonsense and let them know it.

They don't like it so the whine like little school-girls.

Over on Uncoomon Descent PaulT whines his way into the blog with:

You have, of course, every right to ban the likes of h.pesoj and Voice Coil, and it is helpful that you have given reasons for doing so. However I sense a certain irony when your explanation comes immediately after a comment by Joseph in which he calls his opponents clowns and liars. How long would an ID sceptic last here using that sort of approach?

I call 'em as I see 'em bitch.

To stop me from using that language just stop lying and acting like clowns.

But whining to the moderator just makes you look like a wussy.

Evolve a backbone- Too funny...

John Coleman, meteorologist- Co-Founder of "The Weather Channel" on "climate change"

-
John Coleman on "climate change"

His data demonstrates that man-made global warming/ man-made climate change is pure nonsense.