Human Chromosome 2 From a Design Perspective

-
Even before the release of "Science and Human Origins" there has been an uproar over human chromosome 2, the alleged fusion of two other chromosomes (still found in other primates) and sharing a common ancestor with chimps. According to evos this was supposed to be a chromosomal fusion that occurred in some gamete and then got passed along- a random event.

However if we look at it from a design perspective the randomness disappears. Why? Chromosome/ DNA packaging and chromosome territories.

Ya see gene expression and regulation depend on both the packaging and the location of the chromosomes within the nucleus, ie chromosome territories. And if you have two different/ separate chromosomes then they can be packaged differently and ferried around separately also, meaning they can be separated and placed in different territories.

So perhaps with humans it is required that the information never be separated. And the easiest way to accomplish that was by splicing the two together. Snip off the excess and splice.*

The research would be to determine where HC2 resides in certain tissues and cells and during development and then compare with the two primate chromosomes for the same tissues/ cells and stages of development.

So HC2 is explained as a design feature, for humans. It not only helps with reproductive isolation but it also allows for a different gene expression and regulation pattern necessary for the different requirements of humans.


* it could also be that the two chimp chromosomes were the result of splitting HC2 into two separate chromosomes

How to Test and falsify Intelligent Design- a Repost

-
Seeing that Kevin the retard McCarthy is still choking on his ignorance of genetics and wants positive evidence for ID, I figure we can start with the basics- again:

Yes, Intelligent Design is both testable and falsifiable. Intelligent Design relies on Newton's First Rule, meaning agencies are only added when REQUIRED. Therefor to refute ID and any given design inference all one has to do is step up and demonstrate that blind and undirected processes can account for it. IOW all evotards have to do to stop ID cold is to actually step up and A) produce a tyestable hypothesis for their position and B) produce positive, supporting evidence.

However all evotards can do is cry foul and say "blind, undirected processes is a strawman!"- yet it is a given that natural selection, genetic drift and HGT are all blind, purposeless processes and all mutations are undirected-> that is given the current theory of evolution. IOW evotards are so clueless they don't even understand the theory they try to defend!

So there you have it ole ignorant and cowardly evotards- just start supporting your position and ID will go away.

How is ID tested? As in positive evidence?

1- See above as the way to the design inference is THROUGH the blind watchmaker

2- The criteria for inferring design in biology is, as Michael J. Behe, Professor of Biochemistry at Leheigh University, puts it in his book Darwin ' s Black Box: "Our ability to be confident of the design of the cilium or intracellular transport rests on the same principles to be confident of the design of anything: the ordering of separate components to achieve an identifiable function that depends sharply on the components.”

So if nature, operating freely cannot account for it AND it meets that criteria, some agency is required and we infer design (or at least agency involvement).

The prediction is Kevin won't understand any of that because he is scientifically illiterate

Cornelius Hunter Steps Up and Does the Right Thing

-
It's about time Dr Hunter. You can write all you want and you do NOT need the comments of evoTARDs to make your posts. They add nothing. They know nothing. And they just pollute all they touch.

There are plenty of blogs that do not allow comments so you are not the only one. When you want comments just post on Uncommon Descent and you will get them without any evoTARDgasms, which also means without any retaliations from your supporters. Perhaps a real discussion will break out.

If you ever do open up comments I again I will volunteer to be a moderator- I will never use another bad word on your blog because I will just moderate all evoTARD posts that do not conform to a civil discourse. IOW troy and thorton will not be posting very much as they do not know what being civil is and they are too stupid for any discourse.

But anyway, kudos for stepping up and doing the right thing.

Oleg Tchernyshyov Needs Directions to Find His Balls

-
Oleg is such a clueless fuck. He thinks that because he is a Russian with a physics background that means he knows everything. Yet I have exposed his ignorance on a few subjects including cladistics, nested hierarchies and information.

This has pissed off the mad Russian. It has made him so upset that he can't find his balls.

Ya see I told him and thorton that seeing that they want to make this personal let's meet and get it over with. And they both wet themselves.

You, and all evos (it appears) are clueless imbeciles and cowards.

I don't need to meet you in any corner of any parking lot. I will meet you right in the middle but you are too much of a chicken-shit to show.

Pathetic, but typical...

As for your balls, just look on Richie Hughes' chins....

Kevin ReTARD McCarthy- AKA Ogre MKV- Cowardly Equivocator and Ignorant of Genetics

-
Kevin, you are one ignorant dickhead.

Kevin spews:

BTW: Joe, our position (i.e. evolution) does NOT require that there existed a species of ape-humans with 47 chromosomes.

No, the theory of evolution requires there be individuals with 47 chromosomes.

This is how it works you fucking moron:

You have a population with 48 chromosomes. A fusion occurs in one gamete and that gamete now has 23 as opposed to 24. That gamete with 23 connects with the opposing/ other-sex gamete that has 24. 23 + 24 = 47.

That is how it starts. Then 47 spreads in the population until a 46 appears.

Simple math and genetics Kevbo. I can see how you would manage to fuck it up.

Why Elizabeth Liddle Did NOT Create CSI Via Natural Selection

-
In this blog Elizabeth Liddle sez she created CSI using natural selection. However she didn't create any CSI and she didn't use natural selection.

For one she uses replicating coin tosses. So sorry Liz, replication is the very thing- the specified complexity- that needs to be explained. And coin toss results do not replicate. Add to that the selection coefficient is totally artificial and the "pattern" is only seen when looking at groups of descendents. The CSI needs to be in the individual and your individuals do not measure up.

And that is why Elizabeth Liddle did not create CSI using natural selection.

The Septic Zone- A New Thread and STILL NO Evidence

-
Elizabeth Liddle, as with all evoTARDs, is proving that she is one clueless tard.

When all it would take to refute any given design inference, she can offer nothing but evobabble.

Case in point: Semiotic argument for ID: penguin rules version- all evos can do is bullshit their way through it. Notice how not one presented any evidence that transcription and translation evolved via accumulations of random mutations.

That is because not one evo has a clue as to how it could have happened. They can't even produce a testable hypothesis for such a thing. Heck they can't produce a testable hypothesis for anything their position claims.

Experiments That Do NOT Need a Hypothesis

-
Yes there are at least a couple types of experiments that do not require a hypothesis.

One type is Exploratory Experiments:

Philosophers of experiment have acknowledged that experiments are often more than mere hypothesis-tests, once thought to be an experiment’s exclusive calling. Drawing on examples from contemporary biology, I make an additional amendment to our understanding of experiment by examining the way that ‘wide’ instrumentation can, for reasons of efficiency, lead scientists away from traditional hypothesis-directed methods of experimentation and towards exploratory methods.

1. Introduction. Recently, philosophers have argued that experiments do more than test hypotheses. Additional roles have included determining whether scientific instruments are functioning properly (Galison 1987) and exploring new phenomena when theories are either absent or in turmoil (Steinle 1997, 2002; see also Hacking 1983 and Radder 2003).

Unfortunately Richie won't understand any of that because he is a moron who learned about experiments from reading wikipedia.

What is an "experiment"?

-
experiment:

1.
a test, trial, or tentative procedure; an act or operation for the purpose of discovering something unknown or of testing a principle, supposition, etc.: a chemical experiment; a teaching experiment; an experiment in living.

2.
the conducting of such operations; experimentation: a product that is the result of long experiment.

3.
Obsolete . experience.

verb (used without object)
4.
to try or test, especially in order to discover or prove something: to experiment with a new procedure.

Yes, you can have an experiment without a hypothesis nor a goal, other than to find out what happens when you do something. Ever try something new? You are experimenting.

You do not need a lab, a white lab coat, a hypothesis nor a goal beyond wanting to discover what happens when I do this.

"Describe an experiment that is not designed"

-
Richie wants me to describe an experiment that was not designed"-

Eclipses are natural experiemnts so I guess I just described an experiment that wasn't designed, unless of course you are going to agree that our solar system is designed. Then there are earthquakes and of course, according to evos, evolution is one continous natural experiment- unless they are going to agree that evolution is by design

And then we have Flemming's discovery of penicillin- an undesigned experiment.

If you want more you will have to pay me for my time.

Now what Richie the cowardly liar needs to do is make a connection between this and something I said about GAs. The safe money is that he never will...

Kevin ReTARD McCarthy- AKA Ogre MK V, Choking on EAs

-
Kevin is one stupid son-of-a-bitch. There is an evolution algorithm that allowed a computer program to play checkers without explicitly programming it to do so. The program learned to play checkers- it was given the rules and moves, along with other relevant information.

So it learned how to play checkers, as designed, ie it fulfilled the GOAL.

Kevin ReTARD McCarthy sez that playing checkers was not the goal, or something to that effect, because the program had no idea, it wasn't told, that it was for playing checkers nor was it told how to complete that goal.

Are YOU really that fucking stupid Kevin? Really?

You got that? A program was written with the express purpose of having it "learn" to play checkers, it does that but that was not the goal because no one told the program that was the goal and no one told the program how to reach that goal.

Only an ignorant fuck could even think such a thing, and here is Kevin.

Genetic Algorithms Have a Goal, Natural Evolution Does Not

-
Richie the evoTARD Hughes still thinks that just because someone can call a search heuristic a "genetic" algorithm that there is really genetics involved. He also thinks that just because wikipedia can say GAs mimic natural evolution, that they do.

Well GAs only mimic natural evolution if and only if natural evolution is Intelligent Design evolution. Ya see GAs have goals and according to the theory of evolution there aren't any goals, meaning mutations are not searching for some solution for the organism. With GAs the whole point is searching for a solution (or solutions). Specified solutions such that you know when the algorithm is finished.

genetic algorithms have a goal

RichTARD Hughes- Captain Coward and Pathological Liar, Calls Me Out!

-
BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA

Richie, you aren't anyone to call out someone. You are a proven intellectual coward, liar and loser. The fact that you cannot stay on-topic proves exactly that.

I have called you out several times and you have choked each and every time.

So go play with yourself and your evoTARD stroke butties..

"Obesity in the United States"

-
The costs of an unhealthy lifestyle:

Obesity in the United States

Obesity in the United States has been increasingly cited as a major health issue in recent decades. While many industrialized countries have experienced similar increases, obesity rates in the United States are among the highest in the world.[2] Of all countries, the United States has the highest rate of obesity. Estimates have steadily increased, from 19.4% in 1997, 24.5% in 2004[3] to 26.6% in 2007,[4] to 33.8% (adults) and 17% (children) in 2008.[5] In 2010, the CDC reported higher numbers once more, counting 35.7% of American adults as obese, and 17% of American children.[6]

According to a study in The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), in 2008 the obesity rate among adult Americans was estimated at 32.2% for men and 35.5% for women; these rates were roughly confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention again for 2009-2010. Using different criteria, a Gallup survey found the rate was 26.1% for U.S. adults in 2011, up from 25.5% in 2008. Though the rate for women has held steady over the previous decade, the obesity rate for men continued to increase between 1999 and 2008, the JAMA study notes. Moreover, “The prevalence of obesity for adults aged 20 to 74 years increased by 7.9 percentage points for men and by 8.9 percentage points for women between 1976-1980 and 1988-1994, and subsequently by 7.1 percentage points for men and by 8.1 percentage points for women between 1988-1994 and 1999-2000.”[7]

The direct medical cost of obesity and indirect economic loss to obesity has been estimated to be as high as $51.64 billion and $99.2 billion in 1995, respectively;[8] this rose to $61 billion and $117 billion in 2000.[9] Researchers for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and RTI International estimate that in 2003, obesity-attributable medical expenditures reached $75 billion.[10]

Universal health care is a joke without universally leading healthy lifestyles.

Kevin R McCarthy, AKA Ogre MK V, Still a Lying Ignorant Punk

-
Kevin, give it a rest. You are an ignorant little fuck.

Kevin posted ignorant drivel on Obamacare, I responded, which went straight to "your comment is awaiting moderation", just as all my comments do- I have many there now- and kevvy the liar lets one through and spews:

Hey, they must have reset the spam filters. Meh, I’ll let this go.

You are a lying faggot Kevin. YOU let the comment through because you thought you had something to say to refute it. Unfortunately you choked.

My response, which is awaiting moderation-

The “tax” thing is the only reason it got through the USSC.

A for eating healthy, well that is the reason why health care is so expensive- we, as a people, are very unhealthy. Car accidents are covered by auto insurance and are a very minor player in the health care system.

But anyway, Kevin, obviously you are ignorant of the health-care issues of today and the fact that the people of the US are very unhealthy because we choose to be.

And you are lying about the spam filters because my post said “waiting for moderation” and you chose to post it.

Kevin is too fucking stupid to understand that the reason our health care system is so expensive and over burdened is becauuse we Americans are unhealthy and that just by changing our life styles to a healthy life style would alleviate the burden and the expense.

He is also too stupid to understand that any health care system that using reactive measure as opposed to preventitaive measures is doomed to failure and insurance is reactive.

Stupid, evoTARD liberals. It should be legal to launch them to the moon.

Oleg Tchernyshyov- Still Ignorant of GAs

-
Yup ole Oleg is at it again, this time he thinks that just because the "inventors" of genetic algorithms called them genetic algorithms that means they are GENETIC algorithms.

Unfortunately those alleged "genetic" algorithms do not have anything to do with genetics!

The point being is that just because someone can name something, that alone doesn't mean the name fits. But oleg thinks just the opposite. He thinks that because they are called genetic algorithms then they are- genetics be damned I tell you!

The point?Why do I bring this oleg is spewing his nonsense, again and he just doesn't get it.

Credible Evidence for UFOs

-
Yes there is credible evidence for UFOs. For one there is the crash near Roswell, NM. For another there are radar AND pilot confirmations, yup more than one. There are military sitings as well as government files that document UFOs.

Then there are ancient texts and paintings that discuss and depict flying crafts.

Credible evidence for UFOs

Elizabeth Liddle (and Oleg)- Still Lying About Creating CSI

-
Geez Lizzie, I told you that you didn't create any CSI, but that is because you obvioulsy do not understand the concept. Now Lizzie is still promoting her lie that natural selection created CSI.

Unfortunately for Lizzie natural selection didn't have anything to do with what she created. Blind and undirected processes didn't have anything to do with what she created. And what she created is NOT even CSI! (by Dembski's definition)

EvoTARDs are such lying fucks and the sad part is they believe their lies.