Evolution Pros and Cons

[Moontanman]

Let me give a practical example of a logical reason water helped predefine selective advantage in cell evolution. The most energy intensive process in the cell involves the Na, K pumps, which establish the membrane potential. The cell net accumulates K+ ions and pumps Na+ ions out of the cell.

 

 

 

Kosmotropes and Chaotropes

 

The cell will pump out the Na+ and accumulate the K+. During the cell cycle the more Na+ will enter the cell. The Na+ means a greater disruption in the water structure (more high density or more energetic water) at the time the DNA duplicates and the cell is the most active.

 

HB, if water wasn't the solvent of life on the Earth do you think evolution would have progressed in a basically different way? If we used Sulfuric acid as our life solvent wouldn't we be sitting around talking about how perfect sulfuric acid was for life and how it had influenced how life progressed and developed? Isn't claiming that Life is due to water putting the horse before the cart? I have no doubt that water influences life but it's just paper the life is drawn on, if another substrate was used the picture would still be one of life.

[HydrogenBond]

Water is the most likely solvent for life. The primary reason is, water is the second most abundant molecule in the universe. Even using odds, this gives water selective advantage as soon as it came out of the first stars. But other reasons have to do with water's unusually boiling point for a small molecule. It is still liquid at high enough temperature where chemical reactions have reasonable rates. Lower boiling point molecules would create a sluggish beginning and fall way behind. This is another selective advantage of water that was defined by nature to stack the deck or load the dice in water's favor.

 

The observation of high and low density water, or two energy states within water, that can exist at the same time at ambient conditions, also give water another selective advantage in terms of contributing energy or taking away energy from the molecules of life.

 

If you look at protein structure, in general terms, it buries hydrophobic elements and puts hydrophilic aspects on the surface. This is defined because of the interaction with water. A non-polar solvent would lower energy by reversing this. Polar organic solvents like ethanol would create more ambiguity since both polar and non-polar on the surface may be OK. Water creates sort of a default protein basic shape, that the DNA templates need take into account if they wish to be maximize efficiency.

 

If we translate mRNA into protein, since we are using water as the continuous phase, genes needed to evolve in terms of a strategy that will get with the program in terms of the default shape of proteins within water. In other words, they need to create a basic order within the mRNA templates so the hydrophobic will end in the the core and hydrophilic on the surface, but in a fool proof way. That means it would be smarter to start the protein and therefore the mRNA, with an hydrophobic seed (intelligent design). This is observed with Methionine appearing from the starter regions of mRNA templates, with the methionine being non-polar. It had nothing to do with rolling the dice. The final design was the intelligent thing to do based on energy and the affect of water. This is what I call intelligent design. Evolve life with the slope of the land, with the water defining that slope.

[Moontanman]

Water is the most likely solvent for life. The primary reason is, water is the second most abundant molecule in the universe. Even using odds, this gives water selective advantage as soon as it came out of the first stars. But other reasons have to do with water's unusually boiling point for a small molecule. It is still liquid at high enough temperature where chemical reactions have reasonable rates. Lower boiling point molecules would create a sluggish beginning and fall way behind. This is another selective advantage of water that was defined by nature to stack the deck or load the dice in water's favor.

 

The observation of high and low density water, or two energy states within water, that can exist at the same time at ambient conditions, also give water another selective advantage in terms of contributing energy or taking away energy from the molecules of life.

 

If you look at protein structure, in general terms, it buries hydrophobic elements and puts hydrophilic aspects on the surface. This is defined because of the interaction with water. A non-polar solvent would lower energy by reversing this. Polar organic solvents like ethanol would create more ambiguity since both polar and non-polar on the surface may be OK. Water creates sort of a default protein basic shape, that the DNA templates need take into account if they wish to be maximize efficiency.

 

If we translate mRNA into protein, since we are using water as the continuous phase, genes needed to evolve in terms of a strategy that will get with the program in terms of the default shape of proteins within water. In other words, they need to create a basic order within the mRNA templates so the hydrophobic will end in the the core and hydrophilic on the surface, but in a fool proof way. That means it would be smarter to start the protein and therefore the mRNA, with an hydrophobic seed (intelligent design). This is observed with Methionine appearing from the starter regions of mRNA templates, with the methionine being non-polar. It had nothing to do with rolling the dice. The final design was the intelligent thing to do based on energy and the affect of water. This is what I call intelligent design. Evolve life with the slope of the land, with the water defining that slope.

 

The first thing you mention is significant, water is common in the universe but it isn't common as a liquid, it exists mostly as a gas or ice. There are many environments where water is not suitable as a solvent for life.

 

All the other things you mention have more to do with life adapting to water rather than water being the only uniquely suitable solvent for life. On other planets other solvents might be used and that life will be adapted to that solvent in way we cannot predict and will seem to any intelligent lifeforms that their solvent is mysteriously perfect for their life.

 

Life based in other solvents will be uniquely adapted to that solvent, whether it's silanes dissolved in hydrocarbons on Titan or silicones dissolved in sulfuric acid on Venus, the environment will determine what solvent is used by life. We might have to explore outside the solar system to find life other than the protein water type life we know but there is no reason to conclude at this time we have all the facts in hand.

[Pyrotex]

Water is the most likely solvent for life. ... This is what I call intelligent design. Evolve life with the slope of the land, with the water defining that slope.

Well, duh. :doh:

The bottom line is, molecular action is dominated by energy states. Molecules that achieve a lower energy state are more likely to be formed than molecules at higher energy states.

Water runs downhill for similar reasons. Is THAT intelligent design?

Well, when you think about it, it IS "intelligent". Wouldn't make much sense for water to run uphill, would it?

But that doesn't warrant the conclusion of ID as a "sentient" intelligence.

 

Ima gettin tired of spelling out "intelligence". Couldn't we just call him/her/it a name?

How about Frob? :lol:

[Galapagos]

The first thing you mention is significant, water is common in the universe but it isn't common as a liquid, it exists mostly as a gas or ice. There are many environments where water is not suitable as a solvent for life.

 

All the other things you mention have more to do with life adapting to water rather than water being the only uniquely suitable solvent for life. On other planets other solvents might be used and that life will be adapted to that solvent in way we cannot predict and will seem to any intelligent lifeforms that their solvent is mysteriously perfect for their life.

 

Life based in other solvents will be uniquely adapted to that solvent, whether it's silanes dissolved in hydrocarbons on Titan or silicones dissolved in sulfuric acid on Venus, the environment will determine what solvent is used by life. We might have to explore outside the solar system to find life other than the protein water type life we know but there is no reason to conclude at this time we have all the facts in hand.

Aha! But if we found this alien life enjoying the silicon(or whatever alternative biochemistry they have) equivalent of bananas, we would then know that the universe was perfectly designed to sustain life and make it very pleasurable and enjoyable for us!

YouTube - Kirk Cameron And Bananas http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4

:lol:

 

 

On a more serious note, points raised in Neil Tyson's "Stupid Design" talk puts these sorts of discussions in perspective:

YouTube - Stupid Design http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_nqySMvkcw

[Pyrotex]

...Neil Tyson's "Stupid Design" talk puts these sorts of discussions in perspective:...

Loved the clip on Stupid Design!! Woulda repped ya if I coulda.

[Moontanman]

Damn, I can't watch those videos!

[Galapagos]

Damn, I can't watch those videos!

 

I feel for ya moonman! Some of the points Tyson makes are brought up in his article "The Perimeter of Ignorance", but tbh, the video, although less informative, is a lot more exciting!

Stupid design could fuel a movement unto itself. It may not be nature's default, but it's ubiquitous. Yet people seem to enjoy thinking that our bodies, our minds, and even our universe represent pinnacles of form and reason. Maybe it's a good antidepressant to think so. But it's not science—not now, not in the past, not ever.

 

and the first video is an old one, where 80s/90s actor Kirk Cameron and evangelist Ray Comfort discuss how bannanas are "the atheists worst nightmare" because they exemplify the world designed for human indulgence by a Christian god. Perfect shape, convenient easy-open tab, bio-degradable wrapper... what could explain this perfect fit other than the banana being designed just for us!??!!! :doh: :lol:

[Moontanman]

I feel for ya moonman! Some of the points Tyson makes are brought up in his article "The Perimeter of Ignorance", but tbh, the video, although less informative, is a lot more exciting!

 

 

and the first video is an old one, where 80s/90s actor Kirk Cameron and evangelist Ray Comfort discuss how bannanas are "the atheists worst nightmare" because they exemplify the world designed for human indulgence by a Christian god. Perfect shape, convenient easy-open tab, bio-degradable wrapper... what could explain this perfect fit other than the banana being designed just for us!??!!! :doh: :lol:

 

 

That was a great read, people need to see this sort of thing more often, possibly science should proselytize as much as religion to get the message out? I have to ask, aren't bananas as we know then the result if HID? Human Intelligent Design? Much like pineapples, apples, pears and all the other fruits we take for granted? None of these in their modern form are found in the wild and would not be the way they are without HID.

[Galapagos]

I have to ask, aren't bananas as we know then the result if HID? Human Intelligent Design? Much like pineapples, apples, pears and all the other fruits we take for granted? None of these in their modern form are found in the wild and would not be the way they are without HID.

 

Certainly some of the features of bananas were manipulated by artificial/unconscious selection, but some of the things he says are just goofy coincidences in development, I think. Some of the reasons he list are also due to how we are adapted to our environment. A quick google turns up a transcript by someone else:

21stCenturyDandy's Profile - Boing Boing

RAY COMFORT: (Earnestly) Behold! The atheist's nightmare. Now if you study a well-made banana, you'll find on the far side there are three ridges; on the close side, two ridges. If you get your hand ready to grip a banana, you'll find on the far side, there are three grooves; on the close side, two grooves. The banana and the hand are perfectly made, one for the other. You'll find the maker of the banana -- Almighty God -- has made it with a non-slip surface. It has outward indicators of inward contents: green, too early; yellow, just right; black, too late. Now if you go to the top of a banana, you'll find -- as with the soda can makers, who've placed a tab at the top -- so God has placed a tab at the top. When you pull the tab, the contents don't squirt in your face. You'll find the wrapper, which is biodegradable, has perforations. Notice how gracefully it sits over the human hand. Notice it has a point at the top for ease of entry. It's just the right shape for the human mouth. It's chewy, easy to digest, and it's even curved towards the face to make the whole process so much easier. Seriously, Kirk, the whole of Creation testifies to the genius of God's creative --

 

KIRK CAMERON: (Interjecting goonishly) Oh, it absolutely --

[Moontanman]

Certainly some of the features of bananas were manipulated by artificial/unconscious selection, but some of the things he says are just goofy coincidences in development, I think. Some of the reasons he list are also due to how we are adapted to our environment. A quick google turns up a transcript by someone else:

21stCenturyDandy's Profile - Boing Boing

 

Ok, I looked into the wild banana thing, they are short squat fruits with thick skins and full of seeds. They are not pop top fruits made perfect for human consumption. many years of cultivation of triploid forms has produced the bananas we eat today. So Bananas are indeed the result of ID, HID :lol:

[Buffy]

WARNING: While on topic--showing how easy it is to show "purpose" in the "design" of just about any object for any purpose--it's getting into R-rated territory (and was suggested by the BF, so I'm not going to take credit for the idea...).

 

You were warned.

 

KIWI COMFORT: (Earnestly) Behold! The atheist's nightmare. Now if you study a well-made sheep, you'll find on the far side there are two ears; on the close side, a tail designed to be docked. If you get your hand ready to grip sheep, you'll find on the far side, those ears and the hand are perfectly made, one for the other. You'll find the maker of the sheep -- Almighty God -- has made it with a non-slip surface that make for easy alternate grips. It has outward indicators of inward contents: shorn, too early; wooly, just right; black, well, you know what they say about black sheep. Now if you go to the back of a sheep, you'll find -- as with the automobile makers, who've placed the hole in the trunk (boot) for a key -- so God has placed a hole at the back for your key. When you insert your key, the contents don't squirt in your face because you can hold on to the ears instead of squeezing the middle which is what causes the squirting. You'll find the wrapper, which is biodegradable, is soft and yet stimulating. Notice how gracefully it matches the human abdomen. Notice it has a wiggling docked tail at the back for ease of entry. It's just the right shape for the human key. It's frisky, easy to mount, and it's even curved away from the face to make the whole process so much easier. Seriously, Kirk, the whole of Creation testifies to the genius of God's creative --

 

KIRK CAMERON: (Interjecting goonishly) Oh, it absolutely

 

:doh: :cheer: :eek: :rolleyes: :phones: :cheer: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

 

Apologies also to our friends from New Zealand, but I could not restrain myself.... :evil:

 

I searched the world over and I thought I'd found true love, but you met another and PFFT! you was gone, :lol:

Buffy

[TheBigDog]

Bill, while it's true that if aliens had really seeded the Earth with life we would be hard pressed to prove it, two things need to be said here, first trust me when i say that aliens are not what the ID people have in mind and if aliens did seed the earth it only pushes the problem back, how did the aliens evolve? No matter how far back you carry ID at some point you have to explain the existence of the seeders.

It does not have to be that there is only ID or Evolution. The point I am making is that stripped of the power of God, ID is is not just plausible, but likely to occur. Intelligence as I am using it is at a human level of knowledge. Selective breeding of dogs and livestock is a rudimentary form of intelligent design. Genetic engineering gets us closer to the source and allows us to do things that are inconceivable through breeding alone. We are just scratching the surface of this now, but imagine how capable we may be in another century!

 

I am frustrated no end by the knee jerk reaction on this site to what are perceived to be anti-science buzzwords. ID is not without truth. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because of who is doing the scrubbing.

 

As far as intelligence building the whole of the universe; poppy cock! What we have is the natural engineering of forces finding a natural balance. People talk about how unlikely certain things are to have happened by circumstance. Well, they did! Some rare things have a stability to them that will make them outnumber their far more likely, yet unstable alternatives. Billions upon billions of alternatives happened that simply didn't work and they became nothing more than raw material for the next effort. The few that did work stuck around and proliferated because of that reason; they found harmony with the laws of nature and that harmony allowed them to thrive.

 

All the intelligence in the world will not change the laws of nature, like you cannot buy happiness. We may learn to bend them, or appear to bend them, like you can rent happiness. That ability to work from an understanding of the truth of the natural laws of the universe is the limit to what intelligence can design. If we were in a universe with different natural laws then the reality known there would face the same issues, no matter how different they may otherwise be.

 

Bill

[Buffy]

It does not have to be that there is only ID or Evolution. The point I am making is that stripped of the power of God, ID is is not just plausible, but likely to occur. Intelligence as I am using it is at a human level of knowledge. Selective breeding of dogs and livestock is a rudimentary form of intelligent design.

 

I am frustrated no end by the knee jerk reaction on this site to what are perceived to be anti-science buzzwords. ID is not without truth. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because of who is doing the scrubbing.

I agree with your sentiments here, but I'll ask for granting a clarification on terminology: Intelligent Design is a specific reference to the set of arguments that are applied in attempt to demonstrate how many effects normally ascribed to natural laws are indeed evidence of designed by a *metaphysical* intelligence. Whereas intelligent design--note the lower case--does indeed fairly refer to any natural/physical intelligence controlling or altering the design of other natural/physical entities.

 

The knee jerk part really is that the uppercase version of this term has--fortunately or unfortunately--come to be a generally accepted definitional term.

 

Gay bells or sad, they bring you memories, of half-forgotten innocent old places, :lol:

Buffy

[Moontanman]

It does not have to be that there is only ID or Evolution. The point I am making is that stripped of the power of God, ID is is not just plausible, but likely to occur. Intelligence as I am using it is at a human level of knowledge. Selective breeding of dogs and livestock is a rudimentary form of intelligent design. Genetic engineering gets us closer to the source and allows us to do things that are inconceivable through breeding alone. We are just scratching the surface of this now, but imagine how capable we may be in another century!

 

I am frustrated no end by the knee jerk reaction on this site to what are perceived to be anti-science buzzwords. ID is not without truth. Don't throw the baby out with the bathwater because of who is doing the scrubbing.

 

As far as intelligence building the whole of the universe; poppy cock! What we have is the natural engineering of forces finding a natural balance. People talk about how unlikely certain things are to have happened by circumstance. Well, they did! Some rare things have a stability to them that will make them outnumber their far more likely, yet unstable alternatives. Billions upon billions of alternatives happened that simply didn't work and they became nothing more than raw material for the next effort. The few that did work stuck around and proliferated because of that reason; they found harmony with the laws of nature and that harmony allowed them to thrive.

 

All the intelligence in the world will not change the laws of nature, like you cannot buy happiness. We may learn to bend them, or appear to bend them, like you can rent happiness. That ability to work from an understanding of the truth of the natural laws of the universe is the limit to what intelligence can design. If we were in a universe with different natural laws then the reality known there would face the same issues, no matter how different they may otherwise be.

 

Bill

 

Bill, again you are correct it is very possible that some intelligent beings (aliens) did indeed seed the earth with organisms that were even preprogrammed to develop into humans at some point. but this is totally disingenuous, it only backs the argument up to where did the designers come from, from yet another super race of aliens?

 

While it's not impossible that a race of aliens designed life on the earth there is no evidence to suggest such a thing and it really doesn't answer the original question of where does life and complex organisms come from.

 

As for the the creation and design of the universe I totally agree that the idea of a creator is plain silly but even there it openly asks yet another question of where did the designer come from. No answers only questions.

[Moontanman]

WARNING: While on topic--showing how easy it is to show "purpose" in the "design" of just about any object for any purpose--it's getting into R-rated territory (and was suggested by the BF, so I'm not going to take credit for the idea...).

 

You were warned.

 

 

 

:cheer: :eek: :rolleyes: :phones: :cheer: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

 

Apologies also to our friends from New Zealand, but I could not restrain myself.... :evil:

 

I searched the world over and I thought I'd found true love, but you met another and PFFT! you was gone, :doh:

Buffy

 

:lol: Sheep were designed by HID too :evil:

[HydrogenBond]

By intelligent design (lower case) I simply meant a logical explanation using the rational laws of chemistry. It does not mean a creator, except in the loose sense of natural laws were already defining the default results even before the results occurred. Even before there was any water in the universe, natural laws predict water will occur when the conditions are correct. There will not be a random trial and error to decide what water will look like, since H2O is already the logical result of the previous stuff.

 

I have been trying to apply this POV. If we look at an energy balance combined with the behavior of materials in water, life on earth, had many things already defined in advance. For example, bio-materials show hydrogen bonding and use water as the solvent. This hydrogen bonding across the board is not coincidence or random but could have been predicted because water is the solvent and commonality would be expected. That is logical common sense. I never expect this would be lumped into religion, just because poor choice of words. I can understand since I actually thought evolution meant progress but I learned that it can evolve to a previous state. I have to admit I am still confused about using the word evolve into less complexity. It sort of defies my common sense but that is the convention so I will respect that.

 

As far as alternate solvents. There are counter arguments using logical laws of chemistry. For example, silicone polymers are very stable, which is why they make good synthetics substitutes for organic versions of the same thing like oils and plastics. This means they are not as easily reversed under similar conditions. This creates a potential problem even before we get started in terms of the energy requirements of such life.

 

Aqueous life builds upon CO2 and H2O using photosynthesis to supply an energy conversion that is renewable. The logical question is would be the parallel source of energy in a silicone world? Would that be SiO2 or sand/glass and H2SO4 to make (SiOHS)n? Concentrated lab H2SO4 can be stored in SiO2 or glass containers. It would be hard to even get past the initial raw material problem to make monomers for polymers.

 

In evolutionary theory, we start with replicators, but are not sure how to start from scratch. Silicone will have a hard time with step one and may never reach active replicators, even if human can skips all these steps and make such polymers in the lab, directly. This is not intelligent design since the laws of chemistry make it hard to do by itself. Again by intelligent design, I mean it should flow easily from logical laws without relying too much on a unique random event that defies the odds.

 

The only thing this version of id this has in common with religious ID is that both assume there was distinct milestones. Where they differ is id defines the milestones based on natural laws of chemistry which will have the lowest energy requirements. The loaded dice will always come up 7. This is the only philosophical difference with modern evolutionary theory. The problem that id faces, is it looks like card counting when you go into the evolutionary casino. This is illegal and you get banished from Vegas since the odds are stacked for the house to win. But card counting should be part of the game since it uses laws of logic to beat the odds.