Creation & EvolutionForum for the discussion of this important topic. This forum is open to non-believers. There is a Christians-only forum in the Christians-only section too.
Sorry, got off topic with Calvin saying Mitochondrial DNA is his favorite subject and glad we asked! Odd he left immiediately after I mentioned it last night and then comes back today and pastes this thing, clearly not in his own words-which he demands as a requirement from others! Not only that his post was way off mark and misleading. Obviously fro ma Creationist web site!
__________________
None of the gods love wisdom or desire to become wise, for they are wise already -- nor if someone else is wise, do they love wisdom. Neither do the ignorant love wisdom or desire to become wise; for this is the grievous thing about ignorance, that those who are neither good nor beautiful nor sensible think they are good enough, and do not desire that which they do not think they are lacking.
The error is that the cell gets its fuel from the host. Before anything happens inside the cell it first takes a 6 carbon Glucose molecule and braks it down into two 3 carbon pyruvate molecules (I am going to truncate this because it would take pages) the the to 3 carbon pyruvates at this time NADH and ATP are formed. THEN they (The degrade Glucose) enter the Mit and form Acetyl CoA and then enter the Krebs cycle which is what most people are familair with. Basically the Mit.is using sugars to make ATP (Adenosine tri-phosphate) and that is what powers our body. The fact they have their own DNA shows theyonce existed outside the cell alone. Plants also have Mitochondria PLUS Chloroplast which is believed to have evolved the same way. In plants however ADP (Adenosine DI Phosphate) is produced. This is more involved and the chloroplast runs a Calvin Cyle and performs light and dark reactions using the Photons of the sun. So to say it using energy from the cel is not completely correct. Initially this "sugars" came from consuming food for energy to be used by the Mit. to produce ATP (in animals) ADP (in plants).
Originally Posted by pureone
Don't forget all the prokaryotic intracellular pathogens The fact that these exist give good evidence that a symbiotic relationship would have easily come about...the Mitochondria allowed the host cell to "worry" about other things instead of energy production...
I learn something new every day. We only briefly touched on this subject so far in my A-level biology classes. I found it fascinating that we have symbiotes living inside our cells, and have done for billions of years.
__________________ Greatest Hovind quote of all time, as voted for by members of CF:
"Teaching the pagan religion of evolutionism is a waste of valuable class time and textbook space. It is also one of the reasons American kids don't test as well in science as kids in other parts of the world."
If all else fails claim victory. Wonderful theater Calvin...keep it coming. At the very least you are providing us with more evidence of the logically bankrupt arguments of typical YEC science 'pushers'.
I suppose I know why you don't answer my posts. It's would require to quote mine from material that doesn't exist. It would be nice to hear a plain and honest answer from you, however...minus all of the mind-numbing 'victory' cries.
At this point I get the feeling that Calvin isn't trying to convince anyone but himself. It's pretty obvious to anyone reading this thread that he ignores posts, applies a double-standard to those he argues against (this whole "post in your own words, while I cut 'n paste mine from web sites" bit), and then claims hollow "victories" that don't exist anywhere but in his own mind.
Unless, of course, he's just a troll yanking our chains. Sometimes it gets hard to tell...
__________________ Creationism has not made a single contribution to agriculture, medicine, conservation, forestry, pathology, or any other applied area of biology. Creationism has yielded no classifications, no biogeographies, no underlying mechanisms, no unifying concepts with which to study organisms or life. - Botanical Society of America's Statement on Evolution
If the creationists who cut-and-paste and quote mine and throw ad hominems around instead of participating in discussions really think they're impressing the lurkers, they must have an awfully low opinion of lurkers. This thread is a very good example of the quality of the creationist arguments and presentations as opposed to the scientific ones.
Still wondering about the notion of Francis Crick the closet creationist...
__________________ "Sadly, biblical literalism brings not only the bible but Christianity itself into disrepute." - The Rt. Revd. Richard Harries, Anglican Bishop of Oxford.
I learn something new every day. We only briefly touched on this subject so far in my A-level biology classes. I found it fascinating that we have symbiotes living inside our cells, and have done for billions of years.
Phantom, thanks, we all do. I learn much from you and the others, everyday!
Yes, it is a fascinating subject. I myself have only scratched the surface of the Mitochondria. Some Biologists spend their whole careers researching the Mitochondria and Krebs cycle (aka-Citric Acid cycle or TCA Cycle. AND only that. Day in and day out they work on only that one organelle!! Amazing, to me. (So for calvin to paste that nonsense and then claim it was his favorite subject, really irked me)
I still remeber one Prof. I had who was quite elderly at the time. She always mentioned how the Mit. was her "VERY favorite organelle." She also told us that her husband and her had had Sir Hans Kreb and Lady Marg. Krebs over to their home for dinner a couple of times.
__________________
None of the gods love wisdom or desire to become wise, for they are wise already -- nor if someone else is wise, do they love wisdom. Neither do the ignorant love wisdom or desire to become wise; for this is the grievous thing about ignorance, that those who are neither good nor beautiful nor sensible think they are good enough, and do not desire that which they do not think they are lacking.
I learn something new every day. We only briefly touched on this subject so far in my A-level biology classes. I found it fascinating that we have symbiotes living inside our cells, and have done for billions of years.
My fav's so far for my biomedical/biotech(pre-professional) B.S. have been virology, immunology, microbiology and pathophysiology. funny, they all seem to go together...
__________________ Jesus said, "If a blind person leads a blind person, both of them will fall into a hole." Thomas 34
"On blind faith they place reliance, what they need more of is science"- MC Hawking
If the creationists who cut-and-paste and quote mine and throw ad hominems around instead of participating in discussions really think they're impressing the lurkers, they must have an awfully low opinion of lurkers. This thread is a very good example of the quality of the creationist arguments and presentations as opposed to the scientific ones.
Still wondering about the notion of Francis Crick the closet creationist...
Hello Cantaur. Yes, when I read a creationist post that the other day about Crick, I almost choked. The ironic part is that I had just finished reading an article About Watson and Crick and Crick had said looking back in retrospect the discovery was so important for evolutionary Biology- to see where we have been as a species and where we are going.
When these guys name drop and try to say these famous people were really creationists, who do they think they are fooling?
__________________
None of the gods love wisdom or desire to become wise, for they are wise already -- nor if someone else is wise, do they love wisdom. Neither do the ignorant love wisdom or desire to become wise; for this is the grievous thing about ignorance, that those who are neither good nor beautiful nor sensible think they are good enough, and do not desire that which they do not think they are lacking.
But this does nothing to indicate why God has not left us with some 'supernatural' evidence of Himself in order that we might better connect with that meaning.
Since when did revelation stop being evidence? The intervention of Yahweh in history at the Exodus certainly constituted evidence -- and very convincing evidence -- the the Hebrews who were there. Also, the evidence of the appearance of the risen Jesus to Saul constituted convincing evidence to him.
I think it's a compliment to science that even you think of "evidence" only in the context of scientific evidence. But now you are doing what the militant atheists do: saying that the only evidence is scientific evidence. But that ain't so. Science never claims it is the only way of knowing. Within its domain, science is very reliable, but science is limited.
The reason we don't have "scientific evidence" is mostly due to the limitations of science.
IOW, there may be meaning in God's design..and God has designed creation so that its existence is meaningful, but without faith no-one will recognize it as such.
Or rather, without the personal experience to convince them of the reality of God.
__________________ "If sound science appears to contradict the Bible, we may be sure that it is our interpretation of the Bible that is at fault." Christian Observer, 1832, pg. 437
"Christians should look on evolution simply as the method by which God works." Rev. James McCosh, theologian and President of Princeton, 1890
Not only that his post was way off mark and misleading. Obviously fro ma Creationist web site! 
The fact that these exist give good evidence that a symbiotic relationship would have easily come about...the Mitochondria allowed the host cell to "worry" about other things instead of energy production...
Linear Mode
