Yes, there are. There are 6 billion humans, and they all have different genomes
Humans are 99.9% genetically the same.
Different proteins have different 3d structures, and they all still function.
Yes but there are only a certain set of functional proteins. Their 3D structure has to be exact otherwise it will not function. Yet there are many possible shapes a protein can take on that wont work. To many to say that the exact functional ones happened by chance. In fact to just make small changes to a protein from random mutation and still produce the right shape for function has been shown to be improbable.
Estimating the prevalence of protein sequences adopting functional enzyme folds.
Combined with the estimated prevalence of plausible hydropathic patterns (for any fold) and of relevant folds for particular functions, this implies the overall prevalence of sequences performing a specific function by any domain-sized fold may be as low as 1 in 10(77), adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15321723
One in 10/77 is another way of saying its impossible.
There isn't an exact correct one, as I have already demonstrated multiple times.
adding to the body of evidence that functional folds require highly extraordinary sequences.
That to me is saying that protein folds require very specific sequences.There are unlimited possible structures that a protein could become but there are only certain specific structures that can produce functional proteins.
Are you saying any shape protein can be functional. Whether is is one protein or a set of proteins they need to all be a specific structure to work. In fact creating a set of specific structures rather than just one is harder.
That is completely a completely unsupported claim. It also flies in the face of observations.
Only 20 standard amino acids are used to build proteins, but why exactly nature "chose" these particular amino acids is still a mystery.
http://www.astrobio.net/news-exclusive/mapping-amino-acids-to-understand-lifes-origins/
there are 20 types of amino acids in proteins, each with different chemical properties
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK26830/
"The new technique originated in the laboratory of George Church, a geneticist at Harvard Medical School. Two years ago, Church and his team (which included Isaacs) reported the synthesis of a strain of
Escherichia coli that had a reprogrammed genetic code
3. Instead of recognizing a particular DNA triplet known as the amber stop codon as an order to terminate protein synthesis, the recoded bacterium read the same instruction as a directive to incorporate a new kind of amino acid into its proteins."
http://www.nature.com/news/gm-microbes-created-that-can-t-escape-the-lab-1.16758
Good for them, they can artificially make new amino acids. They can also artificially create a test tube baby. It doesn't mean that it happens naturally and is meant to happen. Scientists may one day make life in a lab but that mean that life evolved. It actually proves ID because its having to take brilliant intelligent minds to design and work out how to do it in the first place. But still in nature there are only 20 that make up all proteins in different combinations. Some say that these 20 amino acids are like the laws of physics. They are a part of nature and have always been there.
The protein folds as Platonic forms: New support for the pre-Darwinian conception of evolution by natural law
However, in the case of one class of very important organic forms-the basic protein folds- advances in protein chemistry since the early 1970s have revealed that
they represent a finite set of natural forms, determined by a number of generative constructional rules, like those which govern the formation of atoms or crystals, in which functional adaptations are clearly secondary modifications of primary "givens of physics."
The folds are evidently determined by natural law, not natural selection, and are "lawful forms" in the Platonic and pre-Darwinian sense of the word, which are bound to occur everywhere in the universe where the same 20 amino acids are used for their construction.
http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=14417556
That's right, a bacterial strain that uses a different amino acid than the 20 you claim have to be used. They incorporated this feature into another bacterial species, and it requires that artificial amino acid in its diet:
Then why do these papers say that there are only 20 amino acids for all life.
"Two US teams have produced genetically modified (GM) bacteria that depend on a protein building block — an amino acid — that does not occur in nature. The bacteria thrive in the laboratory, growing robustly as long as the unnatural amino acid is included in their diet. But several experiments involving 100 billion or more cells and lasting up to 20 days did not reveal a single microbe capable of surviving in the absence of the artificial supplement."
Once again this is artificial evolution. It doesn't mean it will survive in the wild. As seen with artificial selection we can create new features. But that doesn't mean they will be viable. Quite often the artificially selected animals have a fitness loss and can get many diseases. If this extra amino acid was a natural thing then why wasn't it formed in nature. why wasn't a million other ones formed. Why is it only these 20 that make up life. Along with the fact that proteins need to be a specific structure to function it is showing how design is in nature.
There is absolutely no expectation that alien life from a different planet would use the same amino acids that life on this planet uses, or if they would use amino acids at all.
There is nothing at all to speculate about this because nothing has been proven that there is any life out there anyway let alone what type of amino acids they have. The funny thing is many scientists are saying that life came from outta space anyway because they cant explain how such a complex life could form form non life or a simpler form without having some help. Thats almost an admission that life has design anyway. One of the latest theories is that aliens have created our genomes. Because scientist are seeing that our genetics is far to complex to have evolved they are now having to come up with far fetched ideas to explain this away.
Scientists have found an Alien code in our DNA: Ancient Engineers
According to mainstream scientists: Alien code found in our DNA. Extraterrestrial beings created our species.
http://www.ancient-code.com/scientists-have-found-an-alien-code-in-our-dna-ancient-engineers/
If the combinations are different from organism to organism and species to species, then it a specific combination isn't need for life.
The genetic code is so complex that we cant comprehend what its like. But even evolutionists acknowledge that all life comes from a similar basic genetic makeup and thats what they base the tree of life on and common ancestry. It wouldn't be common if it didn't have similar basics. So though the genetics differ for each animal they still use the same basic blueprints. what makes eyes is basically similar.
But the differences are not completely alien to the way in which body structures are made through our DNA. Its just coded differently for different features. Its not as if a completely different code for life has evolved for different animals and the fact that even evolution says that all life comes from one common ancestor proves this. Of course its disputed as to whether life did stem from a common ancestor or it has the hallmarks of common design. But either way all life has a similar signature.
You can use different ratios and get different results, many of which are quite edible.
Being edible and being what would be classed as a proper cooked item are two different things. Ive eaten someone cooking that didn't turn out because I was hungry and thats OK. But this is food and we can get away with it. Still it is not a proper example of what it should be because the receipt and ingredients were not properly used. When it comes to life you cant have that same compromise. Even the smallest mistake can render life non functional and even destroy it. That is why our copying process is so good at eradicating those mistakes.There is only something like 1 mistake in 10 million in the copying process.
You can change cytochrome c by 40% and it still functions just fine and in the same way.
I am not sure what this means. Whether you are completely changing cytochrome c or it is still the same thing or does the same job but with a smaller capacity. Even so a yeast is not going to need the same % as humans. So I guess its like humans have more blood and water in their bodies than other creatures. But its still blood and water but just a lesser %. I would say that yeast still have to have the right balance of all their proteins to be functional. They cant have 39.9999% different cytochrome c to humans. It still has to be 40% which is precise for the amount that they need event tough the possibility for them to have ended up with 41% , 20%, 57% or and other % was there.
Every ape has a different genome, so there is no exact ape genome.
But all apes have to have a similar set of genetics to be made. That difference wont be great and the variations are only within a certain scale. I would say the genes to make a nose are the same but there is slight variations for the types of noses. That difference is a small variable in a very exact science.
Every human genome is different, so this is also false.
There is only about a 0.1% difference between the most distinct human genomes.
I just showed you an example of a protein that can differ by 40% at the sequence level, and it still has the same function.
It is going to be different because one is a yeast and one is a human. But its all still the same protein. Can a yeast do without this protein and thats the important thing. There is a code for life but there is still variation within that specific code. That doesn't mean that yeast have a completely different basic blue print for life. They still have to have proteins to make their features and functions. They still have to have the same amino acids, they still have to have DNA ect.
Its like comparing a motor bike and a truck. They both have to have a combustion engine, oil, gas, electrics. But their % of oil, gas ratios, electronic components, CC capacity ect will be different. But they couldn't function unless they have the oil , gas and combustion engines. Yet each has to have the exact ratios, combinations of components that suit their particular requirements. They still both are made from the same basic blueprint for engines.
