When is an ounce greater than a ton?

[PsychoSarah]

The answer is when you have the right math. Now evolutionists tell us that evolution is a process that can be used to find the right math. Perhaps they would like to explain to us just how this all works. This has to do with algorithms and proteins. Just how does evolution build a protein that can get the job done?

What is even the nonsense about math for? Evolution doesn't contribute anything to math, though math can be used to describe evolution in certain models.

As for how proteins are influenced by evolution, proteins that are both useful to a cell and not may be produced, but those with the best proteins for living in their environment are more liable to reproduce successfully, thus those genes which produce the most useful proteins will persist while those which produce the most harmful will die out. Genetic mutation can influence protein structure, impacting its function and usefulness.

 

[joshua 1 9]

What is even the nonsense about math for?

This is a reference to Fred Hoyle's book: "Mathematics of Evolution" where he shows through the use of highly complex mathematical formulae that Neo Darwinism is not possible.

 

[bhsmte]

This is like a Twilight Zone thread.

 

[joshua 1 9]

This is like a Twilight Zone thread.

I understand the program is close to an hour long. I do not think that is a waste of time at all. So far no one wants to take the time to watch the program so we can have a discussion.

The Origami Revolution — NOVA | PBS

space missions. Aired February 15, 2017 on PBS


Program Description
The centuries-old tradition of folding two-dimensional paper into three-dimensional shapes is inspiring a scientific revolution. The rules of folding are at the heart of many natural phenomena, from how leaves blossom to how beetles fly. But now, engineers and designers are applying its principles to reshape the world around us—and even within us, designing new drugs, micro-robots, and future space missions. With this burgeoning field of origami-inspired-design, the question is: can the mathematics of origami be boiled down to one elegant algorithm—a fail-proof guidebook to make any object out of a flat surface, just by folding? And if so, what would that mean for the future of design? Explore the high-tech future of this age-old art as NOVA unfolds “The Origami Revolution.”

 

[joshua 1 9]

This is an example of how Dr Yamanoi's work can be applied to Evolution Theory.

NEW LESSON: The Galapagos Origami Bird - Its DNA Connection:
This new lesson is based on Westerling's Origami Birds, and the research by Dr. Yamanoi. Students experience how the random mutations they produce can result in random variations, from which environmental factors allow certain variations to survive and reject others. Emphasis is on the random events and their interaction with selective pressures in the environment, showing that the birds do NOT adapt (or develop adaptations) in order to fly longer distances, or because they need to adapt. Those are Lamarckian teleological inferences that are not supported by scientific study.

Lesson: evolution mini-lesson:Origami Birds

 

[Ophiolite]

Most science documentaries have a single clear message, supported by up to half a dozen points of evidence or observation. All are typically repeated throughout the documentary.

Since you have viewed it, Joshua, you should be able to write down those points in a few minutes and save members many hours in total. Your summaries will likely sufficiently intrigue several members to watch the documentary in full.

May we shortly expect you to help yourself make your point by providing such a summary? If not, why not?

 

[joshua 1 9]

Most science documentaries have a single clear message, supported by up to half a dozen points of evidence or observation. All are typically repeated throughout the documentary.

Since you have viewed it, Joshua, you should be able to write down those points in a few minutes and save members many hours in total. Your summaries will likely sufficiently intrigue several members to watch the documentary in full.

May we shortly expect you to help yourself make your point by providing such a summary? If not, why not?

It is not that simple. The subject is much more complicated than that. I am simply not here to spoon feed people that are to lazy to feed themselves. People need to learn how to do their own research and not depend on others to do that for them. Everyone needs to pull their own weight.

 

[Ophiolite]

It is not that simple. The subject is much more complicated than that. I am simply not here to spoon feed people that are to lazy to feed themselves. People need to learn how to do their own research and not depend on others to do that for them. Everyone needs to pull their own weight.

So, just to confirm, you are asserting that this documentary is unlike any of the many other hundreds of documentaries produced in the last couple of decades and cannot be summarised in a handful of points? That is your clear, irrevocable assertion? Yes?

You are making claims. Guess what! Most readers have little or no interest in your claims. It therefore behoves you to summarise the research you have done, in a clear and concise manner.

Any laziness would be on your part for failing to take the steps to interest readers in your argument and to make it in a convincing manner.

So, are you interested in members engaging with your ideas, or do you just want to waffle?

 

[joshua 1 9]

So, just to confirm, you are asserting that this documentary is unlike any of the many other hundreds of documentaries produced in the last couple of decades and cannot be summarised in a handful of points? That is your clear, irrevocable assertion? Yes?

Close but no banana. A lot has happened in the last 10 years. This show could be a contender for the number one spot. There are between 10 & 12 points made in this program. There are layers of meaning and this program is a way to understand those different layers.

First of all they are developing a contender for the big bang theory. They are saying that the evidence could support that the universe unfolds as it expands. This could explain why there are 10 or 12 layers to string theory.

They talk about a protein that can heal people of aids. Not only aids but all virus and the common cold. So this program talks about DNA and the area of study for DNA where the research is the greatest.

This program talks about how a leaf on a tree grows. Again they talk about an unfolding process as the leaf expands and grows and gets bigger. This is based on the science of the ancient art of Origami. The art of folding a two dimensional paper into three dimensional art.

Aristotle: “The whole is greater than the sum of its parts.” We are clearly dealing with the sum of its parts. So according to Aristotle that is not greater then the whole.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Any laziness would be on your part

Yep your right I am too lazy to do your homework for you when there is nothing in it for me. God rewards us when we serve Him. That is why we serve God and not man. Jesus showed us how we are to live. His life was an example for us to follow. He went about preaching, teaching and healing the sick. That is what we are to do. The greatest healing of all is for people to be reconciled with their Creator.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

This is a reference to Fred Hoyle's book: "Mathematics of Evolution" where he shows through the use of highly complex mathematical formulae that Neo Darwinism is not possible.

Fred Hoyle was wrong about the 'steady state' universe too. But he was rather more justified in his belief in the 'steady state' universe than in the impossibility of Neo Darwinian evolution, because he was an astronomer and cosmologist, not an evolutionary geneticist.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

This is an example of how Dr Yamanoi's work can be applied to Evolution Theory.

NEW LESSON: The Galapagos Origami Bird - Its DNA Connection:
This new lesson is based on Westerling's Origami Birds, and the research by Dr. Yamanoi. Students experience how the random mutations they produce can result in random variations, from which environmental factors allow certain variations to survive and reject others. Emphasis is on the random events and their interaction with selective pressures in the environment, showing that the birds do NOT adapt (or develop adaptations) in order to fly longer distances, or because they need to adapt. Those are Lamarckian teleological inferences that are not supported by scientific study.

Yes, this is a pretty standard statement of the basics of evolution; so what?

If you're saying you now see how it works and you've come round to accepting it, congratulations!

E.T.A. re-reading that statement, to say the birds don't adapt because 'they need to adapt' could be confusing, because strong selection pressures can be said to produce an existential need to adapt, and the adaptations selected will be the ones needed to survive the selection pressures; the causality may be indirect, but the effect is the same.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Guess what! Most readers have little or no interest in your claims.

I agree man's opinions are not worth much. That is why we seek to know and understand the Divine thoughts of God and we seek to have the Mind of Christ.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Fred Hoyle was wrong about the 'steady state' universe too. But he was rather more justified in his belief in the 'steady state' universe than in the impossibility of Neo Darwinian evolution, because he was an astronomer and cosmologist, not an evolutionary geneticist.

Yet he was able to crunch the numbers and determined the mathematical impossibility of evolutionary theory. In our example of the folding of proteins. There are many many proteins, very few of them are able to get the job done of forming a chemical bond with a virus to render that virus inactive.

Your the expert so perhaps you can explain how natural selection is used to find the protein that is able to bond to the virus to cure people of aids. (Or even artificial selection if we are talking about a man made protein)

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

It is not that simple. The subject is much more complicated than that. I am simply not here to spoon feed people that are to lazy to feed themselves. People need to learn how to do their own research and not depend on others to do that for them. Everyone needs to pull their own weight.

So you're saying that we shouldn't depend on you to explain what your thread is about - you can make some unintelligible claims about a video, and we should find out for ourselves what you're talking about; and if we're not inclined to, its we who are not pulling our weight, not you... have I got that right?

 

[bhsmte]

I agree man's opinions are not worth much. That is why we seek to know and understand the Divine thoughts of God and we seek to have the Mind of Christ.

Well, you keep seeking what suits you. In regards to justifying what you post on these boards, you fall woefully short.

 

[joshua 1 9]

If you're saying you now see how it works and you've come round to accepting it, congratulations!

I accept evolutionary theory in context. You try to take it out of context to try to explain things that it does not explain. They say everyone believes in micro evolution. The problem is with what they call macro evolution.

 

[joshua 1 9]

Well, you keep seeking what suits you. In regards to justifying what you post on these boards, you fall woefully short.

I am here to learn. In this thread I am here to have a conversation about a recent Nova program on TV. Sense we are on a evolution board then we need to talk about the impact of the science of the ancient art of Origami on the science of evolutionary theory. We know that Nova is a LOT more reliable when it comes to science then a pay to play like the discovery station that does not maintain the standard that public TV maintains.

 

[bhsmte]

I accept evolutionary theory in context. You try to take it out of context to try to explain things that it does not explain. They say everyone believes in micro evolution. The problem is with what they call macro evolution.

The theory of evolution is clearly stated. You either agree with what the theory states or you dont. You have stated before; "we all know parts of the theory are wrong". You have also stated, you agree with francis collins take on evolution and he supports the theory strongly. So, which is the accurate statement, because they contradict each other.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

In our example of the folding of proteins. There are many many proteins, very few of them are able to get the job done of forming a chemical bond with a virus to render that virus inactive.

Yes, protein activity can be very specific - so?

Your the expert so perhaps you can explain how natural selection is used to find the protein that is able to bond to the virus to cure people of aids. (Or even artificial selection if we are talking about a man made protein)

I'm not an expert, but I know enough to know your question doesn't make sense. Natural selection is what happens in nature - the clue is in the name.

E.T.A. Incidentally, the NOVA video you linked isn't available in my region 'due to right restrictions'.