CeilingCat
Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007
|
Ok, which one of you has hacked gpuccio's account?
| Quote | Myoglobin has functionally remained the same. I don’t believe the modifications in the primary structure have modified substantially its 3D structure and its function. It binds iron, and oxygen.
What I am saying is that there is continuity and variation in the primary structure of different myoglobins, while the function remains the same and the fold remains the same. And the differences become greater when the “separation” between species becomes greater. That is due, IMO, to cumulative neutral mutations, while negative selection keeps the molecule inside the island of functionality which it has achieved just from the beginning.
That has nothing to do with top down or bottom up design. It is just an argument in favour of CD (it is more or less so: if neutral mutations are inherited, there must be a physical continuity in proteins through different species).
I have absolutely no doubt about the designed nature of proteins, and if it is top down or bottom up we will say according to facts: for me that remains an open argument.
Please note that I have stayed very generic, without referring to any detailed “tree of life”, but just limiting the discussion to few examples which anyone would accept as well separated in time and natural history: insects, fish, mammals, primates and humans. Are you objecting even to that elementary “sequence”? And yet, the differences in homology are stunning, and they are in full accord with the chronological sequence.
So, if you have specific and pertinent observations about these facts, I am willing to listen. Otherwise, we can well remain with our opinions. |
BA77 replies with a paste storm and in message 19, gpuccio replies with a perfectly polite, lucid and conventional explanation of how variations in myoglobin are strong evidence for common descent.
This unwelcome dose of common sense seems to shake BA77 and at first he can only reply with a two paste reply with no links.
But he soon recovers and adds a multi page paste storm with nine links, none of which answer or even acknowledge anything that gpuccio said.
I'm having to raise my opinion of gpuccio. He seems to realize that the evidence for common descent is overwhelming and has God do his designing by changing DNA in a manner we have not yet observed which just happens to give results that mimic Darwinian evolution. And he nails BA77 in ever so polite a manner.
Unfortunately, that also makes him one of those Dreaded Theistic Evolutionists. He will never be granted cafeteria privileges. In fact, he has to worry that Clive (Hi!) might convene a meeting with him and several high-ranking administrators at UD and discuss this heresy with him.
|
