Joined: Sep. 2006
|Quote (afdave @ Dec. 21 2006,11:36)|
|Mike PSS ... |
Mike-- As I told Improvius, I don't care how you label the test. But I determine it with my eyeballs in the same way that you do. This test would not work if the object was questionable. We would need something more rigorous. But it works great for stuff like arrowheads and pottery ... and many biological machines!
Let's say I find a rock with a sharp edge. How can I qualitatively determine whether this rock is a designed tool or just a sharp rock?
I know how to quantitatively determine this but you state in your point 1) that we determine archeological design qualitatively.
So where in this figure does it work? And where DOESN"T it work. Be specific because that is what your trying to do... identify machines.
I guess we can look at the mitochondria like this...
But where do we store all the waste?
However, to put this in perspective we can't compare to a power plant since the chemical process for energy in a mitochondria is this...
So what "machine" is this process comparable to?
Maybe Alberts was using an ANALOGY instead of absolutely stating that all the cell functions were machines.