Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 02 2012,10:36)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 02 2012,10:27)|
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 02 2012,09:44)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 02 2012,09:27)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 01 2012,09:16)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 30 2012,21:32)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 30 2012,15:19)|
If I understand this correctly, according to CSI, a protein with odds of random construction of 3X10^34 is not designed.
Still waiting on this one. It's very important.
I have to revise this slightly.
Is a protein that has a CSI of 1/(2.2E66) designed or not?
Come on Jerry, I'm serious. This is important.
1) You waffle between the 10^50 and 10^150 value.
2) You say it is not designed.
Those are really the only two choices. Well, you'll probably choose not to answer, which I totally understand.
Hi Jerry. Can you answer?
I'm not positive why you haven't read (or maybe you don't comprehend, which is OK) what I have stated already on this.........Borel's UPB was the starting point, but the accepted UPB in ID is now Dembski's which is 10^-150 or 1:10^150.....that works out to 500 bits of information....
Just convert your math accordingly...is it over 500 bits? It is designed......
Is it UNDER 500 bits? Design cannot be determined.......IOW, it may or may not be designed, but I don't have the information to determine that it IS.
Ah, the old goal post shift.
We spent 4 pages arguing about the calculation of probability, now it's become bits of information.
OK, so how do you determine the bits of information in a protein? This is an interesting question, because not the following.
If you use amino acids. There's 20 amino acids that are commonly used in proteins. Therefore you need a minimum of 5 bits per amino acid. So a protein that is 100 amino acids long is designed. Unfortunately, this is manifestly untrue as scientists have put amino acids in a chamber and gotten proteins longer than 100 amino acids... just in the way you say is impossible.
However, that's beside the point. No, the point is that if you consider the DNA in which the amino acid came from, you need 2 bits for each nucleotide. So, you can have 250 nucleotides, which, when divided by 3 gives us a maximum protein length of 83 amino acids.
So which is it? Is the maximum length of a non-designed protein 83 amino acids or 100 amino acids (hint, it's neither).
As a last comment, I love the way you waffle on the last bit.
"Is it UNDER 500 bits? Design cannot be determined.......IOW, it may or may not be designed, but I don't have the information to determine that it IS."
So, you have no idea what the designer does or does not do either.
It's a good thing that no modern proteins are randomly assembled isn't it?
I'm going to start ignoring your posts unfortunately, because you simply are NOT willing to read....or you do not understand what I post....I'm not sure which.
I have ALWAYS stated that 10^150 or 500 bits is the UPB......they are mathematically the SAME THING...if you don't understand this simple math, then you are way above your level of education in this discussion and I don't mean that as a cut to you personally. It's just a fact.
If you think you are detecting waffling, then I fear I must point out that you are probably just lost.
Now, I addressed CSI in detail......we have now moved on....care to join us?
Yes, do ignore the things that show you are wrong.
That's OK. It happens all the time.
I'll just remind you that a protein that is 83 AA long is not equal to a protein that is 100 AA long.
I'm just asking a question. Which is it? Do you use the actual protein or the instructions for the protein?
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.