Joined: Oct. 2009
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 02 2012,12:50)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 02 2012,11:26)|
|Quote (Jerry Don Bauer @ Dec. 02 2012,11:01)|
|Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 02 2012,10:53)|
|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?
Gee...really? I had NO IDEA that "a protein that is 83 AA long is not equal to a protein that is 100 AA long." :0 :)
And I guess I use the instructions unless I'm eating the protein.......New proteins do come with an owner's manual like a new vacume cleaner does, don't they??
Why can't you just answer the question...
what method do you use? Do you use the actual protein or the instructions for the protein in the DNA?
But you are right about one thing. We've already established that the entire concept of CSI as promoted by you and other IDists is fundamentally flawed (in no fewer than three ways), so right now, I'm just seeing how far you will go to avoid answering a question.
If you don't even understand what method I'm using, how do you know it's wrong....lol....:)
Because there are three fundamental flaws, which you (nor anyone other ID proponent has EVER addressed).
1) false dichotomy (designed or random)
2) assuming even distribution of amino acids, chiral molecules, and binding affinity
3) assuming that all modern proteins are developed from random collections of amino acids, instead of being build from a template that has undergone 3.5 billion years of evolution.
But like I said, I'm really just seeing how long you'll go without answering the actual question. 4 posts and counting.
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.