Blog/October 2009/Oct 23rd - Revision history

Ron at 13:23, 30 October 2009

2009-10-30T13:23:05Z

Ron at 11:16, 23 October 2009

2009-10-23T11:16:44Z

Ron at 10:25, 23 October 2009

2009-10-23T10:25:00Z

Ron at 10:12, 23 October 2009

2009-10-23T10:12:33Z

Ron at 10:04, 23 October 2009

2009-10-23T10:04:35Z

Ron at 09:49, 23 October 2009

2009-10-23T09:49:27Z

Ron at 19:14, 22 October 2009

2009-10-22T19:14:39Z

Ron at 12:46, 22 October 2009

2009-10-22T12:46:09Z

Ron at 10:42, 21 October 2009

2009-10-21T10:42:10Z

Ron at 10:20, 21 October 2009

2009-10-21T10:20:15Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 13:23, 30 October 2009
Line 26:		Line 26:
	Shabbat shalom!<br>		Shabbat shalom!<br>

−	{{nav\|Blog\|Blog\|Blog/October 2009/Oct 16th\|Oct 16th\|\|}}	+	{{nav\|Blog\|Blog\|Blog/October 2009/Oct 16th\|Oct 16th\|Blog/October 2009/Oct 30th\|Oct 30th}}

@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 As you probably remember, Arik Sharon (the former Prime Minister of Israel) fell into a coma several years ago and is still awaiting Judgement Day.  But what would he think [http://www.jewgleperth.com/?p=19 if he woke up today]?  It would be much funnier were it not so true.  He would probably agree with this former Egyptian terrorist [http://wejew.com/media/6531/Ex-Terrorist__Concessions_Strengthen_Radicals/ that giving concessions strengthens radicals].
-In Science and Technology news: a recently published [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 report in Scientific American] reveals the results of genetic drift in 40,000 (forty thousand) generations of E. Coli -- the longest running experiment of its kind to date.  After all that, the E. Coli is still E. Coli -- although some were able to consume citrate (E. Coli cannot do that ordinarily) (see an interesting [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O discussion on that topic] from last year).
+In Science and Technology news: a recently published [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 report in Scientific American] reveals the results of genetic drift in 40,000 (forty thousand) generations of {{wiki2|Escherichia_coli|E. Coli}} -- the longest running experiment of its kind to date.  After all that, the E. Coli is still E. Coli -- although some were able to consume citrate (E. Coli cannot do that ordinarily) (see an interesting [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O discussion on that topic] from last year).
 Another interesting paper indicates that [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 ancient bacteria are virtually indistinguishable] from modern ones.  The "money quote" is: ''Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels''.  This raises a serious question for my scientific readers: where is the macro-evolution?  There should be direct evidence of it all around us, and yet we see none.  Please refer me to the appropriate scientific literature if I am wrong.
-For my non-scientific readers: "macro-evolution" refers to one species evolving into another species.  The term "species" generally refers to varieties of organisms which cannot interbreed (or do not normally interbreed).  A simple thought-experiment will illustrate one serious problem with macro-evolution.  Suppose you have a population of creatures all of one species.  One of them develops a mutation of such a type that it cannot breed with the rest of the members of the species... in effect, it has become a different species.  The problem is obvious: that species dies out after one individual.  So you need to have two such (identical or compatible) mutations in the same population at the same time (and the mutated individuals need to mate with each other).  Or you need a "two step" solution: some mutation occurs which takes the individual to a 'half-way' position where he can still breed with the host population, but down the line another mutation renders further interbreeding impossible.
+For my non-scientific readers: "macro-evolution" refers to one species evolving into another species.  The term "species" generally refers to varieties of organisms which cannot interbreed (or do not normally interbreed).  A simple thought-experiment will illustrate one serious problem with macro-evolution.  Suppose you have a population of creatures all of one species.  One of them develops a mutation of such a type that it cannot breed with the rest of the members of the species... in effect, it has become a different species.  The problem is obvious: that species dies out after one individual.  So you need to have two such (identical or compatible) mutations in the same population at the same time (and the mutated individuals need to mate with each other).  Or you need a "two step" solution: some mutation occurs which takes the individual to a 'half-way' position where he can still breed with the host population, but down the line another mutation renders further interbreeding impossible.  Of course this applies only to organisms which use sexual reproduction, unlike the lowly E. Coli.
 The serious question to my scientific readers is: given the infinitesimal probability of even one such occurrence, how can you support the notion that all the millions of species on Earth were formed by such random events?  If you can believe that premise, you must be a champion Lotto player!  40,000 generations of E. Coli remained E. Coli in this experiment.  Indeed, in 40,000 generations of humans we seem to have remained humans.  How is macro-evolution possible solely as a result of random mutation?

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 In Science and Technology news: a recently published [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 report in Scientific American] reveals the results of genetic drift in 40,000 (forty thousand) generations of E. Coli -- the longest running experiment of its kind to date.  After all that, the E. Coli is still E. Coli -- although some were able to consume citrate (E. Coli cannot do that ordinarily) (see an interesting [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O discussion on that topic] from last year).
-Another interesting paper indicates that [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 ancient bacteria are virtually indistinguishable] from modern ones.  This raises a serious question for my scientific readers: where is the macro-evolution?  There should be direct evidence of it all around us, and yet we see none.  Please refer me to the appropriate scientific literature if I am wrong.
+Another interesting paper indicates that [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 ancient bacteria are virtually indistinguishable] from modern ones.  The "money quote" is: ''Almost without exception, bacteria isolated from ancient material have proven to closely resemble modern bacteria at both morphological and molecular levels''.  This raises a serious question for my scientific readers: where is the macro-evolution?  There should be direct evidence of it all around us, and yet we see none.  Please refer me to the appropriate scientific literature if I am wrong.
 For my non-scientific readers: "macro-evolution" refers to one species evolving into another species.  The term "species" generally refers to varieties of organisms which cannot interbreed (or do not normally interbreed).  A simple thought-experiment will illustrate one serious problem with macro-evolution.  Suppose you have a population of creatures all of one species.  One of them develops a mutation of such a type that it cannot breed with the rest of the members of the species... in effect, it has become a different species.  The problem is obvious: that species dies out after one individual.  So you need to have two such (identical or compatible) mutations in the same population at the same time (and the mutated individuals need to mate with each other).  Or you need a "two step" solution: some mutation occurs which takes the individual to a 'half-way' position where he can still breed with the host population, but down the line another mutation renders further interbreeding impossible.

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:12, 23 October 2009
Line 18:		Line 18:
	Another interesting paper indicates that [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 ancient bacteria are virtually indistinguishable] from modern ones. This raises a serious question for my scientific readers: where is the macro-evolution? There should be direct evidence of it all around us, and yet we see none. Please refer me to the appropriate scientific literature if I am wrong.		Another interesting paper indicates that [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 ancient bacteria are virtually indistinguishable] from modern ones. This raises a serious question for my scientific readers: where is the macro-evolution? There should be direct evidence of it all around us, and yet we see none. Please refer me to the appropriate scientific literature if I am wrong.

−	For my non-scientific readers: "macro-evolution" refers to one species evolving into another species. The term "species" generally refers to varieties of organisms which cannot interbreed (or do not normally interbreed). a	+	For my non-scientific readers: "macro-evolution" refers to one species evolving into another species. The term "species" generally refers to varieties of organisms which cannot interbreed (or do not normally interbreed). A simple thought-experiment will illustrate one serious problem with macro-evolution. Suppose you have a population of creatures all of one species. One of them develops a mutation of such a type that it cannot breed with the rest of the members of the species... in effect, it has become a different species. The problem is obvious: that species dies out after one individual. So you need to have two such (identical or compatible) mutations in the same population at the same time (and the mutated individuals need to mate with each other). Or you need a "two step" solution: some mutation occurs which takes the individual to a 'half-way' position where he can still breed with the host population, but down the line another mutation renders further interbreeding impossible.
		+
		+	The serious question to my scientific readers is: given the infinitesimal probability of even one such occurrence, how can you support the notion that all the millions of species on Earth were formed by such random events? If you can believe that premise, you must be a champion Lotto player! 40,000 generations of E. Coli remained E. Coli in this experiment. Indeed, in 40,000 generations of humans we seem to have remained humans. How is macro-evolution possible solely as a result of random mutation?

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 Hi again!
-Thankfully, this week was very calm and peaceful... and hot.  We are eagerly awaiting any sign of the approaching fall season; but so far, nothing doing.  Tomorrow night we resume asking for rain in our prayers (here in Israel, not elsewhere), so hopefully those prayers will be responded to positively.
+Thankfully, this week was very calm and peaceful... and hot!  We are eagerly awaiting any sign of the approaching fall season; but so far, nothing doing.  Tomorrow night we resume asking for rain in our prayers (here in Israel, not elsewhere), so hopefully those prayers will be responded to positively.
 In a burst of unexpected honesty, the "Palestinian Authority" says it has [http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/133896 no evidence of Israeli 'war crimes'], though I'm sure they'll find a way to fabricate some.  In further good news, the former [http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=7536409 commander of British forces in Afghanistan] refutes the Goldstone blood libel, in the UN.
-As you probably remember, Arik Sharon (the former Prime Minister of Israel) fell into a coma and is still awaiting Judgement Day.  But what would he think [http://www.jewgleperth.com/?p=19 if he woke up today]?
+As you probably remember, Arik Sharon (the former Prime Minister of Israel) fell into a coma several years ago and is still awaiting Judgement Day.  But what would he think [http://www.jewgleperth.com/?p=19 if he woke up today]?  It would be much funnier were it not so true.  He would probably agree with this former Egyptian terrorist [http://wejew.com/media/6531/Ex-Terrorist__Concessions_Strengthen_Radicals/ that giving concessions strengthens radicals].
 Until next week,<br>

← Older revision		Revision as of 19:14, 22 October 2009
Line 11:		Line 11:
	* A [http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=7536409 righteous Gentile] refutes the blood libels in the UN		* A [http://www.unwatch.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=bdKKISNqEmG&b=1313923&ct=7536409 righteous Gentile] refutes the blood libels in the UN

		+	* What if [http://www.jewgleperth.com/?p=19 Sharon woke up today]?

	Science and Technology:		Science and Technology:

@@ Line 16: / Line 16: @@
 :* [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 modern ancient bacteria]
 :* [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O citrate problems in E Coli]
+* Former Egyptian terrorist [http://wejew.com/media/6531/Ex-Terrorist__Concessions_Strengthen_Radicals/ speaks out]
 Until next week,<br>

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:42, 21 October 2009
Line 15:		Line 15:
	* [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 40,000 generations later], E. Coli is still E. Coli.		* [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 40,000 generations later], E. Coli is still E. Coli.
	:* [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 modern ancient bacteria]		:* [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 modern ancient bacteria]
		+	:* [http://www.amazon.com/gp/blog/post/PLNK3U696N278Z93O citrate problems in E Coli]

← Older revision		Revision as of 10:20, 21 October 2009
Line 14:		Line 14:
	Science and Technology:		Science and Technology:
	* [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 40,000 generations later], E. Coli is still E. Coli.		* [http://www.scientificamerican.com/blog/post.cfm?id=evolution-details-revealed-through-2009-10-18 40,000 generations later], E. Coli is still E. Coli.
		+	:* [http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/full/19/9/1637 modern ancient bacteria]