It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Evidence for entropy in virus genome

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 01:56 AM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Entropy can lead to order as well.



ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Researchers trying to herd tiny particles into useful ordered formations have found an unlikely ally: entropy, a tendency generally described as "disorder."

Computer simulations by University of Michigan scientists and engineers show that the property can nudge particles to form organized structures. By analyzing the shapes of the particles beforehand, they can even predict what kinds of structures will form.


Source


At the nanoscale the entropy can be fluctuated by fluctuating the energy into the system no different than shaping Iron at the microscale influencing the crystalline structure to the way you want it. Once your structure is made and you are no longer adding excess energy it degrades over time, but you did influence it's final configuration by controlling the energy in the system.




posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 08:07 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Why is it that you can't even stick to your own topic? You started talking about viruses, then went to the argument that man didn't come from ape despite BEING AN APE, then changed to primordial soup, then changed to the tireless Cambrien explosion argument. What exactly is your point? Do you actually have a case to present? You still haven't even explained why a virus from 30,000 years ago having more genes than viruses today is a problem for evolution. Instead of beating around the bush and addressing this main point, you keep making invalid points that have nothing to do with evolution and backtracking out of your arguments. Please make your case instead of going off on unrelated tangents and blatantly misunderstanding entropy and the role it plays in a system that constantly gains energy.
edit on 10-9-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   

originally posted by: Barcs
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Why is it that you can't even stick to your own topic? You started talking about viruses, then went to the argument that man didn't come from ape despite BEING AN APE, then changed to primordial soup, then changed to the tireless Cambrien explosion argument. What exactly is your point? Do you actually have a case to present? You still haven't even explained why a virus from 30,000 years ago having more genes than viruses today is a problem for evolution. Instead of beating around the bush and addressing this main point, you keep making invalid points that have nothing to do with evolution and backtracking out of your arguments. Please make your case instead of going off on unrelated tangents and blatantly misunderstanding entropy and the role it plays in a system that constantly gains energy.


That is where the derailers steered it, since they had nothing to offer on the evidence of viruses in the past having a much larger genome than all live viruses today. Just the usuals blindly bowing at the alter of the man made religion of Darwinism.

Viruses go through generations faster than multi cellular life so the entropy from around 30,000 years even at 10 to the 2 power calculations of generational progression puts them at a comparison of a few million years of "evolution" compared to us, and 10 to the 2 power is conservative.
edit on 10-9-2015 by TinfoilTP because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 08:38 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Learn first then come back.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Learn first then come back.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


I learned on page one of that thread, the devoted turned their brains off and gave the thread piles of stars before one tidbit of data was offered.

No thanks, been there done that, nothing to learn there.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

And that is why we all dismiss you.
You are unwilling to learn or even look at the evidence. You have shown time and time again that you don't have any grasp of what evolution is.
Again I ask you why does evolution destroy your religious views? because it is obvious that as a sheep you are so far gone and brainwashed into your brand of religion no amount of evidence can exist for you to change your mind.
Ignorance personified you are.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 09:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

What is an evolutionist?



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 09:04 AM
link   
Here we go Tinsheep.
Answer this question here.

www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 11:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: TinfoilTP

And that is why we all dismiss you.
You are unwilling to learn or even look at the evidence. You have shown time and time again that you don't have any grasp of what evolution is.
Again I ask you why does evolution destroy your religious views? because it is obvious that as a sheep you are so far gone and brainwashed into your brand of religion no amount of evidence can exist for you to change your mind.
Ignorance personified you are.



I deny no real demonstrable evidence. All evidence fits into Creation just fine, no need for Darwin's man made evolution system with it's sole purpose to exclude a creator before they even had a fossil record. What they classify as evolution is nothing more than built in adaptation potential that was always there.

Example, Chickens adapted from bird Dinos? So what, the potential was there in the original creation to adapt to changing environments over time. No need to create a chicken when a bird Dino could turn into one after eons, that is some awesome potential the Creator accounted for, and we know it by looking into the genetic code of todays chickens.

There is a huge portion of our genetic makup we have no clue what it codes for. Maybe we have the potential to turn into living rotting corpses to survive nuclear holocaust and come out of it a million years later ok. Darwin followers would call that evolution absent a Creator, but the potential was there in the genes all along and they are full of hooey.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
this thread is a waste of time. you cannot MAKE anyone accept a fact. you cannot MAKE anyone understand why it is a fact. you cannot MAKE anyone grasp even the straightest, shortest line between points A and B. we have literally hundreds of threads on this topic - everyone who understands it, understands it. everyone else has made a deliberate effort to avoid understanding it and wont cease that effort simply because another username insists.

same old song and dance, my friends.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 12:02 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

Precisely.

edit on 10-9-2015 by boozo because: We'll see to it if he's right or wrong.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 12:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP
That is where the derailers steered it, since they had nothing to offer on the evidence of viruses in the past having a much larger genome than all live viruses today. Just the usuals blindly bowing at the alter of the man made religion of Darwinism.


The "Derailers" pointed out obvious flaws in your understanding of evolution that debunk your idea that a genome cannot get smaller.


the entropy from around 30,000 years even at 10 to the 2 power calculations of generational progression puts them at a comparison of a few million years of "evolution" compared to us, and 10 to the 2 power is conservative.


Source please. 10 to 2nd power is 100, FYI. I don't see what calculation you are making here or where you got your numbers. Please cite your source with the math broken down.

You guys just champion the word "entropy" as it is one of the latest creationist buzzwords. It doesn't mean anything you think it does.


edit on 10-9-2015 by Barcs because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 12:54 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Proved my point again.
Again go to this thread and learn.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The evidence is in there...If you can not see it (I suspect understanding is the problem) you are willfully ignoring the evidence.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 01:03 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Hey, so when are you going to let me know what an evolutionist is?



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 01:28 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

You're trying really hard to sound like you know what you're talking about. The fact still remains that entropy can lead to order. Our solar system and life on Earth is proof of that. Evolution doesn't care how many genes a species has, your argument is invalid and doesn't disprove evolution anymore than a ham sandwich does.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 01:54 PM
link   
a reply to: TinfoilTP

You talk about the Cambrian explosion and the lack of pre-Cambrian fossil evidence... have you ever considered that those pre-cambrian animals were soft-bodied hence had not shells or bones to fossilize?





originally posted by: MisterlondonI'm more concerned this has now been discovered and actually taken from the safety of the siberian frost..


Don't fret: Pithovirus sicbericum can only kill amoebas!!



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 05:51 PM
link   
I think tinfoil is just trying to make a point that all the life on Earth could of been seeded by a higher consiousness.

It's much more likely than all this complexity arising from nothing. Life takes ingredients in matter and multiplies based on it.

But for anyone who does gardening or tries growing mushrooms or coral knows very well that life thrives in PERFECT CONDITIONS.

A lot of these perfect conditions are extremely rare to ocure by themselves. Such as something as simple has having fish in a tank. If there is no air pump, Most fish will die. Temperture variables.

Even starting off with bacteria and micro-organisms that can generate a atmosphere from carbon or iron to begin with.

Micro-organisms are one thing. But to have our planet start off with complex organisms such as evidence of these super viruses that millions of years ago. The Enviroment itself was supercharged.

It might even be possible that for such a thing to happen for the ratio of oxygen to be so high there would have to be more land mass. More land mass means less water.

So if there was less water during the time of the dinosaurs. How did all this exass water arrive on our tiny green dot orbiting our small star?

The chances of all these changes happening without outside intervention is pretty damn low.

Mars has a higher chance of being Teraformed by humans, opposed to mars trying to develop life similar to earth and a habitable atmosphere is almost impossible.

Factor in an advanced intelligence such as humans. And suddenly, Mars actually has a chance of becoming green.

What's to say that such a thing hasn't been done to Earth? And if it did happen. Whose to say the beings that did this to begin with havn't left?

Creationism and evolutionism are not seperate when it comes to live because all traces of life come from evolution and all traces of evolution come from creation.

In a Universe that is infinit and eternal. That means there is 100% probability that life smarter than us humans exist. And if they can figure out how to travel galaxies. Then their species can acheive immortal status. Where they would be so old, we would be using numbers like googleplex 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000
Ect. to describe such timelessness.

If something like that stopped by to make us. That's about as close as we will get to having an all powerful creator.

Speaking in literal terms.



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 06:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

Interestingly, these ancient viruses are more complex genetic specimens than their modern counterparts.

Mollivirus sibericum contains more than 500 genes, which pales in comparison to the 2,500 genes belonging to a family of giant virus discovered in 2003. The modern flu – Influenza A – only has eight genes


Source

So a couple of ancient viruses recently discovered in the permafrost of Siberia show that their gene counts are many orders of magnitude higher than modern viruses infecting us today.

To take a quote from
Medical Microbiology. 4th edition., in order to establish the consensus on the gene count range of todays viruses,


Viruses are simple entities, lacking an energy-generating system and having very limited biosynthetic capabilities. The smallest viruses have only a few genes; the largest viruses have as many as 200.


Source

These are not from millions of years ago but the age of the permafrost, like 30,000 years approx.

So we can conclude the complexity of viruses at that time were more than today.

Since evolution goes from the simple to the complex, this contradicts the model.

Evolutionists start wringing your hands and wiping off those beads of sweat on your brows, and come up with some comical malarkey to dismiss this embarrassment.


Where do you see anything about entropy in this article??? And what's your definition of entropy? Is this another martini moment?



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 06:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: boymonkey74
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Learn first then come back.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


I learned on page one of that thread, the devoted turned their brains off and gave the thread piles of stars before one tidbit of data was offered.

No thanks, been there done that, nothing to learn there.


Well I guess that says everything we need to know about your brain. You must be joking about data. Open up any one of the links. Don't see any data? Please make an appointment with an ophthalmologist asap. Then go next door to the psychiatrist. There's a two-for-one discount on I think.

BTW, where's your data??




edit on 10-9-2015 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2015 @ 06:50 PM
link   

originally posted by: TinfoilTP

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: TinfoilTP

Entropy can lead to order as well.



ANN ARBOR, Mich.—Researchers trying to herd tiny particles into useful ordered formations have found an unlikely ally: entropy, a tendency generally described as "disorder."

Computer simulations by University of Michigan scientists and engineers show that the property can nudge particles to form organized structures. By analyzing the shapes of the particles beforehand, they can even predict what kinds of structures will form.


Source


At the nanoscale the entropy can be fluctuated by fluctuating the energy into the system no different than shaping Iron at the microscale influencing the crystalline structure to the way you want it. Once your structure is made and you are no longer adding excess energy it degrades over time, but you did influence it's final configuration by controlling the energy in the system.



Can you please cite a system whose entropy "fluctuates by fluctuating the energy". This is new physics to me. I might take this over to the Science board and get an opinion over there.

edit on 10-9-2015 by Phantom423 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join