Originally posted by Elzon1
reply to post by Sinny

---

"bananas being made to peel."

In case you didn't know THAT was from humans using selective breeding and other processes to make bananas more human friendly. The supermarket banana you know of today is not anywhere close to how it started.

When you understand how evolution works you can understand how salmon, as well as other animals, develop the capability to sense the earth's magnetic field for navigational purposes.

Here is another example of an animal with the ability to sense the earth's magnetic field for navigational purposes... only it uses light instead of magnetite (interesting concept):

Bird light compass

edit on 31-7-2012 by Elzon1 because: (no reason given)

edit on 31-7-2012 by Elzon1 because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by Elzon1
Here is another example of an animal with the ability to sense the earth's magnetic field for navigational purposes... only it uses light instead of magnetite (interesting concept):

Bird light compass

But discoveries in recent years suggest that nature knows a few tricks that physicists don't: coherent quantum processes may well be ubiquitous in the natural world. Known or suspected examples range from the ability of birds to navigate using Earth's magnetic field to the inner workings of photosynthesis

A recent paper, which will surely figure centrally in the debate between evolutionists and Intelligent Design creationists, proposes a (perhaps too simple) scheme for the evolution of bacterial flagella.

Fail. I'm pretty sure I said not a story?

IC is confirmed.

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by TheJackelantern

---

OK dude, I don't want to derail the thread. If you wish to ignore experimental evidence and testimony from someone who has decades of hands on experience with the flagella over stories that's entirely your decision.

You are a funny fella.

edit on 1-8-2012 by squiz because: (no reason given)

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by TheJackelantern

---

Sigh.... WRONG!!! you presented a proposal. It even says so. There are plenty of those.

Scott A. Minnich and Stephen C. Meyer, “Genetic analysis of coordinate flagellar and type III regulatory circuits in pathogenic bacteria,” Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Design & Nature, Rhodes, Greece, edited by M.W. Collins and C.A. Brebbia (Ashurst, Southampton, United Kingdom: WIT Press, 2004).

This article underwent conference peer review to be included in the peer-edited volume of proceedings.

Another. jb.asm.org...

He shows the results of the experiments for crying out loud, and he has dozens more papers on the subject.
He's pretty much THE expert on the matter.

And just for the record his a list of peer reviewed material.
www.discovery.org...

You are extremely rude. You do realize the first person you insulted and attacked was actually presenting a case for standard evolution and not intelligent design?

Thick as... What ever happened to the ignore button?

edit on 1-8-2012 by squiz because: (no reason given)

Muller's definition of "interlocking complexity" is exactly the same as the definition of "irreducible complexity" -- a system of mutually independent parts that requires all those parts to be present for the system to work. However, Muller's claim is that this is an EXPECTED result of evolution. Behe took the same definition, and claimed it was IMPOSSIBLE as a result of evolution.

The reason for the difference is basically that Muller was using evolution; and Behe was using a weird strawman of his own devising. Behe describes evolution as working by the gradual addition of parts, one by one. Muller, however, describes evolution as working by gradual modifications of parts. Muller's description is the more accurate. New proteins don't get added to systems particularly often; the vast majority of evolution is small modifications to proteins, to alter their amino acid sequence and hence their chemistry. Behe neglects this entirely; and hence omits the vast majority of evolutionary change.

Originally posted by DarknStormy
reply to post by EnochWasRight

---

I thought thought came before the word?

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by TheJackelantern

---

Consciousness is a mystery. It has never been refered to as IC. So it is a strawman.

Originally posted by squiz
reply to post by TheJackelantern

---

Wow you even now the mystery of existance! Impressive.