This thread is closed

Neuroscience at Kings!!

irisng

Yeh organisms binding together - sounds so simple. But think of a protein - haemoglobin alone is complicated enough! The exact bonding to the exact orientation to the exact position and element - binds together with another such precise molecule - and now think in millions. All that together - and all in the same place at the right time - wouldn't do for one correct molecule to be present without another - now think how many of those exact molecules we need to be all together in the right place. Think the active site - simple thing like optical isomers means the enzyme and substrate will not react, a slight change in shape will render the enzyme inactive. Such precision! No way - it can't be simple chance.

Besides evolution doesn't work - we're all made of D-alanine, aren't we? Bacteria is made of the other kind - don't remember what it's called now. The optical isomer of alanine anyway. And there is no way of making a pure sample of one - there will always be 50% of the other optical isomer present it will always be impure if you tried making it. So how can men possibly evolve from a single cell at the very beginning? The optical isomers don't match - yet humans are pure D-alanine - not a mixture. Lol I learnt this from Chemistry :biggrin:

Tbh altruism just goes to show that men are not just a clump of genes and science does not explain all. Science is very useful, mind you - but it's not everything.

I think that supporting this argument with the example from bacteria is flawed. Merely because bacteria is prokaryotic and we are eukaryotic. Can't say I know too much about this. But anyway, D-Alanine must has proved that it is the better material to be used in eukaryotes, else it would not have survived the evolutionary process. Perhaps I am just trying to rationalise the most complex animal behavior - human behavior - with examples and observations from less complex lifeforms. Evolution does work. There has been overwhelming evidence supporting this theory.

Reply 21

khil

15

soonalvin

I think that supporting this argument with the example from bacteria is flawed. Merely because bacteria is prokaryotic and we are eukaryotic. Can't say I know too much about this. But anyway, D-Alanine must has proved that it is the better material to be used in eukaryotes, else it would not have survived the evolutionary process. Perhaps I am just trying to rationalise the most complex animal behavior - human behavior - with examples and observations from less complex lifeforms. Evolution does work. There has been overwhelming evidence supporting this theory.

Like I've said - there's no way you can make a pure sample. Wouldn't you try to replicate the protein for use? - as you do that the first time round, a mixture of the 2 optical isomers would be produced. You use this to make the next lot it's still gonna be a mixture. I don't know the details behind this argument but I did hear it from a Chem teacher I very much respect and I gotta say I trust him on this one. The point is - there is no way of making a pure sample of one without the other isomer. So how did the pure sample come about?

I don't see what you mean by my argument being flawed merely due to the difference between eukaryotes and prokaryotes. There is no reason why D-Alanine should be used though - everyone knows microbes survive rather well!!

Evolution is far fetched anyway - the chances of everything coming together in one place to make something so complex are minimal. That doesn't look to me like the most obvious answer, which is what a scientist should accept - they accept the most obvious answer. The only reason why they don't bring God into the equation and propose evolution is cus science tries to explain and understand everything and talking God isn't scientific. It doesn't mean it's the wrong answer though, does it? If you look at any complex thing like a watch or a computer you don't think it just fell out of the sky, all the components and it all just assembled this way by chance, do you? So why is a human cell or a whole mammal any different? Why must there be no creator behind it all?

Everyone say there's overwhelming evidence supporting evolution but no one has as yet given me any evidence other than saying there is evidence.