“After hundreds of millions of years many homologous proteins retain structure but not sequence identity. Therefore, finding homologues for the last two may require solving protein structures as some already have.
All of the steps shown here each involve the modification of only one protein.
For simplicity I have spared their names and their homologues names.”
This is the part that I find most fascinating. Why detail, structure, modification and THEN “SIMPLICITY” I think names and especially the homologues names would be important. I’m just saying
no.. those are easily findable.. This was designed to be a simple explanation. Irreducible complexity is a bogus obfuscatory concept. Nothing supports it and as per usual it is a “hot button” used by the evangelical and the fanatical to prevent people from actually thinking. There is nothing biological that cannot be tracked back or forwards by evolutionary theory. Saying that complexity is a proof of a deity is both a poor argument and intellectual cowardice.
TippiLashell Said,
December 2, 2008 @ 4:46 pm
“After hundreds of millions of years many homologous proteins retain structure but not sequence identity. Therefore, finding homologues for the last two may require solving protein structures as some already have.
All of the steps shown here each involve the modification of only one protein.
For simplicity I have spared their names and their homologues names.”
This is the part that I find most fascinating. Why detail, structure, modification and THEN “SIMPLICITY” I think names and especially the homologues names would be important. I’m just saying
Chimp Said,
December 2, 2008 @ 11:32 pm
no.. those are easily findable.. This was designed to be a simple explanation. Irreducible complexity is a bogus obfuscatory concept. Nothing supports it and as per usual it is a “hot button” used by the evangelical and the fanatical to prevent people from actually thinking. There is nothing biological that cannot be tracked back or forwards by evolutionary theory. Saying that complexity is a proof of a deity is both a poor argument and intellectual cowardice.
Chimp Said,
December 3, 2008 @ 10:36 am
sorry that sounded angry… didn’t mean it to be