Posts by hooberus

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

The talkorigins article uses the phrase “possible functional cytochrome c protein sequences.”, in an article on “functional” redundancy.

”functional” being the key word in both.

“functional” does not necessarily refer to just ‘optimal’, but would also include any others that would ‘work’.

Thus, even the sourced talkorigins article shows that Yockey was referring to “functional” not ‘optimal’ for the calculated figure.

On the previous page Cofty wrote:

”The number of sequences that will produce something 'good enough' is orders of magnitude greater than the - astonishingly massive - number of sequences that result in the optimum version.”

I haven’t seen any separate calculations for “optimum versions”.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

In response to my point that “The calculations by Yockey were not just for optimum sequences but for all possible functional sequences.” Cofty replied:

No it wasn't. You can't even understand the creationist arguments AGAINST the science. How on earth are you going to understand the hard stuff?
Please provide a specific reference and quotation with context

On the bottom of page 16 of this thread and on the top of page 17 it was pointed out by another evolutionist here, and Cofty, that talkorigins was a source used. (Or that it was a source used by a source used).

The talkorigins article on “protein functional redundancy” cites Yockey’s 1992

“Importantly, Hubert Yockey has done a careful study in which he calculated that there are a minimum of 2.3 x 1093 possible functional cytochrome c protein sequences, based on these genetic mutational analyses (Hampsey et al. 1986; Hampsey et al. 1988; Yockey 1992, Ch. 6, p. 254). For perspective, the number 1093 is about one billion times larger than the number of atoms in the visible universe.”

Note the words “possible functional cytochrome c protein sequences”

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Cofty claims:

”Comparison of Cytochrome C sequences PRECISELY confirms the evolutionary history of all species, from humans to yeast, EXACTLY as predicted by pre-existing models.”

Yeast, insect, a fish, a bird, and a mammal all have approximately the same number of Cytochrome C differences relative to a bacteria.

Is there a pre-existing evolutionary predicting this?

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

This is a distraction from the topic but let's get it out the way.

If naturalistic processes cannot likely produce something like Cytochrome C, then they cannot produce any pattern of sequences of it either.

The number of sequences that will produce something 'good enough' is orders of magnitude greater than the - astonishingly massive - number of sequences that result in the optimum version.

It arrives at its final form as a result of natural selection that favours any small improvement. After that, any future changes will be selected for if and only if they don't negatively affect the efficiency of its function.

The calculations by Yockey were not just for optimum sequences but for all possible functional sequences.

So unless you have another source demonstrating better odds the evolutionist problem is still there.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Cofty claims:

”Comparison of Cytochrome C sequences PRECISELY confirms the evolutionary history of all species, from humans to yeast, EXACTLY as predicted by pre-existing models.”

Yeast, insect, a fish, a bird, and a mammal all have approximately the same number of Cytochrome C differences relative to a bacteria.

Is there a pre-existing evolutionary publication predicting this?

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Let’s not forget that Cofty has the burden of proof here (though he tries to shift it).

Furthermore he has not shown that naturalistic processes can even overcome the hurdle of likely obtaining even a single Cytochrome C molecule. See my post on page 24 of this thread.

Probability Problem

For those who wanted sources:
What Cofty said:
"The number of possible amino acid sequences that would result in a functional Cytochrome C protein molecule has been calculated to be a billion times larger than all the atoms in the known universe."
The source:
Yockey, H. P. (1992) Information Theory and Molecular Biology. New York, Cambridge University Press.

The number of different possible functional versions of cyctochrome c sequences calculted by Yockey is staggering (2.3 x 10 ^93 ).

However, Yockeys calculations also show that when compared to the number of random possible sequences of the same length as cyctochrome c (110 amino acid length = 1.15 x 10^137 possible sequences) that functional cyctochrome c sequences are exceedingly rare.

The odds of obtaining even one of these by chance is 2.0 x 10 -44

Has any evolutionist demonstrated enough likely trials and time available on the Earth to likely obtain one functional cytochrome c sequence?

If naturalistic processes cannot reasonably generate Cytochrome C, then they cannot generate a pattern of it.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Do you understand the gulf between prokaryotes and eukaryotes? I have explained the evolutionary link between the two on a previous thread. The topic of this one is ubiquitous proteins in eukaryotes.

Where does it say specifically in the O.P. that this thread is only about eukaryotes?

Nowhere.

Instead, we read the phrases:

”Some proteins are so vital to life that they are shared by every living thing.These are coded by bits of genetic code that are called ubiquitous genes. An example of such a gene is Cytochrome C . . .”

“If all living things evolved from a common ancestor then we can make a prediction about the differences between the Cytochrome C protein in different species.”

Now you object that the thread is not necessarily about every living thing. - And the fact that bacteria are living things with Cytochrome C is somehow ‘off the table’ —since they aren’t eukaryotes!

What a poster you are!

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Cofty, I also would like to remind you that you started this thread not merely claiming ‘evidence for evolution,’ but instead that “Evolution is a Fact” and that Cytochrome C sequence data proves this.

Therefore, the burden of proof rests upon you.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Bacteria don't have mitochondria!
We are talking about comparison between cytochrome C amino acid and nucleotide sequences in eukaryotes not eukaryotes and prokaryotes..

Bacteria don’t have mitochondria? So what? Who said that they did?

They are living things and have Cytochrome C. That makes them revelant here.

On another thread you wrote: “Every living thing descended from a common ancestor over millions of years. This is the central fact that the theory of evolution explains.”

Obviously that includes bacteria. So they are relevant to this discussion.

As a matter of fact evolutionists claim (or have anyway) that everything else descended from bacteria (that includes eukaryotes).

Your whole ‘objection’ here is illustrative that you are the type of poster that tries to ‘challenge’ everything.

291

Evolution is a Fact #1 - Protein Functional Redundancy

by cofty in

i intend for this to be one of a series of bite-sized ops on the evidence for evolution.. introduction to dna genes are sequences of dna made up of words (codons) each of which are three letters (bases) long.

there are only four letters in the genetic alphabet (acg&t) each word or codon is the recipe for one amino acid.

there are 20 different amino acids in living organisms.

hooberus

Yeast, insect, a fish, a bird, and a mammal all have approximately the same number of Cytochrome C differences relative to a bacteria. Is there a pre-existing evolutionary publication predicting this?

You claim:

”Comparison of Cytochrome C sequences PRECISELY confirms the evolutionary history of all species, from humans to yeast, EXACTLY as predicted by pre-existing models.”