1 edit
The two video's I recommended above are not by evangelical or creationist organizations (as far as I know) They are merely informative from the secular science community. I chose them only for their educational content.
They were two purely science lectures for people to absorb, and stop and think about the mechanisms at work there in the transcription of DNA.
Just absorb and contemplate for a bit.
They were chosen purely for their informational content.
13 edits
@sonship saidTo those who watched this great video on transcription of DNA so that a ribosome can read the mRNA to build a chain of amino acids for protein to be manufactured as needed.
Transcription and Translation - Protein Synthesis From DNA - Biology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wAwLwJAGHs&ab_channel=TheOrganicChemistryTutor
Transcription and Translation - Protein Synthesis From DNA - Biology
&ab_channel=TheOrganicChemistryTutor
I would like you now to use your imagination.
Just use your imagination and get back to me with what you imagine could have been the case.
1.) How many years (hundreds, thousands or millions) do you imagine it took for natural selection to arrive and freeze in place as a successful method the process of initiation as a sub-process of transcription ?
2.) After initiation had been established, how many more years (hundreds, thousands, or millions) do you imagine it took for elongation to be arrived at and frozen in place so that now it successfully followed initiation as a second step in the overall process of transcription?
3.) How many more years (hundreds, thousands, millions) do you imagine that after that natural selection then selected out and froze in place the sub-process of termination following initiation and elongation had been established?
What I hope to garner from your imaginative guestimates is the total evolutionary time from start to finish in the evolving from proto initiation through development of elongation through to conclusive and successful termination in this process transcription.
Three sub-processes together developed over a time accumulated roughly how many years?
Thanks
1 edit
@sonship saidDo you see what I mean guys?
To those who watched this great video on transcription of DNA so that a ribosome can read the mRNA to build a chain of amino acids for protein to be manufactured as needed.
Transcription and Translation - Protein Synthesis From DNA - Biology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wAwLwJAGHs&ab_channel=TheOrganicChemistryTutor
I would like you now to use your imagi ...[text shortened]... Three sub-processes together developed over a time accumulated roughly how many years?
Thanks
Any good material on transcription is good to examine this process.
I recommend with others Ask Prof. Dave too.
@sonship saidWhy do you think time (a human construct) is an issue in the great vastness of space?
To those who watched this great video on transcription of DNA so that a ribosome can read the mRNA to build a chain of amino acids for protein to be manufactured as needed.
Transcription and Translation - Protein Synthesis From DNA - Biology
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wAwLwJAGHs&ab_channel=TheOrganicChemistryTutor
I would like you now to use your imagi ...[text shortened]... Three sub-processes together developed over a time accumulated roughly how many years?
Thanks
@sonship saidNatural selection relates to evolution, not origin.
Can Pre-Biotic Natural Selection Explain the Origin of Life?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDiLQbfH4CM
The process of origin remains something not fully understood. This doesn't mean however we should abandon logic and attribute everything to a divine being.
2 edits
Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.
Give CREDIT to your SOURCES dude !!
You know that was not original.
You on some kind of ego trip, wanting everyone to think you're so original and
smart. Credit your SOURCE and don't sneakily pass this off to us as your OWN
research. Credit where you learned this sentence and from who you lifted this
utterance.
( How's it feel ? )
@sonship saidHappy to confirm that every word was entirely my own.
@Ghost-of-a-Duke
Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.
Give CREDIT to your SOURCES dude !!
You know that was not original.
You on some kind of ego trip, wanting everyone to think you're so original and
smart. Credit your SOURCE and don't sneakily pass this off to us as your OWN
research. Credit where you learned this sentence and from who you lifted this
utterance.
( How's it feel ? )
Clearly, you are impressed by my words, 'Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.' Did they reach you?
1 edit
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNope. I won't accept you being influenced by someone, using your own words with your own study.
Happy to confirm that every word was entirely my own.
Clearly, you are impressed by my words, 'Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.' Did they reach you?
Credit your sources just like you insist I do when I write.
'Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.'
You're not allowed to speak that without giving source reference.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You do it to me. I can do it to you.
Again, Idiocy is posting 3 consecutive posts in a single minute comprising of 55 lines of text and claiming it was original and not an unsourced copy and paste.
@sonship saidNatural selection relates to evolution, not origin. This is based on 'my' understanding of how evolution works. I was not quoting anybody. This is not the same as you copy and pasting wads of material by Witness Lee and passing it off as your own.
Nope. I won't accept you being influenced by someone, using your own words with your own study.
Credit your sources just like you insist I do when I write.
'Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.'
You're not allowed to speak that without giving source reference.
What's good for the goose is good for the gander.
You d ...[text shortened]... ising of 55 lines of text and claiming it was original and not an unsourced copy and paste. [/quote]
This is clearly evidenced by your posting 55 lines of text in a single minute and claiming it was original and not copied. (Humanly impossible).
@sonship saidPlease show where any other human being has said those words. Why not follow my example and post original thoughts?
@Ghost-of-a-DukeNatural selection relates to evolution, not origin.
HARDLY ORIGINAL.
Source please.
No ego tripping, passing off thoughts as your own and original.
Evolution relates to how we developed as a species. It's not about origin/creation, and doesn't require a quote by Darwin.