Every mechanism of antibiotic resistance can be defeated ... in the same way that humans have improved plants for human use with plant breeding [i.e. human manipulated evolution] through observation, selection and testing. It is IMPOSSIBLE to stop antibiotic resistance with regulation, fear and misinformation -- but the is plenty of misinformation on antimicrobial resistance and blaming certain practices. The cure for antibiotic resistance is [accelerating] observation, selection, testing.
THE CURE FOR ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE HAS BEEN FOUND. SEE MY YOUTUBE "jlevitt7". OLIVE LEAF EXTRACT [AVAILABLE AT ANY HEALTH FOOD STORE], MEGADOSES OF VIT. C, AND CRUSHED GARLIC. USE THEM TOGETHER SYNERGESTICALLY..
what difference does it make if it is on plasmids? Its still genetic information that has been altered-ie information gain arrising from gene duplication and later alteration. Im guessing the 9 day example is in lab strains and not in nature, even so if the information/aparatus was already there it would be able to digest on the first day
@shadyamigo If the adaptation always occurs only in plasmids then it suggests that the change is not random. Note there are two enzymes involved in the catabolism of nylon. One is the product of a frame shift and 140 point mutations (47 were necessary). The other is due to one point mutation. The probability of getting 6 of 47 random mutations to allow one function in one enzyme in 30 years would be about 3x10^35. Getting it done in 9 days suggests a nonrandom, already designed process.
@alstoq thanks for the reply. Im not sure I follow your reasoning regarding plasmids, do you mean adaption just with regards to nylon digestion only occurring on plasmids, or more broadly with bacteria adaptations in general?
I'm not a stats guru so I cant see how you came to the probability you mention, does this assume that all the mutations occur simultaneously, or more piecewise? Best wishes
@shadyamigo The figures are taken from an American physicist Lee Spetner. They are based on them being piecewise. The trouble is that for evolution to work every mutation must add a benefit to the organism or they are not selected for. My understanding is that Lee has assumed that 6 of the 47 mutations actually add incremental benefit and based his calculations on that. The reality is; probably all 47 mutations needed to occur before the organism could have a benefit. Irreducible compexity
@alstoq Lee Spetner believes in evolution but does not believe it happened by chance. He believe it was already designed within the DNA or added there by a creator. Paraphrasing one of his lines "if you won the lottery twice in a row the police would be at your door asking questions".
i looked for his paper on pubmed but couldn't find it. The problem with that assumption is that it assumes that there is only one way for the bacteria to evolve the nylon digesting ability, this is not true as shown by the naturally occuring adaptation being differrent to the one that evolved with the selective pressure that you cite in the 9 day example.
@shadyamigo Lee writes on the improbability of random evolution. His reasoning is that if someone won Tattslotto 2 times running the police would be at the door suspecting foul play. The above estimation was in a personal communication to an evolutionist (you should be able to google it). Although I don't know the exact number of mutations for the 9 day example I would suspect it would not be much different. Organisms are created with the ability to adapt quickly - beyond random chance.
@alstoq I personaly dont think that is a good analogy, we dont know how many possible ways a protein could function as a nyolonase-therefore its impossible to give it a probability i.e. there maybe thousands of possible peptides that could potentially catalyze this reaction. I can see we are not going to agree on this, it was nice having the conversation. Best wishes
I am not sure I follow your argument re. penicilin resistance. The PBP no longer recognises penicilin but it is still able to do catalyze its endogenous reaction. ie it is more specific
@shadyamigo Thanks for pointing that out. The issue "re: new information" is - has the PBP developed increased sensitivity to the endogenous protein. If it has the same sensitivity to its endogenous protein (in the formation of the cell wall) then it hasn't developed an "increased" ability to do its normal job BUT it has lost an ability in binding Penicillin. While you are technically right, the increased specificity is only due to a loss of information ... not a gain of it.
@shadyamigo This is example often touted as an example of evolution. A couple of things to say. All examples of nylonase formation have happened on plasmids. It also has been shown to be a rapid change. For example one can get naive pseudomonase to produce nylonase in 9 days. This indicates an already designed apparatus within the organism that is capable of dealing with different environments in a rapid manner. This does not indicate a slow evolutionary process. More research req. !
@alstoq One bacteria making one new protein is not exactly 'rapid' evolution. Most ceationists would say it is not evolution at all and you say it is too fast. LOL
@gregrutz Thanks for you comment. Nylonase has 392 amino acids that fold to produce the perfect catalytic site for nylon. For that to happen by random chance .... is theoretically close to impossible, but even with the mathematics used by evolutionists the amount of replications required would far outweigh that achieved within 9 days .... it would requires decades. Thus, like other adaptations, creationists believe it is either achieved through loss of information or due to inbuilt design.
@alstoq The bacteria evolved into a different species that could digest nylon, that is evolution that happened. It must be ''mathamaticlly possible'' if it did happen, and it did..
@gregrutz Thanks. It is clear from your comment that you have not studied biology (species comment). Have you had any training in statistics so I can respond to your comment in an appropriate manner? For example do you understand the following statement; if you won Tattslotto two times running then the police would be at your door as it is more likely there is foul play involved rather then you winning by random chance.
@gregrutz What has been observed? Your contention is that nylonase occured due to evolution - that is the increase of complex information for a specific function. My video demonstrates that new functions can occur as a degradation of information (which is not evolution). The other possibility is that there is an inbuilt designed system within pseudomonas that allows it to adapt rapidly; ie: it is not due to random mutation and selection. This is more likely then rapid evolution....
@alstoq What has been observed? A new species of bacteria that can digest Nylon. Evolution has been observed and you still say it is statistically impossible. Evloution was accepted 150 years ago, get over it.
@gregrutz Thank you for interest in my video. I can see that you are not even acknowledging my arguments - just completely ignoring them. I hope that one day you will come to know the truth.
@gregrutz The reason I ask about your background in statistics.... is to see if you have any chance in understanding the complete improbability of nylonase forming due to evolution (the increase of complex information due to random mutation and selection).
Every mechanism of antibiotic resistance can be defeated ... in the same way that humans have improved plants for human use with plant breeding [i.e. human manipulated evolution] through observation, selection and testing. It is IMPOSSIBLE to stop antibiotic resistance with regulation, fear and misinformation -- but the is plenty of misinformation on antimicrobial resistance and blaming certain practices. The cure for antibiotic resistance is [accelerating] observation, selection, testing.
Bruns9959 4 months ago
THE CURE FOR ANTIBIOTIC RESISTANCE HAS BEEN FOUND. SEE MY YOUTUBE "jlevitt7". OLIVE LEAF EXTRACT [AVAILABLE AT ANY HEALTH FOOD STORE], MEGADOSES OF VIT. C, AND CRUSHED GARLIC. USE THEM TOGETHER SYNERGESTICALLY..
jlevitt7 4 months ago
what difference does it make if it is on plasmids? Its still genetic information that has been altered-ie information gain arrising from gene duplication and later alteration. Im guessing the 9 day example is in lab strains and not in nature, even so if the information/aparatus was already there it would be able to digest on the first day
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo If the adaptation always occurs only in plasmids then it suggests that the change is not random. Note there are two enzymes involved in the catabolism of nylon. One is the product of a frame shift and 140 point mutations (47 were necessary). The other is due to one point mutation. The probability of getting 6 of 47 random mutations to allow one function in one enzyme in 30 years would be about 3x10^35. Getting it done in 9 days suggests a nonrandom, already designed process.
alstoq 11 months ago
@alstoq thanks for the reply. Im not sure I follow your reasoning regarding plasmids, do you mean adaption just with regards to nylon digestion only occurring on plasmids, or more broadly with bacteria adaptations in general?
I'm not a stats guru so I cant see how you came to the probability you mention, does this assume that all the mutations occur simultaneously, or more piecewise? Best wishes
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo The figures are taken from an American physicist Lee Spetner. They are based on them being piecewise. The trouble is that for evolution to work every mutation must add a benefit to the organism or they are not selected for. My understanding is that Lee has assumed that 6 of the 47 mutations actually add incremental benefit and based his calculations on that. The reality is; probably all 47 mutations needed to occur before the organism could have a benefit. Irreducible compexity
alstoq 11 months ago
@alstoq Lee Spetner believes in evolution but does not believe it happened by chance. He believe it was already designed within the DNA or added there by a creator. Paraphrasing one of his lines "if you won the lottery twice in a row the police would be at your door asking questions".
alstoq 11 months ago
i looked for his paper on pubmed but couldn't find it. The problem with that assumption is that it assumes that there is only one way for the bacteria to evolve the nylon digesting ability, this is not true as shown by the naturally occuring adaptation being differrent to the one that evolved with the selective pressure that you cite in the 9 day example.
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo Lee writes on the improbability of random evolution. His reasoning is that if someone won Tattslotto 2 times running the police would be at the door suspecting foul play. The above estimation was in a personal communication to an evolutionist (you should be able to google it). Although I don't know the exact number of mutations for the 9 day example I would suspect it would not be much different. Organisms are created with the ability to adapt quickly - beyond random chance.
alstoq 11 months ago
@alstoq I personaly dont think that is a good analogy, we dont know how many possible ways a protein could function as a nyolonase-therefore its impossible to give it a probability i.e. there maybe thousands of possible peptides that could potentially catalyze this reaction. I can see we are not going to agree on this, it was nice having the conversation. Best wishes
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo It has been a pleasure. Thank you.
alstoq 11 months ago
I am not sure I follow your argument re. penicilin resistance. The PBP no longer recognises penicilin but it is still able to do catalyze its endogenous reaction. ie it is more specific
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo Thanks for pointing that out. The issue "re: new information" is - has the PBP developed increased sensitivity to the endogenous protein. If it has the same sensitivity to its endogenous protein (in the formation of the cell wall) then it hasn't developed an "increased" ability to do its normal job BUT it has lost an ability in binding Penicillin. While you are technically right, the increased specificity is only due to a loss of information ... not a gain of it.
alstoq 11 months ago
@alstoq On a slightly related note, I would be interested in your thoughts on the presence of nylonase enzymes which have developed in some bacteria
shadyamigo 11 months ago
@shadyamigo This is example often touted as an example of evolution. A couple of things to say. All examples of nylonase formation have happened on plasmids. It also has been shown to be a rapid change. For example one can get naive pseudomonase to produce nylonase in 9 days. This indicates an already designed apparatus within the organism that is capable of dealing with different environments in a rapid manner. This does not indicate a slow evolutionary process. More research req. !
alstoq 11 months ago
@alstoq One bacteria making one new protein is not exactly 'rapid' evolution. Most ceationists would say it is not evolution at all and you say it is too fast. LOL
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz Thanks for you comment. Nylonase has 392 amino acids that fold to produce the perfect catalytic site for nylon. For that to happen by random chance .... is theoretically close to impossible, but even with the mathematics used by evolutionists the amount of replications required would far outweigh that achieved within 9 days .... it would requires decades. Thus, like other adaptations, creationists believe it is either achieved through loss of information or due to inbuilt design.
alstoq 5 months ago
@alstoq The bacteria evolved into a different species that could digest nylon, that is evolution that happened. It must be ''mathamaticlly possible'' if it did happen, and it did..
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz Thanks. It is clear from your comment that you have not studied biology (species comment). Have you had any training in statistics so I can respond to your comment in an appropriate manner? For example do you understand the following statement; if you won Tattslotto two times running then the police would be at your door as it is more likely there is foul play involved rather then you winning by random chance.
alstoq 5 months ago
@alstoq what random chance. Did Darwin write ''Origin of Species by random chance''?
You can't say something is mathamaticly impossible when it has already been obserbed.
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz What has been observed? Your contention is that nylonase occured due to evolution - that is the increase of complex information for a specific function. My video demonstrates that new functions can occur as a degradation of information (which is not evolution). The other possibility is that there is an inbuilt designed system within pseudomonas that allows it to adapt rapidly; ie: it is not due to random mutation and selection. This is more likely then rapid evolution....
alstoq 5 months ago
@alstoq What has been observed? A new species of bacteria that can digest Nylon. Evolution has been observed and you still say it is statistically impossible. Evloution was accepted 150 years ago, get over it.
gregrutz 5 months ago
@gregrutz Thank you for interest in my video. I can see that you are not even acknowledging my arguments - just completely ignoring them. I hope that one day you will come to know the truth.
alstoq 5 months ago
@gregrutz The reason I ask about your background in statistics.... is to see if you have any chance in understanding the complete improbability of nylonase forming due to evolution (the increase of complex information due to random mutation and selection).
alstoq 5 months ago
@alstoq I know enough about statistics that if something happens the chance that it happened is 100%
gregrutz 5 months ago