Dr. Stephen Meyer: What is the key thing to be explained in origin of life research

[MichTR88]

It's funny that people bash someone like Meyer on YouTube....your telling me you are more informed than the guy that works on this stuff first hand? It's rediculous to say he's wrong because u went on some website that said so...

[schruter47]

"Ph.D. in the History and Philosophy of Science, and M.Phil. in the History and Philosophy of Science, University of Cambridge, England; B.S. in Physics/Earth Science (double major program), Minor in Philosophy, Whitworth College."- That's Stephen Meyer's résumé.. I think he might know what he's talking about...

[TheLizardPeople]

Too bad Meyer the liar left out so many different cells. An entire CLASS of cells, Prokariotes, have no nucleus! Viruses often have no nucleus, no organelles, and no DNA, HIV being an excellent example. Meyer is an incompetent poseur, typical of the frauds making up the Disco Institute "Fellows". Believe these people at your peril: they are nothing more than dogmaholics who worship the bible.

[chersharni]

just watched Illustra Medias clip of their new doco -Metamophisis.Looks awesome.

[DannyBoy443]

Beautiful structure?? It's fucking twisted ladder. How is that in any way beautiful?

[WoundedNoMore]

Biologists must constantly keep in mind that what they see was not designed, but rather evolved.”

Francis Crick - Crick, Francis (1998). Cited in William Dembski, Science and Design, First Things 86 (Online), October, 21-27.

Amazing, this guy Crick, states a biologists must "Constantly" make an effort when looking at biology to refuse to see obvious design, "constantly." Constantly because that is all they do see, and yet they must refuse it as clear evidence of intelligent deisgn.

[fbergman30]

@popecoyote1st - and you should go talk to someone about your feelings before you hurt yourself, or someone else for that matter.

[fbergman30]

@popecoyote1st There is no such thing as transitional forms. Things have just been created similarly by design. The fossilized remains of different breeds of poodles ranging from big to small may appear to have evolved from a small dog to a big dog, but in reality they are just different species. If you think that all of life is happening for no reason, or that we evolved from slime billions of years ago in a universe completely hostile to us, there is something mentally wrong with you.

[fididle]

@fbergman30 Uh...fossil record?

[fbergman30]

@ScienceIsKnowledge When has evolution ever been observed ? I am going for my masters in biology and have researched the subject tirelessly and I have never came across anything even remotely showing a documented case of evolution. Don't give me the, "swine flu" example as that was the product of hybridization. Give me an example of random beneficial mutation resulting in a species becoming a new species.

[fbergman30]

@ScienceIsKnowledge It's amazing how the degenerate Darwinist incompetents always give those quick reassuring replies like, "Evolution IS and HAS been observed" without ever giving any evidence. They have really mastered the art of appearing to be right. I sometimes ponder what would happen if they could no longer cover up their lies or oppress evidence to the contrary ? Perhaps then we would see them for the weirdo's they are. All Darwinist seem off like junkie's or the mentally handicapped.

[IloveYOUviruses]

The signature clearly was created all at once, the central dogma, the robustness of DNA and uniqueness of DNA points only to that direction, Doesn't matter if someone wants to deny it with "naturalistic" imaginations, the most obvious conclusion is that information was created.

[FiverBeyond]

I'm not sure why Intelligent Design advocates do not accept Dr. Szostak's experimentation in this area. Dr. Szostak has clearly and repeatedly shown that self-replicating, information-holding RNA strands can and do form naturally. Isn't this the "natural formation of information" that Intelligent Design proponents have been looking for?

[BrightonContrarian10]

"Ratings have been disabled for this video" tells you all you need to know. When your areguments are so weak they can't stand up to Youtube you have a problem

[popecoyote1st]

Ichthyostega, Acanthostega, Panderichthyes,Tiktaalik are all transitional fossils from fish to amphibian and discussed in the book. Transitional fossils are not "missing links" which is a straw man as one species doesn't give rise to another in a single generation but over time. The four I've mentioned are not necessarily all part of the same "line" but represent modifications in that direction - part of a breeding population with some different adaptations. We have actual fossils to study.

[pdblouin33]

Summary of the video for anyone who doesn't want to waste 3.5 minutes of their time - 80% high school biology, to make the stupid rednecks this is supposed to convinced feel smart, then 20% left in which he basically says "God dun it" - he really says something about "the best explanation" and he's looking for a supernatural one.

[TheTruthless666]

@pdblouin33 I think this video worth the 3.5 minutes. Maybe God did not dun it but it certainly was not evolution. That is worst than crap.

[popecoyote1st]

Interesting concept - promote science by disabling ratings and posting only favorable comments. Where have we seen this tactic before? The rhythm of the rain is "like a code" if you want it to be.

[hugenex2000]

@popecoyote1st - And yet somehow your comment made it through. Hmmm...

but it is not clear how thumbs up or down on YouTube either helps or hinders science. How many thumbs do you need for science Pop E. Coyote?

[popecoyote1st]

@hugenex2000 - apparently more than two if you work for the D.I. In the years they've been in operation, no new science has been published. We have gotten criticism of evidence based science, "wedges", suggestions, and defections from court testimony. They are supported by Fox News and religious home schoolers, but very little of the scientific community. Intelligent Design is a reasonable hypothesis - just show the evidence for it rather than just "gee whiz - it's complex!"

[hugenex2000]

@popecoyote1st - Looks to me like the Galileo affair all over again. Refuse to publish any of their work and then criticize them for not being published.

[popecoyote1st]

@hugenex2000 - where the Church and it's apologists tried to prevent evidence from science to challenge their ideas? Exactly. I.D. = creationism with "sciency" words. If you mean that science is excluding I.D. because it challenges evolution, you have been watching too much Ben Stein. But you need some research with evidence and results to put ideas out there. D.I. doesn't have it. Again, I would be interested in seeing some real work.

[TheTruthless666]

@popecoyote1st I hope you told the evolutionists the same comment you are making here. They need to produce some research and evidence to support the theory. Evolution is mathematically flawed.

[popecoyote1st]

@TheTruthless666 - evolution has made predictions that have been found to be accurate - transitional forms, common genetic code, change over long periods of time, molecular clock vs fossils, etc. Read Neil Shubin's book "Your Inner Fish" to see how real science works - looking at evidence, making predictions, following those predictions to discovery, another transitional form in the fossil record. I.D. and creationism merely assert from authority. The math is for abiogenesis, not evolution.

[TheTruthless666]

@popecoyote1st - Abiogenesis is the study of how life on Earth could have arisen from inanimate matter. How one living organism undergo genetic changes randomly to produce a functional protein is the theory of evolution. You need to know your definitions before commenting. I suppose you are willing to believe anything you are told. No one has found any transitional forms. It is a hoax.

[popecoyote1st]

@TheTruthless666 - the math you were referring to concerns abiogensis, not evolution. What you describe as "the theory of evolution" is genetic mutation, which we know does occur. In fact, most people agree evolution from mutation DOES occur but some refer to it as "microevolution", but don't accept "macroevolution". Many transitional forms have been found between groups of organisms showing the eventual change. You need to read a little before asserting fact as hoax. I look at all the data

[popecoyote1st]

@TheTruthless666 - Seriously, read Shubin's book. It discusses several transitional forms between fish and amphibians and the evidence behind it. This is just one example but it is very well done and very well documented. What predictions have been made with Intelligent Design that have been shown to be as accurate? How has it advanced science? At the bottom of it, you insert another "something that comes from nothing", regardless of what "cause" triggered I.D.

[TheTruthless666]

@popecoyote1st This sounds like SciFi. Nothing triggers I.D. WOW. Could you kindly name one of these non-hoax transitional forms? Shubin's book discuss several of them .Right. It should not be hard to name one. Right.

[popecoyote1st]

@TheTruthless666 - I.D. IS Sci-Fi. God or aliens or interdimensional beings come to Earth to create life - but no one answers - where did THEY come from? Why don't you list for me three things about I.D. that you feel explain the evidence found in the fossil records, radiometric dating and molecular biology better than evolution, other than goddidit and it's complex. Again, how has I.D. advanced science or the discussion in general? Like the D.I., you condemn rather than enlighten.

[TheTruthless666]

@popecoyote1st Easy. The fossil records show no transitional forms. Even evolutionist Prof. Stephen Gould agree with that. Yet you a novice disagrees. Microbiology shows the cell is not simple but beyond any human invention and contains intelligent digital codes. I suppose you believe human inventions (simple relative to the cell) can spontaneously appear given enough time. The fact that we exist and beings lower that us exist does not rule out being higher than us existing. Think man. Think.

[popecoyote1st]

@TheTruthless666 - "Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists—whether through design or stupidity, I do not know—as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups." SJG I'm no novice. Again, where did the Designer come from?? You need to read AND think. On your own.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@TheTruthless666 "The fossil records show no transitional forms". What an absurdly wrong and ignorant comment. Thats a lie. Transitional forms litter the fossil record. Next time u come to a fight, bring your gloves and mouth guard next time. DNA is understood as code. That does not mean it was designed. Humans see code in DNA , not DNA showing humans code. Same can be said about the origin of the universe. Its all relative baby. Think about it....

[TheTruthless666]

@ScienceIsKnowledge It is surprising that you are aware of transitional fossil littering the fossil records while the great paleontologist and evolutionary biologist Professor Stephen Gould could not find them?

It seem as if there is an inverse mathematical relationship between finding transitional forms and intelligence.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@TheTruthless666

Well the Professor needs to open his eyes then.

Evolutionary process goes beyond 1's and 0's, my creationist friend.

You will never convince me that 0 + 0 = 1. Even if Albert Einstein himself, told me the answer was 0.

Evolution IS and HAS been observed. If you continue to refute this fundamental law of nature, you might as well be saying apples also fall upwards.

I think life arose on the back of a comet. But hey, we are all entitled to our "beliefs" now aren't we :)

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge it's funny you say we are all entitled to our beliefs, but it seems like by your comments on here that we are only entitled to your beliefs. Now what do you really believe, that we are all entitled to our own beliefs because if you really believe that, why do you call us fucking idiots, morons and cunts?

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

There is a big difference between a scientific fact and a "belief".

You not being able to understand that is not surprising. Your ignorance shines brighter it with every reply. How desperate you people have become to be heard. I do not assert that evolution is a fundamental force of nature, I know it. Now, you are entitled to speculate the unknown, but the moment you begin to deny what is already known, people like me will be here to call out your bullshit.

Be educated, or abused.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge educated like you? No thank you, even most scientists don't agree with you.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge In order for something to be a science fact it must follow certain rules, the scientific method of observation, hypothesis, testing and demonstration, evolution has never been tested or shown to exist in any way sahpe or form in any living thing or in any remains (fossils) found in the earth and no scientist has ever been able to observe, test or demonstrate anything that corroborates the theory of evolution.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

"Nylonase" "the peppered moth"

Google those phases and get yourself an argument before you spout your ID bullshit.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

Where is your reply telling me that "evolutionary indoctrination" makes nylonese, peppered moths, viruses, every other sentient being for that matter??

You really are just a blow hard. A mouthpiece for your agenda.

Science is my agenda. There are plenty of "blow hard's" on my side that have been tearing you people new assholes since you began this "anti-Darwin" bullshit. Darwin was the man who nailed God into his coffin, deal with it.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge you are an idiot who only knows how to get your point across by insulting others. I guess you don't realize that not everyone has to agree with your point of view. What a sad and colorless world this would be if everyone in it was exactly alike and thought exactly alike and acted exactly alike. Who would you find to insult then?

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

You deny evolution, you deserve to be insulted, based on a high form of ignorance.

Instead of having a sook, get a valid argument and back up your bullshit assertions or I have nothing to say, bye.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge sorry bub, but evolution has never been proved, as far as the peppered moth goes, maybe you should do a little research on the peppered moth. there is not one ounce of evidence for evolution which is kind of funny don't you think after all these thousands of years you think there would be some evidence. Even Einstein said that the more he studied the Cosmos the more he came to believe an intelligence created everything.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

"evolution has never been proved, as far as the peppered moth goes"

LOL. You fucking idiot. Evidence for the evolution if the peppered moth is well documented.

(wiki/Peppered_moth) - It even has illustrations for morons like you who refuse to accept the facts.

You wonder why people abuse you ignorant cunts...

By the way, Einstein was a Deist, so his opinion on natural selection is irrelevant.

Evolution's the argument here, or are you "shifting the goal posts" again?

Pwn'd. Again.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Heres a little science lesson for you moron, the peppered moth did not evolve into anything, it is the same moth, around the iddle of the 19th century a new form of the moth began to appear, it's color was darker, the dark colored from is known as carbonaria, while the light colored moth is known as typica. the dark colored moth came into being during the industrial revolution when a lot of coal was being used and burned.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge cont...and recently because of the burning of cleaner fuels and clean air laws the dark moth has declined dramatically and biologists suggest that the dark colored peppered moth will be all but extinct within a few decades, why should the dark moth have appeared so suddenly in industrial areas and then decline sharply when levels of pollution declined? the biologists answer to this is obvious. In areas were pollution darkened the landscape, the dark moths were camouflaged

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge cont....and because the dark moths were camouflaged there were less likely to be eaten by birds and under less polluted conditios the light colored moths prevailed for similiar reasons, the moth is exactly the same one darker and one lighter but the same moth. I get a tan on my skin every year during the summer but I'm the same person that tan doesn't mean I've evolved into something else. Black people are black and white people white but they are both human.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge and yes Einstein was a deist, but that meant he believed in a higher power that created everything, the more he studied science the more he believed in this higher power, he didn't practice religion , but he had a healthy respect for God. and if you could stop with calling people fucking idiots and cunts you might get people to listen to you more.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge cont... and if the best you can come up with is the peppered moth to prove evolution after all these millions of years to look for information on evolution, I think you have just been check mated.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

Counter arguments.

Now your just being a troll, fuck off.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Well I have made my point sir, because when you can't come up with information to refute what I have said, you and people like you always come back with some answer like yours "Now your just being a troll, fuck off" Well sorry but that answer does not get you off the hook, I need more of your scientific information, after all don't you believe science is knowledge, havn't you said that many times over? I guess you only believe that when people are agreeing with you.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

done.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Check Mate.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

Nylonase, Lake Malawi Cichlids, Californian Salamanders, Australian Taipan...i have a thousand more examples. Your checkmate is denied. Your "king" fell after your first comment.

I still haven't got a counter argument from you. What was that, exactly?

"prove evolution after all these millions of years to look for information on evolution"

That sentence is barely coherent, let alone an argument against evolution.

You are are an ignorant, uneducated moron. Good day "sir"

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge As far as nylonase goes when the mechanism was observed it turned out to be an adaption by protein replacement. If it was a random mutation then we would have seen a mutation in the genes instead the gene simply produced two different proteins which indicates a purposeful adaptation and not something random, a Plasmid is responsible and thats not random mutation, its a system not a random process. If I can find this info, why can't you?

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

WRONG.

Source please....

Make it something legit and peer reviewed, not some ID website.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge didn't you tell me to educate myself and check out wiki, how about you doing that. just google or bing nylonase and read everything that it brings up. Have fun finding the truth.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

"Purposeful adaptation" - Did you just make that up or what?

Many creationists, such as yourself, seem to think evolution is a matter of chance, which is surprising, since the word "selection" is quite obvious in the words "Natural Selection." Organisms are not the product of chance, but selection, with the best genetic traits surviving and being passed on, while the useless ones died out.  Why you morons keep playing the "random" card is beyond me...

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Oh now you are saying that evolution has it's own intelligence and designs itself? you evolutionists ignore evidence which discredit your claims so that you can continue to believe that random genetic mutation is the supreme creator. I read something somewhere that said to believe in evolution is as irrational as looking at a twelve cylinder engine with all it's parts working in unison and claiming the engine designed itself over a period of time.

[angelgal707]

@ScienceIsKnowledge cont--- So therefore evolution is not a science based on the definition of science, evolution falls entirely into the realm of a faith based system of belief. Evolution can not be proven like the law of gravity, it's only a belief not a science fact. Anyone can believe anything they want but that doesn't make it true. In fact common sense goes against evolution, go out in your backyard and blow up a few hand granades and see how much order that creates, won't happen.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@angelgal707

Are you about to tell me that evolution has never been observed in the lab?

Go on, i dare you....

[5tonyvvvv]

@ScienceIsKnowledge You have been Indoctrinated like most people, The information needed for one protein to form is absurd, read up on homochirality.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@5tonyvvvv

A counter argument would be a great starter.

If you are going spout an opinion, it's cute and all, albeit, dishonest and wrong.

lacking any shred of the evidence that's needed to begin to think ID has any sort of scientific validity....

Judging by your replies to people here, you have an agenda and I see right through your

"god did it" bias FACT: Evolution is a "closed case".

It would be like re-releasing OJ Simpson, only to jail him again, based on the same evidence.

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@TheTruthless666

Evolution is beyond you because you can not understand it through the veil of faithful bias you continue to uphold.

If i said Aliens from a distant Galaxy created life on earth, you couldn't prove me wrong could you. If you can, you are now an atheist.

[TheTruthless666]

@ScienceIsKnowledge  Does SciencelsKnowledge means Science LESS Knowledge?

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@TheTruthless666

Yeah, uh...

A typical Creationist reply..

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@hugenex2000

Who gives a fuck, you a still a fucking moron who is trying to promote a lie.

[hugenex2000]

@ScienceIsKnowledge Such language is unnecessary among educated civil people but rather is employed by bullies who coerce their point by intimidation. A couple of questions for you; Are you capable of composing a coherent sentence, the kind with proper punctuation and verbs? If so, then why didn't you post one? Are you drunk? If you have convincing evidence then why do you resort to insults instead of explaining the evidence? Science is Knowledge, so why are you acting like a jackass?

[ScienceIsKnowledge]

@hugenex2000

Ok, grammar Nazi.

Name one thing I have said that was misleading or untrue....

ZERO. Stay on the subject, sparky.

I insult ignorant people with facts.

[hugenex2000]

@ScienceIsKnowledge

Everything you have said is untrue, misleading and/or irrelevant. You insult people because your 'facts' don't add up so intimidation and insult is your only recourse. The catastrophic failure of the Evolutionary Synthesis by comparative genomics is already published. Those who refuse to admit that the Theory of Evolution is dead are forced to lie about the evidence such as I show in my video "Dawkins Caught Lying for Darwin" and also on my blog, NewCreationist.blogspot.com

[PrometheusWithLight]

watch?v=U6QYDdgP9eg

Booya.

[benthemiester]

I hear his book is doing well and I'm glad more people are starting to notice that the emperors of Neo Darwinism are wearing no clothes, and if they are, there worn and tattered and one hundred & fifty years out of date.

[twentyinchsoul]

@benthemiesterW

Where did you "hear" that?

A little example for the other claim would surely be beneficial.

[benthemiester]

@twentyinchsoul It made the list of "Top Ten Best Selling Science Books of 2009" at Amazon.com. It is no big secret that the modern synthesis, or whats referred to as Neo Darwinism is on its last legs. Many criticized the Dissent from Darwin list that was signed by hundreds of scientist but now even the hard core evo devos are proposing a new extended synthesis based on epigenetic models. The modern synth is outdated. Check my vid "Will the real theory of evolution Please Stand Up"

[angelgal707]

@benthemiester great reply, I could not have said it better.

[benthemiester]

@angelgal707 Someone giving me a positive comment. Thats pretty rare. lol

[DiscoveryInstitute]

Today only you can win a copy of Signature in the Cell at anyluckyday-dot-com, just go there and post a comment to enter to win.

[KyazuTheInsane]

@DiscoveryInstitute

Does it teach us how to illegally file false DMCAs through the power of god?

[popecoyote1st]

@KyazuTheInsane - the light of day bothers a lot of insecure and dishonest people.