1. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    01 Aug '21 03:353 edits
    @sonship said
    Transcription and Translation: From DNA to Protein

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bKIpDtJdK8Q&ab_channel=ProfessorDaveExplains
    The depths to which confirmation bias will make a fundamentalist stoop.

    YouTube
  2. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    01 Aug '21 13:491 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.
  3. Joined
    28 Oct '05
    Moves
    34587
    01 Aug '21 14:17
    @sonship said
    They were chosen purely for their informational content.
    You are beyond parody, sonship.
  4. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    01 Aug '21 16:5413 edits
    @sonship said
    Transcription and Translation - Protein Synthesis From DNA - Biology

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8wAwLwJAGHs&ab_channel=TheOrganicChemistryTutor
    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
    YouTube&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
  5. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    02 Aug '21 13:401 edit
    @sonship said
    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
    Do you see what I mean guys?

    Any good material on transcription is good to examine this process.
    I recommend with others Ask Prof. Dave too.
  6. The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28603
    10 Aug '21 15:26
    @sonship said
    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
    Why do you think time (a human construct) is an issue in the great vastness of space?
  7. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    25 Aug '21 12:50
    Can Pre-Biotic Natural Selection Explain the Origin of Life?

    YouTube
  8. The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28603
    31 Aug '21 16:43
    @sonship said
    Can Pre-Biotic Natural Selection Explain the Origin of Life?

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDiLQbfH4CM
    Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.

    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.
  9. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    31 Aug '21 17:322 edits
    @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 ? )
  10. The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28603
    31 Aug '21 18:48
    @sonship said
    @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 ? )
    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?
  11. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    01 Sep '21 08:081 edit
    @Ghost-of-a-Duke
    'Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.'

    Credit your sources.
  12. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    01 Sep '21 08:141 edit
    @ghost-of-a-duke said
    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?
    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 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.
  13. The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28603
    01 Sep '21 13:30
    @sonship said
    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]
    Natural 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.

    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).
  14. R
    Standard memberRemoved
    Joined
    03 Jan '13
    Moves
    13080
    01 Sep '21 13:41
    @Ghost-of-a-Duke
    Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.


    HARDLY ORIGINAL.

    Source please.
    No ego tripping, passing off thoughts as your own and original.
  15. The Ghost Chamber
    Joined
    14 Mar '15
    Moves
    28603
    01 Sep '21 14:09
    @sonship said
    @Ghost-of-a-Duke
    Natural selection relates to evolution, not origin.


    HARDLY ORIGINAL.

    Source please.
    No ego tripping, passing off thoughts as your own and original.
    Please show where any other human being has said those words. Why not follow my example and post original thoughts?


    Evolution relates to how we developed as a species. It's not about origin/creation, and doesn't require a quote by Darwin.
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree