Comments on: Tool Kit Genes http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/ An independent blog about intelligent design Tue, 02 Dec 2008 02:51:33 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.3 By: Bilbo http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-127042 Bilbo Wed, 25 Jul 2007 14:09:25 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-127042 Yeah, I know Carroll doesn't like ID. The question is whether the discovery of toolkits can be used in understanding how ID may have happened, as you are exploring. I think there <em>may</em> be a difference of opinion between you and Behe on this. Though maybe not. Behe still leaves open the possibility that the designer somehow frontloaded the universe for life. So frontloading the first cells seems somewhat less daunting. I think the difference between you and Behe may focus on the role of randomness. Yeah, I know Carroll doesn't like ID. The question is whether the discovery of toolkits can be used in understanding how ID may have happened, as you are exploring. I think there may be a difference of opinion between you and Behe on this. Though maybe not. Behe still leaves open the possibility that the designer somehow frontloaded the universe for life. So frontloading the first cells seems somewhat less daunting. I think the difference between you and Behe may focus on the role of randomness.

]]> By: MikeGene http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126876 MikeGene Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:22:04 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126876 Hi Bilbo, Carroll's book is good, but it seems to run out of steam in the last few chapters. The very last chapter has a short section on ID and Carroll takes a swipe at it (and Behe), but it's really pretty lame. In fact, he quotes someone who seriously misrepresents Behe. Hi Bilbo,

Carroll's book is good, but it seems to run out of steam in the last few chapters. The very last chapter has a short section on ID and Carroll takes a swipe at it (and Behe), but it's really pretty lame. In fact, he quotes someone who seriously misrepresents Behe.

]]> By: MikeGene http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126872 MikeGene Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:17:53 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126872 Thanks, Dane. Thanks, Dane.

]]> By: Dane Parker http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126863 Dane Parker Wed, 25 Jul 2007 04:01:36 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126863 Hey Mike, I was wondering if you've yet to read Robert G. B. Reid's recent book in the Vienna Series of Theoretical Biology entitled "Biological Emergences: Evolution by Natural Experiment". I've only just started it myself but it looks like it may be up your alley. Hey Mike,

I was wondering if you've yet to read Robert G. B. Reid's recent book in the Vienna Series of Theoretical Biology entitled "Biological Emergences: Evolution by Natural Experiment". I've only just started it myself but it looks like it may be up your alley.

]]> By: mcromer http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126798 mcromer Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:30:58 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126798 I still think it is a huge leap to go from some genes that obviously influence body plan, to actually building that body plan from the cells up. Where does the rubber actually hit the road??? I still think it is a huge leap to go from some genes that obviously influence body plan, to actually building that body plan from the cells up.

Where does the rubber actually hit the road???

]]> By: Bilbo http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126796 Bilbo Wed, 25 Jul 2007 00:24:46 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126796 Behe didn't seem to be as impressed by Carroll's attempt at explaining how multicellular organisms may have evolved. His discussion of Carroll was difficult to follow, even on a second reading. I should probably read Carroll's book, first. But I <em>think</em> Behe's point was that <strong>random</strong> use of the toolkit probably wouldn't result in designing new body plans. Behe didn't seem to be as impressed by Carroll's attempt at explaining how multicellular organisms may have evolved. His discussion of Carroll was difficult to follow, even on a second reading. I should probably read Carroll's book, first. But I think Behe's point was that random use of the toolkit probably wouldn't result in designing new body plans.

]]> By: Bradford http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126724 Bradford Tue, 24 Jul 2007 19:37:56 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126724 <blockquote>Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence Not at all, an ID Creationist designed those analogies on purpose!</blockquote> More accurately, the obvious analogies were discerned although it took no great insight to see the parallels.

Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence

Not at all, an ID Creationist designed those analogies on purpose!

More accurately, the obvious analogies were discerned although it took no great insight to see the parallels.

]]> By: salimfadhley http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126592 salimfadhley Tue, 24 Jul 2007 13:12:28 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126592 Jason, <blockquote>Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence</blockquote> Not at all, an ID Creationist designed those analogies on purpose! :-) Jason,

Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence

Not at all, an ID Creationist designed those analogies on purpose!

:-)

]]> By: thesciphishow http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126443 thesciphishow Tue, 24 Jul 2007 04:49:08 +0000 http://telicthoughts.com/tool-kit-genes/#comment-126443 I noticed this when I did the <a href="http://darwinordesign.com">Darwin or Design</a> interview with him. Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence ;) I noticed this when I did the Darwin or Design interview with him.

Although no doubt all of these machine analogies are just coincidence ;)

]]>