Sunday, February 25, 2007

ID vs ERVs-- Part Four: Doing the Limbo Rock

How does UD do it? How do they fit so much crap into a single post? Uuuuuuuugh! Its going to take me forever to clean this up! But, Im ERV. If anyone is going to clean up a UD ERV crapfest, its me. So Im going to hack at this bit by bit.

How low can they go? Just when you think Creationists have hit an all time low... you find out theyve got a crawl-space to hide in.

Holy crap.

I made a discovery last night that made this whole thing even worse.

Okay, one of the first things I tell friends who are first starting to deal with Creationists online is to Google everything the Creationist writes. Average Joe Creationists are fond of copy/pasting large chunks of text written by other people-- pretending they wrote it when they dont understand a word that was written.

Example:

Creationist-- "Radioisotope dating is completely inaccurate! The following is a summary of results from a two year study among 8 scientists:
1. Conventional radioisotope dating methods are inconsistent and therefore not reliable.In dating the same rock layer, radioisotope dating showed four different ages.

2. Substantial amounts of helium found in crystals within granite.If the Earth evolved over billions of years, the helium should have already escaped.

3. Radiohalos in rocks caused by the decay of uranium and polonium, which strongly suggests a rapid decay rate, not gradual decay over billions of years.

4. Diamonds thought to be millions/billions of years old by evolutionists contain significant levels of carbon-14. Since carbon-14 decays quickly, none should have been found in the diamonds if the evolutionary age is correct."

Anyone who saw this would immediately begin carefully refuting every point in the hopes that the person who wrote the post held those opinions because he/she knew enough about physics to summarize the research findings, thus would be able to discuss and be persuaded by evidence.

Unfortunately, the Creationist poster didnt write a word of it.

Certainly Evilutionists frequently copy/paste things from TalkOrigins and such, but I have never seen anyone directly copy a rebuttal to a Creationist Claim without directing them to T.O.

So how does this relate to ID vs ERVs? This is a lesson in clicking EVERY link on a UD article. Look at this excerpt from the UD article:
UD-- The research, published in the October issue of Developmental Cell, suggests that retrotransposons may not be just the “junk DNA” once thought, but rather appear to be a large repository of start sites for initiating gene expression. Therefore, more than one third of the mouse and human genomes, previously thought to be nonfunctional, may play some role in the regulation of gene expression and promotion of genetic diversity. Dr. Barbara B. Knowles and colleagues from The Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine, found that distinct retrotransposon types are unexpectedly active in mouse eggs, and others are activated in early embryos. Surprisingly, by acting as alternative promoters, retrotransposon-derived controlling elements drive the coordinated expression of multiple mouse genes. The researchers think that expression of retrotransposons during very early stages may contribute to the reprogramming of the mammalian embryonic genome, a prerequisite for normal development.

In the UD article, it looks like the writer made these summaries himself, so I knocked down the improper terminology and inaccuracies in this particular claim.

Heres the 'Shauer’s Article' that the UD article links to at the very beginning:
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/printerfriendlynews.php?newsid=14812
The research, published in the October issue of Developmental Cell, suggests that retrotransposons may not be just the "junk DNA" once thought, but rather appear to be a large repository of start sites for initiating gene expression. Therefore, more than one third of the mouse and human genomes, previously thought to be non-functional, may play some role in the regulation of gene expression and promotion of genetic diversity. Dr. Barbara B. Knowles and colleagues from The Jackson Laboratory in Bar Harbor, Maine, found that distinct retrotransposon types are unexpectedly active in mouse eggs, and others are activated in early embryos. Surprisingly, by acting as alternative promoters, retrotransposon-derived controlling elements drive the coordinated expression of multiple mouse genes. The researchers think that expression of retrotransposons during very early stages may contribute to the reprogramming of the mammalian embryonic genome, a prerequisite for normal development.

To the 'Shauers'credit, he put the quote in italics to indicate he did not write it. But thats who he cited. Not the paper, 'Medical News Today.com'. And science journalist are so well known for accurately summarizing research data.

Here is the actual paper:
Retrotransposons Regulate Host Genes in Mouse Oocytes and Preimplantation Embryos


Guess how many times Dr. Peaston says 'junk DNA' in her paper.



Guess.



GUESS.


Common! You know you know the answer!


Fine. How many times does Dr. Peaston say 'junk DNA' in her paper? Zero.

What have we learned today? You can find out if Average Joe Creationist is misrepresenting their 'knowledge' in one click (Google). Professional Creationists are more elaborate, as you have to click three times to find out theyre lying. lol!

4 comments:

Gerald said...

It is annoying when have an Internet debate with creationists when they do that. They think they can win by swamping their opponent, but the funny thing is they probably don't even understand what they just C&Ped.

ERV said...

I feel so stupid for not thinking of this in the first place! I mean all the people Ive dealt with on message boards, a quick Google should have been the first thing I did.

Isnt it funny how the 'Professionals' pull the EXACT SAME SHIT as the Average Joe Creationists?? Youre so right-- they just swamp you with crap so its almost physically impossible to wade through it all! Internet version of the Gish Gallup...

JJ Anderson said...

The creationists and ID people can't have it both ways. They love to say evolution can't create new genetic "information", and now they are saying we should appreciate retrotransposons as an exciting source of new... oops, information...

ERV said...

Thats what I kept trying to tell them on 'Intelligently Sequenced'. I kept asking, "So even if I ignore all the very wrong things you say about the functionality of mobile elements, how are any mobile elements proof of ID Creationism? Theyre excellent bits of evidence that point towards evolution!"

And no one ever got back to me on that.

This was more about a smear campaign against T.O., Dawkins, and the scientific community as a whole.