Ornery.org
  Front Page   |   About Ornery.org   |   World Watch   |   Guest Essays   |   Contact Us

The Ornery American Forum Post New Topic  Post A Reply
my profile login | register | search | faq | forum home

  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Ornery American Forum » General Comments » Soft squid ink sac found in 150 million year old rock (Page 2)

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!   This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   
Author Topic: Soft squid ink sac found in 150 million year old rock
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
*sigh*
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom, if you are willing, then ask God to reveal Himself to you. He will find a way to do it that will surprise you and perhaps even amuse you. He likes to do that.

Careful, kmbboots--don't hyperventillate!

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Just wondering - which concessions to evolutionary theory do you find necessary, and how do you decide which are or are not?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kmbboots
Member
Member # 6161

 - posted      Profile for kmbboots   Email kmbboots   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:
Tom, if you are willing, then ask God to reveal Himself to you. He will find a way to do it that will surprise you and perhaps even amuse you. He likes to do that.

Careful, kmbboots--don't hyperventillate!

Heh. I will also work on keeping my eyes from rolling all the way out of my head. [Razz]
Posts: 2635 | Registered: Jul 2008  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
kenmeer livermaile
Member
Member # 2243

 - posted      Profile for kenmeer livermaile   Email kenmeer livermaile       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
God shows Himself to me by remaining so hidden as to be nonexistent.
Posts: 23297 | Registered: Jan 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hide and Seek always was HIS best game...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Lobo
Member
Member # 89

 - posted      Profile for Lobo     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oil is produced in very old rocks. It seems kind of soft...
Posts: 1094 | Registered: Oct 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DonaldD, I make no concessions to evolution at all, because the theory is completely wrong. It is impossible for the DNA coding in the genomes of living things to have been written by any natural processes by chance, no matter how long a time you allow for it. It is also impossible for the DNA code to be so substantially re-written as to allow one basic species to transform into another. Evolutionists are invoking virtual magic, and then deride creationists for believing that God should be taken into account as Creator.

Lobo, how do you know those rocks are very old? And how do you know that all the Hydrocarbons in the earth's crust formed from the decomposition of organic life--plants and animals--and none of it was primordial? Other planets in our solar system have hydrocarbons, such as the gas giants, where no life ever existed.

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kuato
Member
Member # 6445

 - posted      Profile for Kuato   Email Kuato       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Well, RL, I'm actually with you on creationism, because I really really believe God created the universe, and that we are His Sons and Daughters. I'm just also of the belief that it is designed to never be provable- this would thwart the plan (and rewards) of faith.

I do not ask to see, but bow the knee.

Posts: 1038 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ron, if you make no concessions, then why characterize "the 'official' position of the majority in [your] church" as making an unnecessary concession to the evolutionist majority. Unless this adjective was completely meaningless, that implies there are some concessions that you do consider 'necessary'. Did you misspeak?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
How has God shown himself to you, Ron?
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kuato
Member
Member # 6445

 - posted      Profile for Kuato   Email Kuato       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Ricky, come on now.....

The proofs that you are looking for will not be in evidence to your eyes because they are made to the individual heart. I rarely share my spiritual experiences though I will say to anyone that I know that God lives and loves us. I don't expect different from Ron.

Posts: 1038 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm not looking for "proof". Proof would have to be the deity in question showing itself to ME. I'm just asking Ron how he experienced it.
Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Kuato
Member
Member # 6445

 - posted      Profile for Kuato   Email Kuato       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
[Smile]
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Apr 2009  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
KonerAtHome
Member
Member # 2168

 - posted      Profile for KonerAtHome   Email KonerAtHome       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
My question about creation has always been very simple. WHY? Why did God/god create this universe? What purpose does it serve?

Look at human creations. Everything created by man is a tool of one sort or another. They were created to serve a purpose to its human creator.

From everything I've learned about religion, at least the Abrahamic religions the purpose of the universe is to create legions of slaves with no other desire than to bask in the greatness of God. Of course we are given a choice in the matter, free will and all, of choosing this path to heaven or we can burn for eternity in a lake of fire.

Well if I were an all powerful all knowing god arrogant enough to need millions upon millions of worshipfull minions doing nothing but singing thier praises to me, there would have been a far easier and faster way to get what I wanted than creating an imperfect tool. I simply would have said "Let there be light, and in that light put millions upon millions of perfect being that do nothing but sit around all day and worship me in all my perfection".

But perhaps I'm just not as twisted and sadistic as God is.

Posts: 461 | Registered: Nov 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0Megabyte
Member
Member # 1217

 - posted      Profile for 0Megabyte   Email 0Megabyte       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Eh, that's just a plot hole.

Like blowing up the Death Star in orbit around the forest moon of Endor should, if you think about it, cause massive ecological devestation to said moon when considering it's size and proximity.

Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:
DonaldD, I make no concessions to evolution at all, because the theory is completely wrong. It is impossible for the DNA coding in the genomes of living things to have been written by any natural processes by chance, no matter how long a time you allow for it. It is also impossible for the DNA code to be so substantially re-written as to allow one basic species to transform into another. Evolutionists are invoking virtual magic, and then deride creationists for believing that God should be taken into account as Creator.

Ron, you're aware that we've observed organisms evolving new functions from scratch, right? Not just hitting upon traits that they had the potential to come up with if the right genes were combined, but actually getting the right genes in the first place through chance mutations.

It was one of this decade's most significant moments in biology. As an added bonus, the creationist response to it was also one of the most hilarious fiascos in Conservapedia's already lulz-saturated history [Smile]

Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Colin JM0397
Member
Member # 916

 - posted      Profile for Colin JM0397   Email Colin JM0397   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Koner said: "Well if I were an all powerful all knowing god arrogant enough to need millions upon millions of worshipfull minions doing nothing but singing thier praises to me..."

That's the Judeo-Christian-Muslim point of view, but there are far more ideas/belifes out there. I realize that's predominatly what Western Culture is based on, but that's not necessarily the answer for everyone, and there is no "proof" that it is accurate.

My faith points me away from such a God where I'm some little minion who is supposed to grovel at his feet and do his bidding. I have free will to do as I choose to do. I know many in the J-C-M persuasion say I have free will in order to freely submit to him/her, but I disagree.

For a long, over 1000-page idea on what this all means check out "Conversations with God". For the shorter idea, there's a short book called "What God Wants" by the same guy. The very short answer is God wants nothing from you. Yes, NOTHING.

The jist of it is this - God, being all knowing, seeing, the alpha and the omega, the up and the down, the light and, yes, the dark, that kind of God is everything and nothing at the same time, so that kind of God has no ability to experience life because he is everything. So God fractures himself (Big bang?) into a infinite amount of parts - both physical and spiritual, and this fracturing spawns you and me. In other words, we are each a little piece of the whole. Our purpose is simply to experience life as an individual part, and then bring those experiences back into the fold of the whole.

The interesting thing, and we could talk for months about the implications and what all this means... But you look at some of the cutting edge physics that show reality isn't really real, and the universe is kind of a big giant hologram. What happens when you split a hologram? Each part looks exactly like the original, only smaller.

Therefore, we are created in the image of God, and we all contain within us all of the power, knowledge, and possibility/probability that is God.

Sort of a Gnosticism meets Buddha, I suppose, if you have to slap a label on it.

IMO, other than the “thou shall worship me and do my will on Earth” part, I don’t think this idea goes against any organized religion. In fact, the way I see it, it just takes it in a bit of a different direction, and a different interpretation, but you can read a lot of that in scripture if you look for it.

For example, Jesus saying “I am the way” not meaning that unless you go through him (accept Christ as your savior) you don’t get to God. Why not “I am the way” means “I am the example – do what I do, and you too will be enlightened/sit at the right hand of God” and so on. It’s just a different way of looking at what we already know.

Posts: 4738 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
DonaldD, when I said I believe the mainstream majority in my church make unnecessary concessions to evolution/gradualism, I did not mean that any concessions should be made. My contention is that any and all concessions made to evolution/gradualism are unnecessary, because evolution/gradualism are completely wrong about everything.

RickyB, you asked how God has revealed Himself to me. He has, in very many direct and personal ways, but most importantly through fulfilled Bible prophecy, which cannot be faked, and do not depend upon my senses, which can be deceived. But it would really be best if you found out how God can reveal Himself to you for yourself.

There have been several questions-assertions-contentions going in divergent directions. I hope no one will take offense if I choose not to chase off in all those directions here and now.

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
but most importantly through fulfilled Bible prophecy, which cannot be faked, and do not depend upon my senses, which can be deceived.
Just wondering: how did you perceive of these fulfilled prophecies, if not through your senses?
Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Athelstan
Member
Member # 2566

 - posted      Profile for Athelstan   Email Athelstan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I have no trouble with believing the earth’s age should be measured in (US) billions of years. I base that belief on observation, the stratigraphy of the South Coast of England and the work, at the beginning of the 19th century, of William Smith, the Father of English Geology. I live on a Geological timeline starting with the newest rocks in the east, The White Cliffs of Dover, and travelling back in time to the west and the granite coast of Cornwall. In the middle, and nearest to me, I have the Jurassic Coast of Dorset. Many times I’ve been fossil (not sculptured stone) hunting on a Dorset beach, these days the official line is not to dig them out of the cliff. All the grained sedimentary strata I have seen must have been horizontal once. The now eastward dipping strata of the South Coast of England is like a wide book, laying at an slight incline on its cover with its fore-edge facing, and it’s the only book I need to workout the age of the Earth.
Posts: 715 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
That is an exceptionally favorable area for the study of geological history, which is why many of the early studies were done there. But I enjoy the eastern slope of Mt. Diablo, where the rising block tipped westward to reveal 35,000 feet of continuously layered sediments from the San Joaquin Valley. Those deposits formed in a much shorter time period, but they certainly suggest that a period of quite a few years was required. As Ron Lambert points out, those layers could have been created where they are; but such an explanation seems less likely than concluding that what seem to be annual layers from long ago took years to create just like the annual layers being formed now. Without the stories of the Bible, it seems unlikely that the possibility of a young age for such deposits would even have been considered.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Athelstan:
I have no trouble with believing the earth’s age should be measured in (US) billions of years.

What's the exchange rate for (US) billions to (UK) billions?
Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Wikipedia explains the different meanings of billion:
quote:
Billion may refer to:

In numbers:

Billion (word), explanation of long and short scales
1,000,000,000 (number), one thousand million, 109, in the commonly used short scale
1,000,000,000,000 (number), one million million, 1012, in the long scale

The United States uses the former, and the United Kingdom the latter.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Athelstan, hobsen, It does not take millions of years for such strata to be formed--only a few catastrophic events. Since the explosion of Mt. St. Helens in 1980, up to 400 feet of rock strata have been formed.

"On June 12, 1980 a third explosive eruption produced 25' of stratification that amazed geologists. Successive layers are traditionally thought to require long periods of time to form; yet upwards of 100 layers accumulated mostly between the nighttime hours of 9 and 12."
Link: http://www.creationism.org/sthelens/MSH1b_7wonders.htm

DonaldD, it still says the same thing every time I read it. I also consult nearly a dozen different translations, and sometimes check the original languages using the available resources for that. Others tell me they read the same thing. There are limits to Satan's powers of deception. With history providing the context for seeing the fulfillment of Bible prophecy, we are given a context that is too vast for even Satan to deceive us about everything.

Back in New Testament times, when most of human society only have a 5% literacy rate, believers had to depend upon others to read the scriptures to them. Thus the Apostle Paul said: "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (Romans 10:17; NKJV)

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
DonaldD
Member
Member # 1052

 - posted      Profile for DonaldD   Email DonaldD   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The thing is, your perception of others is all that needs to be mistaken. How do you know that others even exist?

All is needed is one virtual reality interface into which to plug one single entity (you).

Posts: 10751 | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
scifibum
Member
Member # 945

 - posted      Profile for scifibum   Email scifibum   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by hobsen:
Wikipedia explains the different meanings of billion:
quote:
Billion may refer to:

In numbers:

Billion (word), explanation of long and short scales
1,000,000,000 (number), one thousand million, 109, in the commonly used short scale
1,000,000,000,000 (number), one million million, 1012, in the long scale

The United States uses the former, and the United Kingdom the latter.
1000 to 1!

Seriously, I had no idea about that. So billionaires don't exist in the UK, I guess.

Posts: 6847 | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Athelstan
Member
Member # 2566

 - posted      Profile for Athelstan   Email Athelstan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The thing about all those different levels of rock formation that appear along the South Coast of England is that they are not haphazard events. Each level is totally different from the next. For example Portland Stone is limestone only found at Portland in Dorset. The set of fossils found in Portland Stone are unique to that stratum whereas limestone from another stratum will contain a different set of fossils. There is no evidence of any mixing of the levels, no occurrence of sculptured stone being buried as if by a giant flood. Another example would be the Chedworth Bun. This was a weight used to measure the weight of butter. They had been used for centuries in Oxfordshire, as they were all similar and found only in the stratum that appears in Oxfordshire. They have now been identified as a fossilised sea urchin and they are unique to that stratum. Recently I was in Swanage in Dorset looking at stratum of Mudstone. Totally unstable stuff and one of the reasons our cliffs are falling into the English Channel. If there had been any mixing of levels then this Mudstone wouldn’t exist and it certainly wouldn’t have come out of any volcano. It is possible by noting the fossils in any rock in England to know what stratum that rock belongs and also what strata are directly below it.
Posts: 715 | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Rallan
Member
Member # 1936

 - posted      Profile for Rallan   Email Rallan   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Oh look, Ron's stopped replying to me. I can't imagine why.
Posts: 2570 | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Rallan, no I am not aware of organisms developing new characteristics entirely from scratch--unless you are referring to something that results from genetic damage that you are "calling" a new characteristic, like maybe dwarfism or Type 1 diabetes. Or a change in one molecule that causes a virus to attach to a different site. It is the creationists who are laughing. You evolutionist fans are so gullible. You don't even know what would constitute real evolution.

And Rallan, you are being a bit childish, complaining if I choose not to respond to you promptly every time you say something. Or do you just crave my attention?

DonaldD, I am not a solipsist. You must be fond of the fiction of Philip K. Dick.

Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Wayward Son
Member
Member # 210

 - posted      Profile for Wayward Son   Email Wayward Son   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
You evolutionist fans are so gullible. You don't even know what would constitute real evolution.
Fortunately, evolutionists are under no obligation to define evolution as you wish they would. [Wink]
Posts: 8681 | Registered: Dec 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
RickyB
Member
Member # 1464

 - posted      Profile for RickyB   Email RickyB   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
"but most importantly through fulfilled Bible prophecy, which cannot be faked, and do not depend upon my senses, which can be deceived."

Ummm. OK.

Posts: 19145 | Registered: Jan 2004  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
unless you are referring to something that results from genetic damage that you are "calling" a new characteristic
How are you defining genetic "damage?"
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
hobsen
Member
Member # 2923

 - posted      Profile for hobsen   Email hobsen   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oh look, Ron's stopped replying to me. I can't imagine why.
That seemed needless, Rallan. Presumably Ron Lambert has other things to do besides monitor Ornery. Even if someone fails to reply for a week, that could mean he is hospitalized, or out of town, or dealing with some family emergency. Everyone should remember that.
Posts: 4387 | Registered: Jul 2006  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
Ron Lambert
Member
Member # 682

 - posted      Profile for Ron Lambert   Email Ron Lambert   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Tom, I would regard genetic damage to be a broken link or improper link in a single DNA molecule, that causes a previously programmed function to be disrupted--perhaps by turning on a DNA switch that had been turned off, or vice-versa. Or maybe one DNA strand linked to an improper site. Something simple, but drastic enough that the natural error correction mechanisms in the nucleus cannot fix it. It takes millions of linked DNA coding in a precisely (intelligently) organized form to produce a real genetic characteristic. That cannot happen by chance, no matter if you allow trillions of years for it to happen.
Posts: 2645 | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
TomDavidson
Member
Member # 99

 - posted      Profile for TomDavidson   Email TomDavidson   Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
The weird thing is, I majored in biotechnology in college. I have hands-on experience with the sort of research you're presumably talking about. And I have absolutely no idea what you mean. The distinction you're drawing between a "DNA switch" and a "strand linked to an improper site" and a "real genetic characteristic" is not one that I'd have any idea how to identify.
Posts: 22935 | Registered: Nov 2000  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
swbarnes2
Member
Member # 3789

 - posted      Profile for swbarnes2         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Ron Lambert:
[QB] Tom, I would regard genetic damage to be a broken link or improper link in a single DNA molecule

Why don't you just show us what you mean?

acggcgacgcgtcgatctacgCcagcctggtgcgcatggcccagccctggtcgctgcgctacccgctggtggacggccag

acggcgacgcgtcgatctacgAcagcctggtgcgcatggcccagccctggtcgctgcgctacccgctggtggacggccag

Where's the "link" here?

Which is the original, as-God-created-it sequence, and which is the fallen, damaged sequence?

quote:
Something simple, but drastic enough that the natural error correction mechanisms in the nucleus cannot fix it.
Can you explain how the organism that has the above sequence would go about fixing this mistake in its nucleus?

That e. coli citrate paper from last year, remember? If all it takes is a simple flipping of a switch to give e. coli the ability to metabolize citrate, why don't you copy and paste the wild-type sequence of that swtich? Pick whatever strain of E.coli you like, I'm sure no one will mind. The E. coli sequence has been available for perusal for decades now, surely Creationsts have annotated every scrap by now.

quote:
It takes millions of linked DNA coding in a precisely (intelligently) organized form to produce a real genetic characteristic.
M. genetalium doesn't need millions of anything to be a complete organism, let alone to make a single genetic characteristic.

That is basic microbial genetics. There are thousands of puke-drunk frat boys who know that.

Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0Megabyte
Member
Member # 1217

 - posted      Profile for 0Megabyte   Email 0Megabyte       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Darn it. It WAS e. coli! I couldn't remember which species the paper was based on for the life of me.
Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
swbarnes2
Member
Member # 3789

 - posted      Profile for swbarnes2         Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by 0Megabyte:
Darn it. It WAS e. coli! I couldn't remember which species the paper was based on for the life of me.

Yup, by Blount and Lenski. I'm bummed that they haven't done the sequencing yet to find the mutations. It wouldn't take that long nowadays.

Someone else generated a Pseudomonas strain that could eat nylon by-products, years ago.

Posts: 231 | Registered: Feb 2007  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
0Megabyte
Member
Member # 1217

 - posted      Profile for 0Megabyte   Email 0Megabyte       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
Hey, does someone happen to have a copy of that particular paper, btw?

Anyway, to be fair to Ron, you'd kinda have to study genes a bit to be able to discern much.

I, for example, wouldn't have the expertise to show anything of interest in the sorts of genes you posted without at least a few classes and a good number of books of study.

Although, is that as much a defense as I thought it was? I'm not so sure, now.

Posts: 2668 | Registered: Sep 2003  |  IP: Logged | Report this post to a Moderator
  This topic comprises 4 pages: 1  2  3  4   

Quick Reply
Message:

HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
UBB Code™ Images not permitted.
Instant Graemlins
   


Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic   Feature Topic   Move Topic   Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:


Contact Us | Ornery.org Front Page

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.1