Bob Enyart spins yarns?
Bob Enyart spins yarns?
As much as I appreciate Bob's economic and politic ideas as much I laugh out loud when I listen to his 'arguments' against evolution.
Unfortunately one more time Bob committed a anti-evolution talk show without any tenable arguments.
Let me deal with the most obvious yarns:
1. Sickle cell anemia. Bob, it's not about loosing any information. If you read some genetic books you'll learn it is caused by REPLACEMENT of thymine by adenine (parts of nucleotides). If thymine is replaced by adenine the triplet Cytosine - Adenine - Thymine (CAT) takes new form: Cytosine - Thymine - Thymine (CTT). Therefore mRNA codone created on a basis of DNA is GUA instead of GAA (G- guanosine, U - uridine, A- adenosine). Such mRNA is used by rybosomes as an instruction how to produce proteins from aminoacids. GUA codes Valine while GAA Glutamine thus replacement of thymine with adenine in DNA results in replacement of just one (among thousands if not millions) aminoacid. The improper aminoacid (Valine instead of Glutamine) deforms chain B of hemoglobin therefore it is less soluble in water and thus malformed red blood cells look a little bit like a crescent instead of a "tire".
There is no loosing any DNA - just replacement of one nucleotide with another. In fact it is gaining since adenine has a bigger molecule than thymine.
Bob Enyart always says evolution doesn't create new abilities and sickle cell anemia is an excellent example he is dead wrong: hemoglobine S (that's the name of the altered hemoglobine) has new ability: it has a different shape, it is 'sticky' thus it changes shape of a red blood cell what makes them resistant to germs causing malaria (plasmodium). This is an excellent example one single DNA mutation means an organism gains a completely new ability.
Bob said it is a disease of blacks - that's another lie, although I believe unintentional. Hemoglobine S has many negative, disadvantageous featers but one huge ability: the red blood cell cannot be infected by plasmodium. Whites can have the disease as well, but there is one problem: it decreases chances of survival thus it exists only in areas where the disadvantage is counterbalanced by being free of malaria. In malaria -free areas sickle cell anemia is virtually wiped out by evolution (surival of the fittest gene). On the other hand in malaria infested areas sickle cell anemia is relatively common.
Bob compares hemoglobine S to loosing information, I would compare sickle cell anemia to rain tires (sickle cell anemia) and slicks (regular hemoglobine): rain tires are by far worse if there are dry conditions (no malaria in neibourghood), but are much better when a road is wet (epidemic of malaria). Replacing slicks with rain tires doesn't mean 'loosing information' it means 'changing' information.
2. Bob thinks he mocks the theory of evolution with the program randomly casting letters in order to achieve an alphabet. Thus Bob Enyart uses liberals' favourite tactics: to say falsely that ridiculous idea is believed to be true by your enemy, mock it, then mock the believer and everything seems to be fine except for one thing: the idea is cosidered by your opponent false as well...
Bob's program has nothing to do with evolution since it is based on 2 false, ridiculous theses:
- evolution always starts a new, from the scratch (have you ever heard evolutionist saying reptiles and mammals evolved directly from amoebas completely independently?)
- there is no survival of the fittest (have you ever heard evolutionist saying anything like that?)
Thus what Bob Enyart is doing is claiming these false theories to be believed by evolutionists, mocks the theories and then mocks the evolutioninsts. Successful, truly, but devastatingly unfair.
This is how the program should be written:
1. It should cast chain of 24 letters in a specific order randomly.
2. If any of the letters is in the right place it must have higher 'survival rate' then others (survival of the fittest gene).
3. The code should 'multiple' (just like every living species can multiple).
4. There can be different rules of multiplying, let me propose one:
- every chain of 24 letters creates 10 copies, half of them identical, half of them (to speed up evolution) with mutations (2-3 letters different than original)
- if any chain of 24 letters has any letter in the right place it gets higher survival rate - like 20% more copies for every letter in the right place (for example: if a chain has no correct letters it gets 10 new copies, if it has 1 correct letter it gets 12 new copies, if 2 gets 14, 3 - 16 and so on).
- at the end of multiplying phase some chains must die (death is substantial for evolution, eternal life of all organisms means end of evolution) - let's say for the first 1000 turns there will be lower death rate (empty Earth), but later it should increase and reach a stable point - new chains should replace dying ones.
- "dying" rules: for every correct letter a chain should have 20% less risk of death (because good genes mean one can survive many threats like avoiding predators or finding more food).
If Bob Enyart writes new program, abiding rules of evolution, real ones, not fake ones, I guarantee in less than 10 years he will have many chains very similar or even identical to the Latin alphabet. I can bet him any money he wants.
There are several dozen yarns Bob span in his talk show. Suffice for me to discuss this 2 since it gives everyone an excellent example how untenable his theses are.
