Who, exactly, said the world would be simple?
The world seemed simpler in the 1970s, when molecular biology brought us concepts such as “gene A leads to protein B, which leads to function C.” Thinking this way, scientists uncovered amazing mechanistic insights and, sometimes, designed effective drugs-the cancer drug Gleevec is the poster child of that reductionist approach. Wouldn’t it be nice if drug discovery always went this way?”
Those first drugs, however, were low-hanging fruit. Biology is much more complicated than simple schematics. Biological processes do not work in linear ways independently of one another but in tightly interconnected networks. In each branch of these networks, layers of regulatory controls constantly change the nature and abundance of the molecular players. We know little about the inner workings of human cells.”
When dealing with humans, we are also dealing with intentions, with mind.
You only think that guy is the sum total of his cells. Wrong.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
Is this link correct? it doesn’t work for me:
http://www.scientificamerican......f-biology/
The link doesn’t work for me, either.
Thank you, Barb.
Perhaps this is why?
Access
To read this article in full you will need to log in or gain access through a site license (see right).nature.com > Journal home > Table of Contents
Forum
Scientific American 310, 13 (2014) Published online: 15 April 2014 | doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0514-13
Article tools
Send to a Friend
Eureka Once, Eureka TwiceVeronique Kiermer
AbstractBiology is making it harder for scientists to reproduce one another’s experiments
To read this article in full you will need to log in or gain access through a site license (see right).
Maybe this link works ?
http://www.scientificamerican......print=true
The original link “would be simple?” seems fixed now. Thanks!
Interesting article indeed.
Well, what can one say? Perhaps the author of this report is an ignorant creationist IDiot who just doesn’t understand evolution? 😉
What evolutionist ever claimed that biology was simple. Every cell, every organ, every individual, is a product of a combination of genetics and environment. Whether or not a turtle is male or female depends on the temperature at which they are incubated. All clownfish are born male; only the largest in a group will become female. In both these circumstances, every individual has the potential to be either sex but it is environment that plays the deciding role.
Natural selection is not limited to simple changes. The only difference between micro and macro-evolution (distinctions only made by creationists, by the way) is magnitude. The limitations to natural selection are sources of genetic variation and time, neither of which are in short supply.
Acartia_bogart:
I seem to recall one speaking about a simple warm pond, somewhere in the distant past.
Acartia_bogart said, “he only difference between micro and macro-evolution (distinctions only made by creationists, by the way) is magnitude. The limitations to natural selection are sources of genetic variation and time, neither of which are in short supply.”
Actually, both of those are in VERY short supply. I won’t try to go into detail here, but it has been adequately explained that there isn’t possibly close to enough time for natural selection to do its thing (from goo to you). In addition, your assertion that only creationists say that there is any difference between micro and macro evolution is also false. It has been referenced in the literature by proponents of Darwinian evolution. Further, when all the evidence we have shows JUST micro evolutionary changes (antibiotic resistance, loss of function, moth colorations, beak shapes and sizes that revert back to their original after selection pressures are removed, etc.)
(sorry, cut off my post above)
then, why is it unreasonable to conclude that ONLY micro-evolution is a scientific fact?
incompletely understood… but getting there…
Dionisio @ 12
incompletely understood how it currently works,…
But how long before it is completely understood how it actually appeared on the scene?
“Endosomes are not rendered inactive during mitosis as previously envisioned”
Why was it previously envisioned that endosomes are rendered inactive during mitosis? What factual evidences led them to such a believe?
little is known about Rab11 endosomes in mitosis
Keep researching… that’s what science is all about!
These findings suggest a molecular mechanism for the organization of astral microtubules and the mitotic spindle through Rab11-dependent control of spindle pole assembly and function
Oh really? duh!
The function of membrane trafficking during mitosis has become the focus of increasing interest.
Many things in biology are becoming the focus of increasing interest. These are exciting days to watch the scientific discoveries made by serious researchers in biology. We look forward, with much anticipation, to reading newer reports from research labs, shedding more light on the wonderful biological systems.
While trying to learn the mechanisms behind the cell fate determination, differentiation and migration; the intrinsic asymmetric cell division popped up. Behind it appeared the spindle apparatus mechanisms. What will it be next? This is an unending revelation of the ultimate reality 🙂
By the way, the available information is disseminated around, at times very difficult to gather. Lots of searching, reading, discarding, saving. To non-biologists the challenge is greater, because we need to learn the terminology. But the whole process, though it seems like the ‘long and winding road’, is enjoyable
While trying to learn the mechanisms behind the cell fate determination, differentiation and migration; the intrinsic asymmetric cell division popped up. Behind it appeared the spindle apparatus mechanisms. What will it be next? This is an unending revelation of the ultimate reality 🙂
By the way, the available information is disseminated around, at times very difficult to gather. Lots of searching, reading, discarding, saving. To non-biologists the challenge is greater, because we need to learn the terminology. But the whole process, though it seems like the ‘long and winding road’, is enjoyable
No, there is no crisis in biology, we are just facing facts, which seem to conflict with old-fashioned presuppositions. As serious dedicated research scientists advance in their discoveries, which produce a data avalanche that helps science to answer many outstanding questions, new deeper questions arise, hence more research is required. There are more wonders awaiting beyond every new discovery. This goes on and on, like the unending revelation of the ultimate reality. Let’s enjoy it! 🙂
Just watching this short video clip brings up a number of questions to our minds: what triggers this or that? What determines the timing for this or that to occur? And so on…
Mitosis ballet choreography