Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

Vernal Equinox Sees Outbreak of DDS

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

In his Dead Dog post Sal quotes Jonathan Wells as follows:

If we place a small amount of sterile salt solution in a test tube at just the right temperature and acidity, add a living cell, and then poke a hole in that cell with a sterile needle, the contents will leak out. We will have in our test tube all of the molecules needed for life, in just the right proportions (relative to each other) and already assembled into complex specified DNAs, RNAs, proteins, lipids, and carbohydrates. But we will not be able to make a living cell out of them. We cannot put Humpty Dumpty back together again.

Later Sal specifically addresses Neil Rickert with the following question:

I said “dead dogs stay dead dogs.”  What say you?

To which Neil responds:

In the context of that dreadful quote from Jonathan Wells, I’m not sure what I would say.

Wow!  Who knew we would have an outbreak of DDS (Darwinist Derangement Syndrome; see our glossary for a description of the symptoms) here at UD on the first day of spring.  Maybe there is something about the vernal equinox that, like the phases of the moon for a werewolf, brings on the outbreak.

I would ask Neil a question though.  You say the Wells comment is “dreadful.”  It is most certainly true.  Why, then, do you consider it dreadful?

Comments
Joe:
Apply what Wells said (about a cell) to dogs, Barry.
We lawyers call that an a fortiori argument Joe. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_fortiori_argumentBarry Arrington
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:51 AM
8
08
51
AM
PDT
Eric:
Several years ago I was thinking of performing this exact experiment
As was I: https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/contemplating-the-undead/Barry Arrington
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:48 AM
8
08
48
AM
PDT
Neil:
. . . it makes for terrible science.
That is an assertion, not an argument. Are you suggesting that Wells' statement is false? If so, put up or shut up. Tell us why you think it is false.Barry Arrington
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:46 AM
8
08
46
AM
PDT
You can see Wells' quote here:
Punctured cell will never reassemble - Jonathan Wells - 2:40 mark of video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WKoiivfe_mo
To try to put a number on the impossibility of this, Dr. Morowitz did a probability calculation working from the thermodynamic perspective, with a already existing cell, and came up with this number:
DID LIFE START BY CHANCE? Excerpt: Molecular biophysicist, Horold Morowitz (Yale University), calculated the odds of life beginning under natural conditions (spontaneous generation). He calculated, if one were to take the simplest living cell and break every chemical bond within it, the odds that the cell would reassemble under ideal natural conditions (the best possible chemical environment) would be one chance in 10^100,000,000,000. You will have probably have trouble imagining a number so large, so Hugh Ross provides us with the following example. If all the matter in the Universe was converted into building blocks of life, and if assembly of these building blocks were attempted once a microsecond for the entire age of the universe. Then instead of the odds being 1 in 10^100,000,000,000, they would be 1 in 10^99,999,999,916 (also of note: 1 with 100 billion zeros following would fill approx. 20,000 encyclopedias) http://members.tripod.com/~Black_J/chance.html
Here are a few quotes to put an exclamation point on the preceding calculation:
The Theist holds the Intellectual High-Ground - March 2011 Excerpt: To get a range on the enormous challenges involved in bridging the gaping chasm between non-life and life, consider the following: “The difference between a mixture of simple chemicals and a bacterium, is much more profound than the gulf between a bacterium and an elephant.” (Dr. Robert Shapiro, Professor Emeritus of Chemistry, NYU) http://www.faithfulnews.com/contents/view_content2/49631/rabbi-moshe-averick-the-theist-holds-the-intellectual-high-ground-apologetics-christian-apologetics-defending-gospel Scientists Prove Again that Life is the Result of Intelligent Design - Rabbi Moshe Averick - August 2011 Excerpt: “To go from bacterium to people is less of a step than to go from a mixture of amino acids to a bacterium.” - Dr. Lynn Margulis http://www.algemeiner.com/2011/08/17/scientists-prove-again-that-life-is-the-result-of-intelligent-design/
bornagain77
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:37 AM
8
08
37
AM
PDT
Why, then, do you consider it dreadful?
It is excellent political rhetoric (if you happen to agree with Wells), but it makes for terrible science.Neil Rickert
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:34 AM
8
08
34
AM
PDT
Accumulating emergent properties. Bypass at your own peril. That is also their way around the OoL and why we can’t do it in a lab.
Might even be true - Michael Denton thinks along those lines, it seems. But if hypothetical, unobserved, laws are allowed into science it may as well be alchemy.Jon Garvey
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:18 AM
8
08
18
AM
PDT
Eric, It's all about emergent properties accumulating along the way. Seriously, that is allegedly why artificial ribosomes don't work and why partially artificial ribosomes only partially function. Meaning there is something mysterious that emerged along the way in an evolving system that a directly designed system cannot mimic. Accumulating emergent properties. Bypass at your own peril. That is also their way around the OoL and why we can't do it in a lab.Joe
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
08:02 AM
8
08
02
AM
PDT
Apply what Wells said (about a cell) to dogs, Barry.Joe
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
07:55 AM
7
07
55
AM
PDT
I am grateful for Wells' comment. Several years ago I was thinking of performing this exact experiment, because it is relevant to the question of whether the parts of a cell will naturally come together to form the greater whole on their own. But of course I don't have access to a lab and the idea languished. Then I ran across Wells' quote. Wells' point is not "dreadful." It is extremely interesting and gives the lie to the idea that if all the parts are found together at the right time and place that they will automatically come together as a result of chemistry and physics. It demonstrates that the cell -- while being made up of biochemicals -- is not just a collection of biochemicals that spontaneously join together. Something else is driving the organization. Something other than purely natural chemical and physical processes.Eric Anderson
March 21, 2014
March
03
Mar
21
21
2014
07:50 AM
7
07
50
AM
PDT
1 2

Leave a Reply