Intelligent Design

William Bialek: More Perfect Than We Imagined

Spread the love

Three hundred years ago William Leibniz said we live in the best of all possible worlds but today Princeton’s world reknown theorist William Bialek explains that it is more perfect than we imagined. This video is long and it sometimes dwells on Bialek rather than the slide he is talking to, but those drawbacks are minor compared to what you will learn. If you want to hear an intelligent, thoughtful scientist scratch the surface of creation’s wonders and reflect on what it all means, then this video is for you.  Read more

6 Replies to “William Bialek: More Perfect Than We Imagined

  1. 1
    bornagain77 says:

    of note: Darwinism doesn’t do optimization:

    Oxford University Admits Darwinism’s Shaky Math Foundation – May 2011
    Excerpt: However, mathematical population geneticists mainly deny that natural selection leads to optimization of any useful kind. This fifty-year old schism is intellectually damaging in itself, and has prevented improvements in our concept of what fitness is. – On a 2011 Job Description for a Mathematician, at Oxford, to ‘fix’ the persistent mathematical problems with neo-Darwinism within two years.

    Yet optimized processes are found to permeate and control the cell:

    Optimal Design of Metabolism – Dr. Fazale Rana – July 2012
    Excerpt: A new study further highlights the optimality of the cell’s metabolic systems. Using the multi-dimension optimization theory, researchers evaluated the performance of the metabolic systems of several different bacteria. The data generated by monitoring the flux (movement) of compounds through metabolic pathways (like the movement of cars along the roadways) allowed researchers to assess the behavior of cellular metabolism. They determined that metabolism functions optimally for a system that seeks to accomplish multiple objectives. It looks as if the cell’s metabolism is optimized to operate under a single set of conditions. At the same time, it can perform optimally with relatively small adjustments to the metabolic operations when the cell experiences a change in condition.

    Map Of Major Metabolic Pathways In A Cell – Diagram

    Learning from Bacteria about Social Networking (Information Processing) – video
    Excerpt: I will show illuminating movies of swarming intelligence of live bacteria in which they solve optimization problems for collective decision making that are beyond what we, human beings, can solve with our most powerful computers.

  2. 2
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: Dr. Stephen Meyer’s new book is coming out soon..

    Darwin’s Doubt
    The Explosive Origin of Animal Life and the Case for Intelligent Design
    By Stephen C. Meyer

    On Sale: 6/18/2013
    Formats: Hardcover | eBook

    When Charles Darwin finished The Origin of Species, he thought that he had explained every clue, but one. Though his theory could explain many facts, Darwin knew that there was a significant event in the history of life that his theory did not explain. During this event, the “Cambrian explosion,” many animals suddenly appeared in the fossil record without apparent ancestors in earlier layers of rock.

    In Darwin’s Doubt, Stephen C. Meyer tells the story of the mystery surrounding this explosion of animal life—a mystery that has intensified, not only because the expected ancestors of these animals have not been found, but because scientists have learned more about what it takes to construct an animal. During the last half century, biologists have come to appreciate the central importance of biological information—stored in DNA and elsewhere in cells—to building animal forms.

    Expanding on the compelling case he presented in his last book, Signature in the Cell, Meyer argues that the origin of this information, as well as other mysterious features of the Cambrian event, are best explained by intelligent design, rather than purely undirected evolutionary processes.

  3. 3
    bornagain77 says:

    A Darwinist on Dr. Hunter’s blog claimed that:

    “Small physical changes result in small optical changes, exactly the sort of problem evolution is adept at optimizing.”

    Yet ‘Small physical changes’ is precisely the thing that Darwinism is NOT ‘adept’ at optimizing (especially in multicellular creatures):

    The next evolutionary synthesis: Jonathan BL Bard (2011)
    Excerpt: We now know that there are at least 50 possible functions that DNA sequences can fulfill [8], that the networks for traits require many proteins and that they allow for considerable redundancy [9]. The reality is that the evolutionary synthesis says nothing about any of this; for all its claim of being grounded in DNA and mutation, it is actually a theory based on phenotypic traits. This is not to say that the evolutionary synthesis is wrong, but that it is inadequate – it is really only half a theory!

    Darwin’s Theory – Fruit Flies and Morphology – video

    Experimental Evolution in Fruit Flies (35 years of trying to force fruit flies to evolve in the laboratory fails, spectacularly) – October 2010
    Excerpt: “Despite decades of sustained selection in relatively small, sexually reproducing laboratory populations, selection did not lead to the fixation of newly arising unconditionally advantageous alleles.,,, “This research really upends the dominant paradigm about how species evolve,” said ecology and evolutionary biology professor Anthony Long, the primary investigator.

    The princess and the pea paradox of natural selection:

    Evolution Vs Genetic Entropy – Andy McIntosh – video

    The GS Principle (The Genetic Selection Principle) – Abel – 2009
    Excerpt: The GS Principle, sometimes called “The 2nd Law of Biology,” states that selection must occur at the molecular/genetic level, not just at the fittest phenotypic/organismic level, to produce and explain life.,,, Natural selection cannot operate at the genetic level.

    Natural Selection’s Reach – Ann Gauger – February 12, 2013
    Excerpt: What is the mutational reach of natural selection in general? It’s very short. For bacteria, our work suggests the reach is only a few mutations at a time. That’s not enough to get a genuinely new function for a protein, let alone a new pathway made up of a handful of proteins, or a metabolism made up of hundreds of proteins. For larger multicellular organisms like us, with slower generation times and smaller populations, the problem gets worse. Much worse.

  4. 4
    jerry says:

    Some hypotheses from the past:

    Ecology is one of the best examples of why Darwinian macro evolution is not only bogus but bad design and bad science. But Darwinian micro evolution is both great science and great design.

    For those who don’t know, Candide, the short book by Voltaire, that was meant to mock Leibniz and his idea that this was the “best of all possible worlds.” The only problem is that what Voltaire believes is best may not be what God believes is best. Ecology is a great example of this.

  5. 5
    jstanley01 says:

    I love watching mainstream science guys flirt with Miss Design, like as if they can’t help themselves. I mean, it’s not like Mom hasn’t warned them over and over again until she’s blue in the face, that the Little Missy is nothing but a trollop who will bring them to a bad end. But there she sits on the back row, batting her eyelashes as she watches them gesticulate, preen and pose for no one’s benefit but her very own. It’s scandalous, really.

  6. 6
    bornagain77 says:

    OT: Computer Simulations Yield Clues to How Cells Interact With Surroundings – Mar. 21, 2013 (With examples of simulation)
    Excerpt: Your cells are social butterflies. They constantly interact with their surroundings, taking in cues on when to divide and where to anchor themselves, among other critical tasks.
    This networking is driven in part by proteins called integrin, which reside in a cell’s outer plasma membrane. ,,,
    Their “molecular dynamics” model is the latest example of computational biology, in which scientists use computers to analyze biological phenomena for insights that may not be available via experiment. As you’d expect from a model that accounts for the activities of half a million atoms at once, the integrin model takes a lot of computing horsepower to pull off. Some of its simulations require 48 hours of run time on 600 parallel processors at the U.S. Department of Energy’s (DOE) National Energy Research Scientific Computing Center (NERSC), which is located at Berkeley Lab.,,,

Leave a Reply