Ribosome Origins and Evolution - Prof. George Fox, University of Houston

[@ksbalaji1287]

Thank you for posting. A very very interesting lecture.

[@baraskparas9559]

Foxy deserves a Nobel prize in chemistry for helping C Woese discover the Archaea. However the 30S subunit is the older of the 2 and the 50S represents an evolved 30S subunit. It is all spelled out in a book to be published on June 21 by Austin Macauley Publishers titled From Chemistry to Life on Earth.

[@Raydensheraj]

You mean a Nobel Prize for molecular biology?

[@baraskparas9559]

@@Raydensheraj There is no category for mol. biol. it comes under chemistry.

[@gwkdad]

"I'm going to talk about both and not solve either one". So sad that a man will spend a lifetime in search of answers to find out he is no closer to them then when he first began.

[@MatterStorm1]

god bless people who do this, they make the grinding progress necessary to actually understand this world

[@leonmichalski8220]

Does any post with „evolution” have to attract religious weirdos? Firstly, a great lecture. Secondly, why you don’t have problems with the evidence for gravitational lensing, for example, but the emergence of cellular machineries is somehow „impossible” to explain in your minds? Why do you want ribsomomes to be „created by God” and refuse to see that they are still perfectly explained by our understanding of biochemistry?

[@carlosvila805]

Hola!...creo que ese razonamiento es incorrecto...una cosa es las lentes gravitacionales y otra cosa es una máquina molecular que se autoensambla. Esta es una máquina presente en seres vivos. Las lentes gravitacionales y otras estructuras como agujeros negreos, etc, con su notable comlejidad también deberían ser objeto de análisis sobre su existencia...¿por que hay orden y organización en la naturaleza y no mas bien lo simple? ¿al azar por ensayo y error? ¿aleatoria, estocástica? sin un propósito. ¿O hay algo más aún no descubierto? sólo describimos máquinas y congeturamos cómo podrían haber originado pero aún no lo sabemos y no hace falta poner a Dioa o lo que sea...aún Saludos desde Buenos Aires

[@devinsmith2843]

You have to admit there’s a lot of hand waving. “This then does this” isn’t really an argument. Just an idea.

[@Raydensheraj]

​@@devinsmith2843So just quitting and proclaiming "my preferred version of invisible supernatural super being" did it....basta!!! Done. You believe this to be the better option than trying to actually understanding the natural material world via applying real empirical evidence based science?

[@Raydensheraj]

​@@carlosvila805Emergence is not random. Nether is evolution. And science is based on translating the laws and processes of the natural, material world into a scientific theory based on human language and human understanding. Of course it's incredibly hard to translate the emergence of certain natural processes into something that makes sense to us humans. We wouldn't even be where we are....with CRISPR, mRNA vaccines, understanding natural selection, endosymbiosis, transposons, how certain diseases are formed etc. Without the incredible collected scientific research by thousands of scientists....we would still be stuck with vitalism, creationism and other magical thinking that offer absolutely nothing to help us understand the material natural world....

[@tigertiger1699]

I got to 4 mins… hurt me head Damn interesting…🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@metipallearuna223]

Chirality is a hidden mirror-holy other handed orphan urchin automaton non machinery irredundant hole.

[@metipallearuna223]

A real time video of, let's say for instance a mis-sense mutant of an ant moving on false pair of walking legs attached to the left antenna is anthropomorphic crystallization of the movement of tRNA attached to the incorrect information in the amino acid entering and exiting the RNA's pore animated as a movie in deciding the merits of the other RNA world helices independent of r n ases that would have been lost by not having catalytic functions.

[@johnandrew2711]

NCMR Inventing Method book Discovery chapter Consciousness is the origin of life and has been experimentally verified.

[@metipallearuna223]

suosoenegomoh koot ssenuoisnoc litnu emit si CUTCU5

[@johnnyllooddte3415]

my boeing 747 developed by itself from mud too...ahahahaha

[@Raydensheraj]

The refutation of this incredible naive argument can be found in many works of real mathematicians and even Christian De Duves Book Vital Dust from the 1980ies trashes the Airplane analogy. I highly suggest you go to your local library and get a couple books on Evolution, Geography, Neuroscience, Genetics etc and not make it a culture wars type of thing. And you don't have to add " hahahahaha" like a child at the end of every sentence. We get it...your the Authority in emergence of biological lifeforms and know all the answers. And you understand Science enough to reject it with mere Philosophical arguments. You can also give us ONE example of a Supernatural claim that can be falsified or tested and explain how a scientist can use Intelligent Design to make predictions that can be tested like= www.theguardian.com/science/lost-worlds/2013/oct/02/moth-tongues-orchids-darwin-evolution

[@ivarvaw]

An airplane is a perfect example of evolution. There wasn't a perfect 747 all of a sudden (and it's still not perfect, judging by the crashes lately...). We started with a very basic design, then a little more complex one. And now, 100 years later, we're getting somewhere. It wasn't perfectly designed and probably never will be.

[@myopenmind527]

There is a cure for your ignorance. 📚

[@josealbertosalazarga]

NEW TITLE: RIBOSOME ORIGINS AND DESIGN... SOUNDS FAR BETTER TO ME

[@pavel9652]

But the talk is not for those satisfied with ignorance.

[@josealbertosalazarga]

@@pavel9652 Iam only satisfied with SCIENTIFIC TRUTH, not with garbage. Lest Keep in Sciencie.

[@pavel9652]

@@josealbertosalazarga Hardly the truth, otherwise you wouldn't be making creationists comments.

[@josealbertosalazarga]

@@pavel9652 Time will judge, With some open mind, leaving phylosophy out, We will see wich hypotesis is more REASONABLE, SCIENTIFIC AND ALIGN WITH EVIDENCE.

[@pavel9652]

​@@josealbertosalazarga I am looking forward to see the ever-receding pocket of scientific ignorance make another step back. The ID is not even a valid scientific hypothesis.

[@carlosvila805]

La biología molecular le está pateando el trasero a Darwin

[@johnnyllooddte3415]

you actually believe this is all random...ahahahaha

[@johnnyllooddte3415]

super complexity from nothing.. these dna have more complexity and coded info them all super computers combined..and its random from nothing....ahahahaha

[@markmanning2921]

a complete disavowal of the laws of thermodynamics. satans minions working hard to disprove god.

[@kennethbransford820]

@millionmanification I am all ways learning. Lord Kelvin said, “We are absolutely forced by science to believe with perfect confidence in a Directive Power-in an influence other than physical or dynamical or electrical forces . . . You will be forced by science into a belief in God.” The reason why most people believe in pseudoscience evolution is because of ignorance and lack of knowledge. It takes time to reason and come to the conclusion that pseudoscience evolution never happened. It is a false knowledge or pseudoscience. The combinatorial numbers are proving it never happened. The evidence always points to design as the only solution for the existence of your brain that is right now giving you the ability to think and to have CONSCIOUSNESS. For sure this was not by accident. No way that your brain came out of the dirt by accident just like the universe didn't come into existence by accident out of nothing , and a terraformed earth, that once was a ball of rock just like venus floating through the dead of space and being the same size as earth is considered to be earth's twin sister. === Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible ====

[@kennethbransford820]

@millionmanification Why did you delete my last comment? Not fair. See how people act when THEY don't like what they hear or what others say? They delete you or discredit you. ==== Evolution = Self Assembling Atoms = Impossible =====

[@carlosvila805]

@@markmanning2921 Esto es erroneo...no hace falta poner a Dios...¿qué Dios? ¿Cristiano?¿Musulman?¿Indio?¿el de los pueblos originarios?..hay algo más..y el puro azar, no alcanza...información sin dirección no tiene ningún fundamento...

[@sedevacantist1]

This is a religion and not science. @ 2:35 this speaker reveals his insanity "to make something useful in size". A thing can be the size of the universe and still be useless. The insanity of this RNA world hypothesis is in believing meaningless strings of RNA contain information. Information is a separate thing from the physical thing that contains it. The misconceptions of the atheist are in believing information is a natural physical thing. A physical thing that contains real information is actually two things not one. For the atheist, abiogenesis is one thing so any repeating pattern in the physical world is considered to be information but that is not true.

[@perverse_ince]

You could have summed it up as "I disagree with your definition of Information"

[@sedevacantist1]

@@perverse_ince I did and explained why. If I take your advice and just say (I disagree) then it would be nothing more than an opinion. The academics in this field get away with defining everything as information.

[@metipallearuna223]

If an RNA world really exists like in a PTC pore not one bit two of false walking ant legs is not quite impossible to find physically for entropy of mis-sense mutation.

[@sedevacantist1]

@@metipallearuna223 You need DNA to makes RNA. You need RNA to make proteins. You need Proteins to make DNA. Therefor you need all three from the start at the same time to start life.That doesn't include a lot of everything else, and the information to make and control the molecular machines. Darwinian evolution is dead, molecular biology killed it.

[@metipallearuna223]

@@sedevacantist1 Darwinian devolution or the opposite of evolution is exemplified in Mis -s ense mutation which requires altered DNA codon which is taken up by the ribosomes' rRNA and translated into a pair of false walking legs made of polypeptidea attached to the first left thoracic leg of the ant whose entrance into the left antenna is by making an entry site, from which both the shorter and longer polypeptide structures of the pair of false walking legs exit at different times .Therefore you need a mis-sense reading of the genetic code for translation mechanism to be completed and be incomplete without stop codons for such a condition. How does crystallography study for this condition satisfies your understanding of anthropomorphic crystallization of the movement in your observing movements of tRNA matching with altered codons create empirical evidence of DNA chemicals test in the RNA double helices?