March 2005 - Utah-Astronomy - mailman.xmission.com

Natural Selection and Such
by Dave Gary 05 Mar '05

05 Mar '05

Concerning the on-going discussion.... Science has to have a naturalistic base. The alternative would be to admit supernaturalistic data. Science can not, by definition, validate supernatural phenomena. I find that many people are under the impression that natural selection, somehow, implies randomness. If this was the take-home lesson from one’s biology courses, then, (1) the teacher did not understand natural selection, (2) one missed the point. Natural selection is the antithesis of randomness. In fact, the non-randomness of natural selection appears to give some people a sense of teleologic consequence associated with common descent. Hence, to some, there appears to be a purpose. Of course, man is the pinnacle of this “creation”. The fossil record appears discontinuous because of the conditions necessary to preservation, not because of a flaw in the theory of common descent. Natural selection would get along fine without any reference to the fossil record. That we have a fossil record is just icing on the cake. Also, any reference to punctuated equilibrium as a means to bolster an argument against natural selection is unfounded. Punctuated equilibrium is a theory of gradualism and in no way invalidates common descent. Irreducible complexity is insufferably anachronistic and amounts to a “biochemical Paleyism”. The major fallacy of irreducible complexity is inferring that the current utility of a given biologic feature explains why the feature evolved. For example, the homeotic gene complex is involved in specifying the pattern of segmentation in insects and assists with the proper development of the vertebrate hindbrain. The homeotic gene complex is highly conserved and did not originally evolve to regulate vertebrate hindbrain development. The complex is a consequence of co-optation by natural selection to regulate one aspect of vertebrate development. Additionally, the flagella of microorganisms, a favorite example with many who advocate “Intelligent Design” and irreducible complexity, has secretory functions in many bacteria and is not, solely, irreducibly, a mechanical, “designed”, means of motility. Also, where does one draw the line with irreducible complexity? At the level of the organ? The protein level? The DNA level? Flagella are highly variable concerning the number of proteins that constitute their makeup. Some microorganisms have 27 proteins that make a complete functioning flagellum, some have as many as 44 proteins for a functioning flagellum. Obviously, flagella protein numbers are not conserved. What would be the minimum “irreducible” number of proteins? This might be a question that could be investigated by “creation science”. However, if one does a Google Scholar search for all the “intelligent design” papers that are published in peer-reviewed journals one will be hard pressed to find one. “Creation science” apologists talk the talk, they do not walk the walk. As a side note. What creator is inferred by “creation science”? What if “creation science” had a logical foundation and its confirmed observations (facts) resulted in a theory of the origin of the universe that supported an origin based on the Great Turtle myth, not Judeo-Christian myth? Would any of the “creation science” proponents accept the result? There’s my feelings on the subject, Dave Gary

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list
by Olhomorto＠aol.com 04 Mar '05

04 Mar '05

If life was transplanted to Earth, was that merely one in a long process of transplants? If so, going how far back in time? It still had to "originate" somewhere, didn't it? And did it only "originate" once? Or does it "originate" over and over?

1 0

Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list
by astrodeb＠charter.net 04 Mar '05

04 Mar '05

Yes, and maybe a man could get pregnant eventually. LOL. Debbie > > From: Patrick Wiggins <paw(a)trilobyte.net> > Date: 2005/03/04 Fri PM 03:52:46 MST > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list > > astrodeb(a)charter.net wrote: > > > Fred Hoyle proved that germs/viruses could come from outer space. > > So since we have found martian rocks on Earth, maybe life was > transported here on Mars rocks and we are martians. > > > Nobody has ever created life in a laboratory either. > > Not yet... > > Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

1 0

Re: Re: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list
by astrodeb＠charter.net 04 Mar '05

04 Mar '05

Fred Hoyle proved that germs/viruses could come from outer space. If this is true then it is possible that life could be transplanted from another world to earth. Looking at M81/M82 last night through a 25", and seeing the structure of the galaxies, how could this be an accident or mistake? Nobody has ever created life in a laboratory either. Debbie > > From: Patrick Wiggins <paw(a)trilobyte.net> > Date: 2005/03/04 Fri PM 01:22:24 MST > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list > > Don J. Colton wrote: > > > There are several viewpoints about intelligent design including those of > > Phillip Johnson and microbiologist Michael Behe. Johnson and Behe believe > > that intelligent design (God) in some manner placed life on earth over > > geological time frames. > > But did it really have to be a deity? Could we (some/most/all) life > forms on Earth be here because we were seeded, intentionally or > accidentally, by some other civilization? > > I always grin when I contemplate we could be here because some explorers > visited early Earth and left their garbage behind. Those who don't like > the idea that humans might have evolved from apes might really get > irritated at the notion we evolved from alien "droppings". > > Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

2 1

Re: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005
by astrodeb＠charter.net 04 Mar '05

04 Mar '05

It would be interesting if I could spot Omega Centauri from there. Debbie > > From: "Don J. Colton" <djcolton(a)piol.com> > Date: 2005/03/02 Wed PM 04:40:04 MST > To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005 > > Yes > > -----Original Message----- > From: utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com(a)mailman.xmission.com > [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+djcolton=piol.com@mailman.xmission.com]On > Behalf Of astrodeb(a)charter.net > Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 4:03 PM > To: Utah Astronomy > Subject: Re: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005 > > > Would that be on the east side of the highway? > > Debbie > > > > From: "Don J. Colton" <djcolton(a)piol.com> > > Date: 2005/03/02 Wed PM 03:56:26 MST > > To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005 > > > > Anyone interested in attending the Bryce Canyon Star Party (June 1-4, > 2005) > > for at least two nights please contact me at djcolton(a)piol.com, if you > > haven't already. The Park will provide free camping at Sunset Campground > and > > free admission if you help out with the public star party from 9:00-11:30 > > PM, after 11:30 PM it essentially becomes a private star party till dawn. > > The star party this year will be across the highway from the visitors > center > > in a bigger parking lot than we had last year. It also provides a better > > southeast horizon. On Saturday night - Sunday morning Kevin Poe promises > to > > have his bacon wrapped filets again for all participants. > > > > We hope to have at least 50 scopes for the event. All participants must > > attend one volunteer orientation session. They will be held Wednesday, > > Thursday and Friday at 5:30 PM (?). > > > > Clear Skies > > Don Colton > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

5 4

RE: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list
by Lambert, Aaron 04 Mar '05

04 Mar '05

Does anyone know if Weber tapes these presentations or if a transcript will be provided, etc? I would be curious to hear what he has to say but there is no chance that I can get up there for it. Aaron > -----Original Message----- > From: Ron Vanderhule > Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2005 8:10 PM > To: Utah Astronomy > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] fodder for the list > <Snip info on Dr. Jason Lisle presentations at Weber> > Here is the schedule for Monday > > 7 March 2005 Monday Presentations 10:00 a.m. Relevance of > Genesis Weber State University Wildcat Theatre 3750 Harrison > Boulevard Ogden UT 84408 (The Wildcat Theatre is located in > the Student > Union.) > 11:00 a.m. Question/Answer > 2:00 p.m. Creation Astronomy: Viewing the Universe through > Biblical Glasses > 6:00 p.m. Big Problems with the Big Bang > 7:30 p.m. Astronomy: What do we Really Know > 8:30 p.m. Question/Answer >

1 0

Re: [Utah-astronomy] Omega Cen. from Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005
by astrodeb＠charter.net 03 Mar '05

03 Mar '05

I saw it in binoculars last spring through the light pollution of Hurricane. I may have to go out to Warner Valley, where we were last month, to get a better view. I viewed it through my 15" Obsession at Black Rock Rd, AZ back in 2002. My scope was all the way down when I viewed it. It was huge and bright. I would like to see it higher in the sky someday. Debbie > > From: Patrick Wiggins <paw(a)trilobyte.net> > Date: 2005/03/02 Wed PM 07:31:34 MST > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Omega Cen. from Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, > 2005 > > astrodeb(a)charter.net wrote: > > > It would be interesting if I could spot Omega Centauri from there. > > > > Debbie > > Theoretically it can be seen from as far north as SLC but it only gets a > bit over 1 degree above the southern horizon. > > It has been seen from Rush Valley. > > From Bryce (and St. George) it reaches about 5 degrees. > > In early June it transits about 2215 MDT. > > Patrick > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

4 3

RE: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005
by Rob Ratkowski 03 Mar '05

03 Mar '05

21 North on the Island of Maui, 1600 ft. up on the side of Haleakala Aloha Rob

2 1

Re: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005
by astrodeb＠charter.net 02 Mar '05

02 Mar '05

Oh, how I would love to image this cluster with my Rebel. Just may have to make a trip to Arizona so I can catch some of Omega's photons. Debbie > > From: Rob Ratkowski <ratkwski(a)hawaii.rr.com> > Date: 2005/03/02 Wed PM 05:24:11 MST > To: Utah Astronomy <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: Re: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Bryce Canyon Star Party June 1-4, 2005 > > Saw Omega Centauri from my front yard last night, Spring is coming > .............. > > > Aloha > Rob > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

2 1

Re: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Goodbye Astrophysics
by astrodeb＠charter.net 02 Mar '05

02 Mar '05

Hi Dale, They are still making their fine mounts, probably the best in the world. They just won't make their fine small refractors so they can concentrate on larger scopes, like the AP 160. I just hope you still have your teeth by the time you get your mount. Just kidding and I don't have any bad feelings against Astrophysics. I just like to get equipment in a reasonable amount of time. Debbie > > From: "Dale Hooper" <Dale.Hooper(a)sdl.usu.edu> > Date: 2005/03/02 Wed PM 04:49:04 MST > To: "Utah Astronomy" <utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com> > Subject: RE: [Utah-astronomy] Goodbye Astrophysics > > Hi Debbie, > > Your title had me kind of worried. AP does seem to have backlogs for > everything. But, I have hopes for an AP1200GTO in my way, way, way > distant future - and from your title I thought AP was going out of > business! <g> > > -----Original Message----- > From: > utah-astronomy-bounces+dale.hooper=sdl.usu.edu(a)mailman.xmission.com > [mailto:utah-astronomy-bounces+dale.hooper=sdl.usu.edu@mailman.xmission. > com] On Behalf Of astrodeb(a)charter.net > Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2005 4:32 PM > To: utah-astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > Subject: [Utah-astronomy] Goodbye Astrophysics > > I found out last night that Astrophysics is no longer making the smaller > scopes (AP 130 and smaller). I had to laugh out loud because my name as > been on their list for over four years. I guess I really wasn't in the > market for a Traveler since I turned down one back in 2002. The gal that > sold me my Losmandy mount also had a Traveler for sale but I declined. > > I guess I'm more into good customer service that TeleVue offers. Making > people wait four years for a product and then telling them "sorry, we > are not going to make these anymore" is not my idea of good customer > service! In fact, it is ridiculous. I think I would of said "no thanks" > if they ever called me and asked me if I wanted one. > > Anyway, I'm glad TeleVue wants my business if I ever decide to upgrade > to the NP101. It had a better startest anyway. I think there are better > more available options out there such as TeleVue, Takahashi, and TEC. > What do you guys think? > > Debbie > > No, I'm not disappointed. I'm glad to have my TeleVue. > > > > _______________________________________________ > Utah-Astronomy mailing list > Utah-Astronomy(a)mailman.xmission.com > http://mailman.xmission.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/utah-astronomy > Visit the Photo Gallery: http://www.utahastronomy.com >

2 1