Science > Physics > Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in a peerreviewed biology journal
| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"Sam Wormley" |
| Date: |
23 Apr 2005 11:38:25 AM |
| Object: |
Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in a peerreviewed biology journal |
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
These "skeptics" find what they consider to be a weak point in the
mainstream theory and critique it. Not by conducting original research;
they simply review previous work. Then they find a little-known, not
particularly influential journal where an editor sympathetic to their
viewpoint hangs his hat.
They get their paper through the peer review process and into print.
They publicize the hell out of it. Activists get excited by the study,
which has considerable political implications.
Before long, mainstream scientists catch on to what's happening. They
shake their heads. Some slam the article and the journal that published
it, questioning the review process and the editor's ideological
leanings. In published critiques, they tear the paper to scientific
shreds.
Embarrassed, the journal's publisher backs away from the work. But it's
too late for that. The press has gotten involved, and though the work
in question has been discredited in the world of science, partisans who
favor its conclusions for ideological reasons will champion it for
years to come.
The scientific waters are muddied. The damage is done.
See: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
.
|
|
| User: "Andy Resnick" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
25 Apr 2005 07:50:05 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
<snip>
It's not clear to me that this is a new problem rather than an extension
of an older problem. For years, sufficiently motivated individuals have
been founding "The National Center for the Study of ..." or some such
title, and set themselves up as a WELL-KNOWN NATIONAL EXPERT in
something (it helps if they can append some letters to the back of their
name also).
The fundamental problem is the willingness of people to give the benefit
of the doubt to sympathetic viewpoints and skepticism to opposing
viewpoints. Counteracting this tendency requires constant effort on
the part of the individual.
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
25 Apr 2005 08:54:47 AM |
|
|
In article <d4ip27$d82$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@op.case.edu> wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
<snip>
It's not clear to me that this is a new problem rather than an extension
of an older problem. For years, sufficiently motivated individuals have
been founding "The National Center for the Study of ..." or some such
title, and set themselves up as a WELL-KNOWN NATIONAL EXPERT in
something (it helps if they can append some letters to the back of their
name also).
Well, that's a fine idea. I'm happy to announce The National Center for
the Study of Greg Hansen. Its location will shift around as I go about
my daily chores.
--
"Tell me, Dr. Einstein, at what time does Boston arrive at this train?"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Andy Resnick" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
25 Apr 2005 02:18:27 PM |
|
|
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
In article <d4ip27$d82$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@op.case.edu> wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
<snip>
It's not clear to me that this is a new problem rather than an extension
of an older problem. For years, sufficiently motivated individuals have
been founding "The National Center for the Study of ..." or some such
title, and set themselves up as a WELL-KNOWN NATIONAL EXPERT in
something (it helps if they can append some letters to the back of their
name also).
Well, that's a fine idea. I'm happy to announce The National Center for
the Study of Greg Hansen. Its location will shift around as I go about
my daily chores.
You're not thinking big enough. How about "The International Foundation
for the Preservation of Greg Hansen"? Charge people $50 per year for an
annual newsletter.
Even better: "Hansen's Disease Foundation". :) Help us find a cure!
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed biology journal |
09 May 2005 01:54:43 PM |
|
|
Andy Resnick wrote:
You're not thinking big enough. How about "The International
Foundation
for the Preservation of Greg Hansen"? Charge people $50 per year for
an
annual newsletter.
Starting a foundation is NOT a null action. It requires filing for
incorporation. This will have further consequences down the line of
tax forms you will need to file (and how often). Further information
can be found by web search.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Gregory L. Hansen" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
25 Apr 2005 03:44:53 PM |
|
|
In article <d4jfqf$puc$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@op.case.edu> wrote:
Gregory L. Hansen wrote:
In article <d4ip27$d82$1@eeyore.INS.cwru.edu>,
Andy Resnick <andy.resnick@op.case.edu> wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
<snip>
It's not clear to me that this is a new problem rather than an extension
of an older problem. For years, sufficiently motivated individuals have
been founding "The National Center for the Study of ..." or some such
title, and set themselves up as a WELL-KNOWN NATIONAL EXPERT in
something (it helps if they can append some letters to the back of their
name also).
Well, that's a fine idea. I'm happy to announce The National Center for
the Study of Greg Hansen. Its location will shift around as I go about
my daily chores.
You're not thinking big enough. How about "The International Foundation
for the Preservation of Greg Hansen"? Charge people $50 per year for an
annual newsletter.
Ooh, a Foundation! I can manage an endowment of a buck-fifty, but I
haven't talked to my contributors yet.
"Hey, Maw! Ya wanna contribute to my foundation?"
Even better: "Hansen's Disease Foundation". :) Help us find a cure!
--
Andrew Resnick, Ph.D.
Department of Physiology and Biophysics
Case Western Reserve University
--
"Let us learn to dream, gentlemen, then perhaps we shall find the
truth... But let us beware of publishing our dreams before they have been
put to the proof by the waking understanding." -- Friedrich August Kekulé
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Sefton" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
23 Apr 2005 04:59:37 PM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
These "skeptics" find what they consider to be a weak point in the
mainstream theory and critique it. Not by conducting original research;
they simply review previous work. Then they find a little-known, not
particularly influential journal where an editor sympathetic to their
viewpoint hangs his hat.
They get their paper through the peer review process and into print.
They publicize the hell out of it. Activists get excited by the study,
which has considerable political implications.
Before long, mainstream scientists catch on to what's happening. They
shake their heads. Some slam the article and the journal that published
it, questioning the review process and the editor's ideological
leanings. In published critiques, they tear the paper to scientific
shreds.
Embarrassed, the journal's publisher backs away from the work. But it's
too late for that. The press has gotten involved, and though the work
in question has been discredited in the world of science, partisans who
favor its conclusions for ideological reasons will champion it for
years to come.
The scientific waters are muddied. The damage is done.
See: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Sam, you're such a square.
I never believe 100% in anything; rather, I give
something a percentage rating of being true.
That there is *a* or perhaps *several levels* of
higher intelligence than Man is in the high 90s.
If you don't agree with that, then maybe there
are different levels of perception of, or perhaps
involvement with, things ordained somehow.
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
23 Apr 2005 05:11:06 PM |
|
|
John Sefton wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
These "skeptics" find what they consider to be a weak point in the
mainstream theory and critique it. Not by conducting original research;
they simply review previous work. Then they find a little-known, not
particularly influential journal where an editor sympathetic to their
viewpoint hangs his hat.
They get their paper through the peer review process and into print.
They publicize the hell out of it. Activists get excited by the study,
which has considerable political implications.
Before long, mainstream scientists catch on to what's happening. They
shake their heads. Some slam the article and the journal that published
it, questioning the review process and the editor's ideological
leanings. In published critiques, they tear the paper to scientific
shreds.
Embarrassed, the journal's publisher backs away from the work. But it's
too late for that. The press has gotten involved, and though the work
in question has been discredited in the world of science, partisans who
favor its conclusions for ideological reasons will champion it for
years to come.
The scientific waters are muddied. The damage is done.
See: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Sam, you're such a square.
I never believe 100% in anything; rather, I give
something a percentage rating of being true.
That there is *a* or perhaps *several levels* of
higher intelligence than Man is in the high 90s.
If you don't agree with that, then maybe there
are different levels of perception of, or perhaps
involvement with, things ordained somehow.
John
Science is based on empirical data, John.
.
|
|
|
| User: "John Sefton" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
24 Apr 2005 06:38:43 AM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
John Sefton wrote:
Sam Wormley wrote:
How did the Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed
biology journal? A similar--and notorious--story from climate science
sheds light on the question.
Ref: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Chris Mooney; September 13, 2004
This is how it begins: Proponents of a fringe or non-mainstream
scientific viewpoint seek added credibility. They're sick of being
taunted for having few (if any) peer reviewed publications in their
favor. Fed up, they decide to do something about it.
These "skeptics" find what they consider to be a weak point in the
mainstream theory and critique it. Not by conducting original research;
they simply review previous work. Then they find a little-known, not
particularly influential journal where an editor sympathetic to their
viewpoint hangs his hat.
They get their paper through the peer review process and into print.
They publicize the hell out of it. Activists get excited by the study,
which has considerable political implications.
Before long, mainstream scientists catch on to what's happening. They
shake their heads. Some slam the article and the journal that published
it, questioning the review process and the editor's ideological
leanings. In published critiques, they tear the paper to scientific
shreds.
Embarrassed, the journal's publisher backs away from the work. But it's
too late for that. The press has gotten involved, and though the work
in question has been discredited in the world of science, partisans who
favor its conclusions for ideological reasons will champion it for
years to come.
The scientific waters are muddied. The damage is done.
See: http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/deja-vu/
Sam, you're such a square.
I never believe 100% in anything; rather, I give
something a percentage rating of being true.
That there is *a* or perhaps *several levels* of
higher intelligence than Man is in the high 90s.
If you don't agree with that, then maybe there
are different levels of perception of, or perhaps
involvement with, things ordained somehow.
John
Science is based on empirical data, John.
so is statistics
and you can argue either side of any question
with them
interpretation of the data is the province
of the current ruler- qm or whatever- voodoo?
same thing
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
24 Apr 2005 07:25:18 AM |
|
|
John Sefton wrote:
and you can argue either side of any question
with them [statistics]
Not so in physics, John.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tom Potter" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in a peer reviewed biology journal |
26 Apr 2005 07:11:31 AM |
|
|
*** post for FREE via your newsreader at post.newsfeed.com ***
"Sam Wormley" <swormley1@mchsi.com> wrote in message
news:OeMae.15816$r53.266@attbi_s21...
John Sefton wrote:
and you can argue either side of any question
with them [statistics]
Not so in physics, John.
Is the cat dead or alive?
--
Tom Potter
http://home.earthlink.net/~tdp
http://photos.yahoo.com/tdp1001
-----= Posted via Newsfeed.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeed.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== 100,000 Groups! - 19 Servers! - Unlimited Download! =-----
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "John Sefton" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
24 Apr 2005 05:09:06 PM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
John Sefton wrote:
and you can argue either side of any question
with them [statistics]
Not so in physics, John.
In Physics, it seems, one can conjure
up a completely new class of invisible
and unseeable matter ( DM ) when the
data doesn't match ( *your* suck gravity )
predictions.
Then 20 years later a new class
of energy ( DE ) which pushes things-
coincidentally, exactly the kind of energy
moving in all directions which could produce
Le Sage type gravity- can be created out of thin air
(where does it come from, what kind of energy;
em?)
In Physics, it seems, the most totally outrageous
arguments are accepted on less-than-nothing.
John
.
|
|
|
| User: "Sam Wormley" |
|
| Title: Re: Cranks take note -- Intelligent Design movement publish in apeer reviewed biology journal |
24 Apr 2005 06:02:02 PM |
|
|
John Sefton wrote:
In Physics, it seems, one can conjure
up a completely new class of invisible
and unseeable matter ( DM ) when the
data doesn't match ( *your* suck gravity )
predictions.
In physics, astrophysicists measure the effects of gravitation
on the rotation of galaxies and members of galactic clusters.
Gravity is well modeled by GTR and is fruitful tool to map Dark
Matter!
Scientists Map Dark Matter, Prove Einstein Right
http://www.space.com/news/cosmic_shear_000512.html
Particle Dark Matter: Evidence, Candidates and Constraints
http://arxiv.org/abs/hep-ph/0404175
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Intelligent Design is Obviously False (was: ... Intelligent Design ... publish[ed]) |
28 Apr 2005 06:12:23 PM |
|
|
Sam Wormley wrote:
Science is based on empirical data, John.
.... the main problem which is spelled out repeatedly below.
Sorry if it repeats, but some times it pays to beat a dead horse, just
to make doubly sure it doesn't get back up.
From talk.origins
March 2, 2002
macaddicted <harisel...@starsend.org> wrote:
Does anyone know of a scientist who holds a graduate
level degree in a specialty related to evolution and has
published in scientific peer reviewed journals who supports ID?
It would be kinda hard, since in order to have intelligent design you
have to have things whose designs were intelligent! But when you look
around, all you ever see are incredibly stupid "designs" that no
competent designer would have ever made.
If intelligent design were true, we'd all have wheels instead of legs,
or operate by jet power (combined with our respiratory system); instead
of having to compensate for this stupid design with a whole glut of
automobiles and other vehicles.
Nobody in their right mind would design a system-critical function
without some serious redundant backup. If there were intelligent
design, we'd have 2 hearts, not 1. A left heart and a right heart;
just like we have a left and right lung.
We wouldn't have nerves, but microelectronic (or better) structures
which allow signalling speeds of a sizeable fraction of the speed of
light, instead of the piddling slow speed.
If there were intelligent design, this whole planet would not be so
easily ripe for takeover by the REAL products of intelligent design --
the generation of intelligent machines and/or cyborgs
(machine-retrofitted organic lifeforms) which will overtake the human
race and become the dominant species.
==================
From news://sci.anthropology
January 23, 2003
edconrad@shenhgts.net (Ed Conrad) wrote:
Deceit, deception, collusion, conspiracy
[x 15]
Littanies of personal manifestos aside, the main problem is that in
order to have intelligent design, you need to first HAVE an intelligent
design, which there clearly ain't very much of.
There are so many sound, well-known, principles of sound engineering
lacking from the construction of the human body that it looks like
nothing more than a parsimonious accident ... and even that achieved
only after extensive trial and error.
Meanwhile, a mere 100 years of engineering have led to machines that
can outperform even the best chess player in the world, outfly the
swiftest birds, and move over land up to 10 times faster than a
cheetah.
And half the endeavor wouldn't have even been necessary, had the body,
itself, just been designed more soundly so that humans wouldn't have to
constantly go seeking compensations via machines for what nature was
too inept to equip them with. Add to that the whole medical industry.
============
From news://talk.origins
April 4, 2003
Glenn <gsheldon@qwest.net> wrote:
Today, biologists have a new and growing theory of life's origin:
intelligent design.
But in order to have intelligent design, you need to have an
intelligent design! Humans are a monstrosity of ad hoc kludges and
horrifically incompetent "design decisions" (looking so bad that it's
like someone just threw a bunch of parts up in the air and said
'done!') which our societies have already spent too much time
dedicating too many resources trying to fix. Automobiles, computers,
communications networks, houses, clothing, the entire medical and
health profession -- all these things to fix a "design" that no
"designer" ever had any business putting together in the first place!
And all that wasted effort creating a massively parallel computer of a
brain and then squandering it all by hooking it up to the world with
low bandwidth channels practically worse than a single lousy RS-232
link. What a waste of effort, if it really was a "design".
The critical systems are ALWAYS designed with redundant backup. That
means at 2 hearts, not one. There's no capacity for self-repair (i.e.,
self-cloning of replacement organs during a period of stasis following
severe injury); extremely slow and inefficient locomotion (where's the
jet propulsion system linked to the respiratory system? Or for God's
sake, even wheels?!) Signals going a mere paltry few hundred miles per
hour. I mean come on. Is it too much both to use something that
actually conducts electricity and allows signals to go around light
speed?
The list just goes on and on.
The "design" shows no evidence of intelligence.
The mere proposition of the theory is the height of hubris of a species
too full of itself which has clearly overstayed its welcome aboard the
top of the food chain.
===========
From news://wi.general
November 6, 2002
Carol Lee Smith <human@csd.uwm.edu> writes:
Dr. Massimo Pigliucci will give a free 60-minute presentation entitled
"A Critique of Intelligent Design Theory"
In his UWM presentation, Dr. Pigliucci will dissect arguments
advanced by creationists, who claim intelligent design--and its
implied God-designer--is the best explanation for existence.
According to Dr. Pigliucci, such arguments are "clever but [...]
Not even. It is not only not clever, but the whole idea misses the
point: the body is NOT an intelligent design to begin with!
As a design, it is incredibly stupid and incompetent. The
communications is ploddingly slow, inefficient -- so much so that a
great deal of technology has been dedicated just to compensate for that
flaw. The most critical subsystem (the heart) has no backup -- any
responsible designer would have placed 2 hearts in the body: a left and
right one.
There's no repair system for any of the critical systems. Other
species can, for instance, grow new body parts. It's taken up to the
latter part of the 20th century just to get to the point where this
flaw can even begin to be addressed and compensated for by technology
(cloning body parts).
[And the brains of a large segment of the population (the
fundamentalists) is so thoroughly damaged that they actually trying
their damned hardest (of all things!) to lobby to prevent even so much
as that!]
The transportation system is -- frankly -- totally lame; and a large
portion of modern technology has had to have been developed just to
compensate for the unbelievably incredible oversight of the "designer".
If there had been a designer, they must have been half asleep when
doing the project.
If the body had been designed, it would have had wheels, not legs, or
otherwise would have been capable of flight by jet propulsion, with the
respiratory system linked up with the propulsion system. The only good
legs do is that they serve as nice ornamentation for female bodies.
For all the supposed advantages of the "design" of the brain, what good
does it do if it's all just going to get lost the first time the heart
breaks down because someone forgot to design a backup to the critical
system. And what good does all the processing power do, if the
reaction time is so incredibly slow that you end up getting run down by
a car (or animal in the wild) because you couldn't think fast enough to
get out of the way. At the level of milliseconds, you're as dead and
unresponsive as a rock.
And what good is all the power or intelligence (which, itself, is
begging the
question) if it's all imprisoned inside a calcium prison with nothing
connecting it to the outside world except an extremely narrow channel.
That's like designing a 10 lane highway and then routing it to a dead
end street. Good going, there.
Had this "designer" been working for me, I would have fired their butt
for their extreme incompetence. There simply is no design. That much
is self-evident.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Nick" |
|
| Title: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
28 Apr 2005 09:43:03 PM |
|
|
That's all there is.
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
02 May 2005 08:00:57 PM |
|
|
Egg contains a little space of air gap inside of its flatter side.
Examine that before you eat it. Do you know what is for? Chicken going
on creation inside of the egg does not need this air space because it
does not breath. But at the moment of its grown up, it has to breath
air in order to break out its shell. You have to note this careful
design is not made by its mother hen or father *****, or their ancestors.
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
07 May 2005 04:16:04 AM |
|
|
newedana wrote:
Egg contains a little space of air gap inside of its flatter side.
Examine that before you eat it. Do you know what is for? Chicken
going
on creation inside of the egg does not need this air space because it
does not breath. But at the moment of its grown up, it has to breath
air in order to break out its shell. You have to note this careful
design is not made by its mother hen or father *****, or their
ancestors.
As one knows, water has the highest density at 4 celsius degrees, and
the density of solid water is smaller than that of boiling water. This
is quite unusual in density trend of materials as changing their phase
states, since any of solid materials has a higher density than that of
their liquid state. Dr. Yoon elegantly explains the mechanism how water
can have such physical characters in molecular level in his new physics
based on universal atomic model ( www.yoonsatom.net), and says if water
is not exception from this ubiquitous density trend of materials, no
living creatures would survive in an extremely cold weather, because
ice formation has to start from the bottom of ponds, streams and seas
as temperature goes down under its freezing point, and cannot cover the
water surface for to sustain the temperature of liquid water. He
continues to explain the mechanism in molecular level in his book, how
can water have such an outstandingly larger heat capacity, so that
water can play a role of giant heat reservoir for adjustment of global
wether, occupying 4/5 of global surface. Otherwise living things cannot
survive on the earth. Isn't it an intelligent structural design of
water molecule to have such physical characters for living things on
the earth? Present science cannot explain these physical characters of
water molecules, even the liquid state of water in orbital electron
level. newedana
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bilge" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
09 May 2005 02:29:33 AM |
|
|
newedana:
wether, occupying 4/5 of global surface. Otherwise living things cannot
survive on the earth. Isn't it an intelligent structural design of
water molecule to have such physical characters for living things on
the earth?
That's completely silly. Do you really think water molecules decided
to have those properties so humans could evolve on earth?
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
09 May 2005 08:41:01 AM |
|
|
DNA > That's completely silly. Do you really think water molecules
decided
to have those properties so humans could evolve on earth?
The physical character of water molecules explained in Dr. Yoon's new
physics through 15 pages, is really revolutionary and surprising, in
terms of its scientific perfect analysis. One cannot find such
informations in any existing publications. Physics and chemistry today
do not know at all for physical characters of water molecules, except
that its chemical composition is two hydrogen and one oxygen atom.
Presently, the interaction between two OH groups of water molecules is
hydrogen bonding force, but this understanding is totally incorrect,
since water molecule is electrically perfect neutral by itself, so
there does not occur such a coulomb's attraction between them, if
coulomb's law is correct. Attraction between water molecules is due to
Meissoner's magnetic attraction induced by two OH molecular electron
rings and two non-bonded electron rings of oxygen atom( details are in
his book). So that a water molecule can have 4 hands possible to link
neighboring other water molecules. The force binding between OH*OH and
binding between O*O are temperature sensitive due to molecular heat
motion of water molecules, and their curves of attractive intensity
drawn on temperature scale have differently sloped curvatures.
Intersecting point of these two curves on temperature scale represents
the 4 degree celsius where water has the highest density. Intersecting
point between OH*OH curve and that of heat momentum of water molecule
represents boiling temperature of water, and another intersecting point
between O*O curve and the same momentum curve represents 70 degrees
celsius. What is the meaning of this 70 degrees? Surprisingly it is the
temperature of killing living creatures, the temperature denaturing
organic living tissues, ie, raw eggs turn into boiled eggs at this
temperature.(More details are in his book). According to Dr. Yoon's new
physics, the single crystallography today applied in analysis of
protein or DNA structure contains full of nonsense. RNA or any protein
chains do not have such an intricately curved 3 dimensional structure
in living tissues. They must have rather straightly extended chain
forms, due to coexistence of water molecules with great numbers. DNA
does not form a double helix inside the living body, because it does
not form a single crystal inside it. He explains how is the form of
bio-waters in living creatures, not yet defined in biochemistry today.
Then is it the same as the water in a glass cup? No! It is a linear
association of water molecules laterally linking between functional
groups of bio-polymer chains arranged in parallel to build a gel
crystal, a new family of crystal which Dr.Yoon discovered first, and
published in Nature, in 1987. Chemical reaction in the network of this
gel crystal is entirely different from that in free chemical
environment. This fact suggests a great deal of new scientific truth
hidden up to the present, such as the mechanism of enzymatic reaction.
The mechanism of attacking living tissure by micro bio-cells. newedana
wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "Bilge" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
10 May 2005 10:27:33 AM |
|
|
newedana:
DNA > That's completely silly. Do you really think water molecules
decided
to have those properties so humans could evolve on earth?
The physical character of water molecules explained in Dr. Yoon's new
physics through 15 pages, is really revolutionary and surprising, in
I assume that your conglomeration of non-sense means you don't
have ab answer.
terms of its scientific perfect analysis. One cannot find such
informations in any existing publications. Physics and chemistry today
do not know at all for physical characters of water molecules, except
that its chemical composition is two hydrogen and one oxygen atom.
Presently, the interaction between two OH groups of water molecules is
hydrogen bonding force, but this understanding is totally incorrect,
since water molecule is electrically perfect neutral by itself, so
there does not occur such a coulomb's attraction between them, if
coulomb's law is correct. Attraction between water molecules is due to
Meissoner's magnetic attraction induced by two OH molecular electron
rings and two non-bonded electron rings of oxygen atom( details are in
his book). So that a water molecule can have 4 hands possible to link
neighboring other water molecules. The force binding between OH*OH and
binding between O*O are temperature sensitive due to molecular heat
motion of water molecules, and their curves of attractive intensity
drawn on temperature scale have differently sloped curvatures.
Intersecting point of these two curves on temperature scale represents
the 4 degree celsius where water has the highest density. Intersecting
point between OH*OH curve and that of heat momentum of water molecule
represents boiling temperature of water, and another intersecting point
between O*O curve and the same momentum curve represents 70 degrees
celsius. What is the meaning of this 70 degrees? Surprisingly it is the
temperature of killing living creatures, the temperature denaturing
organic living tissues, ie, raw eggs turn into boiled eggs at this
temperature.(More details are in his book). According to Dr. Yoon's new
physics, the single crystallography today applied in analysis of
protein or DNA structure contains full of nonsense. RNA or any protein
chains do not have such an intricately curved 3 dimensional structure
in living tissues. They must have rather straightly extended chain
forms, due to coexistence of water molecules with great numbers. DNA
does not form a double helix inside the living body, because it does
not form a single crystal inside it. He explains how is the form of
bio-waters in living creatures, not yet defined in biochemistry today.
Then is it the same as the water in a glass cup? No! It is a linear
association of water molecules laterally linking between functional
groups of bio-polymer chains arranged in parallel to build a gel
crystal, a new family of crystal which Dr.Yoon discovered first, and
published in Nature, in 1987. Chemical reaction in the network of this
gel crystal is entirely different from that in free chemical
environment. This fact suggests a great deal of new scientific truth
hidden up to the present, such as the mechanism of enzymatic reaction.
The mechanism of attacking living tissure by micro bio-cells. newedana
wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
10 May 2005 10:36:24 PM |
|
|
Material World in part 111 of Dr. Yoon's new physics describes a
variety of physicochemical phenomena occurring in material world
without setting forth any postulations or hypotheses, based on simple
two basic principles, existing already but hidden and neglected up to
the present, owing to a strong influence of particle physics. One
principle is the Meissoner's magnetism( discovered in 1911 by H.
Kamerlingh Onnes et al) induced by orbital persistent current ring
building atomic structure and molecules(Dr.Yoon applied their
persistent current as atomic and molecular electron rings). This
magnetism has a unique character not found in ordinary magnetisms such
as magnetisms exerted by permanent magnets(it contains also atomic
electron rings iducing Meisooner's mangnetism within it)or
solenoid-current system. The Meissoner's magnetic force fluxes the
Meissoner's magnetism attracts the orbital electron rings in atoms with
the same radial distance or resonant frequency due to their
unification, while repulse them with different radii or different
frequency. This Meissoner's magnetism is the binding force of atoms to
build a molecule, and governs not only all the chemical reactions, but
also all the physical characters of atom or molecules. The other
principle is energy problem. Energy does not exist as an independent
entity forming a corpuscular ultimate unit in the universe, as particle
physicists believe today. It is a continuous entity in
character,indivisible as ultimate units. So there does not exist such a
phenomenon changing in quantum steps in material world. For example,
people today is wrongly taught, orbital electron can jump up to another
orbit with a higher energy level. It is a false story that can persuade
only little children. Jumping motion means quick movement. Quick
movement does not need its moving path? Mass particle disappears
magically all of sudden and reappears at some wanted place? It appears
that this idea originates to a dummy mathematician who has only
number-counting habits for discontinuous particles. Dr.Yoon explains
almost whole physicochemical phenomena occurring in material world,
with such a broad spectrum ranging from micro biology to cosmology.
Particularly surprising information I got from his text is his
carbohydrate chemistry. For example, CO2 dissolved in H2O is held
between two O's of water molecules, as H2O*CO2*OH2, since there has to
occur a strong Meissoner's magnetic attraction between the same kind of
atoms, according to his principle. It reminds us that CO2 dissolved in
water is completely driven out at 70 degrees celsius, the temperature
killing living tissues. Then what would happen to this molecular
aggregation when the solar energy is irradiated? One of molecular
electron rings binding C and O slide over the atomic core of O, and
turns into electron rings to bind two hydrogen atoms to build C*H2O,
the fundamental building block of all kinds of carbohydrate materials,
such as sugars, starch and cellulose, releasing an O from the system.
The solar energy moves the molecular electron rings binding C and O, to
build a carbohydrate segment. As one knows the photosynthesis by plant
vegetable is the greatest mystery in nature, so human being could never
simulate it yet. He explains the mechanism of forming hydrocarbon
segments in plant cells, CH2-CH2 the basis of vegetable oil, the
conensed energy form, from carbohydrate segments with the same
chemistry. The reverse chemical reaction, the burning reaction of
carbohydrates by oxygen, is elegantly explained also in his book. And
he explains that the energy source of living creature is ultimately
nothing else than the energy released from hydrogen atoms when they
burn to build water molecules, and he concludes finally that how
amazingly designed is the natural law by intelligence of nature.
newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
17 May 2005 07:48:58 AM |
|
|
wedana:
DNA > That's completely silly. Do you really think water molecules
decided
to have
those properties so humans could evolve on earth
?
I assume that your conglomeration of non-sense means you don't
have ab answer.
*************
The Meissoner's magnetism has a unique character not found in ordinary
magnetisms such as magnetisms exerted by permanent magnets or
solenoid-current system. The Meissoner's magnetism attracts the orbital
electron rings in atoms with the same radial parameter or resonant
frequency, while repulse them without these conditions. This
Meissoner's magnetism is the binding force of atoms to build a
molecule, and governs not only all the chemical reactions, but also all
the physical characters of atom or molecules, such as phase change of
materials. For example, CO2 dissolved in H2O is held between two O's of
water molecules, as H2O*OCO*OH2, since there has to occur a strong
Meissoner's magnetic attraction between the same kind of atoms,
according to his principle. Then what would happen to this molecular
aggregation when the solar radiation is irradiated upon it? One of
molecular electron rings binding C and O is pushed to slide over the
atomic core of O, and turns into electron rings to bind two hydrogen
atoms to build C*H2O, the fundamental building block of all kinds of
carbohydrate materials, such as glucose, sugars, starchs and
celluloses, releasing an O from the system. The solar energy acts to
move the molecular electron rings binding C and O, to build a
carbohydrate segment. Thus Six C*H2O connect to build a glucose
molecule which polymerizes again by dehydrating to build starch and
cellulose molecules. With analogical chemistry CH2-CH2 the fundamental
building block of vegetable oil, the energy container more densely
condensed, is built possible from C*H2O segments by releasing also O
atom form the system, in order to store it for use in critical
situation of living things. As one knows this is the photosynthesis
carried out by vegetable or high plant, the greatest mystery in the
nature, so human being could not simulate these processes yet. The
reverse chemical reaction, the burning mechanism of carbohydrates by
oxygen, is elegantly explained in his book. And he explains that the
energy source of living creature is nothing else than the energy
released from hydrogen atoms when they burn to build water molecules.
If we understand water molecules can only bind themselves by hydrogen
bonding force, it is impossible to comprehend the mechanism of
photo-synthesis chemistry, established by Dr.Yoon first.
Photo-synthesis is to supply foods for animal species, and oils in
animal species is a condensed energy source when animals fail to get
food just only a chance, since their mistake connects directly to their
dead if oils are not stored in their body. He concludes finally that
how amazingly designed is the native system by intelligence of nature.
newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
10 May 2005 10:53:21 PM |
|
|
newedana wrote:
DNA > That's completely silly. Do you really think water molecules
decided
to have those properties so humans could evolve on earth?
The physical character of water molecules explained in Dr. Yoon's
new
physics through 15 pages, is really revolutionary and surprising, in
terms of its scientific perfect analysis. One cannot find such
informations in any existing publications. Physics and chemistry
today
do not know at all for physical characters of water molecules
That's crap. The structure of water and why it has those
characteristics has been known for decades. Most basic chemistry texts
feature this information.
except
that its chemical composition is two hydrogen and one oxygen atom.
Presently, the interaction between two OH groups of water molecules
is
hydrogen bonding force, but this understanding is totally incorrect,
since water molecule is electrically perfect neutral by itself, so
there does not occur such a coulomb's attraction between them, if
coulomb's law is correct.
More crap and a complete lack of understanding of the polarization of
neutral bodies, including molecules. Look up molecular dipole moments
in any chemistry text. Look up electronegativity.
Attraction between water molecules is due to
Meissoner's magnetic attraction induced by two OH molecular electron
rings and two non-bonded electron rings of oxygen atom( details are
in
his book). So that a water molecule can have 4 hands possible to link
neighboring other water molecules. The force binding between OH*OH
and
binding between O*O are temperature sensitive due to molecular heat
motion of water molecules, and their curves of attractive intensity
drawn on temperature scale have differently sloped curvatures.
Intersecting point of these two curves on temperature scale
represents
the 4 degree celsius where water has the highest density.
Intersecting
point between OH*OH curve and that of heat momentum of water molecule
represents boiling temperature of water, and another intersecting
point
between O*O curve and the same momentum curve represents 70 degrees
celsius.
Which probably points to a flaw in Yoon's theory.
What is the meaning of this 70 degrees? Surprisingly it is the
temperature of killing living creatures, the temperature denaturing
organic living tissues, ie, raw eggs turn into boiled eggs at this
temperature.
Note that the denaturing of *protein* molecules has nothing to do with
*water* molecules. What is the meaning of this 70, then? Surprisingly,
this is the average lifespan of human beings, measured in years. Gee,
that sounds like as compelling a coincidence as the one you proposed.
(More details are in his book). According to Dr. Yoon's new
physics, the single crystallography today applied in analysis of
protein or DNA structure contains full of nonsense. RNA or any
protein
chains do not have such an intricately curved 3 dimensional structure
in living tissues. They must have rather straightly extended chain
forms, due to coexistence of water molecules with great numbers. DNA
does not form a double helix inside the living body,
Except that this structure has indeed been seen in situ. Experiment
wins again. Of course, Dr. Yoon is relying on 50-year-old information.
because it does
not form a single crystal inside it. He explains how is the form of
bio-waters in living creatures, not yet defined in biochemistry
today.
Then is it the same as the water in a glass cup? No! It is a linear
association of water molecules laterally linking between functional
groups of bio-polymer chains arranged in parallel to build a gel
crystal, a new family of crystal which Dr.Yoon discovered first, and
published in Nature, in 1987.
Yes, for poly vinyl alcohols. These, note, are not biopolymers.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Abstract
To effectively orient the molecular chains of novel syndiotactic
poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA) microfibrillar fiber (PVA fibril), a
high-temperature zone-drawing method was adopted. The PVA fibrils were
directly prepared from the saponification and in situ fibrillation
without a spinning procedure. The maximum draw ratio of the PVA fibril
increased with a decrease in the syndiotactic diad (r-diad) content,
indicating that the deformability of PVA molecules was lowered in
higher syndiotactic PVA. Degree of crystal orientations up to 0.990
were achieved by stretching the PVA fibril with the r-diad content of
65.1% and the original degree of crystal orientation of 0.902 at 250
=B0C close to its crystal melting temperature (Tm). When the same draw
ratio was applied to the fibrils, a higher crystal orientation was
achieved for the fibrils having higher syndiotacticity. Wide-angle
X-ray data show that the longitudinal crystal sizes of drawn PVA
fibrils were larger in higher syndiotacticities. The degree of crystal
orientation, crystallinity, Tm, longitudinal crystal size, and tensile
strength of the maximum drawn PVA fibril with a r-diad content of 65.1%
were 0.99, 0.97, 279 =B0C, 187 =C5, and 4.66 N/tex, respectively. =A9 2001
John Wiley & Sons, Inc. J Polym Sci Part B: Polym Phys 39: 1263-1271,
2001
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
Chemical reaction in the network of this
gel crystal is entirely different from that in free chemical
environment. This fact suggests a great deal of new scientific truth
hidden up to the present, such as the mechanism of enzymatic
reaction.
The mechanism of attacking living tissure by micro bio-cells.
newedana
wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
10 May 2005 11:54:06 PM |
|
|
crystal, a new family of crystal which Dr.Yoon discovered first, and
published in Nature, in 1987.
Yes, for poly vinyl alcohols. These, note, are not biopolymers.
==============================
you do not know what is different in molecular orientation of fiber
from ordinary plastics having merely a fiber shape. Have you ever seen
the streching process performing by plant cell when it forms its native
fibers? Dr. Yoon simulated the formation of native fibers without
streching process, by forming a gel ctrystal. You better read Dr.Yoon's
article published in Nature in 1987 Apr, volum 326 " Fiber Synthesis by
growth-packing" newedana
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
11 May 2005 02:02:25 AM |
|
|
70 is only the span of uman life
Perhaps you do ot know what means the denaturation and pysiological
temperature 70 degrees, denaturing bio-polymers, . It is a real tragidy
as a natural scientist. Present knowledge for the denaturation means a
three dimensional change of molecular conformation of bio-plymer
chains, such as twisting and flodings themselves. However, in Dr.
Yoon's new physics, denaturation means the destruction of gel crystal
built with bio-water chains and bio-polymers in living creatures. Any
one simply can observe the bio-gel crystal in living organic tissue
under a cross polarizers. Dummy scientsts today say that it is a kind
of liquid crystals. But it is wrong! What is the definition of liquid?
Molecules inside the phase is not bounded so thay can move freely
within its phase. What is the basic definition of crystal? Molecules
inside the crystal phase have three dimensionally ordered arrangement
fixing themselves in its crystal networks. Have you ever hear the silly
language, woden iron? natural science conducted by particle physicists
today uses this kind of silly words, in regardlees of its meaning.
newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
17 May 2005 03:53:36 AM |
|
|
Except that this structure has indeed been seen in situ. Experiment
wins again. Of course, Dr. Yoon is relying on 50-year-old information
You are totally ignorant how the information of DNA double helix came
out. It is from single-crystalograpy applied on DNA single crystals by
Dr.Cleak. Do you believe electron microscope can obseve a live specimen
of organic tissure? It is wrong! You do not know electron microscope
the most advanced and powerful observing tool today, is operated under
less than 10^-12 torr of vacuum chamber. You believe our science today
can obeseve molecules directly?. No it is also wrong! We can obseve
only inorganic specimen that is heat resistive against electron
bomardments of ultra high voltage. newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "PD" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
17 May 2005 07:54:46 AM |
|
|
newedana wrote:
Except that this structure has indeed been seen in situ. Experiment
wins again. Of course, Dr. Yoon is relying on 50-year-old information
You are totally ignorant how the information of DNA double helix
came
out. It is from single-crystalograpy applied on DNA single crystals
by
Dr.Cleak.
Again, I remark that you are relying on 50-year-old information.
Do you believe electron microscope can obseve a live specimen
of organic tissure? It is wrong! You do not know electron microscope
the most advanced and powerful observing tool today, is operated
under
less than 10^-12 torr of vacuum chamber.
Again, I remark that you are relying on old information. There are
better, more sensitive instruments than electron microscopy.
You believe our science today
can obeseve molecules directly?. No it is also wrong! We can obseve
only inorganic specimen that is heat resistive against electron
bomardments of ultra high voltage. newedana wrote
I'm including the very first hit I clicked on in a web search:
http://www.hgc.cornell.edu/afmdna/
Catching up on the literature might be a first step.
PD
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
17 May 2005 09:51:00 AM |
|
|
Again, I remark that you are relying on old information. There are
better, more sensitive instruments than electron microscopy.
I'm including the very first hit I clicked on in a web search:
http://www.hgc.cornell.edu/afm=ADdna/
Catching up on the literature might be a first step.
PD
**********
You mean that AFM pictures of PutR-bound PutA DNA (scalebars =3D 50 nm)
in the website www.conell.edu/afmdna/ is real shape of DNA molecule? I
sow it resembles like a tiny band string. Can you imagine how is the
real shape of DNA-like macro molecules in their natural states? It is a
long linkage of component atoms such as carbon, phosphorous hydrogen
oxygen and nitrogen, which are connected with electromagnetic forces
right? Can you template these atoms and electromagnetic binding force
connecting these element atoms on mica so as to be seen as a band
string as shown in two pictures? It is fraud! DNA like molecules cannot
have such a band like shape because DNA component atoms are not bound
with visible tiny strings. You better say you can take photograph of
radio wave with your camera. newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
17 May 2005 07:43:31 PM |
|
|
When I read the prepace p-2 in Dr.Yoon's text book(www.yoonsatom.net).
I felt how amazing is the design work done by intelligence of nature..
A mosquito, a tiny creature of such examples, is constituted with
various organs with amazing functions, in terms of having the finest
structural compactness, functioning preciseness and ideal energy
efficiency in their operations. It is a question of whether we can
simulate these mosquitos organs and its nerve system with the latest
computer technology today, or even with ultimate human technology in
the future. Totally impossible! For the mankind, nature would never
disclose the mystery of vital force and functioning mechanism of nerve
system of living creatures, with which these organs were created.
However, we find this kind of insect fossilized in a natural amber,
assumed to be embedded few hundred million years before the emergence
of human being on the earth. Nature has used this wonderful method
ever since the beginning of creating living things.
As though the earth is not a heavenly body accidently created amongst
numerous stars, human being is also not an ordinary animal species. It
is created uniquely amongst other numerous animal species, providing an
unique brain system with three different brain layers; the innate brain
system of reptile species in the core phase, the warm-blood animal
brain system in the mid-layer, and the human brain system in the
outermost layer that occupies more than 85 % of the total, where occurs
the intellectual activity of human being, based on its time recognizing
capability. The animal the closest to the mankind such as chimpanzee
has none of this sense of recognizing time, so it does not know both
the past and the future, but only recognizes the present moment. We
have never heard therefore that indian monkeys built a religious temple
despite their so long survival history on the earth as that of indians.
newedana wrote
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
27 May 2005 04:32:41 AM |
|
|
Dr. Yoon's textbook(www.yoonsatom.net) contains a surprising chapter, describing dissolving, adhering and compatibility mechanism of materials. This field of science was out of the reach of QM or QED theory. If we refer these kind of problems on their professional textbook, we find only, like dissolves like, or like adhere like. All the terminology they use in general, is hydrophilic, hydrophobic, or lipophilic or lipophoic etc., that is non-scientific terminology. it signifies in turn that there is nothing like science in this field.
Dr, Yoon explains how raw egg-white turns into gel that looks white when it is boiled up to 70 degrees C. He explains amino acids building egg-white protein are connected with - CO-NH- segments upon which a large number of water molecules are attached by their linear association, as such CO*OH2*H2O*OH2*H2O*......., and NH*H2O*OH2*H2O*......, as previously posted as physical character of water molecules to connect themselves. So that protein chains with such a long dimension can be compatible in water phase, or can dissolve in water. Biochemistry today explaining this dissolution of egg-white into water, attributes to protein chains with globular folding. However, it is wrong. When it is heated more than 70 degrees C, or mechanically agitated these water chains are stripped off, and the bare protein chains that are inherently hydrophobic, have to precipitate and aggregate by themselves building a network structure to give a gel phase. Liberated water molecules from raw egg-white become to pack in the network holes as tiny globules, scattering the incoming light to be seen white. We can observe simply this mysterious phenomenon if we dilute this egg-white in water and heat it slowly up to 70 degree C, or agitate it vigorously. newedana
.
|
|
|
| User: "newedana" |
|
| Title: Re: Intelligent Design? You have to be intelligent to see it!!! |
27 May 2005 08:06:41 AM |
|
|
Dr. Yoon's textbook(www.yoonsatom.net) contains a surprising chapter, describing dissolving, adhering and compatibility mechanism of materials. This field of science is beyond the reach of QM or QED theory. If we refer these kind of problems on their professional textbook, we find only, like dissolves like, or like adhere like. All the terminology they use in general, is hydrophilic, hydrophobic, or lipophilic or lipophoic etc., that is non-scientific terminology. it signifies in turn that there is nothing like science in this field.
Dr, Yoon explains how raw egg-white turns into gel that looks white when it is boiled up to 70 degrees C. He explains amino acids building egg-white protein are connected with - CO-NH- segments upon which a large number of water molecules are attached by their linear association, as such CO*OH2*H2O*OH2*H2O*......., and NH*H2O*OH2*H2O*......, as previously posted as physical character of water molecules to connect themselves. So that protein chains with such a long dimension can be compatible in water phase, or can dissolve in water. Biochemistry today explaining this dissolution of egg-white into water, attributes to protein chains with globular folding. However, it is wrong. When it is heated more than 70 degrees C, or mechanically agitated these bio-water chains are stripped off, and the bare protein chains that are inherently hydrophobic, have to precipitate and aggregate by themselves building a network structure to give a gel phase. Liberated water molecules from raw egg-white become to pack in the network holes as tiny globules, scattering the incoming light to be seen white. We can observe simply this mysterious phenomenon if we dilute this egg-white in water and heat it slowly up to 70 degree C, or agitate it vigorously.
How amazing is the intelligent design of protein bio-polymer chains that is possible to dissoluble into water so as to be supplied as aqueous raw protein materials to the site where formation of chicken is on going. The polymer chains from which water chains are stripped off, never redissolve into their initial water solvent. it is because the space between aggregated protein chains does not allow to rebuild bio-water chains, due to its sterical hindrance. Likewise silk fibrin protein attaching bio-waters on their CO-NH segments are contained in silk worm body. When this aqueous silk fibrin is discharged as filament form, it builds silk fibers evaporating water, but they never redissolve into the same water solvent, with the same reason. Thus this kind of worms can build their own cocoons possible to protect their pupas from external attack. How amazing is the intelligent design of fiber forming mechanics utilizing water, appled for formation of natural silk fibers. newedama wrote
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
