<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Behe Doesn&#8217;t Believe in Evolution in a Tube</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/behe-doesnt-believe-in-evolution-in-a-tube/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/behe-doesnt-believe-in-evolution-in-a-tube/</link>
	<description>Righting the wrongs of the Discovery Institute</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:18:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: shamelesslyatheist</title>
		<link>http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/behe-doesnt-believe-in-evolution-in-a-tube/#comment-144</link>
		<dc:creator>shamelesslyatheist</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Oct 2008 17:52:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/?p=21#comment-144</guid>
		<description>&quot;Does Behe really believe that every mutation has to have a large phenotypic effect to be in accord with evolutionary theory?&quot; 

It seems that he does. I have yet to hear him even mention the term &#039;genetic drift&#039;. But Behe is a failure and  irrelevant. I can&#039;t believe he really still believes in irreducible complexity when he is told why in great detail it is a failed idea. So, either he is a liar or incompetent. Take your pick.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;Does Behe really believe that every mutation has to have a large phenotypic effect to be in accord with evolutionary theory?&#8221; </p>
<p>It seems that he does. I have yet to hear him even mention the term &#8216;genetic drift&#8217;. But Behe is a failure and  irrelevant. I can&#8217;t believe he really still believes in irreducible complexity when he is told why in great detail it is a failed idea. So, either he is a liar or incompetent. Take your pick.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: The skepTick</title>
		<link>http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/2008/06/20/behe-doesnt-believe-in-evolution-in-a-tube/#comment-15</link>
		<dc:creator>The skepTick</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jun 2008 04:09:34 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nondiscovery.wordpress.com/?p=21#comment-15</guid>
		<description>So this is a nice coincidence. I just &lt;a href=&quot;http://wayofthewoo.blogspot.com/2008/06/beauty-of-e-coli.html&quot; rel=&quot;nofollow&quot;&gt;posted&lt;/a&gt; about Carl Zimmer and his new book, Microcosm: The Beauty of E. Coli. I won&#039;t throw up all the links here, but Real Science has a great podcast of one of his recent talks about E. Coli, and he specifically covers Lenski&#039;s experiment. Zimmer says they are currently at around Generation 44,000.

I&#039;m also slogging my way through Behe&#039;s book, The Edge of Evolution. So far, at least up through Chapter 5, it&#039;s all a probability game. For instance, he looks at the odds for getting a certain mutation in the gene for hemoglobin to create Sickle-C. While it has benefits for malaria immunity, it also has bad consequences when both the mother and father transfer the gene. He says the odds of this mutation occurring are 1 in 100,000,000. But there is also the C-Harlem mutation, which acts like Sickle Cell, but doesn&#039;t have the adverse effects. However, C-Harlem requires two mutations in the amino acid sequence within hemoglobin. That means 1 in 100,000,000 squared. So, you can take a number like this and compare it to the number of atoms in the universe, or say that the chances of this happening would require 100 billion years of evolution.

Yet, C-Harlem exists. But it exists in North America where malaria has been eradicated. Meanwhile, where this is enormous selective pressure for C-Harlem to evolve (3rd world countries), it has so far failed to do so and therefore evolution can&#039;t explain C-Harlem.

These are all interesting numbers and they would lead a thinking person to say &quot;Hmmm...wonder why that is?&quot;, and then design an experiment to find the answer. IDists would rather jump to a conclusion that supports their agenda without taking that extra leap to gain more knowledge. Why would C-Harlem develop in North America? Could it be because we&#039;re a melting pot with many different gene sets to mix together? I don&#039;t know, but that&#039;s worth considering at least.

Evolution can bite a chunk out of Behe&#039;s ass, and he&#039;ll still think there&#039;s design behind the missing flesh.

BTW...excellent posts. Very understandable for the layperson.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So this is a nice coincidence. I just <a href="http://wayofthewoo.blogspot.com/2008/06/beauty-of-e-coli.html" rel="nofollow">posted</a> about Carl Zimmer and his new book, Microcosm: The Beauty of E. Coli. I won&#8217;t throw up all the links here, but Real Science has a great podcast of one of his recent talks about E. Coli, and he specifically covers Lenski&#8217;s experiment. Zimmer says they are currently at around Generation 44,000.</p>
<p>I&#8217;m also slogging my way through Behe&#8217;s book, The Edge of Evolution. So far, at least up through Chapter 5, it&#8217;s all a probability game. For instance, he looks at the odds for getting a certain mutation in the gene for hemoglobin to create Sickle-C. While it has benefits for malaria immunity, it also has bad consequences when both the mother and father transfer the gene. He says the odds of this mutation occurring are 1 in 100,000,000. But there is also the C-Harlem mutation, which acts like Sickle Cell, but doesn&#8217;t have the adverse effects. However, C-Harlem requires two mutations in the amino acid sequence within hemoglobin. That means 1 in 100,000,000 squared. So, you can take a number like this and compare it to the number of atoms in the universe, or say that the chances of this happening would require 100 billion years of evolution.</p>
<p>Yet, C-Harlem exists. But it exists in North America where malaria has been eradicated. Meanwhile, where this is enormous selective pressure for C-Harlem to evolve (3rd world countries), it has so far failed to do so and therefore evolution can&#8217;t explain C-Harlem.</p>
<p>These are all interesting numbers and they would lead a thinking person to say &#8220;Hmmm&#8230;wonder why that is?&#8221;, and then design an experiment to find the answer. IDists would rather jump to a conclusion that supports their agenda without taking that extra leap to gain more knowledge. Why would C-Harlem develop in North America? Could it be because we&#8217;re a melting pot with many different gene sets to mix together? I don&#8217;t know, but that&#8217;s worth considering at least.</p>
<p>Evolution can bite a chunk out of Behe&#8217;s ass, and he&#8217;ll still think there&#8217;s design behind the missing flesh.</p>
<p>BTW&#8230;excellent posts. Very understandable for the layperson.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
