Creation Museum

[cheesehead]

Originally Posted by jasong

If you would avoid posting straw man attacks, I'd be happy to respond.

Jason,

ET_ didn't make any straw man attack on you.

Quit ducking ET_'s criticisms and questions; post direct, honest replies to them. Throwing a false accusation of straw-manning makes it look like you'll do any dance you can to try to avoid responding directly and honestly.

[Mr. P-1]

Originally Posted by axn

While I fail to see the relevance of this, I am _very_ interested in reading up on this. Perchance, you could provide a link or two?

He's probably talking about this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15060310

[Mr. P-1]

Originally Posted by jasong

Okay, straw man ftw. Let's say an organism has never encountered alcohol in it's normal environment, something that's true for most germs. If germs are exposed to alcohol there's maybe a one in a trillion/quadrillion/whatever chance that it'll survive the encounter.

Pure speculation. You've adduced no evidence that any germs can survive alcohol in the concentrations used in hand disinfectant.

So if a germ can tolerate alcohol, there are probably a ton of other environments it can tolerate long enough to reproduce.

Pure speculation. You've adduced no evidence that alcohol tolerant germs (if any exist) have increased "tolerance" to any other hostile environment, let alone "tolerance" to antibiotics.

I put "tolerance" in scares because what we're actually discussing is resistance. Real microbial tolerance is a non-heritable physiological state. That you don't know the difference is another indicator of your complete ignorance about the topic at hand.

[Christenson]

Originally Posted by xilman

Not to mention the Coptic church, and several others.

But-but-but Western Europe is the center of the world!!!! Arabia doesn't start to exist until about 1400!! (NOT!)

[axn]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-1

He's probably talking about this:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-15060310

Much obliged

Money quote:

Originally Posted by article

Mathematicians said the constraints Mr Anderson introduced to the project mean he will complete it in a reasonable amount of time.

"If he's running an evolutionary approach, holding on to successful guesses, then he'll get there," said Tim Harford, popular science writer and presenter of the BBC's radio show about numbers More or Less.

And without those constraints?

"Not a chance," said Dr Ian Stewart, emeritus professor of mathematics at the University of Warwick.

So, basically, where brute force has no chance of working, an "evolutionary approach" will work in reasonable time. Whodda thunk it?

[jasong]

Originally Posted by Mr. P-1

Pure speculation. You've adduced no evidence that any germs can survive alcohol in the concentrations used in hand disinfectant.



Pure speculation. You've adduced no evidence that alcohol tolerant germs (if any exist) have increased "tolerance" to any other hostile environment, let alone "tolerance" to antibiotics.

Have you no imagination? The permeability of a germ's membrane can differ from one germ to another. Sometimes it's enough to survive an alcohol environment and then still be capable of reproduction when the alcohol evaporates.

[imwithid]

Originally Posted by jasong

What the hell, man? Just because I don't believe there are any perfect women I'm some of horrible person. Let me clue you in, the ONLY person who's ever been perfectly sinless is Jesus Christ. Just because the only person who I believe has ever been sinless is a male doesn't make me a sexist. Talk about your straw men, sheesh.

Your obsession with fallacies (wrongly, in this case) will not help you to refute my point. I did not call you a horrible person. I merely stated that your comment was absolutely false and based on nonsense. I took issue with this and pointed it out. If anything, Mother Theresa has been well documented (more so than the veracity of Jesus and his life's story translated from a language over two millennia old - how is your Shakespeare?) as being sinless. Whether MT or JFC is sinless is a battle of who could care less.

Most religions, if not almost all, are very sexist. Your statement here is somewhat of a tautology:

Originally Posted by jasong

Jesus, the only perfectly sinless man who ever lived(no pefectly sinless women out there, if we want to go down that road).

I cannot assume that you are calling all women whores. That would, perhaps, take the argument to be a straw man. Of course, I am not, by any means, an expert in linguistics and logic.

[xilman]

Originally Posted by jasong

Have you no imagination? The permeability of a germ's membrane can differ from one germ to another. Sometimes it's enough to survive an alcohol environment and then still be capable of reproduction when the alcohol evaporates.

Actually, jasong is proposing an evolutionary argument in rather pure Darwinian terms here. If some organisms have a propensity to survive a hostile enviroment sufficiently for them to reproduce when others do not, the survivors are better fitted to their enviromnent and will reproduce, passing on their resistance to their offspring. It's good to see jasong accepting evolutionary theory and using it to make a reasoned case.

I've no idea (because I haven't investigated) whether any "germs" have evolved genes which code for alcohol resistance but many other organisms have. Examples include fruit flies, humans, crows, pigs and elephants. Each of them eat rotting fruit and so naturally ingest alcohol. All of them have closely similar ADH genes which code for alcohol dehydrogenase, the protein associated with the first step of ethanol metabolism.

Paul

[Christenson]

Paul:
What about the yeasts that make the beer, bread, and wine?

[xilman]

Originally Posted by Christenson

Paul:
What about the yeasts that make the beer, bread, and wine?

I'm certainly aware that yeasts are alcohol tolerant. I don't know whether jasong would classify them as "germs". I certainly would not.

Paul

[Mr. P-1]

Originally Posted by xilman

Actually, jasong is proposing an evolutionary argument in rather pure Darwinian terms here. If some organisms have a propensity to survive a hostile enviroment sufficiently for them to reproduce when others do not, the survivors are better fitted to their enviromnent and will reproduce, passing on their resistance to their offspring. It's good to see jasong accepting evolutionary theory and using it to make a reasoned case.

Unfortunately he's not. His argument wasn't that exposure to alcohol will select for germs with the alcohol-resistant trait. It was that exposure to alcohol will select for germs with the badassitude trait. These badass germs would also be resistant to antibiotics.

I've no idea (because I haven't investigated) whether any "germs" have evolved genes which code for alcohol resistance but many other organisms have. Examples include fruit flies, humans, crows, pigs and elephants. Each of them eat rotting fruit and so naturally ingest alcohol. All of them have closely similar ADH genes which code for alcohol dehydrogenase, the protein associated with the first step of ethanol metabolism.

I specifically asked for evidence that germs had evolved resistance to alcohol in the concentrations used in disinfectants.