Re: Craig Venter! Wow, What a Guy!

spintronic wrote:

On Jul 10, 7:43 pm, dkomo <dkomo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

spintronic wrote:

On Jul 9, 2:18 pm, dkomo <dkomo...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

spintronic wrote:

How come he's basic life form needs 400 genes to work the damn thing?

Surely OOL scenarios cant rely on such a massive number of
prerequisites?

I mean, I knew a simple cell needed a lot of prerequisites, but 400 or
so? That beats my best guesses by far!

I think RNA World is tryinna pull some wool over someones eyes!

A modern car needs, at the very least, an engine control module, fuel
injection and electronic ignition to run at all.

Only because of the OBD2 standard set for emissions in 1992. You
forgot the "cat" by the way.

Which would have been news to the car mechanic of the 1920's, who worked
on automobile engines which ran just fine without any of these components.

Moral: life was much simpler in the early days.

Now, thats the sort of stupid reasoning, that evolutionists are fond
of.

Simplicity **DOES NOT* equate to requirements.

In other words. Putting something further in the past does not reduce
the amount of prerequisites.

Prerequisites, by definition means "required in advance of operation".

1920's cars may not have "required" OBD2 standards, but they still
needed.

1) combustion chamber
2) Inlet manifold
3) Exhaust manifold
4) piston)
5) big end bearing's
6) small end bearings
7) con-rod
8) piston rings
9) sump
10) rocker cover
11) starter - system
12) valves
13 Fuel
14) Spark plug
15) transformer (coil)
16) capacitor (condensor)
17) contacts (points)
18) HT leads
19) oil
20) oil strainer - filter
21) head
22) block

etc etc etc etc etc etc etc.

Since a "carburetor" is mechanically more "complex" than a "single
point injection", and "points & condensor" are more complex than a "
Hall effect sensor",

your example doesnt prove a thing. 1920's cars had more moving parts
than modern cars.

Hmmm. Modern cars still have many of the items you listed above. The
main thing they lack is coil, condensor and points. But they all use
fuel and oil, as far as I know, and they all still have pistons, spark
plugs and combustion chambers -- even the hybrid cars. And they all
still have intake manifolds (else how would air reach the cylinders),
starter systems, engine blocks, valves, tires, springs, shock absorbers,
transmissions, and so forth.

You left a major item off the list: the carburetor. Modern cars have
fuel injection instead. But they still have a throttle plate to control
the amount of air reaching the engine.

Despite having a few more moving parts, the 1920's engine was simpler.
It didn't need a computer to diagnose what was wrong with it.

--dk...@xxxxxxxxx Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


They dont lack a coil, they have multipoint coils. (or one for each
cylinder).


Yep, I checked on this. Modern engines have eliminated the distributor by sending timing signals directly to electronic switches located at coils for each cylinder (or sometimes one coil for two cylinders).

I did not leave off the carb, I made a note at the end. Showing it is
more complicated than single point injectors.

Anyways, the point to all this, was some guy said that "things worked
simpler in the past".


Some guy said that because it's true. At most you can argue that modern engines are *slightly* less complicated mechanically than the ones in the 1920's, but to gain that, they are *much* more complicated in overall design. For example, the car I have has four different computer control units (one for the engine, one for stability control, one for the transmission, and the last one I don't know what for) networked together and communicating with each other. It's like the goddamned space shuttle! Plus it has sensors all over the place for measuring engine RPMs, manifold air pressure, engine knock, exhaust gas oxygen level, throttle position, coolant temperature, cam angle, wheel slip, etc., etc. We're talking some major complexity here.

In the realm of automobile design, just as in the realm of living things, evolution in the fullness of time has created complexity. :>)


--dkomo@xxxxxxxx

.