Friday, November 17, 2006

Cellular Garbage Disposal Systems

Cells routinely degrade faulty proteins. There exist proteins whose functions relate to this task. Research at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill is focused on a protein known as the cystic fibrosis transmembrane conductance regulator or CFTR for short. The idea being to enable CFTR to form a functional shape and thereby treat the disease cystic fibrosis. Faulty CFTRs end up in a cellular trash bin known by a more scientific term called the ubiquitin proteasome pathway. Ubiquitin ligases and proteasomes are part of the system.

There would have been a point in time when no protein degradation systems existed. However as long as proteins are synthesized some will become faulty with respect to their function. Dysfunctional proteins can become more than simply cellular clutter. The can interfere with needed cellular functions.

IDers do not assume the sufficiency of a selection guided generating process. What type of cells would make the transition to cells with fully functional disposal systems. How would they have been described before and during the transition process?

Darwinism functions as the central cosmological myth of modern culture- as the centerpiece of a quasi-religious system that is known to be true a priori rather than as a scientific hypothesis that must submit to rigorous testing.- Phillip Johnson; Darwin on Trial.

Where is the rigorous testing for an evolved protein degradation system?


At 12:37 PM, Blogger Doug said...

Same with the lysosome. If a cell didn't have a lysosome to digest worn out/degraded organelles, bacteria... etc, the vitality of that cell would be snubbed.

At 1:57 PM, Blogger Smokey said...

"Where is the rigorous testing for an evolved protein degradation system?"

It would start in understanding the relationships between the components of the ubiquitin ligase pathway and proteins that have other functions.

You can search for sequences here,

Then you can copy and paste them into the BLAST GUI here,

Many of these papers present other approaches:

Where is the rigorous testing for a DESIGNED protein degradation system?

At 2:04 PM, Blogger Doug said...

And from the ashes... SMOKEY!!
Just kidding, Smoke. I actually like reading the exchanges between you and Bradford. I just wish you could be more understanding.... or atleast, less harsh with some of the personal digs.

At 4:55 PM, Blogger Smokey said...

Where is the lack of understanding or personal digs in the post above?

Bradford asked a question, and I answered it.

Do you think he'll answer my eminently reasonable reciprocal question?

At 8:58 PM, Blogger William Bradford said...

Do you think he'll answer my eminently reasonable reciprocal question?

Where is the rigorous testing for a DESIGNED protein degradation system?

It is needed and I would like to be helpful by indicating what those tests might be. Before testing we need to know which test results would indicate design. That in turn requires some consensus as to what actual present data signifies, which will be a theme of some coming posts, including the next one I will post after finishing this sentence.

At 10:51 AM, Blogger Doug said...

Hi Smoke...
I was refering to how you handled yourself on Telicthoughts. And, considering that it seems you have created another handle on Telicthoughts and have begun posting under that name as well increases my concern.
You're a bright guy... I like reading some of your posts. But, you did start name calling over at TT and various other things as well (making unjustified inferences). I'm more than willing to hear dissent.... but when it seems to be always packaged with insults and vitriol it makes me look elsewhere for relevant dissent.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home