This protein is called topoisomerase type 2. All this guy does is kick so much atheist ball sack, you'd think his name was Liu Kang. Have you ever had 2 pieces of rope or wire that got so twisted together that when you tried to separate them by grabbing the two ends and pulling them apart, they just got more twisted up? These are called super coils.Right now your DNA deals with the same issue, in your body, only it's a matter of life and death. Without cell replication we die. Our body has to untwist and seperate the 2 negatively coiled double helix DNA strands so it can make a mRNA messenger copy of the strands, then recoil them how they were. THIS CAUSES SUPERCOILS TO FORM IN OUR DNA, WHICH IF NOT UNKNOTTED WOULD KILL US BEFORE LIFE EVE HAD A CHANCE TO START.Now, "luckily" for us, the type 2 topoisomerase one and only purpose is to break apart supercoiled DNA strands and pass opposite strands through the break before reattaching them and untangling the supercoils like it's playing double dutch. What sucks for evolutionists is that these topoisomerase MUST BE IN POSITION BEFORE REPLICATION EVEN STARTS. Now, as retarded as it is to even attempt to try and come up with some bullshit about why and how a protein, whose only job is to untangle DNA knots, could possibly ever be in position to do it's 1 and only job, before it even has a job, on account of the knots have not even been formed yet, all by a mindless unguided process, it's even worse than that.See, DNA contains the information to build all proteins. So they also have to explain HOW THAT PROTEIN IS EVEN THERE BEFORE REPLICATION, PERIOD. IF THE TOPOISOMERASE MUST BE THERE BEFORE REPLICATION CAN BEGIN, BUT NO PROTEIN COULD HAVE BEEN BUILT UNTIL AFTER REPLICATION IS COMPLETED, THERE IS NO POSSIBLE RETARDATION EVOLUTIONISTS CAN DUMB UP TO EVER MAKE THAT REALITY. THE ONLY WAY THIS IS POSSIBLE REQUIRES AN INTELLIGENT MIND USING PREEMPTIVE PROBLEM SOLVING.
Quickrundown?
Not sure if broads will go for that pickup line at a party or pub. "Ever seen topoisomerase unwind baby?"
>>533867476Drunk posting obviously...it's Saturday
>>533867239Evolution and intelligent design are not mutually exclusive ideas
>>533867628Correct!
>>533867239it probably simply developed on its own, for life to work you dont need a god.
So what is the explanation then?
>>533867239Mutations are a thing you dumb nigger, some are deleterious, some aren't. It's why introns and exons are a thing, it's why LINES and SINES are a thing. Are you telling me God giving niggers different MAOA allelic expression is his holy plan to have hyper aggressive low IQ humanoids among us? What is God's plan with Niggers? Why do niggers continue to exist in a world with a god?
>>533867476>>533867565>>533867690>>533867699>>533867736The point isn’t “wow enzyme exists before mitosis, therefore wizard.” The point is that DNA replication is not one cute little step in a children’s diagram. DNA is an actual physical polymer with topology problems. When you unwind a double helix, you don’t just get two neat strands like opening a zipper on a cartoon jacket. You create torque, supercoiling, knots, tangles, catenanes, mechanical bullshit. The molecule fights you.Topoisomerase is the system’s “cut the cable, pass the cable through, reseal the cable, and pretend nothing exploded” machinery. Type II topoisomerase literally does controlled double-strand breakage and rejoining so DNA can be untangled/relieved/decatenated without the genome turning into molecular spaghetti.So when some midwit says:lol cells already have topoisomerase before replicationYes, genius. Exactly. You just noticed that life is an already-running integrated process, not a chemistry set that reboots from dirt every morning.The question is not “how does Tuesday’s bacterium have the enzyme?” Tuesday’s bacterium got it from Monday’s bacterium. The question is: what is the first workable boot sequence?Because to copy DNA, you need enzymes. To make the enzymes, you need encoded information. To preserve the encoded information, you need replication. To replicate anything long and information-rich, you need topology control, repair, energy coupling, polymerases, membranes, regulation, and translation. And to translate proteins, you need ribosomes, tRNAs, aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, codon assignment, folded enzymes, ATP/GTP handling, and a whole circus of helper machinery.
>>533867838This is not “one missing link.” This is a whole goddamn operating system being handwaved with “given enough time, the mud became a server rack.”And before the fedora brigade starts screeching:muh previous cellsThat explains inheritance after the system exists. It does not explain how the system gets booted.muh evolutionEvolution needs heritable replication with variation. Good. That means you need a replicator competent enough to be selected on. But competent replication of useful genetic information is exactly the thing the machinery is supposed to explain. You don’t get to invoke Darwinian selection before you have the Darwinian game board assembled.muh RNA worldRNA world is just moving the miracle into a smaller font. Now you need an RNA molecule or network that is informational, catalytic, stable enough not to fall apart, concentrated enough to react, protected enough not to get shredded, specific enough to do useful chemistry, and capable of improving by selection before the protein/DNA machinery exists. Cool story. Show the chain, not a TED Talk arrow labeled “complexity happens here.”The real issue is this: short molecules are easier to accidentally get but too stupid to run the show. Long informative molecules can run more of the show but need copying, protection, repair, energy, and topology control. So you get this hilarious bootstrapping problem where every serious version of the system starts quietly assuming pieces of the system it is supposed to be explaining.
>>533867860Topoisomerase is just a clean example because it exposes that DNA is not abstract “information” floating in philosophy land. It is a physical object with mechanical constraints. The moment you want long, stable, double-stranded hereditary information, you inherit all the engineering problems of long, stable, double-stranded hereditary information.So no, the argument is not “protein pretty, therefore God.” The argument is: replication, expression, repair, and topology are interdependent preconditions, not optional DLC.If your answer is “well once cells exist, they pass the machinery down,” congratulations, you have successfully explained that mothers have children. We were asking where the first mother came from.“Time plus chance” is not an explanation. It is a screensaver you stare at while avoiding the boot error.
>>533867699the jewish god spawned it in.>>533867736>What is God's plan with Niggers?the nigger question is a really good one. if there is a god why would he make niggers? kinda breaks the illusion of a God. there is literally 0 reason to make niggers or pajeets if God is real.so the only real explanation is that niggers and jeets are victims of their environment, its what they eat, how they learned to think, changes in the earths magnetic field and radiation from space or from the ground etc. that shapes and changes them over some long period of time.
>>533867891Answer the question faggot, why do we have to deal with subhuman niggers who are literally far removed from the rest of humanity and have fucking ghost DNA in them? What is God's plan with Niggers?
>>533867978i dont know what gods plans are with niggers you would have to ask jews that and they still wouldnt tell you because they will just fake the history of it anyway and pretend that its all part of some plan and struggle that has nothing to do with topoisomerase but maybe, just maybe, it has something to do with white people being aliens first grown in vat pods and used to repopulate devastated continents. what if i were to tell you that the default state of this world was niggers!??!?! where do you think the term "cabbage patch kids" came from you faggot
>>533867891What looks like a single irreducible system today is the product of evolutionary scaffolding, where earlier, simpler versions performed the same essential function (or the function wasn’t needed yet) before the modern interdependencies solidified.tl;dr no jew god needed
>>533868141>>533868170you ever heard of the orphan trains niggas the “Evolutionary scaffolding” is not an answer, it’s a vibe with a lab coat. You don’t get to say “earlier simpler versions did it” and then walk away like you explained anything. Which earlier version? What molecule? What substrate? What function? What environment? What selectable advantage? What broke when it was absent? What changed when it appeared? What intermediate steps are you claiming?Because “the function wasn’t needed yet” is doing a hilarious amount of unpaid labor there. If the function wasn’t needed, then it wasn’t being selected for. If it was being selected for, then you need to explain the primitive version that solved enough of the problem to matter. This is the bootloader problem again. You are not explaining the origin of the system. You are saying:before the finished machine existed, there were unfinished machinesYeah, no shit. The question is whether those unfinished machines actually worked, replicated, survived, and improved without quietly borrowing parts from the finished machine. “Modern interdependencies solidified” is just a polite way of saying “and then the magic became load-bearing.”Topoisomerase is a perfect example because the problem is not aesthetic complexity. It is physical constraint. Long double-stranded DNA creates torque, supercoils, knots, and tangles. If your early system has long DNA, it needs topology management. If it doesn’t have long DNA, then you have to explain the transition into long DNA before the machinery needed to handle long DNA exists.So which is it?
>>533868170Either the primitive system had no need for topological control, in which case it was not yet doing the thing modern DNA replication requires, or it did need topological control, in which case you need a primitive topological-control mechanism that can cut, pass, reseal, and not butcher the genome like a drunk intern with bolt cutters.“Scaffolding” does not remove the problem. It relocates the problem into the scaffold. And this is always the move: whenever the machine is too integrated, they say “earlier it was simpler.” Fine. Describe the simpler thing. Not with a cartoon arrow. Not with “maybe.” Not with “given enough time.” Give the actual chain where each stage is chemically plausible, heritable, selectable, and not fatal.Otherwise you have not explained irreducible complexity. You have written fanfiction where the missing chapters are titled “evolutionary scaffolding.” “scaffolding” is what midwits say when they don’t have a mechanism but still want to sound like they’re standing near one
>>533868291it developed on its own over time and simply no jew god was needed to accomplish any of that.
>>533868373so basically:>all religions Btfo>god doesnt exist/thread
>>533867239Wrong./pol/ is nothing but a constant religious spergout at this point. I guess that's what this shithole of a board has come to.
I have nothing against creationist arguments.It's when they jump into trying to sell any specific religion I tap out."Nature was created = Therefore [specific God] did it" is an absolutely asinine leap.
>>533868552finally a thinking man. this is the exact point. from what ive seen there is evidence of creationism but not towards any specific being with any specific name. if something like that was true then no matter what religion larped as being the absolute would still just be another fake and gay psyop because the truth would be universal and therefore accessible by anyone within it, no matter how fake and gay the religions they push are, even if they are all controlling they cant control reality and if reality itself is somewhat magikal then that is an inherent right to all beings within it because they would be part of that source material. any entity trying to cover this up would be a desperate act of control
>>533868373>>533868422>>533868462Holy shit, you managed to turn “explain the mechanism” into “religion bad” in two posts. That is not an argument, that is a Reddit reflex arc.Nobody asked you to recite your personal apostasy fanfic. The question is mechanical:What is the actual boot sequence?Saying “it developed on its own over time” explains nothing. That is the sentence you say when you do not know the mechanism but still want to keep the conclusion.“How did the system arise?”“It developed.”“How?”“Over time.”“By what steps?”“On its own.”Congratulations, you have invented atheist Genesis, but with worse prose.The problem is not “religion therefore protein.” The problem is that modern life depends on a locked stack of mutually dependent systems:DNA replication needs enzymes.Enzymes need encoded information.Encoded information needs stable replication.Stable replication needs error control.Long DNA needs topology control.Protein synthesis needs ribosomes, tRNAs, codon assignment, aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases, energy coupling, and regulation.You do not get to point at this whole integrated biochemical operating system and say “time did it” like you just solved it.Darwinian evolution works after you have heritable replication with variation and selection. Great. Nobody is confused about that. The question is how you get the first selectable, information-bearing, self-maintaining system without silently borrowing half the machinery from the finished cell.“No god needed” is not a scientific mechanism. It is a metaphysical bumper sticker. It has exactly the same explanatory shape as “God did it,” except you swapped the noun for “time” and started acting superior.
>>533867239WowThat's a lot of meaningless text I didn't read.
>>533868373>>533868422>>533868462And the “all religions BTFO” line is especially funny because I did not even make a denominational argument. I pointed at a physical constraint in DNA replication. You heard “topoisomerase cuts and reseals DNA to resolve supercoiling” and somehow replied “religion btfo.” Your brain saw molecular biology and immediately sprinted to theology because that is the only arena where your NPC script works.If you want to answer, answer this:What was the simpler predecessor system?What molecule carried the information?How was it copied?What copied it?How were errors controlled before repair machinery?How did it avoid degradation?How did it concentrate?How did it acquire energy?How did it transition into coded protein synthesis?How did long double-stranded DNA become viable before DNA-handling machinery?At which step does selection begin, and what exactly is being selected?Do not say “over time.” That is not a step.Do not say “evolution.” That is the process being bootstrapped.Do not say “scaffolding” unless you can name the scaffold.Do not say “religion bad” unless you are admitting you lost the biology argument and need to go punch a church-shaped pillow.The entire atheist reply here is just:“Complex system?”“It developed.”“Mechanism?”“Over time.”“Details?”“You’re religious.”That is not science. That is a security blanket with peer review cosplay.
So you're saying god made a shitty DNA system that gets tangled up. He can't even do the thing Apple does to make sure shit doesn't get tangled. You're calling god a bad designer? Man, you must hate god.
>>533867476God created the scientific laws of the universe that allowed these non-random processes to create life. primordial soup niggers btfo
>>533868860>“How did the system arise?”its very simple actually, over time the universe creates more complexity.seems to be some sort of rule that holds true for all systems.so you see, still no god needed to make any of this work. it just builds up more complexity over time.
>>533867239Macromolecules are just the stupid biologists' way of explaning chemical processes that require thoughtful contemplation.They don't even try to pretend they know details; "there's a tapeworm thingy here and a bunch of corkscrews there and it goes 'snip snip bend tie' and you're done."How many coof jabs did you suckers get. Fuck, you're all so gullible. Biology is what you change your major to when you're flunking out of chemistry.
>>533867239HOLY SHIT, this proves yahweh is real. I suddenly feel the need to guzzle jewish cum. Any circumcised jewish cocks available gentlemen?
>>533867239This isn't intelligent design, it's jugaad. Please redeem the designated detangler sir.
>>533867239Wrong
Anon-kun could you explain to me what dna systems looks like in a retarded manner. Because from what you have typed I get that the copy machine itself needs to somehow be coded for. Which itself depends on other processes to even exist.
>>533867239>ittIf I pick a random number from 1-10^100, after I get the number, I can claim it was a wizard that made it happen because the chance for that particular number is infinitesimally small.
>>533870124sure thing guy, A living cell is not just “DNA.” It is more like a whole factory.DNA = the recipe book.Proteins/enzymes = the machines and workers.Ribosomes/tRNA/etc. = the kitchen that reads recipes and builds workers.Repair/topology enzymes = the mechanics who stop the recipe book from getting shredded, tangled, or miscopied.The weird part is that the recipe book contains the instructions for building the machines that copy and maintain the recipe book.So yes:The DNA-copying machine is itself encoded in DNA.The DNA-repair machines are encoded in DNA.The DNA-untangling machines are encoded in DNA.The protein-making system is also partly encoded in DNA.But DNA by itself is not sitting there like a magic scroll going “build me a cell.” Naked DNA is basically just an information brick. It needs a whole existing biochemical system to read it, copy it, protect it, and turn its instructions into proteins.Modern cells avoid the paradox because they do not start from zero. A daughter cell inherits machinery from the mother cell: enzymes, ribosomes, membranes, energy systems, all the little molecular crackheads already running around doing jobs. So when the cell copies DNA, the copy machinery is already there.That is why “but cells already have topoisomerase before replication” is not a rebuttal. Correct. They do. Because life today is an already-running inherited system.The actual mystery is the first boot sequence.
>>533870405>>533870124Like imagine finding a printer that prints the instruction manual for how to build the printer. Fine, once you already have the printer, it can print more manuals. But where did the first working printer/manual combo come from?That is the origin-of-life problem in caveman terms.DNA replication is not just:DNA copies DNAIt is more like:DNA is copied by proteins, which are encoded by DNA, which are made by ribosomes, which require RNA/proteins, which depend on encoded information, which depends on replication, which depends on proteins not fucking it up.So it is a loop.Not necessarily an impossible loop, but definitely a real bootstrapping problem.The secular answer is usually something like “there was an earlier, simpler system before modern DNA/protein cells,” often RNA-world stuff. Meaning maybe RNA once acted as both information storage and chemical worker before DNA and proteins took over specialized roles.That is the serious answer. Not “DNA just appeared and made proteins.”But that answer still has to explain a lot:How did the first useful information molecule form?How did it copy itself accurately enough?How did it avoid falling apart?How did it get concentrated in one place?How did it get energy?How did it become selectable?How did it transition into coded protein synthesis?How did it eventually become long DNA genomes that need repair and untangling machinery?Topoisomerase is just one example of the bigger issue. Once you have long double-stranded DNA, copying it creates physical problems: twisting, supercoiling, knots, tangles. So now you need machinery to handle that too. If early life did not have long DNA, fine, then topoisomerase was not needed yet. But then you still have to explain how the system graduated into long DNA without the DNA-handling machinery already being there.
>>533870445So the argument is not:protein exists, therefore God, checkmate.The argument is:modern life is an interdependent information-and-machinery system, and saying “it developed over time” does not explain the first working bootloader.Evolution after you already have self-replicating life is one question.How you get the first self-replicating, information-bearing, self-maintaining chemical system is another question.Midwits constantly mix those together, then call you religious when you ask where the copy machine came from.
>>533870481life is not a machine that was assembled it is a process that happened to matter under the right thermodynamic conditions.so you see, still no foreskin munching jew god needed.
>>533867239>from the mother, in the wombI'm no atheist, but your effortpost was quickly unknotted
>>533867239>explain HOW THAT PROTEIN IS EVEN THERE BEFORE REPLICATIONDNA needs proteins to be read/replicated, but proteins need DNA (via RNA) to be made. Modern cells solve it by inheritance (the machinery is already present), but how did the first life-like systems bootstrap this?The leading scientific idea is the RNA World hypothesis (supported by evidence like the fact that the ribosome's catalytic core is RNA, not protein—a "ribozyme"):Early on, RNA (not DNA) likely served dual roles: storing genetic information and acting as a catalyst (like enzymes).RNA can self-replicate (with some help from simple chemistry or other RNAs) and can catalyze reactions, including forming peptide bonds (the basis of proteins).Over time, RNA molecules evolved to produce simple peptides/proteins that helped RNA replicate and function better.DNA later evolved as a more stable storage molecule (replacing RNA for genomes), and proteins took over most catalytic jobs because they're better at it.This created the modern flow: DNA RNA protein (the central dogma), with proteins feeding back to maintain the system.In evolutionary terms, there was no "first cell with naked DNA waiting for proteins." Instead, chemical systems gradually increased in complexity, with replicating molecules and catalysts coevolving until the DNA-RNA-protein system locked in. Once that happened, cells could divide and pass on both the DNA and the protein machinery needed to use it.This is why topoisomerase II (and other enzymes) fits into evolution: once the system existed, enzymes like it enabled larger, more complex genomes by solving topological problems during replication—allowing the whole interdependent machine to scale up and diversify.
>>533870481>the argument is not: >Protein exists, therefore God, checkmate >The argument is:>There is an unlikely event attached to abiogenesis, therefore it didn't happen. Also, I'm going to imply Jewish fairytales are real, but I won't outright say it because I'm a stupid bitch who won't argue in good faith.>Also, I'm going to repeatedly state that I'm not doing the thing that I'm doing and hope nobody calls me out.>And I'm a bot propagandistftfy
>>533867476Ffs that was the qrd. You need crayons?
