Viral Batteries: A Case for Evolution?

ICR ^ | April 13, 2009 | Brian Thomas, M.S.

[GodGunsGuts]

Viral Batteries: A Case for Evolution?

by Brian Thomas, M.S.*

Researchers at MIT have invented a “greener” battery with the help of viruses. Three years ago, they engineered a virus that coats itself with material that serves as an anode, a structure within a battery that attracts positive ions. They have now engineered a virus (bacteriophage) that serves as a cathode, which indirectly links to the anode to help make the battery functional. The result is a battery with little impact on the environment.

National Public Radio (NPR) ran a report on its Morning Edition that compared the development of this battery with the processes of evolution, stating that if the lead researcher “didn't like any properties of the electrode, she just tweaked the DNA of the virus that was making it.”1 But does this research actually portray an evolutionary process?...

[atlaw]

Sure. But your question is rather ridiculous. Did you honestly believe in 1979 that all scientific discoveries would have been made by 2009?

[Cedric]

You failed.

[qam1]

Quite the freighted term, “evolution,” especially when used by National Public Radio. I somehow doubt NPR used the word in any other context.

You are taken at face value an ICR article that's trying to decieve you.

For where the evolution part is relevant

See Virus Built Electronics

Belcher (and Chiang) uses a method sometimes called "directed evolution," which allows her to quickly modify viruses to work with a range of materials.

In this case, directed evolution begins with a small vial that ­Chiang pulls from a refrigerator. Inside is a clear fluid that contains a billion viruses; they are nearly identical, but each has a subtle genetic variation introduced by the researchers. The variations are, in part, fortuitous: the researchers add a randomly generated sequence of DNA to each virus. But the added DNA, which codes for a short strand of amino acids called a peptide, is inserted into the gene for a select protein.

Since there are so many variations among the viruses in the vial, some of them should randomly have peptides that bind to a useful inorganic material. The researchers simply pour the contents of the vial onto a target material, such as a small square of gold, and give the viruses a chance to bind. Then they wash the material. After a few repetitions, only the viruses that happen to bind strongly remain. The process allows the researchers to quickly engineer viruses to bind to a particular material, even if they don't know ahead of time what sequence of amino acids is likely to work.

Funny how the ICR deciced to comment on a science article by a reporter who probably flunked JR high school biology instead of using more detailed technical reports.

[atlaw]

Huh? I spent a sizable part of my undergraduate years collecting lichens in the Smokey Mountains, and I didn't expect then that all lichen species would be discovered in my lifetime. You obvioulsy have a very cloistered view of the world. Maybe you really should spend some time reading the materials I linked above in post 14. Or at least get out of your living room once in a while.

[Cedric]

Smokey Mountains = Appalachia

Had I known, I never would've given you the test.

[atlaw]

Your “test” is a neon-lit billboard advertising your own ignorance.

[Cedric]

Look who’s talkin’, y’all.

[Nipplemancer]

a little bit...

[RegulatorCountry]

You are taken at face value an ICR article that's trying to decieve you.

I took a sourced comment from NPR at face value. Who's trying to deceive whom?

[dmz]

Smokey Mountains = Appalachia
Had I known, I never would’ve given you the test.
______

I thought that we libtard evolutionists were the elitists. Guess I was wrong.

Wonder if there are more creationists, id’ers or believers in evolution in Appalachia. Since you believe that folks in Appalachia are stupid, you would expect them to ‘evolutionists’, wouldn’t you?

I’d guess the opposite is true.

[Cedric]

Guess I was wrong.

That's a start! Let the hgealing begin!

[Cedric]

Guess I was wrong.

That's a start! Let the hgealing begin!

[Cedric]

opps! Typo:

“hgealing”

I meant ghealign.

[Nipplemancer]

do you have andre the giant fingers? no one can have that many spelling errors and then correct a spelling error with a spelling error.

[Alamo-Girl]

Thanks for the ping!

[truemiester]

“Feeeeeliiinnngs, whoa whoa whooaa feeeliinnnggs”

You just had to go there, didn’t you?

[ColdWater]

I just love it when Intelligent men and women in labs are able to Design something cool -- and then they use that as evidence for Evolution. Talk about seeing what you want to see ...

I just love it when you can't see the work the Designer had in evolution, preferring to close your eyes to the miracles of life.

[ClearCase_guy]

I look at nature every day and marvel at the miraculous work of the Designer. What are you talking about?

[ColdWater]

I look at nature every day and marvel at the miraculous work of the Designer. What are you talking about?

Apparently you either did not read my post, you are deliberately distorting my post or you agree that the Designer used evolution to bring the views you observe every day.

[ColdWater]

Employing human intelligence to manipulate the genes of plants and animals is a common practice, and has not a thing to do with genetic alterations resulting by pure chance in an undirected, random fashion.

I see you are a visitor to the same three or four creationist websites that spew these false descriptions of evolution.