And you can not even enumerate the important differences between a flagellum, a flagellums motor, and a human designed motor. If this is all you got, you must be scraping the bottom of the barrel.
1 Like
I’m sorry you are not understanding what a motor is.
What’s your issue?
And how is the motor that drives a bacterial flagellum not a motor?
I’m sorry that it came off as a simple criticism. I should have thought more carefully about what I wrote.
Phrasing it more carefully, that’s the diving board one jumps off to get to the weird, nonintuitive goodies.
1 Like
From your shallow approach, I’m learning nothing new, just getting confirmation of your fear of science.
If you’re wrong about the analogy not breaking down, what would you expect to see?
1 Like
My fear of science. 
Right.
Start with showing me what’s wrong with the analogy and then we’ll worry about that. (It’s not an analogy.)
Y’all just need to enlarge the box you’ve put motors in. (Or rather, make it waay smaller. 
)
That’s not how science works, and your fear of it is showing again.
Science is about resisting the human urge to jump to conclusions. It’s not knowing a bunch of facts, it’s about having a mind open to learning new facts.
Call it an identity if you wish. What do you expect to see if you’re wrong?
Does your pride even allow you to consider such a possibility? You seem to have a lot invested in showing that your intuition trumps everything.
“As long as you are proud you cannot know God. A proud man is always looking down on thing and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down you cannot see something that is above you.”
― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
1 Like
What would be the point, and who has claimed that biological motors are metaphors?
Is it an analogy or is it a metaphor?
Sorry Rumraket. More labels. 
You haven’t scientifically shown that I’m afraid of science. You’ve just built your own conclusion to jump to and bandwagon to jump on.
You don’t seem to have an open mind to the idea that what drives a rotary flagellum is indeed a motor.
Huh? The metaphor is the reference to a particular flagellum of the multiple flagella as a “motor.”
“Biological motors are metaphors” makes no sense.
Then tell me what you expect to see mechanistically if you are wrong.
I’m not wrong. 
I’ve addressed every ‘dissimilarity’ that @Michael_Callen listed, and I’m waiting for more.
A rotary motor is a rotary motor.
This has nothing to do with intuition. It has to do with what a rotary motor is.
Ooo. One more post and we’re at 400.
“As long as you are proud you cannot know God. A proud man is always looking down on thing and people: and, of course, as long as you are looking down you cannot see something that is above you.”
― C.S. Lewis, Mere Christianity
That’s the backwards pseudoscience thing you’re clinging to. Science is about looking forward and predicting what you will observe if you’re right, and what you will observe if you’re wrong.
You don’t seem to be able to consider the latter possibility. You’re just here to argue. As for me, the greatest epiphany I’ve had in science involved switching away from the motor metaphor and thereby seeing a function for which no one would ever employ a motor.
Are you only interested in arguing or are you interested in learning… what a rotary motor is?
I’m interested in your prediction of what you’ll observe if you’re wrong. If you’re so sure, what are you afraid of?
As a Christian, I would say someone did see a function to employ a motor. (Or an ET, or a nanoengineer…)
Suppose we didn’t have bacterial flagella… engineering and deploying them against other and pathenogenic bacteria could be useful.
Nothing? I know what a rotary motor is.