I've been happy to discuss it since day 1 - you're the one whose been looking for excuses not to discuss it....
My problem was and still is you simply won't accept that biology has to play by the universe energetics and laws of entropy you seem to think that biology is somehow special.
You sort of agree QM descriptions sort of exist in macroobjects but that just some sort of inconvienent or legacy by product you sort of repeat that time and time again lets look at them
Life doesn't experience any of that - all biomolicules will degrade at temps far below 3000K, high-powered lasers are no where to be seen, and there are no filtration systems or single-molecule generators to prevent a loss of quantum states due to interactions with other molecules.
Here we have the life doesn't see these conditions counter yet you miss the point that the conditions are simply created to isolate the effects. It is the same as biologists doing vivisections on animals to study things by your argument it's pointless because the animals dead.So how about instead of saying I am lying based on bullshit and prayer because thats all you have done, you say you are a scientist ACT LIKE ONE.
Classic science problem I have shown to you that the effect exists now you need to act like a real scientist and show me evidence that says that it is not important and can be seperated out.
I never claimed otherwise; however, the part you insist on ignoring is that in larger structures (i.e. where they can interact with other molecules) these behaviours are lost, and the system behaves as described by classical mechanics.
See here is the problem you are again claim the energetics of life is somehow unconnected to QM ready to go down a big dark hole.
TWO WORDS => BELL'S INEQUALITY
Here is the layman's version of explaining it http://www.science20.com/alpha_meme/disproving_local_realism-79216
You want the wikipedia reference it's here and NOTE THE FIRST SENTENCE
Bell's theorem is a no-go theorem famous for drawing an important line in the sand between quantum mechanics (QM) and the world as we know it classically. In its simplest form, Bell's theorem states:
No physical theory of local hidden variables can ever reproduce all of the predictions of quantum mechanics.
So now you have a problem because all scientists in the hard science fields are calling GARBAGE on your response as no two atoms or even subatomic particles have a common reality to enable you to divorce QM.Put bluntly above your idea is a no-go theorem.
You may want to search for the terms "Bell's inequality and matter" the only violation of the inequality ever shown was by entangling (http://phys.org/news1022.html
So you keep claiming I am somehow lying or it isn't what I am saying but I am the one showing you reference after reference that what I am telling you is correct.
So now your complaining that we aren't aguing the energetics of life but you can't even get it thru your head that QM is the only not disproven theory that exists to cover the discussion and worse you are insisting QM is wrong.
I have no problem discussing it but when you start telling me QM is wrong sorry I call COMPLETE GARBAGE (and BILL yes I am being argumentative over this point because it's wrong at science).
ImagingGeek you do realize Einstein and Hawkings both got dragged back to ground trying to claim the same garbage. Hawkings couldn't defeat the argument in a black-hole good luck trying to beat the argument about "life in the universe".
If you want to argue your disproven trash classic physics you must first be absolutely certain you do not violate any of the only proven theorem covering your discussion or else falsify that theorem.So as a scientist you have two options show me that what you propose does not violate QM or falsify QM ... take your choice there are no others.
Quantum information theory says no to your energetics theory take it from there.
I am a normal reasonable physics scientist and where I can be shown to be wrong I always concede as I did with one point you originally made and in a number of arguments I could be shown to be in error. To me it appears that some biology theories have not been checked against advances in QM and energy science and like all classic physics they can easily fall into error because they are based on wrong assumptions.
When your whole argument boils down to you don't accept quantum mechanics exists and is important in macro-matter then sorry to me you might as well go and join the flat earth society because that is the same mentality. The truely scary part is you say two physicists work with you and neither is alarmed at your views.
I would also like to ask Bill and Redenewur now we have teased the issue out of the complex biology what do you think?