Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 76 (8863 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-21-2018 8:26 PM
190 online now:
(190 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: rldawnca
Post Volume:
Total: 838,750 Year: 13,573/29,783 Month: 1,019/1,576 Week: 231/303 Day: 28/27 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
24NextFF
Author Topic:   Peppered Moths and Natural Selection
kuresu
Member (Idle past 408 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 181 of 350 (347869)
09-09-2006 10:05 PM
Reply to: Message 178 by jerker77
09-09-2006 9:38 PM


Re: Challenge, who's up for it?
only reason I know swedish--my mom is. I was in stockholm just this past summer--Lidingo to be precise.

came to the chat, seeing as how you're on right now

probably shouldn't continue in the off-topic vein


All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences
This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by jerker77, posted 09-09-2006 9:38 PM jerker77 has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19544
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 182 of 350 (347873)
09-09-2006 10:13 PM
Reply to: Message 180 by Someone who cares
09-09-2006 9:54 PM


yes or no?
... so my posting here may be limited or just non existent.

Understood, that is why I asked a simple yes or no question.

Message 167
... if someone has something about evolution, evidence, pepper moths, natural selection, etc,...

Just one quick yes or no question:

Do you agree that the documented changes in the relative proportions of the {dark\light} variety populations of the peppered moths shows natural selection?

Just a simple yes or no.

Enjoy.

Easy right?


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Someone who cares, posted 09-09-2006 9:54 PM Someone who cares has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by tuned2g, posted 09-23-2006 10:08 PM RAZD has responded

  
tuned2g
Inactive Member


Message 183 of 350 (351688)
09-23-2006 10:08 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by RAZD
09-09-2006 10:13 PM


Re: yes or no?
Yes--the documented changes of coloration of peppered moths is an example of natural selection. But does this prove evolution? Natural selection is the premise of the survival-of-the-fittest--organisms that exhibit traits more ideal for their environment will out-survive organisms without these traits and reproduce, ie dark-colored moths survive near the factories because light-colored moths stand out on the bark of dark-colored trees and are more easily seen by predators, while the dark-colored moths are hidden better. Thus the population is dominantly darker colored after several generations of moths reproducing since the lighter ones are being eaten! Anyway, natural selection can and does cause such variation in the natural world that can give rise to new species and even new genus. This has been observed and well, I know it used to be called microevolution, though I have heard that term is somewhat out of date. But natural selection cannot account for macroevolution, ie taking a one-celled organism and evolving it into a vertebrate through many transitional forms, because microevolution deals with only with genes that are already in place! Macroevolution requires the addition of new genes! These peppered moths will always be peppered moths, no matter how much they mutate. They will need an entirely new genome to become something else. Thus, natural selection is proven scientific fact... but the theory of evolution is not.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by RAZD, posted 09-09-2006 10:13 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 184 by Omnivorous, posted 09-23-2006 11:00 PM tuned2g has not yet responded
 Message 185 by RAZD, posted 09-24-2006 12:49 AM tuned2g has not yet responded
 Message 187 by MartinV, posted 09-25-2006 2:35 PM tuned2g has not yet responded

  
Omnivorous
Member (Idle past 862 days)
Posts: 3808
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005


Message 184 of 350 (351702)
09-23-2006 11:00 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by tuned2g
09-23-2006 10:08 PM


Re: yes or no?
The fly--or moth--in the ointment of your reply is that new genes do, indeed, arise: we call that process mutation.

Should a mutation create a gene which enables the moth to adopt, chameleon-like, the color pattern of its background, it would live long and prosper no matter what rapid changes occur in its chromatic environment.

Genes mutate. Stir in the natural selection that you have already granted exists, and the sky is the limit. Evolution is every bit as "proven" as natural selection.


God gave us the earth. We have dominion over the plants, the animals, the trees. God said, ‘Earth is yours. Take it. Rape it. It’s yours.’
--Ann Coulter, Fox-TV: Hannity & Colmes, 20 Jun 01

Save lives! Click here!
Join the World Community Grid with Team EvC!
---------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by tuned2g, posted 09-23-2006 10:08 PM tuned2g has not yet responded

    
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19544
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 185 of 350 (351717)
09-24-2006 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 183 by tuned2g
09-23-2006 10:08 PM


Re: yes or no? - that's a 'yes' ... and ...
Welcome to the fray, tuned2g (and I'll assume it's middle g ...)

Yes--the documented changes of coloration of peppered moths is an example of natural selection.

And this is all it has ever been presented as evidence of: natural selection in action.

These peppered moths will always be peppered moths, no matter how much they mutate. They will need an entirely new genome to become something else.

Even with a new genome they will still be peppered moths ... for further comments on this and the rest of your post involving {micro\macro}evolution, they have been addressed on a thread dedicated to that issue -- see Message 180 for some background and then Message 181 for details..

If the two varieties of peppered moths became reproductively isolated so that they became different species they would still both be peppered moths, but you would have one species of light peppered moths and one species of dark peppered moths. Then over time each species would develop different varieties within their species populations.

So far this has not happened. They are still considered one species. As such the evidence of their population shifts -- from predominantly light with some dark, to predominantly dark with some light, and then back to predominantly light with some dark -- is clearly a result of preferential predation as a selection mechanism with the change being due to altered environment that change the relative fitness of the different varieties for blending into the predominant environment.

And until speciation occurs this will only be evidence of natural selection in action.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : moved off topic comments to appropriate thread


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by tuned2g, posted 09-23-2006 10:08 PM tuned2g has not yet responded

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12557
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002


Message 186 of 350 (351789)
09-24-2006 12:23 PM


Topic Drift Alert
As the opening post makes clear, this thread is about whether the peppered moth is a legitimate example of natural selection in the wild. Unless it is being argued that melanism in the peppered moth requires addition and deletion of an entire gene, the possibility of mutations introducing new genes is off-topic for this thread.


--Percy
EvC Forum Director

    
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3723 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 187 of 350 (352129)
09-25-2006 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 183 by tuned2g
09-23-2006 10:08 PM


Re: yes or no?
tuned2q writes:


...ie dark-colored moths survive near the factories because light-colored moths stand out on the bark of dark-colored trees and are more easily seen by predators, while the dark-colored moths are hidden better.

As far as I know this is only an unproven speculation. If Kettlewell glued death specimens on bark it does not necessary means, that dark-colored moths are hidden better. As we still
do not know, where exactly pepperd moths rest during day we cannot deduce, that they are "hidden" in that unknown place better.

There is some hypothesis - look back in thread - that they rest on bottom side of branches in canopy. If it is true, I would like see photos of these places - are these hidden, from direct polution diverted parts of branches as poluted as Kettlewell barks? If there exist no photos of genuine resting places of peppered moths, all is only speculation, because we do not know, if they are more hidden/exposed to eyes of predators.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 183 by tuned2g, posted 09-23-2006 10:08 PM tuned2g has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by RAZD, posted 09-25-2006 3:13 PM MartinV has responded
 Message 191 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-25-2006 10:26 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19544
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 188 of 350 (352159)
09-25-2006 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by MartinV
09-25-2006 2:35 PM


Re: yes or no? -- that would be denial ...
As far as I know this is only an unproven speculation. If Kettlewell glued death specimens on bark ...

Then you need to read the rest of the experimental evidence. That would be the honest way to approach the information that is available, rather than to spout further nonsense based on your ignorance of the information.

It is obvious from this post that you have not done that.

Of course the fact that this one experiment invalidates your pet concept on mimicry wouldn't have anything to do with your denial of the evidence that exists would it?

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : subtitle


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by MartinV, posted 09-25-2006 2:35 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by MartinV, posted 09-25-2006 3:22 PM RAZD has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3723 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 189 of 350 (352160)
09-25-2006 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by RAZD
09-25-2006 3:13 PM


Re: yes or no?

That would be the honest way to approach the information that is available, rather than to spout further nonsense based on your ignorance of the information.

I know - one of you darwinist send me even to library to read original Kettlewel researches! As good argument as your.

Anyway - if you or anybody else have any photo/link to research of resting places of peppered moth I would appreciate it very.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by RAZD, posted 09-25-2006 3:13 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by RAZD, posted 09-25-2006 8:02 PM MartinV has responded

  
RAZD
Member
Posts: 19544
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004
Member Rating: 3.3


Message 190 of 350 (352253)
09-25-2006 8:02 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by MartinV
09-25-2006 3:22 PM


Re: yes or no? or more denial?
I know - one of you darwinist send me even to library to read original Kettlewel researches!

That would be a start.

It's what a scientist would do, or a lay person interested in the truth. Or even an honest critic.

Picking up a tid-bit from some creatortionista site and thinking you know more than the scientists that spent years in the field is just a little bit of hubris eh?
Do you think only one study was done? Do you think Kettlewell was the only scientist to study the peppered moths? Do you think his work was not critically reviewed by subsequent scientists? Did you even read the OP? or Message 121 and any of the links that have been posted for you?

Anyway - if you or anybody else have any photo/link to research of resting places of peppered moth I would appreciate it very.

As noted in several posts and links the Majerus book has these photos.

Even the link you posted
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/iconob.html#moths

has two graphs of different places the moths were found and their relative frequencies:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/images/majerus_table6_1.gif
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/images/majerus_table6_2.gif

And the fact remains, that the observed behavior of the birds was to preferentially select dark moths on light backgrounds and light moths on dark backgrounds -- showing a distinct, clear and unambiguous benefit to camouflage patterning, to mimicking a common background in the environment, as a result of selection pressure by predation. Not just in the glued moth experiments but in follow-up ones where moths were released and then recaptured and the differences in relative populations were counted.

Regardless of whether photographs to your satisfaction are available, there is documentation of preferential predation of moths by birds. The first study establishes this point and no later study invalidates it, they document the same effect and final result.

The documentation is sufficiently whelming that creatortionista websites do not contest this point:

John Morris, ICR writes:

Remember that both varieties were present at the start, with the mix of genes producing lights favored over the mix of genes producing darks. As the environment changed, the dark variety had greater opportunity to pass on their genetic mix, and percentages changed. All the while, the two types were interfertile. No new genes were produced, and certainly no new species resulted. This is natural selection in action, but not evolution.

I'm sure with a little effort you could find other creationist sites that also make such statements.

So the question is why are you in such denial of the evidence? Perhaps because you have decided to believe something that is not true, and thus you need to reject any evidence that shows you are wrong.

You want to believe there is no benefit to mimicry, and this study clearly shows there is a distinct and clear and unambiguous benefit.

So either you accept that your concept is invalid or you need to deny the evidence that invalidates it to maintain your fantasy.

Enjoy.

Edited by RAZD, : subtitle


Join the effort to unravel {AIDS/HIV} {Protenes} and {Cancer} with Team EvC! (click)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand

RebelAAmericanOZen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by MartinV, posted 09-25-2006 3:22 PM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by MartinV, posted 09-26-2006 11:57 AM RAZD has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16035
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 191 of 350 (352268)
09-25-2006 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by MartinV
09-25-2006 2:35 PM


Re: yes or no?
As far as I know this is only an unproven speculation. If Kettlewell glued death specimens on bark it does not necessary means, that dark-colored moths are hidden better.

He didn't glue moths to trees. That was an entirely different research team.

Details of Kettlewell's experiments can be found here

As we still do not know, where exactly pepperd moths rest during day ...

Speak for yourself.

Of peppered moths observed in the wild, about a quarter were indeed sighted on tree trunks. (see M.E.N. Majerus: Melanism: Evolution in Action, Oxford University Press) (details here).

Is there anything else you'd like to be wrong about?

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by MartinV, posted 09-25-2006 2:35 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3723 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 192 of 350 (352379)
09-26-2006 11:57 AM
Reply to: Message 190 by RAZD
09-25-2006 8:02 PM


Resting place of peppered moths
RAZD writes:


It's what a scientist would do, or a lay person interested in the truth. Or even an honest critic.
Picking up a tid-bit from some creatortionista site and thinking you know more than the scientists that spent years in the field is just a little bit of hubris eh?

I agree that for this case it is sufficiently enough not to seek true in other links but neodarwinistic.
Anyway you might be right, but I am not sure, if you realize that is importatnt to know, where peppered moths rest in order to prove, that there is selection pressure on them from birds at all. Majerus seems to be of similar opinion himself:


" Majerus sees it as "crucially important" to learn the natural resting place of peppered moths if we are to assess fitness differences between the morphs based on crypsis. This seems reasonable; however, in his call for future research Majerus proposes using ... "

Please use peek and learn how to shorten links

RAZD writes:


As noted in several posts and links the Majerus book has these photos.

Even the link you posted
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/iconob.html#moths

has two graphs of different places the moths were found and their relative frequencies:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/images/majerus_table6_1.gif
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/wells/images/majerus_table6_2.gif

If you agree with arguments there and consider these arguments as valuable to mention them let me cite from it:

Majerus cites his own data on the natural resting places of moths -- some 47 moths -- not a lot, but far more than two. This data, listed in Table 6.1 of Majerus' page 123, indicates that peppered moths in fact rest in diverse locations (12 on tree trunks, 20 on "trunk-branch joints", and 15 in tree branches). Similar percentages are found in Table 6.2 on a larger dataset of resting moths found near traps.

About second example near traps I do not know more details (were peppered moths released during night/day?, why Bruce Grant in previous link mention predominantly first case? ), so I preliminary restrict to the first one that seems to be more connected with real conditions.

47 observed moths during years 1964-1996 (1,5 observed moths/year)
on my opinion have neither any scientific value nor is it statistically representative sample at all. What is more curious, that Majerus - according previous link from Bruce Grant - " Majerus himself reports by far the greatest number of sightings among moth workers."(!!)

Is these observed number 47 moths during 32 years enough for you and is 47 moths satisfactory explanation for you as where peppered moths rest during day?

Because on the previous link of Bruce Grant: " In truth, we still don't know the natural hiding places of peppered moths."

Surely I would appreciate if you instead of common discourtesy and emphasizing your unfounded propositions with highlited letters give some scientific relevant links/facts backed by some relevant research (not only 47 moths with the naked eye during more than 30 years) as to the resting places of peppered moths.
And surely I am not asking so much at the beginning of 21 century, when we see from satelites smallest details on Earth.
Enjoy.

Edited by AdminJar, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by RAZD, posted 09-25-2006 8:02 PM RAZD has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-26-2006 12:06 PM MartinV has responded
 Message 197 by RAZD, posted 09-26-2006 7:57 PM MartinV has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16035
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 193 of 350 (352384)
09-26-2006 12:06 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by MartinV
09-26-2006 11:57 AM


... by some relevant research (not only 47 moths with the naked eye during more than 30 years) as to the resting places of peppered moths.

The total set of observations of the resting places of peppered moths is the relevant research. What other research could be relevant?

Why you complain that these observations were made with the naked eye, I have no idea. How else would you observe a moth?

And surely I am not asking so much at the beginning of 21 century, when we see from satelites smallest details on Earth.

You want satelite images of moths?

In the first place, satelites can't resolve that level of detail, and in the second place, even if they could, they wouldn't pick up moths on tree trunks, because the crown of the tree would get in the way.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by MartinV, posted 09-26-2006 11:57 AM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 194 by MartinV, posted 09-26-2006 12:47 PM Dr Adequate has responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 3723 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 194 of 350 (352397)
09-26-2006 12:47 PM
Reply to: Message 193 by Dr Adequate
09-26-2006 12:06 PM


I would appreciate, if responses bring something intelligent and new that can elucidated problem of resting places of peppered moth instead of ridiculing remarks.

I hit on this German-English link, that reproduces many Majerus pictures of resting peppered moth. Interesting is, that there is picture with text: "A typical peppered moth at rest in hazel foliage."

Than it is necessary to make serious research where moths really rest, while in a green foliage it is much difficult to see any cryptic advantage of melanism as in a poluted bark.

http://www.weloennig.de/BistonA.html#1a

Edited by MartinV, : word green added


This message is a reply to:
 Message 193 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-26-2006 12:06 PM Dr Adequate has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-26-2006 3:57 PM MartinV has not yet responded
 Message 196 by Dr Adequate, posted 09-26-2006 3:58 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16035
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 195 of 350 (352428)
09-26-2006 3:57 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by MartinV
09-26-2006 12:47 PM


Oops, double post.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by MartinV, posted 09-26-2006 12:47 PM MartinV has not yet responded

  
RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
24NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2018