|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: About New Lamarckian Synthesis Theory | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
But the evidence that there is for random mutations is rather compelling. The evidence for guided mutations is virtually non-existent. Is it so difficult that compelling evidence to presented for? I can't prove the non-existance of something that it does not exist.
Epigenetics is not the same thing as guided mutations. Period. As far as we know up to now. But guided mutations are at least having equal chances to exist as random mutations do, regarding the realy slim amounts of evidence for each of them. From JOHN CLOUD's "your DNA ISN'T YOUR DESTINY" I quote: "For deep evolutional changes in multi-cellular organisms, mutations on DNA to be beneficial, need to be prepared by epigenetic phenotype changes, which facilitate these types of mutation. In one cell and other of low organization evolution is endogenously forced by life momentum." Edited by Admin, : Fix quotes, improve formatting.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
The Time article that Zi Ko is referring to is here: Why Your DNA Isn't Your Destiny
It is well worth a read. It clearly describes some supporting evidence in an organized and well presented manner. It includes the Lamarck argument that Zi Ko has been making. While Lamarck was wrong to think that acquired characteristics such as cutting off the tails of mice could be inherited, apparently less overt acquired characteristics *can* be inherited, though they are thought to be impermanent and in the absence of the original environmental factor will fade away and be lost. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nwr Member Posts: 6412 From: Geneva, Illinois Joined: Member Rating: 4.5 |
No, I mean direct environmental effect on deep DNA.
When people use "deep" like that, I tend to take them as signalling that they don't know what they are talking about but want to sound impressive.
"The stress of fear, lack of food, lack of mating opportunities etc., are the main causes of soft or deep changes. As these stresses are empathetically transmitted not only to life peers, but to extant population in wild areas, and to proximal generations , the resultant beneficial mutations are fairly quickly established, reducing the time needed by natural selection to do its work. This long time effect is the main cause of speciation as it expresses deep survival needs."
Much of that might be correct. But that is what I would call "environmental". The biochemical environment has changed, which has effects on development. Personally, I have been a critic of biological determinism. There's nothing in that Time article (thanks for the link, Percy) that particularly surprises me. However, to make a case of Lamarckian inheritance, you would really need to see these effects transmitted to many generations, not only to the immediate next generation. There's another effect that I didn't see in that Time report (or perhaps I missed it). Namely that some of these stress conditions are known to increase mutation rates, which can affect the rapidity of evolution.Jesus was a liberal hippie
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
I have to state and apologise for it, a mistake made unintentionally by me. The quotes mentioned in messages 44 and 46 in replies to nwr and HBD are not from WHY DNA ISN'T A DESTSTINY FOR YOU by JOHN CLOUDS. The mistake had been caused from a mixing up of my notes
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi Zi Ko,
It doesn't matter whether there are quotes around it or who said it, it's just another unsupported assertion. What you need is evidence. And there apparently *is* evidence out there for something somewhat resembling your point of view, but you're being remarkably inept in exploiting it. Why don't you go back to the Time article and use it to structure your arguments. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1
|
No, I mean direct environmental effect on deep DNA. First off, "deep DNA" is a throw away term. It really doesn't mean anything. There is no such thing as shallow and deep DNA. There is just DNA. Second, you are not addressing the real problem. Why are chimps and humans different? Why are humans and horses different? I can tell you right now that these differences are NOT due to differences in DNA methylation or histone packaging. Epigenetics is not an explanation for the problem that we are trying to answer. So why are humans and horses different? It is because the DNA sequence of our genomes is different. Therefore, your synthesis must explain how DNA sequence changes over time. So far, you have failed to explain this. Epigenetics is completely off topic unless you can show how it influences sequence changes over time.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
My intention is to discuss the matter, not to convince anybody.
The article i brought here it is enough for the beginning of the discussion. I think there isn't any need to fo relate passages of it. The important question that arises from it is: Is it correct to stick on the up to now knowledge that epigenetic changes are always remaining epigenetic and don't pave the way, in the long run, to deep DNA changes?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
...apparently less overt acquired characteristics *can* be inherited, though they are thought to be impermanent and in the absence of the original environmental factor will fade away and be lost.
Yes I agree.But what if theoriginal factor will not fade away? Has science any answer on this? ------------------------------------------------------
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3742 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
zi ko writes:
Can you think of any environmental factors that are immutable? Yes I agree.But what if theoriginal factor will not fade away? Has science any answer on this? If all environmental factors are subject to change, then science's answer is: "Those types of environmental factors do not exist.""There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
Epigenetics is completely off topic unless you can show how it influences sequence changes over time. This does not preclude that it could happen. I can not prove how does it happen (becouse of the time limit, or limited knowledge) neither you manage after so intence research to prove it couldn't happen. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
However, to make a case of Lamarckian inheritance, you would really need to see these effects transmitted to many generations, not only to the immediate next generation. in fact the effects were lasting in many generations.
There's another effect that I didn't see in that Time report (or perhaps I missed it). Namely that some of these stress conditions are known to increase mutation rates, which can affect the rapidity of evolution.
You can't see mutations in metazoans and so in man.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
If all environmental factors are subject to change, then science's answer is: "Those types of environmental factors do not exist."
I don't follow you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
neither you manage after so intence research to prove it couldn't happen. Is this really your best argument? After all, I cannot disprove that evolution of mammals was not caused by magic elves living in hollow trees. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison. Well, you may still have time to register to vote. Even North Carolinians can still register for early voting. State Registration Deadlines
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
This does not preclude that it could happen. In order to have a theory, you need to show how it DOES happen.
I can not prove how does it happen (becouse of the time limit, or limited knowledge) neither you manage after so intence research to prove it couldn't happen. It is your theory. You need to present the evidence that it does happen as you claim it does. How does epigenetics guide mutations so that they are not random with respect to fitness?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
Percy writes: While Lamarck was wrong to think that acquired characteristics such as cutting off the tails of mice could be inherited, apparently less overt acquired characteristics *can* be inherited, though they are thought to be impermanent and in the absence of the original environmental factor will fade away and be lost. I believe that PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) is one of these characterstics. I don't have any support, so the rest of this can be taken with a grain of talking-out-of-my-ass: I think they've studied PTSD victims from the 9-11 attacks in New York.Those suffering from PTSD usually have a chemical marker of some sort (levels of this or that are low or high... can't remember). Even if the woman was born "normal" but then sufferes from PTSD... she can pass this PTSD onto her children. That is, those children have a very high percentage chance of also having the same chemical markers... even though the children have not had any trauma happen directly to them. I believe the study also showed that such passing on of PTSD could last up to 3 or 4 generations... (with diminishing effects). I don't recall anything about the affects fading away over time, but I don't see a reason to doubt that. Especially in the case of PTSD, "time" is one of the factors of the healing process anyway.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024