mutattion n vilidity

I have oftn seeen tha t a big argumnt aginst evlution is that thos e who argyue agianst it argue frm the notion that eny chang in the code oder or sttructure shud rendr the orgnism invlaid. It rinders it uterly incappable of dilvering it’s merssage. THs it sems isnt the case. Ay mutattion may indead cause the orngism to be les efective in dooing it s joh but nun the less the massage getts through.This message has been edited by ohnhai, 14-11-2005 01:00 AM

(1) Can you remove your side note. Otherwise you are inviting the discussion to go off-topic from the start.(2) How about trying a spell checker on both the title and the message content. Correct spelling improves readability. Did you mean "virility" or "validity" in the title line (where you have "vilidity")?

---

have removed the side note. and as for the spelling please re-read the post.

Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

ROFLOLthink they'll get it?perhaps we should calculate the number of mutations and their probabilities that resulted in that post .... This message has been edited by RAZD, 11*13*2005 01:26 PM

---

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

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

I was thinking in terms of a computer program that would take a text file and "shoot holes in it" - i.e. mutate it - by changing random characters to random values.Otherwise, somebody is bound to say, "It took a lot of intelligence to create that post."

---

People who think they have all the answers usually don't understand the questions.

well we have 3 basic forms of mutations involved: additions (random letter added, random location), deletions (random location) and substitutions (letter changed to random letter, random location) ...

---

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

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

On a similar note, there was a post I made some time back (arguing against Faith) where I proposed a computer program to mutate words . ah here it is . {copied form previous thread, with changes in the wording, mainly to save me typing it all again}As you see this was written to counter the argument that Immunity in bacteria could not arise by simple mutation and selection, but also works well here.ABE---
Oh and it doesn’t take a lot of intelligence for me to write like that, but it does take time to go back and un-fix all errors that Microsoft Word so helpfully auto corrects . This message has been edited by ohnhai, 14-11-2005 07:36 AM

you can turn off auto correct you know.tools\autocorrect ...there is a box at the bottom that is checked{} Automatically use suggestions from the spelling checkerremove the checkspelling errors will be highlighted but you can chose the corrections that are usedI'm looking at moving over to openoffice.org and linux on a new harddrive just for funziesenjoy life, the universe and everything.

---

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

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

first step determine the length of the string elementuse a random number generator to generate a number between 0 and {stringlength}if n=0 no change
if n>0 then random number generator to generate 1 2 or 3
if m=1 then delete letter at position n from {string}
if m=2 then random number generator to generate 1 to 26 and insert letter at position n
if m=3 then random number generator to generate 1 to 26 and replace letter at position ndo 1000 times
check results against dictionary for viability
repeat 1000 timesof course this assumes that all mutations result in immediate life and death tests, whereas in real life there are many mutations that are neutral until conditions change

---

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

​

RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.

any craetionist kare to rebutt my argumnt ?

The message might not get through the whole biochemical DNA plenuum among Mitochondrial and Nuclear encoded proteins if the following scheme for programmed cell death is true.

quote:

---

In summary, the evolutionary scenario that I have outlined suggests a multistep process for the emergence of programmed cell death that originated in bacteria. The most commonly accepted proposal for the origin of the eukaryotic cell - an endosymbiont that arose from the capture of a bacteria by an ancestor of the eukaryotic cell - suggests the hypothesis that programmed cell death has undergone a further step of stabilization in the first eukaryote cell, in which an evolutionary arms race between two heterogenous genomes condemmend to live together (the mitochondrial genome and the preeukaryote cell nuclear genome), led to a resolution of these genomic conflicts through a process of enforced cooperation (Ameisen, 1996a). Such a process, as I will discuss later, may provide an explanation for the recently described - and surprising - role of mitochondria in the execution of programmed cell death.

​

An interesting aspect of this multistep scenario for the evolutionary origin of programmed cell death is the suggestion that the “altruistic” genetic modules regulating programmed cell death may have initially emerged from the propagation of “selfish” infections genetic modules that were selected through their ability to “addict” the cells that expressed them. This scenario, however, may not be the only possible scenario for the evolutionary origin of programmed cell death. I have proposed an alternative model that has another interesting aspect: it removes the need for the multistep process in the emergence and selection of the genetic modules allowing the regulation of self-destruction(Ameisen, 1996).

---

Drunk bugs do not necessarily bear Frankincense, & Myrrh. If we are drunk bugs writ larger then indeed we do not always pervay the message because of our less than perfect ability to mate when drunk. I doubt we are, but this French author thinks so. There are many perspectives depending how one thinks empirical data of individual cell deaths bear on vital statistics. I think stepping through these different views on origins is what permitted Freeman Dyson to think it was not an issue if he separated replication and metabolism. Anyway, once one begins to think of these possibilities in the newer EVO/DEVO, one can imagine how higher level affects might effect lower level organizations (via past deaths of cells (not individuals)) where death itself takes on a new unrecognized significance that only theology seems to presently make more intelligible. It is hard to say what starvations will change the human taste. Could starving bacteria be casually linked to human future reproductions?Anyway when I was questioning Malthus' validity in choosing a good wine,
http://www.students.tc3.edu/bmcfall/fripge.htm
it all depends on if death be truly categorized adequeately at the loss of 1-D symmetry with entropy, cell, individual, deme or population , when not species levels and contrasted for differences through time.Quote from THE EVOLUTIONARY ORIGIN AND ROLE OF PROGRAMMED CELL DEATH IN SINGLE-CELLED ORGANISMS: A NEW VIEW OF EXECUTIONERS, MITOCHONDRIA, HOST-PATHOGEN INTERACTIONS, AND THE ROLE OF DEATH IN THE PROCESS OF NATURAL SELECTION by Jean Cladue Ameisen in WHEN CELLS DIE edited by Lockshin, Tilly and Zakeri ISBN 0-47-16569-7 1998 Wiley-Liss, Inc.This message has been edited by Brad McFall, 11-14-2005 11:27 AM