Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8749 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 05-25-2017 6:06 PM
388 online now:
14174dm, Asgara (AdminAsgara), CRR, edge, kjsimons, ooh-child, PaulK, ramoss, Stile, Tangle (10 members, 378 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Roshankumar1234
Post Volume:
Total: 809,015 Year: 13,621/21,208 Month: 3,103/3,605 Week: 445/933 Day: 34/56 Hour: 1/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
131415
16
1718Next
Author Topic:   A New Run at the End of Evolution by Genetic Processes Argument
NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8776
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003
Member Rating: 5.0


(1)
Message 226 of 259 (771865)
10-31-2015 10:43 AM
Reply to: Message 225 by Faith
10-31-2015 9:52 AM


Reliable Mutations
A very reliable form of mutation I might add, that actually formed alleles instead of mistakes, unfunctioning alleles or diseases, a mutation rather different from that we know today.

But that kind of mutation, as you point out, doesn't exist. Never has existed. Is not necessary at all.

As has been noted over and over. Each human is born with a number of novel mutations. In addition, a large number of humans are not born because they started off with malfunctioning mutations and spontaneously aborted. Roughly half of the "tries" are removed this way. (more or less since many of those abortions may have been for non genetic problems).

In a population of 100,000 reindeer each year there maybe 30,000 new births. Already tens of thousands of "tries" have been removed. Over the next year another 10 or 15 thousand young reindeer will die. Some of these had "unreliable" mutations.

You don't need "reliable" mutations. You need enough "okish" mutations out of all of them and a mechanisms for getting rid of the "unreliable" ones.

When we examine the real world that is what we see.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 9:52 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 227 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 11:28 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 227 of 259 (771866)
10-31-2015 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 226 by NosyNed
10-31-2015 10:43 AM


Re: Reliable Mutations
Why don't you distinguish between mutations in body cells and those in sex cells? Those in body cells are completely irrelevant to evolution because they don't get passed on.

And the fact that there are so many of them does not exactly suggest a healthy process at all, which presumably you are trying to prove here, that mutations that are mistakes are sufficient. The only reason you need *enough* is because there are so many NOT-OKish mutations, some of which actually kill the life they are credited with making.

You accept that as just a fact of nature. But I think it argues for a perfect original Creation that has degenerated. It's hard to see how such an UNreliable hit-or-miss trial-and-error system could ever have produced one functioning cell let alone all life as we see it. The odds are ridiculously against it, but that too is an article of faith about nature that you all accept. Yes, when you "examine the real world" this is what you see, but what you SHOULD see is an originally perfect system that has a major bug in it, not at all what it was meant to be.

Nature is so wonderfully complex and precise in so many ways, how did it manage to goof up about something as basic as the method that forms the coding system for the variability of life forms? DNA processes themselves are wonderfully precise, unbelievably complex and yet orchestrated to an amazing perfection. How DNA replicates itself, which we've all seen illustrated in various animations, is truly awesome in the way that word should be used. The basic system itself ought to be regarded as evidence for a Creator. The organization, the precision that is required for the reproduction of life is breathtaking, yet you all believe it just came together out of mindless physical ingredients? And somehow that amazingly precise machinery also makes all those mistakes in replication we call mutations? You all believe that such imprecision is how nature works to produce all that perfection and precision? This does not compute.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by NosyNed, posted 10-31-2015 10:43 AM NosyNed has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:01 PM Faith has responded

    
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 228 of 259 (771871)
10-31-2015 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 224 by Admin
10-31-2015 9:27 AM


Re: Moderator Suggestion
You're not the only one having trouble following these long posts that cover a lot of territory

I would appreciate it if it was pointed out when something in my post(s) is unclear or hard to follow, even if it has to come from Admin. I tend to try to abbreviate my explanations for time's sake and may fail to make some details clear; and yes, sometimes I try to cover a lot of territory. "I don't understand this concept or this line of argument" is completely appropriate, but "your post is completely incomprehensible" is just not - I am not a incomprehensible, babbling buffoon. It just seems like an avoidance strategy to me.

So please, call me out if my points are not as clear as they should be.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 224 by Admin, posted 10-31-2015 9:27 AM Admin has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 229 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 12:54 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 229 of 259 (771872)
10-31-2015 12:54 PM
Reply to: Message 228 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 12:49 PM


Re: Moderator Suggestion
That was actually illuminating, since I wouldn't have guessed that saying your post is incomprehensible was anything more than saying it's incomprehensible TO ME. Which is all I meant. I assume you know what you are talking about, but it isn't reaching ME, that's all.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 228 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 12:49 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

    
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 230 of 259 (771873)
10-31-2015 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by Faith
10-31-2015 11:28 AM


Re: Reliable Mutations
DNA processes themselves are wonderfully precise, unbelievably complex and yet orchestrated to an amazing perfection. How DNA replicates itself, which we've all seen illustrated in various animations, is truly awesome in the way that word should be used. The basic system itself ought to be regarded as evidence for a Creator. The organization, the precision that is required for the reproduction of life is breathtaking, yet you all believe it just came together out of mindless physical ingredients?

I agree, and the more I learn about how natural systems work, the more I am convinced of a Creator. Personally, I don't believe that it all came together out of "mindless physical ingredients."

However, personal incredulity is not an effective system to use to determine how the world actually works.

Why don't you distinguish between mutations in body cells and those in sex cells? Those in body cells are completely irrelevant to evolution because they don't get passed on.

I take it you mean this as a rhetorical question, because I am skeptical that you would really be open to the explanation.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 11:28 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 1:09 PM herebedragons has responded
 Message 236 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 2:23 PM herebedragons has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 231 of 259 (771877)
10-31-2015 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 1:01 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
I take it you mean this as a rhetorical question, because I am skeptical that you would really be open to the explanation.

I don't mind explanations, what I mind is accusations that I'm not "open" to this that or the other for underhanded reasons. If you could keep that in mind, I'd be happy to hear an explanation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:01 PM herebedragons has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 233 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:34 PM Faith has responded

    
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 232 of 259 (771878)
10-31-2015 1:20 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by Faith
10-31-2015 9:52 AM


Re: Moderator Suggestion
If the question is simply where did the alleles come from above and beyond the two for each locus that had to have been in the individuals on the ark, I've said there had to have been a form of mutation to account for them. A very reliable form of mutation I might add, that actually formed alleles instead of mistakes, unfunctioning alleles or diseases, a mutation rather different from that we know today.

Yes, I guess I did miss where you postulated "a very reliable form of mutation." Would this be of the type where the polymerases know what mutations are needed and deliberately make nucleotide substitutions that the organism needs to evolve? Or is it divine intervention?

Seriously, instead of speculating what must be true because your premise is true, let's talk about how things ACTUALLY work.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 9:52 AM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 1:41 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 233 of 259 (771883)
10-31-2015 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 231 by Faith
10-31-2015 1:09 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
If you could keep that in mind, I'd be happy to hear an explanation.

Will do. Just let me know what you don't understand... it can't be everything.

what I mind is accusations that I'm not "open" to this that or the other for underhanded reasons.

I apologize, but it often feels that way, and I am not the only one who gets that impression. But I will try to be more patient.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 1:09 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 1:43 PM herebedragons has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 234 of 259 (771886)
10-31-2015 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 232 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 1:20 PM


Re: Moderator Suggestion
Yes, I guess I did miss where you postulated "a very reliable form of mutation." Would this be of the type where the polymerases know what mutations are needed and deliberately make nucleotide substitutions that the organism needs to evolve? Or is it divine intervention?

No, it would be the consistent never-failing production of a viable allele instead of one that either has no discernible effect or produces disease and death. The viable alternative alleles vary the expression of the gene, right? They don't need to "know" anything, they just do something that works as opposed to something that is either a dud or destructive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 232 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:20 PM herebedragons has not yet responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 235 of 259 (771888)
10-31-2015 1:43 PM
Reply to: Message 233 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 1:34 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
I apologize, but it often feels that way, and I am not the only one who gets that impression.

The main reason you or anybody get that impression is that you have the ToE bias and don't understand how a YEC thinks.,


This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:34 PM herebedragons has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 237 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 2:27 PM Faith has responded

    
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 236 of 259 (771893)
10-31-2015 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 230 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 1:01 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
Two things I failed to address in your post:

It isn't "personal incredulity" to appreciate that such a complex system is evidence of a Creator, it is in fact actual evidence of a Creator.

The other thing is that you didn't address the other point I was making: the first is that the precision is evidence of a Creator; the second is that the imprecision of mutations is evidence of a bug in the system because the Creator obviously only creates perfection.

So are you accepting that imprecision as how nature works as the Creator made it or do you agree with me?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 1:01 PM herebedragons has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 239 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 2:57 PM Faith has not yet responded

    
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


(2)
Message 237 of 259 (771894)
10-31-2015 2:27 PM
Reply to: Message 235 by Faith
10-31-2015 1:43 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
The main reason you or anybody get that impression is that you have the ToE bias and don't understand how a YEC thinks.

Maybe you could drop the accusations as well. I began studying this subject with a very open mind in search of the truth. In fact, I started this with a "creationist bias" and found it seriously lacking - downright false. I am not offended that you hold a creationist perspective or believe in a recent creation, but to suggest that the only reason I or anyone else accepts the ToE is because of some inherent bias and not because we have studied it in depth and have come to an honest conclusion IS offensive.

Now enough of this, back to the topic...

If you concede that mutations are involved and that genetic diversity does increase due to mutation, then maybe we should focus on the nature of mutations and what we know about mutations.

Faith writes:

No, it would be the consistent never-failing production of a viable allele instead of one that either has no discernible effect or produces disease and death.

But in order to be this "never-failing" process, there would need to be some type of foreknowledge of what result any particular mutation would produce. What cellular process would "know" that?

Faith writes:

The viable alternative alleles vary the expression of the gene, right?

Much more complicated than that. I could give an example of how a gene works to produce a phenotypic effect, but it is not a quick and easy subject.

Faith writes:

They don't need to "know" anything, they just do something that works as opposed to something that is either a dud or destructive.

"something that works" is incredibly vague. What if you have a gene product that represses activity at another site and a mutation makes that gene no longer functional. Would that "do something" or would it be a "dud?" - a disabled, dead gene? It would release activity at the target site allowing expression of that gene.

One thing about biochemical process is that they work by a cascade of events, one event triggering another event, triggering another, etc. It becomes a network or processes, not individual effects.

If you are interested in what we know about what causes mutations and what types of mutations we know about, we could discuss that, but it is not an easy subject.

Or maybe you want me to explain better how molecular markers are used and what they mean?

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 235 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 1:43 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 2:35 PM herebedragons has responded

  
Faith
Member
Posts: 24846
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 238 of 259 (771896)
10-31-2015 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 237 by herebedragons
10-31-2015 2:27 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
But in order to be this "never-failing" process, there would need to be some type of foreknowledge of what result any particular mutation would produce. What cellular process would "know" that?

No there would not need to be such a thing. All that's needed is the CHEMICAL "logic" of what works to produce a protein that does something that works and isn't a dud or lethal to the host. That should be a purely chemical process.

I need a break. Back later.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 237 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 2:27 PM herebedragons has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by herebedragons, posted 10-31-2015 3:20 PM Faith has responded

    
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


(2)
Message 239 of 259 (771898)
10-31-2015 2:57 PM
Reply to: Message 236 by Faith
10-31-2015 2:23 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
the first is that the precision is evidence of a Creator; the second is that the imprecision of mutations is evidence of a bug in the system because the Creator obviously only creates perfection.

This is such faulty logic. Is the system precise or imprecise? How is the imprecise system not evidence that the Creator is also imperfect? You have never observed a "perfect" system, so you have no standard with which to compare this present "imperfect" system. Maybe this system is the "perfect" system.

So are you accepting that imprecision as how nature works as the Creator made it or do you agree with me?

A leading question based on a false dichotomy. Mutations introduce variation; variation is necessary to survival. A beautiful and effective system. Unless you consider a static, unchanging world to be perfection... I don't. Life was designed to thrive, to persevere, to overcome. What am amazing system life is!!

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 236 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 2:23 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1324
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009
Member Rating: 6.0


Message 240 of 259 (771899)
10-31-2015 3:20 PM
Reply to: Message 238 by Faith
10-31-2015 2:35 PM


Re: Reliable Mutations
No there would not need to be such a thing. All that's needed is the CHEMICAL "logic" of what works to produce a protein that does something that works and isn't a dud or lethal to the host. That should be a purely chemical process.

Something you may not be aware of, but in organic chemical reactions there are often (usually) impurities (side reactions) produced just because of the nature of organic chemical interactions. This is way beyond what we can cover here, but even this "chemical logic" is imperfect. Basically, it has to do with reaction energies and stochastic processes and though one product may be highly favored, other products occur simply by chance.

In Organic Chemistry, when we drew a chemical reaction, we also had to also specify what side products were likely to be produced and in what proportion based on reaction energies.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 238 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 2:35 PM Faith has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Faith, posted 10-31-2015 5:57 PM herebedragons has responded

  
RewPrev1
...
131415
16
1718Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017