Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 113 (8790 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 09-24-2017 8:56 PM
361 online now:
anglagard, Chiroptera, Coragyps, edge, halibut, JonF, Percy (Admin), RAZD (8 members, 353 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Porkncheese
Upcoming Birthdays: Tempe 12ft Chicken
Post Volume:
Total: 819,367 Year: 23,973/21,208 Month: 1,938/2,468 Week: 31/416 Day: 31/24 Hour: 6/1

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
15Next
Author Topic:   Can mutation and selection increase information?
Vlad
Junior Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 06-03-2017


Message 76 of 222 (815964)
07-27-2017 5:17 AM


Can mutation and selection increase information?
With a single phrase “Words don’t reproduce” New Cat’s Eye has tossed all the population genetics in the garbage (its proper place, too). Attaboy!
And yet, would the clone “revolution” be able to spontaneously evolve to such complex form as, say, “counterrevolution”? Apparently, point mutations are of no avail here: there are merely no “fit” enough intermediate forms, between “revolution” and “counterrevolution”. Incidentally, this is the very case of the so-called “irreducible complexity” associated with the notorious William Paley’s doctrine.
Paley or no Paley, the problem of “irreducible complexity” is the sad evolutionary reality, and we are to consider the possibility of macromutations, along with those point. Say, 7-fold chance mutation +counter would settle the problem, yet what are the chances for such a lucky occurrence to happen?
Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by NoNukes, posted 07-27-2017 6:44 AM Vlad has not yet responded
 Message 81 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-27-2017 11:26 AM Vlad has not yet responded
 Message 83 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 11:39 AM Vlad has not yet responded
 Message 89 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-27-2017 7:40 PM Vlad has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9928
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 77 of 222 (815967)
07-27-2017 6:44 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Vlad
07-27-2017 5:17 AM


Re: Can mutation and selection increase information?
With a single phrase “Words don’t reproduce” New Cat’s Eye has tossed all the population genetics in the garbage (its proper place, too). Attaboy!

Apparently, Mr. Impaler, you just don't get it. Population genetics relates to the theory of evolution because of the imperfect copying that occurs during reproduction. Noting that "words don't reproduce" is a completely valid point, although I might have made an argument that there is a version of "mis-hearing and copying" that might be analogous to evolution. Of course, someone else could point out the limits that must be observed when arguing by analogy.

I suspect though that you "aren't getting it" on purpose. Perhaps you should spend some time reading and learning.

Say, 7-fold chance mutation +counter would settle the problem, yet what are the chances for such a lucky occurrence to happen?

What if most of those mutations produced an enhancement that improved fitness, and it was not a requirement that they happened simultaneously. What if evolution occurred over billions of years. What if evolution had no goal, and we were not falling into the Sharpshooter fallacy? What if creationists were, with relatively few exceptions, completely ignorant about the theory they despised.

If all of that were the case, we might well begin to understand your posts, case 3.5.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

I was thinking as long as I have my hands up … they’re not going to shoot me. This is what I’m thinking — they’re not going to shoot me. Wow, was I wrong. -- Charles Kinsey

I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson

Worrying about the "browning of America" is not racism. -- Faith

I hate you all, you hate me -- Faith


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Vlad, posted 07-27-2017 5:17 AM Vlad has not yet responded

    
CRR
Member
Posts: 578
From: Australia
Joined: 10-19-2016
Member Rating: 1.2


Message 78 of 222 (815968)
07-27-2017 7:06 AM


random and non-random mutations
Lee Spetner makes the distinction between random and non-random mutations. He says that there are no examples of random mutations increasing information in the genome. However there are inbuilt mechanisms that can cause non-random genetic changes to respond to environmental events.
https://www.trueorigin.org/spetner3.php
Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by JonF, posted 07-27-2017 8:53 AM CRR has responded
 Message 80 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-27-2017 11:25 AM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 82 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 11:38 AM CRR has not yet responded
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 07-27-2017 1:16 PM CRR has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 79 of 222 (815972)
07-27-2017 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by CRR
07-27-2017 7:06 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
Ah, the good ol' equivocation on "random".

Genetic changes can respond to environmental events. They are still random with respect to fitness.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 7:06 AM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by CRR, posted 08-01-2017 3:32 AM JonF has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11707
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 80 of 222 (815978)
07-27-2017 11:25 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by CRR
07-27-2017 7:06 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
Lee Spetner makes the distinction between random and non-random mutations. He says that there are no examples of random mutations increasing information in the genome. However there are inbuilt mechanisms that can cause non-random genetic changes to respond to environmental events.

Consider a coin flip...

If we knew all the information about the forces that were involved in flipping it and causing it to tumble around in the air, we could accurately predict which side it lands on because, technically, it is not random.

But from our perspective it doesn't matter, we don't actually know which side it is going to land on so it appears random to us and gets the job done.

It's similar for mutations. The physical organism is what interacts with the environment and the mutations are to the genome that is buried deep within. The mutations may not, technically, be random in that there are causes for them, but from the perspective of the environment and its interactions with the physical organism, the mutations have the appearance of being random from the perspective of the environment.

The environment is blind to the alleles and only sees the phenotype. From that perspective, the mutations are random even if they do have predictable causes at the genetic level.

Mutations are random "with respect to fitness", not purely random as in a completely non-predictable manner.

Make sense?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 7:06 AM CRR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 11:52 AM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11707
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 81 of 222 (815979)
07-27-2017 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Vlad
07-27-2017 5:17 AM


Re: Can mutation and selection increase information?
Wow, you wrote an whole lot of words to end up saying nothing at all
This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Vlad, posted 07-27-2017 5:17 AM Vlad has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 82 of 222 (815980)
07-27-2017 11:38 AM
Reply to: Message 78 by CRR
07-27-2017 7:06 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
CRR writes:

He says that there are no examples of random mutations increasing information in the genome.

He could say that there is an invisible fire breathing dragon in his garage. Just saying something doesn't make it true.

Why don't you DEMONSTRATE that random mutations can not produce new information.

However there are inbuilt mechanisms that can cause non-random genetic changes to respond to environmental events.

Examples?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 7:06 AM CRR has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by JonF, posted 07-27-2017 12:50 PM Taq has responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 83 of 222 (815981)
07-27-2017 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Vlad
07-27-2017 5:17 AM


Re: Can mutation and selection increase information?
Vlad writes:

And yet, would the clone “revolution” be able to spontaneously evolve to such complex form as, say, “counterrevolution”?

A BLASTp search for "revolution" in the human genome doesn't turn up any matches for human proteins. Does this mean that the human genome does not contain any information?

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Vlad, posted 07-27-2017 5:17 AM Vlad has not yet responded

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


(1)
Message 84 of 222 (815982)
07-27-2017 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 80 by New Cat's Eye
07-27-2017 11:25 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
New Cat's Eye writes:

It's similar for mutations. The physical organism is what interacts with the environment and the mutations are to the genome that is buried deep within. The mutations may not, technically, be random in that there are causes for them, but from the perspective of the environment and its interactions with the physical organism, the mutations have the appearance of being random from the perspective of the environment.

I think it is more accurate to say that the mechanisms which cause mutations are not guided by what the organism needs in a given environment. The organism can not sense which mutations it needs, and then produce those mutations, and only those mutations.

It is a bit like a game of craps. The person throwing the dice (in a fair game) is not able to guide the dice so that they produce the numbers that people have bet on. Like the coin flip, knowing the precise forces exerted onto the dice would allow us to predict the outcome of the roll, but the important part is whether the roller is able to manipulate the roll to produce a beneficial outcome. The same for mutations, which are random with respect to fitness in the same way that a roll of the dice are random with respect to the placement of the chips on the craps table.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 80 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-27-2017 11:25 AM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 85 of 222 (815992)
07-27-2017 12:50 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by Taq
07-27-2017 11:38 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
Probably referring to the (irrelevant) fact that in many situations environmental stress can increase mutation rates.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 11:38 AM Taq has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 1:17 PM JonF has responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 13125
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 86 of 222 (815993)
07-27-2017 1:16 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by CRR
07-27-2017 7:06 AM


Re: random and non-random mutations
That is pretty obvious rubbish. The sorry misunderstanding of "random" has been covered already, but there is more.

Consider Spetner's attempt to discredit duplication and divergence.

quote:

The claim in the second bullet is that gene duplication represents an increase of information. That is like saying that two copies of a newspaper provide more information than does one. The role that evolutionists customarily assign to gene duplication is not that the duplication itself adds information, but that the duplication makes available a free copy of a gene (or even the whole genome), which is released from its normal function and is permitted to mutate in the hope of achieving an adaptive mutation. Any added information would then come from mutations. So the question reverts back to whether random mutations can add information, and I claim there is no evidence for it.

There are two errors here. First, the existence of the duplicate is itself information.

But the far worse error is that the very fact that Spetner doesn't count the duplicate as adding information completely changes the question of whether the subsequent mutations add information. Instead of considering just one gene, Spetner has to consider both together to validly measuring the information. Can Spetner honestly say that adding a gene that is very similar to one already present, but not a duplicate does not add information ? Even if it has - somehow - less information than the original ?

I think not. But that is exactly the way his argument goes.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by CRR, posted 07-27-2017 7:06 AM CRR has not yet responded

    
Taq
Member
Posts: 7141
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 87 of 222 (815994)
07-27-2017 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by JonF
07-27-2017 12:50 PM


Re: random and non-random mutations
JonF writes:

Probably referring to the (irrelevant) fact that in many situations environmental stress can increase mutation rates.

Probably. Most people I have seen who argue for non-random mutations focus on the increased rates of beneficial mutations, but they tend to ignore that there is also an increased rate of neutral and [detrimental] mutations that go along with it. To use an analogy, it is like a poor person buy 100 lottery tickets instead of just 1. The lottery is still random even though someone can increase their chances of winning by increasing the number of attempts.

Edited by Taq, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by JonF, posted 07-27-2017 12:50 PM JonF has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by JonF, posted 07-27-2017 6:53 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 3962
Joined: 06-23-2003
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 88 of 222 (816007)
07-27-2017 6:53 PM
Reply to: Message 87 by Taq
07-27-2017 1:17 PM


Re: random and non-random mutations
ITYM "neutral and deleterious"?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by Taq, posted 07-27-2017 1:17 PM Taq has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 15950
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 4.2


(2)
Message 89 of 222 (816008)
07-27-2017 7:40 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Vlad
07-27-2017 5:17 AM


Re: Can mutation and selection increase information?
With a single phrase “Words don’t reproduce” New Cat’s Eye has tossed all the population genetics in the garbage (its proper place, too). Attaboy!
And yet, would the clone “revolution” be able to spontaneously evolve to such complex form as, say, “counterrevolution”? Apparently, point mutations are of no avail here: there are merely no “fit” enough intermediate forms, between “revolution” and “counterrevolution”. Incidentally, this is the very case of the so-called “irreducible complexity” associated with the notorious William Paley’s doctrine.
Paley or no Paley, the problem of “irreducible complexity” is the sad evolutionary reality, and we are to consider the possibility of macromutations, along with those point. Say, 7-fold chance mutation +counter would settle the problem, yet what are the chances for such a lucky occurrence to happen?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Vlad, posted 07-27-2017 5:17 AM Vlad has not yet responded

  
Vlad
Junior Member
Posts: 27
Joined: 06-03-2017


Message 90 of 222 (816032)
07-28-2017 5:16 AM


Can mutation and selection increase information?
Apparently, NoNukes so far didn’t grasp the textbook basics. What did fitness get to do with probabilities of this or that mutation? True Darwinists tend to slip down to Lamarckism – without fail. And no wonder, since the founder of Darwinism himself remained Lamarckist till the end of his days.
An exercise would be of certain use: will you try and trace an evolutionary path from “bit” to “counterrevolution”? Or even further – to “counterrevolutionary” (or any other 20-character English noun)? Then you will be pleasingly surprised: to advance along such a path due to chance mutations, it will take, under more or less realistic assumptions, longer space than all the time depth of living nature…
At that, you will see what obstacles would natural selection put up, en route. And does anybody believe that the evolutionary creation, due to chance mutations, such a form as, say, a sea mollusk Nautilus pompilius – not to mention a chickadee or a house mouse, – would take less time than a primitive 20-character noun?
Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Taq, posted 07-28-2017 10:43 AM Vlad has not yet responded
 Message 107 by NoNukes, posted 08-01-2017 1:56 PM Vlad has not yet responded

    
Prev1
...
45
6
78
...
15Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017