Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8914 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 06-16-2019 7:33 PM
27 online now:
4petdinos, AZPaul3, Coragyps, DrJones*, edge, Percy (Admin), xongsmith (7 members, 20 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: Arnold Wolf
Post Volume:
Total: 853,869 Year: 8,905/19,786 Month: 1,327/2,119 Week: 87/576 Day: 87/50 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Flies and birds share flight-specific gene use
Peter
Member (Idle past 2086 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 4 of 14 (13139)
07-09-2002 4:12 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by Tranquility Base
07-09-2002 2:30 AM


This basically falls back to the 'it could be
common descent or common design' statement depending
solely on how you choose to interpret this
data.

It advances neither side of the debate to continue.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-09-2002 2:30 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-09-2002 8:10 AM Peter has responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2086 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 6 of 14 (13157)
07-09-2002 9:49 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Tranquility Base
07-09-2002 8:10 AM


The abstract linked in your first post has ::

'Recent comparative developmental analyses demonstrate that
many of the mechanisms used to pattern limbs are ancient. One of the major consequences of this phenomenon is parallelism in the
evolution of anatomical structures.'

Which suggests that the full paper is using this evidence as
support for parallelism in evolution, or as having a positive
impact on the possibility of such parallelism.

The premise seems to be that since these genetic mechanism are
very ancient, they have been retained and re-used.

Do you have the full paper ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-09-2002 8:10 AM Tranquility Base has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-09-2002 8:36 PM Peter has responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2086 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 12 of 14 (13330)
07-11-2002 3:19 AM
Reply to: Message 10 by peter borger
07-11-2002 2:25 AM


... but you have not even responded to my arguments
against your 4 points, purley on the basis that you
consider them story telling.

If you haven't thought your ideas through enough to
rebutt me, why do you expect a panel of 'experts' to
take your claims seriously ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by peter borger, posted 07-11-2002 2:25 AM peter borger has not yet responded

    
Peter
Member (Idle past 2086 days)
Posts: 2160
From: Cambridgeshire, UK.
Joined: 02-05-2002


Message 14 of 14 (13704)
07-17-2002 9:06 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Tranquility Base
07-09-2002 8:36 PM


If you have the same start point and broadly similar
selective pressures in respect of this one gene, would
that effect the likelihood of current ToE thinking to
account for the similarity ?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Tranquility Base, posted 07-09-2002 8:36 PM Tranquility Base has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019