Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8896 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-22-2019 2:31 AM
41 online now:
Dredge, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Tangle (4 members, 37 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,539 Year: 3,576/19,786 Month: 571/1,087 Week: 161/212 Day: 3/25 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
21Next
Author Topic:   Why Darwinism is wrong
nator
Member (Idle past 246 days)
Posts: 12961
From: Ann Arbor
Joined: 12-09-2001


Message 181 of 305 (207006)
05-11-2005 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 179 by Wounded King
05-11-2005 8:29 AM


Re: Heh.
True, but it would give us an idea of the honesty of our opponent.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 179 by Wounded King, posted 05-11-2005 8:29 AM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Jianyi Zhang
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 305 (207023)
05-11-2005 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 178 by nator
05-11-2005 8:11 AM


Re: Heh.
My thesis or publication is about oncogene, somehow, my name was spelled wrong in the paper for PhD.

I use my real name here, it is insane to lie at front of public.
Besides PhD, I also have MS in preventive medicine. Since I do not think any of these degree related with the topic, I do not understand your motivation. Can you tell me what kind education you have?


Jianyi Zhang
This message is a reply to:
 Message 178 by nator, posted 05-11-2005 8:11 AM nator has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by nator, posted 05-11-2005 11:11 PM Jianyi Zhang has not yet responded

derwood
Member
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 183 of 305 (207068)
05-11-2005 10:35 AM
Reply to: Message 169 by Wounded King
05-10-2005 12:18 PM


Does anyone remember Peter Borger?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Wounded King, posted 05-10-2005 12:18 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
EZscience
Member (Idle past 3230 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 184 of 305 (207088)
05-11-2005 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by TheNewGuy03
05-10-2005 12:41 PM


Mitochondria
tng writes:

What is the origin of mitochondria?

Endocytosis of a bacteria by a primitive eukarotic cell that led to a symbiotic relationship and continued co-existence of the two.

Go to message 36 of this thread to read more.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by TheNewGuy03, posted 05-10-2005 12:41 PM TheNewGuy03 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 12:41 PM EZscience has responded

Jianyi Zhang
Inactive Member


Message 185 of 305 (207095)
05-11-2005 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by EZscience
05-11-2005 12:21 PM


Re: Mitochondria

Endocytosis of a bacteria by a primitive eukarotic cell that led to a symbiotic relationship and continued co-existence of the two.

So, endocytosis of a bacteria is an event, it occurs instantaneously. NS works on these pre-formed symbiotic organism.
Dr. Lynn Margulis's book (Acquring Genomes) is the best reference, since she is the person to propose the idea.


Jianyi Zhang
This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 12:21 PM EZscience has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 186 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 1:03 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

EZscience
Member (Idle past 3230 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 186 of 305 (207104)
05-11-2005 1:03 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by Jianyi Zhang
05-11-2005 12:41 PM


Re: Mitochondria
JZ writes:

endocytosis of a bacteria is an event, it occurs instantaneously

Well, the actual event would probably have occurred a few billion times and resulted in consumption of the bacteria before a unique event led to the symbiosis becoming established.

JZ writes:

NS works on these pre-formed symbiotic organism.

I have no problem with this.
NS can only work on what already exists and has some mechanism of heritability.

This message has been edited by EZscience, 05-11-2005 01:03 PM


This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 12:41 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 1:34 PM EZscience has responded

Jianyi Zhang
Inactive Member


Message 187 of 305 (207116)
05-11-2005 1:34 PM
Reply to: Message 186 by EZscience
05-11-2005 1:03 PM


Re: Mitochondria

Well, the actual event would probably have occurred a few billion times and resulted in consumption of the bacteria before a unique event led to the symbiosis becoming established.

Yes, any event out of billions billions events is an instantaneous one, they occur every seconds even now.

Likewise, speciation occurs every seconds instantaneously. With or without natural selection, they occur. That is huge difference between me and Neo-Darwinists.


Jianyi Zhang
This message is a reply to:
 Message 186 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 1:03 PM EZscience has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 189 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 2:06 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

TheNewGuy03
Inactive Member


Message 188 of 305 (207120)
05-11-2005 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by Jianyi Zhang
05-10-2005 9:44 PM


Re: Heh.
Yep, Dr. Zhang, it certainly does seem that way. But, unfortunately for them, I won't add myself to their ranks.

Αγάπη,
Το Παιδί


This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-10-2005 9:44 PM Jianyi Zhang has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 195 by crashfrog, posted 05-11-2005 4:45 PM TheNewGuy03 has responded

EZscience
Member (Idle past 3230 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 189 of 305 (207133)
05-11-2005 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 187 by Jianyi Zhang
05-11-2005 1:34 PM


Re: Mitochondria
JZ writes:

Likewise, speciation occurs every seconds instantaneously

OK now we have a problem.
I am familiar with gradualism versus punctuated equilibria etc when it comes to phylogenies, and allopatric and sympatric models of speciation,
but instantaneous speciation ?

Do you mean like a polyploidy event that makes for instantaneous reproductive isolation?

That's about as close to instantaneous speciation as I can conceive.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 187 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 1:34 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 2:22 PM EZscience has responded

Jianyi Zhang
Inactive Member


Message 190 of 305 (207143)
05-11-2005 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 189 by EZscience
05-11-2005 2:06 PM


Re: Mitochondria

Do you mean like a polyploidy event that makes for instantaneous reproductive isolation?

Yes. Besides polyploids in plants, generation of asexuals from sexual animals (generation of virgin birth animals), a few polyloids cases in animals are other evidences. Instantaneous speciation has a much bigger picture, polyploids is only one part of it.


Jianyi Zhang
This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 2:06 PM EZscience has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 2:35 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

EZscience
Member (Idle past 3230 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 191 of 305 (207147)
05-11-2005 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 190 by Jianyi Zhang
05-11-2005 2:22 PM


Instantaneous Speciation
JZ writes:

generation of asexuals from sexual animals

Loss of sexuality is an interesting evolutionary scenario that appears to have occurred more than once in some lineages.
But I would not call it a common event.
What kind of animals were you thinking of here ?

JZ writes:

Instantaneous speciation has a much bigger picture, polyploids is only one part of it

I am interested.
What other phenomena are you refering to ?
Any references ?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 190 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 2:22 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 3:34 PM EZscience has responded

Jianyi Zhang
Inactive Member


Message 192 of 305 (207162)
05-11-2005 3:34 PM
Reply to: Message 191 by EZscience
05-11-2005 2:35 PM


Re: Instantaneous Speciation

But I would not call it a common event.
What kind of animals were you thinking of here ?

Although most higher animals reproduce by copulation, various lower animal forms can reproduce in a parthenogenetic manner without copulation. Aphids (plant lice), some ticks, water fleas, ants, wasps, bees and certain lizards and snakes can all develop without male fertilization.

http://www.braincourse.com/virga.html


What other phenomena are you refering to ?
Any references ?

Every sexual animals, go my website http://chickensfirst.net

Also in this thread, and other on-going debates:

http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/13/t/002150.html

http://www.arn.org/ubb/ultimatebb.php/ubb/get_topic/f/13/t/002172.html


Jianyi Zhang
This message is a reply to:
 Message 191 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 2:35 PM EZscience has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 193 by EZscience, posted 05-11-2005 4:21 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

EZscience
Member (Idle past 3230 days)
Posts: 961
From: A wheatfield in Kansas
Joined: 04-14-2005


Message 193 of 305 (207175)
05-11-2005 4:21 PM
Reply to: Message 192 by Jianyi Zhang
05-11-2005 3:34 PM


Re: Instantaneous Speciation
JZ writes:

various lower animal forms can reproduce in a parthenogenetic manner

Of course. I have worked with aphids for almost 20 years.
I am also quite familiar with the distribution of parthenogenesis and apomixis among animal taxa.
Incidentally, when I said 'not a common event' I was referring specifically to the 'loss' of sexual reproduction within a phylogenetic lineage.

I would also agree that asexual lineages can *potentially* diverge more quickly than sexual ones.

But how does that relate to mechanisms of speciation for obligately sexual (amphimictic) populations that make up the majority of higher animals?

I looked at the four parts of your theory as explained on the website, and I immediately see at least one problem for applying it to higher animals.
What about inbreeding depression and detrimental homozygosity among siblings?
Most higher animlals have many behavioral mechanisms (dispersal etc.) that evolved specificall to reduce or prevent inbreeding.
The only organisms truly adapted to inbreeding are those that routinely mate only with siblings, like gregarious hymenopterous parasitoids.
Your model might work for them, but not for organisms adapted for outbreeding.
The first few generations of your new species would have very low fitness compared to their progenitors, and yet presumably they would still be trying to occupy the same niche.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 3:34 PM Jianyi Zhang has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 196 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 4:51 PM EZscience has not yet responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 194 of 305 (207186)
05-11-2005 4:41 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by TheNewGuy03
05-09-2005 3:01 PM


Yeah, creationists are wrong, and evolutionists are right. Evolutionists are always right.

Only because creationists rely on evolutionists for information and research. If they actually bothered to do any work they might be right once in a while.

y "not knowing anything," I mean that nothing is 100% sure.

But not being 100% sure doesn't mean we don't know anything. Those phrases don't mean the same thing, so why did you use them like that?

You obviously didn't read the last line of my last reply. DO NOT REPLY. That's it.

That's what? It's a public forum; I'll reply to whomever I chose.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by TheNewGuy03, posted 05-09-2005 3:01 PM TheNewGuy03 has not yet responded

crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 195 of 305 (207187)
05-11-2005 4:45 PM
Reply to: Message 188 by TheNewGuy03
05-11-2005 1:38 PM


You know what? Somehow I've become very familiar with creationist models and positions - better than most of their proponents, in fact - without actually becoming a creationist.

So I think you can familiarize yourself with modern evolutionary models with no risk to your mortal soul, ok? Shouldn't you have at least half an idea about the position you're arguing against?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 188 by TheNewGuy03, posted 05-11-2005 1:38 PM TheNewGuy03 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by Jianyi Zhang, posted 05-11-2005 4:58 PM crashfrog has responded
 Message 202 by TheNewGuy03, posted 05-12-2005 2:30 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
1112
13
1415
...
21Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019