More Evidence of Evolution - Geomyidae and Geomydoecus

Great post, crash. Exellent point.Unfortunately, the creationists are going to yelp, "b-b-b-but, they're still gophers and lice!"They will probably claim that these just microevolved together since the Flud. That goalpost was moved long ago, I'm afraid.But I like it. Thanks for posting it.Edited by Chiroptera, : added a word

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

It'll have something to do with sharks and crocodiles, I suspect.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

I see explanation that two unrelated organisms speciate in the same way via undirected random mutation picked up by natural selection as utterly ridiculous and as darwinistic fancy.

---

Sure. But "darwinists" don't say that unrelated organisms speciate in the same way. In fact, that sentence doesn't make sense, whether you are a darwinist or not.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Ah, I see.In context, I can understand what crashfrog was saying when he wrote that.Meanwhile, your reasoning (and your East European affectation) is so confusing it is hard to tell what you are talking about.Anyway, my apologies. I do see that you are riffing off of crashfrog. I still doubt that you either understand what he was saying, or even what you are talking about. Warning! In this thread white swans are red herrings. Do not continue to discuss them!

quote:

---

I am looking forward on "Is evolution finnished" to your darwinistic explanation why are swans white.

---

I'll give it to you here. White swans are probably better able to produce surviving progeny than swans that aren't white.Now, if you'd like, you can give some evidence of this supposed "spirit force" that is supposed to be causing (or was causing) evolution. "I don't understand natural selection" is not evidence, by the way.Edited by AdminNosy, : topic warning

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

What is the problem with the article crashfrog brought up? This is exactly evidence of random mutations.As the gophers evolved into different species, the lice that are associated with the different populations no longer interact; you now have isolated populations of lice that do not interbreed. The mutations that arise in one population will be different than the mutations that occur in a different population because the mutations are random. Therefore, you will see the different population of lice evolve differently.The paper crashfrog is citing is evidence in favor of random mutations being important in the process of evolution.Of course, you are free to babble incoherently about crocodiles and sharks in the environment posing some kind of problem for the lice adapting to life on new species of gopher, but I assure you that there is no problem here for Darwinian theory.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

From this almost infinite all possible mutations (1 mutation of nucleotide in given sequence, two mutation or 10 mutations but on different places etc...) only one was picked by natural selection.

---

Yeah, of course. Natural selection can only act on a mutation that has actually occurred. If a mutation does not occur, then there is nothing actually in existence upon which natural selection can act. Natural selection cannot act on potential mutations.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Besides what crashfrog wrote, I would add the question why aren't these alleles expressed? Because the regulatory mechanisms don't transcribe them. Why would they become expressed? Because a mutation, presumably random, changes the regulatory parts of the genome to cause these alleles to be transcribed.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

quote:

---

Well, they might already be expressed when exaptation takes place.

---

Well, okay, but that isn't what you said before: --

quote:

---

Let me try this hypothetical scenario:

---

Thanks. That does make it clear what you are saying.Except how did these two alleles come about to begin with? Presumably one of these alleles did not exist previously; it came to exist because a mutation in a gametes of some individual change the previously existing allele to this particular one.Of course, it is possible that given some allele or other, once it is produced (presumably through a mutation) it may not be selected for or against; then because of neutral drift it might disappear or it might become established in the population. Then, as you say, later on some environmental factor might change and give one allele an advantage over the other.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine

Martin, you have demonstrated that you can write in perfectly clear English. Please do so. It has become almost impossible to decipher these almost incomprehensible strings of words.

---

Actually, if their god makes better pancakes, I'm totally switching sides. -- Charley the Australopithecine