Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 86 (8950 total)
28 online now:
Diomedes, jar, xongsmith (3 members, 25 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,191 Year: 22,227/19,786 Month: 790/1,834 Week: 290/500 Day: 53/65 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   "New genetic material" --- QUESTION
SR71
Member (Idle past 4558 days)
Posts: 38
Joined: 05-07-2006


Message 1 of 10 (390780)
03-21-2007 9:18 PM


I have a question that should be pretty simple for most of you to answer. I have a teacher who loves to preach (I'm in High school), and I just let him do it. I don't want a confrontation ruining my grade as it has in the past. He says some pretty offensive things, for example, "Atheism spits in the face of logic" etc. Anyway, this is not my question, it's just background.

This is a Spanish class, and the other day we couldn't do Spanish classwork because the day was messed up due to state testing. So we talked about other things. The discussion led to him stating that the earth is only 6000 years old (talking about global warming). Blah blah blah, he ends up saying how ridiculous it is to say that Species + Species = New Species, which is apparently his idea of macroevolution.

I straightened some things up, and he produced many new excuses which I've heard before thanks to this forum. One thing he said, though, was something I couldn't talk about due to lack of knowledge. He stated that new genetic material cannot enter the gene pool. Obviously you can see how this is necessary for evolution to happen. He said he majored in Biology in college for a while, and that this is one of the most fundamental concepts of biology.

Can you explain this for me? I don't plan on confronting him with the information, I am just curious. And I am totally expecting to find out that it's complete bullshit.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added the "bolding".


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by crashfrog, posted 03-21-2007 10:23 PM SR71 has responded
 Message 6 by Allopatrik, posted 03-22-2007 12:38 PM SR71 has not yet responded
 Message 7 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-22-2007 1:51 PM SR71 has not yet responded

  
Adminnemooseus
Director
Posts: 3911
Joined: 09-26-2002


Message 2 of 10 (390787)
03-21-2007 9:52 PM


Look at the "bolded" in message 1
Thread moved here from the Proposed New Topics forum.

I suggest that all focus in on what I "bolded" in message 1. Let's shoot for some concise quality here.

Adminnemooseus

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Added text after move info.


  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 10 (390793)
03-21-2007 10:23 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SR71
03-21-2007 9:18 PM


He stated that new genetic material cannot enter the gene pool.

Well, that's clearly false. Mutation is one way that new genetic material enters gene pools, and genetic material can move from one gene pool to another as individuals move from one population to another.

He said he majored in Biology in college for a while, and that this is one of the most fundamental concepts of biology.

Suffice to say, it is not. It may be a fundamental principle that he's pulled out of his ass, but it has nothing to do with the biology that represents consensus science.

Where did he "major in biology", anyway? Bob Jones University?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SR71, posted 03-21-2007 9:18 PM SR71 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by SR71, posted 03-22-2007 9:27 AM crashfrog has not yet responded

  
SR71
Member (Idle past 4558 days)
Posts: 38
Joined: 05-07-2006


Message 4 of 10 (390838)
03-22-2007 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 3 by crashfrog
03-21-2007 10:23 PM


quote:
Well, that's clearly false. Mutation is one way that new genetic material enters gene pools, and genetic material can move from one gene pool to another as individuals move from one population to another.

This makes me glad that my reply to him was "I don't believe that." I couldn't make a definite statement, because I simply didn't know for sure. But I knew that it would be a major problem with any theory of evolution and nobody would believe it.

quote:
Suffice to say, it is not. It may be a fundamental principle that he's pulled out of his ass, but it has nothing to do with the biology that represents consensus science.

I love it! I won't tell him this, as much as I'd love to, but it's good to know.

quote:
Where did he "major in biology", anyway? Bob Jones University?

Haha! I'm pretty sure he went to LSU like almost everyone around here. Either way, he changed his major to some foreign literature degree.

Edited by SR71, : Quote tags messed up


This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by crashfrog, posted 03-21-2007 10:23 PM crashfrog has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Chiroptera, posted 03-22-2007 10:12 AM SR71 has not yet responded

  
Chiroptera
Member
Posts: 6838
From: Oklahoma
Joined: 09-28-2003
Member Rating: 6.5


Message 5 of 10 (390840)
03-22-2007 10:12 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by SR71
03-22-2007 9:27 AM


Any really, really basic description of genetics will explain how insertions and gene duplication will add genetic material to an individual's genome (and thus to the gene pool).


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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by SR71, posted 03-22-2007 9:27 AM SR71 has not yet responded

  
Allopatrik
Member (Idle past 4529 days)
Posts: 59
Joined: 02-07-2007


Message 6 of 10 (390872)
03-22-2007 12:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SR71
03-21-2007 9:18 PM


quote:
And I am totally expecting to find out that it's complete bullshit.

It is, though it sounds to me that he is thinking of the biological species concept, which defines species as those populations which are reproductively isolated from one another. Of course, reproductive isolation between closely related species is often not absolute; however, creationists are almost congenitally incapable of thinking of anything in terms other than in absolutes. That's what makes them universally piss-poor biologists.

A

Edited by Allopatrik, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SR71, posted 03-21-2007 9:18 PM SR71 has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 7 of 10 (390891)
03-22-2007 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by SR71
03-21-2007 9:18 PM


He said he majored in Biology in college for a while ...

I wonder why he stopped.

... and that this is one of the most fundamental concepts of biology.

At this point, I would bet him a large sum of money that he can't find this "fundamental concept of biology" in biology textbooks.

Also, if it is his supposition that this "fundamental concept" invalidates evolution, one might ask why it is that biologists are so gung-ho for evolution. You'd think that one or two of them would have noticed one of the most fundamental concepts in biology, what with them being biologists and all.

I'm thinking of people like this:

"Evolutionary theory ranks with Einstein's theory of relativity as one of modern science's most robust, generally accepted, thoroughly tested and broadly applicable concepts. From the standpoint of science, there is no controversy."

--- Louise Lamphere, President of the American Anthropological Association; Mary Pat Matheson, President of the American Assn of Botanical Gardens and Arboreta; Eugenie Scott, President of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists; Robert Milkey, Executive Officer of the American Astronomical Society; Barbara Joe Hoshiazaki, President of the American Fern Society; Oliver A. Ryder, President of the American Genetic Association; Larry Woodfork, President of the American Geological Institute; Marcia McNutt, President of the American Geophysical Union; Judith S. Weis, President of the American Institute of Biological Sciences; Arvind K.N. Nandedkar, President of the American Institute of Chemists; Robert H. Fakundiny, President of the American Institute of Professional Geologists; Hyman Bass, President of the American Mathematical Society; Ronald D. McPherson, Executive Director of the American Meteorological Society; John W. Fitzpatrick, President of the American Ornithologists' Union; George Trilling, President of the American Physical Society; Martin Frank, Executive Director of the American Physiological Society; Steven Slack, President of the American Phytopathological Society; Raymond D. Fowler, Chief Executive Officer American Psychological Association; Alan Kraut, Executive Director of the American Psychological Society; Catherine E. Rudder, Executive Director of the American Political Science Association; Robert D. Wells, President of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; Abigail Salyers, President of the American Society for Microbiology; Brooks Burr, President of the American Society of Ichthylogists & Herpetologists; Thomas H. Kunz, President of the American Society of Mammalogists; Mary Anne Holmes, President of the Association for Women Geoscientists; Linda H. Mantel, President of the Association for Women in Science; Ronald F. Abler, Executive Director of the Association of American Geographers; Vicki Cowart, President of the Association of American State Geologists; Nils Hasselmo, President of the Association of American Universities; Thomas A. Davis, President of the Assn. of College & University Biology Educators; Richard Jones, President of the Association of Earth Science Editors; Rex Upp, President of the Association of Engineering Geologists; Robert R. Haynes, President of the Association of Southeastern Biologists; Kenneth R. Ludwig, Director of the Berkeley Geochronology Center; Rodger Bybee, Executive Director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study; Mary Dicky Barkley, President of the Biophysical Society; Judy Jernstedt, President of the Botanical Society of America; Ken Atkins, Secretary of the Burlington-Edison Cmte. for Science Education; Austin Dacey, Director of the Center for Inquiry Institute; Blair F. Jones, President of the Clay Minerals Society; Barbara Forrest, President of the Citizens for the Advancement of Science Education; Timothy Moy, President of the Coalition for Excellence in Science and Math Education; K. Elaine Hoagland, National Executive Officer Council on Undergraduate Research; David A. Sleper, President of the Crop Science Society of America; Steve Culver, President of the Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research; Pamela Matson, President of the Ecological Society of America; Larry L. Larson, President of the Entomological Society of America; Royce Engstrom, Chair of the Board of Directors of the EPSCoR Foundation; Robert R. Rich, President of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology; Stephen W. Porges, President of the Federation of Behavioral, Psychological and Cognitive Sciences; Roger D. Masters, President of the Foundation for Neuroscience and Society; Kevin S. Cummings, President of the Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society; Sharon Mosher, President of the Geological Society of America; Dennis J. Richardson, President of the Helminthological Society of Washington; Aaron M. Bauer, President of the Herpetologists' League; William Perrotti, President of the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society; Lorna G. Moore, President of the Human Biology Association; Don Johanson, Director of the Institute of Human Origins; Harry McDonald, President of the Kansas Association of Biology Teachers; Steve Lopes, President of the Kansas Citizens For Science; Margaret W. Reynolds, Executive Director of the Linguistic Society of America; Robert T. Pennock, President of the Michigan Citizens for Science; Cornelis "Kase" Klein,President of the Mineralogical Society of America; Ann Lumsden, President of the National Association of Biology Teachers; Darryl Wilkins, President of the National Association for Black Geologists & Geophysicists; Steven C. Semken, President of the National Association of Geoscience Teachers; Kevin Padian, President of the National Center for Science Education; Tom Ervin, President of the National Earth Science Teachers Association; Gerald Wheeler, Executive Director of the National Science Teachers Association; Meredith Lane, President of the Natural Science Collections Alliance; Cathleen May, President of the Newkirk Engler & May Foundation; Dave Thomas, President of the New Mexicans for Science and Reason; Marshall Berman, President (elect) of the New Mexico Academy of Science; Connie J. Manson, President of the Northwest Geological Society; Lydia Villa-Komaroff, Vice Pres. for Research Northwestern University; Gary S. Hartshorn, President of the Organization for Tropical Studies; Warren Allmon, Director of the Paleontological Research Institution; Patricia Kelley, President of the Paleontological Society; Henry R. Owen, Director of Phi Sigma: The Biological Sciences Honor Society; Charles Yarish, President of the Phycological Society of America; Barbara J. Moore, President and CEO of Shape Up America!; Robert L. Kelly, President of the Society for American Archaeology; Richard Wilk, President of the Society for Economic Anthropology; Marvalee Wake, President of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology; Gilbert Strang, Past-Pres. & Science Policy Chair of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; Prasanta K. Mukhopadhyay, President of the Society for Organic Petrology; Howard E. Harper, Executive Director of the Society for Sedimentary Geology; Nick Barton, President of the Society for the Study of Evolution; Deborah Sacrey, President of the Society of Independent Professional Earth Scientists; J.D. Hughes, President of the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers; Lea K. Bleyman, President of the Society of Protozoologists; Elizabeth Kellogg, President of the Society of Systematic Biologists; David L. Eaton, President of the Society of Toxicology; Richard Stuckey, President of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology; Pat White, Executive Director of the Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education; Richard A. Anthes, President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.

I mean, you'd think that the President of the American Genetic Association would have stumbled across this "fundamental principle" of genetics at some point in his career.

Perhaps he means "fundamentalist principle of biology".

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by SR71, posted 03-21-2007 9:18 PM SR71 has not yet responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4170 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 8 of 10 (413999)
08-02-2007 9:34 AM


Gene for homosexuality
Obviously gene for homosexuality contradicts Dawkins concept of "selfish gene". Dawkins admitted that such gene is not created by reccurent random mutation and he pointed out:

quote:

Genes that predispose a significant minority of men to homosexuality raise a Darwinian puzzle.

Dawkins himself about the problem:

quote:

If a homosexuality gene lowers its own probability of being reproduced today, and yet still abounds in the population, that is a problem for commonsense as much as for Darwin's theory of evolution. And, intriguing as several of these theories may be, I have to conclude that it remains a problem.

http://www.simonyi.ox.ac.uk/dawkins/FAQs.shtml

In this case homosexuality gene is not as much a problem for Darwin's theory but for his "selfish gene" concept. Dawkins equate darwinism theory with his "selfish gene" hypothesis. Homosexuality gene obviously cannot pass and replicate itself however selfish it is.

Edited by AdminPaul, : Off topic


Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by AdminModulous, posted 08-02-2007 10:01 AM MartinV has responded

  
AdminModulous
Administrator (Idle past 446 days)
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 9 of 10 (414003)
08-02-2007 10:01 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by MartinV
08-02-2007 9:34 AM


Appropriate thread
Homosexuality and Natural Selection.

Take it there.


New Members should start HERE to get an understanding of what makes great posts.

Comments on moderation procedures (or wish to respond to admin messages)? - Go to:
General discussion of moderation procedures
Thread Reopen Requests
Considerations of topic promotions from the "Proposed New Topics" forum

Other useful links:

Forum Guidelines, Thread Style Guides for EvC and Thread Assistance w/ Forum Formatting


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by MartinV, posted 08-02-2007 9:34 AM MartinV has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by MartinV, posted 08-02-2007 12:20 PM AdminModulous has not yet responded

  
MartinV 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4170 days)
Posts: 502
From: Slovakia, Bratislava
Joined: 08-28-2006


Message 10 of 10 (414024)
08-02-2007 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by AdminModulous
08-02-2007 10:01 AM


Re: Appropriate thread

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by AdminModulous, posted 08-02-2007 10:01 AM AdminModulous 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