Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,483 Year: 3,740/9,624 Month: 611/974 Week: 224/276 Day: 0/64 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   An accurate analogy of Evolution by Natural selection
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 45 of 49 (512229)
06-15-2009 10:25 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by slevesque
06-14-2009 1:49 AM


Re: Analogy -- not!
slevesque writes:
But does my analogy represent accurately a situation that could happen in nature ? Yes. In fact, I was hoping someone would have figured what situation I was referring to. It represents an asexual population of bacteria. The 'fitness' characteristic of the population is represented by the image quality, and so the eventual decrease of the image quality as generations of copies go on actually represents something well known and that we have discussed: Muller's ratchet. As mutations accumulate in an asexual population, so do the copying errors accumulate in my analogy, causing an overall diminution of 'image quality' and 'fitness'.
Did you forget my post about the nylon eating bacteria? That shows that what you are saying here isn't the case. I know you read it, because you commented on it in a later message of that thread.
Here's a link to my post

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by slevesque, posted 06-14-2009 1:49 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by slevesque, posted 06-20-2009 1:23 AM Huntard has replied

  
Huntard
Member (Idle past 2317 days)
Posts: 2870
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 47 of 49 (512696)
06-20-2009 4:36 AM
Reply to: Message 46 by slevesque
06-20-2009 1:23 AM


Re: Analogy -- not!
slevesque writes:
If it is indeed a preexisting mechanism that was responsible for this mutation, then it was not random as Ohmo had suggested back in 1984.
How so? The mechanism for mutations is pre-existing as well, being the imperfect copying mechanism of DNA. Does this mean ALL mutations aren't random either?
You also had used Shannon's information theory and applied it to genetics, something shannon himself warned not to do.
I'd like a source for that, please.

I hunt for the truth

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by slevesque, posted 06-20-2009 1:23 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by slevesque, posted 06-20-2009 5:02 AM Huntard has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024