Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.
dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 196 of 752 (577419)
08-28-2010 6:51 PM
Reply to: Message 194 by Dr Adequate
08-28-2010 12:44 AM


"And how do you measure genetic complexity?"
"‘As the arrangement of a printed page is extraneous to the chemistry of the printed page, so is the base sequence in a DNA molecule extraneous to the chemical forces at work in the DNA molecule. It is this physical indeterminacy of the sequence that produces the improbability of any particular sequence and thereby enables it to have a meaninga meaning that has a mathematically determinate information content."
(Michael Polanyi, chairman of physical chemistry at the University of Manchester)
The length and diversity of amino acid sequences in nucleotides that provide the instructions for the production of protiens and instructions for the size, shape, and (inter)function of complex systems that are found in complex organisms and unique to specific species. This complexity is explained by the large amount of information found in DNA sequences. If you need further clarification, google it.
"And in this particular case one of them will be flat-out wrong. That would be you." This is also an opinion, since the only reason I am wrong is that my opinions differ from yours, yet we both believe in an untested, non scientific theory. The only point we differ on is that your explanation for the beginning (and diversity) or life is naturalistic. This doesn't make you right.
No response to my fruit fly experiments? Let me get you started.
Drosophila melanogaster - Wikipedia
Please, offer some sort of scientific evidence against my claim. You are usually so good at that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-28-2010 12:44 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by anglagard, posted 08-29-2010 10:18 PM dennis780 has not replied

dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 197 of 752 (577421)
08-28-2010 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by Dr Adequate
08-28-2010 12:46 AM


"My specific point is that mutation in documented experiments such as these do not point to gradual increased complexity, or indroduction of new information ...
Then your specific point is wrong. Obviously a new allele is new information. This is because DNA contains information, and because new things are new."
Genetic diversity is a documented and scientific fact. Variation within a species is a good example of micro evolution, but does
Not explain the oorigin of new genetic information, but rather the explanation of genetic traits passed from pre existing information from parents.
"DNA contains information" WAIT! How do you know DNA has information? Prove it. Hahahahahaha. At least we can forgo the information jazz, since we are now both (finally) saying that DNA contains genetic information.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-28-2010 12:46 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 7:22 PM dennis780 has replied
 Message 199 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 8:09 PM dennis780 has not replied
 Message 200 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 12:20 AM dennis780 has replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 198 of 752 (577423)
08-28-2010 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by dennis780
08-28-2010 7:00 PM


Variation within a species is a good example of micro evolution, but does
Not explain the oorigin of new genetic information, but rather the explanation of genetic traits passed from pre existing information from parents.
Since the phenotype of organisms is specified by the information in their genetics, then an increase of diversity of phenotypes within a species (variation) must, by definition, be an increase in genetic information within that species.
but rather the explanation of genetic traits passed from pre existing information from parents.
If organisms could never have any more or any different information than what their parents had, all individuals in a species would be clones of each other. Because we can observe that individuals in a species aren't clones of each other, nor of their parents, we know that individuals have access to a source of genetic information beyond heredity, and that source is random mutation. Every individual of a complex organism - say, any mammal - is born with roughly 100 germline mutations that they did not inherit from either parent or from anybody else. These mutations represent novel genetic information.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by dennis780, posted 08-28-2010 7:00 PM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 8:19 AM crashfrog has replied

Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 199 of 752 (577437)
08-28-2010 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by dennis780
08-28-2010 7:00 PM


Hi, Dennis.
Instead of using quotation marks ("), please type [qs] (at the beginning of the quote) and [/qs] (at the end).
It really isn't that hard to do: stop being a punk about it.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by dennis780, posted 08-28-2010 7:00 PM dennis780 has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 200 of 752 (577474)
08-29-2010 12:20 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by dennis780
08-28-2010 7:00 PM


Genetic diversity is a documented and scientific fact. Variation within a species is a good example of micro evolution
No. Variation within a species is a good example of variation within a species. For something to be an example of microevolution, it has to be an example of evolution.
, but does
Not explain the oorigin of new genetic information, but rather the explanation of genetic traits passed from pre existing information from parents.
Mutation explains the origin of new genetic information.
And hence the variation within a species.
WAIT! How do you know DNA has information? Prove it. Hahahahahaha. At least we can forgo the information jazz, since we are now both (finally) saying that DNA contains genetic information.
What do you mean "finally"? I was not aware that you had ever denied that DNA contains information --- just that you've refused to say how you're measuring it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by dennis780, posted 08-28-2010 7:00 PM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 8:32 AM Dr Adequate has replied

bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 201 of 752 (577485)
08-29-2010 6:16 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by dennis780
08-21-2010 4:56 PM


600 does not equal ONE!
dennis780 writes:
I've heard mention of the E-coli evolution miracle. Since all that happened was a group of e-coli lost control of the switch that allows them to metabolize citrate in low or no oxygen environments, it's fair to claim that whether information was gained or lost genetically is irrelevant (even though it was not gained), the one mutation that occurred at 20,000 and 32,000 generations does not give enough time for evolution. Over "10 trillion E-coli have been produced over the 22 year old experiment", equalling 1 million years of human life, and ONE genetic mutation has occurred.
ONE GENETIC MUTATION? What? You'll never learn from reading Conservapedia, Dennis.
Here's a chart of just one of the Lenski cultures after 20,000 generations, half way through the experiment, which shows the differences from the ancestral organism. Click on the pic. to enlarge.
Here, you see a graph of the increase in fitness over the first 20,000 generations, with another graph inset which shows the sharp increase in mutation rate and fitness after a mutator phenotype appeared and took over the population (at about 26,000 generations).
Click Pic.
There are over 600 differences from the ancestor at 40,000 generations.
Edited by bluegenes, : deleted surplus phrase

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by dennis780, posted 08-21-2010 4:56 PM dennis780 has not replied

dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 202 of 752 (577491)
08-29-2010 8:19 AM
Reply to: Message 198 by crashfrog
08-28-2010 7:22 PM


"by definition, be an increase in genetic information within that species."
No, by definition, this would be an increase in diversity of existing information. The only possible information that could be different from that of either parent would be the result of copying errors, or corrupted DNA (in some form or another). Though you could possibly be born with different colors of eyes, it is impossible for your body to code for eye color that is not inherant from either parent line. The only possible difference could be corrupted alleles that would code for no color, but this is another example of genetic LOSS.
"all individuals in a species would be clones of each other."
Asexual species do this.
"we know that individuals have access to a source of genetic information beyond heredity" I'm DYING to know where the source for this is.
"100 germline mutations that they did not inherit from either parent or from anybody else. These mutations represent novel genetic information." Of the sum billions of genetic code found (in humans)? If you were on a beach, and you picked up a handful of sand, this is the amount of genetic difference caused by mutation could possibly be. Most of those, based on genetic research, would be useless information (due to corruption), or harmful (loss of physical or mental trait).
Anything else genius?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 7:22 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 9:27 AM dennis780 has not replied
 Message 206 by crashfrog, posted 08-29-2010 12:37 PM dennis780 has replied

dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 203 of 752 (577493)
08-29-2010 8:32 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by Dr Adequate
08-29-2010 12:20 AM


[qt]No. Variation within a species is a good example of variation within a species. For something to be an example of microevolution, it has to be an example of evolution.[/qt]
No, microevolution is the occurrence of small-scale changes in allele frequencies in a population. This is exactly what you described in your previous email. Would you like me to go find it for you?
As I have stated many times. I am 2/3 evolutionist. I believe in genetic diversity, and gradual change over time. I dispute the definition of evolution that states that organisms over time form new, usually more complex organisms. This is not documented.
"Mutation explains the origin of new genetic information." I'm not disputing that either. Mutation, as I have given in previous examples, can bring about slight advantages. Are we arguing whether genetic mutation exists? Because I think we are in agreement that it does. I think to save us both some time, we should discuss whether or not it is possible for an organism to GAIN complexity over time, and list references for this.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 12:20 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 9:17 AM dennis780 has replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 204 of 752 (577496)
08-29-2010 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 203 by dennis780
08-29-2010 8:32 AM


No, microevolution is the occurrence of small-scale changes in allele frequencies in a population. This is exactly what you described in your previous email. Would you like me to go find it for you?
As you admit that this is what I have said, why did you begin this paragraph with the word "no" rather than the word "yes"?
I dispute the definition of evolution that states that organisms over time form new, usually more complex organisms.
That is not the definition of evolution.
I think to save us both some time, we should discuss whether or not it is possible for an organism to GAIN complexity over time, and list references for this.
Please tell us how to measure the complexity of an organism.
(The answer to your question will be "yes" so long as your measure gives different quantities for different organisms, but obviously I cannot give specific examples unless I know what that measure is.)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 8:32 AM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 207 by Blue Jay, posted 08-29-2010 6:04 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 208 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 10:00 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 205 of 752 (577497)
08-29-2010 9:27 AM
Reply to: Message 202 by dennis780
08-29-2010 8:19 AM


No, by definition, this would be an increase in diversity of existing information.
No. By definition (unless the mutation has occurred previously in the gene pool and is still there) it is new information. Because what DNA contains is information, and because it is new.
Writing meaningless sentences will not make this fact go away any more than shouting abracadabra will.
The only possible information that could be different from that of either parent would be the result of copying errors, or corrupted DNA (in some form or another).
In short, the result of a mutation.
Though you could possibly be born with different colors of eyes, it is impossible for your body to code for eye color that is not inherant from either parent line.
Nonsense.
"all individuals in a species would be clones of each other."
Asexual species do this.
Asexual species are not all clones of each other.
"we know that individuals have access to a source of genetic information beyond heredity" I'm DYING to know where the source for this is.
Mutation.
"100 germline mutations that they did not inherit from either parent or from anybody else. These mutations represent novel genetic information." Of the sum billions of genetic code found (in humans)? If you were on a beach, and you picked up a handful of sand, this is the amount of genetic difference caused by mutation could possibly be.
In a single individual, yes.
And your point would be?
Most of those, based on genetic research, would be useless information (due to corruption), or harmful (loss of physical or mental trait).
If by "useless" you mean no more or less useful than the original information, then you may actually have written something true, though you would in that case have expressed it appallingly badly.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 8:19 AM dennis780 has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


(1)
Message 206 of 752 (577519)
08-29-2010 12:37 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by dennis780
08-29-2010 8:19 AM


No, by definition, this would be an increase in diversity of existing information.
Right, and that diversity can only increase by adding additional, new information.
The only possible information that could be different from that of either parent would be the result of copying errors, or corrupted DNA (in some form or another).
Copying errors are how new information is introduced into DNA. We call these errors "mutations" to reflect how they represent changes to DNA, and these changes are the means by which new genetic information arises.
Though you could possibly be born with different colors of eyes, it is impossible for your body to code for eye color that is not inherant from either parent line.
It's not at all impossible; Liz Taylor famously had violet eyes which were not inherited from either parent but were the result of a mutation. Human eye color is a polygenic trait and mutations to various genes can alter the composition and concentration of iris pigmentation.
Asexual species do this.
Right, and asexual species are highly clonal except for where their genetics diversify as a result of new information gained by random mutations.
I'm DYING to know where the source for this is.
I've been telling you the source throughout, over and over again. Mutation is the source of genetic information not received via heredity.
Of the sum billions of genetic code found (in humans)?
Yes, that's correct - out of the 3.6 billion base pair genome, about 100 bases per individual - per every individual who has ever been born - are altered as a result of random mutation.
It is estimated that as many as 150 billion human beings have lived on planet Earth. That's 15 trillion mutations, then - enough for, over 200,000 years of human evolution, every single base pair in the human genome to have been mutated approximately four thousand times.
If you were on a beach, and you picked up a handful of sand, this is the amount of genetic difference caused by mutation could possibly be.
You only believe this because you cannot do math.
Most of those, based on genetic research, would be useless information (due to corruption), or harmful (loss of physical or mental trait).
You're right that the bulk of mutations are "silent"; they result in no effect on organism phenotype. This is largely due to the lack of obligate specificity in most of the structure of the average protein. (Protein function is determined by the small number of residues that make up the protein's active site.) But, rarely, a mutation in a gene results in a protein product that has a dramatically different structure than wild-type. In these cases, the mutation will have an effect on phenotype, and whether or not that mutation is beneficial or harmful is a function of its interaction with environment. Organisms we observe now, after 3.5 billion years of evolution, are sufficiently adapted to their environments that a non-silent mutation will, in most cases, be maladaptive; but rarely, mutations produce beneficial change. Many examples of such mutations can be found, for instance the mutation that allows humans of European descent to consume cow's milk in adulthood.
Natural selection, therefore, is the means by which rare beneficial mutations nonetheless come to spread throughout the population due to their survival benefit. Natural selection is, fundamentally, a process that magnifies the incidence of beneficial mutations and reduces the effect of harmful ones, at the species level.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 8:19 AM dennis780 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by dennis780, posted 08-29-2010 11:20 PM crashfrog has replied

Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 207 of 752 (577601)
08-29-2010 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Dr Adequate
08-29-2010 9:17 AM


Sorry: I couldn't resist!
Hi, Dr Adequate.
Dr Adequare writes:
Please tell us how to measure the complexity of an organism.
I believe Dennis answered this question, back in Message 196:
dennis780 writes:
The length and diversity of amino acid sequences in nucleotides that provide the instructions for the production of protiens and instructions for the size, shape, and (inter)function of complex systems that are found in complex organisms and unique to specific species. This complexity is explained by the large amount of information found in DNA sequences. If you need further clarification, google it.
And, in Message 133, I believe he settled on the teaspoon as his unit of measure.
So, if we start with the premises that...
  1. Amino acid sequences provide instructions for the production of proteins and complex systems of organisms.
  2. The length and diversity of amino acid sequences is a surrogate measure for the complexity of an organism.
  3. The length and diversity of amino acid sequences can be measured in either nucleotides or teaspoons.
...I don’t think it surprises anybody that Intelligent Design is the conclusion.

-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 9:17 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 208 of 752 (577648)
08-29-2010 10:00 PM
Reply to: Message 204 by Dr Adequate
08-29-2010 9:17 AM


quote:
As you admit that this is what I have said, why did you begin this paragraph with the word "no" rather than the word "yes"?
If this is what you said in your last response, then yes. I was refering to your arguement in the last email to...whatever. No response to my arguement. Good enough.
quote:
That is not the definition of evolution.
evolution
1. The process of developing
2. The historical development of a related group of organisms; phylogeny
3. A gradual process in which something changes into a different and usually more complex or better form.
Again. I am 2/3 evolutionist. Do I get a special card or something?
quote:
Please tell us how to measure the complexity of an organism.
I did, twice now. If you can't use the previous explanations to figure out why you are more complex than a single celled organism (though this is debatable as well in your case), then perhaps this is not the right forum for you. I really don't know how to explain it any better than that (or better than my quoted scientist).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-29-2010 9:17 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Blue Jay, posted 08-30-2010 12:05 AM dennis780 has replied

anglagard
Member (Idle past 836 days)
Posts: 2339
From: Socorro, New Mexico USA
Joined: 03-18-2006


Message 209 of 752 (577650)
08-29-2010 10:18 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by dennis780
08-28-2010 6:51 PM


All Hail Polychaos Dubium, the Most Complex Organism
dennis780 writes:
The length and diversity of amino acid sequences in nucleotides that provide the instructions for the production of protiens and instructions for the size, shape, and (inter)function of complex systems that are found in complex organisms and unique to specific species. This complexity is explained by the large amount of information found in DNA sequences. If you need further clarification, google it.
I did Google it using the search term 'dna length comparison among animals.'
This was the first link.
Did you know that a single-celled critter, Polychaos Dubium, has the largest genome, and therefore according to your reasoning, is the most complex creature. Humans even lose to lungfish by this measure as they have the largest genome of any vertebrate.
Here is a nice comparison chart of genome size.
Looks like us mammals lost out to some amphibians and flowering plants.
Diversity, maybe but doubtful, length, no.
Perhaps measuring an organism's complexity is a little more complex than you may have thought.
Edited by anglagard, : Add second to last sentence.

The idea of the sacred is quite simply one of the most conservative notions in any culture, because it seeks to turn other ideas - uncertainty, progress, change - into crimes.
Salman Rushdie
This rudderless world is not shaped by vague metaphysical forces. It is not God who kills the children. Not fate that butchers them or destiny that feeds them to the dogs. It’s us. Only us. - the character Rorschach in Watchmen

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by dennis780, posted 08-28-2010 6:51 PM dennis780 has not replied

dennis780
Member (Idle past 4776 days)
Posts: 288
From: Alberta
Joined: 05-11-2010


Message 210 of 752 (577657)
08-29-2010 11:20 PM
Reply to: Message 206 by crashfrog
08-29-2010 12:37 PM


quote:
Right, and that diversity can only increase by adding additional, new information.
Scientific source supporting your claim? No one is disputing genetic variation, but that mutation can, over time, result in new, useful genetic material, in turn leading to development of a new species (man-ape).
quote:
these changes are the means by which new genetic information arises.
thughyomig t be hin kin tth atcop yingerr scan re ltin usefl matr al treall yd oesn papear hatt w y.
Sorry, let me try that again. There were some copying errors in the above statement...
Though you might be thinking that copying errors can result in useful material, it really doesn't appear that way. Though it is documented that genetic mutation has resulted in beneficial changes to a species (see previous messages with Dr. Adequate and myself), these examples of mutation were the result of genetic loss.
quote:
every single base pair in the human genome to have been mutated approximately four thousand times.
And more than likely has. Physical examples of these would include dwarfism, albino eyes and skin colors, etc. How is this scientific evidence of new useful genetic information from genetic mutation?
quote:
except for where their genetics diversify as a result of new information gained by random mutations.
Documented. Same question still applies.
quote:
mutations to various genes can alter the composition and concentration of iris pigmentation.
Again, not disputing this.
Baiting me to deny that genetic mutation can cause physical characteristics to change is useless. Genetic mutation is a documented scientific FACT.
quote:
Mutation is the source of genetic information not received via heredity.
NO. Mutation is your explanation. Your reference would be (since I have to fight for both sides now):
quote:
Many organisms have been observed to acquire various new functions which they did not have previously (Endler 1986). Bacteria have acquired resistance to viruses (Luria and Delbruck 1943) and to antibiotics (Lederberg and Lederberg 1952). Bacteria have also evolved the ability to synthesize new amino acids and DNA bases
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 5
Now, would you like me to respond to the source I found for you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by crashfrog, posted 08-29-2010 12:37 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by crashfrog, posted 08-29-2010 11:46 PM dennis780 has not replied
 Message 213 by Dr Adequate, posted 08-30-2010 12:45 AM dennis780 has replied
 Message 226 by abrown9, posted 08-31-2010 2:11 PM dennis780 has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024