Problems with evolution? Submit your questions.

quote:

---

Do you agree that all modern domestic dogs are descended of wolfs? If so, does this mean that these ancestral wolfs had all the genetic information necessary to make all domestic dog breeds?

---

quote:

---

The origin of the domestic dog (Canis lupus familiaris) began with the domestication of the gray wolf (Canis lupus) several tens of thousands of years ago. Domesticated dogs provided early humans with a guard animal, a source of food, fur, and a beast of burden. The process continues to this day, as the intentional cross-breeding of dogs continues, to create the so called "designer dogs".
Domestication of the dog - Wikipedia

---

Yes. I do.

quote:

---

Oetzi

---

No. I am not at all. Can you offer my a source to read up on it?

quote:

---

The same thing that causes mutations of nucleotides 1,2,4,5,7,8,10,11, etc.

---

Not frameshift mutations.

quote:

---

Mutations do not have the kind of specificity to attack the first and second base of a codon but ignore the third.

---

Yes, frameshift mutations do this specifically.

quote:

---

you're aware that frameshift mutations are cyclic, right?

---

No, but I can't find any information online that says they are, can you provide a link, so I can read it?

quote:

---

add another two to return to the original reading frame

---

OH, I see. you are saying after three frameshifts, the mutation returns to the original sequence?? That doesn't make any sense. And you are only bringing up one form of frameshift mutation.The car was red. The red car had one key. TAGFor my examples sake, I am using words that make sense to us, and using just one of the different stop codons (DNA amber).Insertion Frameshift 1 (occurs at H in first the)The car was red. Tth ere dca rha don eke yth eTA GInsertion Frameshift 2 (occurs at C in car, stop codon TAG used)The jca rwa sre. dTt her edc arh ado nek eyt heT AGTo things to notice, that the mutations caused the loss of information, as well as altering the stop codon. If we took one more step, the stop codon would be functional again, but the message is still useless.I hope this was what you meant by cyclic. I also only used insertion framshifts, since using both deletion and insertion could result in a nearly infinite amount of possibilities (though more than likely, the information contained would contain no functional purpose).

quote:

---

I mean, surely you wouldn't pop up here and not know what you were talking about, right?

---

Please show me an example of a sequence of frameshift mutations that produce new functional information randomly. You cannot select for certain letters, since the new chain of nucleotides would then have been designed. Hope your keyboard is new.

quote:

---

Yet, if you have a dozen people each roll two dice a hundred times and chart the results

---

If the total sequences of genetic information equalled twelve, or close to it, you would be correct. Give 100 people 3 million dice, then let them roll them a hundred times. The likelyhood of 2 people having 2,453,564 is next to impossible. Since human, or for that matter most any organisms' genome is not as simple as 12, this is a poor example. 3 million is also a fair number, since humans have much more than this, but I am low balling (since I don't know how many base pairs the organism in question actually has).

quote:

---

That means that populations of living organisms come to be dominated by the individuals who had mutations that increased, not decreased their fitness - they are, after all, the only ones left.

---

I'm on your side there.

quote:

---

The source is the same as new nonfunctional genetic code - random mutation. Since mutations are random they produce a mix of functional and nonfunctional new genetic code. Natural selection serves to weed out nonfunctional genetic changes from functional ones.

---

Oh, thats a relief. So you know of thousands of documented cases of this right? New random mutation of functional DNA sequences. Because for evolution to be true, there should be BILLIONS of examples. But since science has not always known about DNA (originally in 1869), it's fair to say that since then, there would have been many research projects to support random mutation of new functional genetic information, correct?

quote:

---

The evidence for this is ample, has been given to you already, and was either not understood by you or simply ignored.

---

Thus far I have 4 cases of mutation, two of which are antibiotic resistance, which is not random. One case of HGT, which is not the source, but the method of passing mutation, and one case where two labs performed the same experiment and got similar results, pointing to the fact that this was more than likely not random, but the organisms adaptability to specific conditions (and no sources were quoted that stated the changes were the result of additional or deleterious mutation, of which I did ask for).But why aren't there hundreds? Shouldn't one be able to google it and find thousands of good examples? Because I did. I found many examples of mutation causing disease, and how loss mutation is repaired.

quote:

---

Since those are caused by a dominant allele

---

Dogs with short legs did not inherit them from wolves. They got a disease similar to the one that causes dwarfism in mice.

quote:

---

Since the ancestor wolves didn't have those legs

---

That neither of us can say. But even if a wolf did get this disease, it's fair to say in the wild, it would be at an extreme disadvantage, so it and it's line would have more than likely died.

quote:

---

Therefore, this allele is an addition to the DNA.

---

Again, dwarfism is a birth defect, that is passed on in Alleles, which perfectly explains short legged dogs.

quote:

---

Each micro takes the individual farther from the original.

---

yes.

quote:

---

Eventually the message hardly resembles the original.

---

And it's meaningless.I get what you are trying to say. I follow. I'm just saying there is not evidence to support the claim that these small changes increase complexity, or add new functional genetic information. But there are hundreds of examples of genetic loss, that are both beneficial and detrimental to the organism.

quote:

---

Nonsense!

---

Prove it. Thats what you are here for.

quote:

---

And belief has nothing to do with science.

---

Nor does evolution.

quote:

---

Science deals with evidence.

---

For which there is none for macro evolution.

quote:

---

belief gets in the way of learning

---

This has nothing to do with lack of evidence, since there is plenty of evidence for ID. Both of us are debating because we have bias opinions on how we believe the earth came into existance. Anyone that tells you they are completely unbias is lying...don't lend him your car.

quote:

---

No, all information does not need an ultimate source; each individual gets his "information" from his parents.

---

Where did they get it from?

quote:

---

You seem to want some miraculous change

---

Macro evolution is a miraculous change. That is what we are talking about.

quote:

---

all at once or something, giving instant "new functional genetic information."

---

No one has offered evidence that this takes place over time either.

quote:

---

You can start by reading this thread called "Looking for the Super-Genome. -And it ain't found".

---

Okay. I have a few points to make here, but first a question.Are we going to change the subject of our discussion to this particular topic, because there is alot of information to go over to get to my evidence against your claim.First, if you are claiming that Oetzi was alive during Adams life, then you are to some extent saying that the Biblical account of a person named Adam was correct, since there is no mention of Adam in any non-religious texts. So if the Bible is all we have to go on, then you are wrong. But I first want to clear up a few questions:Where did the name Oetzi come from? From the discoverers? Or was that his real name?Where was he found?What condition was he in (I'm speaking more to the soft tissue, since I am aware that he had shoes, and he was a certain height, I can easily assume that his clothes and his bones were intact)?Now to my points. If you are saying that the Biblical acount of Adam is true, then all people would have been killed in the flood, except for noahs family. So it is possible that he lived before the flood, but I don't know enough about this person to offer any educated assumptions of any kind.Next would be the age issue, I need to know what method was used to determine age. The reason for this is because the Bible tells of many people who were 10 to 12 feet in height, and supposed 'giants' (such as the giants in the Bible (such as Goliath and the Gibeonites) much taller. If age estimates were based on physical features, then the age if determined from an ID bias would probably make him much younger. But again, I'm not sure how they determined this.I need more information about Oetzi specfically before I can argue this further...but I can address some other issues.

quote:

---

The genetic information shows us that the critters and plants and people then did NOT have "all the genes necessary to explain the variety of life we see around us". In fact, the genes were almost identical to what exists today, a sub-group as opposed to a super-group.

---

First, the genetic possibilities of two parents, even today (using humans' 23 chromosomes) have billions of genetic possibilities for each child.Second, it would be extremly likely that genetic loss would occur at a high rate, but no higher than today (even today, since I do not have the gene required to make any of the people I know). The existance of a 'super-genome' seems unlikely, and also very undefined, but if anyone would have had it, it would have been Adam and Eve.If each child only inherits half of their genetic makeup from each individual, the first generation would have lost half of the total genes (depending on dominant and recessive of Adam and Eve).So now you have half the information lost in each individual, but since each child is different, and more than likely contains different genes that the others do not have, most of the total genetic information would be passed, but not ALL. As each family line separates, each one would have information not found in the other lines, which is no different than we see today.As well, the Bible talks about the firmament, a layer of water around the earth, that would have deflected the suns harmful rays, so dna breakdown would have been at a slower rate (though I cannot say what rate this would be, so I'm going with genetic breakdown that occurs today to be safe).Adam and Eve were also created with a perfect genome (well, techinally, only Adam was created, since Eve was made from Adams rib, which could point to existing genetic information was used to create Eve). But even soon after, the small amount of mutations that occured would have been minimal. It would take thousands of years to causes genetic breakdown. Again, this is something that we see today, particularily in humans.I'm not sure if this answers your questions, since I kind of took a biblical approach to it. I need more information on the gene point you made on the other thread as well, so I can respond.Thanks.

quote:

---

This means that unlike your previous statements, you now admit that addition can be made to DNA.

---

No, as I said before, the wolf contained all required genetic information. Dwarfism is a deleterious condition that alters or removes MT1-MMP. The MT1-MMP deficiency is a loss of genetic code, that causes a physical deformity. No new functional information, just a loss of functional information.

quote:

---

No remains of shortlegged wolves were fouhnd.

---

So every wolf that has died has become a fossil. So you know for certain that NO wolf ever has aquired this trait under any circumstances. Thanks.

quote:

---

Therefore, the wolves from which domestic dogs were bred did not have this allele, ergo it was an addition.

---

Already responded. And most all domestic dogs are extremely unfit in comparison to wolves. They require constant medical attention, and have conditions including back problems (daschund), breathing problems (pug, and many other short snouted breeds), cartilage deficiency (Irish wolfhound, Dalmation, Greyhound and other tall-skinny breeds of dogs).

quote:

---

It was an DNA insertion that caused this.

---

I already responded. Dwarfism is a genetic deletion.

quote:

---

This means an addition to the DNA you said couldn't happen.

---

Because it didn't. And I never claimed that mutation cannot cause insertion, but rather than the insertion causes a loss of functional information, rather than a gain, like you would claim.

quote:

---

That's correct, but again - 3 dice or 3 million, the dice are going to follow entirely predictable probability distributions.

---

I agree with you. But here inlies the problem. Since only certain arrangements of nucleotides contain functional purpose, almost all of your random 'dice rolls' would be useless numbers.

quote:

---

"Random" doesn't mean "unreplicatable." It means "probabilistic."

---

As I said before, the odds of two separate experiments getting 2,374,484, would be extremely unlikely. Unless the experiment was repeated millions of times, you should not see the SAME RANDOM mutation take place, since the odds are extremely against this.

quote:

---

Many documented cases have already been given to you. You've simply incorrectly attributed them to horizontal gene transfer or outright ignored them. I think there's plenty on your plate to respond to as it is.

---

I'll make you a deal. If you find me 15 examples of genetic mutation of new functional DNA (coding for any protien, trait, or physical attribute that was not present in past organisms of the species), I will concede the genetic arguement. 15 examples would show that beneficial mutations DO occur, and at a rate that COULD explain the driving force behind macro evolution. As I said before, I have four cases, of which NONE offer new functional genetic information that code for something not present in past lines of the organism. If you have thousands, you will win for sure. Just give me the sources, you don't even have to type them, I'll read them.

quote:

---

Incorrect - we've proved that HGT was not responsible.

---

Since you agree with me, saying that I am incorrect makes us both wrong. I too, believe that HGT is not the source for new information.

quote:

---

Incorrect - you've failed to understand what "random" means.

---

Oh? I'm thinking of a number between 1 and 3 million. Guess what it is. I'll give you one hundred tries. If you are correct, within 100 tries, you should get the same result as me. GO!

quote:

---

Losing a stop codon doesn't really matter. A frameshift might introduce a spurious stop codon, however, and that will have a drastic effect on the protein product.

---

Wait. What??? I was under the impression that mRNA needs to have the ribosome recognize the 'start and stop' of the codon sequences, and it needs to tell the ribosome when it comes to the end of the protein it is producing. How are starts and stops not important (minus your point of creating a new stop codon that prematurely ends the sequence).

quote:

---

Most of your genome is information with no functional purpose. Well over 98% of the human genome is sequence with no regulatory or protein-encoding function at all.

​

Does that suggest to you, perhaps, that the human genome is the result of mutation?

---

Hmmm. It's possible, but unlikely. I'll concede that much.

quote:

---

It's not possible to produce "nonsense" codons because all possible codons code for something;

---

quote:

---

Mutation can result in several different types of change in DNA sequences; these can either have no effect, alter the product of a gene, or prevent the gene from functioning properly or completely. Studies in the fly Drosophila melanogaster suggest that if a mutation changes a protein produced by a gene, this will probably be harmful, with about 70 percent of these mutations having damaging effects, and the remainder being either neutral or weakly beneficial.
Mutation - Wikipedia

---

My arguement has never been that codons produce nothing, but the informational content is non functional. Certain orders of codons are required to produce functional information.

quote:

---

Kind of cuts the information available by half, doesn't it, if Eve is Adam's parthenogenetic clone?

---

If ID were correct, or rather, christianity, it would be impossible to know for sure. But even if this were true, no one would know the total informational content in Adam. This I don't know.

quote:

---

Of course neither the account of Adam or the Biblical Flood are factual.

---

quote:

---

Two earlier studies of tzi's mtDNA were done. The first used a small part of tzi's mtDNA; as a result of it, many people came to believe they were his descendants. But a second study (October 2008) that analyzed his complete mtDNA sequence suggested that he has no living descendants...as far as we now know.
Mummytombs.com

---

If he has no living decendants, this would support the theory of a flood, since all of mankind today would have been decendants of Noah. If a global flood did happen (though this is not currently the subject of debate), the levels of pollen would have changed dramatically, as well as altering any other samples used to give him his supposed age. Though the number may be correct, I don't think it's fair to say they know for sure how old he was when he died. Global flood aside even, the levels of any natural substance changes over time, and no one could possibly know what those were over 5000 years ago.

quote:

---

And short legs is not dwarfism.

---

Dwarfism is a condition affecting the conversion of cartilage to bone.

quote:

---

A gene associated with dwarfism in mice, the study reports, appears to mediate variations in dog breed size and weight. Small-size breeds, like Dachshund, Beagle, Jack Russell Terrier, and Brittany have enormous differentiation in this gene, compared to larger-size breeds.
Dog genome researchers track paw prints of selective breeding

---

Do what your name says if you don't know.

quote:

---

In my own archaeological research I tested a site recently that was dominated by a component we dated at about 5,600 years ago.

---

First, you mean: dated at 5,600 years old, not years ago, otherwise the date changes as time goes on.Second, which method of dating did you use?

quote:

---

And we could tell a great deal about how the people who lived there were making their living.

---

Though I am sure that there were people there, the specfic forms of dating are what I am interested in.

quote:

---

Radiocarbon dating, along with artifact typologies and stratigraphy. Also obsidian hydration, but that is nowhere near as accurate.

---

And what results were found from each method?