|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Potential falsifications of the theory of evolution | |||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2669 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
I would think Shapiro's talk of Natural Genetic Engineering, sentience in cells etc. that this would lead to a Designer. How? How does NGE = designer? btw.Just because you ignore the fact that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away. Just because you ignore Percy reminding you that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away. Just because you ignore me reminding you that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
molbiogirl writes;
How? How does NGE = designer? btw.Just because you ignore the fact that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away. Just because you ignore Percy reminding you that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away. Just because you ignore me reminding you that Shapiro said "highly nondeterministic" doesn't make it go away. NGE does not, I repeat does not equal DESIGNER. I was giving my opinion that perhaps the ID supporters would pick up on the "Engineering" part of the theory and that means to many design. If something is Engineered wouldn't you agree it is probably not random? In re "Highly nondeterministic." I guess the statement that there is no possible chance it could be determinsitic would be more final. But who would be able to say that with certainity, except for...?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
shadow71 writes: Jar writes;
How? Fitness is determined after the fact. That is the understanding of science, my question goes to the possibility as to whether fitness is in fact determined by the non-random mutation itself.Thereby questioning when in fact fitness is determined. No, that is NOT the understanding of science, it is the reality. Fitness is whether or not something lives long enough to reproduce. It is totally and completely separate, disconnected from and unrelated to any mutations. Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
DBlevins writes;
Are you are suggesting that the mutation that allowed a strain of bacteria to be able to digest nylon was directed by some agency that had the foreknowledge of the discovery of nylon? That ability may have been given to the bacteria as part of its makeup. Is there something aboult nylon that makes it unique? Edited by shadow71, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Shadow wrote;
I could live with this statement. "mutations are non-random, but their effect on fitness are not yet fully known and may well be deterministic. Molbiogirl wrote;
Those are your words!!! Jeezlooweez. Are you that thick? I assume that your position is that mutations have no effect on fitness is a closed case. Do no more research, Molbiogirl has closed out that option?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
I was giving my opinion that perhaps the ID supporters would pick up on the "Engineering" part of the theory and that means to many design. I can see that. We often see ID supporters jump to conclusions like this.
If something is Engineered wouldn't you agree it is probably not random? The lottery is engineered and it is random. I have used an engineered transposon for random mutagenesis before.
In re "Highly nondeterministic." I guess the statement that there is no possible chance it could be determinsitic would be more final. It would also be outside the realm of the scientific method. Scientific conclusions do not make absolute statements of truth. Conclusions are always tentative and based on the evidence at hand. So far, all of the evidence is consistent with random mutations with respect to fitness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
That ability may have been given to the bacteria as part of its makeup. It wasn't. The emergence of the nylonase enzyme (nylC) was the product of an insertion mutation in a plasmid carried by the bacteria. We know this because we have the parent populations and daughter populations.
Is there something aboult nylon that makes it unique? The nylon oligmers that the bacteria are now able to utilize as a food source did not exist until the 20th century, well after the flavobacterium existed.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2669 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
You said and I quote:
That the scientists on this board should keep an open mind and be prepared to accept that evolution may not be non-random, even in regards to fitness. I am not saying evolution has not and is not happening, but that it may in fact be directed. You said and I quote:
I take it that you believe that the complexity of such a single cell came about by random accident? Would you agree that it also may have come about by a directed plan? You said and I quote:
That in my opinion will lead to what I beleive, that evolution is in fact a created phenemon. I reallly don't care if ID is recognized as a science or not, to me it is irrevelant. If it walks like a duck and talks like a duck ... From wiki:
Intelligent design is the proposition that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection. Also from wiki:
It is neo-creationism, a form of creationism restated in non-religious terms. Capiche?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
shadow71 writes: DBlevins writes;
Are you are suggesting that the mutation that allowed a strain of bacteria to be able to digest nylon was directed by some agency that had the foreknowledge of the discovery of nylon? That ability may have been given to the bacteria as part of its makeup. Is there something aboult nylon that makes it unique? Let's try a whole different path and see if it helps you. Do you understand that when folk talk about mutations in evolutionary biology they are talking about changes passed on during reproduction. With me so far? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
molbiogirl Member (Idle past 2669 days) Posts: 1909 From: MO Joined: |
I assume that your position is that mutations have no effect on fitness is a closed case. I'm going to give you a mulligan on this one.Why don't you try rephrasing that?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10077 Joined: Member Rating: 5.1 |
I just found a paper by Shapiro that should help illuminate the subject at hand. It actually ties together several things that I have been talking about, including the Lederberg paper that I mention in previous posts. Shapiro uses the plate replica method to demonstrate that DNA fusions resulting in beneficial adaptations are unrelated to specific selective pressures. They specifically looked at the appearance of reverse lacZ mutants that were capable of digesting lactose.
quote: The paper can be found here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/...95473/pdf/emboj00069-0222.pdf So the same randomness of mutations established by the Lederberg and Luria-Delbruck experiments is the same randomness seen in the genetic engineering systems that Shapiro actually studies. The paper also goes on to mention that the same results are produced by the Luria-Delbruck fluctuation method. In addition, this paper really spells out how Shapiro views "random" mutations and genetic engineering systems. A perfect example is this quote:
quote: So Shapiro sees two different sources for random mutations: the breakdown of the normal replication process and specific cellular complexes. IMO, he does a disservice in other papers referring to the former as random and the latter as non-random, even though both are random according to the standard assays used to determine the randomness of mutations with respect to fitness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Molbiogirl writes inter alia;
Capiche? So what is your point?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
Shadow writes;
In re "Highly nondeterministic." I guess the statement that there is no possible chance it could be determinsitic would be more final. Taq writes;
It would also be outside the realm of the scientific method. Scientific conclusions do not make absolute statements of truth. Conclusions are always tentative and based on the evidence at hand. So far, all of the evidence is consistent with random mutations with respect to fitness. My point exactly. There are papers out there, and I will be citing them in the future, that appear to raise the possibility that non-random mutations are deterministic as to fitness . I think at this point we don't know that and cannot say, as Molbiogirl states, that there is no way that non-random mutations can be deterministic as regards to fitness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
shadow71 Member (Idle past 2961 days) Posts: 706 From: Joliet, il, USA Joined: |
jar writes;
Do you understand that when folk talk about mutations in evolutionary biology they are talking about changes passed on during reproduction. With me so far? Yes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 421 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
shadow71 writes: jar writes;
Do you understand that when folk talk about mutations in evolutionary biology they are talking about changes passed on during reproduction. With me so far? Yes. Okay. So we are talking about mutations in the "parent" of the offspring (in the case of sexual reproducing critters) or the critter itself before before it splits in asexual critters. Still with me? Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024