|
Author
|
Topic: New theory about evolution between creationism and evolution.
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
Message 196 of 433 (623502)
07-11-2011 1:41 AM
|
Reply to: Message 193 by Larni
07-10-2011 6:29 PM
|
|
Re: DOUPTING IS THE BEAUTY OF SCIENCE
You've already stated that you are only speculating in the other thread.
Time to end things, I think. Evidence is not a condition of a theory. A theory must be coherent and can be just challenged in terms of logic and arguments. Evidence for or against is highly desired but not a reason not to be discussed in a forum. So my question (which i think is crucial) remains: Do epigenetics accept the idea of information flow from environment to genome though neural system? Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 193 by Larni, posted 07-10-2011 6:29 PM | | Larni has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 200 of 433 (623615)
07-12-2011 1:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 199 by AZPaul3
07-11-2011 12:06 PM
|
|
Re: Do epigenetics accept or not information flow from environment to genome?
AZPaul, I have shown that scientists on epigenetics uniquivocally accept information flow from environment to genome (Baldwin effect, epigenetics in wikipedia, Cooney et all. 2002) . Cooney hasn'd said it straightly but he implied it quite clearly. You haven't comment on it yet. I think this matter has to be settled for before any further discussion. Information: knowledge communicated or received concerning a particular fact or circumstance. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given. Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Touch up subtitle to get rid of smilie.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 199 by AZPaul3, posted 07-11-2011 12:06 PM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 208 by AZPaul3, posted 07-12-2011 10:49 AM | | zi ko has not replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
----------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They prove also that the authors believe that life style (obviously by neural system- how else it coulld be done?) can affect epigenome areas. It is simple as that. Sorry Zi Ko, I've already pointed out to you why this is wrong, either you really can't understand plain english or you are just lying at this point. The papers they referred to were not looking at the epigenome, they were looking at health and longevity. The quotes you gave were from the introduction talking about the work of others, not the epigeentic factors studied in that paper. TTFN, Cooney et all clearly are implying environment genome communication. MY english are not so good as yours, but on this matter i have to insist. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 202 of 433 (623617)
07-12-2011 2:01 AM
|
Reply to: Message 194 by Taq
07-11-2011 1:36 AM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome?
Not only. Tthey prove also that the authors believe that life style (obviously by neural system- how else it coulld be done?) can affect epigenome areas. It is simple as that. Once again, epigenetics does not explain the difference between species. The theory you are trying to replace DOES Not only. Tthey prove also that the authors believe that life style (obviously by neural system- how else it coulld be done?) can affect epigenome areas. It is simple as that. Once again, epigenetics does not explain the difference between species. The theory you are trying to replace DOES explain the differences between species. You seem to have a problem here. You seem to have a problem here. My theory ( http://www.sleepgadgetabs.com), or as you like to call it, does explain the differences between species, as it encorporates all mechanisms your theory is using, plus the information concept. Your concept of strictly random mutations restricts Current theory's ability to explain new scientific findings, and so its validity.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 194 by Taq, posted 07-11-2011 1:36 AM | | Taq has not replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 203 of 433 (623618)
07-12-2011 2:11 AM
|
Reply to: Message 195 by Taq
07-11-2011 1:39 AM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
Using my analogy above, we are not doubting the existence of cars or rainbows just as we do not doubt mutations or empathy. What we doubt is the claim that cars CAUSE rainbows just as we doubt that empathy guides mutations. Your analogy is unfortunate. Information impact on genome has been almost proved. Empathy is a type of information. so? --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 195 by Taq, posted 07-11-2011 1:39 AM | | Taq has not replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 204 of 433 (623619)
07-12-2011 2:18 AM
|
Reply to: Message 198 by Larni
07-11-2011 3:51 AM
|
|
Theory definition: see wikipedia Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 198 by Larni, posted 07-11-2011 3:51 AM | | Larni has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 209 of 433 (623660)
07-12-2011 11:35 AM
|
Reply to: Message 205 by Larni
07-12-2011 3:14 AM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
A theory needs evidence. It must have evidence: do you not agree? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Absolutely. But remember there are many theories in science today that started as speculations. My theory (?) ( http://www.sleepgadgetabs.com) being so comprehensive, it doesn't need to bring evidence from the scratch. I have the right i think to use any relative evidence that is available, at least in matters that it coinsides with existing scientific findings. So as it refers information flow from environment to genome, i use the evidences brought by J. Shapiro, Cooney and B. Wright. I think they are more than enough. Obviously i need evidence relating my idea of empathy and neural system intervention on the evolution process. Presently i can only speculate. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 205 by Larni, posted 07-12-2011 3:14 AM | | Larni has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 213 by Larni, posted 07-12-2011 1:04 PM | | zi ko has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 210 of 433 (623661)
07-12-2011 11:49 AM
|
Reply to: Message 206 by AZPaul3
07-12-2011 3:47 AM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
You do not have a theory, zi ko. I don't mind if i have a "theory" AZPauL3. This moment what i care is to make clear to others what i am saying.---------------------------------------------------- Edited by zi ko, : No reason given. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 206 by AZPaul3, posted 07-12-2011 3:47 AM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 211 by AZPaul3, posted 07-12-2011 12:56 PM | | zi ko has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
[qs]I've said over and over again that the environment interacts with the genome.[\qs] But you need to clarify, what do you mean by this. This interaction is done by natural selection or otherwise. Be specific please.
What I was objecting to was your assumption that this is via the neural system when I have already shown you papers which detailed the routine biochemical pathways which can mediate the environmental interaction through diet and which do not require the nervous systems involvement. You are right. This is an assumption of mine. There is no evidence about it .It can or cannot be provet correct. So here is the theory's falsifiability. As for the papers you have cited , i understand that environmental interaction thrugh diet does not require nervous system intervention. But speculating about i inferred that some types of life style require this intervention ,as i suppose you had said as well.
And 'Life style' covers so many variables that to say that 'life style' affects the genome/epigenome is to essentially say nothing. Smoking could be part of a life style, regular and prolonged sunbathing, drinking ethyl methanesulfonate or ethidium bromide could be part of a 'life style'. all of these things would affect the genome, some would even affect the germ cells producing heritable mutations. What this certainly doesn't show is that these environmental factors in any way direct the changes to the genome/epigenome that they produce. It depends what meaning do you give to the word 'direct'. If you imply any teleology, this is not my intention.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 214 of 433 (623730)
07-13-2011 1:03 AM
|
Reply to: Message 211 by AZPaul3
07-12-2011 12:56 PM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
This moment what i care is to make clear to others what i am saying. I think you have accomplished this. The problem you now face is presenting adequate evidence to show your speculations have merit. As I said in Message 206 your speculation that neural systems can channel environmental "information" via "empathy" into directed alteration of a genome needs to be evidenced with precise definitions and a complete mechanism. It is not that we do not understand, zi ko. You have given us nothing but your ideas and we do not agree. My comprehensive theory has two parts.The first one is based on old knowledge and contemporary scientific findings and asserts by adequate, i think, evidence that environmental information flow ( not by natural selection)"directs" evolution. The second comprises my non evidenced assumptions of neural system involvement in the process of evolution, and empathy's role in this process. For the second part i can not insist i am wright and you can agree or not. But for the first part i think you have to be specific and bring arguments if you dont agree --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 211 by AZPaul3, posted 07-12-2011 12:56 PM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 217 by AZPaul3, posted 07-13-2011 4:54 AM | | zi ko has not replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 215 of 433 (623731)
07-13-2011 1:11 AM
|
Reply to: Message 213 by Larni
07-12-2011 1:04 PM
|
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
I expected arguments against the first part of my theory (environmental information flow to genome) where there is plenty of evidence., or you don't disagree. You could more specific. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 213 by Larni, posted 07-12-2011 1:04 PM | | Larni has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 216 by Larni, posted 07-13-2011 3:14 AM | | zi ko has not replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 219 of 433 (623771)
07-13-2011 9:33 AM
|
Reply to: Message 206 by AZPaul3
07-12-2011 3:47 AM
|
|
Re: "Theory" in Science
National Academies of Science quote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The formal scientific definition of theory is quite different from the everyday meaning of the word. It refers to a comprehensive explanation of some aspect of nature that is supported by a vast body of evidence. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Evidence is paramount to having a "theory". And a "theory" must be a "comprehensive" explanation of a phenomenon based upon observable, demonstrable and repeatable evidence for all aspects of the theory. You are missing cogent definitions of "information" and "empathy" and you are missing a defined comprehensive testable mechanism for this effect on a genome. You do not have a theory, zi ko. In wikipedia' s definition of SCIENTIFIC THEORY not once you find the word evidence
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 206 by AZPaul3, posted 07-12-2011 3:47 AM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
Re: Epigenetic information flow from environment to genome
I It is both. The environment interacts with the genome by testing it and providing the matrix within which variants experience differential reproductive success so as to give rise to the patterns of natural selection. Certain elements of the environment also interact with DNA either directly or indirectly, such as the examples I gave of mutagens and the methyl supplements. The vast majority of such genetic/epigenetic modifiying interactions occur in the somatic cells, but a small proportion occur in the germ cells. In these cases there are well understood biochemical pathways for the modifications that arise both in somatic cells, germ cells and the cells of developing embryos. IN any case even if neuronic information transfer to genome happens, there are always biochemiical pathways, though many not understanably being identified yet. I agree in general with all you say. except in the participational proportion of the above mechanisms in nature. We should not forget there wasn't any research specifically on neural system intervention, propably because of the difficulties the matter is presenting. The important thing is that ,being at the begginings, it is accepted at least in some cases, there is a type of information transfer from environment to genome.This, of course , means there are mechanisms grown up for it. This what i was sayng all the time.
There is some pretty convincing evidence that many aspects of the nervous system are affected by epigenetics, including elements of memory. What there isn't is any reason to believe that this in any way means that the nervous system modifies the genome/epigenome of the germ cells as would be required for heritability. I believe that soon there would be such reason. It is unavoidable ( this is my theory's prediction andfalsifiability point)
Well what meaning do you give to the word 'direct' or indeed to the term 'non-random'? If you simply mean that not all mutations are equiprobable then it is trivially obvious but has nothing to do with what you have been talking about. A definition of what you mean by information would also be very useful, and possibly what you mean by epigenetics. So why don't you do the clarification for a change since this is supposed to be your theory after all?
It is nice to allow me to use the word theory. Direct- random: Environmental Information , by altogether biochemical pathways always, direct evolution. Natural selection is always present. Random mutations are not excluded, but most of them are in away directet by information. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 229 of 433 (623891)
07-14-2011 11:27 AM
|
Reply to: Message 224 by AZPaul3
07-13-2011 12:01 PM
|
|
Re: "Theory" in Science
In view of your 'evidence' against i would like to make a question: In case that one or more researchers proved that nerous system does intervenes in evolution process and empathy has effect on genome, how would you call my"speculations" then?
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 224 by AZPaul3, posted 07-13-2011 12:01 PM | | AZPaul3 has replied |
|
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3649 days) Posts: 578 Joined: 01-18-2011
|
|
|
Message 230 of 433 (623892)
07-14-2011 11:30 AM
|
Reply to: Message 228 by Larni
07-14-2011 6:53 AM
|
|
The same answer as my message 229.
Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 228 by Larni, posted 07-14-2011 6:53 AM | | Larni has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2