Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Information's role in evolution.Should we put it more in the picture?
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 101 of 192 (623051)
07-07-2011 11:45 PM
Reply to: Message 97 by zi ko
07-02-2011 11:13 AM


Re: Falcifiability
It is an example( from wikipedia) in how epigenetically acquired traits are incorporated to DNA.
It is not incorporated through a change in DNA sequence. Once again, the difference between humans and chimps is due to a difference in DNA SEQUENCE. It is NOT due to a difference in DNA methylation or histone packaging (i.e. epigenetics). If you are looking for information's role in evolution then you must explain the role of information at the sequence level, not the patterns of methylation.
'Choosing' and 'deciding' is according to Shapiro are intergrated functions of bacteria and higher organisms.
One of the integrated functions that Shapiro points to is the SOS system in E. coli. In this system, the bacteria "decide" to increase their random mutation rate. This decision is quite mechanical and is triggered by DNA damage.
This claim is made by a scientist. Where are the data to disclaim this?
Where is the data to back it up? Remember, the burden of proof is on the one making the claim.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 97 by zi ko, posted 07-02-2011 11:13 AM zi ko has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 102 of 192 (623052)
07-07-2011 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 98 by zi ko
07-02-2011 11:31 AM


Re: Information's role
You ignore my arguments. I say Darwin himself and others contemporary to us scientists share Lamarcks wiews on evolution, who obviously thought his evolution theory based o information from environment in terms differrent than natural selection , Darwin did not always talk about evolution strictly in terms of natural selection and mutations.
If your argument is "because Darwin said so" then it should be ignored. Darwin got a lot wrong. We have moved past Darwin. Please fast forward from the 19th century to the 21st century.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by zi ko, posted 07-02-2011 11:31 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by zi ko, posted 07-09-2011 11:46 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 112 of 192 (623495)
07-11-2011 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by zi ko
07-09-2011 11:46 AM


Re: I need clear answers
Isaid Darwin and other contemporary scientists.
Yes, scientists contemporary to Darwin such as Weismann. Please, fast forward to the 21st century.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by zi ko, posted 07-09-2011 11:46 AM zi ko has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 113 of 192 (623496)
07-11-2011 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 105 by zi ko
07-09-2011 4:56 PM


Re: I need clear answers
Empathy is a type of information connected with organism survival.
I can agree with that in a round-about way. So let's not argue this point for now.
The problem that you have is that empathy is a function of DNA sequence, not the other way around. Humans are able to empathize because we have DNA sequences that result in a brain capable of empathizing. You have things back asswards.
It is usefull to life and i believe nature in its economy wouldn't let it to be wasted.
Perhaps you should do some research on the human extensor coccygis muscle. It is a muscle found on the dorsal surface of our tailbone. In other animals this muscle is used to lift the tail. In humans, it spans a fused joint in the coccyx, the human remnant of the structure that was used to support a tail in our ancestors. It is as useful as tits on a boar, to use a colloquialism. So your fantasy about economy in nature simply does not exist, and the extensor coccygis is but one small example. The more you study biology the more you start to realize how kludgy evolution can be. If I were to point to the man who best understood the designer of life, that man would be Rube Goldberg.
Empathy acting over long time periods on same genomic place can have a permanent effect .
Other way around. Natural selection acting on different areas of the genome resulted in the empathy found in humans.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 105 by zi ko, posted 07-09-2011 4:56 PM zi ko has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 114 of 192 (623497)
07-11-2011 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 109 by zi ko
07-10-2011 2:57 PM


Re: I need clear answers
No evidence unfortunately. Only speculation at present.
Just as long as we both understand that it is speculation that is fine. There are many theories in science today that started as speculations.
In order to get to the theory stage you need to do more than speculate. You need to figure out some sort of experiment, and then figure out what results would either confirm or falsify your theory/hypothesis. Science is one part inspiration and one part hard work. The hard part is designing experiments that will tell you if your speculation is right or wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 109 by zi ko, posted 07-10-2011 2:57 PM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by zi ko, posted 07-12-2011 2:39 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 119 of 192 (623790)
07-13-2011 12:35 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by zi ko
07-12-2011 2:33 AM


Re: I need clear answers
What is the evidence that mutations are strictly random and not information or function driven?
AZPaul mentioned the Lederberg experiment which is one of the classic experiments which demonstrate how mutations are random with respect to fitness. In that example, the Lederbergs discovered that mutations conferring antibiotic resistance occur in the absence of antibiotics, not in response to the presence of antibiotics.
Another great example is the Luria-Delbruck fluctuation experiment. Like the Lederbergs' experiment, Luria and Delbruck demonstrated that beneficial mutations occur in the absence of an environment in which the mutation would be beneficial. In this particular case, they demonstrated that mutations confering phage resistance occurred in an environment devoid of bacteriophage. They used the same experimental design to confirm the Lederberg's findings as well.
Both of these experiments demonstrate a disconnect between mutagenesis and the needs of the organism. They demonstrated that the process which produces variation is blind to what is beneficial, detrimental, or neutral.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by zi ko, posted 07-12-2011 2:33 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by zi ko, posted 07-14-2011 12:59 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 122 of 192 (623936)
07-14-2011 3:22 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by zi ko
07-14-2011 12:59 PM


Re: I need clear answers
It is knoun that fungi produce antibiotics in nature. How the authors had excluded that some bacteria had met these fungi?
The bacterial populations were grown from a single bacterium. If that single bacterium was resistant to antibiotics then nearly the entire population would have been resistant. That was not the case. Instead, only 1 out of billions of bacteria were resistant, and this resistance came about due to a mutation that occured prior to the bacteria being exposed to antibiotic. The mutation was not a reaction to the presence of the antibiotic.
This experiment has been done time after time after time. The mutations observed in this experiment, and others like it, are random with respect to fitness. I can cite specific biochemical pathways that further demonstrate how mutations are random, if you like.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by zi ko, posted 07-14-2011 12:59 PM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by zi ko, posted 07-16-2011 10:47 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 128 of 192 (624517)
07-18-2011 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 123 by zi ko
07-16-2011 10:35 AM


Re: Lederberg experiment
So the experiment prooves that there are randon mutations. It does not prove that they are the only ones.
According to my "speculative theory"(http://www.sleepgadgetabs.com): 1. random and directed mutations can coexist. 2.In onecell organisms randomness is seen more often. 3.The experiment conditions energise random mutations.
"Speculative theory" is an oxymoron within the confines of science.
Also, we have shown experiments which demonstrate random mutagenesis. Where are your experiments which demonstrate guided and directed mutations which would make a significant impact on evolution?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 123 by zi ko, posted 07-16-2011 10:35 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by zi ko, posted 07-22-2011 12:03 AM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 134 of 192 (625335)
07-22-2011 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 130 by zi ko
07-22-2011 12:45 AM


Re: Lederberg experiment
Shapiro and Wright had been studying bacteria only. But they say that macroevolution in multi cell organisms is mainly information driven.
We have been saying the same thing, that species evolve through information that moves from the environment to the population through the filter of natural selection.
The replica plate had its own characteristics that they may didn't enhance mutation rates.
This doesn't explain why the clones on the replica plate came from the same spot on the master plate. The only explanation for this is that the mutation occurred on the master plate before the bacteria were exposed to antibiotics on the replica plates.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 130 by zi ko, posted 07-22-2011 12:45 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by zi ko, posted 07-22-2011 12:21 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 135 of 192 (625336)
07-22-2011 11:28 AM
Reply to: Message 129 by zi ko
07-22-2011 12:03 AM


Re: Lederberg experiment
the question of environment guiding eolution towards specific adaptations, together with natural selection and random mutations
is i think, solved ( see epigenetics, J Shapiro wright, Pigliucci ect).
How does epigenetics explain the differences between humans and chimps?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by zi ko, posted 07-22-2011 12:03 AM zi ko has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 137 of 192 (625356)
07-22-2011 3:14 PM
Reply to: Message 136 by zi ko
07-22-2011 12:21 PM


Re: Lederberg experiment
They say information comes directly from outer or inner invironment WITHOUT THE FILTERING BY NATURAL SELECTION( capitalization is mine). What you are saying is entirely different.
It is only the information that is passed on to each generation that is important in the process of macroevolution. In this case, natural selection is the filter.
I could say the same about the conditions of master plate.
Why would you say this? The master plate is made up of a very rich medium that bacteria have no problem growing on. So what is it about the plates that predisposes the bacteria to mutations confering antibiotic resistance?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 136 by zi ko, posted 07-22-2011 12:21 PM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 150 by zi ko, posted 07-28-2011 10:57 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 141 of 192 (626128)
07-27-2011 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 140 by shadow71
07-27-2011 8:42 AM


Re: I need clear answers
The reason, I a layman, cite authority for my positions is that I do not have the scientific training to reply to many scientific points.
You need this same training to put those citations in context with the rest of science.
However, I can read what other scientists say and use them as authority for my position.
The other problem you seem to have is that you insert your own ideas into what the scientists are actually saying. That is why a knowledge of the data that underpins their conclusions is important. It removes this bias. You lack this knowledge.
I would be more than willing to help share my knowledge in this arena. My suggestion is that we all dissect a paper by Barbara Wright (this one). Would you be willing to walk through this paper with me?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 140 by shadow71, posted 07-27-2011 8:42 AM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by shadow71, posted 07-27-2011 6:59 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 144 of 192 (626229)
07-27-2011 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 143 by shadow71
07-27-2011 6:59 PM


Re: I need clear answers
What protocol do you suggest in walking through the paper?
The way I picture it, I could help clarify any questions you have as it relates to the methods and results sections. Before we can have any fruitful discussion you need to understand what each of the figures/tables are saying and how the authors got that data.
After that, we can parse the authors' conclusions.
Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 143 by shadow71, posted 07-27-2011 6:59 PM shadow71 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by zi ko, posted 07-28-2011 1:22 AM Taq has replied
 Message 149 by Wounded King, posted 07-28-2011 4:34 AM Taq has not replied
 Message 169 by shadow71, posted 07-31-2011 1:21 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 153 of 192 (626338)
07-28-2011 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by zi ko
07-28-2011 1:22 AM


Re: I need clear answers
Maby it would be useful if there is first a definition about your argumentation will be just a debate between a creationist and a naturalist.
I will argue that the mechanisms described in the paper are blind to the specific needs of the bacteria in a given environment. I will argue that the mutations are random with respect to fitness and consistent with unguided mutation.
It is also useful to define what is "random".
Sure. In this case, I will argue that the mutations produced by the mechanism in Wright's paper will produce a wide range of mutations, from detrimental to beneficial. The mechanism is incapable of discerning between what is helpful and what is not which makes it random with respect to fitness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by zi ko, posted 07-28-2011 1:22 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by zi ko, posted 07-29-2011 10:55 AM Taq has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 160 of 192 (626452)
07-29-2011 12:27 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by zi ko
07-29-2011 11:30 AM


Re: Empathy is a type of information
Empathy is a type of information and a special one, as it is always fortified with emotion under stress, it actsts over long periods ( maybe thousands or millions of years) over the same subject and so it is the most propable of all types of information to act on genome
What subject is thousands to millions of years old? Last I checked, average human life span was around 80 and the oldest person was like 120. Are we talking about Methuselah or something?
Also, you have yet to show how empathy acts on the genome in an meaningful way where it concerns evolution. You claim it does, and yet you can't show how it does.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by zi ko, posted 07-29-2011 11:30 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by zi ko, posted 07-30-2011 12:02 AM Taq 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