Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How do "novel" features evolve?
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 196 of 314 (660177)
04-21-2012 4:06 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by intellen
04-21-2012 4:00 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
OK, let us use your scenario.
Yes, that is a change! From this combination: t1, t2 to this combination, t2, t1...that is exactly a change.
Please answer the question. What is the real-world difference corresponding to the different "arrangement"? If one generation has blue eyes and earlobes, and the next generation has earlobes and blue eyes, then what "change" has occurred?
So, where is evolution and where is mutation? Do you imply that t3 will be formed? That is a fantasy! OK, I'll play. BUT you need to be sure that you know the meaning of "inheritable traits" because this will be the biggest blow to ToE.
How can you show that t3 will be formed by mutation or evolution?
We can watch new traits arising, but that of course involves looking at the real world rather than the muddled mess of verbiage in your head, and so you may have overlooked it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by intellen, posted 04-21-2012 4:00 PM intellen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 197 by intellen, posted 04-21-2012 4:37 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
intellen
Member (Idle past 4355 days)
Posts: 73
Joined: 05-23-2011


Message 197 of 314 (660179)
04-21-2012 4:37 PM
Reply to: Message 196 by Dr Adequate
04-21-2012 4:06 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
Please answer the question. What is the real-world difference corresponding to the different "arrangement"? If one generation has blue eyes and earlobes, and the next generation has earlobes and blue eyes, then what "change" has occurred?
The change that occurred is the arrangement of its location. That is definitely a change. (Remember that there are only 2 traits in our example). That what we see in the real world in all living organisms, from gen1 to gen2.
We can watch new traits arising, but that of course involves looking at the real world rather than the muddled mess of verbiage in your head, and so you may have overlooked it.
So, you are implying that t3 is arising even though it is not present in gen1? Am I right? So, meaning, the "inheritable traits, say t1, t2 of gen1 to gen2 is wrong?
How can you explain that when ToE claimed that inheritable traits is part of evolution?
Maybe you can enlighten me up since until now ToE and you is messing science.

Nothing makes sense in science except in the light of the new Intelligent Design .

This message is a reply to:
 Message 196 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 4:06 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 4:55 PM intellen has not replied

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


(1)
Message 198 of 314 (660180)
04-21-2012 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 197 by intellen
04-21-2012 4:37 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
The change that occurred is the arrangement of its location.
How does a trait have a "location"?
That what we see in the real world ...
What do we see? How can we look at two populations and say: now this population has blue eyes and earlobes, but that population has earlobes and blue eyes?
In what way are the "arrangement" and the "location" of these two traits visible?
So, you are implying that t3 is arising even though it is not present in gen1? Am I right? So, meaning, the "inheritable traits, say t1, t2 of gen1 to gen2 is wrong?
How can you explain that when ToE claimed that inheritable traits is part of evolution?
Perhaps this meant something in your first language, but it seems to have lost something in translation.
Maybe you can enlighten me ...
I'm not sure I can. Maybe the best I can do for you is advise you that if you keep quiet people won't notice how ignorant you are.
... up since until now ToE and you is messing science.
Well, not according to scientists, who know about science, it isn't. If you, a non-scientist who is profoundly ignorant of science, have a different opinion, then I would suggest to you that maybe it is they who are right and you who is wrong.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by intellen, posted 04-21-2012 4:37 PM intellen has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 199 of 314 (660181)
04-21-2012 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by intellen
04-21-2012 4:00 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
Hi intellen,
... Instead of a hundred traits, let's consider two --- the two I've mentioned. Let t1 = having blue eyes, and t2 = having earlobes.
What is the difference between the "arrangement" t1, t2 and the "arrangement" t2, t1?
Yes, that is a change! From this combination: t1, t2 to this combination, t2, t1...that is exactly a change.
Actually it is a neutral mutation that has no effect on the phenotype of the individual, they both will have blue eyes and earlobes, and selective pressure on them will be equal.
Selection operates on the phenotype while reproduction acts on the genotype. The phenotype is those traits of the genotype that are expressed in the grown organism and that are subject to selection.
How can you show that t3 will be formed by mutation or evolution?
First let's consider an individual that has a duplication mutation, and it has t1, t2a, and t2b ...
... is this a change? Yes No
... is this a neutral mutation? Yes No
Are both versions of t2 needed for the earlobe to be expressed in the phenotype? Yes No
Can t2b mutate while t2a is still expressed in the phenotype? Yes No
If t2b is not expressed in the phenotype is it a neutral mutation? Yes No
If If t2b is no longer the same as If t2a is it a t3? Yes No
Can this t3 spread through the population if it is not subject to selection? Yes No
Can further mutations affect t3 without affecting the rest of the traits? Yes No
Enjoy
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by intellen, posted 04-21-2012 4:00 PM intellen has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 5:00 PM RAZD has replied

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


Message 200 of 314 (660182)
04-21-2012 5:00 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by RAZD
04-21-2012 4:57 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
Actually it is a neutral mutation ...
Not even that. It's simply meaningless, a distinction without a difference.
Remember, we're talking here about phenotype, not genotype.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 4:57 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 5:07 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Meddle
Member (Idle past 1270 days)
Posts: 179
From: Scotland
Joined: 05-08-2006


(1)
Message 201 of 314 (660183)
04-21-2012 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by foreveryoung
04-21-2012 12:06 PM


Re: slightly off topic ... but we can redirect
My arguments are either valid or invalid. Please either refute my premises or refute my argument. Are you going to do that or are you going to ask me for evidence again?
Okay, you initially stated that there is no way for keratin change into collagen but gave no explanation why. After all these are both protein molecules defined by their sequence of amino acids, so it does not seem unreasonable that a series of mutations over time could change one to another.
In a later post you then elaborate that the reason being that during the change to collagen the original function as keratin would be destroyed. However as others have pointed out this argument would fail if the mutations resulted in collagen affected a duplicate of the keratin gene. It is well documented that genes can be become duplicated and one one of them subsequently become altered by mutations while the other retains it's original function. Look at pseudogenes such as steroid 21-hydroxylase gene, which humans have two of, one being disabled by an eight base-pair deletion (the same as found in chimpanzee's).
Also if you looked into collagen or keratin you would know that they are not examples of single genes but each actually comprise of a group of proteins. Any one of these could have had mutations and then diversified through further duplication to form another protein or group of proteins. Of course having said all this I'm not saying that keratin actually change into collagen.
I realise you are getting tired of people asking for evidence, but I would say when you first posted in this topic it came across as an off-hand post. But if you had taken your time and developed your argument, even including what you put into your second post in the thread, we would have a better understanding on where you were coming from and could have a more useful discussion. As you say you don't want to spend 2 hours writing a post, but then we may need to spend that time or more to do the same to give a satisfactory response.
As for being off topic, as said above the change from one protein to another is fairly simple and likely to have happened in a unicellular or simple multicellular organisms. If we were discussing such changes in bacteria you ould have probably dismissed it as microevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by foreveryoung, posted 04-21-2012 12:06 PM foreveryoung has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 202 of 314 (660184)
04-21-2012 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 200 by Dr Adequate
04-21-2012 5:00 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
Hi Dr Adequate,
Not even that. It's simply meaningless, a distinction without a difference.
Yet it is a fairly common mutation to flip sections of DNA around without altering their expression in the phenotype. In some instances this can cause trouble with genes aligning properly during reproduction, but these would be large scale flips.
Remember, we're talking here about phenotype, not genotype.
Yes, and any change to the genotype that is not expressed in the phenotype would be neutral, essentially by definition.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 5:00 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 203 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 5:14 PM RAZD has replied

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


Message 203 of 314 (660185)
04-21-2012 5:14 PM
Reply to: Message 202 by RAZD
04-21-2012 5:07 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
Yet it is a fairly common mutation to flip sections of DNA around without altering their expression in the phenotype.
Yes, but that's not what we're talking about. If the gene for eye color swapped places on a chromosome with the gene for earlobes, that would be a neutral mutation. But what can it even mean for two traits to swap places?
It may be that intellen is trying to be wrong about the genotype rather than the phenotype, in which case now would be a good time for him to say so.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 202 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 5:07 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 204 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 5:38 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 204 of 314 (660188)
04-21-2012 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by Dr Adequate
04-21-2012 5:14 PM


Re: how populations evolve - when is it "novel"?
and this does not even begin to discuss the ramifications of the dual strand DNA with one trait version inherited from the mother and another from the father, and the matter of dominant and recessive genes and the possible mutation of recessive genes, nor the division of genes into chromosomes ....
So much to cover that needs to be brought down to elementary levels the mind boggles.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by Dr Adequate, posted 04-21-2012 5:14 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 205 of 314 (660190)
04-21-2012 5:56 PM
Reply to: Message 185 by foreveryoung
04-21-2012 2:58 PM


Re: Evidence
foreveryoung writes:
You cannot produce a tonsil from random mutation and natural selection where there was no tonsil before.
The Italian Wall lizards evolved cecal valves in 30 generations. Not good enough for you? (First mentioned in Message 61. --Admin)
Edited by Admin, : Add message reference.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 185 by foreveryoung, posted 04-21-2012 2:58 PM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 6:24 PM Tangle has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 206 of 314 (660191)
04-21-2012 6:24 PM
Reply to: Message 205 by Tangle
04-21-2012 5:56 PM


regarding the topic once again ...
Hi Tangle,
The Italian Wall lizards evolved cecal valves in 30 generations. Not good enough for you?
You presented this information in Message 61:
quote:
This is from the wiki:
[My bold in last sentence]
Rapid evolution
In 1971, ten adult P. sicula specimens from the island of Pod Kopite were transported 3.5 km east to the island of Pod Mrčaru (both Croatian islands lie in the Adriatic Sea near Lastovo), where they founded a new bottlenecked population.[3][11] The two islands have similar size, elevation, microclimate, and a general absence of terrestrial predators[11] and the P. sicula expanded for decades without human interference, even outcompeting the (now extinct[3]) local Podarcis melisellensis population.[4]
Following the Yugoslav Wars, scientists returned to Pod Mrčaru and found that the lizards currently occupying Pod Mrčaru differ greatly from those on Pod Kopite. While mitochondrial DNA analyses have verified that P. sicula currently on Pod Mrčaru are genetically indistinguishable from the Pod Kopite source population,[3] the new Pod Mrčaru population of P. sicula was described, in August 2007, as having a larger average size, shorter hind limbs, lower maximal sprint speed and altered response to simulated predatory attacks compared to the original Pod Kopite population.[11] These population changes in morphology and behavior were attributed to "relaxed predation intensity" and greater protection from vegetation on Pod Mrčaru.[11]
In 2008, further analysis revealed that the Pod Mrčaru population of P. sicula have significantly different head morphology (longer, wider, and taller heads) and increased bite force compared to the original Pod Kopite population.[3] This change in head shape corresponded with a shift in diet: Pod Kopite P. sicula are primarily insectivorous, but those on Pod Mrčaru eat substantially more plant matter.[3] The changes in foraging style may have contributed to a greater population density and decreased territorial behavior of the Pod Mrčaru population.[3]
The most surprising[5] difference found between the two populations was the discovery, in the Pod Mrčaru lizards, of cecal valves, which slow down food passage and provide fermenting chambers, allowing commensal microorganisms to convert cellulose to nutrients digestible by the lizards.[3] Additionally, the researchers discovered that nematodes were common in the guts of Pod Mrčaru lizards, but absent from Pod Kopite P. sicula, which do not have cecal valves. The cecal valves, which occur in less than 1 percent of all known species of scaled reptiles,[5] have been described as an "evolutionary novelty, a brand new feature not present in the ancestral population and newly evolved in these lizards".[7]
Italian wall lizard - Wikipedia
Now we note that this is objective empirical evidence for the evolution of a new trait to have occurred.
We also note that this does not necessarily mean that we have a new species, but that is not a concern in this thread.
The questions are:
  1. how do we know that it is a new feature and did not exist in the ancestral population?
    and
  2. if it is a new feature then how do we know that it evolved rather than just appeared?
I note that some of this information is included above, but perhaps I can play something of the devil's advocate here so we can hone this information into the level needed here ...
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Tangle, posted 04-21-2012 5:56 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by Tangle, posted 04-22-2012 2:50 AM RAZD has replied
 Message 217 by Tangle, posted 04-23-2012 4:36 AM RAZD has replied

  
foreveryoung
Member (Idle past 582 days)
Posts: 921
Joined: 12-26-2011


Message 207 of 314 (660202)
04-22-2012 12:19 AM
Reply to: Message 194 by JonF
04-21-2012 3:53 PM


Re: Evidence
I don't have a clue? Take your clue and shove it. I am out of here. I have had more than I can stand with you assholes . Good bye.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 194 by JonF, posted 04-21-2012 3:53 PM JonF has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Tangle, posted 04-22-2012 3:44 AM foreveryoung has not replied
 Message 213 by Granny Magda, posted 04-22-2012 5:00 AM foreveryoung has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 208 of 314 (660203)
04-22-2012 2:50 AM
Reply to: Message 206 by RAZD
04-21-2012 6:24 PM


Re: regarding the topic once again ...
RAZD writes:
how do we know that it is a new feature and did not exist in the ancestral population?
Because the ancestral population still exists on the first island and can be examined. I have to assume that has been done, otherwise someone will feel very silly......
and
if it is a new feature then how do we know that it evolved rather than just appeared?
As in Goddidit? I don't think we can. If god wants the lizard to look as though it evolved a gut capable of digesting cellulose, I guess we're knackered.
PZ Myers blogged about it a few years ago
Page not found | ScienceBlogs
In the follow-up posts there, there is some discussion about whether the cecal valves could have appeared due to phenotype plasticity ie. the genes for the valves already existed but were switched on by environmental factors. I don't know whether further genetic work has been done since then. Perhaps a real biologist/geneticist with access to research papers can find out?
Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 206 by RAZD, posted 04-21-2012 6:24 PM RAZD has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2012 4:21 AM Tangle has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


(1)
Message 209 of 314 (660204)
04-22-2012 3:44 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by foreveryoung
04-22-2012 12:19 AM


Re: Evidence
foreveryoung writes:
I don't have a clue? Take your clue and shove it. I am out of here. I have had more than I can stand with you assholes . Good bye.
Well foreveryoung, it appears that you want to live up to your name.
Bye bye, come back when you're ready to behave like a grown-up

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by foreveryoung, posted 04-22-2012 12:19 AM foreveryoung has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by RAZD, posted 04-22-2012 4:14 AM Tangle has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1404 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 210 of 314 (660206)
04-22-2012 4:14 AM
Reply to: Message 209 by Tangle
04-22-2012 3:44 AM


unneccessary
Hi Tangle,
Well foreveryoung, it appears that ...
This is unnecessary. Remember that we are dealing with people that are having trouble understanding new concepts and information. Frequently their understanding of science is being challenged because they are either underinformed or misinformed.
We are also dealing with people that have strong beliefs, especially about various aspects of evolution, that are due to this underinformation\misinformation being presented to them in a religious context.
We are up against cognitive dissonance, a psychological behavior that we are all subject to, that resists new information that is seen to contradict personal opinions and beliefs.
Cognitive dissonance - (Wikipedia, 2010)
Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding two contradictory ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors, or by justifying or rationalizing them.[2] It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.
A powerful cause of dissonance is an idea in conflict with a fundamental element of the self-concept, such as "I am a good person" or "I made the right decision". The anxiety that comes with the possibility of having made a bad decision can lead to rationalization, the tendency to create additional reasons or justifications to support one's choices. A person who just spent too much money on a new car might decide that the new vehicle is much less likely to break down than his or her old car. This belief may or may not be true, but it would reduce dissonance and make the person feel better. Dissonance can also lead to confirmation bias, the denial of disconfirming evidence, and other ego defense mechanisms.
The initial denial can lead to disparaging the dissonant information as being silly or hilarious or the product of some kind of conspiracy.
It can block their acceptance of new ideas and make it difficult to comprehend what is actually being said.
These defense mechanisms can also lead to the person lashing out at those providing the dissonant information.
Enjoy

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Tangle, posted 04-22-2012 3:44 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 212 by Tangle, posted 04-22-2012 4:27 AM RAZD 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