Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 87 (8891 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-20-2019 9:10 PM
156 online now:
marc9000, Meddle, Tanypteryx, Theodoric (4 members, 152 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Upcoming Birthdays: CosmicChimp
Post Volume:
Total: 847,740 Year: 2,777/19,786 Month: 859/1,918 Week: 146/301 Day: 29/35 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
69NextFF
Author Topic:   Evolution Requires Reduction in Genetic Diversity
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1867 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 226 of 1034 (692342)
03-01-2013 9:34 PM
Reply to: Message 219 by Faith
03-01-2013 6:26 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE

I need another cup of tea.

I must again point to the mutation of the fused chromosomes in man when the ape surrogate mother gave birth to the first human.
You have not used this in support of the other side here, that that mutation demonstrates a singular case and example of mutations increasing diversity.

As I pointed out to you elsewhere, the research now even supports that what changed in accord with that mutation was Intelligence, the most obvious and singularly well understood difference between the Apes and Humans.

"Recent studies suggest that genes on chromosome 2 may play an important role in human intelligence:"

A Linkage Study of Academic Skills Defined by the Queensland
Core Skills Test

Mark A. Wainwright,1,2,3 Margaret J. Wright,1 Michelle Luciano,1 Grant W. Montgomery,1
Gina M. Geffen,2 and Nicholas G. Martin1
Received 18 Apr. 2005—Final 15 Aug. 2005

This study used genome-wide linkage analysis to detect Quantitative Trait Loci (QTLs) implicated in variation in general academic achievement as measured by the Queensland Core Skills Test (QCST) (Queensland Studies Authority, 2004).

While no empirically derived significant or suggestive peaks for general academic achievement were indicated, a peak on chromosome 2 was observed in a region where Posthuma et al.

(2005) reported significant linkage for Performance IQ (PIQ) and suggestive linkage for Full Scale IQ (FSIQ), and Luciano et al. (this issue) observed significant linkage for PIQ and word reading.

In addition, on chromosomes 2 and 18 peaks for a number of specific academic skills, two of which were suggestive, coincided with the general academic achievement peaks.

The findings suggest that variation in general academic achievement is influenced by genes on chromosome 2 which have broad influence on a variety of cognitive abilities.

http://genepi.qimr.edu.au/contents/p/staff/CV453.pdf

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This message is a reply to:

Message 138 by Faith, posted 02-27-2013 12:19 PM

Faith has not yet responded


This message is a reply to:
 Message 219 by Faith, posted 03-01-2013 6:26 PM Faith has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 03-01-2013 11:10 PM kofh2u has responded

    
sfs
Member (Idle past 580 days)
Posts: 464
From: Cambridge, MA USA
Joined: 08-27-2003


Message 227 of 1034 (692344)
03-01-2013 9:50 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by AZPaul3
03-01-2013 8:57 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
quote:

I disagree. If a new allele arises it can only be passed on if the whole of the individual is selected for.


This is incorrect, though whether the error is one of terminology or of concept I'm not sure. A new allele can be passed on even if the individual who carries it has lower fitness than other individuals in the population. In particular, it can be passed on even if the new allele is responsible for the lower fitness. This is identical to saying that it is passed on despite being selected against.

quote:

A most excellent mutation will be stopped dead if it pops up first in an individual whose remaining genome causes the individual to get caught in the sieve of natural selection.


A most excellent mutation, occurring in an individual with nothing but excellent alleles, can still be stopped dead if the individual is hit by a truck -- or simply fails to pass on that allele to any of its descendants. There is a large amount of randomness in the transmission of alleles that has nothing to do with selection.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 8:57 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 228 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 10:24 PM sfs has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3762
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 228 of 1034 (692348)
03-01-2013 10:24 PM
Reply to: Message 227 by sfs
03-01-2013 9:50 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
sfs,

I agree with all the above. But I object to characterizing a trait as "selected for" or "against" when it is the entire genome of the individual that is the sole subject of selection. Any allele that lessens fitness may very well be countered by another that enhances fitness. It is the sum total of all the pluses and minuses that determines fitness and thus selection of the individual, not any trait.

Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

Edited by AZPaul3, : I'll get it right some time.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 227 by sfs, posted 03-01-2013 9:50 PM sfs has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 229 of 1034 (692350)
03-01-2013 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 225 by AZPaul3
03-01-2013 8:57 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
I disagree. If a new allele arises it can only be passed on if the whole of the individual is selected for.

I don't believe that to be correct usage of selected for.

We cannot say that an individual with trait Y is selected for simply because the individual manages to reproduce and pass on his traits. What if of a group of similar individuals with the trait, the rate of survival is substantially the same as for a group of individuals without the trait. It would be incorrect to say that individuals with trait Y are selected for or to say they are selected against. Neutral traits are not selected for, yet they can appear and become fixed in the population.

Further if a trait does contribute to or detract from the survival of individuals to propagate heirs on a statistical basts, I don't think it is incorrect to speak of the trait itself as being selected for or against at least with respect to the general phenotype. Yes, selection does operate on entire individuals, but the result is to alter the frequency of traits in a population.

Example: Are individuals with sickle cell anemia selected for here in the US where there is no malaria? I don't think it makes any sense to say so, yet parents do pass the trait onto their offspring.

Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 225 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 8:57 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 231 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 11:47 PM NoNukes has responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 230 of 1034 (692352)
03-01-2013 11:10 PM
Reply to: Message 226 by kofh2u
03-01-2013 9:34 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
when the ape surrogate mother gave birth to the first human.

Say what? In what sense would that ape not have been 'real' mom?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 226 by kofh2u, posted 03-01-2013 9:34 PM kofh2u has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 240 by kofh2u, posted 03-02-2013 8:53 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3762
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


Message 231 of 1034 (692355)
03-01-2013 11:47 PM
Reply to: Message 229 by NoNukes
03-01-2013 10:58 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
What if of a group of similar individuals with the trait, the rate of survival is substantially the same as for a group of individuals without the trait. It would be incorrect to say that individuals with trait Y are selected for or to say they are selected against.

Exactly. Individuals are selected for or against based upon the whole genome, not any specific trait (gross deformities excepted).

Further if a trait does contribute to or detract from the survival of individuals to propagate heirs on a statistical basts {basis}, I don't think it is incorrect to speak of the trait itself as being selected for or against at least with respect to the general phenotype.

We have specific technical language for this. Traits enhance, detract or are neutral to fitness. "Selection" is still at the individual, whole genome level.

Now, among us girls, since we know what each other mean even if the technical talk is not quite accurate, this may pass. But in this case there are too many lurkers who may assume from careless talk that specific traits are the items that natural selection, in all its various forms, operates by. This is not the case. We should not be leaving that impression.

Am I being too strict?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 229 by NoNukes, posted 03-01-2013 10:58 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 232 by herebedragons, posted 03-02-2013 12:38 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply
 Message 233 by NoNukes, posted 03-02-2013 12:49 AM AZPaul3 has responded

  
herebedragons
Member
Posts: 1493
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 232 of 1034 (692359)
03-02-2013 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by AZPaul3
03-01-2013 11:47 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
"Selection" is still at the individual, whole genome level.

Actually, if you are being technical, selection only operates on the phenotype not the genome. This is an important distinction to make because there can be a lot of things going on at the genomic level that are not expressed in the phenotype, and therefore, not subject to selection.

But other than that, yea ... traits contribute to individual fitness and selection operates on the whole individual.

Am I being too strict?

Its good to be precise.

I'm not sure its particularly wrong to refer to a trait being selected for or against though. If you assume a fairly stable population that a new, beneficial trait arises in, it would not be wrong to say that the trait was selected for. For example, you could say that bacteria was selected for an antibiotic resistance trait. But sure, the whole individual needs to be selected for.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for. But until the end of the present exile has come and terminated this our imperfection by which "we know in part," I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 11:47 PM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 233 of 1034 (692360)
03-02-2013 12:49 AM
Reply to: Message 231 by AZPaul3
03-01-2013 11:47 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
Am I being too strict

I am trying to decide. If you could humor me a bit, would you use the terminology 'selected for' in a sentence that makes sense to you?


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 231 by AZPaul3, posted 03-01-2013 11:47 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 238 by AZPaul3, posted 03-02-2013 7:43 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
Faith
Inactive Member


Message 234 of 1034 (692362)
03-02-2013 2:48 AM
Reply to: Message 200 by NoNukes
03-01-2013 1:28 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
but that even IF it increases beneficial diversity then it can't be always coming along to undo the processes of selection and isolation or you'll never get new varieties

The new diversity need not be of the same kind that is being subject to selection to create the species.

OF COURSE. Why are you saying this as if it's different from what I'm saying? Of COURSE the new "diversity" is going to be different and of COURSE that's why it's going to interfere with the formation of a variety that's already begun.

If you have new traits popping up in a new isolated population that haven't yet been worked through the population to form a characteristic phenotype or look to that population, but at that point OTHER new traits ALSO start popping up you'll NEVER get a coherent variety. It's like while a breeder is getting a new breed established having to contend with alien alleles all the time. That breed is never going to get established and the same thing has to happen in the wild. Instead of the homogeneous populations we actually see you'd have nothing but motley populations.

For example if evolution were creating a dog species, mutation could produce in the population of dogs any of the variations that currently exist in the sub species we currently call dogs without undermining the process of creating a species That is one distinction between evolution and breeding.

This makes NO sense at all.

Not up to finishing the rest of this right now.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


He who surrenders the first page of his Bible surrenders all. --John William Burgon, Inspiration and Interpretation, Sermon II.

2Cr 10:4-5 (For the weapons of our warfare [are] not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of strong holds;) Casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 200 by NoNukes, posted 03-01-2013 1:28 PM NoNukes has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-02-2013 2:52 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 237 by PaulK, posted 03-02-2013 5:34 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 239 by Percy, posted 03-02-2013 8:35 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16083
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 235 of 1034 (692363)
03-02-2013 2:52 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by Faith
03-02-2013 2:48 AM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
OF COURSE. Why are you saying this as if it's different from what I'm saying? Of COURSE the new "diversity" is going to be different and of COURSE that's why it's going to interfere with the formation of a variety that's already begun. If you have new traits popping up in a new isolated population that haven't yet been worked through the population to form a characteristic phenotype or look to that population, but at that point OTHER new traits ALSO start popping up you'll NEVER get a coherent variety.

I'll just sit here watching you beat yourself up. Does anyone have some popcorn? I want some popcorn.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-02-2013 2:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16083
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 10.0


(1)
Message 236 of 1034 (692364)
03-02-2013 3:01 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by Faith
03-01-2013 2:48 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
I know that the production of a new trait is phenotypic change in an individual [...] in order for a new population to get a new phenotype that characterizes all its members so that it can be called a new breed or variety or species or subspecies that trait has to be selected and worked through an entire reproductively isolated population by inbreeding for some number of generations.

If anyone else had posted that, then I would say: "By golly! A creationist has nearly understood the theory of evolution!"

Since it's you, I presume that you haven't. But in your frantic ridiculous attempts to be wrong, that is the very closest you've got to being right.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by Faith, posted 03-01-2013 2:48 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 14717
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 237 of 1034 (692369)
03-02-2013 5:34 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by Faith
03-02-2013 2:48 AM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
quote:

OF COURSE. Why are you saying this as if it's different from what I'm saying? Of COURSE the new "diversity" is going to be different and of COURSE that's why it's going to interfere with the formation of a variety that's already begun.

Surely you mean why it ISN'T going to interfere? A variation that isn't in the parent population will help make the child population distinct.

quote:

If you have new traits popping up in a new isolated population that haven't yet been worked through the population to form a characteristic phenotype or look to that population, but at that point OTHER new traits ALSO start popping up you'll NEVER get a coherent variety. It's like while a breeder is getting a new breed established having to contend with alien alleles all the time. That breed is never going to get established and the same thing has to happen in the wild. Instead of the homogeneous populations we actually see you'd have nothing but motley populations.

This is really not making sense. It looks to me as if you are arguing that if evolution worked as it is supposed to it would produce species as we see them, rather than the breeds produced by human breeders.

Let's start with this. The parent population has a "characteristic phenotype", yes ?

So it is possible to have as much variation as the parent population and still have a "characteristic phenotype", yes?

So adding new variations to the child population won't necessarily interfere with it having a characteristic phenotype, correct ? If you disagree, please explain WHY.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-02-2013 2:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3762
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 4.4


(1)
Message 238 of 1034 (692371)
03-02-2013 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 233 by NoNukes
03-02-2013 12:49 AM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
Sometimes we get so loose in our language we are not even aware it is happening. Dragons is right. Expression of a genotype passed through developmental processes create the phenotype upon which natural selection can work.

If you could humor me a bit, would you use the terminology 'selected for' in a sentence that makes sense to you?

In the Nubian ibex the alpha male guards his harem allowing no other male to breed. The alpha male is selected for breeding by virtue of his combination of physical and personality traits. The smaller, weaker and/or less aggressive males are not allowed the opportunity to breed. Nature has selected against their combination of traits.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 233 by NoNukes, posted 03-02-2013 12:49 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18261
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.1


Message 239 of 1034 (692372)
03-02-2013 8:35 AM
Reply to: Message 234 by Faith
03-02-2013 2:48 AM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE
Hi Faith,

I've been looking at these inverted nested quotes you've been including in your messages for some time now and finally have to comment:

quote:
but that even IF it increases beneficial diversity then it can't be always coming along to undo the processes of selection and isolation or you'll never get new varieties

The new diversity need not be of the same kind that is being subject to selection to create the species.

The top quote is you and the bottom quote is NoNukes, but in NoNukes original message it actually looked like this:

quote:
but that even IF it increases beneficial diversity then it can't be always coming along to undo the processes of selection and isolation or you'll never get new varieties

The new diversity need not be of the same kind that is being subject to selection to create the species.


So obviously you're manually creating the nested quotes. Did you know that when composing your message that if you click on the "Peek Mode" button of the message you're replying to (displayed a few inches below the message box where you're entering your message) then you'll see the raw text that created the quotes? Then you just cut-n-paste them into your message and add quote codes around them.

If you already know this but are quoting this way because you prefer it, then I'll just comment that for me it is confusing that your manner of quoting is backwards from the original and from the way everyone else is quoting.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 234 by Faith, posted 03-02-2013 2:48 AM Faith has not yet responded

    
kofh2u
Member (Idle past 1867 days)
Posts: 1162
From: phila., PA
Joined: 04-05-2004


Message 240 of 1034 (692373)
03-02-2013 8:53 AM
Reply to: Message 230 by NoNukes
03-01-2013 11:10 PM


Re: Mutations Don't Add Anything That Could Rescue the ToE

kofh:
when the ape surrogate mother gave birth to the first human.

No Nu:
Say what? In what sense would that ape not have been 'real' mom?

In the sense that she was not the same soecies as the baby she was merely carrying for the next evolution.

And God, by this act of probability, would be the real father of the offspring, since this new creature would be the first born.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 230 by NoNukes, posted 03-01-2013 11:10 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 241 by Theodoric, posted 03-02-2013 9:20 AM kofh2u has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1415
16
1718
...
69NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019