|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,435 Year: 3,692/9,624 Month: 563/974 Week: 176/276 Day: 16/34 Hour: 0/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
No, that is a false analogy. losing genetic diversity in the emergence of a population with new phenotypic characteristics is not just a matter of addition plus subtraction.; The loss is NECESSARY to the formation of the new population, it can't happen unless there is such a loss, and that's why continued selection would eventually have to arrive at a point where further evolution couldn't occur. It's not a matter of add and subtract.
A big part of the problem here seems to be that this is the first time you've ever encountered my argument. However, I don't know what your evolution simulating program does or how same or different it is from Dawkins.' When I joined this conversation I commented on having seen Dawkins' program demonstrated some time ago and it was clear that it represented the usual idea of unimpeded microevolution becoming macroevolution without any recognition of the necessary loss of genetic diversity. And so far nothing you've said shows that your program takes it into account either. Edited by Faith, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
Gosh you make a lot of snarky assertions, without one iota of actual substance.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Why not ? We have a supposedly limited resource but we have something that keeps replenishing it. That's exactly the case. And the mere fact of replenishment is enough to show that evolution doesn't have a built-in stopping point.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Faith  Suspended Member (Idle past 1466 days) Posts: 35298 From: Nevada, USA Joined: |
That's been answered a million times already. I know you aren't stupid so you must keep asking it to distract from the argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: By asserting that the car will run out of fuel even if the tank is kept topped up.
Message 301. Message 306 Or asserting that the rarity of beneficial mutations somehow invalidates it (which would come down to a numbers argument - except the numbers aren't there - and mistakenly ignores neutral and mildly detrimental mutations)
Message 310 quote: I'd have to be stupid to accept those answers. And as I pointed out the mere fact that diversity is replenished - even if it is only occasionally - kills your assertion that evolution must end. Looking at a vital point is hardly a distraction - am I supposed to think that you are too stupid to realise that ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DOCJ Inactive Member |
Evolution has a built-in stopping point
Where? I have not seen any evidence suggesting species within any kingdom can produce a new kind. Here is a quote from the Strong's Hebrew Lexicon regarding kind atblueletterbible.org. quote: -DOCJ
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2128 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Loss is necessary?
Not so. What is necessary is change!Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge. Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1 "Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity. Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other points of view--William F. Buckley Jr.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
I'll say two things.
First the Blue Letter Bible apparently can't tell the difference between modern creationists and ancient Hebrews. Second, of course evolution can't produce a species with no ancestors, which is what would be required to meet that definition of "kind". So, pretty pointless.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
PaulK writes: I hope that you mean that there is no overall loss, Percy. Yes. There's genetic gain and loss happening in populations constantly, and a loss or gain can produce "new varieties or races or breeds or species."
Certainly alleles are removed from the population ... And added.
It's just that mutation increases variation is overall there is balance (in the species that survive). Balance, meaning that the amount of genetic information remains unchanged, is probably the least likely possibility.
And I would expect a species formed by the rapid allopathic speciation expected in PE to have less genetic diversity than the parent species (quite likely less than the founding population, IMHO) PE is just an illusion created by the nature of the fossil record. Sudden appearance in the fossil record must involve many agencies operating both singly and together - allopathic speciation is just one among many. Faith is fixated on a single scenario and insisting it's the only possible one. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17825 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Meaning that the amount of variation in the population remains roughly constant - in the sense of fluctuating about a mean rather than never changing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
This is absurd Nope.
The understanding that mutations are predominantly neutral, many deleterious and a very very few beneficial is so commonly known I wouldn't expect to have to justify it. That's true, but irrelevant. They are very rare but that's not enough to support your argument. The evidence shows us that they aren't too rare to offset loss of genetic diversity. You claim they are too rare to offset that loss. That's the foundation of your claims. If it's false your claims are false. So it's up to you to produce some analysis or measurements that show they are not just rare but too rare to offset loss of genetic diversity. But you have none. Because the claim that they are too rare is false. {ETA} I've deleted those extra forward slashes three times and they keep coming back. Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by JonF, : No reason given. Edited by Admin, : Fix italicized/bold text.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Even if ALL mutations were beneficial, selection inevitably brings about loss of genetic diversity. Show your calculations. Oh, wait, you have no calculations. It's just another of your fantasies. Each human has something on the order of 100 mutations. That's about 700,000,000,000 in all the humans on earth. Is that not enough to offset the loss of genetic diversity?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 190 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
Gosh I make a lot of snarky assertions, without one iota of actual substance.
FIFY.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Stile Member Posts: 4295 From: Ontario, Canada Joined: |
If I were a dog breeding lineage (me, my children, their children, their children...) and selected dogs with short hair and small stature over the years while not selecting too fast and keeping the general population numbers high... I could end up with a small dog with very short hair, yes?
Then, if my lineage decided to change it's selection to dogs with long hair and large stature over the years, again while not selecting too fast and keeping the general population numbers high... I could end up with a large dog with long hair, yes? Isn't this what Faith is saying is flatly impossible?That breeding a small dog (or pick whatever feature you want) "loses" the ability of being a large dog (or anything that is not-the-feature-in-question)? Isn't this done by many breeders today? I thought there were many breeds of things (birds, fish) that were bred in one direction traditionally, but lately breeders have been reversing the trends to give a "shock factor" in their attempts to sell animals? Sort of an "Oh my! A traditionally short-haired dog with long hair! I must buy it, my friends will all be so impressed because they've never seen such a thing!!" Doesn't such breeding tactics fly directly in the face of Faith's breeding examples for this "loss" she claims to exist? Or, maybe I'm just not understanding any of the arguments here... Edited by Stile, : God's will
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Faith writes: That's one of the ways the analogy breaks down because you are not getting beneficial mutations that frequently... Just using some ballpark figures, if each individual has 100 mutations, and the probability of a beneficial mutation is 0.000001%, and the population is 1 billion, then there are 1000 beneficial mutations per generation. A recent study showed the probability of beneficial mutations at the SNP level is far higher than thought. I read about this recently, wish I could find it again. Adaptive Mutations in Bacteria: High Rate and Small Effects isn't the study I read about, but seems somewhat similar, and it says in its abstract:
quote: --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024