Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9045 total)
124 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 123 visitors)
Newest Member: maria
Upcoming Birthdays: AdminPhat
Post Volume: Total: 887,139 Year: 4,785/14,102 Month: 383/707 Week: 114/197 Day: 3/55 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Any practical use for Universal Common Ancestor?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 46 of 1385 (843893)
11-22-2018 2:28 PM
Reply to: Message 44 by ringo
11-22-2018 11:13 AM


Re: Name one.
Proteins are large, complex molecules that can fold into various shapes (think Tinker-Toys). The parts that "stick out" determine how the protein interacts with its environment, so the different shapes that it can have are very important, particularly to medicine.

Which says absolutely nothing about the ToE as stated.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by ringo, posted 11-22-2018 11:13 AM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by ringo, posted 11-22-2018 2:45 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 47 of 1385 (843894)
11-22-2018 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Tangle
11-22-2018 2:32 AM


Re: Name one.
The difference betwen myth and fact is that fact can be demonstrated objectively to be true.

What's really odd is this hasn't been demonstrated for the ToE AT ALL. It's rather strange how you all think it has been when it hasn't.

For example your belief that the world is 6,000 years old is a myth proven wrong by objective evidence.

Only by dating methods, all reasonable observational evidence says otherwise as I've many times shown.

The ToE is the most empirically supported theory in science.

A really hollow statement of faith there. Really strange how you all think a multiplication of theoretical speculations can add up to empirical evidence.

Your religious beliefs can have no baring on objective facts - ie knowledge.

Straw man there. I don't argue from "religious beliefs." There is real-world physical evidence for the Flood which is absurdly denied by the Establishment, and against evolution beyond the Kind or Species.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Tangle, posted 11-22-2018 2:32 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 49 of 1385 (843896)
11-22-2018 2:38 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by Tangle
11-22-2018 2:32 AM


Re: Name one.
Yes but I'm not the one claiming the ToE is useful. The OP says it is not and I agree, but others here have disagreed and I'm answering them.

You're making a right mess of it too. The OP is asking about the usefulness of finding the common ancestor, not the usefulness of the ToE.

To be clearer, I am not directly answering the OP, I'm answering the claim that the ToE is useful to the various sciences which isn't confined to the claim of a universal common ancestor.

The finding of a common ancestor would be knowledge and knowledge is useful for its own sake.

It would be if it were true but it isn't.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Tangle, posted 11-22-2018 2:32 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 52 of 1385 (843900)
11-22-2018 3:06 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by PaulK
11-22-2018 12:48 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
If evolutionary change cannot happen the population cannot genetically change. But a new allele has appeared and taken over the population. Evolution HAS occurred. And it can happen again.

You don't need a new allele for new variations to occur, all you need is new combinations of existing alleles to come to dominate in a new population, and all that is required for that to happen is the isolation of some number of individuals from the original population. These breeding together over some number of generations in reprotucive isolation will bring that new combination to expression and even eventually become characteristic of the new population, making a "new species." Natural Selection can bring this about just as artificial selection or breeding programs can ("purebreds" are animals that have fixed loci for their salient traits). Anything that isolates a population will do it, even genetic drift has that effect. In many cases the isolation is not complete, there may be resumed or continuing gene flow, hybrid zones, all kinds of things that slow down the process, but the ultimate trend is to the formation of new phenotypes by the decrease of genetic diversity. Mutations are one of the ways the process is slowed down. They may or may not contribute to a new phenotypic presentation of a whole population, but they are not necessary.

So the boundary is a theoretical limit that hasn’t occurred yet -

Oh it must have occurred many times, in many places where a new isolated population that no longer breeds with the parent population has formed and gets called a new "species." Belief in the ToE would keep it from being recognized. The ToE assumes that this is a launching point for further changes but in fact it has to reflect a condition of reduced genetic diversity. It may still have enough genetic variability for some further change but before long it can only be running on fumes as it were because each new population that breaks off has less genetic diversity to bring about its new gene frequencies, and that is no platform for the claims of the ToE. And unfortunately the more phenotypic variation in more and more subpopulations the more likely they are headed toward extinction despite their wonderful variations. In breeding programs this condition brings out genetic diseases, which is why the drastic methods of the past have been abandoned and purebreds have given way to healthier but less pure breeds.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 12:48 AM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 3:24 PM Faith has responded
 Message 58 by caffeine, posted 11-22-2018 3:57 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 53 of 1385 (843901)
11-22-2018 3:13 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by ringo
11-22-2018 2:45 PM


Re: Name one.
It's knowledge that dovetails neatly with the ToE.

Simply repeating the Creed doesn't amount to evidence.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by ringo, posted 11-22-2018 2:45 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by ringo, posted 11-22-2018 4:45 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 55 of 1385 (843904)
11-22-2018 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by PaulK
11-22-2018 3:24 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
NO change is possible at all once a population has reached the point of homozygosity at most loci.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 3:24 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 3:38 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 57 of 1385 (843906)
11-22-2018 3:47 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by PaulK
11-22-2018 3:38 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Your endless slimy insinuations remind me of the character so often described in the Book of Proverbs who sets traps for the righteous. (Yes, I'm righteous but not in myself, only because Christ has saved me and I try to serve Him. You're like the Pharisees who were always trying to trip Him up.). Sometimes he gets caught in them himself.

That’s been proven wrong even in the case where a species is homozygous at every allele. You unwittingly admitted it. That’s why you were changing the subject.

You rarely ever explain what you mean which makes it possible to accuse me of all kinds of things, in this case of admitting something I have no idea of admitting. NO idea what you are saying, but that is of course what you intend. The less you explain the more you can accuse. Maybe you'll slip in your own slime and knock yourself out some day.

In any case there is no way to get further change from a condition of homozygosity at even most gene loci let alone all.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 3:38 PM PaulK has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by PaulK, posted 11-22-2018 4:09 PM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 59 of 1385 (843908)
11-22-2018 4:02 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by caffeine
11-22-2018 3:57 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
Mutations occasionally produce a viable allele. Occasionally. So what? They've produced a prodigious number of genetic diseases that far outstrips any beneficial results.

And I have no idea what you are trying to say otherwise. There are many reasons populations are not able to breed with other populations. So?

I'll wait a while for you to answer this but I have to leave soon. Then maybe someone wiill come along to rescue the thread ffrom the topic deviation, which by the way I didn't start.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by caffeine, posted 11-22-2018 3:57 PM caffeine has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 61 of 1385 (843912)
11-22-2018 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by caffeine
11-22-2018 3:57 PM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
If the latter, then you've accepted that mutation creates new alleles. I predict your response would be that it only creates 'bad' alleles because it's part of the fall. But these alleles are not 'bad'. They're the standard (not sure if fixed) in their relevant populations - they only cause problems in combination with one another. By populations being seperated, new species have been created with new versions of genes.

Too much technical detail has the effect of abscuring rather than illuminating. Again I'm not sure what your point is here. What I've been describing has to happen no matter what the source of genetic variability: the trend has to be to reduced genetic diversity with any kind of selection process that reduces the number of individuals in a reproductively isolated population. Reduced genetic diversity is the opposite of what the ToE needs to be true.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by caffeine, posted 11-22-2018 3:57 PM caffeine has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by caffeine, posted 11-23-2018 5:47 AM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 69 of 1385 (843986)
11-23-2018 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by edge
11-23-2018 2:09 PM


Re: Name one.
... the known fact that Species or Kinds do have built in ability to vary but only within the Kind.

So, Faith, tell us about the what species represented giraffe kind in Cambrian times, or even in the Jurassic? After all, modern giraffes must have adapted from a precursor giraffe, yes?

There is no Cambrian or Jurassic time. You know, just the layered sedimentary rocks with fossils in them, nothing to do with time. You said somewhere that you were starting to think like a YEC. Naaa, not yet.

I suppose there was some other form of the giraffe, that evolved into the giraffe we have today but that happened over the last 4500 years or so.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by edge, posted 11-23-2018 2:09 PM edge has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 70 of 1385 (843991)
11-23-2018 5:27 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by caffeine
11-23-2018 5:47 AM


Re: Another useful application of evolutionary theory
So I guess you are merely arguing the usual, that because mutation produces the occasional viable allele that therefore we have an increase in genetic diversity which falsifies what I'm saying. But it doesn't because any increase gets eaten up as it were by the selection processes that reduce genetic diversity in order to bring about a new species or subspecies, ---a new population with new phenotypic characteristics. Genetic decrease is NECESSARY to the formation of new species or subspecies.

Even if all alleles were mutations this would be the case. A population full of mutated traits isn't evolution anyway since that's just a motley collection of differences, while evolution requires the formation of new populations based on new gene frequencies with new phenotypic characteristics. You have to lose alleles in order to get that new population, their source is really irrelevant.

As a matter of fact, however, beneficial mutations simply do not show up in any frequency that would interfere with the processes of reduction (and if they did you'd never get new phenotypic groups anyway). The cheetah has been waiting a long time for mutations to save it from extinction. It's been fortunate in that at least any mutations that have arisen haven't completely done it in yet, although the creature is certainly struggling.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by caffeine, posted 11-23-2018 5:47 AM caffeine has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by PaulK, posted 11-24-2018 2:49 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 363 of 1385 (850167)
04-02-2019 12:55 PM


Has anything been said claiming the ToE has something useful to offer? I've skimmed the thread and don't see anything. Lots of side issues, lots of "noise," but the ToE remains as useless as ever to science or life.

Replies to this message:
 Message 364 by Stile, posted 04-02-2019 1:08 PM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 365 by Tangle, posted 04-02-2019 1:15 PM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 366 of 1385 (850173)
04-02-2019 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 365 by Tangle
04-02-2019 1:15 PM


First, the OP is about the UCA, not the ToE. The UCA is a simple and simplistic prediction/conclusion from the principle of common ancestry.

Oh right, my bad. But there is no usefulness for either the UCA or the ToE. Which you go on to acknowledge without really acknowledging it:

Whether it has a use or not is irrelevant. It's scientific knowledge which is useful for it's own sake.

But that's an evasion of course because the topic is its practical usefulness. You know, the way the knowledge of gravity and air made flight possible, how the knowledge of bacteria fostered cleanliness in medical interventions saving countless lives. How knowledge of the circulation of the blood fostered knowledge of how the heart works, leading to all kinds of medical interventions saving people from heart attacks etc. Zip zilch nada for anything to do with the UCA or the ToE.

Second, of course he's been given uses for the ToE, but he prefers to bugger about with words instead of attempting to understand what it is that he disagrees with.

There are no practical uses for the ToE so he can't have been given any.

Evolutionary principles are now routinely incorporated into medicine and agriculture. Examples include the design of treatments that slow the evolution of resistance by weeds, pests, and pathogens, and the design of breeding programs that maximize crop yield or quality.

Yes, "evolutionary principles" ARE routinely incorporated into all kinds of scientific biological discussions, where they just sit there like barnacles without any usefulness whatever. However, the "evolution of resistance by weeds" is not about the ToE at all, since this sort of genetic effect is on the level of "microevolution" which we would know about without any input from the ToE. We've always known how to breed all kinds of living things for various effects utterly without any input from ToE or UCA. The science of genetics has of course made this much more sophisticated, and that science is utterly independent of the ToE. The habit of thinking in terms of the ToE unfortunately creates the illusion that it is relevant though it is not.

Evolutionary principles are also increasingly incorporated into conservation biology, natural resource management, and environmental science. Examples include the protection of small and isolated populations from inbreeding depression, the identification of key traits involved in adaptation to climate change, the design of harvesting regimes that minimize unwanted life-history evolution, and the setting of conservation priorities based on populations, species, or communities that harbor the greatest evolutionary diversity and potential.

Oh dear, the ToE has SO confused things. This again needs no more knowledge than the common understanding of how individual species change from generation to generation, which is microevolution which has zip to do with the ToE or the UCA. We can see the need for onservationi interventions occurring all the time without reference to evolutionary history. If some salmon happen to go up the wrong stream and reproduce away from the main population they will form a very undesirable subpopulation which has to be controlled. Nothing to do with anything but one generation of reproductive error. The ToE is incorporated into such observations without any relevance whatever, where it just sita like a useless third thumb.

The adoption of evolutionary principles has proceeded somewhat independently in these different fields, even though the underlying fundamental concepts are the same. We explore these fundamental concepts under four main themes: variation, selection, connectivity, and eco-evolutionary dynamics. Within each theme, we present several key evolutionary principles and illustrate their use in addressing applied problems.

Microevolution again. What we can observe of biological systems in present time without any reference whatever to the principles of the ToE let alone the UCA. Variation occurs from generation to generation in observable present time. Selection is a common event, such as the salmon type that gets accidentally selected by merely swimming up a tributary and reproducing outside the main population. If a predator killed off the main population it would be the same effect of selection. Same I'm sure with connectivity and eco systems.

Science is hampered by this confusion of the ToE with microevolution or simple variation within a species built into every genome.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 365 by Tangle, posted 04-02-2019 1:15 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 367 by Tangle, posted 04-02-2019 3:00 PM Faith has responded
 Message 387 by Dredge, posted 04-04-2019 2:52 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 389 by Dredge, posted 04-04-2019 3:36 AM Faith has not yet responded
 Message 407 by Dredge, posted 04-05-2019 3:21 AM Faith has not yet responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 368 of 1385 (850188)
04-02-2019 8:48 PM
Reply to: Message 367 by Tangle
04-02-2019 3:00 PM


You say dredgie got plenty of examples of the ToE's usefulness but name not one. Besides that empty assertion you make other empty assertions and then resort to ad hominem name calling. Which is probably an excellent example of how this whole thread has gone.

Sorry, what I said is true. Oh and I didn't conflate the UCA with the ToE, I kept them separate. It is true however that there is no practical use for either. Of course there is no evidence that microevolution just goes on to be macroevolution, that's just one of those empty assertions of which the ToE is constructed. And I've many times showed that the processes of variation must come to an end before macroevolution could occur.

And besides, none of the examples given requires anything but common garden variety microevolution.

Cheers.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 367 by Tangle, posted 04-02-2019 3:00 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 372 by Tangle, posted 04-03-2019 3:33 AM Faith has responded

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 376 of 1385 (850205)
04-03-2019 1:21 PM
Reply to: Message 371 by AZPaul3
04-03-2019 3:11 AM


The development of bacterial resistance also has nothing to do with the ToE, it's the usual variation built into every species, sometimes called "microevolution," or it's a mutation or a deterioration of some sort, but all on the level of microevolution. There is no reason whatever to evoke the ToE to explain anything biological.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 371 by AZPaul3, posted 04-03-2019 3:11 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2021