Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 79 (8898 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-25-2019 11:57 PM
18 online now:
Dredge, DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (3 members, 15 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,645 Year: 3,682/19,786 Month: 677/1,087 Week: 46/221 Day: 17/29 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
23456
...
36NextFF
Author Topic:   Evolving the Musculoskeletal System
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 2878 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 1 of 527 (577391)
08-28-2010 2:32 PM


This thread is based on the assumption that ToE is true.
Any perceived flaws in the system we will assume is the fault of Evolution.
Please save your comments about an imperfect Intelligent Designer for a different thread.

Their are 206 bones in the adult skeletal system.
Their are 360 joints and more than 650 muscles.

Lets start out here by asking the simplest of questions.
How did Evolution create the more than 1200 bones,
joints and muscles and manage to put them all in just
the right position performing the exact needed functions?

For example:

There are 5 basic types of joints: ball-in-socket, hinge, gliding, pivoting, and fixed.
Each type is specifically appropriate for its particular motions.
How did Evolution manage to put the correct joint in the appropriate position?


Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by Percy, posted 08-28-2010 2:43 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 4 by jar, posted 08-28-2010 2:49 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 5 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 3:10 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 6:38 PM ICdesign has responded
 Message 19 by Omnivorous, posted 08-28-2010 8:45 PM ICdesign has responded
 Message 67 by Taq, posted 08-30-2010 1:12 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 120 by scarab, posted 08-31-2010 6:29 PM ICdesign has responded
 Message 364 by derwood, posted 01-05-2011 8:52 AM ICdesign has responded

    
Admin
Director
Posts: 12580
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 3.0


Message 2 of 527 (577394)
08-28-2010 2:39 PM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Evolving the Musculoskeletal System thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18312
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 3 of 527 (577396)
08-28-2010 2:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 2:32 PM


ICDESIGN writes:

How did Evolution create the more than 1200 bones,
joints and muscles and manage to put them all in just
the right position performing the exact needed functions?

For the most part it was random mutation and natural selection. Those whose genes best allowed them to compete survived and passed those genes on to the next generation, with slight modifications due to mutation, of course.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 2:32 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-28-2010 9:56 PM Percy has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 30934
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 4 of 527 (577399)
08-28-2010 2:49 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 2:32 PM


ICDESIGN writes:

How did Evolution create the more than 1200 bones,
joints and muscles and manage to put them all in just
the right position performing the exact needed functions?

First, there is no evidence that the bones, joints and muscles are in just the right position. The evidence shows that they are in just good enough position to get by.

ICDESIGN writes:

How did Evolution manage to put the correct joint in the appropriate position?

The critter that had bones, joints and muscles in a placement that worked better got to reproduce and pass on those genes. The critter that had bones, joints and muscles in a place that didn't work died off.

It really is that simple.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 2:32 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


(1)
Message 5 of 527 (577402)
08-28-2010 3:10 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 2:32 PM


Evolution of limbs
Hi, ICDESIGN.

This sounds suspiciously similar to other topics you started.

As an example, I'll focus on the evolution of vertebrate limbs (a subject about which I admit I am not an expert). Let me start with this image:

Although these organisms are not thought to be direct ancestors and descendants of one another, they show an important trend.

On the far left (earlier in time), we see Glyptolepis, a more or less traditional fish. Notice there there is very little variety and specialization among the joints in the fin.

Then, moving right (later in time) across the image, we see a smattering of what I consider to be awkward conglomerations of joints and branches, with increasing specialization of various joints into differing patterns and configurations, with Tiktaalik showing an interesting middle-ground state between the semi-chaotic branches of the second, third and fourth pictures, and the more linear branches of the two amphibian limbs on the right.

It seems pretty straightforward to me to suggest gradualistic, accumulative evolution via mutation and natural selection as the cause here:

Many types of ancient animals secreted minerals as spicules (little chunks), shells or protective crusts.

The ancestors of vertebrates localize this secretion to specific regions inside the body, producing structures we call "bones." Muscles (which also already existed) can attach to bones through developmental mutations, making it easier to produce high-energy motion (i.e. swimming).

Then, irregularities and variations in the genes controlling where bones are formed can explain the diversity of limb-branching we see in the fossil limb drawings above, and natural selection can account for the gradual convergence of these branching patterns on a pattern that is conducive to movement on land.

I see no reason to think this is particularly farfetched.

Edited by Bluejay, : Added "...moving right (later in time) across the image..."


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 2:32 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

  
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 2878 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 6 of 527 (577414)
08-28-2010 6:19 PM


With all due respect guys, your answers do not even come close to answering the questions at hand.

Over 1200 bones, joints and muscles completely transcends random mutation and natural selection.

Each joint is very meticulously suited for particular actions.
The shoulder is a ball-in-socket joint
The hip is a ball-in-socket joint.
The elbows, knees, fingers, toes, and jaws are hinge joints.
Hands are refined biological tools.
The ankle and wrist are gliding joints that compliment all actions of the hands and feet.
...and on and on.

Where are your answers that make sense on how the right joint ended up in the correct location.

..and where are the fossils with false starts or bones in the wrong place?

Why doesn't the femur extend from the hip to the ankle?

Bones grow into very specialized shapes. The foot has 26 bones,31 joints, and 20 intrinsic muscles that work together perfectly.

That's just one foot. Why would evolution develop matching left and right sides of our bodies?

How did rm/ns develop the over 600 muscle groups and how did they end up connected with the right muscle to the right bone?
How did it figure out to develop the tug-of-war between flexors and extendors to produce the movement of the skeleton?

I reiterate: The Musculoskeletal system completely transcends rm/ns

Respectfully,
ICDESIGN


Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Coyote, posted 08-28-2010 6:31 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 6:52 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 13 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 7:54 PM ICdesign has responded

    
Coyote
Member (Idle past 186 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 7 of 527 (577416)
08-28-2010 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 6:19 PM


Nonsense!
I reiterate: The Musculoskeletal system completely transcends rm/ns

Not when you can look back in the fossil record and see all the different variations which have developed from earlier forms.

You are just unwilling to accept what the evidence shows.


Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 6:19 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 8 of 527 (577417)
08-28-2010 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 2:32 PM


How did Evolution create the more than 1200 bones,
joints and muscles and manage to put them all in just
the right position performing the exact needed functions?

Well, the glib answer is that they're frequently not all in the right positions (these aren't from the same individual):

The quick answer is that there's clearly a pretty substantial survival advantage to having functioning limbs, so the genetic and epigenetic limb development program is obviously very highly conserved.

The long answer is that cells work together to match skin to muscle to bone. Bone cells say "grow from this end to that" to muscle cells. Muscle cells say "cover us" to epithelial cells. Genetically, limb length and development isn't a coincidentally-synchronized series of separate programs; there's one genetic program that determines limb development by determining the rate, order, and extent of bone lengthening.

The proof of this is the phenomena of achondroplasic dwarfism:

Achondroplasia is caused by a single point mutation that changes one amino acid in the protein FGFR3 (fibroblast growth factor receptor 3), a transmembrane receptor protein in collagen-growing cells (fibroblasts) that results in the receptor being constantly "active"; fibroblast growth factor is a negative regulator of cartilage formation, so individuals with achondroplasia never experience normal bone elongation.

As you can see, though, achondroplasiac dwarves have limbs with muscle and skin appropriate to the shortened size of their bones; their muscles and skin don't grow any longer than their bones even though they have completely normal genes for muscle and skin growth.

This proves that limb growth is not as you construe it - it's not a matter of separate genetic programs producing skin, muscle, bone, nerves, and circulatory tissues that all just so happen to be the right length to fit together; the tissues are coordinating their growth by means of signalling hormones, following a program of growth determined entirely by the skeletal system.

How did Evolution manage to put the correct joint in the appropriate position?

Because gross deformities in skeletal structure are usually fatal, organisms evolved a fairly high accuracy in terms of constructing their own bodies. Of course, when something goes wrong, spontaneous abortion is usually the result, so you don't see living examples of organisms with the wrong sort of joints.

Frankly the more necessary something is for an organism to live, the easier it is to imagine it being the result of random mutation and natural selection, because there's such an obvious selection pressure against ill-formed organisms.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 2:32 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 7:36 PM crashfrog has responded

  
crashfrog
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 9 of 527 (577420)
08-28-2010 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 6:19 PM


Where are your answers that make sense on how the right joint ended up in the correct location.

Natural selection against ill-formed individuals explains why, for the most part, organisms are well-formed.

..and where are the fossils with false starts or bones in the wrong place?

I've posted some examples of people with bones in the wrong place, bones that did not follow the appropriate plan of growth, and so on. Skeletal deformities are quite common. Here's some more examples, individuals who were exposed pre-natally to s-thalidomide, a compound that intercalates DNA and inhibits synthesis of hormone growth factors such as IGF and FGF, which inhibits limb bug formation due to suppression of vascular growth:

As you can see, despite the fact that limb growth is truncated only by suppression of vascular tissue (which bones need to grow), these individuals don't have long "empty sleeves", normal-length limbs with truncated bones. They have truncated muscles and truncated skin to match their truncated bones, because limb growth is primarily a phenomenon where bones grow according to a genetic program and muscle, skin, nerves, and vascular tissues grow to match.

That's why your muscles frequently ache during puberty; your bones are extending and your muscles get stretched, damaging them, and they have to grow to match, just as if you had worked out. I have stretch marks across my back from the time I grew about 7 inches in a single summer (but I tell people they're from the time I was lashed in Russian prison, it's a better story.)

Why doesn't the femur extend from the hip to the ankle?

The femur, pelvis, and bones of the ankle all grow from individual osteoblasts. They're not a single bone because they're never a single bone at any point in your life.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 6:19 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by Bolder-dash, posted 08-28-2010 10:04 PM crashfrog has responded

  
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 2878 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 10 of 527 (577425)
08-28-2010 7:36 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by crashfrog
08-28-2010 6:38 PM


the glib answer is that they're frequently not all in the right positionsFrankly the more necessary something is for an organism to live, the easier it is to imagine it being the result of random mutation and natural selection

Thank you for reestablishing my point. What does 26 bones, 31 joints and 20 muscles in the foot have to do with survival?

All of you are still avoiding my main question from the opening post.
How did rm/ns develop 5 different joints and manage to put the right joint in the proper place?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 6:38 PM crashfrog has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by DrJones*, posted 08-28-2010 7:50 PM ICdesign has responded
 Message 12 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 7:52 PM ICdesign has responded
 Message 18 by jar, posted 08-28-2010 8:23 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 30 by crashfrog, posted 08-28-2010 11:02 PM ICdesign has not yet responded
 Message 367 by derwood, posted 01-05-2011 10:26 AM ICdesign has not yet responded

    
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 1806
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 4.2


Message 11 of 527 (577428)
08-28-2010 7:50 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 7:36 PM


manage to put the right joint in the proper place?

how do you determine what is the "right" joint and that it is in the "proper" place?


It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds
soon I discovered that this rock thing was true
Jerry Lee Lewis was the devil
Jesus was an architect previous to his career as a prophet
All of a sudden i found myself in love with the world
And so there was only one thing I could do
Was ding a ding dang my dang along ling long - Jesus Built my Hotrod Ministry

Live every week like it's Shark Week! - Tracey Jordan
Just a monkey in a long line of kings. - Matthew Good
If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist! - Get Your War On
*not an actual doctor
This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 7:36 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 8:08 PM DrJones* has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 12 of 527 (577429)
08-28-2010 7:52 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 7:36 PM


Hi, ICDESIGN.

ICDESIGN writes:

Thank you for reestablishing my point. What does 26 bones, 31 joints and 20 muscles in the foot have to do with survival?

For humans who live with other people who can protect them and care for them?

Or for fish that have to survive on their own in the wild?


-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 7:36 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 8:03 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 778 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 13 of 527 (577430)
08-28-2010 7:54 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by ICdesign
08-28-2010 6:19 PM


Well, as long as we're just repeating what we said in our earlier posts:

quote:
Hi, ICDESIGN.

This sounds suspiciously similar to other topics you started.

As an example, I'll focus on the evolution of vertebrate limbs (a subject about which I admit I am not an expert). Let me start with this image:

Although these organisms are not thought to be direct ancestors and descendants of one another, they show an important trend.

On the far left (earlier in time), we see Glyptolepis, a more or less traditional fish. Notice there there is very little variety and specialization among the joints in the fin.

Then, moving right (later in time) across the image, we see a smattering of what I consider to be awkward conglomerations of joints and branches, with increasing specialization of various joints into differing patterns and configurations, with Tiktaalik showing an interesting middle-ground state between the semi-chaotic branches of the second, third and fourth pictures, and the more linear branches of the two amphibian limbs on the right.

It seems pretty straightforward to me to suggest gradualistic, accumulative evolution via mutation and natural selection as the cause here:

Many types of ancient animals secreted minerals as spicules (little chunks), shells or protective crusts.

The ancestors of vertebrates localize this secretion to specific regions inside the body, producing structures we call "bones." Muscles (which also already existed) can attach to bones through developmental mutations, making it easier to produce high-energy motion (i.e. swimming).

Then, irregularities and variations in the genes controlling where bones are formed can explain the diversity of limb-branching we see in the fossil limb drawings above, and natural selection can account for the gradual convergence of these branching patterns on a pattern that is conducive to movement on land.

I see no reason to think this is particularly farfetched.



-Bluejay (a.k.a. Mantis, Thylacosmilus)

Darwin loves you.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 6:19 PM ICdesign has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by ICdesign, posted 08-28-2010 8:01 PM Blue Jay has responded

  
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 2878 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 14 of 527 (577432)
08-28-2010 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by Blue Jay
08-28-2010 7:54 PM


Hi Bluejay

I see no reason to think this is particularly farfetched.

I think your drawings are extremely underfetched in explaining any
of my posed questions.

IC


This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 7:54 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 35 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 11:50 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

    
ICdesign
Member (Idle past 2878 days)
Posts: 360
From: Phoenix Arizona USA
Joined: 03-10-2007


Message 15 of 527 (577433)
08-28-2010 8:03 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Blue Jay
08-28-2010 7:52 PM


For humans who live with other people who can protect them and care for them?

Or for fish that have to survive on their own in the wild?

...cute


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Blue Jay, posted 08-28-2010 7:52 PM Blue Jay has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 92 by Blue Jay, posted 08-30-2010 11:03 PM ICdesign has not yet responded

    
1
23456
...
36NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019