Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,821 Year: 3,078/9,624 Month: 923/1,588 Week: 106/223 Day: 4/13 Hour: 0/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Are mutations truly random or are they guided?
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 1 of 134 (548531)
02-27-2010 11:46 PM


The purpose of this thread is to discuss the evidence regarding mutations and whether they are really random or whether they are directed and guided by the cell or the organism and influenced by the environment.
This initial post is not intended to present evidence for either assertion, but to establish the basis for my challenging the accepted norm of RM + NS = Evolution. I feel there is sufficient reason to question whether mutations are truly random and that randomness is sufficient to explain the diversity of life we have here on Earth. So, in this post I will describe some of the observations that got me thinking about this subject and then we can discuss the experimental and observed evidence and see where it leads.
French zoologist Pierre-Paul Grass believed that
quote:
To explain evolution he instead thinks that you must look at the internal dynamics of living things.
So let’s begin with a brief description of what goes on within a living cell. I have heard living cells compared to the most advanced factories on Earth, but the more I learn about the cell the more I see that as an understatement. Part of what makes the cell so incredible is the scale. All these biochemical functions happen in a factory less that 1mm in size. Many cells are invisible to the naked eye yet carry on processes so complicated that there is still much we don’t know.
Proteins are manufactured by ribosomes using mRNA. Each protein is made up of an exact sequence of amino acids brought to the ribosome by a specific tRNA. Each protein has a specific function and is specifically suited to that function. The Golgi apparatus can then modify the protein, creating a molecular tag that is used to target the protein to a specific cellular location.
DNA replication is very critical and extremely precise. It uses a complex system of proteins, enzymes, and polymerases to break the DNA strands apart, create daughter strands and correct any errors. The process is exceptionally accurate, with less than 1 error every 1 billion nucleotides.
ATP is produced in precisely the quantities needed for cellular operation and is not stored by the cell. If the cell is deprived of the resources it needs for cellular respiration, it will die in a matter of just a few minutes. Protein pumps move resources, such as Na+ in and out of the cell. Cells throughout the organism can communicate with one another, ensuring resources are available where and when needed.
The DNA contains all necessary information for the growth and development of the organism. Look out over a cornfield and you will see that all the plants are about the same height, have developed in the same sequence and mature at about the same time. This is a highly regulated process. Even when hundreds of cell types are involved in an organism, they still manage to organize into tissues, organs and systems with incredible precision.
These cellular processes are taught in freshmen level biology and, of course, I have greatly abbreviated them. Advanced courses, such as Cellular Biology, spend the entire semester (sometimes two) discussing only cellular processes. What I have concluded is that cells are highly ordered and regulated. None of it is random or left to chance. When something goes wrong with the process it is detrimental to the cell and therefore to the organism. How do we rely on mistakes to produce improvement?
This is not an argument about irreducible complexity and I am not saying God-did-it. What I am suggesting is that random mutations may not be the all powerful driving force of evolution that they have been thought to be. Instead, it makes more sense that mutations, (and therefore adaptation) are directed by the cell and by cellular processes.
So, I would like to discuss the experimental and observed evidence for and against the idea that mutations are random and yet can still provide the needed resources for evolution to occur.
Defendez-vous bien!

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by ZenMonkey, posted 02-28-2010 1:23 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 4 by slevesque, posted 02-28-2010 2:20 AM herebedragons has replied
 Message 5 by Stagamancer, posted 02-28-2010 3:27 AM herebedragons has replied
 Message 6 by Percy, posted 02-28-2010 6:36 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 7 by RAZD, posted 02-28-2010 8:18 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 8 by AZPaul3, posted 02-28-2010 10:34 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 9 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-28-2010 2:21 PM herebedragons has replied
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 02-28-2010 4:55 PM herebedragons has replied
 Message 39 by slevesque, posted 03-01-2010 2:11 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 129 by Hyroglyphx, posted 03-09-2010 9:10 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 12 of 134 (548664)
02-28-2010 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by slevesque
02-28-2010 2:20 AM


Non, je ne parle pas franais
You speak french ?
No, I don’t. I just thought it was a very appropriate closing line to use for this forum so I decided to use it. It is the equivalent of Take care of yourself or You be careful. Literally translated it means Defend yourself well. (But you probably knew that already)
Defendez-vous bien!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by slevesque, posted 02-28-2010 2:20 AM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by slevesque, posted 03-01-2010 1:54 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 13 of 134 (548665)
02-28-2010 10:39 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by Stagamancer
02-28-2010 3:27 AM


serendipity???
Hi Stagamancer
serendipitous advancements in science and technology
Point well taken. However, there is a difference between accidently discovering something while looking for something else and relying on mistakes for advancements. You would be very unlikely to make any significant discovery by just randomly mixing chemicals, for instance. You begin in a specific direction and keep your eyes and mind open for serendipitous results.
quote:
The French scientist Louis Pasteur also famously said: "In the fields of observation chance favors only the prepared mind."
How exactly would this work? How could a cell know to direct mutation?
When you say "it makes more sense..." have you really thought about it?
Yes I have thought about it and honestly, I don’t have a good answer yet. That’s why I am on this forum - that’s why I am asking the question.
How would an individual cell possess the forethought to make the correct mutations?
Let me put the question back to you. How does the individual cell know how to do any of the cellular functions it carries out? Do you understand the extreme complexity of cellular processes? How does the cell have the knowledge to keep itself functioning? If we consider the amount of knowledge a cell does have, why can we not conceive that it also has the knowledge to make changes to itself in order to survive?
Keep in mind, I am not overly confident that my assertions are true, but I think they are worth investigating. I would like to see experimental evidence (I already have looked at the Luria-Delbruck case)
Defendez-vous bien!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Stagamancer, posted 02-28-2010 3:27 AM Stagamancer has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by Stagamancer, posted 03-01-2010 1:54 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 15 of 134 (548668)
02-28-2010 10:43 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Dr Adequate
02-28-2010 2:21 PM


Hi Dr. Adequate
I would not completely rule out a scenario in which an organism had a mechanism for performing some specific act of genetic engineering on itself in response to long-standing fluctuations in the environment. But it is beyond belief that the cell could have a general mechanism for making appropriate changes to its genome.
This is probably closer to what I am thinking. (I wonder why you put it in such a small font size?) For example, a plant would not need to respond to novel food sources, but they would need to respond to climate changes, altitude changes and the like. So a general mechanism would not be necessary, but a specific mechanism would allow the organism to respond appropriately to changes in environment.
One point which has already been made is that most mutations are not particularly useful. Now you might suggest that only one cell in a million has the intelligence to figure out what the right mutation is, but it seems simpler to imagine that they all mutate at random and one cell in a million is lucky enough to get it right.
I do realize that there are mutations that are random, being caused by errors in replication. I noted the error rate that seems to be accepted - 1 error in 1 billion nucleotide replications. As you noted, most are not particularly useful. Then add into it that the mutation must happen in the germ cells and then be the lucky germ to be fertilized (or involved in fertilization) and the odds are beyond my liking. I think your comment about being simpler to imagine fails to recognize the incredible complexity of cellular processes. Nothing that goes on within the cell is simple. Nothing about the cell is simple to imagine.
I would also add that I am not overly confident that my assertions are true, but I think they are worth investigating. I would like to see experimental evidence (I already have looked at the Luria-Delbruck case). I have some things of my own that I will present for discussion as soon as I get a chance.
Defendez-vous bien!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-28-2010 2:21 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-01-2010 1:17 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 21 by Meldinoor, posted 03-01-2010 1:26 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 16 of 134 (548670)
02-28-2010 10:54 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Taz
02-28-2010 4:55 PM


Of course, your entire post is a straw man.
waste of time getting involved then, huh?
The way I understand it, mutations are the engine and natural selection is the steering wheel. Without mutations, where would NS go? Although NS and RM are interrelated, this thread is about mutations. I don't have to discuss both topics in one thread.
So, it leads me to wonder why you started this thread. Since you are aware of natural selection, I doubt that you are either ignorant or genuinely seeking out knowledge. What's the alternative? Only the gods and you know.
apparently you have been able to discern my motives and can see through my veiled attempt to convert you to my religion. lol
Defendez-vous bien!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Taz, posted 02-28-2010 4:55 PM Taz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by Taz, posted 02-28-2010 11:17 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 100 of 134 (549037)
03-03-2010 11:21 AM


Help! my thread has been hyjacked
First of all, I didn’t want to reply to everyone individually, since there were so many issues I wanted to address. Since I’m fairly new on this forum and didn’t know a better way to do this, I just did a general reply. Is there a better way to do this? Maybe tag those involved that I want to know I was responding to them?
Let’s try to get this discussion back on topic. This thread has been hijacked by pointless arguing. No one benefits from this. I came to this forum seeking some scientific discussions on this debate between evolution and creation. If I wanted a pointless arguement, I would just talk to my wife . So let’s get back to the discussion, please.
The purpose of this thread is to discuss the evidence regarding mutations and whether they are really random or whether they are directed and guided by the cell or the organism and influenced by the environment.
Note the bolded word evidence.
Zen Monkey wrote in message 3:
Do your have any basis for your doubts other than you have been led to believe that science conflicts with your religion, and so science must therefore be wrong?
Yes I do. Directed vs. random mutations is not a dead issue. If I were arguing that the Earth was flat, that would deserve such a response. However, I don’t feel this is anywhere near the same type of argument. (Also note that I am not necessarily arguing for directed mutations, but asking the question. But since this is a debate forum, I am taking the side of directed mutations).
I’m not sure how my religion came into this discussion. What verse in the Bible or any other religious material addresses the issue of mutations? I don’t know of any. So, if you want to spend time bashing me for my religious beliefs, we won’t do much science, will we?
I have also noticed that there has been a resurrection of Lamarkism in recent years. I don’t think I would go to that extreme, but perhaps a form of it. I have also seen some instances of adaptation that , at least for me, call into question the randomness of those adaptations. One of my problems is I don’t have access to scientific journals (they require a subscription). So when I have found some research in this area, I only have access to the abstract (if I’m lucky). So I was hoping those that had information from scientific writing could help me find such papers or point me in the right direction.
Taz wrote in message 17:
... you could have worded your OP a lot better. Try to understand it from my view. We get a hundred or so ignorant creationists a month declaring that evolution = 100% random. Hell, even our long time (years) resident creationists still insist that evolution = 100% random.
Sorry, my first thread. Hopefully I’ll get better at this. And hopefully I’ll be able to earn enough respect that even if I disagree, it’s not just because of religious dogma. I love science, isn’t that why your all here too?
Stagamancer wrote in message 23:
It doesn't "know". The processes of the cell occur spontaneously. All of the reactions that happen in the cell are either thermodynamically favorable (exergonic) or are fueled by an outside source of energy. Either way, they occur simply as a consortium of biochemical reactions without any conscious thought. Cognitive function is an emergent property of groups of cells. It cannot exist within a single cell.
This is the sort of hand waving dismissal of cellular complexity that prompted me to write my OP the way I did. It goes far beyond simply biochemical reactions. As a most basic example, put glucose and oxygen together and what happens? Nothing. The reaction requires an input of energy from the cell in the form of ATP. The complexity of these reactions, interactions and cellular controls increases exponentially from there. One of the key points here is the cell must be living for most of the processes to occur.
This may not constitute conscious thought, nor require it, but it deserves more recognition than calling them simply biochemical reactions. Without considering the issue of mutations or evolution, have I made my point about cellular complexity? Or do we need to continue discussing it?
Stagamancer also wrote in message 23:
Because, as I said, individual cells do not have knowledge, much less the creative capacity to guess at what they'll need. What you're implying is that a single cell has the ability not only to recognize that it needs to adapt, but has the knowledge of how a change in nucleotide sequence will alter the function of a protein.
Perhaps not knowledge in the traditional sense, but the cell does contain a vast amount of information. Each individual cell has all the information needed to construct an entire organism from a single cell. This is remarkable in itself - that from one cell all the tissues, organ and systems of an organism can develop. I would say that the cell knows how to develop in to the mature organism. It does not leave development to chance (although clearly there are instances where things go wrong or develop incorrectly, but the cell is extremely accurate and in the grand scheme makes very, very few mistakes).
I think the best Response so far is:
Bluegenes wrote in message 25:
The answer to the question in the O.P. title, "Are mutations truly random or are they guided" is that some mutations are partially guided by a combination of environmental factors and the history of the species involved (whether or not it has inherited the tendency to react positively to a specific kind of stress).
I do have some specific examples that have caused me to question the randomness of mutations, but I don’t have time right now to go into them. I will try to post some by the end of the week.
Defendez-vous bien!

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Taq, posted 03-03-2010 11:50 AM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 104 by AZPaul3, posted 03-03-2010 2:26 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 105 by Stagamancer, posted 03-03-2010 3:29 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 108 by RAZD, posted 03-03-2010 11:35 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 119 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-04-2010 4:49 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 120 by Dr Adequate, posted 03-05-2010 2:01 AM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 101 of 134 (549040)
03-03-2010 11:27 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Percy
03-01-2010 9:58 AM


creationist??
It does seem strange that the creationists in this thread seem to be arguing against the possibility of advantageous mutations when the thread's premise is that positive mutations happen and that they are "directed by the cell and by cellular processes." (see Message 1)
Who are the creationists? How can you recognize them, just because they disagree with neo-darwinism? I never argued against advantageous mutations, so am I a creationist or not? I only saw one person arguing against advantageous mutations and I’m not sure whether he is a creationist or not. He just seems to like to derail the discussion and get the evolutionists all worked up.
I personally want the opportunity to discuss science with intelligent, knowledgeable people. I tried to present my opening in such a way as to describe why I was asking the question and none of it involved religion. I realize your experience may be that 99% of creationists are ignorant and base their assumptions on religious dogma, but it’s really not fair to lump everyone that disagrees into that one category. If you think I am an ignorant creationist so be it. But please, don’t judge me by bolder-dash.
I came to this forum because I love science and want to explore and discover the world around me, not to defend my religion or to convince you that my religion is right. I think you are here for the same reason, because you love science, not because you want to defend your beliefs.
Defendez-vous bien!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Percy, posted 03-01-2010 9:58 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 103 by Percy, posted 03-03-2010 1:13 PM herebedragons has not replied
 Message 106 by Bolder-dash, posted 03-03-2010 9:16 PM herebedragons has not replied

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 858 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


Message 130 of 134 (550042)
03-12-2010 9:18 AM


sorry for the delay in responding
Hi all.
Just a quick note to say that I have not abandoned this thread. I still have some things to discuss, I have just been very busy lately. I am taking a Sociology couse online and because I got enrolled a bit late, I am playing catch up. I will respond to the issue as soon as I can find the time, hopefully within the week.
Thanks for the patience
Edited by herebedragons, : No reason given.

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024