Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 80 (8897 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-18-2019 1:24 PM
136 online now:
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 848,429 Year: 3,466/19,786 Month: 461/1,087 Week: 51/212 Day: 12/39 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4445
46
4748
...
51Next
Author Topic:   Does the Darwinian theory require modification or replacement?
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3789
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 676 of 760 (622544)
07-04-2011 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 653 by shadow71
07-03-2011 9:45 AM


Re: Natural Engineering
In message 643 I present evidence of dedicated, nonrandom, beneficial change.

In that some organisms may have developed an evolutionary mechanism by random mutation that allows them to identify and combat parasites by incorporating a portion of the invaders genome into their own thereby allowing them and their offspring to quickly identify like invaders and have responses ready that were already learned by random mutation and selection.

The mechanism appears to be specific to specific classes of pathogens and thus can be called dedicated. The evolved processes have been developed and put in place by random trial and error over many millions of years and are thus now non-randomly invoked by the presence of the specific pathogens.

None of this in any way indicates any directed intelligence performing predetermined modifications to the host genome for specific pre-need purposes.

What if any effect does this proof have on the modification of the MS?

None whatsoever.

Finally, am I misrepresenting Shapiro in message 643?

That does seem to be your purpose here.

What changes do you think your references would require of the Modern Synthesis?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 653 by shadow71, posted 07-03-2011 9:45 AM shadow71 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 677 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 1:09 AM AZPaul3 has responded
 Message 687 by shadow71, posted 07-05-2011 5:21 PM AZPaul3 has responded

zi ko
Member (Idle past 1692 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 677 of 760 (622550)
07-05-2011 1:09 AM
Reply to: Message 676 by AZPaul3
07-04-2011 6:29 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
The mechanism appears to be specific to specific classes of pathogens and thus can be called dedicated. The evolved processes have been developed and put in place by random trial and error over many millions of years and are thus now non-randomly invoked by the presence of the specific pathogens

Where are the data of this trial and error procedure?


Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 676 by AZPaul3, posted 07-04-2011 6:29 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 678 by AZPaul3, posted 07-05-2011 1:46 AM zi ko has responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3789
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 678 of 760 (622552)
07-05-2011 1:46 AM
Reply to: Message 677 by zi ko
07-05-2011 1:09 AM


Answers
AZPaul3 writes:

What changes do you think your references would require of the Modern Synthesis?

zi ko writes:

Where are the data of this trial and error procedure?

You answer my question first and I'll answer yours in kind.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 677 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 1:09 AM zi ko has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 679 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 8:54 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

zi ko
Member (Idle past 1692 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 679 of 760 (622593)
07-05-2011 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 678 by AZPaul3
07-05-2011 1:46 AM


Re: Answers
AZPaul3 writes:
What changes do you think your references would require of the Modern Synthesis?

zi ko writes:
Where are the data of this trial and error procedure?

You answer my question first and I'll answer yours in kind.

This question is not adressed to me. So what answer can i give?
I am still asking. What are the data for this random trial and error procedure?

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


Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 678 by AZPaul3, posted 07-05-2011 1:46 AM AZPaul3 has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 680 by Percy, posted 07-05-2011 10:10 AM zi ko has responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18307
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 680 of 760 (622596)
07-05-2011 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 679 by zi ko
07-05-2011 8:54 AM


Re: Answers
zi ko writes:

What are the data for this random trial and error procedure?

This is a reference to evolution. Evolution by means of descent with modification and natural selection is a trial and error process. Trials are performed on random modifications, selection weeds out the "errors".

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 679 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 8:54 AM zi ko has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 681 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 11:21 AM Percy has responded

  
zi ko
Member (Idle past 1692 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 681 of 760 (622608)
07-05-2011 11:21 AM
Reply to: Message 680 by Percy
07-05-2011 10:10 AM


Re: Answers

zi ko writes:
What are the data for this random trial and error procedure?

This is a reference to evolution. Evolution by means of descent with modification and natural selection is a trial and error process. Trials are performed on random modifications, selection weeds out the "errors".

--Percy


Are there ny data that exclude any information participation in procedure of evolution?

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


Information: It is time its undeservedly neglectet powerful role to evolution to be restored.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 680 by Percy, posted 07-05-2011 10:10 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 682 by Percy, posted 07-05-2011 12:30 PM zi ko has not yet responded
 Message 683 by AZPaul3, posted 07-05-2011 1:36 PM zi ko has not yet responded

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 18307
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.5


Message 682 of 760 (622614)
07-05-2011 12:30 PM
Reply to: Message 681 by zi ko
07-05-2011 11:21 AM


Re: Answers
zi ko writes:

Are there ny data that exclude any information participation in procedure of evolution?

When scientists purposefully omit data from consideration in order to promote their own personal agenda they're always very careful to make sure it can't be detected.

Seriously, an information theoretic perspective is just one among many, and it isn't often the best one. For most problems in evolutionary theory, approaching them at the information theoretic level would be like calculating the path of a rolling ball through an analysis at the atomic level.

I share your fascination with information theory, but it isn't the best solution for every problem.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 681 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 11:21 AM zi ko has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3789
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 683 of 760 (622617)
07-05-2011 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 681 by zi ko
07-05-2011 11:21 AM


Information Trial and Error
Are there ny data that exclude any information participation in procedure of evolution?

In a broad sense the "information" content of the genome changes with random mutation (to include insertion, frame-shift etc.) and the resulting phenotype is matched against the "information" of the environment. The "information" in the environment determines if the "information" in the genome continues as part of the larger population or if it is lessened or eliminated from the larger population.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 681 by zi ko, posted 07-05-2011 11:21 AM zi ko has not yet responded

shadow71
Member (Idle past 1006 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 684 of 760 (622636)
07-05-2011 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 646 by Taq
06-30-2011 5:09 PM


Re: Pretty much an irrelevant question.
Taq writes:


If which mutations are nonrandom? If 99.999% of mutations are random with a few examples of specialized systems that insert viral DNA into palindromic sequences would the entire theory need to be rewritten, or would a footnote do?

I take it you agree that the papers Shapiro referred to in his book and I cited on this board re CRISPR System is a process of nonrandom mutations for fitness.

If so does this process fit into the theory of evolution as it is known today?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 646 by Taq, posted 06-30-2011 5:09 PM Taq has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 689 by Wounded King, posted 07-05-2011 5:38 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

  
shadow71
Member (Idle past 1006 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 685 of 760 (622638)
07-05-2011 5:04 PM
Reply to: Message 674 by Percy
07-04-2011 2:07 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
Percy writes:


Descent, modification and selection are natural processes. Planned and implemented by some entity is not a natural process. You seem to be trying to have it both ways.

What I am saying is that the whole process of evolution may in fact be planned.
Obviously I cannot prove that, nor can you disprove it.

But if in fact the process of evolution is planned then it still can be a natural process, planned by a Supernatural being.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 674 by Percy, posted 07-04-2011 2:07 PM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 686 by Straggler, posted 07-05-2011 5:20 PM shadow71 has not yet responded
 Message 688 by jar, posted 07-05-2011 5:29 PM shadow71 has not yet responded
 Message 691 by Percy, posted 07-05-2011 9:14 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

  
Straggler
Member
Posts: 10284
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 686 of 760 (622640)
07-05-2011 5:20 PM
Reply to: Message 685 by shadow71
07-05-2011 5:04 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
Shad writes:

What I am saying is that the whole process of evolution may in fact be planned.

Obviously I cannot prove that, nor can you disprove it.

But if in fact the process of evolution is planned then it still can be a natural process, planned by a Supernatural being.

The invisible hand of Zeus could be manipulating every ecoli experiment in order to dupe us into thinking that ecoli bacteria evolve. Likewise undetectable gravity gremlins could be manipulating reality to fool us into thinking that space-time curvature is responsible for gravitational effects.

Obviously I cannot prove that, nor can you disprove it.

So I guess these conclusions are as valid as the ones you are advocating?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 685 by shadow71, posted 07-05-2011 5:04 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

shadow71
Member (Idle past 1006 days)
Posts: 706
From: Joliet, il, USA
Joined: 08-31-2010


Message 687 of 760 (622641)
07-05-2011 5:21 PM
Reply to: Message 676 by AZPaul3
07-04-2011 6:29 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
AZPaul3 writes:


The mechanism appears to be specific to specific classes of pathogens and thus can be called dedicated. The evolved processes have been developed and put in place by random trial and error over many millions of years and are thus now non-randomly invoked by the presence of the specific pathogens.

Not trying to be a jerk, but can you show by data that the processes have been developed and put in place by RANDOM TRIAL AND ERROR over many millions of years and are thus now nonrandomly invoked by the presence of the specific pathogens?

Or is this merely the assumption that that is how evolution works?
It seems to me to be a contradiction that the presence of specific pathogens would suddenly lead to a nonrandom process.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 676 by AZPaul3, posted 07-04-2011 6:29 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 690 by AZPaul3, posted 07-05-2011 6:00 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

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


Message 688 of 760 (622645)
07-05-2011 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 685 by shadow71
07-05-2011 5:04 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
If it is a natural process then no supernatural being need apply.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 685 by shadow71, posted 07-05-2011 5:04 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2167 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 689 of 760 (622647)
07-05-2011 5:38 PM
Reply to: Message 684 by shadow71
07-05-2011 4:55 PM


Fitness of CRISPR incorporations
I don't think the question of fitness for any particular CRISPR incorporation event can be evaluated on the basis of the papers discussed so far. Certainly it is easy to appreciate how a defence system against bacteriophages in general should be beneficial to a bacterial population.

It isn't clear however to what extent any particular protospacer sequence will be an effective substrate for the CRISPR system to combat bacteriophage infection. The sequences the review discusses are ones already established in various bacterial populations, in other words they are ones that have already passed through several rounds of natural selection.

It may be that when a bacterial population is subject to a challenge from bacteriophage infection its constituent bacteria will incorporate dozens or hundreds of different spacer sequences depending on the prevalence of the particular PAM motifs that the CRISPR loci in the population targets. If a particular spacer sequence confers immunity to the bacteriophage challenge we would expect it to proliferate in the population. But we can't simply assume that all spacer sequences confer the same degree of immunity or even any immunity at all.

I'll have a look in some of the other CRISPR papers and see if there is anything about this. As it stands though I don't think we can say that every CRISPR locus spacer incorporation is a beneficial mutation even though we have specific instances where they have been.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 684 by shadow71, posted 07-05-2011 4:55 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 3789
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.8


Message 690 of 760 (622651)
07-05-2011 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 687 by shadow71
07-05-2011 5:21 PM


Re: Natural Engineering
Not trying to be a jerk, but can you show by data that the processes have been developed and put in place by RANDOM TRIAL AND ERROR over many millions of years and are thus now nonrandomly invoked by the presence of the specific pathogens?

I have a thick skin. No 'jerk' assumed.

If you comprehended the papers you have been citing you would have answered your own question. All of them cite the usual and customary mechanisms to evolve what can now be seen as embedded non-random responses to external stimuli.

Similar, indeed, to the evolved non-random responses some people have to certain plant pollen: blind chemical cascades evolved to fight the effects of some specifically irritating external stimuli.

It seems to me to be a contradiction that the presence of specific pathogens would suddenly lead to a nonrandom process.

If you comprehended the papers you have been citing you would see the error in your statement.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 687 by shadow71, posted 07-05-2011 5:21 PM shadow71 has not yet responded

RewPrev1
...
4445
46
4748
...
51Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019