Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/7


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   How novel features evolve #2
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3619 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 166 of 402 (672264)
09-05-2012 9:53 AM
Reply to: Message 159 by Percy
09-04-2012 12:44 PM


Re: choosing the propper opponent?
What if creationists are pathologically incapable of posting on-topic? Or is it a skill you worked on? A strategy you're purposefully employing? An odd mental quirk? Maybe we could discuss this question too in every thread, along with guided evolution and philosophical questions about the nature of evidence. Why have forums and threads, anyway? Why not just go to a single thread with a few hundred thousand messages?
What if evolutionists avoid (for what reason?) answering crucial questions and use authority to get away? Of course i am off topic now , but you were the same just before me.When i posed a simple question on message 127, i just got an authoritarian NO, based on such a meagre evidence and against any contemporary scientific knowledge.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by Percy, posted 09-04-2012 12:44 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by Taq, posted 09-05-2012 10:56 AM zi ko has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 167 of 402 (672267)
09-05-2012 10:56 AM
Reply to: Message 166 by zi ko
09-05-2012 9:53 AM


Re: choosing the propper opponent?
What if evolutionists avoid (for what reason?) answering crucial questions and use authority to get away? Of course i am off topic now , but you were the same just before me.When i posed a simple question on message 127, i just got an authoritarian NO, based on such a meagre evidence and against any contemporary scientific knowledge.
Each and every time you bring up the randomness of mutations I cite EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS. In this thread I have referenced two experiments which demonstrate random mutations. I even started a thread where I discussed a paper written by Wright who is much more friendly to your ideas of guided mutations than most scientists (thread found here).
Now you are once again claiming that we are ignoring some phantom evidence that you fail to supply each time, all the while ignoring the experimental results we post.
To help steer this somewhere else, I would be happy to start a new thread on a peer reviewed primary research paper of your choosing (no secondary reviews please). Are you up to the task?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by zi ko, posted 09-05-2012 9:53 AM zi ko has not replied

  
AdminModulous
Administrator
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 168 of 402 (672271)
09-05-2012 3:48 PM


Topic warning
Hi guys. I think I can see my way through to connect the current discussions to the topic, but it's becoming a rapidly disappearing target.
If there is some point you feel is excellent, though off topic, try composing a new PNT. If you think you can tie together your current discussion towards either explaining how novel features evolve or refuting the notion that novel features can evolve - then please do.
Suspensions, or text hidings may follow if I don't see the connection between what you are saying and the topic. I don't promise that it will be fair. You have been warned.

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by Taq, posted 09-06-2012 11:23 AM AdminModulous has seen this message but not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 9489
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 4.9


Message 169 of 402 (672272)
09-05-2012 4:18 PM


This thread died around page 6 when we couldn't pin down the gene(s) that changed in the mice and haven't as yet been able to provide another likely candidate for a complete audit trail from mutation to selection.
Shame, it leaves the insane with an almost reasonable argument.

Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 170 of 402 (672308)
09-06-2012 11:23 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by AdminModulous
09-05-2012 3:48 PM


Re: Topic warning
Hi guys. I think I can see my way through to connect the current discussions to the topic, but it's becoming a rapidly disappearing target.
Understanding the relationship between fitness and mutation is vitally important for understanding how novel features evolve.
Going back to the pocket mouse example, the authors found that the mutations in the MC1R (which is thought to be responsible for dark fur) only occurred in one of the populations found on dark lava. However, the other populations still had dark fur. This is a very important observation.
First, we observe that the lava fields are separated by hundreds of miles. We also observe that the dark allele is strongly selected against in the range between the dark lava fields. Therefore, there is no expectation that the mutations conferring dark fur will be able to move from one lava field to the other given that the dark allele is dominant.
This offers a way of testing whether mutations are guided or random with respect to fitness. Given the multitude of possible mutations in different genes that can give rise to dark fur we would not expect random mutations to result in the same mutation in independent populations. If mutations are guided then we would expect the same mutations to occur in each population. What do we observe? Different mutations in each populaton. This is extremely strong evidence for random mutations.
We can apply this same knowledge to evolution in general. Given the random nature of mutations and the contigencies within the genomes that they occur in we would expect different solutions to the same problem in different lineages. This is why we see feathers and fur as two separate solutions for thermoregulation in mammals and birds. This is why we see different solutions for eyes, wings, and fins amongst different lineages.
So I would say that the random nature of mutations is strongly on topic. However, an extended discussion of why we think that mutations are random probably deserves a focused topic of its own.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by AdminModulous, posted 09-05-2012 3:48 PM AdminModulous has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 09-06-2012 2:26 PM Taq has replied
 Message 175 by zi ko, posted 09-07-2012 10:09 AM Taq has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(1)
Message 171 of 402 (672320)
09-06-2012 2:26 PM
Reply to: Message 170 by Taq
09-06-2012 11:23 AM


Re: Topic warning
Taq writes:
So I would say that the random nature of mutations is strongly on topic.
If guided mutations can lead to novelty then wouldn't they also be on topic?
It seemed like Zi Ko was trying to co-opt yet another thread to discuss his own favorite ideas, but if he can introduce some evidence for guided mutations and describe how they lead to novelty then it seems like it would be a welcome addition to this thread.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Taq, posted 09-06-2012 11:23 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Taq, posted 09-06-2012 3:40 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied
 Message 173 by zi ko, posted 09-07-2012 12:34 AM Percy has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 172 of 402 (672322)
09-06-2012 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Percy
09-06-2012 2:26 PM


Re: Topic warning
If guided mutations can lead to novelty then wouldn't they also be on topic?
Very much so, at least in the opinion of this non-moderator.
What is needed is evidence of these guided mutations and how they lead to novel features. I think the pocket mouse example found earlier in this thread may be useful in such a discussion, but I think it should be up to zi ko to choose the examples to be used.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 09-06-2012 2:26 PM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3619 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 173 of 402 (672335)
09-07-2012 12:34 AM
Reply to: Message 171 by Percy
09-06-2012 2:26 PM


Re: Topic warning
It seemed like Zi Ko was trying to co-opt yet another thread to discuss his own favorite ideas,
It isn't so bad after all, if it is not off topic. You just fight and redicule , if you can, my ideas. Choosing "proper" opponents it is not scientific at least.
Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Percy, posted 09-06-2012 2:26 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Percy, posted 09-07-2012 7:34 AM zi ko has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 174 of 402 (672347)
09-07-2012 7:34 AM
Reply to: Message 173 by zi ko
09-07-2012 12:34 AM


Re: Topic warning
What part of "if he can introduce some evidence for guided mutations and describe how they lead to novelty then it seems like it would be a welcome addition to this thread" didn't you understand?
--Percy
Edited by Percy, : Remove extraneous space.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by zi ko, posted 09-07-2012 12:34 AM zi ko has not replied

  
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3619 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 175 of 402 (672356)
09-07-2012 10:09 AM
Reply to: Message 170 by Taq
09-06-2012 11:23 AM


Re: Topic warning
This offers a way of testing whether mutations are guided or random with respect to fitness. Given the multitude of possible mutations in different genes that can give rise to dark fur we would not expect random mutations to result in the same mutation in independent populations. If mutations are guided then we would expect the same mutations to occur in each population. What do we observe? Different mutations in each populaton. This is extremely strong evidence for random mutations.
We can apply this same knowledge to evolution in general. Given the random nature of mutations and the contigencies within the genomes that they occur in we would expect different solutions to the same problem in different lineages. This is why we see feathers and fur as two separate solutions for thermoregulation in mammals and birds. This is why we see different solutions for eyes, wings, and fins amongst different lineages.
I would easily agree, if we accept guidance as the act of an omnipotent all knowing Supernatural choosing the best, in our opinion, procedure. But this is not the case.
According to my thesis guidance is expressed by the information flow from environment to genome. It is not strictly determined. It is a loosely directed try and error process. In one cell organisms even pure randomness can be allowed for, if is economical, as nature can use all available means in its scope to preserve and evolve life. Maybe this is the procedure Supernatural had chosen to act . Maybe it is just a matter of natural laws . So your deductions do not seem so strong, as other mechanisms could have as well the same results.
As for the need of evidence I say:
After about 250 ys what is the evidence for random mutations in metazoa? Almost negligible, understandably though. Because of complexity of the subject (see discussion of pocket mouse issue) it is difficult to expect proofs. But the fact is remaining. Your laboratory examples are based on one cell organisms, not on metazoa.
How would we then expect clear cut evidence for guided evolution in order to just discuss the issue?
Still , accepting lately the importance of environmental effect on genome sequence is quite enough to justifiably discussing it in this thread .
We know of spontaneous mutations. Do we know for sure that these are not the result o some kind of environmental pressure?
Stress in chicken causes always the same behavior disturbances. Isn’t it an indication of guided genome change, due environmental pressure? The same I think applies to pocket mouse coloring.
Can we say with confidence that the repairing mechanism is not guided, so to ensure the perpetuation of useful mutations? Of course I should have brought the evidence in favor of my case, not just ask questions. I think we share the same fate. You don’t have it either. Can we agree on that?
Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 170 by Taq, posted 09-06-2012 11:23 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by Taq, posted 09-07-2012 1:00 PM zi ko has replied
 Message 179 by RAZD, posted 09-09-2012 12:55 PM zi ko has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9972
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.5


Message 176 of 402 (672369)
09-07-2012 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by zi ko
09-07-2012 10:09 AM


Re: Topic warning
I would easily agree, if we accept guidance as the act of an omnipotent all knowing Supernatural choosing the best, in our opinion, procedure.
We don't need to accept that at all. If there is a set mutational response to a specific stimuli then we would expect the same stimuli to result in the same mutations. You don't need a supernatural creator to do that.
According to my thesis guidance is expressed by the information flow from environment to genome. It is not strictly determined. It is a loosely directed try and error process.
Please provide evidence for this claim.
After about 250 ys what is the evidence for random mutations in metazoa?
Massive mountains of genomic data showing sequence divergence of orthologous genes due to synonymous mutations, not to mention different rates of change in genes and pseudogenes. The pocket mouse example is another piece of evidence since differnent mutations for dark fur occurred in different populations.
How would we then expect clear cut evidence for guided evolution in order to just discuss the issue?
If the same mutation occurred in response to the same stimuli when other options were open. The evolution of dark fur in pocket mice is the perfect example, and I laid out what I would have expected to see if guided mutations were true. I would reread that post if I were you.
We know of spontaneous mutations. Do we know for sure that these are not the result o some kind of environmental pressure?
What evidence led you to believe that they were guided?
Stress in chicken causes always the same behavior disturbances. Isn’t it an indication of guided genome change, due environmental pressure?
Absolutely not. Those changes in behavior do not require changes in DNA sequence. We are talking about changes in DNA sequence.
Can we say with confidence that the repairing mechanism is not guided, so to ensure the perpetuation of useful mutations?
Yes, we can. Repair mechanisms fix DNA damage based on the chemistry of the DNA. It is not based on the changes in fitness that the repairs will induce. There is no way for these repair mechanisms to differentiate between a mutations that will have no effect on fitness and those that will.
I think we share the same fate. You don’t have it either. Can we agree on that?
No, I don't agree.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by zi ko, posted 09-07-2012 10:09 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by zi ko, posted 09-08-2012 9:31 AM Taq has replied

  
zi ko
Member (Idle past 3619 days)
Posts: 578
Joined: 01-18-2011


Message 177 of 402 (672442)
09-08-2012 9:31 AM
Reply to: Message 176 by Taq
09-07-2012 1:00 PM


Re: Topic warning
We don't need to accept that at all. If there is a set mutational response to a specific stimuli then we would expect the same stimuli to result in the same mutations. You don't need a supernatural creator to do that.
No we don't need.But we don't need either for the same reason, a one way alternative only, that of purely random mutatations.
Massive mountains of genomic data showing sequence divergence of orthologous genes due to synonymous mutations, not to mention different rates of change in genes and pseudogenes. The pocket mouse example is another piece of evidence since differnent mutations for dark fur occurred in different populations.
These "massive mountains of data" can equally be qaused by the flaw of environmental information to genome. So this argument is of no value. You obviously need to exclude first this possibibility, before being so sure about your theory. It is not me that needs to bring the evidence, as i only want to discuss that possibility.
If the same mutation occurred in response to the same stimuli when other options were open. The evolution of dark fur in pocket mice is the perfect example, and I laid out what I would have expected to see if guided mutations were true.
Again, this would be true if we would need a Supernatural creator. But this isn't the case.
Repair mechanisms fix DNA damage based on the chemistry of the DNA. It is not based on the changes in fitness that the repairs will induce. There is no way for these repair mechanisms to differentiate between a mutations that will have no effect on fitness and those that will.
.
Again repair mechanisms in my paradigm fix DNA damage based on the chemistry of DNA and and the chemicals brougt by the environmental changes.We just need a better SUPER PC.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by Taq, posted 09-07-2012 1:00 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 178 by Percy, posted 09-08-2012 9:35 AM zi ko has not replied
 Message 194 by Taq, posted 09-10-2012 1:50 PM zi ko has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 178 of 402 (672443)
09-08-2012 9:35 AM
Reply to: Message 177 by zi ko
09-08-2012 9:31 AM


Re: Topic warning
Is there any chance you'll begin addressing the topic anytime soon?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by zi ko, posted 09-08-2012 9:31 AM zi ko has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 179 of 402 (672559)
09-09-2012 12:55 PM
Reply to: Message 175 by zi ko
09-07-2012 10:09 AM


guidance vs selection
Hi zi ko
According to my thesis guidance is expressed by the information flow from environment to genome. ...
Isn't this just selection?
The "information flow from environment to genome" is where the individuals survive to breed, yes?
Change the ecological environment and different individuals survive to breed because there is different "information flow from environment to genome" -- and this can lead to different genomes in different populations, novel traits, and eventually to speciation, yes?
Thus the directed part of the evolution would have to be in manipulation of the ecological environment, yes?
Enjoy.
Edited by RAZD, : clrty

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
Rebel American Zen Deist
... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ...
to share.


Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 175 by zi ko, posted 09-07-2012 10:09 AM zi ko has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 188 by zi ko, posted 09-10-2012 7:53 AM RAZD has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22391
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 180 of 402 (672563)
09-09-2012 1:24 PM


About the Topic
Hey, guys, if I'm just not grasping how Zi Ko is on-topic then please just briefly explain. I'm not that dumb, it shouldn't take more than a few sentences. But if he really is off-topic then could we please stop helping him be off-topic?
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 181 by RAZD, posted 09-09-2012 1:42 PM Percy has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024