|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,442 Year: 3,699/9,624 Month: 570/974 Week: 183/276 Day: 23/34 Hour: 4/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: How novel features evolve #2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Percy,
The topic is development of novel features. We start with (a) a parent population and end up with (b) a daughter population with novel features. The question is how we get from (a) to (b):
So far I see it as being on topic. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : listby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
How can Zi Ko be on topic in a thread about how novel features evolve while never mentioning or even alluding to novel features? He's not talking about how guided evolution can create novel features. He's just talking about his favorite topic, guided evolution, and ignoring the topic of this thread. What Zi Ko is saying here is no different from what he said in the Wright thread. Zi Ko does not change topic when he changes threads - he only has one topic.
Your position is akin to arguing that the milling of lumber is on topic in discussions ranging from home building to furniture manufacturing to sandpaper. It isn't like there isn't a relationship, but the topic demarcations are not subtle. --Percy Edited by Percy, : Add clarifying sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Percy,
How can Zi Ko be on topic in a thread about how novel features evolve while never mentioning or even alluding to novel features? He's not talking about how guided evolution can create novel features. ... So let's ask: IF we accept that "directed\guided evolution (zi ko)" occurs, THEN how does that produce novel features? ie what's the next step in his thesis to increased diversity of species. Enjoyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
RAZD writes: So let's ask: IF we accept that "directed\guided evolution (zi ko)" occurs, THEN how does that produce novel features? ie what's the next step in his thesis to increased diversity of species. If you click on "Percy posts only" and peruse the messages you'll see that this has already been done several times. Should we wait until everyone (including a moderator a couple days ago) has asked him to address the topic? In general I feel participants should be allowed considerable leeway in addressing the topic, but Zi Ko has a demonstrated history of raising his favorite pet topic in any thread he posts. I've done most of the work moderating Zi Ko, but I'm a participant in this thread, so I'm trying to recruit the other participants to help keep the thread on-topic. Zi Ko wants to talk about guided evolution. That's all he wants to talk about. Unless he begins talking about guided evolution leading to novelty he shouldn't be engaged in discussion. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi Percy
Not have participated on threads with him before I will leave you to decide then. Enjoyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
RAZD writes:
So let's ask: IF we accept that "directed\guided evolution (zi ko)" occurs, THEN how does that produce novel features? ie what's the next step in his thesis to increased diversity of species. I agree.The procedure of how novel features evolve, after the mutation have had happened, is exactly the same as thought to be by New synthesis Theory.The difference is in the nature of mutation. So any evidence existing in the way random mutations cause novel features to evolve ,can be used in explainig how guided mutations cause new features to evolve! Edited by zi ko, : No reason given. Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi zi ko
I agree.The procedure of how novel features evolve, after the mutation have had happened, is exactly the same as thought to be by New synthesis Theory.The difference is in the nature of mutation. So any evidence existing in the way random mutations cause novel features to evolve ,can be used in explainig how guided mutations cause new features to evolve! Great, so now we can move on in this thread to the formation of those novel traits, and you can participate in that discussion, or not, as you wish. Enjoy.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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
RAZD writes:
I suppose i can agree with above. Is there something more after that?
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?Isn't this just selection?
Ithink it is both. Selection and guided mutations.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1427 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Hi zi ko,
... Thus the directed part of the evolution would have to be in manipulation of the ecological environment, yes?
I suppose i can agree with above. Is there something more after that? The formation of novel traits, which begins the process of increasing the diversity within living species, that leads to phyletic speciation, and can lead to divergent speciation and the increase in the diversity of species on earth:
quote: The "the accumulation of changes from generation to generation may become sufficient for individuals to develop combinations of traits that are observably different from the ancestral parent population" is the formation of novel traits, the topic of this thread. Remember that mutations affect the genotype and selection (ecological or sexual) operates on the phenotype (the expressed traits of the individuals), that it is a two-step dance, and not just hopping along on one leg.
Isn't this just selection?
Ithink it is both. Selection and guided mutations. And I can agree with that, as working hypothesis. It has always seemed to me that evolution just shows the how of the process: that science, in general does not, cannot, really address the whys (purpose\causal\intent), because of the way science is formulated -- not because there is any intended attempt to eliminate it from science, philosophical or theistic consideration, but because science is just not capable of addressing those issues. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : format Edited by RAZD, : more format Edited by RAZD, : clrtyby 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)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8
|
When I started this thread, I had hoped that we could move from the theoretical - take it as accepted that mutation followed by natural selection is the mechanism for novel features to evolve - and actually demonstrate it in an animal big enough for creationists to think it's 'proper'.
We started well with lizards and mice but stumbled when we couldn't totally nail it. Let's not go backwards to argue the theoretical.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
RAZD writes: It has always seemed to me that evolution just shows the how of the process: that science, in general does not, cannot, really address the whys (purpose\causal\intent), because of the way science is formulated -- not because there is any intended attempt to eliminate it from science, philosophical or theistic consideration, but because science is just not capable of addressing those issues. I fully subscribe.My "guided mutations' doesn't intend to bring aboutSupernatural intervention.It seems to me a clearly scientific issue, though very much complicated, involving high and maybe unknoun yet level of biochemistry in relation to simplistic concept of random mutations. RAZD writes: From my proposed thread Introduction to Evolution, Message 1): If we look at the continued effects of evolution over many generations, the accumulation of changes from generation to generation may become sufficient for individuals to develop combinations of traits that are observably different from the ancestral parent population. This lineal change within species is sometimes called phyletic change in species, or phyletic speciation. This is also sometimes called arbitrary speciation in that the place to draw the line between linearly evolved genealogical populations is subjective, and because the definition of species in general is tentative and sometimes arbitrary.... (2) The process of divergent speciation involves the division of a parent population into two or more reproductively isolated daughter populations, which then are free to (micro) evolve independently of each other. The reduction or loss of interbreeding (gene flow, sharing of mutations) between the sub-populations results in different evolutionary responses within the separated sub-populations, each then responds independently to their different ecological challenges and opportunities, and this leads to divergence of hereditary traits between the subpopulations and the frequency of their distributions within the sub-populations. Over generations phyletic change occurs in these populations, the responses to different ecologies accumulate into differences between the hereditary traits available within each of the daughter populations, and when these differences have reached a critical level, such that interbreeding no longer occurs, then the formation of new species is deemed to have occurred. After this has occurred each daughter population microevolves independently of the other/s. These are often called speciation events because the development of species is not arbitrary in this process. If we looked at each branch linearly, while ignoring the sister population, they would show phyletic change in species (accumulation of evolutionary changes over many generations), and this shows that the same basic processes of evolution within breeding populations are involved in each branch. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- The "the accumulation of changes from generation to generation may become sufficient for individuals to develop combinations of traits that are observably different from the ancestral parent population" is the formation of novel traits, the topic of this thread. Remember that mutations affect the genotype and selection (ecological or sexual) operates on the phenotype (the expressed traits of the individuals), that it is a two-step dance, and not just hopping along on one leg. I Think i could easily use this text to describe the mechanism of how "guided mutations" work in producing evolution! May i? Edited by zi ko, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zi ko Member (Idle past 3641 days) Posts: 578 Joined: |
When I started this thread, I had hoped that we could move from the theoretical - take it as accepted that mutation followed by natural selection is the mechanism for novel features to evolve - and actually demonstrate it in an animal big enough for creationists to think it's 'proper'.
You seem to think that "guided mutation caused by environmental information flow" is an nonscientific or natural issue. Can you tell me why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9504 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
zi ko writes: You seem to think that "guided mutation caused by environmental information flow" is an nonscientific or natural issue. Can you tell me why? In this thread I don't give a stuff about guided mutation. As has been pointed out to you many times, this thread is not about guided mutation. If you want to talk about guided mutation take it elsewhere. Edited by Tangle, : No reason given.Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10042 Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
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. Guided mutations have been excluded by the evidence. The evidence is consistent with random mutations, not guided mutations.
Again, this would be true if we would need a Supernatural creator. That is not the case as I discussed before. All you would need is a protein capable of producing a set mutation when it is triggered by a set environmental cue.
Again repair mechanisms in my paradigm fix DNA damage based on the chemistry of DNA and and the chemicals brougt by the environmental changes. And in the case of the pocket mouse, it resulted in random mutations that produced a novel and beneficial trait.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22480 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.8 |
Hi Zi Ko,
Discussion in this thread ceased before it reached the 300 message limit when it would be closed, but that doesn't mean this thread is now available to discuss anything related to evolution. It you'd like to talk about how novel features evolve then please proceed, by all means. But if you'd just like to talk about guided evolution then please propose a new thread over at Proposed New Topics. Then you'll be able to talk about guided evolution to your heart's content. --Percy
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024