Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
64 online now:
dwise1, kjsimons (2 members, 62 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,162 Year: 4,274/6,534 Month: 488/900 Week: 12/182 Day: 12/28 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Iconic Peppered Moth - gene mutation found
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 31 of 76 (785406)
06-04-2016 8:56 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by JonF
06-04-2016 8:28 AM


Re: Yes it's totally weird
I don't think so.

Selection changes over time just as the genome changes over time. The environment at any given moment and location will be different from some other location and time.

Would make an interesting thread?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by JonF, posted 06-04-2016 8:28 AM JonF has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 32 of 76 (785407)
06-04-2016 9:20 AM
Reply to: Message 29 by jar
06-04-2016 8:22 AM


Re: Yes it's totally weird
Faith writes:
If you'd been following my posts you would know that this is exactly what I said would be the situation if the black moth alleles were built in. While the whites were selected the blacks would show up from time to time in heterozygous form and be picked off by predators. It was only when the whites started getting picked off instead (selected against) that the blacks could start to multiply.

But Faith you have provided no evidence of any built in conditions and all the evidence shows that is NOT the case nor have you provided a model, process, mechanism, procedure or thingamabob that would explain how the genes would get transferred when the critter gets eaten immediately.

Of course you've changed the subject. How predictable. How's about taking a break from your rote response long enough to grant that I made exactly the same point you claimed I didn't understand, that IF the alleles are built in they would follow exactly the pattern you claim for mutations -- and a lot more efficiently for the reasons I gave that mutations are at a disadvantage.

And showing that mutations are a crock ought to count for something in favor of my point of view and I've certainly shown they are a crock in this and other posts.

You're the master of blather. Try acknowledging the very simple obvious point I made please.

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by jar, posted 06-04-2016 8:22 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 06-04-2016 10:10 AM Faith has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 33 of 76 (785409)
06-04-2016 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Faith
06-04-2016 9:20 AM


Re: Yes it's totally weird
Faith writes:

Of course you've changed the subject. How predictable. How's about taking a break from your rote response long enough to grant that I made exactly the same point you claimed I didn't understand, that IF the alleles are built in they would follow exactly the pattern you claim for mutations -- and a lot more efficiently for the reasons I gave that mutations are at a disadvantage.

There is a difference between unsupported assertions Faith and support for a theory.

You need to provide evidence the alleles are built in and so far you have never done that.

Faith writes:

And showing that mutations are a crock ought to count for something in favor of my point of view and I've certainly shown they are a crock in this and other posts.

You're the master of blather. Try acknowledging the very simple obvious point I made please.

But you have not shown mutations are a crock and ALL of the evidence shows that mutations happen constantly.

You have not yet made a point, only unsupported assertions.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 9:20 AM Faith has taken no action

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 34 of 76 (785413)
06-04-2016 11:15 AM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
06-04-2016 6:18 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
Mutation is in fact harder to explain. See my post to jar above. There is something very very weird about the idea that it was a mutation instead of built-in for the reasons I give there.

You know the dark allele is dominant, right? So if it had existed before the early nineteenth century then don't you think someone would have noticed it? And if it was magicked into existence by God In The Beginning, then wouldn't 6,000 years of natural selection have removed it from the gene pool before pollution made it beneficial?

You either need many same or similar mutations at the same locus to counteract the constant loss to predation, which doesn't fit with the general observations of mutations as random accidents of replication, or you have to count on one mutation surviving against ridiculous odds, or showing up so exactly at the right time that only a teleological mechanism could explain it. Not what the ToE normally has in mind.

This is more or less incomprehensible. What you actually need is for the mutation to show up and be favored by natural selection. Mutations occur, and natural selection would have favored this one. Any questions?

If there is any reasoning behind your false trichotomy, you have failed to demonstrate it, though I'm gonna guess that the Sharpshooter Fallacy is involved somewhere.

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 6:18 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 3:43 PM Dr Adequate has replied
 Message 41 by herebedragons, posted 06-04-2016 7:57 PM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
14174dm
Member (Idle past 343 days)
Posts: 161
From: Cincinnati OH
Joined: 10-12-2015


Message 35 of 76 (785414)
06-04-2016 11:26 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Faith
06-03-2016 7:43 PM


Re: not wierd at all.
I'm trying to think through Faith's built in genes vs. mutations.

How precisely are genes located on the chromosome? If Faith is right, each variation of a gene would have to be in a slightly different location with surrounding alternative genes degraded to "junk dna"

If the change is due to mutation, wouldn't the gene be in the same exact location with other functioning genes surrounding it?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Faith, posted 06-03-2016 7:43 PM Faith has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by RAZD, posted 06-05-2016 9:45 AM 14174dm has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 36 of 76 (785420)
06-04-2016 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Faith
06-04-2016 6:18 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
Faith writes:

That much is common knowledge, and quite easily explained in terms of a built-in allele for the black moth.

There was no 'built in allele for the black moth'. This isn't blue or brown eyes.

We know conclusively that the black colouration is the result of a mutation. We know which gene caused it and we can date it.

Mutation is in fact harder to explain.

The mutation has been explained totally and incredibly diligently - it took 15 years of painstaking experiment. The fact that YOU find it difficult to accept is irrelevant.

There's no hiding place Faith, this is the smoking gun.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

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

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 6:18 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 3:37 PM Tangle has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 37 of 76 (785425)
06-04-2016 3:37 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Tangle
06-04-2016 2:15 PM


Re: Very weird indeed
Interesting of course that you don't even consider what I actually said about why mutations are harder to explain. Try it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 2:15 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 4:16 PM Faith has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 38 of 76 (785426)
06-04-2016 3:43 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Dr Adequate
06-04-2016 11:15 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
This is more or less incomprehensible. What you actually need is for the mutation to show up and be favored by natural selection. Mutations occur, and natural selection would have favored this one. Any questions?

It would have favored it only at precisely exactly the right time for it to fit into the newly blackened environment. Otherwise it would have been eaten. Do follow the argument. Really. Make an effort to follow the argument.

I don't know why it wasn't noticed but it must have arisen earlier, because it makes less sense for it to have arisen "just in time" to be selected. Most mutations are said to have been present some time before they get selected anyway. It's just that this situation is peculiarly high pressure -- get selected NOW or die!

Edited by Faith, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2016 11:15 AM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2016 4:48 PM Faith has taken no action

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8486
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 39 of 76 (785427)
06-04-2016 4:16 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Faith
06-04-2016 3:37 PM


Re: Very weird indeed
Faith writes:

Interesting of course that you don't even consider what I actually said about why mutations are harder to explain. Try it.

Whether this is true or not (it's not of course) is totally irrelevant because it *happened*.

Got that? It happened. The thing you say can't happen has been shown to have happened. The thing that the theory predicts happened.

I see that your final resort is to say that goddidit. God plays directly with moth evolution now does he?


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

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

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 3:37 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by Faith, posted 06-05-2016 5:11 AM Tangle has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16112
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 40 of 76 (785429)
06-04-2016 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by Faith
06-04-2016 3:43 PM


Re: Very weird indeed
t would have favored it only at precisely exactly the right time for it to fit into the newly blackened environment. Otherwise it would have been eaten. Do follow the argument. Really. Make an effort to follow the argument.

Why is that your argument? Not only is that true (apart from the pharse "precisely exactly", since the Industrial Revolution didn't happen at one single instant of time, but rather went on for a bit) but also it appears to contradict everything else you're saying, such as:

I don't know why it wasn't noticed but it must have arisen earlier ...

It (or a mutation having the same effect) may well have done. A quick look on google shows that melanism does occur now and then in the animal kingdom. But then it would have been eaten, because of being anti-adaptive. So it had to happen again. Hence the evidence that this particular mutation dates from the early nineteenth century.

Most mutations are said to have been present some time before they get selected anyway.

Well, naturally they occur before they're selected for. But "some time before"? How much time, and by whom is this said?

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Faith, posted 06-04-2016 3:43 PM Faith has taken no action

  
herebedragons
Member (Idle past 91 days)
Posts: 1517
From: Michigan
Joined: 11-22-2009


(3)
Message 41 of 76 (785433)
06-04-2016 7:57 PM
Reply to: Message 34 by Dr Adequate
06-04-2016 11:15 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
wouldn't 6,000 years of natural selection have removed it from the gene pool before pollution made it beneficial?

Yeah, especially since it is part of a fairly large genus, Biston, that presumably diversified rapidly after the flood into 54 species and 40 subspecies culling alleles at every population split / speciation event. It's lucky it has any alleles at all.

HBD


Whoever calls me ignorant shares my own opinion. Sorrowfully and tacitly I recognize my ignorance, when I consider how much I lack of what my mind in its craving for knowledge is sighing for... I console myself with the consideration that this belongs to our common nature. - Francesco Petrarca

"Nothing is easier than to persuade people who want to be persuaded and already believe." - another Petrarca gem.

Ignorance is a most formidable opponent rivaled only by arrogance; but when the two join forces, one is all but invincible.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-04-2016 11:15 AM Dr Adequate has taken no action

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 678 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 42 of 76 (785436)
06-05-2016 5:11 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Tangle
06-04-2016 4:16 PM


Re: Very weird indeed
I haven't said it can't happen. But exploring the consequences of different scenarios makes it highly improbable this was a mutation. Unless it was a very old mutation that kept popping up from time to time anyway, most of the time to be eaten by birds, many years before being selected. In which case it might as well be a built-in allele anyway. Righto, I don't trust this kind of science.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Tangle, posted 06-04-2016 4:16 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by JonF, posted 06-05-2016 8:38 AM Faith has taken no action
 Message 44 by jar, posted 06-05-2016 8:57 AM Faith has taken no action
 Message 48 by Tangle, posted 06-05-2016 1:11 PM Faith has taken no action

  
JonF
Member
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


Message 43 of 76 (785442)
06-05-2016 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Faith
06-05-2016 5:11 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
But exploring the consequences of different scenarios makes it highly improbable this was a mutation

Please explain how you explored the consequences and show how you arrived at your probability estimate.

As if.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Faith, posted 06-05-2016 5:11 AM Faith has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 44 of 76 (785443)
06-05-2016 8:57 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by Faith
06-05-2016 5:11 AM


Re: Very weird indeed
Faith writes:

Righto, I don't trust this kind of science.

You do understand Faith that whether or not you "trust this kind of science" is irrelevant; it is still the only science we have.

It seems though that what you don't trust has nothing to do with the science but rather the conclusions that show your interpretation of the Bible stories is false.

Faith writes:

But exploring the consequences of different scenarios makes it highly improbable this was a mutation.

Yet the very study under discussion shows that not only was it a mutation but a specific mutation that dates from a specific period of time.

Where is your study, model, method, process, procedure, thingamabob that we can compare to this study?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by Faith, posted 06-05-2016 5:11 AM Faith has taken no action

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 639 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


(1)
Message 45 of 76 (785447)
06-05-2016 9:45 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by 14174dm
06-04-2016 11:26 AM


Re: not wierd at all.
I'm trying to think through Faith's built in genes vs. mutations.

Actually it is rather easy. You see all this genetic material is just lying around in the genome (and a lot of it is stored in junk files), and there are three ways these built-in genes become activated:

  1. an inactive gene section is moved into an active section of the genome and goes to work, or
  2. a previously active gene has the blocking mechanism that prevented it from being active removed.
  3. an activator section is moved to where an inactive built-in gene resides, turning it on.

Don't you dare call these "mutations" though (that is an evilutionist assumption), because these are brought about by simple recombination of the existing genes in small populations, when they were suppressed in larger populations.

Enjoy

Edited by RAZD, : #3


we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAmerican☆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 35 by 14174dm, posted 06-04-2016 11:26 AM 14174dm has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022