Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 74 (8962 total)
130 online now:
AZPaul3, caffeine, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), PaulK, Tangle (5 members, 125 visitors)
Newest Member: Samuel567
Post Volume: Total: 871,207 Year: 2,955/23,288 Month: 1,146/1,809 Week: 265/313 Day: 6/71 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution.
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 83 of 1311 (807844)
05-06-2017 2:43 AM
Reply to: Message 82 by Dredge
05-06-2017 1:44 AM


2 - 0. Own goals.
Dredge writes:

This is an excellent post, CRR! I must try and find out more about these blokes, Witham, Moroz and Pigliucci.

Actually, an own goal. The Moroz article completely disagrees with you. Pigliucci would disagree, as you've spotted, and the link to the other guy, a journalist FFS!!!!, doesn't work

Dredge writes:

I suspect Pigliucci's reference to "evolutionary theory" helping understand "developmental and molecular systems" is being a bit overly generous to the influence of Darwinism.

An opinion, like your claim on another thread that genetics doesn't explain increases in information, that certainly wasn't formed based on any knowledge of biology, was it?

Dredge writes:

I wonder why Darwinists haven't cited the evolution of the car as a practical application of the theory of Common Descent yet. lol

Another own goal, in a way, because Darwin's theory is certainly useful in engineering. Variation and selection has found optimum results for aeroplane bodies and antennae.*

*Click pic. to enlarge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolved_antenna


This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by Dredge, posted 05-06-2017 1:44 AM Dredge has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 87 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 6:51 AM bluegenes has responded
 Message 143 by Dredge, posted 05-09-2017 1:41 AM bluegenes has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


(2)
Message 85 of 1311 (807850)
05-06-2017 4:51 AM
Reply to: Message 84 by CRR
05-06-2017 4:17 AM


CRR writes:

So Darwin was probably correct regarding the origin of “species” within the kind but wrong about extending that to common ancestry from one or a few original ancestors.

What's the mechanism that limits change? How many new alleles can reach fixation in a population before this kicks in?

When did the cats start to diverge from a common ancestor? Why can't you get a cat and a linsang from a common ancestor?

Asiatic linsang

This message is a reply to:
 Message 84 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 4:17 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 90 of 1311 (807858)
05-06-2017 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 87 by CRR
05-06-2017 6:51 AM


What mechanism stops evolutionary change?
CRR quoting Axe: writes:

"Fine tuning involves the adjustment of many small details, so trial and error is often the best way to do it."

In fact I'd say it is more a trial and error solution aided by the power of computers than it is an application of evolutionary theory.

That's pretty much Darwin. Fine tuning by variation and selection (trial and error) until you've fined tuned into new species.

You haven't told me at what point change stops. What is the limit to the number of changes that can go to fixation across a population group by mutation, natural selection and drift, and what is the mechanism that halts change?

You could try asking Douglas Axe, couldn't you?

You like talking about giraffes, so how would you explain the genetic differences between the 7 existing sub-species without doing so in the light of evolution? Were there 14 giraffes on the Ark?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 87 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 6:51 AM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 8:16 AM bluegenes has responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 93 of 1311 (807863)
05-06-2017 8:38 AM
Reply to: Message 91 by CRR
05-06-2017 8:16 AM


Re: What mechanism stops evolutionary change?
CRR writes:

Recent research by GCF and partners has shown that there are four distinct species of giraffe in Africa. Two of these species have two and three subspecies respectively. All species and subspecies live in geographically distinct areas across Africa and while some of the species/subspecies have been reported to cross-bread in zoos, there is little to no evidence that this occurring in the wild.

I'd explain these the same way I'd explain horse/zebra/donkey. They are all descended from the kinds on Noah's Ark. The horse/zebra/donkey also prefer to breed with their own but can cross breed.

But how many are on the Ark? If it's ~4,500 yrs ago, then the genetics tell you that there would have been ~14 giraffes on the Ark. (They have diverged too far to descend from one pair). And what about the Samotherium? There would also have to be loads of equids on the Ark.

And once again, what is the mechanism that stops populations of organisms changing over time into new species (kinds)?

Edited by bluegenes, : fixed link


This message is a reply to:
 Message 91 by CRR, posted 05-06-2017 8:16 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 324 of 1311 (810000)
05-22-2017 7:42 PM
Reply to: Message 323 by CRR
05-22-2017 6:45 PM


Micro or macro?
CRR writes:

Taq writes:

Then show me a single genetic difference between humans and chimps that could not be produced by microevolution.

The Y chromosome. 20% of the genes have no homologue anywhere in the chimp genome.

That difference could be achieved by ~40 deletions on the chimp lineage; 40 mutations, one every 150,000yrs. or so. If one deletion can be micro, how many does it take to get macro?

What about the differences on the most divergent human Y-chromosomes in the 180 generations since Noah? There will be a lot more than 40 mutations involved, so micro or macro?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 323 by CRR, posted 05-22-2017 6:45 PM CRR has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 360 by CRR, posted 05-23-2017 3:30 AM bluegenes has responded

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 896 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 391 of 1311 (810138)
05-24-2017 3:45 AM
Reply to: Message 360 by CRR
05-23-2017 3:30 AM


Re: Micro or macro?
CRR writes:

The problem is much worse than that, bluegenes.

What problem?

CRR writes:

To account for all the non-homologous genes by deletions would require the common ancestor to have had hundreds of surplus genes available for deletion.

Hundreds? On the Y chromosome? And why would the genes being "surplus" in chimps mean they were "surplus" in the common ancestor? And where does "macroevolution" come in"? With one deletion? Ten?

CRR writes:

Unless these genes were nonsense then this is a large loss of information, and if they were nonsense why did the common ancestor have them?

Perhaps they were sufficiently advantageous to the common ancestor for them to be retained, but not for the chimps. And "loss of information" is common in evolution, as is gain. We don't have gills and scales; birds don't have teeth.

On the subject of micro and macro in relationship to human/chimp differences, Taq has just started a thread on the subject here. Message 1.

If you'd care to support your view that evolutionary processes are inadequate for increasing information in the life system, I've started an information thread here. Message 1


This message is a reply to:
 Message 360 by CRR, posted 05-23-2017 3:30 AM CRR has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020