Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Favorable Mutations? Help me!!
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 36 of 56 (57562)
09-24-2003 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 35 by Fred Williams
09-24-2003 8:23 PM


Re: A big goose egg
ROTFL! Need I say more? Evolution at its finest, folks! Let’s take a poll. How many here wish they would evolve the hemoglobin C type? Come on, don’t be shy!
Better poll: How many people in West Africa, where the gene is concentrated and malaria is high, would want the hemoglobin C in order to have a better chance of seeing their 16th birthday?
Possible spleen and gall bladder problems are nothing compared to contracting malaria.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by Fred Williams, posted 09-24-2003 8:23 PM Fred Williams has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 42 of 56 (58081)
09-26-2003 7:27 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Joralex
09-26-2003 6:52 PM


Re: Nylon is just pantyhose
"Does the nylon example qualify? A quick read of the link and you will see it doesn’t. A huge cost is incurred in efficiency, and thus in a normal environment the mutated strain could not last long (AiG also argues plasmid xfer, but the enzyme effeciency loss alone in the article cited by zephyr is sufficient to dismiss mr. nylon as a hero of the evolutionary faith). Does sickle-cell qualify? Of course not."
Of course not! But that part isn't advertised since it doesn't help the 'cause'.
This is a bit of a misnomer. The loss in effeciency comes about when comparing the effeciency of the glycocytic enzymes and the effeciency of the nylonase enzyme. The activity of the nylon enzyme is only 2% that of the glycolytic enzymes which is what you would expect given the amount of time that both enzymes have been subjected to natural selection. Read post 23 in this topic to find examples of enzymes increasing in effeciency due to mutation. Also, nylon as a primary food source was a "normal" environment for the mutant bugs. That's why they were cultured, because bacteria were found growing in an environment they had never been found in before. Do you think mutations that allow an organism to fill and empty niche is a bad thing for the organism? No competition is a very good think IMO.
I really can’t believe the number of evolutionists who use a DISEASE as evidence of evolution!!!
Their choices are few and far between so they gotta go with what they have. It's sort'a like when they're asked for evidence of a 'transitional fossil'. Archaeopteryx has been used so many times that the blasted thing doesn't have any feathers left ... it's been plucked clean! (heheh)
Actually, parasitism (like malaria) is a very strong selective force. Those that can resist the parasite will have more children than those who can not survive the infection. Makes sense to me that evolutionists use it. It's really not that much different than predation, just on a microscopic scale.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Joralex, posted 09-26-2003 6:52 PM Joralex has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024