Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 57 (9174 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Neptune7
Post Volume: Total: 917,616 Year: 4,873/9,624 Month: 221/427 Week: 31/103 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Is there really such a thing as a beneficial mutation?
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 91 of 223 (343176)
08-25-2006 12:45 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Aegist
08-25-2006 12:26 AM


Seems to me that this thread is dead because your question has been answered several times over more than sufficiently. Yet every example that is given isn't the one you want to hear....
... Either way, because it is conceivable of a situation in which it would be beneficial, it is therefore a fact that beneficial mutations exist.
Obviously there is no way to discuss this, and I really don't enjoy the attitude, not that yours is particularly bad.
Perhaps we can turn this thread in another direction?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 12:26 AM Aegist has not replied

  
Aegist
Member (Idle past 3783 days)
Posts: 23
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Joined: 08-21-2006


Message 92 of 223 (343179)
08-25-2006 12:57 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by Faith
08-23-2006 9:07 PM


What is a "beneficial" mutation REALLY
A mutation which can concievable benefit the organism that has undergone that mutation.
Is it possible that at least one form of "mutation" is not a "mistake" but a normal predictable method of producing variations in the normal processes of reproduction, just as the process of mixing of alleles is
Well sexual reprooduction is that normal predictable method of producing variations. More specifical, recombination is the variation creator. mixing alleles from two parents just works to move around pre-existing genes. Recombination actually re-organises some of those alleles and has a potential chance of changing things permanently.
As a general rule all mutations are avoided by organisms where possible because heritability is the most important aspect of life. if you didn't replicate yourself accurately, then your offspring probably wouldn't survive (all possible combinations of DNA considered far more would be dead than living). So accurate replication of self is THE most important thing. Hence mutations are 'avoided'
BUT
any organism which succeeded in this first tenant too well would die in the not too distant future. If any organism ever succeeded in STOPPING mutation, then it would never change ever again. one virus could kill everyone of them. A bacterial superbug which they had no immunity to. Or they could be outcompeted by a new predator or new competing species which wants their niche.
mutation is Necessary.
------------------------------
Does this help faith?

----------------------------------
Research, Innovation, Risk Taking and Living Forever
http://www.sportsarbitrageguide.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Faith, posted 08-23-2006 9:07 PM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 93 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 1:13 AM Aegist has replied
 Message 97 by kuresu, posted 08-25-2006 1:55 AM Aegist has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 93 of 223 (343183)
08-25-2006 1:13 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Aegist
08-25-2006 12:57 AM


What is the thrill in being the tenth or twelfth evolutionist to pile on the one or two creationists, just expounding variations on the same old thing? What do you get out of it? I got the message a long time ago. I have my own opinion nevertheless, and I'm very tired of arguing it. You don't like my opinion, you don't want to consider it, you just want to bash it. You are determined to tar me as stupid. What's the thrill? Give it up. The whole lot of you.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 12:57 AM Aegist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 1:25 AM Faith has replied
 Message 145 by Archer Opteryx, posted 08-25-2006 12:01 PM Faith has replied

  
Aegist
Member (Idle past 3783 days)
Posts: 23
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Joined: 08-21-2006


Message 94 of 223 (343187)
08-25-2006 1:25 AM
Reply to: Message 93 by Faith
08-25-2006 1:13 AM


It's not about you.
Its about the overwhelming evidence and the pointlessness of opinions in face of evidence.
Should I assume this thread is completed? Conclusion reached?
"Is there really such a thing as a beneficial mutation?"
Yes

----------------------------------
Research, Innovation, Risk Taking and Living Forever
http://www.sportsarbitrageguide.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 1:13 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 95 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 1:33 AM Aegist has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 95 of 223 (343190)
08-25-2006 1:33 AM
Reply to: Message 94 by Aegist
08-25-2006 1:25 AM


The "overwhelming evidence" is an illusion. But there is no point in arguing this with a dozen people who are only going to use their numbers and their being on the side of the "right" opinion, plus ridicule, to win their point, instead of arguments, and who just can't bear it when we aren't persuaded.
But maybe it's just that the positions on both sides are clear and this is an impasse. I doubt it though. I don't think anybody here grasped what mjfloresta or I was trying to say.
Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 94 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 1:25 AM Aegist has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 96 by kuresu, posted 08-25-2006 1:52 AM Faith has not replied
 Message 108 by nator, posted 08-25-2006 7:00 AM Faith has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2596 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 96 of 223 (343195)
08-25-2006 1:52 AM
Reply to: Message 95 by Faith
08-25-2006 1:33 AM


then how about telling us what you two were trying to say?
as far as I could tell, mjfloresta was spouting crap. but if she wasn't, tell us what she said that wasn't crap.

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 95 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 1:33 AM Faith has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2596 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 97 of 223 (343199)
08-25-2006 1:55 AM
Reply to: Message 92 by Aegist
08-25-2006 12:57 AM


which is exactly the bananas we eat today are facing extinction--they're all clones, (our fault), and there's a new fungal disease.
And this is the repeat. For those old enough to remember bananas from the fifties, today's variety is a different sort--not as sweet, or good tasting.
we control the genetic identity so well in bananas that they are essentially clones, and we don't let them mix--the only source of new information is genetic mutation, and we probably do an effective job of weeding it out.

All a man's knowledge comes from his experiences

This message is a reply to:
 Message 92 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 12:57 AM Aegist has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 116 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 98 of 223 (343201)
08-25-2006 2:15 AM
Reply to: Message 90 by Aegist
08-25-2006 12:26 AM


Evolution of Nylonase from frameshift mutation: http://www.nmsr.org/nylon.htm
RAAARRRRRRGH!!!!! You have awoken the slumbering beast!!!!
This sites is riddled with innaccuracies, it is one of my prticular bugbears since it is so often cited in relation to the evolution of nylon metabolisis. A much better reference would either be to the paper that the NMSR site misrepresents (Ohno, 1984) which is freely available online or to the much more relevant to this discussion Prijambada (1995) paper which actually discusses the de novo development of nylonase enzymes.
For the specific details of my issues with this site see my thread 'Is the evidence concerning the Nylon bug being exaggerated'.
TTFN,
WK
/rant

This message is a reply to:
 Message 90 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 12:26 AM Aegist has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 2:21 AM Wounded King has not replied
 Message 100 by Aegist, posted 08-25-2006 2:21 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 99 of 223 (343203)
08-25-2006 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Wounded King
08-25-2006 2:15 AM


Great. Instead of a continuation of the back and forth about the creo interpretation vs the evo interpretation, maybe you could launch this thread in the direction of a discussion of the actual particulars of some of the mutations known as beneficial. Perhaps a list of all known ones at some point. Or maybe Crash could offer that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Wounded King, posted 08-25-2006 2:15 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 142 by crashfrog, posted 08-25-2006 11:46 AM Faith has replied

  
Aegist
Member (Idle past 3783 days)
Posts: 23
From: Sydney NSW Australia
Joined: 08-21-2006


Message 100 of 223 (343206)
08-25-2006 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 98 by Wounded King
08-25-2006 2:15 AM


Oops. Sorry, I didn't actually read it closely, I just looked for a quick reference so people who didn't know about it at all could see some info on it.
I did find the TalkOrigins reply to AnswersInGenesis paper too, which was interesting. (I actually read that!)

----------------------------------
Research, Innovation, Risk Taking and Living Forever
http://www.sportsarbitrageguide.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 98 by Wounded King, posted 08-25-2006 2:15 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
ikabod
Member (Idle past 4576 days)
Posts: 365
From: UK
Joined: 03-13-2006


Message 101 of 223 (343215)
08-25-2006 4:59 AM
Reply to: Message 14 by Faith
08-24-2006 11:34 AM


But this is precisely what we are questioning, that such a system could produce the amazing stuff of life that we see all around us, that a system which only produces degrees of disease and deformity could ever have come up with the functioning precision and elegance in so many living things, most of which functions without the compromises and trade-offs accepted as beneficial mutations.
i think here to review the "precision and elegance " you need to step away from evolution and look at how eco systems work and how well creatures fit in them ....
the high flying eagle is superb at gliding and swoping down to snatch its prey ... oh except in forests , jungles etc
the shark is a class act as a hunter , except in open savana , and in deserts
the owl has great low light vision for seeing its prey , except under water ...
the archer fish is unreal in its ability to fire a water spit at insects , except in salt water
all of the "precision and elegance " of creature is forced apon it to deal with the demands of the eco system it is in , it has become that way or it has died out .
look at open water living creatures ..fish , sharks , seals , whales , dolphins , and humans in submarines .. all the same basic streamlines shape with fin like structures to steer the . why because any other form is less well suited .. the enviroment creates a straitjack for survival .. the "precision and elegance " is not optional , its is manditory .. while at the same time robbing the creature of options .... be good in the sea be poor on the land ...
fish ,sharks ,whales are better in the water than seals in many ways .. this is one reason why seal are prey to them , the whales swim faster and can catch them ..... but seals are better on land and if ashore are at an advantage .....
it is a constant war to out do others that forces creature to be so "well adaptered"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by Faith, posted 08-24-2006 11:34 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 102 by Wounded King, posted 08-25-2006 5:04 AM ikabod has replied
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 5:24 AM ikabod has not replied

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 116 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 102 of 223 (343216)
08-25-2006 5:04 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by ikabod
08-25-2006 4:59 AM


be good in the sea be poor on the land ...
So true, as this research shows.
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by ikabod, posted 08-25-2006 4:59 AM ikabod has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 146 by ikabod, posted 08-25-2006 12:04 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 103 of 223 (343219)
08-25-2006 5:24 AM
Reply to: Message 101 by ikabod
08-25-2006 4:59 AM


I have NO idea why you are informing me of these obvious things.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 101 by ikabod, posted 08-25-2006 4:59 AM ikabod has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 104 by Belfry, posted 08-25-2006 6:19 AM Faith has replied

  
Belfry
Member (Idle past 5169 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 104 of 223 (343220)
08-25-2006 6:19 AM
Reply to: Message 103 by Faith
08-25-2006 5:24 AM


Trade-offs
Faith writes:
I have NO idea why you are informing me of these obvious things.
I think the point was that most traits that could be considered "beneficial" do indeed involve compromises and trade-offs, which is in response to your Message 14, in which you speak of "the functioning precision and elegance in so many living things, most of which functions without the compromises and trade-offs accepted as beneficial mutations."
Edited by Belfry, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 5:24 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 105 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 6:28 AM Belfry has not replied
 Message 106 by Faith, posted 08-25-2006 6:40 AM Belfry has replied

  
Faith 
Suspended Member (Idle past 1528 days)
Posts: 35298
From: Nevada, USA
Joined: 10-06-2001


Message 105 of 223 (343221)
08-25-2006 6:28 AM
Reply to: Message 104 by Belfry
08-25-2006 6:19 AM


Re: Trade-offs
Thank you, that's at least an explanation, but the trade-offs I had in mind weren't adaptations, they were active diseases vs. active diseases.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by Belfry, posted 08-25-2006 6:19 AM Belfry has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by nator, posted 08-25-2006 7:07 AM Faith 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