|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total) |
| |
anil dahar | |
Total: 919,516 Year: 6,773/9,624 Month: 113/238 Week: 30/83 Day: 6/3 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The End of Evolution By Means of Natural Selection | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
One that produces a normal trait ... Normal trait?
... not a disease and not a dead gene. So ... any beneficial or neutral mutation, such as the ones that are constantly being observed?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I started a thread a while back asking if anyone had ever observed the beneficial conversion of a gene to a pseudogene, and I'm still interested. The experiment shouldn't be too difficult --- just provide a model organism with a constant supply of something that the "wild" organism expends energy and nutrients to make.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Based on a totally fantasy scenario you want me to accept that mutations are possible? Wait ... you still don't even understand that mutations exist? Sheesh. It's pathetic. Perhaps you should go away and (I may have said this before) learn some frickin' genetics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Normal based on what we actually see in nature ... ... so, a mutation that doesn't actually produce anything novel? You are funny. Of course, one could supply you with instances ... but how would they be relevant to the production of evolutionary novelty? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Yeah, "beneficial" by the back door as it were, nothing like the kinds of alleles that already exist in all species that produce all the variations. You're describing what is essentially a disease process and assuming it's something normal. That's what I encountered in Bluejay's descriptions also. Just shows to me that evolution is in the business of making up loads of BS. Again, if this made sense, it would be a lie. But again, your own incoherence has prevented you from being as wrong as you'd like.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Oh it produces NOVEL stuff, sick novel stuff plus miles of dead DNA. Unlike you, I have studied genetics. If you really wish to deceive people with this pathetic trash, try a Sunday School class. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
BENEFICIAL for cripes' sake. Get the CONTEXT. The context? The context, Faith, is that you are so incoherent, and so wrong about such a multitude of subjects, that it is sometimes hard to tell what in particular you want to be wrong about. If you scream in denial of one fact, how am I meant to know that you meant to be shrieking in denial of another? What you now claim you meant to say sounds just as silly as what you actually did say, so how am I to know which ludicrous error you intended to make? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
The EVIDENCE for this is the occasional oddball fluke ... ... and your point is? Yes, mutations are a product of chance. Have you really not grasped that yet?
... and otherwise nothing but treating as fact what is only assumed because you need it for evolution to work. This lie would be more interesting if fewer creationists had learned to recite it.
And "science" in the case of evolution is turning out to be nothing but reified hypotheses, not science at all. Scientists disagree with you. So who should I believe about the nature of science --- scientists, or a woman who drivels out hopeless nonsense about every scientific topic she mentions?
Sorry, I do expect to find something in human beings that recognizes the differences between truth and BS, fact and fiction ... But you can't recognize it when you see it. Why do you suppose scientists think that creationists are a bunch of drooling halfwits? Why do you think everyone round here is laughing at you? Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
If it causes disease or simply nullifies an existing allele it's a mutation. "Nullifies"? Is that the same as "changes"?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
In order to head off another meltdown I'm temporarily removing your posting privileges in this forum, the Biological Evolution forum. This will allow you to focus your energies on the Reduction of Alleles by Natural Selection (Faith and ZenMonkey Only) thread. ... I guess.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Could you elaborate on the definition of species a bit? No. Not any more. One of the consequences of evolution is that our habit of dividing organisms into species may be useful to us but can never have any logical foundation.
Beyond this, the breeding potential of dogs and cats works in her favor, as it proves that there is a vast quantity of alleles already present in the dog/wolf population, which is necessary for her model. Your point is obscure. Remember that Faith's "model" involves every non-kosher animal being reduced to a single breeding pair around 2517 B.C. Given that there were only two wolves on the Ark, then how, in Faith's model, did the "vast quantity of alleles" originate? Faith is a creationist, she doesn't do joined-up thinking.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Given long enough, and without any mutations happening, then one allele will become fixed. That's just math.
In many cases there has not been enough time, and in no cases have there been no mutations.
To me, this simply follows out from the math, that with nothing else to stop it, the Black allele would simply by virtue of its being dominant to all the others ... You haven't done the math, and you are misunderstanding the word "dominant". Faith is, of course, talking complete rubbish. But unfortunately, so are you.
I really believe that this should work out just by virtue of the math, but I'd like to be sure. You haven't done the math. Where is the math? You need "Wounded King", an actual geneticist, to talk about this, or you need me, an actual mathematician. Or both of us working in concert. The "Great Debate" concept of these forums is stupid and should be abolished.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined:
|
Surely genetic dominance does confer some population dominance too. No. You are stupidly, pathetically, droolingly, hopelessly incompetent and stupid and ignorant about the very meaning of the technical terms used in genetics. Once more, once again, once again for one more time --- go and read a textbook of genetics.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I don't see how if black is dominant to all the others, brown is dominant to grey and grey is dominant to tan. No, of course you don't see that. This is because you have never studied genetics even so far as to understand even the words that you are using. I may have said this before. And I am going to say it again. You are hopelessly ignorant about genetics, so what you need to do now is to get a basic textbook about genetics so that you at least know the meaning of the vocabulary that you are using. For pity's sake, Faith.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member Posts: 16113 Joined: |
But can I assume that the same concept of a consistant probability for the distribution of alleles across the generations would hold? Only if the population is infinitely large. If it isn't, and if no new mutations occur, then given enough time one of the variant alleles must become fixed in the population. And the question of which allele is "dominant" has nothing to do with which one will become fixed. If new mutations do arise, which they will, then the question becomes moot.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024