Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 45 (9208 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: anil dahar
Post Volume: Total: 919,516 Year: 6,773/9,624 Month: 113/238 Week: 30/83 Day: 6/3 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The End of Evolution By Means of Natural Selection
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 288 of 851 (555093)
04-12-2010 7:58 AM
Reply to: Message 285 by Faith
04-12-2010 7:54 AM


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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 285 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 7:54 AM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 291 by Wounded King, posted 04-12-2010 8:04 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 295 of 851 (555103)
04-12-2010 8:26 AM
Reply to: Message 291 by Wounded King
04-12-2010 8:04 AM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 291 by Wounded King, posted 04-12-2010 8:04 AM Wounded King has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 296 of 851 (555105)
04-12-2010 8:28 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:00 AM


Re: ring species genotypes are different
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:00 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:30 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 298 of 851 (555107)
04-12-2010 8:30 AM
Reply to: Message 294 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:26 AM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 294 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:26 AM Faith has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:31 AM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 301 of 851 (555110)
04-12-2010 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:10 AM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:10 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 302 of 851 (555111)
04-12-2010 8:36 AM
Reply to: Message 300 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:31 AM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 300 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:31 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 305 of 851 (555119)
04-12-2010 8:41 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:30 AM


Re: ring species genotypes are different
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:30 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 306 of 851 (555120)
04-12-2010 8:46 AM
Reply to: Message 303 by Faith
04-12-2010 8:37 AM


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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 303 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 8:37 AM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 339 of 851 (555281)
04-12-2010 11:42 PM
Reply to: Message 324 by Faith
04-12-2010 3:02 PM


If it causes disease or simply nullifies an existing allele it's a mutation.
"Nullifies"? Is that the same as "changes"?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 324 by Faith, posted 04-12-2010 3:02 PM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 343 of 851 (555317)
04-13-2010 4:41 AM
Reply to: Message 332 by Admin
04-12-2010 3:38 PM


* sighs *
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by Admin, posted 04-12-2010 3:38 PM Admin has seen this message but not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 354 of 851 (555491)
04-14-2010 12:38 AM
Reply to: Message 352 by Pluto
04-13-2010 11:08 PM


Re: ring species genotypes are different, how do you get C, D and E by loss?
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by Pluto, posted 04-13-2010 11:08 PM Pluto has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 365 of 851 (556009)
04-16-2010 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 361 by ZenMonkey
04-16-2010 4:09 PM


No, You Lose
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 361 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-16-2010 4:09 PM ZenMonkey has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 386 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-16-2010 11:57 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


(1)
Message 368 of 851 (556020)
04-16-2010 6:04 PM
Reply to: Message 366 by Faith
04-16-2010 5:44 PM


Re: dominance
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 366 by Faith, posted 04-16-2010 5:44 PM Faith has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 395 by Admin, posted 04-17-2010 8:19 AM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 385 of 851 (556057)
04-16-2010 11:37 PM
Reply to: Message 377 by Faith
04-16-2010 8:20 PM


Let's Try This Again
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 377 by Faith, posted 04-16-2010 8:20 PM Faith has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 389 of 851 (556071)
04-17-2010 1:21 AM
Reply to: Message 386 by ZenMonkey
04-16-2010 11:57 PM


Re: No, You Lose
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 386 by ZenMonkey, posted 04-16-2010 11:57 PM ZenMonkey 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