Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,810 Year: 3,067/9,624 Month: 912/1,588 Week: 95/223 Day: 6/17 Hour: 2/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Mamalian red blood cells
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 16 of 51 (500481)
02-26-2009 4:09 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 1:34 PM


Mutation and selection
AlphaOmegakid writes:
Now you did a good job searching the internet for some science on the subject, But this science says zero about how this process evolved. That is my question. Do you have an answer?
I do. By mutation and selection, natural processes known to exist, unlike this Jesus character you mention in the O.P.
More specifically, and for part of the story, the duplication of a gene and its subsequent mutation seem to have added a key component to erythrocyte spectrin, which is a key to the functioning of mammalian red blood cells in the absence of new protein synthesis.
As you're interested in the subject, you'll enjoy this:
Some analysis of one aspect of mammalian RBC evolution
Apart from that, your objections in the O.P. would be met by the fact that the ancestral reptiles already had the features of RBC production and circulatory organs necessary to cope with the changes in the mammalian system.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 1:34 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by traste, posted 05-25-2009 12:55 AM bluegenes has not replied

  
Capt Stormfield
Member (Idle past 455 days)
Posts: 428
From: Vancouver Island
Joined: 01-17-2009


Message 17 of 51 (500483)
02-26-2009 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 12:13 PM


quote:It's an interesting question. If you were a scientist, how would you go about seeking an answer? What kind of research do you think is required here? What kind evidence would lead you to say "Oh, yeah, I get it. That's obviously how the function of hemoglobin evolved."
First of , you don't know that I am not a scientist. And secondly, you may want to explore the differences between hemoglobin and red blood cells. Hint: It similar to the difference between pebbles and Mt. Everest.
Nice dodge of the question.
If you think I am using argument ad ignoratiam, then please spell this out. I have stated quite a few facts about red blood cells. Some from a religious perspective, but most from a biological perspective. Then I have asked a question about you and others supplying evidence of how this process of extrusion of the DNA and the mitochondria evolved.
Did you read your own post? You said:
I am posting this topic primarily because I think it is evidence of God's creation. However, I also think the evidence of red blood cells in mammals defies evolutionary theory.
...Now I will stop the preaching and share why I think this is impossible under an evolutionary process.
You have presented nothing in the way of evidence for creation, you have only attempted to show that there is not an evolution based description of the process. If you are not making an argument from ignorance, then please show your positive evidence for creation.
This is not about hemoglobin! It is about mammalian red blood cells. You have created a strawman/red herring
The essence of your post was about the process whereby RBCs change so as to facilitate the transfer of oxygen via the hemoglobin they contain. If you wish to make the semantic quibble that it is somehow relevant to the point of your post whether I refer to the evolution of hemoglobin vs. the evolution of the red blood cell, then you merely make yourself appear desperate to avoid the subject at hand. The subject, of course, being that you are making an argument for creation based on your (or everyone's) alleged ignorance of how this system might have evolved. You have presented no logical connection between this alleged ignorance and your belief in creation.
So, again: If you are not making an AFI, what is the point of your post? Why are RBCs evidence creation? Do they have God's fingerprints on them?
Capt.
Edited by AdminModulous, : cleaning up bbcode
Edited by Capt Stormfield, : Quoting not working?
Edited by Capt Stormfield, : Thanks Admin we crossed paths trying to fix the missing slash.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 12:13 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
kuresu
Member (Idle past 2513 days)
Posts: 2544
From: boulder, colorado
Joined: 03-24-2006


Message 18 of 51 (500485)
02-26-2009 5:08 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 12:13 PM


you may want to explore the differences between hemoglobin and red blood cells. Hint: It similar to the difference between pebbles and Mt. Everest.

What, size?
And you wonder why people don't take you seriously.
Please, don't continue. The laughter will kill me.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 12:13 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 19 of 51 (500486)
02-26-2009 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 12:13 PM


If you think I am using argument ad ignoratiam, then please spell this out.
Very well, let me spell it out. You are basing your argument on the things that you don't know about evolution. This is an argument from ignorance.
I have stated quite a few facts about red blood cells.
However, you have skipped the few seconds' thought and research that would have led you to an answer.
Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 12:13 PM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
lyx2no
Member (Idle past 4716 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 20 of 51 (500487)
02-26-2009 5:57 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 9:19 AM


For the Record
The Hemoglobin in the cell joins with oxygen molecules in our lungs and transports this "breath of life" (spirit) to every one of the six trillion cells in the human body.
Oxygen = Spirit
If there is to be a vote on why people don't take you seriously, I want this to be entered into nomination.
People, by the way, are just chock full of things that a functionally important without being alive. Boogers come to mind. But that's because booger are funny.

Genesis 2
17 But of the ponderosa pine, thou shalt not eat of it; for in the day that thou shinniest thereof thou shalt sorely learn of thy nakedness.
18 And we all live happily ever after.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 9:19 AM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
Stagamancer
Member (Idle past 4915 days)
Posts: 174
From: Oregon
Joined: 12-28-2008


Message 21 of 51 (500530)
02-27-2009 2:21 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 9:19 AM


Therefore, random mutations over time must have caused the red blood cells to sacrifice their life for the benefit of the organism. But hold on! This change in red blood cells is huge! Not small! Any organism that would have mutated to have living red blood cells turn into dead red blood cells would not have had the capacity to replenish these cells. The bones and the marrow would have had to change (mutate)to provide additional cells, because the red blood cells could no longer divide and multiply on their own. But they would only have about 120 days for those changes to evolve. Then the kidneys which filter the blood would have had to adapt to these new cells. The heart would have to adapt to these new cells. The blood pressure would change, because the capilaries would have to adapt. The fluid dynamics of the blood would have changed, and all the other organs would have to compensate. And not only would they have to compensate, but they would have to all coordinate together to compensate in avery short period of time.
This is the oldest and most ridiculous argument against evolution by natural selection. "It's too impossible!" "There's not enough time!" "The system is too complicated to handle change!" Every time an argument like this is made, it's shown to be utterly ridiculous. (E.g. the bacterial flagellum).
Anucleated erythrocytes are not an evolutionary problem. "Lower" vertebrates such as fish have nucleated RBCs, but they are still generated through erythropoiesis, similar to humans and other mammals. In fact they have similar signaling pathways:
In this issue of Blood, Paffett-Lugassy and colleagues take us back 450 million years, to the time when fish diverged from higher vertebrates in evolution, to show that the EPO-EPOR signal transduction axis is a highly conserved component of vertebrate erythroid
development.
Quote taken from here
So, all that happens is that eventually, a mutation occurs that causes the RBCs to eject their nuclei after they've been generated. This is no real sacrifice as you argue because the only cells that truly reproduce, that put genetic information into the next generation, are the gametes. Or maybe it is sacrifice (but not in any divine sense), but in that case you must include ALL somatic cells because even ones that retain their nuclei and reproduce within the life of the organism still do not directly pass their genes to the next generation. Luckily for them, the gametes have (barring mutation) an identical genome and therefore in helping the gametic cells, the somatic cells are still increasing their own fitness, even RBCs.
But I digress. The point is, that no major change in the way erythropoiesis happens had to occur. As for the changing of the circulatory system, well, that's gone through way bigger changes than dealing with anucleated RBCs. E.g. fish have 2 chambered hearts, birds and mammals have 4 chambered hearts. And conveniently in between is the 3 chambered heart of the amphibians and reptiles. All of these changes can be easily explained by small step by step mutations over millions of years that never result in any catastrophic events that end life as we know it. (Obviously there could have been some "catastrophic" mutations along the way, but those organisms wouldn't have reproduced.) So, as for dealing with erythrocyte evolution, the size of the RBCs would have changed gradually, as would the change in capillary and vessel size, and there's no real problem.

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 9:19 AM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
Blue Jay
Member (Idle past 2697 days)
Posts: 2843
From: You couldn't pronounce it with your mouthparts
Joined: 02-04-2008


Message 22 of 51 (500636)
02-28-2009 4:13 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid
02-26-2009 9:19 AM


Menopause = Death... and "Mammalian" has three M's in it.
Hi, AOK. Good to see you(r words) again.
AOK writes:
But something "miraculous" happens about the seventh day (how interesting) of its life.
What does seven days have to do with the symbolism of Jesus's sacrifice? I think you're confusing your bible stories.
-----
AOK writes:
But did you know that these cells really no longer fit the definition of a biological cell? In fact they are dead!
...They can no longer produce any proteins, or reproduce. They basically die on purpose.
The Tweedmeier-Buxley defense is a little-known legal strategy that is acceptable under the United States Constitution, whereby a defense lawyer can use Cell Theory to conflate the arrest of a man for the murder of a post-menopausal woman with double jeopardy. It goes something like this:
"Your Honor, my client could not have killed this woman: clearly, by the tenets of Cell Theory, she died back in her forties."
-----
AOK writes:
Even small genetic changes in the blood system caused by mutations are catastrophic and at best cause fitness deterioration.
Yes. This is why we don't have four different basic blood types and two different Rh-factors.
It is also why all animals must have the exact same base-pair sequence for the hemoglobin gene that we do, otherwise their hemoglobin wouldn't work.
And, why pig blood and lizard blood and fish blood work perfectly well in the human body.
Wait a minute... none of that stuff is true, is it?
Edited by Bluejay, : "gene sequence" is not the phrase I wanted

-Bluejay/Mantis/Thylacosmilus
Darwin loves you.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by AlphaOmegakid, posted 02-26-2009 9:19 AM AlphaOmegakid has not replied

  
AlphaOmegakid
Member (Idle past 2875 days)
Posts: 564
From: The city of God
Joined: 06-25-2008


Message 23 of 51 (501088)
03-04-2009 7:31 AM


Sorry Unable to respond
Hey guys, I'm sorry I haven't responded, but I will. I have been working a major project that has deterred any blogging time. I should be able to jump in this weekend.

  
olivortex
Member (Idle past 4778 days)
Posts: 70
From: versailles, france
Joined: 01-28-2009


Message 24 of 51 (501101)
03-04-2009 9:22 AM


observing.
I can't wait. I don't have neither enough scientific knowledge to participate yet, so i just read you all, with great interest.
I may be way off topic here, but i'm looking for other's people opinions on the great ape/human genome issue.
Edited by olivortex, : supressed a word.

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Wounded King, posted 03-04-2009 11:09 AM olivortex has replied

  
Wounded King
Member
Posts: 4149
From: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 25 of 51 (501110)
03-04-2009 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 24 by olivortex
03-04-2009 9:22 AM


its all great
Is that the great 'ape/human' genome issue or the 'great ape'/human genome issue?
And what issue is it exactly?
TTFN,
WK

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 9:22 AM olivortex has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 1:18 PM Wounded King has not replied

  
olivortex
Member (Idle past 4778 days)
Posts: 70
From: versailles, france
Joined: 01-28-2009


Message 26 of 51 (501124)
03-04-2009 1:18 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Wounded King
03-04-2009 11:09 AM


Re: its all great
I won't get lost in a clumsy introduction to it, so here is what drew my attention:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zi8FfMBYCkk
On request of our moderator, i will invite you to read instead of listening to a video from another site.
"The complete DNA sequence of one of those great apes, the chimpanzee, provides us with a remarkable new opportunity to answer a question that has fascinated people of every culture, of every place and time. Where did we come from?
We human beings carry our genetic information on 23 pairs of DNA-containing chromosomes. The great ape species, on the other hand, have 24 pairs. And there’s the mystery. How could we share a common ancestor with them if you and I are, quite literally, missing a chromosome? Where’d it go?
Well, if one thought that our genome was designed, as many Americans seem to, it wouldn’t have gone anywhere. If our DNA was the unique product of an intelligent designer, that fellow could simply have arranged our DNA in fewer packages than the apes, and since there is no real relationship between us and them, nothing would be missing.
But if a fellow named Charles Darwin was right, there is a relationship, a link, and the remnants of that missing chromosome have to be somewhere inside us. You couldn’t just throw a whole chromosome away, and therefore evolution makes a testable prediction. When we lay the human and chimpanzee genomes side by side, we’ve got to find a human chromosome constructed by sticking two chromosomes together from that common ancestor. And if we cannot find it, evolution is wrong. Well, guess what? It’s chromosome #2.
Our second chromosome was produced by the head to head fusion of ape chromosomes 12 and 13, and the new primate and human data show the exact point at which those two chromosomes were pasted together. No doubt about it — like a criminal at the scene of a crime, evolution left its messy fingerprints all over us — and we know where we came from."
These are not my words, but some have to come from somewhere sometimes. These are from Ken Miller. I hope i don't break another rule doing this. If so please don't take no offence, i'm still quite new to this forum in terms of practice.
Edited by olivortex, : admin request
Edited by olivortex, : wrong spelling

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Wounded King, posted 03-04-2009 11:09 AM Wounded King has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by AdminNosy, posted 03-04-2009 1:31 PM olivortex has not replied
 Message 28 by Coragyps, posted 03-04-2009 2:53 PM olivortex has replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 27 of 51 (501126)
03-04-2009 1:31 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by olivortex
03-04-2009 1:18 PM


Your own words
We do not debate other sites here. If there is anything interesting presented in the video please offer it here in your own words.
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 1:18 PM olivortex has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 28 of 51 (501130)
03-04-2009 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by olivortex
03-04-2009 1:18 PM


Re: its all great
How could we share a common ancestor with them if you and I are, quite literally, missing a chromosome? Where’d it go?
never mind............
Edited by Coragyps, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 1:18 PM olivortex has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 29 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 3:59 PM Coragyps has not replied

  
olivortex
Member (Idle past 4778 days)
Posts: 70
From: versailles, france
Joined: 01-28-2009


Message 29 of 51 (501133)
03-04-2009 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by Coragyps
03-04-2009 2:53 PM


Re: its all great
Explanations often come when we expect them the less

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by Coragyps, posted 03-04-2009 2:53 PM Coragyps has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 30 by bluegenes, posted 03-04-2009 4:40 PM olivortex has not replied

  
bluegenes
Member (Idle past 2477 days)
Posts: 3119
From: U.K.
Joined: 01-24-2007


Message 30 of 51 (501140)
03-04-2009 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by olivortex
03-04-2009 3:59 PM


Re: its all great
olivortex writes:
Explanations often come when we expect them the less
Olivor, I'll happily discuss fused chromosomes and pig genomes if you want to start threads on them, but here, we'll be told that we're off topic, quite rightly, because neither of them are mammalian red blood cells, are they?
So, why not start a topic on whatever you're interested in?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by olivortex, posted 03-04-2009 3:59 PM olivortex 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