The steps of mutation

JohnR7 · #1 2nd June 2006, 10:52 AM

Can you show the steps of mutation needed to change one species into another. Do we have to accept on faith that mutations can make the needed change or is their actual evidence to that effect. I mean REAL evidence and not kangaroo court evidence. You can preach to the choir all you want, but I want real world rubber meets the road evidence.

AirPo · #2 2nd June 2006, 11:51 AM

Ring species.

GoSeminoles! · #3 2nd June 2006, 03:30 PM

Originally Posted by JohnR7

Can you show the steps of mutation needed to change one species into another. Do we have to accept on faith that mutations can make the needed change or is their actual evidence to that effect. I mean REAL evidence and not kangaroo court evidence. You can preach to the choir all you want, but I want real world rubber meets the road evidence.

Ring species provide a good example of this since we can sample their DNA right now and identify the genetic differences.

Identifying the mutation steps associated with a historical speciation event, such as the evolution of whales, is all but impossible because we cannot sample the genetic material of any of its extinct precursors. Fortunately, we don't need to do this to know whales evolved, to identify their precursors, or to place them on a phylogenic tree. Fossils and other genetic tests are more than sufficient for this.

Likewise, crime scene investigators do not need to know every miniscule detail of a crime to determine who did it and how. After the suspect broke into the house, did he put his foot down on this particular patch of carpet? Did he wipe his nose with his sleeve? Don't know, don't care. We do know that his blood and hair are at the scene of the crime, that the ballistics match his gun, that he had a motive, and that he's got no alibi. That spells conviction.

TheNewAge · #4 2nd June 2006, 08:28 PM

Originally Posted by JohnR7

Can you show the steps of mutation needed to change one species into another. Do we have to accept on faith that mutations can make the needed change or is their actual evidence to that effect. I mean REAL evidence and not kangaroo court evidence. You can preach to the choir all you want, but I want real world rubber meets the road evidence.

Scientists have already observed the emergence of new species in several varieties of plants, specifically, beans and some varieties of lilies, if I recall correctly.
I think what you are questioning is the criteria used to determine when a new species has emerged or if we are simply studying an isolated abberation from an existing species' genotype/phenotype.

TheNewAge · #5 2nd June 2006, 08:30 PM

Originally Posted by JohnR7

Can you show the steps of mutation needed to change one species into another. Do we have to accept on faith that mutations can make the needed change or is their actual evidence to that effect. I mean REAL evidence and not kangaroo court evidence. You can preach to the choir all you want, but I want real world rubber meets the road evidence.

Is this guy capable of starting a thread for discussion without being pompous and condescending?

ApocryphaNow · #6 2nd June 2006, 08:48 PM

Mutation alone is only part of the constellation of requirements that lead to the formation of a new species. It means little without the action of natural selection and the forces of gene flow and drift. So no, I cannot do that, and science if fairly clear on how this works. Neither history or evolution operate in a "vacuum." (heh, unless, in the literal sense, you mean "space"... although that isn't really a "true" vacuum)

Asimov · #7 2nd June 2006, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by JohnR7

Can you show the steps of mutation needed to change one species into another. Do we have to accept on faith that mutations can make the needed change or is their actual evidence to that effect. I mean REAL evidence and not kangaroo court evidence. You can preach to the choir all you want, but I want real world rubber meets the road evidence.

Can you show me evidence of God without your kangaroo court evidence?

rmwilliamsll · #8 2nd June 2006, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by TheNewAge

Scientists have already observed the emergence of new species in several varieties of plants, specifically, beans and some varieties of lilies, if I recall correctly.
I think what you are questioning is the criteria used to determine when a new species has emerged or if we are simply studying an isolated abberation from an existing species' genotype/phenotype.

Plants are good places to start to answer these kinds of questions. Partly because they tend to polypoidy, especially with cultivated plants like rice, wheat and maize. Since they are important to people, since we like to eat *grin*, there also tends to be a bit more research than on other creatures. Another thing which makes them easier to study is that fixation in a population is easier since a single plant can produce lots of fertile seeds where a good mutation in animals may have a hard time fixing in a population.

another good study is hemoglobin and myogloblin, mostly because of the increasing number of chains, which are in turn multiple genes and the presence of pseudgenes.

likewise the blood clotting proteins form a good study to show gene duplication and divergence.

Dannager · #9 2nd June 2006, 08:58 PM

Owned.

JohnR7 · #10 2nd June 2006, 09:31 PM

Originally Posted by TheNewAge

Is this guy capable of starting a thread for discussion without being pompous and condescending?

Not when I have to put up with the **** I have to put up with from the evolutionists on this forum. It is the natural reaction to the heathen beliefs I run into on here.