I might have used "stopped" accidentally once, but most of the quotes I used " fixed benifitial mutations are slowing down" as you quoted above. But you should know what I meant given all my other responses.
Even though you and I have different ideas and we totally disagree on many topics, I never accused you of "making false statements over and over again". I can tell you right here that I am making my arguments in good faith, I wish you can say the same.
Well thank you. Its a controversial topic, whether or not evolution is true or not. Many people make aggressive claims, even in topics that are unclear. I just want to be safe, and try to be honest, so I appreciate the above response.
You might try your best to explain this away, but you won't even acknowledge that there is a possibility of a mutation limit? Even when faced with real data, and that your explainations are only hypthesis?
There is a limit to how much DNA can change, because there is a limit to how much DNA there is. However, what is possible is such an incredibly vast amount of change, that it becomes trivial to try to use this limit, to say that evolution didnt happen. As we both can see, in the experiment which uses real data, we see, literally tens of billions of mutations over tens of thousands of generations, and the organisms are still going strong.
As a matter of fact, right now, I am going to copy some graphs from the research articles.
The amount of genetic change that is possible in a lifeform, such as these e.coli, and every other animal, is so extraordinarily vast. And all of this is happening in a fixed environment, in a beaker, literally in a glass jar. Imagine the complexity of environmental stresses across the entire planet, and imagine the amount of environmental selection, in combination with the tens of billions, if not trillions of mutations, that happen in just this one species of bacteria alone.
Its mind boggling the amount of change that can occur, genetically and phenotypically, in life, on earth.
So yes, there has to be a physical limit somewhere. But, lets say for example, after trillions of generations and trillions of mutations later, lets say this bacteria finally reaches peak fitness. All you have to do is take that fit bacteria and put it into a new environment, and it is no longer at peak fitness. And with that, new environmental stresses select for new mutations to be fixated, and the process starts all over again.
So yes there is a limit somewhere, these bacteria may some day, about countless generations and countless mutations, they may reach that peak fitness position in that one glass jar. But think about all of life around all of earth, and just try to imagine how incredibly vast genetic and phenotypic changes can be.
I should also add that, mutations are, often products of error in transcription and translation of DNA. Mutations will always occur, so long as DNA is DNA. So long as life, is life as God has created it, it will by its nature, change. Sunlight and subatomic particles also pierce our DNA and create mutations. So long as as DNA can be damaged by outside sources, or driven by environmental change, or so long as it makes transcription and translation errors. There will forever be mutations. Its just the way we exist. And the only limit to that, is death. But so long as we live, we will mutate.
WHY is my statement " mutations should be random, and when there is no selection pressure, more mutation should survive and result in more diversified environment" in correct?
It takes environmental stresses to naturally select for mutations, thereby fixating them, so that they proceed through generations, and this results in an internal variation.
If there is no environmental stress, this could only be possible in an environment where a population has reached peak fitness. If a population is at peak fitness, new mutations will not become fixed because they are out-competed by already existent superior mutations. And there cannot be a beneficial mutation in an organism at peak fitness, because it is already at peak fitness.
And if new mutations are not fixated, then there is no production of diversity within a population.
Mutations will still occur at random, and variation will come into existence. However, if the population is already at peak fitness, the peak fit, will out compete the variants, and the variants will go extinct. At least if in a stable and confined environment.
You said "without selection, mutations fixate at a lower rate", which is totally false. When there is no selection (i.e. all variations live), fixation should pickup since all different strains survives (or the strain with the fastest reproduce rate should manifest more), don't you agree? You explain more in detail since your current answer is not satisfitary.
Read above. This is exactly what the e.coli experiment is explaining. I'll gather some more quotes. I should have said, with lower amounts of selective pressure, mutations will fixate at a lower rate as the organism approaches peak fitness. Or perhaps I could have said, with limited selective pressures, mutations fixate at a lower rate.
A fixed environment, is an environment in which selective pressures are limited. As the E.coli reach peak fitness (which can only exist in an environment that is stable and remains the same, without alternating or any outside selective pressures) beneficial mutations cannot fixate in their lineage, because they are already at peak fitness. But again, this peak fitness cannot occur in environments that are ever changing.
That's what I meant in my statement above. Without environmental pressures that are changing what it means to be "peak in fitness", organisms approach peak fitness, which by definition, means they cannot become more fit and cannot accumulate fixated beneficial mutations. Because no mutation can benefit an organisms that is already at optimal fitness. Therefore, there cannot be a beneficial mutation.
And this is in part, why rate of fitness improvement and rate of fixation of beneficial mutations, both are decreasing, because the organisms are approaching peak fitness, and fixation is decreasing.
You suggested that without selection, all variants would survive. Maybe If there is no outside pressure on a population, or any pressure that would cause an organism not to reach peak fitness, then variants would not survive, because they would be out-competed by the most fit.
