The world's only immortal animal

What I'm wondering is if there is a limit to their immortality due to DNA damage or something.

Cool creatures, though. And quite beautiful.

I just rediscovered this creature the other day.

CACTUSJACKmankin said:

If there is then that would be my guess as well. DNA can't be 100% perfectly copied forever.

Click to expand...

Although, is the accumulation of DNA damage an absolute necessity? Evolution solves the problem with natural selection. The copies that survive are not necessarily perfect, but they work. Selection of that kind could in theory happen within a body - defective cell dies, good cells keep the organism going.

I'm not sure if that's actually possible in nature, though. Things get cancers all the time.

I think I've just wandered way beyond my expertise

Naraoia said:

Although, is the accumulation of DNA damage an absolute necessity? Evolution solves the problem with natural selection. The copies that survive are not necessarily perfect, but they work. Selection of that kind could in theory happen within a body - defective cell dies, good cells keep the organism going.

I'm not sure if that's actually possible in nature, though. Things get cancers all the time.

I think I've just wandered way beyond my expertise

Click to expand...

Don't feel bad. Evolution mythology is well beyond anyone's area of expertise.

I suppose it would be possible to take abiotic chemical molecules and turn them into biological organisms provided you are God, an extraterrestrial angel, or a very powerful mage, witch, or sorcerer proficient in arcane enchantments.

Supposedly lobsters don't suffer the ill effects of aging, they just get stronger, larger and more fertile.

CACTUSJACKmankin said:

If there is then that would be my guess as well. DNA can't be 100% perfectly copied forever.

Click to expand...

My sentiments as well. But once we can understand how it is working this way, we are another step closer to completely controlling our DNA and biology on a molecular level. So we may actually find a way to "endless" biological life but accidents and murder still will be factors in mortality. Just natural causes of death may one day be extremely limited or even bipassed altogether. But whether we live for a million years of 5 years, we are still finite and sinful and in need of God and the gospel.

CACTUSJACKmankin said:

If there is then that would be my guess as well. DNA can't be 100% perfectly copied forever.

Click to expand...

This thought does not automatically prove a case for gradual evolution. Birds do not have a perfect replication system, yet there are few if any variations from the basic design. Is wing DNA perfect? No, but it doesn't stray far from the "standard design. Why?
Not because Evolution isn't possible.
But because evolution doesn't work.
Meaning, small incremental changes are not the way design changes "work".

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

SkyWriting said:

This thought does not automatically prove a case for gradual evolution. Birds do not have a perfect replication system, yet there are few if any variations from the basic design. Is wing DNA perfect? No, but it doesn't stray far from the "standard design. Why?
Not because Evolution isn't possible.
But because evolution doesn't work.
Meaning, small incremental changes are not the way design changes "work".

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

Click to expand...

I recommend looking into Synthesis, Punctuated Equilibrium and the book The Selfish Gene. It is not as simple as your ideas presented there.

And the big elephant in the middle of the room is the fossil record, DNA and the geographic distribution of species. It really is a seriously credible topic when considering biological evolution. Not to mention the observations of biological macroevolution in real time in the Lenski experiment and other observations.

SkyWriting said:

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Click to expand...

Ask an engineer about the process of designing a new machine and compare it with how an animal reproduces.
You'll find they are nothing alike.

SkyWriting said:

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely correct.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2QlyKP6cUhQ

SkyWriting said:

This thought does not automatically prove a case for gradual evolution. Birds do not have a perfect replication system, yet there are few if any variations from the basic design. Is wing DNA perfect? No, but it doesn't stray far from the "standard design. Why?
Not because Evolution isn't possible.
But because evolution doesn't work.
Meaning, small incremental changes are not the way design changes "work".

Click to expand...

you are arguing from the standpoint of a person, we don't see the point of small incremental changes being useful.
that is hardly evidence that evolution doesn't work, just evidence you are arguing from your own incredulity.

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Click to expand...

then you just refuted the claim that life is designed then, well done.

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

Click to expand...

deep down you all know that life can't be designed.

im sorry but. Could we maybe not drag the "evolution is false" debate into every single thread thats posted on here? i mean seriously we get your in denial, you get we are in denial its a given, we're aware of this.

talk about the freaking the topic and your thoughts on it.

Speaking of which. This is awesome, if we somehow copy it though would it require us to go through puberty over and over again? Cause thats a pretty high price to pay for immortality.

SkyWriting said:

This thought does not automatically prove a case for gradual evolution. Birds do not have a perfect replication system, yet there are few if any variations from the basic design. Is wing DNA perfect? No, but it doesn't stray far from the "standard design. Why?
Not because Evolution isn't possible.
But because evolution doesn't work.
Meaning, small incremental changes are not the way design changes "work".

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

Click to expand...

As others have pointed out, you have made a very good argument against the intelligent design hypothesis. No, organisms are not designed by an engineer. Another thing no engineer would do is create DNA to guide an organism's development. They would create a Blueprint. DNA is not a blueprint, because you cannot examine it and determine what the organism will look like. It is more like a recipe (Thanks to Neil Shubin for that analogy).

Agonaces of Susa said:

Don't feel bad. Evolution mythology is well beyond anyone's area of expertise.

Click to expand...

I know it's beyond yours

You'll notice, though, that I wasn't talking about evolution (Evolution is my area of expertise, insofar as I have one.)

I suppose it would be possible to take abiotic chemical molecules and turn them into biological organisms provided you are God, an extraterrestrial angel, or a very powerful mage, witch, or sorcerer proficient in arcane enchantments.

Click to expand...

I do not dispute that.

SkyWriting said:

This thought does not automatically prove a case for gradual evolution.

Click to expand...

It was not supposed to, I think...

Birds do not have a perfect replication system, yet there are few if any variations from the basic design.

Click to expand...

Uh, what? Let's see. Hummingbirds, ostriches, penguins, albatrosses... that's a fairly broad definition of "little variation".

Is wing DNA perfect? No, but it doesn't stray far from the "standard design.

Click to expand...

You have no idea how DNA works or what it even looks like, do you?

What do you mean by the "standard design"?

(FYI, "wing DNA", if that's supposed to be the DNA that makes a wing, consists of zillions of genes and regulatory sequences scattered all over the genome. Most of them are not specific to wings, no more than the muscle, nerve or bone cells they make are. Even "wing-specific" genes, such as Tbx5*, have a range of other functions that have nothing to do with wings [Tbx5 in humans]. "Wing DNA" simply doesn't exist as a distinct series of base pairs.)

*A "make a forelimb here" kind of regulatory gene.

</compulsive education>

Why?
Not because Evolution isn't possible.
But because evolution doesn't work.

Click to expand...

Tell that to Richard Lenski. Or dog breeders.

Meaning, small incremental changes are not the way design changes "work".

Ask any engineer. They'll NEVER come up with small incremental design changes to get something done. The in-between's don't work.

Click to expand...

Why the heck would I ask an engineer about how life works?

Everybody except Evolutionary Biologists understand that, deep down.

Click to expand...

I'm afraid I'm an evolutionary biologist (well, a trainee evolutionary biologist, anyway), so you don't get away with not supporting your stance.

Exiledoomsayer said:

im sorry but. Could we maybe not drag the "evolution is false" debate into every single thread thats posted on here? i mean seriously we get your in denial, you get we are in denial its a given, we're aware of this.

talk about the freaking the topic and your thoughts on it.

Click to expand...

Sorry :o

Speaking of which. This is awesome, if we somehow copy it though would it require us to go through puberty over and over again? Cause thats a pretty high price to pay for immortality.

Click to expand...

I think my mum would rather kill me than have to go through my puberty again

adimus said:

I.... It is not as simple as your ideas presented there.

Click to expand...

A common ploy used by people unable to explain the many competing evolution mechanisms.

Tenka said:

Ask an engineer about the process of designing a new machine and compare it with how an animal reproduces.
You'll find they are nothing alike.

Click to expand...

I would ask him about Genetic Engineering.

Researchers Engineer Mosquitoes into “Flying Vaccinators”

News (9510) News: Horizon Negotiates Licenses to Gene Engineering Technology

New Antibody Engineering Technologies

Genetic Engineering & Biotechnology News ... ... cornucopia of information about genes that are important for sexual reproduction. ...

ReverendDG said:

you are arguing from the standpoint of a person,

Click to expand...

If you are not reading from that viewpoint, then, sure,
- I not make sense you to. -

ReverendDG said:

we don't see the point of small incremental changes being useful....

Click to expand...

That's right. We don't. If we did, we'd design or attempt to fix problems that way, wouldn't we.