A few direct questions for evolutionists

Jim Larmore · May 29, 2008

Just a few questions for those who honestly believe in macroevolution.

1. What is the mechanism genetically that supports macroevolution?

2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

4. What is a viable mechanism for the formation of the first cell?

5. What is a viable mechanism for DNA to self assemble from naturally occurring nucleotides?

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Mallon · May 29, 2008

Good questions, Jim. I'm happy to take a crack at them.

Jim Larmore said:
1. What is the mechanism genetically that supports macroevolution?

There is no one mechanism. There are several. Natural selection, sexual selection, species selection, and genetic drift are a few.

2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

Mutation doesn't always reduce information in the genome. Mutations can sometimes multiply the information in genomes several times over (resulting in polyploidy), thereby increasing the amount of information that can be manipulated by evolution.

3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

Nope. There was a study done recently that demonstrated the usefulness of "half a wing". Read about Wing Assisted Incline Running:
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/299/5605/402

4. What is a viable mechanism for the formation of the first cell?

Don't know yet. This isn't a question most evolutionists worry about since biological evolution happens regardless of how the first life form was made. Scientists like Stuart Kauffman are working on questions like this. You might try checking out his work if you're seriously interested.

5. What is a viable mechanism for DNA to self assemble from naturally occurring nucleotides?

Ditto.

gluadys · May 29, 2008

Jim Larmore said:
Just a few questions for those who honestly believe in macroevolution.

1. What is the mechanism genetically that supports macroevolution?

2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

4. What is a viable mechanism for the formation of the first cell?

5. What is a viable mechanism for DNA to self assemble from naturally occurring nucleotides?

God Bless
Jim Larmore

Well, I was going to take a crack at these too and then realized I would just be repeating what Mallon said.

Tinker Grey · May 29, 2008

Well, no one else's said it yet: How does one define information? By what metric do you determine that it has increased? Given that a down-syndrome child has an extra chromosone, do they have more information or less? If that DS child has a child that is not DS and hence does not have an extra chromosone, have they gained or lost information?

In what sense then do you mean "literally reduce" when noone yet has defined this concept?

Assyrian · May 30, 2008

Jim Larmore said:
3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing

causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

They seemed to manage...

sfs · May 30, 2008

Jim Larmore said:
1. What is the mechanism genetically that supports macroevolution?

What do you mean by macroevolution here? Mostly, the mechanisms for macroevolution are the same as the mechanisms for microevolution. There can be some additional factors, like selection for hybrid sterility as speciation is taking place, but I doubt that's what you're asking about.

2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

This has already been addressed. By any definition of information I've ever seen, mutation can both reduce and increase information. If you have some definition in mind according to which that isn't true, you'd better provide it.

3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

Flying squirrels also seem to do just fine.

4. What is a viable mechanism for the formation of the first cell?

The mechanism is not known. That's why it's an unsolved research problem in science (but not in evolutionary biology, since that's in a different field).

5. What is a viable mechanism for DNA to self assemble from naturally occurring nucleotides?

There probably is no such mechanism. That's one reason for thinking that the first life was not based on DNA. RNA came first, and probably something else before that.

Skaloop · May 30, 2008

Jim Larmore said:
2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

As others have mentioned, information needs to be defined. But even if it isn't, your initial premise (mutation reduces information) is still demonstrably incorrect.

Consider a very short stretch of DNA. Say it's a section coded ACAT. As the initial baseline, it's information is X units. Now suppose that in the next generation, there is a mutation at the third location, giving ACTT. By your reasoning, this is a reduction in information, so it's information is X-1 units. If there is another mutation in the third generation that gives ACAT again, how much information is there? We've already seen from the first generation that ACAT has X units of information. But if mutation must reduce information, third-generation ACAT would have X-1-1 units.

Of course, the same logic shows that a mutation cannot be an increase in information, either. Mutations change information encoded in the genes, they do not increase or decrease information.

atomweaver · May 30, 2008

Not to dog-pile the "reduces information" bandwagon, but here is fresh, new example of a non-mutation mechanism for massive genome information increase;

Common Aquatic Animal's Genome Can Capture Foreign DNA

In essence, Meselson and colleagues say, bdelloids may acquire DNA by habitually disintegrating their genomes -- something these unusual animals do regularly during periods of desiccation, which fractures their genetic material and ruptures cellular membranes. Miraculously, bdelloids can then spring back to life upon rehydration of their habitats, readily reconstituting their genomes and their membranes.
In the process of rebuilding their shattered DNA, though, they may adopt shreds of genetic material from other bdelloids in the same puddle, as well as from unrelated species.
Meselson and co-authors Eugene A. Gladyshev and Irina R. Arkhipova believe the findings may solve the longstanding mystery of bdelloids' sexless ways, and may shed light on their ability to adapt to new environments.
"These fascinating animals not only have relaxed the barriers to incorporation of foreign genetic material, but, more surprisingly, they even managed to keep some of these alien genes functional," says Arkhipova, a staff scientist in Harvard's Department of Molecular and Cellular Biology.
"In principle, this gives them an opportunity to take advantage of the entire environmental metagenome," adds Gladyshev, a graduate student in molecular and cellular biology at Harvard.

props to Naraoia, for first posting this in C&E...

Assyrian · May 30, 2008

Skaloop said:
Consider a very short stretch of DNA. Say it's a section coded ACAT. As the initial baseline, it's information is X units. Now suppose that in the next generation, there is a mutation at the third location, giving ACTT.

Unless we assume, as creationists seem to do, that the new form is simply no longer 'information', what we really have now is two forms of the same stretch of DNA. The first form does not simply disappear but but is passed on to brothers sisters and cousins. Our organism and its cousin both have the same amount of information, but it is different information, and the total amount of information in the gene pool has increased.

Wiccan_Child · Jun 14, 2008

Jim Larmore said:
Just a few questions for those who honestly believe in macroevolution.

1. What is the mechanism genetically that supports macroevolution?

Mutation.

Jim Larmore said:
2. Since mutation literally reduces information in the genome how does complexity increase which demands new or novel information?

I can only asssume 'information' means the sequence of nucleotides (AAC|GTT|GCA|AAC|AGG|TGA, or something). If that is the case:

a) Mutations do not necessarily reduce information. Point insertion mutations, for example, increase the amount of information as defined above.

b) An increase in 'complexity' does not necessarily require an increase in. information. Nevertheless, such increases are exceedingly common.

Jim Larmore said:
3. If a leg slowly became say a wing wouldn't it become a bad or useless leg before it developed into a wing causing the animal millions of years of hardship and difficulty in surviving?

No: 'half a wing' is beneficial to the organism. Just look at flying squirrels and snakes: they glide. Adaptations that help cause better and better gliding can obviously eventually lead to true flight.

Jim Larmore said:
4. What is a viable mechanism for the formation of the first cell?

Formation of Nucleotides.
The primordial Earth was wet, warm, and the atmosphere was full of gases (hydrogen, ammonia, cyanide, etc). Left to their own devices, this soup spontaneously forms nucleotides.
Nucleotides to polynucleotides.Montmorillonite clay, abundant on priordial Earth's seabed, turns out to be the perfect catalyst for nucleotides to form into chains, called polynucleotides.
Polynucleotides to RNA.
Some of these polynucleotides are self-replicating. One such chain is called ribonucleic acid, or RNA. This replication is imperfect, but some of these imperfect copies would be more efficient than their predecessors. This is akin to (or even is) evolution.
RNA to DNA.
Over hundreds of millions of years, RNA became more complex: it evolved from a single strand to a double strand, and thus arose the better adapted DNA molecule.
However, DNA requires proteins called amino acids to replicate, so where did they come from?
Formation of amino acids.
The same chemical soup that produces nucleotides back in step (2) also produces a large variety amino acids. Long chains of amino acids, called polypeptides, also form.
DNA to primitive cells.
It turns out that montmorillonite clay is the perfect breeding ground for all kinds of organic molecules. One such group of molecules are lipids.
Lipids have a natural tendency to clump together in spherical structures called libosomes and micelles.
Now, DNA or RNA molecules trapped in these structures gain an instant advantage: protection.

These were the first primitive cells: self-replicating molecules safely held within lipid shells.

I took this information from video #3 potholer54's series. I recommend watching them all, they are very informative.

Jim Larmore said:
5. What is a viable mechanism for DNA to self assemble from naturally occurring nucleotides?

See above.

A few direct questions for evolutionists

Jim Larmore

Guest

More options

Mallon

Senior Veteran

More options

gluadys

Legend

More options

Tinker Grey

Wanderer

More options

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

More options

sfs

Senior Member

More options

Skaloop

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion

More options

atomweaver

Senior Member

More options

Assyrian

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

More options

Wiccan_Child

Contributor

More options

Similar threads

A few direct questions for evolutionists

Jim Larmore

Guest

Senior Veteran

Legend

Wanderer

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

Senior Member

Agnostic atheist, pro-choice anti-abortion

Senior Member

Basically pulling an Obama (Thanks Calminian!)

Contributor

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency