How the fish got it's fingers

[TasManOfGod]

No, there is no evidence of a Flood. That area of Pennsylvania at the time was an inland sea. There's not evidence of a flood but rather all the fossils indicate a quiet sea where creatures settled into the mud at the bottom when they died (after being eaten by scavengers, of course).

Can you explain how they all died on the sea that they would sink to the bottom at their death?

 

[lucaspa]

Devolve
It means that the fish that once grew fingers grrow out of having them, thereby we can assume that they were once around because they aren't anymore.

I hope that clears that up

Yes, it clears it up, but data is against it. We have seen new traits appear by mutation. Not devolution, but changes in the amino acid sequences of proteins that give a new activity.

5: J Bacteriol 1999 Jun;181(11):3341-50. Isolation and characterization of mutations in Bacillus subtilis that allow spore germination in the novel germinant D-alanine. Paidhungat M, Setlow P

"Bacillus subtilis spores break their metabolic dormancy through a process called germination. Spore germination is triggered by specific molecules called germinants, which are thought to act by binding to and stimulating spore receptors. Three homologous operons, gerA, gerB, and gerK, were previously proposed to encode germinant receptors because inactivating mutations in those genes confer a germinant-specific defect in germination. To more definitely identify genes that encode germinant receptors, we isolated mutants whose spores germinated in the novel germinant D-alanine, because such mutants would likely contain gain-of-function mutations in genes that encoded preexisting germinant receptors. Three independent mutants were isolated, and in each case the mutant phenotype was shown to result from a single dominant mutation in the gerB operon. Two of the mutations altered the gerBA gene, whereas the third affected the gerBB gene. These results suggest that gerBA and gerBB encode components of the germinant receptor. Furthermore, genetic interactions between the wild-type gerB and the mutant gerBA and gerBB alleles suggested that the germinant receptor might be a complex containing GerBA, GerBB, and probably other proteins. Thus, we propose that the gerB operon encodes at least two components of a multicomponent germinant receptor."

Mutations in what are called homeobox genes that control development can have even bigger effects:
4. Zou H, Niswander L , Requirement for BMP signaling in interdigital apoptosisand scale formation. Science 1996 May 3;272(5262):738-41 "Expressionof dnBMPR in chicken embryonic hind limbs greatly reduced interdigital apoptosis and resulted in webbed feet. In addition, scales were transformed into feathers." What this means is that having a mutation that put receptors (a protein) for BMP (a homeobox protein) on cells causes scales to turn into feathers.

There are numerous examples in the fossil record where new features evolved where they did not exist before. No devolution. It's a nice creationist fantasy, but a fantasy nonetheless.

 

[lucaspa]

Can you explain how they all died on the sea that they would sink to the bottom at their death?

If they died of a flood they would not have been scavenged by other fish because the scavengers would also be killed in the flood.

And, if you died in the sea, where else would you sink to? Fish today sink to the bottom after death. The swim bladders collapse and they are heavier than the water.

 

[lucaspa]

Disease control via mutation - what a novel idea. Has there been example of this to your knowledge?

HIV is also controlled by mutation. Some people are lucky enough to be born with natural immunity. They have mutations that have altered the proteins that HIV uses to get into the cell. HIV can't enter and the patient is immune.

So, in the absence of technology, the people with these mutations would be the only ones to survive over a number of generations and thus everyone would be descended from them.

Remember, the disease also is changed by mutation and selection picks the mutations that are less deadly. A microoganism that kills its host before the host can pass them on to a new host ends up killing itself.

Rabbits and myxomylemia is another example. See McNeil's Plagues and Peoples for more examples.

 

[lucaspa]

I wondered when I read this why the fish was still trying to grow fingers when some others around it had already apparently been successful. A point that maybe had escaped the "experts"

The fish was not "trying to grow fingers". Natural selection does not work on the desires of the individual. Instead, those fish lucky enough to be born with rudimentary fingers had an advantage in that environment. They produced more offspring and thus the trait became part of the population.

In terms of "fingers" the original paper in 1998 speculated on a use:
"The finger-like bones may have provided areas for muscle attachment so that these fins had more power and mobility than your average fish," Daeschler said.

 

[TasManOfGod]

So, in the absence of technology, the people with these mutations would be the only ones to survive over a number of generations and thus everyone would be descended from them.

There are two important factors here:
1) Because there is more than one life threatening disease the only outcome possible is that all of mankind would be destoyed ultimately on this basis.
2) The sovereinty of God who would not permit such a scenario as those who looked to Him are healed

 

[lucaspa]

There are two important factors here:
1) Because there is more than one life threatening disease the only outcome possible is that all of mankind would be destoyed ultimately on this basis.

That wouldn't happen. In fact, it didn't happen even when there were multiple plagues that swept over humanity in the first 4 centuries AD. The reasons are that the plagues come sequentially and are self-limiting. They all don't hit at once and, when the population drops below the critical threshold to give new victims to infect, the plague dies out.Thus, immunity also comes sequentially. People immune to the first epidemic pass their immunity on to their offspring, thus giving nearly everyone immunity to the first plague before the second hits (need time to build up the population). So now everyone has the mutation providing immunity to the first plague and among those are those lucky enough to have immunity to the second. So now the next generation comes from people immune to both the first and second.

That said, if there is an outside source of infection -- another human population -- then the human population can indeed go extinct. Several Amerindian tribes went extinct by this very mechanism. But that was because they were in contact with people already having immunity to several diseases and thus transmitting several diseases at once.

2) The sovereinty of God who would not permit such a scenario as those who looked to Him are healed

That hasn't always happened. Missionaries reported the extinction of African and Polynesian peoples to diseases, including the converts "who looked to Him".

 

[TasManOfGod]

lucaspa
Tell me is sickle cell anemia such a blessing that if you had malaria would they (the medicos) give you a dose ?

 

[notto]

lucaspa
Tell me is sickle cell anemia such a blessing that if you had malaria would they (the medicos) give you a dose ?

Not to speak for lucaspa, but you seem to have missed his point (which is a valid one).

So, in the absence of technology, the people with these mutations would be the only ones to survive over a number of generations and thus everyone would be descended from them.

If it wasn't for this mutation, the populations that were exposed to malaria in the past most likely would have gone extinct. (several probably did).

 

[TasManOfGod]

Not to speak for lucaspa, but you seem to have missed his point (which is a valid one).


If it wasn't for this mutation, the populations that were exposed to malaria in the past most likely would have gone extinct. (several probably did).
[/size][/color][/font]

No my point is - Isn't the "mutation" more life threatening than the disease that it causes you to be immune from ?

 

[notto]

No my point is - Isn't the "mutation" more life threatening than the disease that it causes you to be immune from ?

Not if you are dead. If the mutation is your ONLY chance of survival when you population is exposed to malaria, I don't think the mutation is more life threatening.

 

[TasManOfGod]

Not if you are dead. If the mutation is your ONLY chance of survival when you population is exposed to malaria, I don't think the mutation is more life threatening.

Then indeed you are saying that sickle cell anemia is a "cure" for malaria are you not?

 

[notto]

Then indeed you are saying that sickle cell anemia is a "cure" for malaria are you not?

No, sickle cell anemia cannot cure malaria, it can help prevent being infected.

It would be more of a 'vaccine'. Of course now days, we have vaccines available for many diseases. They are working on a malaria vaccine as well.

 

[lucaspa]

lucaspa
Tell me is sickle cell anemia such a blessing that if you had malaria would they (the medicos) give you a dose ?

Would they give you a blood transfusion from a heterozygote for sickle cell trait? Perhaps. Depends on the availability of anti-malarial drugs. If those aren't available, then a transfusion is the next best choice.

Tas, remember that sickle cell trait evolved in an environment without man-made drugs. It may not be the best answer, but natural selection isn't looking for the "best" answer, only the one that works best from among the choices (variations) that are present. Now, without sickle cell trait, 100% of people die. With sickle cell trait, only 50% die. The individuals unlucky enough to be heterozygotes are going to die, either from malaria or from anemia.

 

[lucaspa]

No my point is - Isn't the "mutation" more life threatening than the disease that it causes you to be immune from ?

No. For instance, the people immune to HIV are normal in all other respects. We had no idea they were different from anyone else until they were exposed to HIV and never got infected. In the case of the sickle cell allele, without it people are dead from malaria.

You are thinking of the creationist canard that all mutations are harmful. That's not true. Studies have shown that only 2.8 mutations out of 1,000 mutations are harmful. The other 997.2 mutations are either neutral or beneficial.

 

[lucaspa]

No, sickle cell anemia cannot cure malaria, it can help prevent being infected.

It would be more of a 'vaccine'. Of course now days, we have vaccines available for many diseases. They are working on a malaria vaccine as well.

That's not the information I see. Instead, sickle cells are depleted in potassium and the Plasmodium dies. http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/bindon/ant570/topics/Sicklecell/Sickle_Cell_files/frame.htm

So, in that sense, having the sickle cell trait is a "cure" in that it kills off an infection.

 

[TasManOfGod]

So, in that sense, having the sickle cell trait is a "cure" in that it kills off an infection.

From what I read it seems like a very painful "cure". For me I think prayer to the God who by His grace gave to us redemption from the law of sickness, sin and death, is much better.

 

[notto]

That's not the information I see. Instead, sickle cells are depleted in potassium and the Plasmodium dies. http://www.as.ua.edu/ant/bindon/ant570/topics/Sicklecell/Sickle_Cell_files/frame.htm

So, in that sense, having the sickle cell trait is a "cure" in that it kills off an infection.

Thanks for the correction. I couldn't get your site up but did a bit further reading. Is it correct to say that the sickle cell trait reduces the damage the parasites can cause once you are infected because they cannot damage the sickle cell affected cells?

I was using an analogy of a 'vaccine', from what I read there is no solid vaccine but there are several promising courses of action being taken to develop one.

 

[lucaspa]

From what I read it seems like a very painful "cure".

So? Malaria is very painful. And fatal. Rabies shots are also very painful, but better than getting rabies. Surgery is also painful, but less painful than the alternative. As I understand it, serving God is also not without pain. Certainly Jesus suffered a lot of pain when crucified. Should that cure for spiritual death been avoided because it was painful?

For me I think prayer to the God who by His grace gave to us redemption from the law of sickness, sin and death, is much better.

It seems that you think prayer will cure you. Well, I hope then that you never see a doctor. That would be hypocrisy to see one, wouldn't it? BTW, ever take any over-the-counter medication? That would also be hypocrisy.

 

[lucaspa]

Thanks for the correction. I couldn't get your site up but did a bit further reading. Is it correct to say that the sickle cell trait reduces the damage the parasites can cause once you are infected because they cannot damage the sickle cell affected cells?

It seems that the plasmodium causes the red blood cells to sickle (a heterozygotes cells are normal). Sickling in turn kills all the plasmodium bacteria in the cell. It also causes the cell to be removed from circulation by the spleen quicker. So the sickle cell becomes something like a trap for the Plasmodium. Plasmodium check in but they don't check out.

Here's what the site said:
"The development of the Plasmodium is disrupted by the sickling of the red blood cells disrupted by the sickling of the red blood cellsdisrupted by the sickling of the red blood cells. Sickling depletes cell reserves of potassium which is required for the parasite to grow. Plasmodium quickly dies in potassium depleted cells. Additionally, infected sickled cells may be prematurely removed by the spleen."
–Sickling depletes cell reserves of potassium which is required for the parasite to grow
•Plasmodium quickly dies in potassium depleted cells
–Additionally, infected sickled cells may be prematurely removed by the spleen