Lines of Evidence ( Part 1 : ERVs )

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

'.... evolved in a haphazard, purposeless manner.'

Is this how you think evolution works? Please explain how you came to this conclusion?

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

No pictures?

You used to respond with pictures.

As I said, ''....there are some things which do not change.''

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Are there any Moderators in the house? -- I think we're seeing a return of Batman and Robin.

 

[SteveB28]

I'll use the term 'hand wave' in a little different way. Science hand 'waives' these changes into existence. The process by which these changes are believed to occur are way too fantastic. Just diagramming a single one of millions, if not billions, of changes that must occur in a single evolving organism would probably take a ream of paper.

You commit what is known as a Serial Trials logical fallacy. You assume that those changes must take place, one after the other, within a particular organism. What you fail to recognise is that many, many mutations are taking place across the entire population of a species at any one point in time and that the changes caused by these mutations then move through the species as a whole.

In other words, the changes occur in parallel, rather than in series.

 

[SteveB28]

Now, I understand that the person who initiated this discussion intended that it focus on the evidence of retro viral insertions across species. Has anyone yet arrived at an acceptable alternative to the obvious conclusion, without calling upon one magical intervention or another?

 

[AV1611VET]

Has anyone yet arrived at an acceptable alternative to the obvious conclusion, without calling upon one magical intervention or another?

Will miracles do?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Is this how you think evolution works? Please explain how you came to this conclusion?

Are you intimating that evolution works in a deliberate manner according to purpose?

 

[Justatruthseeker]

You commit what is known as a Serial Trials logical fallacy. You assume that those changes must take place, one after the other, within a particular organism. What you fail to recognise is that many, many mutations are taking place across the entire population of a species at any one point in time and that the changes caused by these mutations then move through the species as a whole.

In other words, the changes occur in parallel, rather than in series.

Or we could just accept the evidence and that two different breeds of the same Kind mate and produce a third breed which would logically explain the missing links that are missing. You know, in real life, like we see with say the Husky and English Mastiff producing the Chinook? Or are real examples versus imaginary ones not good enough?

Not to mention the odds of a single random mutation occurring in tandem across an entire population.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

You commit what is known as a Serial Trials logical fallacy. You assume that those changes must take place, one after the other, within a particular organism. What you fail to recognise is that many, many mutations are taking place across the entire population of a species at any one point in time and that the changes caused by these mutations then move through the species as a whole.

In other words, the changes occur in parallel, rather than in series.

That doesn't negate the fact that millions of changes must take place within a single organism.

 

[Subduction Zone]

That doesn't negate the fact that millions of changes must take place within a single organism.

So? You do realize that change is inevitable, don't you? For example you have 150 to 175 changes in your DNA from the DNA that your mother and father shared. There is an average of 150 to 175 mutations per person in our genome. Luckily for us the vast number of mutations are not harmful, they are neutral.

 

[Justatruthseeker]

So? You do realize that change is inevitable, don't you? For example you have 150 to 175 changes in your DNA from the DNA that your mother and father shared. There is an average of 150 to 175 mutations per person in our genome. Luckily for us the vast number of mutations are not harmful, they are neutral.

No luckily for us that DNA repair mechanism to prevent such happenings in the first place catch most of them, by repairing some, neutralizing others, and some that don't kill the host accidentally makes it better. Say what, 1 in a billion? Since it took over a billion mutations for E coli to process citrus solely?

 

[lasthero]

No luckily for us that DNA repair mechanism to prevent such happenings in the first place catch most of them, by repairing some, neutralizing others, and some that don't kill the host accidentally makes it better. Say what, 1 in a billion? Since it took over a billion mutations for E coli to process citrus solely?

a billion mutations.


Where is this from?

 

[Subduction Zone]

No luckily for us that DNA repair mechanism to prevent such happenings in the first place catch most of them, by repairing some, neutralizing others, and some that don't kill the host accidentally makes it better. Say what, 1 in a billion? Since it took over a billion mutations for E coli to process citrus solely?

No, what I stated is a testable and observed fact:

http://www.genetics.org/content/156/1/297.full

That 175 mutations is in the base genome, the one that an individual's mother and father have.

 

[lewiscalledhimmaster]

Are you intimating that evolution works in a deliberate manner according to purpose?

In the words of Prof. Richard Dawkins: '... a beautiful hierarchical pattern, just like a family tree. It is a family tree. How would you explain that? ....'

 

[OldWiseGuy]

So? You do realize that change is inevitable, don't you? For example you have 150 to 175 changes in your DNA from the DNA that your mother and father shared. There is an average of 150 to 175 mutations per person in our genome. Luckily for us the vast number of mutations are not harmful, they are neutral.

I assume that these 'mutations' are just small changes that prevent us being identical copies, clones, of our parents and give each of us our unique identity. Heck, if were God I'd put that in too.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I assume that these 'mutations' are just small changes that prevent us being identical copies, clones, of our parents and give each of us our unique identity. Heck, if were God I'd put that in too.

All mutations are small changes. The fact is that there are more than enough changes per generation to account for evolutionary differences between various species. Remember that a whole species evolves, not just one individual or one line of descent. That means for people right not there are over One Trillion mutations per generation. Of course this is not quite fair since our population is higher now than it has ever been.

 

[Loudmouth]

Will miracles do?

If you were on a jury for a murder trial, would you accept God planting DNA and fingerprints at crime scenes as a valid reason to ignore forensic evidence?

 

[Loudmouth]

I assume that these 'mutations' are just small changes that prevent us being identical copies, clones, of our parents and give each of us our unique identity. Heck, if were God I'd put that in too.

Yes and no. In the scenario you are talking about there are two different mechanisms at play which prevent you from being a clone of your parents. First, there is the process of meiosis and genetic recombination. During the production of eggs and sperm, the alleles from the diploid genome are shuffled to produce a unique haploid genome. Alleles that were once on separate copies of the genome can end up on the same chromosome in a germ line cell. Second, there are mutations that occur during the production of germ line cells which result in offspring having a few different DNA sequences that are found nowhere in either parents' genome. Everyone is born with 35-50 of these mutations, and they can span the gamut from changes in a single base to large deletions or insertions of DNA.

 

[Loudmouth]

No luckily for us that DNA repair mechanism to prevent such happenings in the first place catch most of them, by repairing some, neutralizing others, and some that don't kill the host accidentally makes it better. Say what, 1 in a billion? Since it took over a billion mutations for E coli to process citrus solely?

35 to 50 mutations per person per generation. DNA repair mechanisms do not catch all of them.

"Through extensive validation, we identified 49 and 35 germline de novo mutations (DNMs) in two trio offspring, as well as 1,586 non-germline DNMs arising either somatically or in the cell lines from which the DNA was derived."
http://www.nature.com/ng/journal/v43/n7/full/ng.862.html

 

[Loudmouth]

Or we could just accept the evidence and that two different breeds of the same Kind mate and produce a third breed which would logically explain the missing links that are missing.

You have two contemporary species producing a hybrid. In evolution, we are talking about change over time which does not involved two contemporary species breeding with one another.

You know, in real life, like we see with say the Husky and English Mastiff producing the Chinook? Or are real examples versus imaginary ones not good enough?

How did you get to the Husky and English Mastiff from wild wolves?