Mutations and Evolution

[Loudmouth]

There seems to be confusion in other threads as to what a mutation is and how it relates to the process of biological evolution.

First, this is the definition that biologists use:

"In biology, a mutation is a permanent change of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements. Mutations result from damage to DNA which is not repaired or to RNA genomes (typically caused by radiation or chemical mutagens), errors in the process of replication, or from the insertion or deletion of segments of DNA by mobile genetic elements.[1][2][3] Mutations may or may not produce discernible changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation

The first question I would like to ask the audience is this:

Humans and chimps look different. They have slightly different body shapes, slightly different physiology, etc. How do you explain these differences?

1. The physical differences (i.e. phenotypes) are due to differences in the DNA sequence of their genomes.

2. Other (include an explanation).

 

[justlookinla]

There seems to be confusion in other threads as to what a mutation is and how it relates to the process of biological evolution.

First, this is the definition that biologists use:

"In biology, a mutation is a permanent change of the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus, or extrachromosomal DNA or other genetic elements. Mutations result from damage to DNA which is not repaired or to RNA genomes (typically caused by radiation or chemical mutagens), errors in the process of replication, or from the insertion or deletion of segments of DNA by mobile genetic elements.[1][2][3] Mutations may or may not produce discernible changes in the observable characteristics (phenotype) of an organism."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation

The first question I would like to ask the audience is this:

Humans and chimps look different. They have slightly different body shapes, slightly different physiology, etc. How do you explain these differences?

1. The physical differences (i.e. phenotypes) are due to differences in the DNA sequence of their genomes.

2. Other (include an explanation).

Different designs....kinda like a 4 wheel drive vs. a corvette.

 

[lesliedellow]

Different designs....kinda like a 4 wheel drive vs. a corvette.

God would needed to have designed humans with telomeres located in the middle of chromosome 2, where they can serve no useful purpose.

 

[justlookinla]

God would needed to have designed humans with telomeres located in the middle of chromosome 2, where they can serve no useful purpose.

There's been adjustments since the fall.

 

[crjmurray]

There's been adjustments since the fall.

Where?

 

[Loudmouth]

God would needed to have designed humans with telomeres located in the middle of chromosome 2, where they can serve no useful purpose.

The first question focuses more on the link between genotype and phenotype. I'm certainly not a moderator, but it might help if we discuss neutral mutations later in the thread.

 

[justlookinla]

Where?

Wherever there's imperfection.

 

[DogmaHunter]

Different designs....kinda like a 4 wheel drive vs. a corvette.

So, does that mean that you disagree that there is a relation between phenotype and genotype?

If that is the case, then what role does DNA play in your view?

If that is not the case... then why didn't you just answer with option 1: the difference are due to different DNA sequences?

 

[justlookinla]

So, does that mean that you disagree that there is a relation between phenotype and genotype?

If that is the case, then what role does DNA play in your view?

If that is not the case... then why didn't you just answer with option 1: the difference are due to different DNA sequences?

Phenotype, genotype.....meaningless in the question concerning how humanity was created.

 

[Oncedeceived]

God would needed to have designed humans with telomeres located in the middle of chromosome 2, where they can serve no useful purpose.

Actually there is evidence that it does serve a useful purpose. It looks like it could be a promoter.

 

[Loudmouth]

Does everyone agree that the physical differences between species is due to the DNA sequence differences between their genomes?

 

[Zosimus]

God would needed to have designed humans with telomeres located in the middle of chromosome 2, where they can serve no useful purpose.

So if I see a car with a smashed windshield that someone is still driving around, I must assume either that the designer of the car designed the car with a smashed windshield or that the car was not designed?

 

[Zosimus]

Does everyone agree that the physical differences between species is due to the DNA sequence differences between their genomes?

No. First of all, species is an undefined and meaningless term. Second, differences in appearance might be due to epigenetics.

 

[Loudmouth]

So if I see a car with a smashed windshield that someone is still driving around, I must assume either that the designer of the car designed the car with a smashed windshield or that the car was not designed?

You don't have to assume anything. There is this thing called evidence . . . oh wait, I forgot. You ignore evidence. Never mind.

 

[Loudmouth]

No. First of all, species is an undefined and meaningless term.

Species are defined by gene flow, and it has meaning for the topic at hand since population specific mutations will stay in those populations.

Second, differences in appearance might be due to epigenetics.

Might?

Can you give examples of mechanisms involved in epigenetics that can produce the differences seen between species such as humans and chimps over hundreds of thousands of years?

 

[Zosimus]

You don't have to assume anything. There is this thing called evidence . . . oh wait, I forgot. You ignore evidence. Never mind.

I don't ignore evidence. I simply deny that evidence can verify a theory true considering that there are infinite numbers of theories that are compatible with the evidence.

 

[Zosimus]

Species are defined by gene flow, and it has meaning for the topic at hand since population specific mutations will stay in those populations.



Might?

Can you give examples of mechanisms involved in epigenetics that can produce the differences seen between species such as humans and chimps over hundreds of thousands of years?

Your argument presupposes multiple unproved things.

At the very least, it presupposes that humans and chimps share a common ancestor and that the differences between the two are the result of thousands of years of mutations. Yet here in this forum there are people who will assure you that the world is no more than 6,000 years old. You have yet to refute their arguments.

 

[Loudmouth]

Your argument presupposes multiple unproved things.

At the very least, it presupposes that humans and chimps share a common ancestor and that the differences between the two are the result of thousands of years of mutations.

I assume no such thing. It is a conclusion supported by massive amounts of genetic evidence.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/creationist-arguments-against-ervs.7898737/

Yet here in this forum there are people who will assure you that the world is no more than 6,000 years old. You have yet to refute their arguments.

I refute them in the thread above.

Also, you avoided everything I posted, as usual. You try to distract with red herrings to avoid the evidence.

 

[Loudmouth]

I don't ignore evidence. I simply deny that evidence can verify a theory true considering that there are infinite numbers of theories that are compatible with the evidence.

Then go somewhere else. This is the science forum.

 

[Zosimus]

I assume no such thing. It is a conclusion supported by massive amounts of genetic evidence.

http://www.christianforums.com/threads/creationist-arguments-against-ervs.7898737/



I refute them in the thread above.

Also, you avoided everything I posted, as usual. You try to distract with red herrings to avoid the evidence.

Evidence is irrelevant because of the problem of contrastive underdetermination.