- Jun 18, 2006
- 3,855,839
- 52,562
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Do I have to?You don't even understand what that means, do you?
I know, adaptive traits on an evolutionary scale is another matter. I have no way of checking the beat fur color gene but Ill bet its nearly identical in vlack, grissley and polar bears.white fur is a comnon trait in the arctic, no waybrandom mutations is the explaination.No maybe about it. Beneficial alleles happen.
No maybe about it. Beneficial alleles happen.
Do I have to?
Circular is circular; irregardless of what is circulating.
If I asked a kid if a merry-go-round is circular or squarular, and he says "circular;" but he doesn't know diddly about playground physics, would you consider him "looking foolish"?When you spout nonsense about something because you don't understand what you are talking about, it just makes you look foolish.
I know, adaptive traits on an evolutionary scale is another matter. I have no way of checking the beat fur color gene but Ill bet its nearly identical in vlack, grissley and polar bears.white fur is a comnon trait in the arctic, no waybrandom mutations is the explaination.
You leave out one vital question and jump straight to a foregone conclusion. Where dis that specific allele come from. There is absolutely no reason to assume a mutation, let alone a beneficial effect. That genome isn't going to produce such a specific trait unless the nessacary allele existed prior to the migration.By itself, no. But random mutations plus natural selection explain it quite nicely.
Suppose that at first, maybe one bear in 10,000 was born with the white fur gene. Given that in the arctic, those white bears are going to succeed at hunting where the brown and black bears fail, that's number's going to change over time, isn't it?
You leave out one vital question and jump straight to a foregone conclusion. Where dis that specific allele come from. There is absolutely no reason to assume a mutation
, let alone a beneficial effect
That genome isn't going to produce such a specific trait unless the nessacary allele existed prior to the migration.
You leave out one vital question and jump straight to a foregone conclusion. Where dis that specific allele come from. There is absolutely no reason to assume a mutation, let alone a beneficial effect. That genome isn't going to produce such a specific trait unless the nessacary allele existed prior to the migration.
Thats just it, a mutation with a benifical effect is not an adaptive trait on an evolutionary scale. Whats more, just there is a change in the DNA, doesn' its the result of a copy error. Most of the variety requires no mutations and some of the nore dramatic changes cannot possibly be the result of mutations. The arctic cod has a special gene that produces an antifreeze protien. This same gen has coevolved at least 4 times. Bacteria adapt quickly to changing conditions, their immune system was thought to adapt from random mutations. Turns out a molucular mechanism call captson 9 was respinsible for that, now its been developed into a DNA editing tool call the Krispur gene.You're right about one thing -- there's no reason to assume a mutation.
However, the mutation would explain where the allele came from, and we know for a fact the allele is there. Where did it come from?
Natural selection is based on circular reasoning: the fittest are those who survive, and those who survive are deemed fittest.
No actually natural selection is an effect without a cause. A population of European anthrapod apes are migrating from Eurasia. A significant number of them are isolated in Borneo, orangatans are the result. This is natural selection due to geologic isolation and explain absolutely nothing with regards to the emergence of unique adaptive traits. However it can be explained by normative Mendelian segregatiom and pristine gene pools that hadn't accumulated mutations following the flood of Noah.Flipping the position of the verb and noun in a sentence does not make something circular logic. If this was the case any process by which something was selected would be circular.
Thats just it, a mutation with a benifical effect is not an adaptive trait on an evolutionary scale.
Whats more, just there is a change in the DNA, doesn' its the result of a copy error.
Most of the variety requires no mutations and some of the nore dramatic changes cannot possibly be the result of mutations.
The arctic cod has a special gene that produces an antifreeze protien. This same gen has coevolved at least 4 times. Bacteria adapt quickly to changing conditions, their immune system was thought to adapt from random mutations. Turns out a molucular mechanism call captson 9 was respinsible for that, now its been developed into a DNA editing tool call the Krispur gene.
Mutations are the worst possible explaination. They are not an explanation, they are a bad idea Darwinians can't let go.
No actually natural selection is an effect without a cause. A population of European anthrapod apes are migrating from Eurasia. A significant number of them are isolated in Borneo, orangatans are the result. This is natural selection due to geologic isolation and explain absolutely nothing with regards to the emergence of unique adaptive traits. However it can be explained by normative Mendelian segregatiom and pristine gene pools that hadn't accumulated mutations following the flood of Noah.
Science is about tools, mental and physical. We are the only tool making animal on the planet.
New species arrive on the scene through a selective process involving molecular mechanisms utilizing already existing allels. Mutations do mnot provide adaptive traits, when the do have an effect sufficent for selection to act it is deleterious the vast majority of the time. This is painfully obvious to Darwinians who cant explain divergence beyond the level of genus. So they propagate the mutation plus selection tautology because they are working fron a naturalistic assumption that reasons fallaciously in circles around known facts. The premise of the OP is sound.
You mean adjective and noun?Flipping the position of the verb and noun in a sentence does not make something circular logic. If this was the case any process by which something was selected would be circular.
...because...?
True, it could be the result of a recessive gene... but then where did that gene come from?
There was a fascinating interview on NPR, I dont have the link right now but definately google it. You wont be sorryCas9 and CRISPR are products of the prokaryotic immune systems, and they're fascinating mechanisms... thank you for the heads up!
Still doesn't explain why you chose to disregard natural selection, however... or what this has to do with non-prokaryotes
Then replace it with a better one.
I dont dismiss natural selection, its just not a sound explanation for adaptive evolution.
Sure, thats the gist of it. Especially in protien coding genes, where the amino acid sequence comes in triplet codons. Mutations in reading frames and truncated protiens. There are just too many other explanations, like epigenetic and gene expression that requires no change in the DNA. I remember the nylon earing bacteria was a big topic on here for a while. I looked into it and turns out, it was swapping out the reading frame, the old one was kind of warehoused.Ah, I think I see where you're coming from... seems to me you're trying to say that natural selection works just fine; it's mutation that's the weak link...
Sure, thats the gist of it. Especially in protien coding genes, where the amino acid sequence comes in triplet codons. Mutations in reading frames and truncated protiens. There are just too many other explanations, like epigenetic and gene expression that requires no change in the DNA. I remember the nylon earing bacteria was a big topic on here for a while. I looked into it and turns out, it was swapping out the reading frame, the old one was kind of warehoused.
Whats more any change in the DNA is automatically called a mutation, when it could be a purposefull modification by a presently unknown molecular mechanism.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?