• 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.

The myth of the "Nested Hierarchy of Common Descent"

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Homologous anatomy can be organized by non-homologous genes.
That's not supported by any source you've cited.
Homologous genes can organize non-homologous anatomy.
Right. Novel function can arise from existing genes. As we've known for a long time. Examples include the evolution of the bacterial flagellum from a type 3 secretory structure, an old response to the irreducible complexity argument.
 
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat

Well you clearly haven't understood it very well.
 
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
Typical non-response because you have no counter-argument.
What? It's just boring, I'm sorry. You're horribly mangling the science and even when actual experts tell you how wrong you are, even when they're telling you how wrong you are about claims about what they would say, you just ignore them. In this case, you clearly don't understand the problem, as you think non-homologous genes form homologous structures (rather than analogous structures).
 
Upvote 0

lifepsyop

Regular Member
Jan 23, 2014
2,416
760
✟94,345.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private


Non-homologous genes, homologous morphology
A growing number of cases demonstrate that the inverse situation, where genes that are not homologous encode a homologous morphological feature, can also occur. One of the first cases to be recognized involves evolutionary changes in the developmental roles of even-skipped (eve), which encodes a homeodomain transcription factor...

http://biology.mcgill.ca/faculty/abouheif/articles/Wray, Abouheif 1998.pdf
 
Upvote 0

The Cadet

SO COOL
Apr 29, 2010
6,290
4,743
Munich
✟53,117.00
Gender
Male
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Democrat
I retract my previous statement. I was in error.
 
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes it is. So you're denying that Homologous anatomy can be organized by non-homologous genes?

State your position.
Hold on, let's clarify terms,

A tetrapod limb is formed by signaling from Tbx genes. All homologous tetrapod limbs will be signaled by Tbx genes.

Now, you switched terms to "organized by" and i just want to make sure you aren't going to pop in with some silliness like, "ah! but another gene is also involved!"

But as long as we are clear that my position is that all homologous tetrapod limbs will be formed by signaling from Tbx genes, we understand each other.
 
Upvote 0

Oncedeceived

Senior Veteran
Jul 11, 2003
21,214
629
✟66,870.00
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
That's not supported by any source you've cited.

What isn't supported by his sources?

Right. Novel function can arise from existing genes. As we've known for a long time. Examples include the evolution of the bacterial flagellum from a type 3 secretory structure, an old response to the irreducible complexity argument.
Provide substantiation on the bacterial flagellum arising from a type III secretory structure rather than the other way around.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,142
Visit site
✟98,015.00
Faith
Agnostic
As usual. Hand-waving and insults, and dodging my responses because you have no counter-argument. Have you made one substantial post this entire thread?

Hand waving is exactly what you are doing. All of the evidence is consistent with the predictions made by the theory of evolution. You hand wave that evidence away because you have invented a fantasy world where there is evidence that doesn't fit the theory.

My counter argument is that none of the evidence you speak of has been found. In science, we deal with the real evidence, not imaginary evidence.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,142
Visit site
✟98,015.00
Faith
Agnostic
You're jumping around. I was addressing your claim that evolutionists would have to invoke convergent genes for convergent anatomy. I explained why they wouldn't. You dodged.

Show where they have invoked this reasoning to explain the evidence you claim would falsify evolution.

Otherwise, all you have is a fantasy world. In the real world, the evidence is consistent with evolution.


How do you explain the correlation between phylogenies based on morphology and DNA sequence?
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,142
Visit site
✟98,015.00
Faith
Agnostic


Your fantasy world does not trump the real world.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,142
Visit site
✟98,015.00
Faith
Agnostic

In what percentage of cases is this true?
 
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Alright, let's take a look:



"homologous structures (segments) are present but at least one homologous gene no longer contributes to their development"

What this paper is talking about is a complex development of a body plan controlled by numerous genes that no longer uses one of those genes, yet the overall structure still develops due to the remaining genes.

Now, lets read a bit more on that eve gene as I'm a few years removed from my entomology training:
http://www.sdbonline.org/sites/fly/segment/evenskp1.htm

"One of EVE's primary functions is regulation of segment polarity through EVE's indirect regulation of engrailed. In odd parasegments, graded expression of eve establishes the en stripes by setting the boundaries of the activator paired and the repressors runt and sloppy paired (Fujioka, 1995). Expression of en in even parasegments results from activation by Fushi tarazu (with Ftz-f1 as a cofactor). Only the most anterior cells of each ftz stripe express en and this restriction is dependent uponodd-skipped and naked."

And hold on again, getting called away. I'll finish the post later, but that should start laying the groundwork for some of the trouble with your position.

And back.

Let's also look at a rundown of insect segmentation generally:
http://what-when-how.com/insects/segmentation-insects/

I know, a generalized explain-stuff website isn't the most robust source, but it's the most clearly written rundown I was able to locate quickly and user friendliness is probably good in this discussion. If you feel prepared to tackle denser writing, i can provide a more comprehensive link.

Anyway, this breaks down the phases of segmentation:


Now, you'll notice that pair rule signaling isn't the first group of genes involved. it kicks in after the Gap genes.

It also gets into some of the different mechanisms for controlling segment formation, which might be interesting to dig into to determine if eve is utilized in all forms, or could be a late arrival to this party.

I hope we can agree that one gene that helps regulation of one specific part of segmentation no longer having that role is VERY different than a homologous structure that does not share homologous genes with other organisms with those homologous structures generally.

Now, there is something interesting I noticed. The paper states that eve is part of the pair rule group of genes rather than segment polarity as my link states. This could be a slightly different use in fruit flies, which my link was discussing specifically, but if someone here is better with entomology than me, I'd love to get some more info on it.

I'm going on way too long, so I'll stop here.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

[serious]

'As we treat the least of our brothers...' RIP GA
Site Supporter
Aug 29, 2006
15,100
1,716
✟95,346.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
In what percentage of cases is this true?
Oh, I'd take one example of it if it were a good example. One gene that kicks on mid way through not kicking on in those zones at those times isn't necessarily going to mess up everything all the other genes are doing.
 
Upvote 0

Loudmouth

Contributor
Aug 26, 2003
51,417
6,142
Visit site
✟98,015.00
Faith
Agnostic
Oh, I'd take one example of it if it were a good example. One gene that kicks on mid way through not kicking on in those zones at those times isn't necessarily going to mess up everything all the other genes are doing.

In the end, lifepsyop tries to feign ignorance in order to have an excuse for ignoring the evidence. If he can't understand why the femur of a chimp and human are homologous while the wing of a bat and moth are analogous, then there really isn't any help that we can give him. Sometimes, people have to remove their own blinders.
 
Upvote 0

lifepsyop

Regular Member
Jan 23, 2014
2,416
760
✟94,345.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Oh, I'd take one example of it if it were a good example. One gene that kicks on mid way through not kicking on in those zones at those times isn't necessarily going to mess up everything all the other genes are doing.

Here's another example from the paper:

"Other cases have been documented within the insects. Sexlethal (Sxl) is a ‘master regulatory gene’ that controls sex determination in Drosophila melanogaster through a well characterized pathway of alternative splicing. This pathway appears to be present in at least two other Drosophila species, based on alternate splicing of transcripts. In several other dipterans — including Ceratitis capitata and Musca domestica — however, Sxl is almost certainly not involved in sex determination: although the gene is present, it is not alternatively spliced and is not expressed at the correct time....

...Once again, we can summarize these examples with a quotation from de Beer, “homologous structures need not be controlled by homologous genes”."


http://biology.mcgill.ca/faculty/abouheif/articles/Wray, Abouheif 1998.pdf
 
Upvote 0