M
mVitus
Guest
Okay. Awesome.
So could these more upright Mandrils 2.0 continue to become more upright and adapt legs more suitable to the ground environment, though not as adept at climbing trees?
Why you should think that the Natural-Evolution of species is true
- Status
So could these more upright Mandrils 2.0 continue to become more upright and adapt legs more suitable to the ground environment, though not as adept at climbing trees?
B
buffalo
Guest
I disagree with the good Fr.
I have challenged this group and they will not reply directly.
B
Bradskii
Guest
I think that what mVitus means, and he was asking you to clarify it because he possibly didn’t believe what you wrote, is that it appears that you don’t know how evolution works.mVitus:
That would be a generalization of what happens in isolated cases…Aloysium:
So, getting to the science only, you would say animals change when they have to? ie the reason a species of monkeys is hairier is because the weather was cold so they “chose*” to become hairier in response. (As opposed to a hairier monkey happened to survive better, hence why they became hairier.)
*Chose is obviously not the best word, but I think it conveys enough of what I’m getting across.
To @mVitus: this is par for the course. After very many months indeed and hundreds of posts on quite a few threads, those appearing for the defence of ID have apparently learned nothing.
And good luck with your attempts at suggesting that gradual changes in the environment will result in gradual changes which step by step become large changes. Apparently there is something which prevents organisms from changing too far from their designed ‘mean’. Now what the ‘mean’ is, who designed this blocking method, what it comprises and how we can access this information is ‘still being worked on’. But it’s definitely there. Because if it wasn’t, then there would be no answer to your argument.
A
Aloysium
Guest
That’s pretty far fetched, and where the kinks in evolutionary theory are clear to all but believers.
B
buffalo
Guest
The variation is limited and hovers about a mean. There is a boundary beyond which the organism cannot go. Many go extinct.
B
buffalo
Guest
Last edited:
A
Aloysium
Guest
They were not preprogrammed to do so.
Random change occurring at and driven by the forces involved at solely a chemical level are destructive to the over-riding order. That’s how we get cancer and birth defects.
Last edited:
B
buffalo
Guest
I believe they were.
M
mVitus
Guest
I want to find the boundary by going step-by-step. So can the Mandrils 2.0 continue to become,more upright and more adapted to the ground?
R
rossum
Guest
HGT takes place between bacteria, archaea and (possibly?) protists. If you have an example of HGT between reptiles and mammals then I would be very interested to see your reference. Make sure you are not confusing common descent with HGT though.
The roots of the tree, down among the unicellular beasties, are indeed tangled, thanks in part to HGT. Once above those tangled roots the tree is very clear.
You are reading far too much into HGT. That recently discovered Neanderthal/Denisovan cross was due to normal reproductive processes, not HGT.
rossum
B
buffalo
Guest
They are adapted to the ground and are very efficient by walking on all fours. ???
R
rossum
Guest
That is what Behe was calculating in his 2004 paper. How slow was an indirect route. It turned out that a simple IC system could evolve in a small (for bacteria) population of bacteria in about 20,000 years.
No doubt the direct route (if allowed) would have been quicker. However, 20,000 years is not a very long timescale, and would have been shorter with a larger population.
rossum
B
Bradskii
Guest
You see, mVitus. There is a mysterious process which prevents organisms moving too far from their ‘mean’. If you dig a little deeper, ‘mean’ is nothing more than ‘kind’ which is as scientific a term as phlogiston and aether. But that’s the type of scientific argument you are up against.mVitus:
The variation is limited and hovers about a mean. There is a boundary beyond which the organism cannot go. Many go extinct.
So a monkey ain’t going to walk upright and develop a bigger brain and learn how to make tools. Because, and this is seriously the argument put forward - they would no longer be monkeys!
It’s like meeting someone in a bar who believes the world is flat. First you think that they’re joking. Then you realise they are serious. Then there’s a whole lot of other emotions you go through as you try to point out the rank illogicality of their position. Until you come up against the brick wall that is ‘that’s what scientists would like you to believe’.
But don’t worry. Everyone else in the place knows about the guy and humours him. You’ll invariably get dragged into a discussion with him now and then but just treat it as some harmless entertainment and you’ll be fine.
And you can get the next round.
B
buffalo
Guest
HGT indeed does take place in bacteria and one reason why anti-biotic resistance happens so fast. Thank you for pointing that out for the folks.
We can start here:
Widespread of horizontal gene transfer in the human genome
Compared to known horizontal gene transfer regions in the human genome, there were few overlapping regions, which indicated horizontal gene transfer is more common than we expected in the human genome.Widespread of horizontal gene transfer in the human genome - PMC
A fundamental concept in biology is that heritable material is passed from parents to offspring, a process called vertical gene transfer. An alternative mechanism of gene acquisition is through horizontal gene transfer (HGT), which involves movement ...
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
B
Bradskii
Guest
So if your kid can see better than you or is taller than you or can run faster, then that’s a negative?Bradskii:
They were not preprogrammed to do so.
Random change occurring at and driven by the forces involved at solely a chemical level are destructive to the over-riding order. That’s how we get cancer and birth defects.
B
buffalo
Guest
How a quarter of the cow genome came from snakes
But not so. If you draw BovB’s family tree, it looks like you’ve entered a bizarre parallel universe where cows are more closely related to snakes than to elephants, and where one gecko is more closely related to horses than to other lizards.This is because BovB isn’t neatly passed down from parent to offspring, as most pieces of animal DNA are. This jumping gene not only hops around genomes, but between them .
How a quarter of the cow genome came from snakes
Genomes are often described as recipe books for living things. If that’s the case, many of them badly need an editor. For example, around half of the human genome is made up of bits of DNA that have copied themselves and jumped around, creating vast tracts of repetitive sequences. The same is...
www.nationalgeographic.com
B
buffalo
Guest
Why is being taller a benefit?
B
buffalo
Guest
Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution
It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations—think ants, rats, humans—will become more genetically diverse over time.
But is that true?
“The answer is no,” said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution .
For the planet’s 7.6 billion people, 500 million house sparrows, or 100,000 sandpipers, genetic diversity “is about the same,” he told AFP.
The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.
“This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could,” Thaler told AFP.
“another unexpected finding from the study—species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there’s nothing much in between."
“If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies,” said Thaler. “They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space.”
The absence of “in-between” species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said."
Read more at: Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution
It is textbook biology, for example, that species with large, far-flung populations—think ants, rats, humans—will become more genetically diverse over time.
But is that true?
“The answer is no,” said Stoeckle, lead author of the study, published in the journal Human Evolution .
For the planet’s 7.6 billion people, 500 million house sparrows, or 100,000 sandpipers, genetic diversity “is about the same,” he told AFP.
The study’s most startling result, perhaps, is that nine out of 10 species on Earth today, including humans, came into being 100,000 to 200,000 years ago.
“This conclusion is very surprising, and I fought against it as hard as I could,” Thaler told AFP.
“another unexpected finding from the study—species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there’s nothing much in between."
“If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies,” said Thaler. “They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space.”
The absence of “in-between” species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said."
Read more at: Sweeping gene survey reveals new facets of evolution
Last edited:
B
Bradskii
Guest
Q: If there are a few trees about then what’s the best way to get a good view of the surrounding area to check for danger?mVitus:
They are adapted to the ground and are very efficient by walking on all fours. ???
B: Climb the tree sir!
Q: Well done lad. Now if there aren’t any trees about and you are in tall grass, what’s the best way to get a good view?
B: Umm. Stand up?
Q: There you go. Now that wan’t difficult, was it…Now think about this one. If there are no trees around, who is likely to survive longest. The ones who can stand up or the ones who can’t?
B: We don’t know, sir. Because we weren’t there.
B
buffalo
Guest
Ahhh I get it now
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
Last edited:
- Status