|
|
|
tkster
Skeptic Friend
USA
193 Posts |
 Posted - 12/15/2004 : 05:55:00
|
I am doing a formal debate with a Creationist at CF and I am making sure this is the same Creationist claim that I've heard before. Here is his argument:
quote:
Using the defenition provided I will begin, starting with A. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of naturual selection acting on the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of a new species. I will break this up. First naturaul selection. DEFINITION-Survival of the fittest, or more recent, reproduction of the fittest. An organism may possess some inheritable trait or charactor which in a given ebvironment gives it a greater chance for survival-over time this change makes it more likely for it to be passed on to the next generation. examples are haveing longer hair in colder weather colour for camoflauge or hunting prey or features that attract the mate. The ones with these types of features have a better chance of survival, they adapt to the environment. BUT naturual selection in a sense acually takes info from their ancestors, they lost a portion of the info which they had. if a plant adapted to dry land by growing longer roots and it was passed down and than it became very wet this plant could not start growing shorter roots. Breeding is a nother example man as been able to breed a variety of horse from wild-big working and miniature. so on. But limits are guickly reached because selection can only work on what is there. you can breed a variety of coats, white brown black mixed, but not green because the info isny there. Each variety has less info from the origianal. you cant produce a clydsdasle by breeding minatures. the info isnt there. so logic states natural selection does not create a uphill process. So as statement A. states and is true natural selection does act on the genetic variations among individuals, it does not create new distinct species but a variety of those already thier. Which is why statement A. begins with "change in the genetic composition of a popolation during successive generations". This i will explain next.
tion needs to add new genetic info which previously did not exist. Granted you can change the genes freguency or ratio of genes that are already present as much as you like, but unless you add new genes you wont get new info. Natural selection can produce changes in gene freguency but it wont automatically produce a new species only variations of the particualer species. Conseguently chance mutations must occure in a variety of areas in the cell and biochemistry of the organism all at once to create a new species, otherwise natural selection would eliminate it. The difference between the species such as reptiles to mammals or water species to land species is far to great even with chance mutations over a trillion years. All parts of the species must work effeciently together, heart, lungs, appendages,chemical balances must all be together at the same time to function properly. This vast difference in the species groups eliminates any chance of chance mutations truelly working. i will elaberate after my opponants remarks.
This is the beginning iof the last thread, sorry my computor shuts down on me. This genetic change of composition is explained by mutations within the genetic system, this mutation in turn creates new info that over time and thru natural selection crerates a new "kind" of species from the origanal. First there is no known natrual law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical procces or material phenomenon known that can do this. Stated by Dr. Werner Gitt of the germanys federal institute of physics and technology.I will go striaght to DNA Its a fact that 99.9% of mutations are fatal distructive or neutrual, and extremly rare. In mutations it is not whether they are benificial but if it adds new genetic information. So these beneficial mutations must survive in the system and be passed on to the next generatuion and than collect other chance mutations so as to create a specified functional creation, organ limb,eyes stc. Crick co-discoverer of DNA sated the Central dogma-"what is in the body and what happens in the body does not affect the DNE coding- I will go further in debth on next post I will end with a few statements. Evolution.... finished in first post. sorry for the confusion.
Appreciate comments.
tk
|
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 06:53:09 [Permalink]
|
Seems like a guy who have read a bit but understand little.
- "But limits are guickly reached".
What kind of limits is this? Any evidence? See.
- "Each variety has less info from the origianal"
How does he measure the information?
- "Conseguently chance mutations must occure in a variety of areas in the cell and biochemistry of the organism all at once to create a new species, otherwise natural selection would eliminate it"
Why? References?
- "The difference between the species such as reptiles to mammals or water species to land species is far to great even with chance mutations over a trillion years"
Why? He needs to present some numbers here.
Is he talking about Haldanes dilemma?
- "no known natrual law through which matter can give rise to information"
Pure ignorance. See.
Does he know what a natural law is?
- "Its a fact that 99.9% of mutations are fatal distructive or neutrual, and extremly rare."
Bullshit figure! References? See.
|
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
 |
|
|
Plyss
Skeptic Friend
Netherlands
231 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 07:49:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Starman
Seems like a guy who have read a bit but understand little.
Indeed
quote:
Granted you can change the genes freguency or ratio of genes that are already present as much as you like, but unless you add new genes you wont get new info
Is he suggesting that completely new genes are necessesary for new fenotypes to occur, as opposed to minor change to the genes that are present? The thing that bugs me the most (besides the spelling) is the use of the phrase "information". See if you can get him to provide a working definition. |
Miss Tick sniffed. 'You could say this piece of advice is pricesless', she said. 'Are you listening?'
'Yes' said Tiffany.
'Good now...If you trust in yourself.."
'Yes..?'
'..and believe in your dreams...'
'yes?'
'...and follow your star..' Miss Tick went on.
'Yes?'
'You'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things and weren't so lazy. Goodbye.' |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 08:13:29 [Permalink]
|
The guy is right in one sense about sexual reproduction: It enables quick changes in appearance in the offspring for the sake of survival, through mixing genes. What he is missing is that there are two distinctly separate processes at work on the genetic level.
In breeding, yes, we are artificially selecting offspring for (already existing) genes that tend to our desired aspect.
Natural selection of traits through mutation of genes are slow, and work on the scale of hundreds, and even thousands of generations, before a change is noticeable. Of course, the number of generations needed to saturate a population depends on the size of the population. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Peptide
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 11:36:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The ones with these types of features have a better chance of survival, they adapt to the environment. BUT naturual selection in a sense acually takes info from their ancestors, they lost a portion of the info which they had. if a plant adapted to dry land by growing longer roots and it was passed down and than it became very wet this plant could not start growing shorter roots.
Isn't this exactly what evolution is? A change in the genetic "information"? According to William, if evolution is true then humans should have the genes for scales and gills. Guess what? When info is no longer needed neutral mutations take that info out. This does not prevent evolution.
quote:
Conseguently chance mutations must occure in a variety of areas in the cell and biochemistry of the organism all at once to create a new species, otherwise natural selection would eliminate it.
The mutations need not all occur at once. Separation of the gene pool through isolation of a subpopulation can result in accumulation of mutations, one by one, without those mutations seeping into the larger population. Over time, this slow accumulation of mutations creates two divergent species. All or none is simply not supported by the evidence.
quote:
All parts of the species must work effeciently together, heart, lungs, appendages,chemical balances must all be together at the same time to function properly. This vast difference in the species groups eliminates any chance of chance mutations truelly working. i will elaberate after my opponants remarks.
Firstly, of course all the "parts" must work together effeciently. Otherwise, the organism would be selected against. Even today we have organisms that are transitional between land and water. The mudskipper, for example, is able to store air in large bags that it then pushes over it's gills when it is on land. All of the parts work fine on a mudskipper and it is able to live on land and in water. Of course the transitionals must be functional, but this doesn't prevent large scale changes over time resulting in the life we see today. William's entire argument is based on his incredulity, "I can't imagine that mutations occured at a high enough rate to create the diversity we see today." Reality does not bend to what William can or can not imagine. William must show how the current mutation rates are inadequate, which he may or may not do.
quote:
First there is no known natrual law through which matter can give rise to information, neither is any physical procces or material phenomenon known that can do this. Stated by Dr. Werner Gitt of the germanys federal institute of physics and technology.
Actually, there is no known law of nature that says that DNA carries information to begin with. Information is a human construct. |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 17:46:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ricky
Just to be a nit-picker:
quote:
Firstly, of course all the "parts" must work together effeciently. Otherwise, the organism would be selected against.
They just have to be more effecient to be selected. It doesn't have to work very well at first. It can in fact be very poor. But as long as it helps the species, even if in a very small way, it will be selected.
Exactly.
Just look at the nylon digesting bug. The digestive enzyme is only a fraction as efficient as it's ancetral carbon-hydrate digestive enzyme. Yet, it survives thanks to the abundance of nylon in it's habitat. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 19:07:18 [Permalink]
|
Oh, yeah, I forgot to mention...
In the case of the mutation that created the nylon-digesting enzyme: It opened up a completely new ecological niche to inhabit. It didn't have to compete with it's non-mutated brothers/cousins for survival. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
tkster
Skeptic Friend
USA
193 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2004 : 20:32:48 [Permalink]
|
Okay, now for the biggy. I heard Shermer and Dawkins state that there are many examples of mutations adding genetic information that is beneficial, yet Shermer never gives an example of this in his debate and I haven't found anything by Dawkins on it.
Anyone know of examples? This will totally pummel this Creationist's argument as he makes this claim.
tk |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
|
Starman
SFN Regular
Sweden
1613 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2004 : 02:28:55 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tkster
Okay, now for the biggy. I heard Shermer and Dawkins state that there are many examples of mutations adding genetic information that is beneficial, yet Shermer never gives an example of this in his debate and I haven't found anything by Dawkins on it.
Mark Isaaks An Index to Creationist Claims:: CB102.1::quote:
2. The question is equivalent to asking how complexity could evolve, which Dawkins has covered in at least four books (The Blind Watchmaker, River Out of Eden, Climbing Mount Improbable, and A Devil's Chaplain). He has answered the question at great length.
3. The ability of a single person to answer a question is largely irrelevant. The scientific literature is rife with examples of information increasing.
Love this list! |
"Any religion that makes a form of torture into an icon that they worship seems to me a pretty sick sort of religion quite honestly"
-- Terry Jones |
| Edited by - Starman on 12/16/2004 04:11:23 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2004 : 08:36:51 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tkster
Okay, now for the biggy. I heard Shermer and Dawkins state that there are many examples of mutations adding genetic information that is beneficial, yet Shermer never gives an example of this in his debate and I haven't found anything by Dawkins on it.
Anyone know of examples? This will totally pummel this Creationist's argument as he makes this claim.
tk
You haven't actually read the formal debate at your own site, have you? I'm talking about the debate between Peptide and jimi.
Peptide's third point is exactly about that: Added information, and the identified extra base pair that resulted in the nylon-digesting enzyme. |
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
| Edited by - Dr. Mabuse on 12/16/2004 13:17:31 |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2004 : 09:24:30 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by tkster
Okay, now for the biggy. I heard Shermer and Dawkins state that there are many examples of mutations adding genetic information that is beneficial, yet Shermer never gives an example of this in his debate and I haven't found anything by Dawkins on it.
Anyone know of examples? This will totally pummel this Creationist's argument as he makes this claim.
tk
Not knowing jack shit about this, one thing that has struck me are examples of people with six fingers. This is or was a mutation that's been passed down, no? While not perhaps beneficial, it's not harmful. I think.
And what about the sickle-cell mutation? That's beneficial if you live in certain climates with high rates of malaria, right?
Thost might be two examples... |
|
|
|
tkster
Skeptic Friend
USA
193 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2004 : 10:44:54 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dr. Mabuse
quote:
Originally posted by tkster
Okay, now for the biggy. I heard Shermer and Dawkins state that there are many examples of mutations adding genetic information that is beneficial, yet Shermer never gives an example of this in his debate and I haven't found anything by Dawkins on it.
Anyone know of examples? This will totally pummel this Creationist's argument as he makes this claim.
tk
You haven't actually read the formal debate at your own site, have you? I'm talking about the debate between Peptide and jimi.
Peptide's third point is exactly about that: Added information, and the identified extra pase pair that resulted in the nylon-digesting enzyme.
Actually yes, I was going to use the Nylon bug, however, in case WJS says "that's only one example" I wanted to be able to pummel him with more. And I remember Shermer saying there were tons, but then never mentioned them and thought that would have been a good source.
tk |
|
|
|
Peptide
Skeptic Friend
USA
69 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2004 : 15:44:28 [Permalink]
|
Hemoglobin C is another great example. This allele, brought about by a mutation of normal hemoglobin, allows it's carriers to avoid serious malarial infection. Unlike the sickle cell allele (hemoglobin S), hemC does not cause any adverse side effects. As you would guess, this mutation is found in a small area in Africa with endemic malaria. They predict this allele will become the predominant allele in 50 generations.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15000665
"J Evol Biol. 2004 Jan;17(1):221-4. Related Articles, Links
Estimation of relative fitnesses from relative risk data and the predicted future of haemoglobin alleles S and C.
Hedrick P.
School of Life Sciences, Arizona State University, Tempe, AR 85287, USA. philip.hedrick@asu.edu
Epidemiological studies of genetic differences in disease susceptibility often estimate the relative risks (RR) of different genotypes. Here I provide an approach to calculate the relative fitnesses of different genotypes based on RR data so that population genetic approaches may be utilized with these data. Using recent RR data on human haemoglobin beta genotypes from Burkina Faso, this approach is used to predict changes in the frequency of the haemoglobin sickle-cell S and C alleles. Overall, it generally appears that allele C will quickly replace the S allele in malarial environments. Explicit population genetic predictions suggest that this replacement may occur within the next 50 generations in Burkina Faso.
"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=15295709
"J Infect Dis. 2004 Sep 1;190(5):1006-9. Epub 2004 Jul 26. Related Articles, Links
Hemoglobin C and resistance to severe malaria in Ghanaian children.
Mockenhaupt FP, Ehrhardt S, Cramer JP, Otchwemah RN, Anemana SD, Goltz K, Mylius F, Dietz E, Eggelte TA, Bienzle U.
Institute of Tropical Medicine, Medical Faculty Charite, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany. frank.mockenhaupt@charite.de
Hemoglobin (Hb) C has been reported to protect against severe malaria. It is unclear whether relative resistance affects infection, disease, or both. Its extent may vary between regions and with disease pattern. We conducted a case-control study of children with severe malaria, asymptomatic parasitemic children, and healthy children in Ghana. HbAC did not prevent infection but reduced the odds of developing severe malaria and severe anemia. Protection was stronger with HbAS. The frequencies of HbCC and HbSC decreased, from healthy children to asymptomatic parasitemic children to children with severe malaria. These data support the notion that natural selection of HbC occurs because of the relative resistance it confers against severe malaria but argue against the notion that HbC offers resistance to infection.
"
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=pubmed&dopt=Abstract&list_uids=12454462
"Acta Crystallogr D Biol Crystallogr. 2002 Dec;58(Pt 12):2038-42. Epub 2002 Nov 23. Related Articles, Links
Structure of mutant human carbonmonoxyhemoglobin C (betaE6K) at 2.0 A resolution.
Dewan JC, Feeling-Taylor A, Puius YA, Patskovska L, Patskovsky Y, Nagel RL, Almo SC, Hirsch RE.
Department of Biochemistry, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10461, USA.
Previous studies have demonstrated that in vitro crystallization of R-state liganded hemoglobin C (HbC), a naturally occurring mutant human hemoglobin (betaE6K), in high-phosphate buffer solutions provides a potential model system for the intracellular crystallization of HbC associated with chronic hemolytic anemia in CC disease. The first high-resolution crystal structure of liganded HbC is reported here. HbC was crystallized from high phosphate and the structure of the carbonmonoxy-liganded R-state form was refined at 2.0 A resolution. Crystals exhibit diffraction consistent with the tetragonal space group P4(1)2(1)2, with unit-cell parameters a = 54.16, c = 195.30 A. The structure was solved by difference Fourier techniques and refinement by simulated annealing and restrained least-squares yielded a final R of 0.183 and an R(free) of 0.238 for all 19,382 unique reflections. The side chain of betaK6 exhibits very weak electron density consistent with significant mobility within the crystalline lattice. The highly dynamic nature of the side chain could potentially support a number of specific polar interactions that might reduce the barrier to crystallization and thus result in enhanced crystallization kinetics for HbC relative to HbA. Specifically, the NZ atom of the BK6 side chain could participate in an amino-aromatic hydrogen bond with the pi-electron cloud of betaH116 in a symmetry-related tetramer. BetaK6 NZ might also interact with the main-chain carbonyl O atom of betaH117 and the carboxylate group of betaE22 from a symmetry-related tetramer.
" |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
