• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Humans are still evolving...

FDRC2014

FDRC2014

WHY?
painted wolf said:
A really extreme mutation of Hox genes. Exposure to teratogens can have this effect.

wa:do
Click to expand...

This is not evolution, just a mutation!
Obviously it could happen, but not evolve into the population easily, as an arm on our head would be a hindrance in our current environment, or have no increase in biological fitness.
 
Noaidi

Noaidi

slow walker
mpt-matthew said:
This is not evolution, just a mutation!
Obviously it could happen, but not evolve into the population easily, as an arm on our head would be a hindrance in our current environment, or have no increase in biological fitness.
Click to expand...

Evolution is a change in allele frequencies within a population. If a mutation arises, then the frequencies change.
 
A

Android

Member
Noaidi said:
Evolution is a change in allele frequencies within a population. If a mutation arises, then the frequencies change.
Click to expand...

Mutations happen in individuals NOT populations.
Natural selection determines if said mutation is passed on to a population.
 
A

Android

Member
Thief said:
Yeah right...and the intelligence of a bird is relative in which way?

Evolution works which way?
First the mutation and the chaos of nature sorts them out?
Or....
First the intelligence and the body adapts...genetically?

Careful...

If you set intelligence first.....

God did it.

Back to Genesis.
Click to expand...


This guy cracks me up!
 
Noaidi

Noaidi

slow walker
Android said:
Mutations happen in individuals NOT populations.
Natural selection determines if said mutation is passed on to a population.
Click to expand...

Yep, and I was talking about the allele frequencies within a population. An individual with a mutation within that population will cause the frequencies to change within the gene pool.

Regarding your second point, natural selection doesn't determine if the mutation is passed on to a population - the mutation is in the population when it arises (albeit within an individual within that population). Natural selection determines whether the mutation survives and spreads within the population.
 
Last edited:
A

Android

Member
Noaidi said:
Yep, and I was talking about the allele frequencies within a population. An individual with a mutation within that population will cause the frequencies to change within the gene pool.

Regarding your second point, natural selection doesn't determine if the mutation is passed on to a population - the mutation is in the population when it arises (albeit within an individual within that population). Natural selection determines whether the mutation survives and spreads within the population.
Click to expand...

Semantics.
From a statistical point of view, one human with "armhead syndrome" out of six billion would be regarded as an extreme outlier and omitted from the data set altogether.

Regarding changing frequencies within the gene pool, the "armhead gene" is not even in the genepool. It must be able to be copied by meiosis and then selected (by natural selection) before it even has the chance to become an allele.
 
Noaidi

Noaidi

slow walker
Android said:
Semantics.
Click to expand...

Well, you brought it up...

From a statistical point of view, one human with "armhead syndrome" out of six billion would be regarded as an extreme outlier and omitted from the data set altogether.
Click to expand...

That may be, but it doesn't negate the fact that it exists.

Regarding changing frequencies within the gene pool, the "armhead gene" is not even in the genepool. It must be able to be copied by meiosis and then selected (by natural selection) before it even has the chance to become an allele.
If it's in a member of the population, then surely it's in the genepool of that population?
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Thief

Thief

Rogue Theologian
Android said:
Semantics.
From a statistical point of view, one human with "armhead syndrome" out of six billion would be regarded as an extreme outlier and omitted from the data set altogether.

Regarding changing frequencies within the gene pool, the "armhead gene" is not even in the genepool. It must be able to be copied by meiosis and then selected (by natural selection) before it even has the chance to become an allele.
Click to expand...


And the genetic 'map' of humanity has been completed?
Which one makes you 'who' you are?
 
A

Android

Member
Thief said:
And the genetic 'map' of humanity has been completed?
Which one makes you 'who' you are?
Click to expand...

We know that only 50% of "who you are" comes from you genes.
The other 50% comes from your environment, upbringing, or brainwashing as the case may be.
 
A

Android

Member
Noaidi said:
If it's in a member of the population, then surely it's in the genepool of that population?
Click to expand...

look I can see what you are getting at, but thats why I called semantics.
My point is...This isn't how evolution works!
You dont get evolution from the mutations alone. Natural selection must happen to control the process.
 
Noaidi

Noaidi

slow walker
Android said:
look I can see what you are getting at, but thats why I called semantics.
My point is...This isn't how evolution works!
You dont get evolution from the mutations alone. Natural selection must happen to control the process.
Click to expand...

I'm not disagreeing with that. Natural selection is a mechanism for evolutionary change. I merely gave a definition of evolution: the change in allele frequency within a population.

"Biological evolution may be slight or substantial; it embraces everything from slight changes in the proportion of different alleles within a population (such as those determining blood types) to the successive alterations that led from the earliest protoorganism to snails, bees, giraffes, and dandelions."
- Douglas J. Futuyma in Evolutionary Biology-

I don't know why you felt the need to call me out on my definition several posts back. It's a standard definition.
I think I'll leave our conversation at that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top