Let's start at the beginning? maybe?

[YoursTrue]

Gene Versions (you may also encounter the term "allele", it means the same) are slight differences in the DNA that code for slight differences in appearance. Everybody has that gene in one form or another. E.g. all humans have eyes, (almost) all humans have a coloured iris. There exist different versions of genes that code for different colours. The frequency (number) of a variant fluctuates from one generation to the next. I.e. while 10% of the population may have blue eyes in generation 0, there are 15% with blue eyes in generation 1.

That's what I thought it might have meant. Now I have questions about gene versions and colors of eyes, for example. Do scientists know how these gene variations (alleles) occur?

 

[Heyo]

That's what I thought it might have meant. Now I have questions about gene versions and colors of eyes, for example. Do scientists know how these gene variations (alleles) occur?

Yes, they do. (But that would be getting ahead of the book.)

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Later perhaps. 13.8 billions of years ago the big bang happened? Me oh my!

Smart Priest

 

[LuisDantas]

Hi, @YoursTrue

Here is an attempt to clarify and comment on some points. I will try to make these sparingly so that there is not too much noise.

Why do you call the use of the term kinds a side issue? Because that is one of the basic issues.

"Kind" is a word sometimes used by Creationists as an alternative to "Species", the main difference being that kinds are presumably stable and do not drift into other kinds/species.

That is a problem, because it is just a dogmatic statement with no support on reality. In the reality of facts species are known to drift into other species.

As we are discussing, fish are still fish and I don't believe they are seen to be evolving, are they? And mudskippers remain as mudskippers. I imagine the excuse they're not seen to be evolving is because there's not enough time to see that.

If you are truly perceiving the rather reasonable statement that it takes time to observe generations as an "excuse", then we have grounds to wonder whether you created this thread in good faith.

Fish are still fish. And they are also still evolving. Mudskippers are one of the ways in which they evolved in the past, and they (or more exactly their ancestors) are a stepping stone in the transition from fish to amphibians. Amphibians eventually evolved into mammals, including humans.

In one of your earlier posts you seem to take issue with some statement that "humans are fish". We would need some specifics of the claim in order to comment on it properly, but barring some form of misunderstanding, the two most likely scenarios are that there was a statement that we descend from fish (which is true) or that we show many traits that come from our fish ancestors (also true, particularly in embryology).

(...)

So now the question is...what is an example of small scale evolution as in changes in the frequency of different gene versions in a population from one generation to another? What does that mean? Now I understand if you or no one here can explain it but in order for me to actually understand what is being said here, I'd have to understand the terminology.

Two of the most often mentioned examples of change in frequency of alleles are that of fruit flies and that of peppered moths.

Let's start with the moths, which are a good illustration of selective pressure and natural selection.

Peppered moths usually had a patterned appearance of light gray with black spots. Sometimes they had noticeably darker bodies, though. The dark body is an allele, a variant that occurs for no particular reason. Both light and dark moths tend to have offspring that has similarly colored appearances, but in each case there is some variance and spread.

The ability of moths to survive long enough to have offspring of their own is influenced by their ability to camouflage in the environment. That changed due to environmental pollution, making the dark variants considerably more frequent along time.

Fruit flies are a similar case, but somewhat more flamboyant.

That's what I thought it might have meant. Now I have questions about gene versions and colors of eyes, for example. Do scientists know how these gene variations (alleles) occur?

As in what causes them?

There are several known mechanisms and it may be a bit too soon to dwell on that, but the short of it is that they happen naturally and constantly due to several forms of random occurrences, imperfections and accidents.

Some of those changes are not viable, meaning that they do not result in living beings that survive and have offspring of their own.

Some are not favored enough by natural selection to make a lasting impression, and may be removed or reversed in a few generations - or at least continue to be rare or become even rarer.

But some end up becoming ever more frequent because they luck out to be beneficial across several generations.

 

[Pogo]

@Heyo here is part of the beginning. berkeley edu. It starts by giving a definition of evolution, saying, "Biological evolution, simply put, is descent with inherited modification. This definition encompasses everything from small-scale evolution (for example, changes in the frequency of different gene versions in a population from one generation to the next) to large-scale evolution (for example, the descent of different species from a shared ancestor over many generations). Evolution helps us to understand the living world around us, as well as its history." An introduction to evolution - Understanding Evolution

So now the question is...what is an example of small scale evolution as in changes in the frequency of different gene versions in a population from one generation to another? What does that mean? Now I understand if you or no one here can explain it but in order for me to actually understand what is being said here, I'd have to understand the terminology.

Watch the news. You have heard of the variants in the covid virus that we have all been following in the past two years, they are all examples of small scale evolution. What does it mean, some are more transmissable, some are more deadly, etc. the main point, they have all changed slightly since the first transmission to humans.

What Is a COVID Variant?​

Viruses are always changing, and that can cause a new variant, or strain, of a virus to form. Changing into a variant usually doesn't affect how the virus works. But sometimes they make it act in different ways.

Scientists around the world are tracking changes in the virus that causes COVID-19. Their research is helping experts understand whether certain COVID-19 variants spread faster than others, how they might affect your health, and how different vaccines might work against them.

How many variants are there?

The number changes often. In late 2023, the World Health Organization listed nine variants as circulating at the time. More than 50 variants have been identified; although some are no longer spreading.

Here is an overview I suggest you read.
Variants of Coronavirus

 

[YoursTrue]

Some do ... sometimes. At best, it's a side issue.



"The map is not the territory." -- Alfred Korzybski


^ This.

First and foremost, evolution deals with descent with modification simply because, if nothing changes, nothing changes.

I'd like to ask you a question about species and gene pool. Could be a simplistic question, but I will ask anyway. Fish and humans - do they possess the same gene pool? Maybe I'm getting the terms mixed up, but from what I am reading, gene pool is "all of the genes in a population. Any genes that could wind up in the same individual through sexual reproduction are in the same gene pool." So would you say that fish and gorillas, let's say, are in the same "gene pool"? I'd like to see what others say also. Thank you.

 

[YoursTrue]

Hi, @YoursTrue

Here is an attempt to clarify and comment on some points. I will try to make these sparingly so that there is not too much noise.




"Kind" is a word sometimes used by Creationists as an alternative to "Species", the main difference being that kinds are presumably stable and do not drift into other kinds/species.
.

Hi there. I am hoping to get an explanation I can understand about the relevance of gene pool with the various species. For instance, would you say fish and gorillas have the same gene pool? From what I understand, and maybe I don't understand properly, a gene pool is "All of the genes in a population. Any genes that could wind up in the same individual through sexual reproduction are in the same gene pool." That from berkely.edu. What is your understanding of gene pool, and does that mean that fish and gorillas do not come from the same gene pool? Also @Pogo

 

[YoursTrue]

Have a look at the mud skipper.

I'm hoping you also will answer about gene pool, which I've asked a few posters. I read the following about gene pool from the berkeley.edu website about this:
"All of the genes in a population. Any genes that could wind up in the same individual through sexual reproduction are in the same gene pool."
Hoping to understand what you think about this.

 

[LuisDantas]

Hi there. I am hoping to get an explanation I can understand about the relevance of gene pool with the various species. For instance, would you say fish and gorillas have the same gene pool? From what I understand, and maybe I don't understand properly, a gene pool is "All of the genes in a population. Any genes that could wind up in the same individual through sexual reproduction are in the same gene pool." That from berkely.edu. What is your understanding of gene pool, and does that mean that fish and gorillas do not come from the same gene pool? Also @Pogo

The concept of gene pool requires potential for interbreeding, so no, of course fish and gorillas can't belong to the same gene pool.

They do have common ancestors that once did, however. Some population of fish or fish-like organisms, or their earlier ancestors if you want to go back further.

 

[YoursTrue]

The concept of gene pool requires potential for interbreeding, so no, of course fish and gorillas can't belong to the same gene pool.

They do have common ancestors that once did, however. Some population of fish or fish-like organisms, or their earlier ancestors if you want to go back further.

OK, thank you, just wondering if I understood it correctly -- that gene pools have the potential for breeding to that population within the gene pool. I wonder what you think about cats and dogs, are they in the same gene pool, because I don't think they can interbreed, can they? I see zebras and horses can, therefore are to assume they are in the same gene pool. But not cats and dogs. Do you agree with that?

 

[YoursTrue]

The concept of gene pool requires potential for interbreeding, so no, of course fish and gorillas can't belong to the same gene pool.

They do have common ancestors that once did, however. Some population of fish or fish-like organisms, or their earlier ancestors if you want to go back further.

But -- gorillas I think, along with humans I suppose, are said by scientists to have evolved from fish, right?

 

[LuisDantas]

OK, thank you, just wondering if I understood it correctly -- that gene pools have the potential for breeding to that population within the gene pool. I wonder what you think about cats and dogs, are they in the same gene pool, because I don't think they can interbreed, can they? I see zebras and horses can, therefore are to assume they are in the same gene pool. But not cats and dogs. Do you agree with that?

I don't know the specifics of the current scientific consensus about horses and zebras, but sure, cats and dogs can't belong to the same gene pool either.

 

[LuisDantas]

But -- gorillas I think, along with humans I suppose, are said by scientists to have evolved from fish, right?

All amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, yes.

Although it is probably fair to point out that prehistoric fish are not necessarily genetically similar to the current ones.

 

[YoursTrue]

The concept of gene pool requires potential for interbreeding, so no, of course fish and gorillas can't belong to the same gene pool.

They do have common ancestors that once did, however. Some population of fish or fish-like organisms, or their earlier ancestors if you want to go back further.

I'm assuming that the gene pool of animals that can interbreed are able to be analyzed. But is that possible with fish and its evolution throughout?

 

[YoursTrue]

I don't know the specifics of the current scientific consensus about horses and zebras, but sure, cats and dogs can't belong to the same gene pool either.

I read about the possibility of zebras and horses interbreeding. I'll have to look at it more carefully. Meet the Relatives | AMNH

 

[YoursTrue]

All amphibians, reptiles, birds and mammals, yes.

Although it is probably fair to point out that prehistoric fish are not necessarily genetically similar to the current ones.

That seems like a fair response. I will reserve my comment on that. But it seems fair enough. And who knows what type of fish is said to have developed fins that grew to be like little legs?

 

[YoursTrue]

Thank you @LuisDantas for your responses. I'm signing off for now -- my body is telling me it's time to close up shop, to sleep. Have a good night.
Psalm 121:4
Behold, He who watches over Israel Will neither slumber nor sleep.

 

[Balthazzar]

Question: Human evolution - If gene pool equates to the human gene pool specifically, then the genes being modified are those from various humans and their individual adaptative developmental progress'. I've been made aware of the Y chromosome being on the decline. It is possible that human macro evolutionary development is still contained within that specific framework, via the many micro evolutionary adaptations we go through over larger periods of time. Instead of looking to other species for the answers, why wouldn't evolutionary advances be contained within our own type, between males and females of the same "genus species type", specifically?

 

[LuisDantas]

I'm assuming that the gene pool of animals that can interbreed are able to be analyzed. But is that possible with fish and its evolution throughout?

Sorry, I am not following. What do you mean by analysis here?

 

[LuisDantas]

That seems like a fair response. I will reserve my comment on that. But it seems fair enough. And who knows what type of fish is said to have developed fins that grew to be like little legs?

There are many generations involved, many intermediary forms.

Richard Dawkins is a good author on this subject.