question for those who reject biological evolution

[leroy]

Whoa! He almost has it. Yes, if the changes were identical then you would have identical proteins.

Nobody said that all the changes in those proteins where identical, only the 200 changes that the authors of the papers reported.

I knew that you could see your error sooner or later. This is why the article calls them convergent, not directed. Not identical. That would be problem for evolution.

I never said that it was a problem for evolution--------- it is just a problem if you restrict your view to “only random mutations”…… but nobody except for @Pogo has this restriction……..so no problem

By the way, the "trees" that they are talking about are self admitted to be false trees since they are only looking at a very small part of the genome.

Yes granted

dolphins apper closer to bats only if you look at a very small portion of the genome

 

[F1fan]

Then why don’t you simply explain clearly and unambiguously your views on non random mutations and non random genetic variation in general

1 Do you grant that the non random mutations/variations can occure every once in a while?

2 do you grant that they likely played an important role in the evolution of various systems like @Subduction Zone and scientists and I claim?

You keep semm to be moving from one position to an other……… so a clear and unabigous answer would help

What do experts say causes non random mutations?

 

[leroy]

You would have to define "non random". There are parts of the genome that are more apt to have mutations than others. I am not sure if that qualifies as "non random". I wonder if the shape of folding and other geometric forces on the strand of DNA could cause some parts to be more exposed than others. Those areas might be more subject to mutations.


Complex questions cannot always be answered yes or no. Frankly I do not know of any cases. That does not rule it out, but you would think that would make the news if it did happen. I am leaning towards, probably no in any meaningful way.

Then why do you resist corrections so ?

Really is not accept claims just ebcause you say so count as vehemently?

You would have to define "non random". There are parts of the genome that are more apt to have mutations than others. I am not sure if that qualifies as "non random".

Epigenetics together with many other known mechanisms would count as nonrandom variation.

If a mutations is more likely to occur just because the organisms would benefit from it, then it is not random..............this is the normal standard defintion of non random.this is what biologists aways mean with random (in this context).............. nobody is inventing crazy creationists terms

 

[leroy]

What do experts say causes non random mutations?

there are many known mechanisms

I am not sure if the specific details of how they work are known

For example there is a mechanism “Natural Geneti Engeneering” where the genome rearranges to produce new proteins that would help the organism to solve a problem (say resist a drug)… in other words the genome acts like Lego blocks to accommodate according to the organisms needs.

But I have no idea if the details for how it works are known

 

[leroy]

How can a nonrandom mutation know if it’s more likely to be a benefit?

Or is this just a classification thing that humans make because they observe a benefit?

I´l assume that somehow the genomes gets information from the outside and mutates/changes accordingly.

If there is a dangerous drug in the environment, the genome will change, such that new proteins will appear and gain resistance to that drug. ……………….. Such mutations would have been less likely to occur in an environment without the drug.

 

[leroy]

Your posts repeated demonstrate your lack of understanding. And when people try to explain your errors to you and all that you have is going back to the article and repeating your false interpretations you are going to have people pointing out your errors to you constantly.

Well so far all the alleged mistakes and misunderstandings , have been your straw men………..you thought that I was claiming something that I never claimed.



This is why I always say

1 quote my words

2 explain /show that they are wrong

If you would have done that, you would have noticed that I never said that the exact same proteins/genes evolved in bats and dolphins

 

[Pogo]

I´l assume that somehow the genomes gets information from the outside and mutates/changes accordingly.

If there is a dangerous drug in the environment, the genome will change, such that new proteins will appear and gain resistance to that drug. ……………….. Such mutations would have been less likely to occur in an environment without the drug.

Just NO

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nobody said that all the changes in those proteins where identical, only the 200 changes that the authors of the papers reported.

Even that would be noticed. Here is the thing, you are assuming that they are the same when we all see language that tells us that they are different. What was amazing was the degree of similarity. But it is not to the degree that you want it to be.

I never said that it was a problem for evolution--------- it is just a problem if you restrict your view to “only random mutations”…… but nobody except for @Pogo has this restriction……..so no problem

Potato Potahtoe. Please you are not fooling anyone.

Yes granted

dolphins apper closer to bats only if you look at a very small portion of the genome

And even then, not exact.

You seem to have a problem understanding how when scientists make a theory shattering discovery that they want to make it very clear.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well so far all the alleged mistakes and misunderstandings , have been your straw men………..you thought that I was claiming something that I never claimed.



This is why I always say

1 quote my words

2 explain /show that they are wrong

If you would have done that, you would have noticed that I never said that the exact same proteins/genes evolved in bats and dolphins

Been there done that, bought the T-shirt. Your false claim of "strawman" is just pure bull**** on your part and you know it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Really is not accept claims just ebcause you say so count as vehemently?

And you continue with the false statements. I am not the only one that explained your error to you. You have it backwards as usual. You think that your use of the ostrich defense is a refutation.

Epigenetics together with many other known mechanisms would count as nonrandom variation.

Epigenetics is only a temporary change. It could cause a permanent one. But there manner of doing so might still fit under the category of random. Please give me a scenario of your own on how epigenetics could change the allele frequency of a populaiton.

If a mutations is more likely to occur just because the organisms would benefit from it, then it is not random..............this is the normal standard defintion of non random.this is what biologists aways mean with random (in this context).............. nobody is inventing crazy creationists terms

And how is that supposed to happen?

 

[F1fan]

I´l assume that somehow the genomes gets information from the outside and mutates/changes accordingly.

How do genomes know to get information? And from the outside? What do you mean?

If there is a dangerous drug in the environment, the genome will change, such that new proteins will appear and gain resistance to that drug. ……………….. Such mutations would have been less likely to occur in an environment without the drug.

Like the rock star genome will change and stop shooting heroin? Or do you mean something else? Be specific.

 

[F1fan]

there are many known mechanisms

I am not sure if the specific details of how they work are known

For example there is a mechanism “Natural Geneti Engeneering” where the genome rearranges to produce new proteins that would help the organism to solve a problem (say resist a drug)… in other words the genome acts like Lego blocks to accommodate according to the organisms needs.

But I have no idea if the details for how it works are known

Yeah, this NGE is tied to Intelligent Design. That's a red flag.

Natural genetic engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Pogo]

Yeah, this NGE is tied to Intelligent Design. That's a red flag.

Natural genetic engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Wow, @leroy could have brought up this NGE hypothesis before he wandered off into his random weeds and might even have generated a discussion of atypical evolutionary mechanisms. how it might relate to his bat/whale scenario none of us know.

Maybe tomorrow we will see if this is just another buzz word or whether @leroy can actually discuss it without putting words into peoples mouths.

 

[leroy]

Just NO

Well that is what peer reviewed sources say


But if an anonymous fanatic atheist from a forum says no.....then no

 

[leroy]

Even that would be noticed. Here is the thing, you are assuming that they are the same when we all see language that tells us that they are different. What was amazing was the degree of similarity. But it is not to the degree that you want it to be.


Potato Potahtoe. Please you are not fooling anyone.

And even then, not exact.

You seem to have a problem understanding how when scientists make a theory shattering discovery that they want to make it very clear.

Ok so
1 what did the authors really say according to you

2 how do you know

3 how is that different from what ive veen saying

 

[leroy]

Epigenetics is only a temporary change. It could cause a permanent one.

Sometimes it is permanent and hereditable (do you what a source)

As unconventional as it may be, there is little doubt that epigenetic inheritance is real. In fact, it explains some strange patterns of inheritance geneticists have been puzzling over for decades.https://learn.genetics.utah.edu/content/epigenetics/inheritance#:~:text=It%20means%20that%20a%20parent's,that%20epigenetic%20inheritance%20is%20real.

..

But there manner of doing so might still fit under the category of random.

Epigenetic changes are sometimes driven by external factors such as environment, diseases, abtibiotics etc
It is not random because this change occure when the organosm needs them

Please give me a scenario of your own on how epigenetics could change the allele frequency of a populaiton.

As far as I know epigenetics doest change the allele frequency. Just gene expresión

And how is that supposed to happen?

No idea how this happen..... there are many non random mechanisms that change the allele frequency and/or gene expresión.... but as far as I know, nobody undestads in detail how this systems really work.

 

[leroy]

How do genomes know to get information?

I personally dont know..... how does you hart know that it has to pump ?

good question I wonder if scientist have a definite answer or if its an open question ....

And from the outside? What do you mean?

Outside ≈ environment

Like the rock star genome will change and stop shooting heroin? Or do you mean something else? Be specific.

Like bacteria changing its genome and gaining resistente to an antibiotic

 

[leroy]

Yeah, this NGE is tied to Intelligent Design. That's a red flag.

Natural genetic engineering - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

That is the definition of fanatism....... you reject a mechanism just because it is supposedly tied to a model that you dont like .

Facts
1 NGE is not tied to ID

2 it shouldn't be relevant, if there is evidence for NGE then there is evidence..... evidence doesn't diappear just because an anonymous fanatic doest like the implications



Many pepple think that evolution is tied to atheism....... is that a good argument against evolution?

 

[leroy]

actually discuss it without putting words into peoples mouths.

If you dont whant me to put words in your mouth then ehy dont you answer directlty to my questions?

Do you grant that there are mechanisms that cause non random mutations (or non random variation) .... do you think they played a relevant role in evolution?


Why dont you answer with a simple yes or no ? .... o you can simply say" I dont know "

It is almost as if you what to keep your view vague and ambigous to hide all your contradictions and mistakes.


Why cant you answer to my question in a clear and unambigous way ?

 

[Pogo]

If you dont whant me to put words in your mouth then ehy dont you answer directlty to my questions?

Do you grant that there are mechanisms that cause non random mutations (or non random variation) .... do you think they played a relevant role in evolution?


Why dont you answer with a simple yes or no ? .... o you can simply say" I dont know "

It is almost as if you what to keep your view vague and ambigous to hide all your contradictions and mistakes.


Why cant you answer to my question in a clear and unambigous way ?

Because your questions are not clear and unambiguous because you don't understand what you are actually asking and you are filtering everything through your personal adgenda.
Is Literal random mutation and natural selection the only method of evolution?
No and nobody thinks that so that is a dumb question but you keep acting as though it is important.
Are there other mechanisms that affect evolution? Yeah, DUH but depending on the level of understanding of the person you are talking to, they may not be worth discussing, your apparent level of understanding leads one to believe you are one of those.
You complain that we are not explaining in detail, but we really have very little idea what question you are asking.

Just what mechanism do you think is responsible for the bat/whale observation and how does it work?