^ And yet we're still all humans. Which just goes to prove that we're extremely resistant to genetic mutations.

Language is another prime example - Language is what separates us from the animals, but it's not genetic. If it was there wouldn't be 100's of different languages.

Yeah I can see how my green eyes mutation from a blue eyed mother would just be the end of humanity as we know it.

talkorigins Wrote:Bacteria mutate much faster than plants and animals do, yet their populations are not becoming less viable.

Most mutations are neutral. Nachman and Crowell estimate around 3 deleterious mutations out of 175 per generation in humans (2000). Of those that have significant effect, most are harmful, but the fraction which are beneficial is higher than usually though. An experiment with E. coli found that about 1 in 150 newly arising mutations and 1 in 10 functional mutations are beneficial (Perfeito et al. 2007).

The harmful mutations do not survive long, and the beneficial mutations survive much longer, so when you consider only surviving mutations, most are beneficial.

Whether a mutation is beneficial or not depends on environment. A mutation that helps the organism in one circumstance could harm it in another. When the environment changes, variations that once were counteradaptive suddenly become favored. Since environments are constantly changing, variation helps populations survive, even if some of those variations do not do as well as others. When beneficial mutations occur in a changed environment, they generally sweep through the population rapidly (Elena et al. 1996).

(May 22, 2014 at 4:48 am)Aractus Wrote: Evolution doesn't happen via random genetic mutations, that's a myth. Plus it's impossible - organisms have shielded themselves from experiencing the effects of such unwanted random mutations. If mutations is how evolution works then why would there be so much hostility towards the mutations occurring in the first place? Evolution doesn't have the opportunity to be able to "test" as many mutations as it would need to in order to work.

Your hidden assumption that all mutations improve fitness betrays a basic lack of understanding of evolution. How exactly do you propose that organisms shield themselves from unwanted random mutations?

---

(May 22, 2014 at 5:15 am)Aractus Wrote: ^ And yet we're still all humans. Which just goes to prove that we're extremely resistant to genetic mutations.

Language is another prime example - Language is what separates us from the animals, but it's not genetic. If it was there wouldn't be 100's of different languages.

Mendel, meet Lamarck.

(May 22, 2014 at 5:15 am)Aractus Wrote: ^ And yet we're still all humans. Which just goes to prove that we're extremely resistant to genetic mutations.

Seriously? Do you think that evolution is dogs giving birth to cats?

This process is a very lengthy one, and humans have only been around for a relatively short period of time. We aren't suddenly going to evolve into a new species, but then, evolution never states that we might.

Mr YEC needs a bit more info.
It's amazing how they just discard what doesn't agree with their view... I've recently thought of this detail and I think I've posted it somewhere else, but here goes a slightly more... err... cited version.

First, let's establish that the simple compass was invented by the chinese in the first millenium BC:
The magnetic compass was first invented as a device for divination as early as the Chinese Han Dynasty (since about 206 BC).[1][2][3] The compass was used in Song Dynasty China by the military for navigational orienteering by 1040-1044,[4][5][6] and was used for maritime navigation by 1111 to 1117.[7]
(follow the citations on the wiki link if you wish)

Then, let's establish that the Earth's magnetic field has been alternating and that alternation is recorded on the rocks that have been formed at that time, the prime example being the Atlantic seafloor, due to the slow but steady creation of new rock at the mid-Atlantic ridge: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geomagnetic_reversal

Now, if the Chinese had compasses pointing north, like we have today and have never recorded the compasses pointing elsewhere (except in the proximity of a magnetic rock), then the most recent band of magnetized rock on the seafloor has been there since, at least, the first millenium BC.

Just look at how many bands there are, how large they are and it's also possible to measure how fast they're moving away from the ridge and you get a geologic age for the Atlantic Ocean which goes far beyond what any YEC is willing to admit for the age of the planet.

(of course, you weren't there; god made it work much faster than what we measure now because... he didn't have enough time?)

(May 22, 2014 at 3:06 am)Luckie Wrote: Sorry love. But I am through with scientific debate.

He could have admitted this from the beginning and saved you both a lot of time.

(May 22, 2014 at 5:57 am)Esquilax Wrote: Seriously? Do you think that evolution is dogs giving birth to cats?

This process is a very lengthy one, and humans have only been around for a relatively short period of time. We aren't suddenly going to evolve into a new species, but then, evolution never states that we might.

I didn't say it's not lengthy, I said it takes place primarily in the organism and not in the genetic code. How do you explain the human brain having 100 trillion connections from 20,000 genes? It's impossible to make a blueprint that complicated in just 20,000 genes - it cannot be done. We know for a FACT that the human brain builds those connections through learning which is not in itself genetic. Ie, we're provided with a brain that has the capability if programmed correctly to use our eyes, and we're provided with our eyes, but we do the programming ourselves - from the time we're born and continue refining the system until at least age 5 or so (maybe a bit later actually), DNA doesn't do that part. It takes 5 years (or more) of learning to build the neurological network for that aspect of the brain.

Furthermore we have schools for education - do you think there's a difference between a person who's completed secondary education and one that never went to school? How big a difference would you say would that environmental change have? More than the difference between two people the same age with 60 mutations and countless many different actual genes? Case in point.

(May 22, 2014 at 6:16 am)Aractus Wrote:

(May 22, 2014 at 5:57 am)Esquilax Wrote: Seriously? Do you think that evolution is dogs giving birth to cats?

This process is a very lengthy one, and humans have only been around for a relatively short period of time. We aren't suddenly going to evolve into a new species, but then, evolution never states that we might.

I didn't say it's not lengthy, I said it takes place primarily in the organism and not in the genetic code. How do you explain the human brain having 100 trillion connections from 20,000 genes? It's impossible to make a blueprint that complicated in just 20,000 genes - it cannot be done. We know for a FACT that the human brain builds those connections through learning which is not in itself genetic. Ie, we're provided with a brain that has the capability if programmed correctly to use our eyes, and we're provided with our eyes, but we do the programming ourselves - from the time we're born and continue refining the system until at least age 5 or so (maybe a bit later actually), DNA doesn't do that part. It takes 5 years (or more) of learning to build the neurological network for that aspect of the brain.

Furthermore we have schools for education - do you think there's a difference between a person who's completed secondary education and one that never went to school? How big a difference would you say would that environmental change have? More than the difference between two people the same age with 60 mutations and countless many different actual genes? Case in point.

Yes, one of the strengths of humanity is that we actually learn what we need to survive, whereas many other animals do not. Those animals rely solely on what their genes built into their brains.
Some other animals also learn things.... take parrots, for example, or dogs, bears and many mammals that need to stick by their mothers while learning what to eat and what not to eat. What to vocalize and what not to vocalize.... how to fly and how not to fly...
http://video.nationalgeographic.com/video/guillemots

Anyway: some animals learn stuff in their infancy.... some come with the firmware fully loaded.
Both strategies seem to work for their respective species.