Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
25-07-2013, 06:54 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 06:47 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 06:21 PM)Chas Wrote:  Mutation determines what forms are available to selection.

Mutation determine what forms are available in the same way pixels determine what pictures are available.

Several forms...such as an eye...independently evolved several times on this planet. If your claim was true, in each instance the exact same mutations and sequence would have had to follow in each case. As I have pointed out to you in the past, the Thylacine and the Wolf shared essentially the same form but a very different history of mutations.

You did not understand what I said, or your read something into it that isn't there. Your statements do not follow from mine. Maybe you could clarify.

Eyes evolved something like 40 times independently; different DNA, different mutations, different paths. It could have happened once or a thousand times.

Convergent evolution is an excellent demonstration of selection. But the variation has to exist to select from.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 06:57 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 06:47 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Mutation determine what forms are available in the same way pixels determine what pictures are available.

That analogy demonstrates your point in the same way a locomotive plays pinball.

(25-07-2013 06:47 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Several forms...such as an eye...independently evolved several times on this planet. If your claim was true, in each instance the exact same mutations and sequence would have had to follow in each case. As I have pointed out to you in the past, the Thylacine and the Wolf shared essentially the same form but a very different history of mutations.

The genetic diversity within a population is generally determined by the rate of viable mutations. This is a random or nearly random process.

The exact same mutations can't occur in different species, because they don't have the same genome to begin with.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 07:25 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 06:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 06:47 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Mutation determine what forms are available in the same way pixels determine what pictures are available.

Several forms...such as an eye...independently evolved several times on this planet. If your claim was true, in each instance the exact same mutations and sequence would have had to follow in each case. As I have pointed out to you in the past, the Thylacine and the Wolf shared essentially the same form but a very different history of mutations.

You did not understand what I said, or your read something into it that isn't there. Your statements do not follow from mine. Maybe you could clarify.

Eyes evolved something like 40 times independently; different DNA, different mutations, different paths. It could have happened once or a thousand times.

Convergent evolution is an excellent demonstration of selection. But the variation has to exist to select from.

Take any given image on a computer screen. That image can be substantially recreated with a huge number of different pixel combinations. The relevance of any particular pixel is insignificant. For the most part the same is true with any given mutation.

Very few if any mutations would alter the ultimate coarse evolution takes. However changes in the selection mechanism will result in substantial changes to evolution's course.

Insults From Thinkingatheists forgiven 151
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 07:30 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 07:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 06:54 PM)Chas Wrote:  You did not understand what I said, or your read something into it that isn't there. Your statements do not follow from mine. Maybe you could clarify.

Eyes evolved something like 40 times independently; different DNA, different mutations, different paths. It could have happened once or a thousand times.

Convergent evolution is an excellent demonstration of selection. But the variation has to exist to select from.

Take any given image on a computer screen. That image can be substantially recreated with a huge number of different pixel combinations. The relevance of any particular pixel is insignificant. For the most part the same is true with any given mutation.

Very few if any mutations would alter the ultimate coarse evolution takes. However changes in the selection mechanism will result in substantial changes to evolution's course.

Without mutations that have phenotypic effects, selection has nothing to act upon.

Why are you refusing to see that?

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 08:22 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 07:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 07:25 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  Take any given image on a computer screen. That image can be substantially recreated with a huge number of different pixel combinations. The relevance of any particular pixel is insignificant. For the most part the same is true with any given mutation.

Very few if any mutations would alter the ultimate coarse evolution takes. However changes in the selection mechanism will result in substantial changes to evolution's course.

Without mutations that have phenotypic effects, selection has nothing to act upon.

Why are you refusing to see that?

I see that just fine. I just see selective pressure playing a substantially greater roll in determining form then any individual mutations. Any given set of mutations is ubiquitous. Meaningful sets of mutations that results in the appearance of forms only exist long term because of selection pressures.

Selection is what drives form. A mutation is only a piece of the mechanism.....it is a pixel in screen.

Insults From Thinkingatheists forgiven 151
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 08:24 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 08:22 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 07:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  Without mutations that have phenotypic effects, selection has nothing to act upon.

Why are you refusing to see that?

I see that just fine. I just see selective pressure playing a substantially greater roll in determining form then any individual mutations. Any given set of mutations is ubiquitous. Meaningful sets of mutations that results in the appearance of forms only exist long term because of selection pressures.

Selection is what drives form. A mutation is only a piece of the mechanism.....it is a pixel in screen.

No, they are both necessary, neither is sufficient. Neither is more important.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Chas's post
25-07-2013, 08:31 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 08:22 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 07:30 PM)Chas Wrote:  Without mutations that have phenotypic effects, selection has nothing to act upon.

Why are you refusing to see that?

I see that just fine. I just see selective pressure playing a substantially greater roll in determining form then any individual mutations. Any given set of mutations is ubiquitous. Meaningful sets of mutations that results in the appearance of forms only exist long term because of selection pressures.

Selection is what drives form. A mutation is only a piece of the mechanism.....it is a pixel in screen.

Mutations dictate the hand dealt, you might win a poker game with a pair of Jacks the same as you might with a pair of Aces and you might win game after game with Jacks but eventually you will come up against Queens or Kings and if you are evolved to get a lot of Jacks and no Aces you are going to loose.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 08:46 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 08:31 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 08:22 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I see that just fine. I just see selective pressure playing a substantially greater roll in determining form then any individual mutations. Any given set of mutations is ubiquitous. Meaningful sets of mutations that results in the appearance of forms only exist long term because of selection pressures.

Selection is what drives form. A mutation is only a piece of the mechanism.....it is a pixel in screen.

Mutations dictate the hand dealt, you might win a poker game with a pair of Jacks the same as you might with a pair of Aces and you might win game after game with Jacks but eventually you will come up against Queens or Kings and if you are evolved to get a lot of Jacks and no Aces you are going to loose.

For a poker player, random hands do not determine win rate, except over short intervals. Over the long run selection determines who the winners and loser are. Over the long run any random hand is insignificant. Poker illustrates my position quite nicely.

Insults From Thinkingatheists forgiven 151
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 08:50 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 08:46 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  
(25-07-2013 08:31 PM)ridethespiral Wrote:  Mutations dictate the hand dealt, you might win a poker game with a pair of Jacks the same as you might with a pair of Aces and you might win game after game with Jacks but eventually you will come up against Queens or Kings and if you are evolved to get a lot of Jacks and no Aces you are going to loose.

For a poker player, random hands do not determine win rate, except over short intervals. Over the long run selection determines who the winners and loser are. Over the long run any random hand is insignificant. Poker illustrates my position quite nicely.

Except that genes are stacking the deck to give you the same hand every time that you win.

Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
25-07-2013, 08:55 PM
RE: Start evolution over. Would the same species appear? Yes!
(25-07-2013 08:46 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  For a poker player, random hands do not determine win rate, except over short intervals. Over the long run selection determines who the winners and loser are. Over the long run any random hand is insignificant. Poker illustrates my position quite nicely.

There is only selection when there are things to select from among.

That variety is due to mutations.

Mutations are random.

I'm pretty sure you're just trolling at this point...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: