Total Posts:83|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

The Shrinking Y Chromosone

Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
brian_eggleston
Posts: 3,347
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 3:18:46 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

I don't know much about biology but this degeneration occurs in all mammal species. It causes mutations which can be harmful, in which case the animal / human is less likely to reproduce and pass on their genes, or they can be beneficial in which case the mutation is more likely to be passed on to future generations.

This process is wholly consistent with evolution, indeed, creationists, not being able to dispute these facts scientifically, are likely to dismiss them in the same way that the Catholics dismissed Galileo's assertion that our planet was not at the centre of the universe and that the sun did not revolve around the earth.
Visit the burglars' bulletin board: http://www.break-in-news.com...
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 3:35:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

Is this a new discovery? if so, how new?
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 3:37:06 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:35:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

Is this a new discovery? if so, how new?

It's at least two years old. probably older.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 3:52:53 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:37:06 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:35:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

Is this a new discovery? if so, how new?

It's at least two years old. probably older.

Well, you don't need to be Einstein or St Paul to see that everything is ageing, rusting, corroding, rotting, declining, cooling etc etc..

This is simply the difference between this, fallen, world (which is FINITE) and the next, perfect, world. (INFINITE; eternity.. heaven)
The Cross.. the Cross.
Kleptin
Posts: 5,095
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:37:06 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:35:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

Is this a new discovery? if so, how new?

It's at least two years old. probably older.

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.

However, all of this is moot, as within a few years, scientists will be able to fuse two eggs into a viable fetus.
: At 5/2/2010 2:43:54 PM, innomen wrote:
It isn't about finding a theory, philosophy or doctrine and thinking it's the answer, but a practical application of one's experiences that is the answer.

: At 10/28/2010 2:40:07 PM, jharry wrote: I have already been given the greatest Gift that anyone could ever hope for [Life], I would consider myself selfish if I expected anything more.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:35:42 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM, Kleptin wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:37:06 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:35:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

Is this a new discovery? if so, how new?

It's at least two years old. probably older.

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.

However, all of this is moot, as within a few years, scientists will be able to fuse two eggs into a viable fetus.

Are you out of high school already? man.. how time does fly. *sigh*

Everything is DYING.
DEATH is the curse mankind has chosen.
One Man came and DEFEATED death.
By Accepting Christ we too can have victory.
We too can have LIFE.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:39:45 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 3:18:46 AM, brian_eggleston wrote:
At 9/3/2009 3:00:29 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
This could have gone in the Science area, but I posting it here as relevant to the whole Evolution vs. Design debate, which people make the mistake of treating as a religious matter.

So anyway... the Y Chromosone is shrinking, it is loosing genes. It apparently has always done so. Does this imply that humanity (and the other species in which this has been detected) were created and have since been degenerating or running down? Or is this phenomana consistent with evolution?

This is a genuine question with input from both 'sides' welcome.

I don't know much about biology but this degeneration occurs in all mammal species. It causes mutations which can be harmful, in which case the animal / human is less likely to reproduce and pass on their genes, or they can be beneficial in which case the mutation is more likely to be passed on to future generations.


But isn't this showing a reduction of genes in the male line, not just normal evolutionary genetic change?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:42:30 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM, Kleptin wrote:

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.


It's probably safe to assume that you know more about biology than me, do I'd like to ask, doesn't this represent permanent damage to the gene pool?

And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Surely from the perspective of the selfish gene it would not have that response anyway?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 5:05:44 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 4:42:30 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM, Kleptin wrote:

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.


It's probably safe to assume that you know more about biology than me, do I'd like to ask, doesn't this represent permanent damage to the gene pool?

And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Surely from the perspective of the selfish gene it would not have that response anyway?

And how does this process 'KNOW' humanity is over populated?
Sounds suspiciously Theistic to me..
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 5:33:58 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 5:05:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:42:30 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM, Kleptin wrote:

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.


It's probably safe to assume that you know more about biology than me, do I'd like to ask, doesn't this represent permanent damage to the gene pool?

And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Surely from the perspective of the selfish gene it would not have that response anyway?

And how does this process 'KNOW' humanity is over populated?

That is my question!

Sounds suspiciously Theistic to me..

Or that nature is 'intelligent' in a way similar to the events in the film "the happening".
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 6:02:49 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
The Y Chromosome is shrinking because of how chromosomes are copied:

"All the other chromosomes come in two copies. Every time a cell divides, mistakes in genes can creep in. In paired chromosomes (like X and X in female), that means that if there is a mistake on one chromosome, a cell can always get the correct gene sequence from the other chromosome.

Over time, mistakes have crept into the Y chromosome, too. But every time a gene on the Y chromosome went bad, it basically disappeared. Scientists theorize that the X and Y chromosome started out with about the same amount of genes -- about 1,000. Today, the Y chromosome has less than 80 genes."

And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Well, two points. One is that females are the limiting factor on how fast a population can grow and not males. One male can impregnate dozens of females a month, but each female can only have one (on average) child every 9 months.

Two... there is no direct evolutionary method for population control. Survival of the fittest dictates basically that the strongest will get the food and therefore survive, but this says nothing directly about direct population control through evolutionary effects. It also doesn't have nearly as much application on humans with modern farming techniques supplying food and compassion leading to attempts to feed the weaker.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 6:10:30 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 6:02:49 AM, Floid wrote:
The Y Chromosome is shrinking because of how chromosomes are copied:

"All the other chromosomes come in two copies. Every time a cell divides, mistakes in genes can creep in. In paired chromosomes (like X and X in female), that means that if there is a mistake on one chromosome, a cell can always get the correct gene sequence from the other chromosome.

Over time, mistakes have crept into the Y chromosome, too. But every time a gene on the Y chromosome went bad, it basically disappeared. Scientists theorize that the X and Y chromosome started out with about the same amount of genes -- about 1,000. Today, the Y chromosome has less than 80 genes."



And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Well, two points. One is that females are the limiting factor on how fast a population can grow and not males. One male can impregnate dozens of females a month, but each female can only have one (on average) child every 9 months.

Two... there is no direct evolutionary method for population control. Survival of the fittest dictates basically that the strongest will get the food and therefore survive, but this says nothing directly about direct population control through evolutionary effects. It also doesn't have nearly as much application on humans with modern farming techniques supplying food and compassion leading to attempts to feed the weaker.

But surely what you have described is incompatible with evolution, instead it shows nature running and deteriorating?

I think in any case the issue of a overpopulation is non-starter, it would suggest our own biology has opinions on conservation.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
feverish
Posts: 2,716
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 7:17:51 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 5:05:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:42:30 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:


Surely from the perspective of the selfish gene it would not have that response anyway?

And how does this process 'KNOW' humanity is over populated?
Sounds suspiciously Theistic to me..

lol The Selfish Gene is a book by that well known theist Richard Dawkins.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 8:08:09 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 5:05:44 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:42:30 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:06:33 AM, Kleptin wrote:

At least 6 years. I learned this in highschool. My hypothesis, going by what BE said, is that it is a defense mechanism for overpopulation. Males control the speed of reproduction faster than females because insemination can be done several times daily. It limits the gene pool to those who can retain the Y chromosome best.


It's probably safe to assume that you know more about biology than me, do I'd like to ask, doesn't this represent permanent damage to the gene pool?

And how would our bodies consider the us to be suffering from overpopulation?

Surely from the perspective of the selfish gene it would not have that response anyway?

And how does this process 'KNOW' humanity is over populated?
Sounds suspiciously Theistic to me..
You need fewer, stronger chillunz.

So the ones that are many and weak don't get as far... they starve or live in Mom's basement till their mid 30s, and don't reproduce.

What's left?

I don't know if that's actually the case here, but it works out as a hypothesis

But surely what you have described is incompatible with evolution, instead it shows nature running and deteriorating?
In evolution, bigger is not always better. Evolution can shrink genes or raise them, the only elements involved are chance and reproductive potential, not a preference for any size.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 8:16:37 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:08:09 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

In evolution, bigger is not always better. Evolution can shrink genes or raise them, the only elements involved are chance and reproductive potential, not a preference for any size.

But to constantly loose them with every generation for no apparent reason is not consistent with evolution is it?
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Puck
Posts: 6,457
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 8:25:27 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:16:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

But to constantly loose them with every generation for no apparent reason is not consistent with evolution is it?

Y chromosome can also add genes, the X can't to my knowledge.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 8:27:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:25:27 AM, Puck wrote:
At 9/3/2009 8:16:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:

But to constantly loose them with every generation for no apparent reason is not consistent with evolution is it?

Y chromosome can also add genes, the X can't to my knowledge.

I see!
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 8:55:41 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
Proverbial spanner:

There is NO SUCH THING AS OVER POPULATION..
The Earth is still VERY UNDER POPULATED..
Anyone been in a plane lately? LOOK DOWN.
The Cross.. the Cross.
Cerebral_Narcissist
Posts: 10,806
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 9:00:19 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:55:41 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Proverbial spanner:

There is NO SUCH THING AS OVER POPULATION..
The Earth is still VERY UNDER POPULATED..
Anyone been in a plane lately? LOOK DOWN.

Agreed.

The world may be over populated according to our personal tastes and desires but it is not as such over populated.
I am voting for Innomen because of his intelligence, common sense, humility and the fact that Juggle appears to listen to him. Any other Presidential style would have a large sub-section of the site up in arms. If I was President I would destroy the site though elitism, others would let it run riot. Innomen represents a middle way that works, neither draconian nor anarchic and that is the only way things can work. Plus he does it all without ego trips.
Floid
Posts: 751
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 9:28:06 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
But surely what you have described is incompatible with evolution, instead it shows nature running and deteriorating?

I am not expert on evolution by any means, but random mutations are indescriminate, some are harmful, some have no overall effect, and some are beneficial. For the most part from what I have read there has been little overall effect in this case (it has not made males stronger or weaker).

It is survival of the fittest that then help determine among the mutations which are better suited for survival... but again that doesn't really hold for humans because we have set up populations that do not have to fight for survival relative to the rest of humanity.
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 9:28:06 AM, Floid wrote:
But surely what you have described is incompatible with evolution, instead it shows nature running and deteriorating?

I am not expert on evolution by any means, but random mutations are indescriminate, some are harmful, some have no overall effect, and some are beneficial. For the most part from what I have read there has been little overall effect in this case (it has not made males stronger or weaker).

It is survival of the fittest that then help determine among the mutations which are better suited for survival... but again that doesn't really hold for humans because we have set up populations that do not have to fight for survival relative to the rest of humanity.

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.
The Cross.. the Cross.
ToastOfDestiny
Posts: 990
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:03:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:55:41 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
Proverbial spanner:

There is NO SUCH THING AS OVER POPULATION..
The Earth is still VERY UNDER POPULATED..
Anyone been in a plane lately? LOOK DOWN.

OMG CLOUDS!
At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
Our demise and industrial destruction
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Only exists in your head, as already shown.

At 10/11/2009 8:28:18 PM, banker wrote:
reveal why you answer with a question mark
At 10/11/2009 10:00:21 PM, regebro wrote:
Because it was a question.

RFDs Pl0x:
http://www.debate.org...
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:08:11 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 8:16:37 AM, Cerebral_Narcissist wrote:
At 9/3/2009 8:08:09 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:

In evolution, bigger is not always better. Evolution can shrink genes or raise them, the only elements involved are chance and reproductive potential, not a preference for any size.

But to constantly loose them with every generation for no apparent reason is not consistent with evolution is it?
See also: chance


Chance is an element in evolution, and consistent with any possible oddity gaining prevalence unless it completely f***s things up :).
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Clockwork
Posts: 349
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:18:55 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 9:28:06 AM, Floid wrote:
But surely what you have described is incompatible with evolution, instead it shows nature running and deteriorating?

I am not expert on evolution by any means, but random mutations are indescriminate, some are harmful, some have no overall effect, and some are beneficial. For the most part from what I have read there has been little overall effect in this case (it has not made males stronger or weaker).

It is survival of the fittest that then help determine among the mutations which are better suited for survival... but again that doesn't really hold for humans because we have set up populations that do not have to fight for survival relative to the rest of humanity.

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.

Desmond and Marley Jones have two kids; Lucy and Eleanor. Lucy's genes mutate and cause her to be highly susceptible to skin cancer by sun exposure, which is highly disadvantageous considering that all of the Joneses are expected to lend a hand on their farm. Eleanor's genes lack any such ailment.

When both girls reach their thirties, Lucy is afflicted with an episode of malignant melanoma and dies. Eleanor obviously lives. Lucy's genes are removed from the gene pool, thereby decreasing the chance of future generations being prone to her genetic deficits, while Eleanor's relatively healthy genes are preserved. Evolution isn't a matter of chromosomes knowing which mutations are good and which are bad, but rather a simple application of common sense in telling that those with harmful attributes will die.
Felonial Disenfranchisement: http://www.debate.org...
Poverty v. Environmental Protection: http://www.debate.org...
On God and Free Will: http://www.debate.org...
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 4:43:31 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.

Two lists:

General mutations - http://www.gate.net...
Specifically Human ones - http://www.gate.net...

Did you not learn to do research in school?
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 5:06:50 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 4:43:31 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.

Two lists:

General mutations - http://www.gate.net...
Specifically Human ones - http://www.gate.net...

Did you not learn to do research in school?

We're not interested in links to LOTS of infomation.. (SAME TACTIC, EVERY TIME)
We would just like ONE example of a benficial mutation explained by a DDO member who purports to have a rudimentary understanding of the basics.
Perhaps you yourself would be so kind, JCMT?
The Cross.. the Cross.
JustCallMeTarzan
Posts: 1,922
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 6:44:14 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 5:06:50 PM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:43:31 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.

Two lists:

General mutations - http://www.gate.net...
Specifically Human ones - http://www.gate.net...

Did you not learn to do research in school?

We're not interested in links to LOTS of infomation.. (SAME TACTIC, EVERY TIME)
We would just like ONE example of a benficial mutation explained by a DDO member who purports to have a rudimentary understanding of the basics.
Perhaps you yourself would be so kind, JCMT?

Just a snippet - the Ser447-Stop mutation of the gene helps prevent the onset of atherosclerosis (http://en.wikipedia.org...) and coronary artery disease.

The way the gene mutation works is by helping to control the balance of lipoprotein lipase in the bloodstream, which in turn balances the amount of triglycerides in the bloodstream. This helps prevent, among other things, hypertriglyceridemia (http://en.wikipedia.org...), which if gone unchecked, can lead to pancreatitis...

So this one mutation helps prevent coronary artery disease, hypertriglyceridmia, atherosclerosis, and pancreatitis....

Sounds beneficial to me...
DATCMOTO
Posts: 6,160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/3/2009 7:02:21 PM
Posted: 7 years ago
At 9/3/2009 6:44:14 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/3/2009 5:06:50 PM, DATCMOTO wrote:
At 9/3/2009 4:43:31 PM, JustCallMeTarzan wrote:
At 9/3/2009 9:46:36 AM, DATCMOTO wrote:

Please supply an example of a beneficial mutation.

Two lists:

General mutations - http://www.gate.net...
Specifically Human ones - http://www.gate.net...

Did you not learn to do research in school?

We're not interested in links to LOTS of infomation.. (SAME TACTIC, EVERY TIME)
We would just like ONE example of a benficial mutation explained by a DDO member who purports to have a rudimentary understanding of the basics.
Perhaps you yourself would be so kind, JCMT?

Just a snippet - the Ser447-Stop mutation of the gene helps prevent the onset of atherosclerosis (http://en.wikipedia.org...) and coronary artery disease.

The way the gene mutation works is by helping to control the balance of lipoprotein lipase in the bloodstream, which in turn balances the amount of triglycerides in the bloodstream. This helps prevent, among other things, hypertriglyceridemia (http://en.wikipedia.org...), which if gone unchecked, can lead to pancreatitis...

So this one mutation helps prevent coronary artery disease, hypertriglyceridmia, atherosclerosis, and pancreatitis....

Sounds beneficial to me...

I'm retiring for the evening now. I'll look into this tomorrow and let you know my prelimary findings as and when I see fit.
Stand down until further notice.
Dismissed.
The Cross.. the Cross.