Here's my original post from a sister thread:<quoted text>
"Good reasons" that are obviously absent in the environmental conditions of the Lenski experiment. Hence the adaptation.
Now, once again, please present your argument as to why adaptation should not be a continual and open ended process? The distinction between adaptation and evolution raised by creationists is an artificial one. Evolution is simply adaptation occurring over long periods of time.
Don't tell me...you're a YEC.
All this sounds great to an evolutionist. Until, enter Stage Left, operons. Thus the changes were not independent at all, but due to a change in just one control gene. A regulatory gene called spoT. The cost of the changes were that the energetically costly genes that make the bacterial flagellum were switched off.
So, as is quite obvious, this experiment showed nothing but information reducing change. Deterioration. Proof of this was that none of the tribes could utilize ribose anymore and some lost their DNA repair ability. These poor pampered bugs could not compete with the wild types outside the environment of the lab.
"A very clever man said this,“Chemicals obey the second Law of Thermodynamics and do not arrange themselves into self sustaining metabolic pathways.
"Living cells have molecular machinery, whose assembly is directed by programmed instructions, to channel the chemistry in the right direction and amounts.”
This brings me to Lenski’s citrate-using E coli.
Rather than labour this point, suffice to say, utilising citrate is not Climbing Mount Improbable for bacteria. The Kreb’s cycle , aka Citric acid cycle, can occur in anaerobic conditions. The reason that this mutation to enable one tribe to utilise citrate, similar to chloroquine resistance, did not occur in the other tribes, was perhaps due to the requirement for more than one mutation. Difficult to achieve.
Even this experiment neatly illustrates the difficulty with obtaining two mutations, even with thousands of generations and a massive population, a new function requiring two mutations was barely obtainable. Three would have been unreachable.
E coli have a whole suite of genes, an operon, able to ferment citrate, including a citrate transporter gene that codes for a transporter protein that embeds in the cell wall.
This operon is activated under low oxic conditions, as anaerobic respiration is less efficient than aerobic, so there is good reason for this to be switched off unless O2 is lacking. But, the Lenski citrate E coli demonstrated a lack of regulation, so it’s a downhill change. Lost specificity. So citrate-transporter-regulation damaged by mutation remains permanently switched on regardless of the oxygen state. A fault in this system. Also a tartrate transporter may have lost specificity and started to take up citrate."
End of my old quote.
You don't have to agree with everything....
You are allowed to have your views
Just appreciate that we have all previously covered a lot of ground.
So don't be astonished if I don't fall over backwards in amazement by what you have to say.
Although I am ever hopeful...