Mutation and Evolution - Mutations ar...

Mutation and Evolution - Mutations are the raw materials of evolution.

Posted in the Evolution Debate Forum

First Prev
of 2
Next Last

“Don't base what is best”

Level 1

Since: Aug 13

off of personal issues

#1 Aug 27, 2013

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#3 Aug 27, 2013
spirit warrior wrote:
There's no problem warrior, all you must do is believe

“Don't base what is best”

Level 1

Since: Aug 13

off of personal issues

#4 Aug 27, 2013
Evolution 101 Genetic Variation

Read and learn all you want

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/...
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#5 Aug 27, 2013
Seems the warrior appears to be something of a schizophrenic:

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/evolution/TCB...

Level 2

Since: Dec 08

Location hidden

#6 Aug 27, 2013
spirit warrior wrote:
Evolution 101 Genetic Variation
Read and learn all you want
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evosite/evo101/...
It's a hopeless battle you are waging against those who have faith in evolution as D. Carnagie once said ...." a man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still"
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#7 Aug 27, 2013
bohart wrote:
<quoted text>
It's a hopeless battle you are waging against those who have faith in evolution
Faith is superfluous when one has evidence.

I could uh, post it for you again but all you'll do is make another lame joke and run away again.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#8 Aug 27, 2013
Now mutations is where it gets hazy for me. For evolution depends on mutations. Now they say it is random mutations but yet is all has to be positive mutations to be where we are for no one can deny where man is today is a better species that where what ever was one million years ago.

For every positive mutations there are many more harmful or negative mutations but yet it all still moves forward regardless.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#9 Aug 27, 2013
Ok. Time to get off the smart phone and get on the lap top. Smart phone spell check is pretty stupid sometimes. lol

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#10 Aug 27, 2013
replaytime wrote:
Now mutations is where it gets hazy for me. For evolution depends on mutations. Now they say it is random mutations but yet is all has to be positive mutations to be where we are for no one can deny where man is today is a better species that where what ever was one million years ago.
For every positive mutations there are many more harmful or negative mutations but yet it all still moves forward regardless.
That is where the other major driving force of evolution comes into play. Natural selection.

Let's look at what happens with bad mutations. If it is bad enough the young does not even get born. A really bad mutation will cause a death in the womb. So it does not enter the genome. Not quite so bad and it will be born, but die before mating. Again, it does not enter the genome. Even less harmful of a mutation and the animal may live to adulthood, but due to its mutation it is out competed by others and again, it does not breed. The mutation still does not enter the genome. So if a mutation is barely bad at all it may enter the genome. Even then over the years it will be bred out. In fact a questionable mutation may be a positive mutation in another environment.

Now on the other hand a positive mutation is not guaranteed to be passed on, but it is more likely to be passed on. It is all a game of probabilities.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#11 Aug 27, 2013
Sub I can see to a point. But harmful mutations far out way helpful mutations and many would not affect reproduction.

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#12 Aug 28, 2013
replaytime wrote:
Sub I can see to a point. But harmful mutations far out way helpful mutations and many would not affect reproduction.
Yes, but most of those would stop breeding in the first place. They therefore don't count. Do you understand that?
The Dude

Birkenhead, UK

#13 Aug 28, 2013
replaytime wrote:
Now mutations is where it gets hazy for me.
No need to panic! The entire field of biology isn't about to collapse just because your education is a little hazy.

:-)
replaytime wrote:
For evolution depends on mutations. Now they say it is random mutations but yet is all has to be positive mutations to be where we are for no one can deny where man is today is a better species that where what ever was one million years ago.
That's a very biased and subjective point of view you have there. As it happens there is no reason to presume you are correct.

Can you survive the middle of the jungle on your own with no special equipent at all, or even clothes for that matter? Your ancestors could. Are you suitably adapted for climbing trees? Nope. Did you know you're gonna end up with a bad back when you're older due to your spine being adapted from four-legged quadrapeds?
replaytime wrote:
For every positive mutations there are many more harmful or negative mutations but yet it all still moves forward regardless.

Sub I can see to a point. But harmful mutations far out way helpful mutations and many would not affect reproduction.
Actually it doesn't move "forward" - it just moves. Evolution is not goal-directed. Mutations are mostly neutral, however some may be beneficial and some may be detrimental. And even though detrimental mutations may outnumber beneficial ones keep in mind that beneficial mutations will more often confer a selective advantage and will spread through the population faster than bad ones. If they don't then that species may end up extinct (bear in mind that 99% of all species which have ever lived are now extinct).

If we take humanity as an example, the human population is increasing and currently not in any danger of any significant reproductive drop any time soon, so obviously detrimental mutations aren't a real problem. We know this because in general babies are born fine while those born with problems are usually the exception to the rule. Unless something serious happens to drastically change these circumstances the human race will continue to evolve, same as always.

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#14 Aug 28, 2013
The Dude wrote:
<quoted text>
No need to panic! The entire field of biology isn't about to collapse just because your education is a little hazy.
:-)
<quoted text>
That's a very biased and subjective point of view you have there. As it happens there is no reason to presume you are correct.
Can you survive the middle of the jungle on your own with no special equipent at all, or even clothes for that matter? Your ancestors could. Are you suitably adapted for climbing trees? Nope. Did you know you're gonna end up with a bad back when you're older due to your spine being adapted from four-legged quadrapeds?
<quoted text>
Actually it doesn't move "forward" - it just moves. Evolution is not goal-directed. Mutations are mostly neutral, however some may be beneficial and some may be detrimental. And even though detrimental mutations may outnumber beneficial ones keep in mind that beneficial mutations will more often confer a selective advantage and will spread through the population faster than bad ones. If they don't then that species may end up extinct (bear in mind that 99% of all species which have ever lived are now extinct).
If we take humanity as an example, the human population is increasing and currently not in any danger of any significant reproductive drop any time soon, so obviously detrimental mutations aren't a real problem. We know this because in general babies are born fine while those born with problems are usually the exception to the rule. Unless something serious happens to drastically change these circumstances the human race will continue to evolve, same as always.
How much of that 99% is there no evidence of? Before the Phanerozoic there were no animals with hard body parts to leave a significant fossil record. SO if there are no fossils, there is no evidence. It comes down to "we believe".

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#15 Aug 28, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
How much of that 99% is there no evidence of? Before the Phanerozoic there were no animals with hard body parts to leave a significant fossil record. SO if there are no fossils, there is no evidence. It comes down to "we believe".
Even in the Phanerozoic we do have casts, very rare but they do exist, of soft bodied creatures. They still fit perfectly in the fossil record. We have stromatolites. And the opposition has nothing.

To be able to use data as evidence you first need to have a testable, that means falsifiable, hypothesis. Creation scientists are very "gun shy" when it comes to devising testable hypotheses. So far all of theirs have quickly been shot down.
The Dude

Macclesfield, UK

#16 Aug 28, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
How much of that 99% is there no evidence of? Before the Phanerozoic there were no animals with hard body parts to leave a significant fossil record. SO if there are no fossils, there is no evidence. It comes down to "we believe".
Ah, then I guess there are no fossils before then at all and therefore no life existed at that time.

Oh, wait....

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#17 Aug 28, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
Even in the Phanerozoic we do have casts, very rare but they do exist, of soft bodied creatures. They still fit perfectly in the fossil record. We have stromatolites. And the opposition has nothing.
To be able to use data as evidence you first need to have a testable, that means falsifiable, hypothesis. Creation scientists are very "gun shy" when it comes to devising testable hypotheses. So far all of theirs have quickly been shot down.
Again I am not even talking about God or creation but you seem to bring it into every conversation.

I got my info about the Phanerozoic from this link.

http://www.scientistsolutions.com/t7274-over+...

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#18 Aug 28, 2013
The universe is said to be 13.7 billion years old. The earth and our solar system around 4.7 billion years old. Do they know what there before our solar system became to be, what was it composed of and how big was the universe then?

Level 9

Since: Sep 08

Everett, WA

#19 Aug 28, 2013
replaytime wrote:
<quoted text>
Again I am not even talking about God or creation but you seem to bring it into every conversation.
I got my info about the Phanerozoic from this link.
http://www.scientistsolutions.com/t7274-over+...
So? That article did not disagree with me.

What is your point?

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#20 Aug 29, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
So? That article did not disagree with me.
What is your point?
My point is I was not talking about God or creation. Why is it you always in your discussion? I was asking/talking about fossils

“Ask Randy From Ballwin”

Level 5

Since: Mar 13

He Is A Sock Know It All

#21 Aug 29, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
<quoted text>
So? That article did not disagree with me.
What is your point?
And again my question still stand. Asking for I don't know, maybe you do.

The universe is said to be 13.7 billion years old. The earth and our solar system around 4.7 billion years old. Do they know what there before our solar system became to be, what was it composed of and how big was the universe then?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 7 min thetruth 40,801
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 46 min The Northener 201,712
News Atheism, for Good Reason, Fears Questions (Jun '09) 3 hr It aint necessari... 16,328
can anyone explain to me why humans are the onl... (Mar '08) 3 hr DanFromSmithville 254
Where does instinct fall within random mutations? 4 hr Reno Hoock 5
Scientists create vast 3-D map of universe, val... 10 hr One way or another 19
The conscious God or the inanimate nature 11 hr THE LONE WORKER 55
More from around the web