Primitive snakes

[JimmyDavid]

Wow, i just got home and i'm surprised to see this thread is still going.

I would like to point some other things that discourage the theory of evolution through random mutations.
To begin with, a mutation isn't even supposed to happen, when it does it's because something went wrong with the dna copying. Though i don't believe in higher designs, i also can't image nature being so incorrect that leaves evolution dependant on mistakes.
But it gets worse; since a mutation is a mistake to start with, it is more lickely that it creates a defective creature other than an enhanced one. STILL assuming it does - notice that chances are growing thinner - and an animal is born with traits that set him superior to the rest of it's species, he still has to breed - chances are growing even thinner because in nature not all animals get to be successfull breeders- but the question is : who will be his partner? Since he is unique, he will have to breed with a REGULAR specimen and therefore spoil those rare genetics (back to zero). If he (By a Long shot) has brothers or sisters that received the same traits, they can breed but will create an inbreed generation that will, most lickely, be unhealthy or even sterile.
The chances of a mutant avoiding premature extinction are slim, much less replacing the entire mother-species.

[CamHanna]

Posted by JimmyDavid
To begin with, a mutation isn't even supposed to happen, when it does it's because something went wrong with the dna copying. Though i don't believe in higher designs, i also can't image nature being so incorrect that leaves evolution dependant on mistakes.

"There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so." Most mutations are unsuccessful, but some, by some lucky coincidence, are beneficial.

Posted by JimmyDavid
chances are growing even thinner because in nature not all animals get to be successfull breeders

This mutated animal has some mutation to help it mature into a successful breeder. If it doesn't work then no big deal, another mutation will come along, then another and another after that. Eventually one of these mutations is bound to find it's way into the main population; that's evolution. This takes tens of thousands of generations. Burbrink (2002) indicates that speciation can occur after 40 000 generations (he may have been citing someone else, I'm not going to look it up).

Posted by JimmyDavid
Since he is unique, he will have to breed with a REGULAR specimen and therefore spoil those rare genetics (back to zero).

A mutation is, by definition, heritable. Albino ball pythons are mutants. They breed with normals to produce hets and these hets breed together to produce albinos.

Winston Churchill once said: "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject."

Cam

[JimmyDavid]

The fanatic comment is out of line! Why is it that after every constructive statement (wich is good for the debate) you feel the need to "spice" it up with an attack?

[lostwithin]

JimmyDavid,

You have shown over and over that you are trying to discuss a topic that is way beyond your understanding.

The reason you are having trouble with this is you are trying to use very limited bits of information to form an entire complex theory , and to make it worse you aren't even right about the few facts you are trying too use. Your all over the place with your information and all in all you are just plain confused.

Now who are you to say a mutation is not supposed to happen. It is a perfect method of keeping diversity in a population allowing it to have the means necessary to adapt to an ever changing environment.

So since you refuse to listen to anything anyone is says go online and look it all up yourself. and don't just fill in blank spots with guess work.

Or you could just prove the entire scientific community wrong and evolve yourself some wings.


Good luck with whichever choice you make.

Cam,
great quote.


Devon

[CamHanna]

Sorry mate. I found that quotation today and thought it clever. This was only a convenient place to share it. I assure you it's all in jest not personal. You can assume that any 'attack' I make against anyone is made with a '' in mind. No hard feelings I hope.

Cam

[JimmyDavid]

Ok. No harm done, i guess.

[tdherper]

:zi:

[spidergecko]

Originally posted by lostwithin
The reason you are having trouble with this is you are trying to use very limited bits of information to form an entire complex theory , and to make it worse you aren't even right about the few facts you are trying too use.

The theory isn't even complicated. It is very simple. However, I think JimmyDavid is missing a key idea.

"Nature is not trying to reach perfection. Nature is trying to reach equilibrium."

As for the "thinning genetics" issue: mutations are carried to subsequent generations. If a mutant survives to breed, more animals will carry the mutation. In time, more individuals in the population will carry the mutation and the probability of two mutant individuals crossing increases. Mutations are NOT bad! They just ... happen.

[JimmyDavid]

CamHanna, your justification through "hets" is a good try and smart thinking as well, but in the end justifies nothing. And the fact that you used a ball python as an example is way too convinient , why didn't you choose a species that produces only one kid per breeding?
A het is not the real thing, only a child that carries part of the genes from both fathers (it's possible to recover traits from either parent) but you make it sound like it's easy and it's not. It works in captivity because we select specimens to breed, in nature it all happens randomly. And your "het kid" would be nothing but a watered-down form of his father; from that point on consecutive breedings with regular specimens would only serve to keep watering down those special traits even more. Unless he could breed with another het, but there would be none. Also unless he could breed directly with his father (that's a long shot, and still the offspring would be inbreed ).
But your point was good, it really was.
I don't know how manny of you have info about the Chaos theory, but the more you learn about it, the more you suspect "convenient" probabilities like beneficial mutations.


Ps _ Also take in consideration that there's a natural tendency in species to breed with familiar looking specimens. That's why Hybrids are rare to obtain. A
creature that looks or acts different within a population probably will never get an interested breeding partner. Once again chances for a mutant to keep going don't look good.



Food for thought: You guys make it sound easy that a new species rises from a single specimen; scientists consider a species is doomed when numbers are reduced to a few thousands. Compare the odds.....

[Cake]

A het is not the real thing, only a child that carries part of the genes from both fathers (it's possible to recover traits from either parent) but you make it sound like it's easy and it's not. It works in captivity because we select specimens to breed, in nature it all happens randomly. And your "het kid" would be nothing but a watered-down form of his father; from that point on consecutive breedings with regular specimens would only serve to keep watering down those special traits even more. Unless he could breed with another het, but there would be none.

Lets not forget that there is more to genetics then simple recessive traits. there are also co-dom, dom, and sex linked traits. Just to say the ones that came to my head quickely. Your watered down theroy works well when you consider the trait to be neither benificial nor deleterious. If the trait is beneficial it will improve the individuals reproductive success.

I don't know how manny of you have info about the Chaos theory, but the more you learn about it, the more you suspect "convenient" probabilities like beneficial mutations.

Does this not go directly against what you were saying earlier in this thread that if evolution were to happen, it would come to the same end result. The probability that the series of random mutations that happened to result in the human race, are extremely unlikely to occur in the same sequence again.

[Removed_2815]

Originally posted by JimmyDavid
in nature it all happens randomly.

I thought it was all "fated?"

[JimmyDavid]

It's all fated, but random as far as our understanding goes.
If the fate of the world is to be destroyed by a comet, it is coming our way already and we just don't know it. In fact, it's course could be traced back since the dawn of earth. But we can only play with information that we have, so everything is random FOR US.

[tdherper]

:zi:

[JimmyDavid]

Hehe, very mature, tdherper.
Your smiley looks cool, though.

[tdherper]

It's a weeble... "weebles wobble, but they WONT fall down!" :zi: