The Common Ancestry Thread

by cantleave 271 Replies latest members adult

  • cofty
    cofty
    the cause of mutations could lead the mutation to be of a specififc nature, no?

    No

    how much influence does what causes a mutation to happen, have on the mutation?

    None at all.

    Imagine a massive instruction manual for building a human - it is 3 billion letters long and consists of only 4 letters with no gaps or punctuation.

    Somebody is assigned to copy the book. However much care they take they will make some random mistakes.

    Some of those mistakes will make no difference to the outcome because different 3 letter words mean the same thing. Other mistakes will end up saying the same thing in a different way. Some mistakes will make significant differences to the outcome.

    Copies that result in humans that don't work will get discarded. Copies that result in humans that work and reproduce will get used again.

    The errors are random, the results of those errors provide diversity.

  • cofty
    cofty

    Psac - The article you posted about experiments with cichlids is an example of epigenetcs.

    As I said earlier...

    To complicate things further the field of epigenetics is revealing how environment may effect which genes get switched on.

    Environment does not cause specific mutations but the field of evo-devo is showing us how environment influences which genes are expressed.

    Further, the article mentions examples like the loss of legs in a whale. The rule is "use it or lose it".

    When the ancestor of the cetaceans returned to the sea there was no longer any slective pressure to protect the genes that code for their legs and so the environment effects which mutations are passed on.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    AH, I understand.

    Mutations are random but environment and natural selection can/will infulence wich random traits are "best" for survival, yes?

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Tornapart, I am sure there are theories to explain the capabilities you mention. Once you understand how chararcteristics are passed down from generation to generation and that certain traits provide a competitive advantage that will result in an orgainsim's increased chance of survival and passing on its genes, you can put start to hypothesise how these type of characteristics could have developed. Drawing from your post 1342, here are some possibilities.....................

    His inbuilt morality.

    “Morality” is as much a survival mechanism as the ability to keep warm or run fast. Social groups provide protection for each individual. If you are outside of the group you are vulnerable to attack, outside the protection (of god’s organisation – sorry couldn’t resist) of the group. In such social systems individual’s that did not modify their behaviour to work within the group or who showed a propensity to selfish behaviour would be killed or ostracised by the group, making them vulnerable to attack and they certainly would not able to breed with other group members. The more cooperative, “team players”, survived and bred. These cooperative traits, which enabled social groups to work would lay the foundations of your “inbuilt morality”.

    His love of beauty, whether it is appreciating a beautiful landscape, a flower, a piece of music or art.

    What we consider beautiful are often things we need to survive. They are based on the hardwiring that has evolved in order for us to seek out opportunities in our environment. A beautiful landscape, is a reflection of us being able to find the perfect habitat for us to live, its strange that we are drawn to bodies of fresh water, sheltered valleys and open spaces where hunting would be easy. We find beauty in colours and our brains are hardwired to identify patterns. Colours helped us to identify foods and patterns helped us to hunt, locate water, find shelter as well as predict natural cycles. I am sure the basic drive of sexual attraction, is part of our foundation for appreciating beauty, for example we are attracted to symmetry and look for it in faces.

    His abilty to express himself in music, in composing it, being able to understand rythm, harmony and melody and putting it together with or without lyrics.

    A gain this could be something that evolved through our need to reproduce. Singing or making music could have been utilised for attracting a partner.

    Singing also is very much associated with the evolution of language as a method of communication and for social cohesion. Singing, dancing and making music may have helped build and maintain early social groups. Also the ability to find patterns may come into play, music probably started by playing simple rythmic beats, patterns in sound.

    His understanding of history and how he fits into it and being able to project into the future.

    As individuals and as social groups, in order to survive you need to learn from past mistakes, a close shave with a predator whilst looking for food in a particular area would mean that

    a/ you avoid that area in the future or

    b/ run like hell if you saw that type of predator again.

    Individuals that didn't possess these abilities were unlikely to survive long enough to pas on their genes, those that did were more likely to be sucessful in doing so.

    His being able to unravel and comprehend science .

    The most successful hunters and therefore the ones that survived, would be those who could plan, look for patterns, draw conclusions and work out strategies. These are the processes that enable us to understand, maths, physics and other sciences.

  • cofty
    cofty
    Mutations are random but environment and natural selection can/will infulence wich random traits are "best" for survival, yes? - Psac

    Yes.

    Natural selection is so simple and yet so powerful.

    Sometimes creationists use silly illustrations like monkeys randomly typing the works of Shakespeare.

    Imagine if the monkeys only had to come up with the first word or first syllable of a word and that was saved to disk while they continued to type and we waited on the next correct syllable to appear and so on.

    Its a very imperfect analogy so don't press it too far - the reality is far more complex - but it may give you an idea of how natural selection produces complexity.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    So, environment causes mutations ( I say environment because UV rays and radiation are part of the environment), as does mistake sin the dna copying sequence ( why these mistakes happen we don't know yet or do we?).

    These mutations are random in the sense that whatever they may be, they are not guided by what caused them and may be of benefit or neutral or have a negative effect ( only time will tell).

    The process we call natural selection helps to determine which of these mutations and it's traits are of benefit and those traits are passed on to the future generations.

    Natural selection is influenced by the environment that the living organisim is in ( [perhaps even directed or driven by it?).

    These changes are called microevolution and when enough of these changes happen to a species and THAt species is not able to breed with the original species that it was BEFORE the changes ( or a branch of that species that has evolved differently) then we have a different species and macroevolution.

    Yes?

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    Micro and macro evolution IMO are misnomers.

    Its like saying my first grey hair is micro aging, and the middle-aged man I am now is macro aging. Tell me when when did the micro become macro in this case?

    Evolution is an ongoing process, just like aging.

  • PSacramento
    PSacramento

    I know but since they are used and people tend to confuse what they mean, I thought it was good to put that in there.

    FOr example:

    http://biologos.org/blog/speciation-and-macroevolution

    The Biological Species Concept is especially useful when you have two species that look and act very similar. Eastern and Western Meadowlarks are a good example of this. They look almost exactly the same. But they cannot interbreed successfully. Therefore, they are separate species. This definition also helps when we study evolution. Where can we draw the line between microevolution and macroevolution? Well, it’s never easy, but having a working definition of this thing called a species helps out a lot. When enough genetic changes accumulate in a population, eventually it loses the ability to mate with others of its species. Then, by definition, it becomes a new species. In other words, macroevolution has occurred.

    As we just discussed, many critics claim that macroevolution can never happen—one species can never cross over to become another one. This statement might sound valid, but a little bit of investigation shows that it is not well supported by evidence. For one thing, the only difference between micro and macroevolution is scope. When enough micro changes accumulate, a population will eventually lose its ability to interbreed with other members of its species. At this point, we say that macroevolution has occurred.

    The same processes—random mutation and natural selection—cause both micro and macro evolution. There are no invisible boundaries that prevent organisms from evolving into new species. It just takes time. Usually, the amount time required for macroevolution to occur is significant—on the order of thousands or millions of years. That’s why you don’t normally see brand new forms of life appear every time you step out your front door. And that’s also why some people think that speciation never happens at all.

    But sometimes macroevolution doesn’t take that much time. In fact, the evolution of new species sometimes happens so quickly that we can actually see it take place! Let’s look at a few recent examples.

    Biologists Peter and Rosemary Grant had been studying finches since 1973. They lived on an island called Daphne Major in the Galapagos. It was here that they conducted their studies. When they first began their studies, only two species of Finch lived on Daphne Major: the medium ground finch and the cactus finch. But, in 1981, Peter and Rosemary noticed that an odd new finch had immigrated to the island. It was a hybrid, a mix between a cactus finch and a medium ground finch. It didn’t quite fit in with the other birds. The odd misfit had an extra large beak, an unusual hybrid genome, and a new kind of song. But somehow he was still able to find a mate. The female was also a bit of a misfit and had some hybrid chromosomes of her own. So their offspring were very different from the other birds on the island.

    Rosemary and Peter continued to carefully watch the odd hybrid line. They wondered if the birds would become isolated from the other finch species on the island or if they would eventually re-assimilate. After four finch generations, a drought killed off many of the birds on Daphne Major. In fact, almost the entire hybrid line was exterminated. Only a brother and sister pair remained. The two family members mated with each other, producing offspring that were even more unique than their parent line. From that point on, as far as biologists Peter and Rosemary could tell, the odd population of finches mated only with each other. They were never seen to breed with the cactus finches or the medium ground finches on the island. The finches with the strange song had become a brand new species.

    (Source: http://www.pnas.org/content/106/48/20141.full)

    Another example of speciation, or macroevolution, also took place on an island—this time, on the beautiful Portuguese island of Madeira. According to history books, the Island of Madeira was colonized by the Portuguese about 600 years ago. The colonizers brought with them a few unassuming European House Mice, which they accidentally left on the island. It’s also possible that a group of Portuguese House Mice was dropped off later on.

    Recently, Britton-Davidian, an evolutionary biologist at University Montpellier 2 in France, decided to collect samples of the Madeira mice and see how those original populations had changed over time. What she found was surprising. Rather than just one or two species of mouse, she found several. In only a few hundred years, the original populations of Mice had separated into six genetically unique species. The first mouse populations had 40 chromosomes altogether. But the new ones were quite different. Each new variety had its own unique combination of chromosomes, which ranged in number from 22 to 30.

    What seems to have happened is that, over time, the mice spread out across the island and split into separate groups. Madeira is a rugged volcanic island with crags and cliffs. So it makes sense that this would have been easy to do. There were many isolated corners for the mice to occupy. Over time, random mutations occurred—some chromosomes became fused together.

    Now, In order to reproduce successfully, both parents must have the same number of chromosomes. So when a population develops a chromosome fusion, suddenly that group cannot mate with the other members of its species. It becomes a brand new species. That’s exactly what happened on Madeira. And because of this phenomenon, 6 new species evolved from just 1 or 2 in an extremely short amount of time.

  • tornapart
    tornapart

    @Cantleave post 10947

    Nice try CL but somehow I'm not convinced... sorry!

  • cantleave
    cantleave

    So what is convincing about the supernatural explanation?

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit