jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 12:04 PM |
Again, I've gotten in an argument that is way over my head. Help me refute this creationist, who argues:
"Maybe so, but according to this genetics website, an insertion mutation is like an out of place word in a sentence, often shortening the DNA or rendering it nonfunctional. Therefore even in an insertion mutation, when an A,T,G or C are added, it can often make the DNA useless. Insertion VERY COMMONLY creates new genetic information, and VERY RARELY is that information functional. Its like inserting a random word in to a roblox script. Its very unlikely that it will function the same way, and even more unlikely that it will work at all. Go ahead. Insert some scripts into your place from free models, and insert random words into them. Try to make a functioning game." |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 12:16 PM |
Hmm, i dont understand that at all but i'll try
Comparing Lua and genetic "code" is very stupid, they are in no way connected. Also i doubt the validity of the website as it sounds like one made by a jesus hippie. If the insertion mutation has such a result that it ruins the DNA then it will delete itself from the gene pool as the specie with malfunctioning DNA cannot live and will propably get aborted by nature whilst its still in womb. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 12:39 PM |
| The website is legit. He's trying to prove that since mutations cannot produce positive changes, evolution is false. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 12:42 PM |
Couldnt deevolution still be true though? also I am creationist |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 01:10 PM |
Couldnt deevolution still be true though?
___
If you mean decreasing complexity in organisms (although complexity is a rather ambiguous term), this is entirely possible and has been observed in some cases. Natural selection has no set direction and if less complexity is more ideal (as it often is when many, many offspring are required to ensure the continuation of a species) then deevolution is likely. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 01:16 PM |
The rare mutations that are positive succeed and the common mutations tat are bad die via natural selection.
If I understanded this correctly. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 01:26 PM |
| When I get back to my desktop, I can help you out. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 01:43 PM |
Hmm...
If a mutation breaks the DNA it will die in natural selection, the chances of a insertion mutation being beneficial is little perhaps, but if a beneficial mutation does happen according to the mechanics of natural selection it should spread in the population. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
| |
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 02:29 PM |
| Just look up the Lenski experiments. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 02:31 PM |
I'm part evolutionist and part creationist so...
☜▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☜☆☞▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬☞ - Candymaniac, a highly reactive substance. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 04:38 PM |
| I think I got it, folks. But if you have any other insights to offer, especially regarding the frequency of mutations and how DNA increases in complexity over time, please chime in. |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| 01 Aug 2012 04:40 PM |
http://en.wikiped ia.o
r g /w iki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_e xperiment |
|
|
| Report Abuse |
|
|
jbg23
|
  |
| Joined: 21 Feb 2011 |
| Total Posts: 2163 |
|
| |
|