Posted on 06/03/2009 10:13:22 PM PDT by GodGunsGuts
--snip--
Adaptive mutation throws a wrench into the evolution machine...
(Excerpt) Read more at answersingenesis.org ...
On the technical side, but worth the read...ping!
Thanks for the ping!
lolwhut?
Darwinism is not Lamarckism.
Lamarckism has nothing to do with “natural selection”, and everything to do with passing on characteristics acquired during lifetime.
But people with a tan do not give birth to tan children.
People who body-build do not give birth to more muscular children.
Marathon runners do not give birth to longer legged children.
If they did, THAT would be Lamarckism.
But natural selection of genetic variation derived by DNA mutation is 100% evolution through natural selection.
Once more showing the amazing explanatory and predictive power of Darwin's theory.
Life certainly has some very complex systems and algorithms with multiple layers of information available for dealing with environmental challenges, but that doesn't mean that these systems, algorithms and information 'evolved'.
Assuming that what is observed supports 'evolution' is simply the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent.
Noooo, that would be genetic mutation, adaptation, etc. and nothing more.
Once more showing the amazing explanatory and predictive power of Darwin's theory.
Put down the liberal cultist kool-aid allmendream. Nothing is "shown", other than you desperately need a cult deprogrammer!
What do you think the word "adaptation" means? And before you go on commenting on my statements, answer those I have posed to you.
P.S. From Adaptive Mutation
In 1988, John Cairns, Julie Overbaugh and Stefan Miller published a paper suggesting that some mutations in E. coli could arise in a Lamarckian fashion in response to the presence of a particular compound.
Their paper was controversial, to say the least. However, the phenomenon that they observed spurred much research that has led to a new understanding of mutagenesis and the dynamic nature of the stationary phase of cell growth.
Most mutations are introduced during replication, so either the individual HAS the variation being selected for or against or it does not; the individual does not have the ability to acquire mutations as needed.
Adaptation at a genetic level has to do with how DNA is packaged, some regions being under higher transcription in some individuals subjected to some stresses more than others.
Umm, that is what these experiments are about. You evidently have not read the article.
Although wild-type ebg ß-gal is not functionally redundant to lac ß-gal, it is possible that the regulation of backup genes may involve activating mutation mechanisms (such as those leading to the hypermutable state in bacteria—see appendix). This would result in mutations in backup genes that lead to proteins that can perform the same function as the proteins from essential genes. Possibly ebgA serves as a backup gene for several essential genes and the most flexibility within the system is achieved by altering ebgA in accordance with the particular essential gene that has been inactivated.
In my experience, Allmendream only reacts to creation science papers, he does not actually read them.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.