Darwin Was Right: Natural Selection Speeds Up Speciation

http://www.sciencedaily.com ^ | Apr. 6, 2008 | ScienceDaily

[samtheman]

In the first experiment of its kind conducted in nature, a University of British Columbia evolutionary biologist has come up with strong evidence for one of Charles Darwin's cornerstone ideas -- adaptation to the environment accelerates the creation of new species.

[samtheman]

People's Exhibit #5,942,876,081

[tokenatheist]

This should be fun.

[tokenatheist]

Now if only the ID people could be bothered to do experiments and publish the results.

[samtheman]

Now if only the ID people could be bothered to do experiments and publish the results.

Their thesis is, essentially, that all experiments mean nothing. How can you prove that thesis with an experiment?

[RightWhale]

This should be fun.

Won't be. Too many threads, only so much #$%^ to go around.

[Alter Kaker]

Thanks read the article (and skimmed the actual paper) - this sounds like a fascinating experiment.

[ASA Vet]

Get your flute ready.

[reasonisfaith]

I wonder when the evolutionists will realize that mutational changes in the genetic code do not result in the adding of new information to the genome.

[Alter Kaker]

I wonder when the evolutionists will realize that mutational changes in the genetic code do not result in the adding of new information to the genome.

Google "insertion mutation." You just might learn something.

[tokenatheist]

I assume you can prove your statement?

[RightWhale]

That is of course mathematically true and is not allowed on these threads.

[BillT]

Try variation of an existing species NOT a new species.

[Nathan Zachary]

a de-volution of a species, in otherwords, a mutation which results in deformed flawed version of a species with a LOSS of genetic information is NOT and Improvment and NOT evolution into a new species. It’s the path to death and extinction of a species.

[Alter Kaker]

Try variation of an existing species NOT a new species.

Reasonisfaith argued that DNA mutations can't result in insertion of new information into a genome. Not only is that argument not correct, but insertion-type mutations are actually extremely common.

Now with regard to your argument regarding speciation vs. variation within a species, I would strongly encourage you to read the article posted at the top of this thread.

[Conspiracy Guy]

I own a 3 legged frog.

[Alter Kaker]

a de-volution of a species, in otherwords, a mutation which results in deformed flawed version of a species with a LOSS of genetic information is NOT and Improvment and NOT evolution into a new species

Except that new genetic information gets inserted into the genome all the time, so I'm not sure what your point is.

[reasonisfaith]

Read Genetic Entropy and the Mystery of the Genome by Cornell University geneticist J.C. Sanford. In particular, see figure 3d, page 32.

The absence of “new information” does not mean that one letter cannot be replaced by another. Instead, it refers to the fact that changes in codons do not lead to the production of new proteins which in turn lead to additional or improved functioning on the level of phenotype.

Sanford explains that overwhelmingly, mutations result in loss of genomic information which leads to a dysfunctioning phenotype.

[reasonisfaith]

see post 17

[Nathan Zachary]

Further, adaptation to a different enviroment is not evolution into another species either, it's just an adjustment of existing genetic information already present in the species, such as a deer in a northern location having a thicker coat than a deer in a warmer southern one. It's still a deer, and contains the same genetic information as the other, except the gene controling long thick fur is dominant over the gene which determines short thinner fur

[DouglasKC]

By displacing some eco-types away from their customary host plants and protecting others from their natural predators, Nosil found that color pattern alone could initiate speciation, while natural selection on additional adaptive traits such as the ability to detoxify different host-plant chemicals are required to "seal the deal," or complete the speciation process initiated by differences in color pattern.

I love it. The walking sticks are still walking sticks, except they adapt to a new environment in which they are artificially thrust. From this rather elementary experiment a theory is constructed that maybe this will lead to a new species. And we know that most people when they hear the word "species" will think of an entirely different type of animal. But no, even if, it will still be a walking stick.

It's like saying that people put on a desert island who end up being tan and whose bodies learn to adapt to the heat and sun and available food on the island and who prefer to mate with other islanders are a different species.