Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DittoJed2
All sorts of mutations seem to have limits within the species and they stop and go no further.

From post 1779:
3)How evolutionary scientists can continue to claim that species develop into new and completely different types of species (I'm talking the big leaps over large amounts of time from say ape to human), when this kind of mutation of genetic material has never been observed ...

Two posts of yours discuss the same issue ... the presumed limit on the mutation process (a blocking mechanism) which confines all of nature to mirco-evolution while preventing macro-evolution. This is a rebuttal of that notion I posted nearly 2 years ago:

One might argue that the fossil record, starting with simple forms and progressing over time to apparently related yet ever-more mutated variations, powerfully illustrates the non-existence of such a "blocking mechanism." But even though it seems not to exist, we should keep an open mind. If such a blocking mechanism actually does exist, let's not worry too much that it hasn't been found yet, because these things take time. Yet, if we are ever to actually find such a mechanism, it's still necessary to propose an hypothesis as to what it might be, so that we know what to search for.

Think about it. The blocking mechanism has to be something that strictly limits the number of mutations in all of a creature's genes that might otherwise occur over time. The mechanism would need to keep track of how many variations had already occured (from some "standard model" which is memorized somehow) and then guard against any more. What is the nature of this mechanism? Is it a radiation shield to prevent background radiation from altering the DNA? Is it a "perfect copy" mechanism that suddenly prevents DNA from faulty replications? How would it work? How could we test for it? Do we find some "already maximum mutated" creature and zap them with radiation to discover the "DNA shield" that has suddenly manifested itself to make the creature "mutation proof"? Does such a mechanism make any sense, now that I've discussed a very few of its problems?

1,794 posted on 08/21/2003 4:18:56 AM PDT by PatrickHenry (Felix, qui potuit rerum cognoscere causas.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1767 | View Replies ]


To: PatrickHenry
What makes sense is that mutations tend to have their limits. You can make a wholphin through genetic manipulation but you can not make a "felineolphin" (I know that is an extreme but we are talking kind to kind here). Dogs are limited to mutations within the dog family. Cats within the cat family. Horses within the horse family. This is observable science.

Even if you may end up with some freakish specimin that looks like a sphinx (head of a human body of an animal) or something, getting that freak to procreate and spread the deformity throughout the species until it indeed takes off on its own is an entirely different thing. First, you'd have to get another specimin with the same genetics. Even with some intermarriage, the "blue people" of Appalachia stopped being blue and the mutant gene faded away. Second, You don't have a part ape mating with a human being I don't care what their visual similarities are. Talk about a problem worse than where Cain got his wife from! Ya'll propose that some human somewhere had offspring with a part-ape.
1,841 posted on 08/21/2003 9:41:11 AM PDT by DittoJed2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1794 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson