Jump to content
Science Forums

Tell me one beneficial mutation example - if there is


jasonparker

Recommended Posts

i always hear the same examples; antibiotics resistance of bacteria, ddt , anemia examples…. These are all invalid. Just please tell me one valid example of beneficial mutation if there is. Also backup your example please. By the way i uggest you to check this before you write " The Collapse of the Theory of Evolution in 20 Questions" http://www.harunyahya.com/20questions01.php

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I always wondered (logically of course), that; "if evolution were true, why would anything be the same?" I mean after all, if it all began as a total fluke of unequaled good fortune and imeassurable luck that life began in the first place from dead matter, in spite of the overwhealming odds against it; and that if it has indeed continued to blossom into the incomprehensible varriety and beauty that we see today because of random mutations that have unfolded into things being the way they are; isn't it far more likely that the world that we know should be filled with millions of "missing links" - not just a few. And of course there are none to speak of. (unless you include the Platipuss, and archeopterix - which would be like sayng that you are a missing link just because you may have red hair wheneveryone you know has brown.

 

But why don't you have three eyes? Or why dosen't your friend have only one nostril, (you can of course put any varriation you can imagine into this scenario) and why arn't these types of atributes seen all over the world in greater numbers than those of us who have been fortunate enough to end up "normal". These types of varriations shouldn't be enough to stop the propigation of such mutations, in spite of the deified theory of "survival of the fittest".

 

Instead we see nothing of the kind.

 

Instead we use for our "proof" that evolution is taking place; such weak examples as you have already cited.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a mutation of "Sickle Cell Anemia" is able to resist the deadly disease malaria:

here is the website: http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/000527.htm

 

 

"Because people with sickle trait were more likely to survive malaria outbreaks in Africa than those with normal hemoglobin, it is believed that this genetically aberrant hemoglobin evolved as a protection against malaria."

 

this is a well know example of beneficial mutation.

i believe that there are more.....

its just a quick research.

 

 

"i always hear the same examples; antibiotics resistance of bacteria, ddt , anemia examples…. These are all invalid"

why would you call them "invalid", give supports plz...

 

by the way, the website I used is XXX.gov, no doubt that it is telling the truth.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

here is a website about beneficial mutations on organisms:

 

http://www.gate.net/~rwms/EvoMutations.html

 

pretty interesting, maybe you wanna take a look.

 

"Changes in the substrate specificities of an enzyme during directed evolution of new functions."

 

"Evolution of a Unicellular Organism into a Multicellular Species

Starting from single celled animals, each of which has the capability to reproduce there is no sex in the sense that we think of the term. Selective pressure has been observed to convert single-cellular forms into multicellular forms. A case was observed in which a single celled form changed to multicellularity. "

nice one : P, it is actually being observed that unicellular organisms come together!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

by the way, the website I used is XXX.gov, no doubt that it is telling the truth.

 

This was the only part of your post that I laughed at, tim. (besides chuckling over you asking for proof...where have I heard *that* before? )The rest is presented in an outstanding way, good job!

But why do you assume that because it is a ".gov' site that it is correct. Do you mean to imply that the government is never wrong, or just that they wouldn't lie to us?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"But why don't you have three eyes? Or why dosen't your friend have only one nostril, (you can of course put any varriation you can imagine into this scenario) and why arn't these types of atributes seen all over the world in greater numbers than those of us who have been fortunate enough to end up "normal". These types of varriations shouldn't be enough to stop the propigation of such mutations, in spite of the deified theory of "survival of the fittest"."

 

imagine we have 3 eyes, one nostril, and your questions would become "But why don't you have 2 eyes? Or why dosen't your friend have 2 nostril?"

 

science is based on observations, not observations based on sciences.

science explains the observations, not non-exist obesrvations.

 

lets say 1+1=2

do we have to proof that 1+2 doesnt equal 2? or 1+3 doesnt equal 2? or 1+n besides 1 doesnt equal 2?

 

no, all we have to do to prove 1+1=2, is proving the equal one, not the unequal ones....

(my 50 cents : P)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by: BEAKER

I always wondered (logically of course), that; "if evolution were true, why would anything be the same?" I mean after all, if it all began as a total fluke of unequaled good fortune and imeassurable luck that life began in the first place from dead matter, in spite of the overwhealming odds against it; and that if it has indeed continued to blossom into the incomprehensible varriety and beauty that we see today because of random mutations that have unfolded into things being the way they are; isn't it far more likely that the world that we know should be filled with millions of "missing links" - not just a few. And of course there are none to speak of. (unless you include the Platipuss, and archeopterix - which would be like sayng that you are a missing link just because you may have red hair wheneveryone you know has brown.

 

But why don't you have three eyes? Or why dosen't your friend have only one nostril, (you can of course put any varriation you can imagine into this scenario) and why arn't these types of atributes seen all over the world in greater numbers than those of us who have been fortunate enough to end up "normal". These types of varriations shouldn't be enough to stop the propigation of such mutations, in spite of the deified theory of "survival of the fittest".

 

Hi

 

You're speaking of hereditary, yes?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the problem is that people do not try to dig deep into evolution.

 

evolution itself does not have any rhyme nor reason.

its simply logic.

 

imagine there are many mutations going on, the organisms with the bad mutations die out, thus they are less likely to reproduce, and the mutation would not continue.

 

somehow, maybe in a millions mutations, a mutation turns out to be beneficial, and the organisms with this mutations are likely to survive and it will survive better than others, thus leaving more offspring and the trait will continue.

 

evolution is simply logic, good stuffs stay because the organisms are more likely to survive and reproduce, bad stuffs go away simply because it is unfavorable, and the organisms carrying the trait is less likely to survive and reproduce.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tim Lou,

 

imagine there are many mutations going on, the organisms with the bad mutations die out, thus they are less likely to reproduce, and the mutation would not continue.

 

I do understand the concept. But what defines bad?

 

The kind of varriations I originallyspoke of in my first entry on this thread (one nostril, three eyes, etc., as well as an innumerable host of other possible varriations), have no less validity in a world with no rhyme or reason than do the "normal" varriations.

 

What "force" has determined that the end result that we see with all it's beauty and gradure shoud be the only version to survive out of the millions of possile varriants?

 

If there is no rhyme or reason, why doesn'n't the whole world look like scene from a starwars movie?

 

Don't tell me it's because we haven't discovered these other species out there in the cosmos yet, because I'll tell you that if it's all really a ramdom mutational twist of a rubics cube, then there's more than enough of that going on right here on our own planet!

 

And that is simple logic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"I do understand the concept. But what defines bad?"

defined as the inability to survive. something that reduces surviving chance.

 

 

"If there is no rhyme or reason, why doesn'n't the whole world look like scene from a starwars movie?"

 

the thing is, if we were in a world like starwars movie, we would be asking y the world isnt like the world we are today.

 

evolution is just like.... a test in school.

people got As, Bs, Cs, Ds, Fs.

 

but the teacher wont mention and praise the Fs, Ds, Cs or Bs.

they will mention the As, because Bs, Cs, Ds and Fs are not worth mentioning.

thus, everything you see on the "top student board" is the As.

 

because As are cool, you get praised and presents by parents, you work hard to get As... which makes a larger population of As.

or a couple Bs i would say...

 

for the Fs... they got dropped out of school... no more Fs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I do understand the concept. But what defines bad?

 

The kind of varriations I originallyspoke of in my first entry on this thread (one nostril, three eyes, etc., as well as an innumerable host of other possible varriations), have no less validity in a world with no rhyme or reason than do the "normal" varriations.

 

One nostril=less airflow, thus not good for exausting activities, thus bad. There are reported cases of people being born deformed and missing certain appendages, my friend 's sister was born without one ear. In modern sociaty such defects can be altered by plastic surgury, thust the people ith them don't have too heightened a chance of death.

 

Enlarged hearts, faulty ventricles, skin color, amounts of body hair, we do see lots of examples of such variations. Now if you'r talking about a FUNCTIONAL third eye, you have to realise that also requires mutation for a functional optic nerve and adaptation of the brain to handle the extra imput. There is an example of one man born with twelve fully funtional fingers aswell.

What "force" has determined that the end result that we see with all it's beauty and gradure shoud be the only version to survive out of the millions of possile varriants?

Which could kill better, eat more, and not die before propogating? There's your answer, the strong survive.

If there is no rhyme or reason, why doesn'n't the whole world look like scene from a starwars movie? have you seen the stuff from the deep ocean?

Check out some articles involving "Alvin" the deep-sea sub. Also look at the odd like cockroaches, squids, moths, birds, snakes....yup pritty varied to my eyes.

Don't tell me it's because we haven't discovered these other species out there in the cosmos yet, because I'll tell you that if it's all really a ramdom mutational twist of a rubics cube, then there's more than enough of that going on right here on our own planet!

were you just referring to Intelligence? Learn sign-language and visit the apes at a zoo, you might find one that understands and responds. Dolphins, are pritty smart too. Maby if there was another smart species we just killed them off?

And that is simple logic.

Yes, very simple
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did you ever here the saying; "simplicity is genius"? - And I'm sure you will say to me that was written by a simpleton to elevate his own stupidity.

 

But anyway,

 

One nostril=less airflow, thus not good for exausting activities, thus bad. There are reported cases of people being born deformed and missing certain appendages, my friend 's sister was born without one ear. In modern sociaty such defects can be altered by plastic surgury, thust the people ith them don't have too heightened a chance of death.

 

I empathise about your friends sister, and don't want to belittle her condition.

 

But the "One nostril=less airflow, thus not good for exausting activities, thus bad." argument can only be used as an excuse if we assume that there was no way that a person might have evolved with a properly functioning single nostril.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...