TeleMad Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 One of my college biology texts wasn't on my bookshelf when I created the long list of definitions that shows FreeThinker's usage of the term 'mutation' to be wrong. Here's what I found in it...add these to the long list above. As before, all emphasis is in the original. ”mutation Any change in DNA; may include a change in the nucleotide base pairs of a gene, a rearrangement of genes within the chromosomes so that their interactions produce different effects, or a change in the chromosomes themselves.” (Biology: Fifth Edition, Eldra Pearl Solomon, Linda R. Berg, & Diana W. Martin, Saunders College Publishing, 1999, Glossary G-26) ”MUTATIONS ARE CHANGES IN DNA One of the first major discoveries about genes was that they can undergo changes, called mutations.“ (Biology: Fifth Edition, Eldra Pearl Solomon, Linda R. Berg, & Diana W. Martin, Saunders College Publishing, 1999, p281) ”However, occasionally a gene was observed to convert to a different form; such genetic changes, called mutations, were then transmitted unchanged to future generations.“ (Biology: Fifth Edition, Eldra Pearl Solomon, Linda R. Berg, & Diana W. Martin, Saunders College Publishing, 1999, p245) ”Darwin did not know about DNA or understand the mechanisms of inheritance. We now understand that the variations of organisms are a result of different varieties of genes that code for each characteristic. The ultimate source of these variations is random mutations, chemical changes in DNA that persist and can be inherited.“ (Biology: Fifth Edition, Eldra Pearl Solomon, Linda R. Berg, & Diana W. Martin, Saunders College Publishing, 1999, p9) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Telefoamingatthemouth, if it will sooth your fragile ego enough to allow discussions to take place without everyone having to be subjected to your obvious vendetta against anything I post, and everyone having to go thru pages of ramblings, I will allow that for this discussion anything that has, is or will ever happen to single celled organisms will have an instant and extreme genetically transmitted affect, even going backwards in time, if it will shut you up and allow others enough space to have an occasional post relevant to the topics at hand. So for this discussion, contrary to all evidence to the contrary, Lamarkian Evolution IS a reality. I will inform the minner of the prestigious Dobzhansky Prize and Vice President of the Society for the Study of Evolution that he is wrong. Again, just in case he should ask, what are your credentials in this area? I am sure he will want to know what authority is overturning Darwinian Evolution in favor of the Lamarkian Evolution which Darwinian Evolution had originally disproved. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 As I have shown before, I am always ready and willing to admit and correct my errors. So let me once more compile, admit and correct as needed. In regards to :Originally posted by: FreethinkerThe problem with asserting radiation as a source of evolutionary mutation is that most radiation mutation is not genetically hereditary. Lamarckian Evolution doesn't work. In fact it would seem that conventional radioactive sources would typically generate non-hereditary mutations.I still stand by this statement. Our bodies are under continual "attack" by radioactive particles. Most pass harmlessly through us. Some strike and mutate individual cells. Statistically this has little affect on us and is only extremely rarely significant to genetic heredity. where I went wrong was in replying to:Originally posted by: Tormod... radiation could be a major source of mutation in bacteria and single-cell organisms, thus having an impact on the evolution of life at a very early stage.in trying to relate Lamarkian Evolution (which is proven to be wrong) to single celled organism. My research has shown to me that in fact "mutation" is in and of itself a cellular DNA phenom exclusively. As such, with only one cell to deal with, any "mutation" to a single celled organism WOULD directly affect it's specific DNA and thus be hereditary. So while on a grand scale, radiation mutation of the DNA of cells in complex organisms would seldom be genetically relevant, for single celled organisms the same is not true. I stand corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 22, 2004 Report Share Posted September 22, 2004 Well actually I am sitting, so I sit corrected. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 FreeThinker: Telefoamingatthemouth, if it will sooth your fragile ego enough to allow discussions to take place without ... if it will shut you up ... Uhm, Tormod, are you going to chastise your buddy for this kind of stuff, or is your moderation biased? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 FreeThinker: So for this discussion, contrary to all evidence to the contrary, Lamarkian Evolution IS a reality. Are you really that stupid and/or dishonest FreeThiniker? I clearly stated multiple times that I have NOT offered the bogus notion of Lamarckian evolution, yet you pretend (your forte) that I HAVE. FreeThinker: I will inform the minner of the prestigious Dobzhansky Prize and Vice President of the Society for the Study of Evolution that he is wrong. No, he’s right. And I’m right. YOU are the one who’s been wrong on this, all along. FreeThinker: Again, just in case he should ask, what are your credentials in this area? Many orders of magnitude better than yours! FreeThinker: I am sure he will want to know what authority is overturning Darwinian Evolution in favor of the Lamarkian Evolution which Darwinian Evolution had originally disproved. That would be YOU. Not me. Grow up FreeThiniker, and stop being such a disingenuous twit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TeleMad Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 FreeThinker: My research has shown to me that in fact "mutation" is in and of itself a cellular DNA phenom exclusively. Your "research" <snicker> I'm sure it had nothing to do with my tons of quotes above that showed everyone just how flat out wrong you were. FreeThinker: I stand corrected. Yes, I corrected you. But you're not done yet. You still have to admit that you were - and still are - wrong in trying to stuff Lamarckian evolution into my mouth. I'm waiting... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 In an additional correction to my correction. Regarding single celled organisms and mutations. My original assertion that radiation could cause a change in a cell's structure that would NOT be hereditary IS 100% correct. e.g. a gamma particle could strike at any number of places within a cell and make any number of chemical changes to the cell's structure. In fact statistically the chances of such a particle hitting it's DNA is far smaller than hitting the rest of the bulk of the cell's structure. It is strictly a matter of semantics. The term "mutation" IS strictly related to a genetic process. Thus while radiation can more often affect a single celled organism in ways that are not hereditary, does not affect the DNA (which was the intention of my actual original point), the term "mutation" is not the correct word to use. I hope this etymological expedition has eliminated not exacerbated the exchange of educationally exemplary explanations at this excellent erudition enclave. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tormod Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 Originally posted by: TeleMadFreeThinker: Telefoamingatthemouth, if it will sooth your fragile ego enough to allow discussions to take place without ... if it will shut you up ... Uhm, Tormod, are you going to chastise your buddy for this kind of stuff, or is your moderation biased? My buddy has been told to stop it, yes. And he has promised to comply. My moderation may be biased, of course. I am only human. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Freethinker Posted September 23, 2004 Report Share Posted September 23, 2004 Moderated moderation by the moderator? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fsmind Posted December 21, 2004 Report Share Posted December 21, 2004 You are correct regarding the Earth being covered by 68.7% water. The Sea has played a part in the evolution of all life on the Earth (speaking from a non-religious point of view). The Human Species, although their primary existent is on land has shown that it can adapt to many environments will one day colonize the great Sea floor. As the Human Species begin to explore the Sea floor, they will soon discover that just as treaties are establish on land so will they be establishing in the Sea with non-land civilizations. To all whom read this comment may wonder what or where did this individual come from, just like you in many cases, a planet called Earth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheBigDog Posted October 16, 2006 Report Share Posted October 16, 2006 Every now and then I have a thread title catch my eye while I am looking at the "Who's Online" page. The mis-spelling on this one struck my interest, and I found a gem of a thread. The titans of their day, Freethinker and Telemad going at it over the nature of mutation in speciation. With Tormod as the referee. But you have to read it to the very end. From beginning to end. And when you get to the final post (the one from Dec '04) tell me where the hell it came from. I love a good plot twist. :hyper: Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.