|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
 Posted - 07/13/2007 : 02:02:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Abdul Alhazred
Butterflies fast forward evolution to evade death [ MSNBC ]
A population of butterflies has evolved in a flash on a South Pacific island to fend off a deadly parasite.
The proportion of male Blue Moon butterflies dropped to a precarious 1 percent as the parasite targeted males. Then, within the span of a mere 10 generations, the males evolved an immunity that allowed their population share to soar to nearly 40 percent — all in less than a year.
“We usually think of natural selection as acting slowly, over hundreds or thousands of years," said study team member Gregory Hurst, an evolutionary geneticist at the University College London. "But the example in this study happened in a blink of the eye, in terms of evolutionary time."
The scientists think the males developed genes that hold a male-killing microbial parasite, called Wolbachia, at bay.
... |
Or it could be that God loved them and did a miracle. Right?
|
If the males with the gene existed before at 1% that means the gene was there. Natural selection is not evolution.
|
From reading the MSNBC article, we don't know that 1%, or any, of the males already had genetic immunity to the bacterial parasite. All we know is that for some time, only 1% of the population was male, which is an entirely different matter. Those males may have simply not been exposed to the infection, or this number may simply reflect the survival rate for non-immune males which get the infection.
This may have been an entirely new mutation -- or not. I don't assume it was new, nor do I assume that it was an pre-existing genetic trait in part of the population. You shouldn't assume either, Jerome. Either way, it's incredibly swift evolution in action, by the clearly defined standards of biology.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 07/13/2007 02:04:26 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 04:53:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
| Dave asked, What "entire process" does one need to show? Be specific. |
One creature becoming another creature. |
What, you've never seen a catepillar turn into a butterfly? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
moakley
SFN Regular
USA
1888 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 05:04:23 [Permalink]
|
How many times do we hold this debate. Jerome has reached a conclusion his quest for knowledge has ended.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
| Dave asked, What "entire process" does one need to show? Be specific. |
One creature becoming another creature.
|
Desperately complicite in his own ignorance. |
Life is good
Philosophy is questions that may never be answered. Religion is answers that may never be questioned. -Anonymous |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 05:18:49 [Permalink]
|
I'm afraid that Jerome is a living example of one creature who will never become another creature.
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Abdul Alhazred
Skeptic Friend
USA
58 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 05:22:09 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
| Dave asked, What "entire process" does one need to show? Be specific. |
One creature becoming another creature.
|
You mean mutating on the hoof like in cheesy science fiction?
Seriously, I do not understand what you would consider evolution or evidence for same.
|
The lack of a rational explanation is not evidence for an irrational explanation. |
| Edited by - Abdul Alhazred on 07/13/2007 05:24:38 |
|
|
|
pleco
SFN Addict
USA
2998 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 06:33:39 [Permalink]
|
How about a manbearpig?
 |
by Filthy
The neo-con methane machine will soon be running at full fart. |
|
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 06:38:59 [Permalink]
|
Think about it, guys: I asked for specifics, and got back "One creature becoming another creature." The common-sense interpretation of such a statement can be nothing but "a single individual undergoing some sort of morphological change." Sure, I thought of lycanthropes first, but then realized that butterflies and frogs should satisfy Jerome's request.
After all, he's already been given a big list of known speciation events in the last 100 years, so he can't have been asking for that. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 14:25:24 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Originally posted by Dude
Moron.
|
Your pitiful
|
Webster:
Main Entry: piti·ful
Pronunciation: 'pi-ti-f&l
Function: adjective
1 archaic : full of pity : COMPASSIONATE
With regards to you, Jerome, I agree that Dude's comments are compassionate, and full of pity for you.
This is the best post I've seen from you yet. More succinct than anything else.
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
marfknox
SFN Die Hard
USA
3739 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 17:59:23 [Permalink]
|
Jerome wrote: | One creature becoming another creature. |
I'll just ignore the fact that this sentence describes metamorphosis, not evolution, and assume you meant something like: "the descendants of one species eventually turning out to be a different species." And for the sake of argument, we'll just say that different species are groups of animals that cannot breed with each other and produce viable offspring. (The actual differences between species in terms of biology are far more complicated, but we need a clear definition to continue.)
Dogs were breed from wolves, but dogs and wolves are considered two different species. If you produce a hybrid from a dog and wolf, the offspring is sterile. Ergo, the breeding of dogs from wolves was a human-guided version of evolution. And to think that natural selection can't do over millions of years what humans did in much less time is absurd.
Another example, the offspring of donkeys and horses are mules - which are sterile. This means that donkeys and horses are two different species. Indeed, they were breed from two different species of wild animals. So why can they produce any offspring? How is it that domestic cows were breed by several different versions of wild species, all similar enough to be considered in the same family, but biologically different species? C'mon, this shit is so obvious. |
"Too much certainty and clarity could lead to cruel intolerance" -Karen Armstrong
Check out my art store: http://www.marfknox.etsy.com
|
| Edited by - marfknox on 07/13/2007 18:00:56 |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 21:20:46 [Permalink]
|
I hear a cricket, but where's Jerome? Hey, maybe he did turn into another creature!
|
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 21:31:12 [Permalink]
|
| Wolbachia bacteria are parasites that infect as many as 80 per cent of the world's insects and manipulate reproduction in their hosts in order to improve their own transmission. |
WOLBACHIA
So, we have a common bacteria present in most insects worldwide.
Anyone think something else was causing the male population to decrease so dramatically in this particular species at this particular time?
Why; if this bacteria was so devastating to this butterfly, had it not decimated the species long ago?
Think people: do not rely on the witch doctors to tell you what the eclipse means!
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 22:01:36 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Why; if this bacteria was so devastating to this butterfly, had it not decimated the species long ago? |
Because it lives on a South Pacific island?
What do you think, Jerome? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 22:24:53 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Why; if this bacteria was so devastating to this butterfly, had it not decimated the species long ago? |
Because it lives on a South Pacific island?
What do you think, Jerome?
|
Maybe this common bacteria was not the cause of the depletion of the males.
|
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 22:42:57 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Maybe this common bacteria was not the cause of the depletion of the males. |
And what would the consequences of that be, regarding the whole of the theory of evolution? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
JEROME DA GNOME
BANNED
2418 Posts |
Posted - 07/13/2007 : 22:53:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by JEROME DA GNOME
Maybe this common bacteria was not the cause of the depletion of the males. |
And what would the consequences of that be, regarding the whole of the theory of evolution?
|
I do not have enough information to state what caused the depletion of the males.
There certainly is not enough information to state that this bacteria is new to this butterfly and this bacteria caused the male population to drop to 1% and these male butterflies had a genetic mutation that counters this bacteria and this is an example of rapid evolution.
The bacteria we are talking about only kills the male sperm that are not already infected. It does not kill all males. This makes one think that this bacteria was not the cause of the initial decimation of the male population. If this were the case this parasitic bacteria would be killing itself by killing all the host males.
 |
What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires -- desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. - Bertrand Russell |
|
|
 |
|
Evolution caught in the act!
