Your Garage Best Books of the Month Amazon Fashion Learn more Discover it $5 Albums Fire TV Stick Sun Care Patriotic Picks Shop-by-Room Amazon Cash Back Offer AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3 AnnedroidsS3  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Starting at $49.99 All-New Kindle Oasis Segway miniPro
Customer Discussions > Science forum

P of RM by NS


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 76-95 of 95 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 6:21:43 AM PDT
Irish Lace says:
"Both the Chinese and the Indians where seen as inferior by the British Empire yet both groups have over time far outstripped the English in reproduction and have proved therefore, by your definition, to be more fit. But only for now. Who knows what will befall each of the many branches of the human race over longer periods, the many today may be the few of tomorrow? "

John, please tell me you are aware that the Chinese, English and Indians are all part of species homo sapiens sapiens? The "human race" does not, at this time, have "branches."

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 6:36:51 AM PDT
Hi Irish, Actually it does: e.g. "The phylogeography of Y chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations"

Free PDF here: http://www.yhrd.org/files/fc82523ca5ab04cacc6bf2e7707e9b66bc6f7fa1.underhill2001.pdf

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 7:24:38 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 27, 2012 7:25:20 AM PDT
Great post Noman. Modeling of selection and adaptation is certainly an important aspect of evolutionary biology. The predictability of adaptive evolution in invasive species is also quite an interesting field. For example: "Rapid Evolution of a Geographic Cline in Size in an Introduced Fly"

Free PDF here: http://gwgilc.people.wm.edu/PDFs/HG_Sci00.pdf

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 12:54:27 PM PDT
Tero says:
Absolutely, all organisms planning to mutate have to file an environmental impact study at the Galactic Home Office.

Your job is to find the signal from there and construct a ship to travel there. Requests for copies are treated with the utmost seriousness, but you have to apply in person. They do not use mail.

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 2:00:33 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 27, 2012 2:05:59 PM PDT
john lachman wrote:
"Who knows what will befall each of the many branches of the human race over longer periods, the many today may be the few of tomorrow?"
==================================
How exactly does such knowledge of thousands or millions of years in the future or past constitute any scientific pursuit?

........................................
Irish Lace wrote:
"John, please tell me you are aware that the Chinese, English and Indians are all part of species homo sapiens sapiens? The "human race" does not, at this time, have "branches."
=====================================
Then, Irish wishes to believe that all men were created equal, but women and fat people excluded.

....................................
Eric M. O'Neill wrote:
"Hi Irish, Actually it does: e.g. "The phylogeography of Y chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations"
===============================
Then, Eric jumps into the ring with such time bomb that modern humans actually have branches, while the article Eric cited (http://www.yhrd.org/files/fc82523ca5ab04cacc6bf2e7707e9b66bc6f7fa1.underhill2001.pdf ) refers inheritable genes, not branches within the Homo sapiens.

Ironically, in that article (The phylogeography of Y chromosome binary haplotypes and the origins of modern human populations), the authors (P. A. UNDERHILL, G. PASSARINO,&, A. A. LIN, P. SHEN, M. MIRAZO!N LAHR. A. FOLEY, P. J. OEFNER and L. L. CAVALLI-SFORZA) made many suspicious moves:

1- Eight authors, from at least 4 nations, agreed to attach their names to a scientific article printed in the UK, not in the USA, despite the fact that the main author works in Standford, CA, USA. That in itself, raises the suspicion that the roles of each of the 8 authors is mostly a payback favor by a single author who wishes to hide in the shadow of big names, form big schools.

2- The article dealt with prehistoric movements without explaining how such endeavor impact science or conform with the scientific method of verification and reliability.

3- The article stressed that Africa was the place of rise of modern humans, without explaining why not South America, India, or Australia, or any other planet with the same atmospheric variables.

4- Even Darwin acknowledged that many species would never be identified or found due to our inability to construct a complete collection of the species that lived on Earth or on other places.

Mohamed F. El-Hewie

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 2:54:40 PM PDT
This one is more recent: "Worldwide human relationships inferred from genome-wide patterns of variation"

PDF: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~lliao/archive/worldwide_human_relationships_inferred_from_genome_wide_patterns_of_variation.pdf

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 4:38:48 PM PDT
zato says:
Tero, I asked a serious question. And, for the most part, I have received serious answers, which I truly appreciate. Admittedly, I am a layman when it comes to evolution and have real questions--real answers would be greatly appreciated. My intention for this forum was to have a serious discussion about evolution, instead of having it spiral downward into yet another evolution vs. creationism shouting match. There are plenty of those to choose from; I'm sure your contributions would be welcome there.

Posted on May 27, 2012 6:06:12 PM PDT
Hi Zato. Has your original question been sufficiently addressed, or do you still seek answers?

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 6:46:28 PM PDT
CDaniels says:
zato, if you are referring to the original question you posed; there are so much empirical evidence of "the preservation of random mutation by natural selection," that it is difficult to know where to begin. Try searching "29+Evidences for Macroevolution" which would address some of your questions, if indeed you are legitimately looking for answers.

In reply to an earlier post on May 27, 2012 8:15:30 PM PDT
Re zato, 5-27 4:38 PM: With respect to your original question, if you have not seen my post on the subject in "Belief in the Christian god is absurd", I suggest that you do so. Find it by searching Customer discussions for "saunderse".

Eric O'Neill has put up some excellent posts here, which are worth re-reading.

In reply to an earlier post on May 28, 2012 12:11:29 AM PDT
john lachman says:
Mohamed - You said,
"As we stand, Natural Selection is as illusive as magic, because we cannot define what is Natural and what is not, and we cannot predict the outcome of Selection without imposing drifting, speciation, adaptation, mutation, and too much luck..."

All of science is about discovering how "the magic" is done, how "the illusion" is being created.

Everything that is, seen or unseen, must be "natural", in its broadest definition, including God. So if there is a Being out there who created the universe, that Being would be the Natural Selector, by dint of having created the potential for Abiogenesis and other "magic" ,"illusive" processes whereby life on earth began and has been developing.

It is due to the glorious complexity of the world/universe we find ourselves in, that many people expect there is a far superior intellect behind it all. Who that might be and what, if anything, it wants of us is the realm of theology (literally "words/Logo, about God/Theo), not science.

Science is about finding evidence that confirms our imaginings, of how the "creation", if you will, (or "Great Accident"/"Singularity"/"Big Bang", if you won't) works. With a bit of "luck" or "the grace of God", the obviously dedicated scientists, posting here, will help to discover how the magic of life, (God's magic?) works. So might you.

In reply to an earlier post on May 28, 2012 12:30:01 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 28, 2012 12:30:25 AM PDT
Eric M. O'Neill wrote:
"This one is more recent: "Worldwide human relationships inferred from genome-wide patterns of variation

PDF: http://www.eecis.udel.edu/~lliao/archive/worldwide_human_relationships_inferred_from_genome_wide_patterns_of_variation.pdf "
================================
Eric,

Exactly, what poster "noman" keeps hounding for years, which is the endless scientific reports and articles that serve no good but spare their authors from the ax of "publish or perish" doctrine.

The geographic evidence of human genetic diversity poses no impact on modern sciences. And the sub-Saharan origin of man is a biblical prophecy, not a scientific one, and in either case would have no use to mankind.

All medical and health care programs are based on research that could improve the quality of life, not rewriting the remote pre-historic chronicles.

Sorry, Eric, I get stomach ache when get struck with scientific articles that have no end in mind other than ranting about the dead past, amidst my search for solution for something that could improve the immediate future.

Mohamed F. El-Hewie

In reply to an earlier post on May 28, 2012 4:27:24 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on May 28, 2012 4:38:11 AM PDT
Tero says:
You have to look at specific genes. Genotype, phenotype. You will have to buy an actual book to study the subject. But the Lenski experiment is easy to read up on:
>>. All populations evolved larger cell volumes and lower maximum population densities, and all became specialized for living on glucose (with declines in fitness relative to the ancestor strain when grown in dissimilar nutrients). Of the 12 populations, 4 developed defects in their ability to repair DNA, greatly increasing the rate of additional mutations in those strains. Although the bacteria in each population are thought to have generated hundreds of millions of mutations over the first 20,000 generations, Lenski has estimated that within this time frame, only 10 to 20 beneficial mutations achieved fixation in each population, with fewer than 100 total point mutations (including neutral mutations) reaching fixation in each population.<<
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E._coli_long-term_evolution_experiment

Some popular books have actual science, but most have just a few pictures and the summary.

Suggest you get a used copy of Lehninger.
Lehninger Principles of Biochemistry, Fourth Edition with CDROM

The mechanisms of mutation are on page 348 of the third edition.

Posted on May 28, 2012 4:50:30 AM PDT
Tero says:
Genetics is not an easy subject for self study, this text got some favorable ratings-
Genetics: Analysis and Principles

In reply to an earlier post on May 28, 2012 4:56:39 AM PDT
Lenski's experiments are certainly some of the best on this subject. I look forward to that group publishing whole genome seqs for these bacteria so we can lean about the specific mutations involved in their adaptation.

Posted on May 29, 2012 6:56:38 PM PDT
I am just bumping this up to the top because I think it was a productive thread and I don't want to see it disappear, especially considering how awful most of the other threads are. So Zato, you had questions. Are there any more? Anyone else care to continue a productive thread? Any comments, questions, etc. on the human relationships papers I linked to?

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2012 1:06:05 PM PDT
zato says:
Tero, thank you for the book suggestion.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 5, 2012 1:10:20 PM PDT
zato says:
Eric, probably, and I think that I have gotten enough suggestions for reading for the time being. If I have more questions later I will make a new post. Thanks for your help.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2012 8:00:37 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
That's an exemplary post. I don't agree with all of it, but some of it helps with a new psychological insight for me.

The foundation that Darwin had in Jesus worship is incomprehensible to me, if we can believe the accounts about him.

In reply to an earlier post on Jun 7, 2012 8:05:24 PM PDT
Roeselare says:
who is this all-encompassing newcomer? haha

'Very glad to meet you and have your help in here!, JL.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Science forum

 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  22
Total posts:  95
Initial post:  May 15, 2012
Latest post:  Jun 7, 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions