 | Nylon: it isn't just for breakfast any more Point number one you said "If you believe in evolution then you are an evolutionist." Since I do not believe in evolution, that means by your usage of the word I am not an evolutionist. However, I accept the fact that evolution occurred and occurs. What do you call a person who knows evolution is a fact, instead of believes it to be? If a person believes in gravity, do you call that person a gravityist? If a person believes in leptons, do you call that person a leptonist? What about people who believe in ablation? An ablationist? Is an incretion believer an incretionist? If you mean someone who accepts modern biology when you say "evolutionist," why don't you say "biologist?" Point number two, you said "evolution is just a believe." The answer is, "No, it is not." Point number three, you quoted Professor Richard Dawkins as stating DNA has quote "information" unquote. With several qualifications, I will tentatively accept the hypothesis that there is information in DNA. However, you did not state what you mean by the word "information" until after I queried you. You claimed that, quote, "new information equals new genes" unquote. If you meant new genes, why did you say new information? Mutations that cause new genes is observed thousands of times, often among scientists working in disease control and best control. Modern corn, for example, was created by Americans out of Zea mexicana via mutation and artificial selection. Gene sequencing of Zea mexicana and corn shows gene duplication, genetic drift, frame shifting, and other mutations that resulted in new proteins, novel sequences of amino acids, and modified enzymes. Another example is, of course, bacteria that digest nylon. See the article "Birth of a unique enzyme from an alternative reading frame of the pre-existed, internally repetitious coding sequence", Susumu Ohno, available on the net. A single nucleotide mutation created a new enzyme; that frame shifted the genome which in turn created an entire new protein. Since you claim new information equals new genes, then it was observed in this bacteria in the 1970s. Not just once, by the way, but TWICE. Downs Syndrome, of course, is another example of a mutation increasing what you call information: an entire chromosome is added to the genome. You have been told this, I see, yet you reject the example without any valid reason for doing so. Point number four, you asked about gene duplication and fusing and you asked for an example. There is a fairly good example: humanity's common ancestor with chimpanzees. We observe in the genetic record that gene fusing occurred: we can see that it happened. Point number five, you then asked for one specific example. Fine: the nylon-digesting bacteria is an excellent example of a mutation adding what you call information into its genome. That single mutation added two new enzymes in the form of a new protein. Those two new enzymes allow the bacteria to digest nylon. Point number six: you then asked what kind of mutation that one example was. The answer is, frame shifting--- a very common mutation that happens all the time in nature. |
 | Epigenetics CousinoMacul just gave me this link to an interview by PZ Myers. It's very interesting...Seeing two engaged biologists is enlightening. Myers and Abigale Smith, the articulate young grad student make epigenetics more accessible. Take a look: http://bloggingheads.tv/diavlogs/12740 Looking at the research and evaluating the data -- these are the only valid methods to employ in the sciences. And the research in the field of epigenetics is certainly no exception. Here are some beginning sources if you want to take a look at the interesting subject of epigenetics. For book I mentioned, "Evolution in Four Dimensions by Eva Jablonka: http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Four-Dimensions-Epigenetic-Philosophical/dp/0262600692/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1216297493&sr=1-1 The New Scientist page dedicated to genetics: http://www.newscientist.com/channel/life/genetics Here's a very good blog entry on the current issue of New Scientist's article "Strange Inheritance": http://smarteconomy.typepad.com/smart_economy/2008/07/you-are-what-yo.html For a popular view of the subject see Survival of the Sickest, a 2007 New York Times bestseller about evolutionary biology by Sharon Moalem with Jonathan Prince. The book presents an evolutionary hypothesis to explain why we have deadly genetic diseases. Moalem argues that some of the "bad genes" which cause diabetes, for example, helped our ancestors survive at some point in our evolutionary history. Knowing the environment where those genes were beneficial to our survival, may help to deal with the disease. Personally I don't agree with all of his conclusions, but he has an excellent chapter giving a coherent overview of what epigenetics is and why its important! For more on this: http://www.amazon.com/Survival-Sickest-Medical-Maverick-Discovers/dp/0060889659 |
العربية
中国
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिन्दी
Italiano
日本語
Português
Русский
Español
