Zachriel
Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
Something's happened to dmso74! He's no longer with us!
| Quote | dmso74: This was at least a 3-step process: one neutral “potentiating” mutation, one weakly beneficial mutation and one strongly beneficial mutation (that may have been a multiple mutation).. Behe clearly states in his book that 2 steps is the “edge”, so we are already over that edge and may be well over it.
which, again, is why it is surprising to me that Behe chose this paper as support for his hypothesis, when it is clear evidence against it.
DaveScot: dmso74 hasn’t read The Edge of Evolution and is either making things up about what’s in it or is parroting falacious sources. He was warned to stop, ignored the warning, and is now no longer with us. |
Behe quotes himself.
| Quote | Behe: | Quote | | If two mutations have to occur before there is a net beneficial effect — if an intermediate state is harmful, or less fit than the starting state — then there is already a big evolutionary problem. |
And what if more than two are needed? The task quickly gets out of reach of random mutation. |
Pharyngula has the skinny on the findings. Meanwhile,
| Quote | | bornagain77: The overwhelming stability of bacteria through thousands upon thousands of generations, strongly indicates that there is no part of the genome (Junk DNA) for evolution to play with,,i.e. Junk DNA is ruled out from straightforward test for genome flexibility! |
Most bacteria are under selection for rapid reproduction, and extraneous DNA slows down the process. Eukaryotes, even single-celled eukaryotes, are much larger organisms than bacteria, consequently eukaryotes have lower populations and selection against genome size tends to be more relaxed.
Nor are bacteria necessarily stable. They are capable of rapid evolution in stressful environments, including mutators (hypermutable lineages) and through gene exchange mechanisms.
--------------
You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.
|
