Jump to content
Evolution Fairytale Forum

Gneiss girl

Veteran Member
  • Content Count

    217
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    23

Gneiss girl last won the day on December 16 2018

Gneiss girl had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

72 Excellent

1 Follower

About Gneiss girl

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Female

Previous Fields

  • What is your Gender?
    Female
  • How old are you?
    50
  • What is your affiliation/religion?
    (private)
  • What is your Worldview?
    Theistic Evolutionist
  • Where do you live (i.e. Denver, Colorado)
    Western US

Recent Profile Visitors

165 profile views
  1. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    More related to fitness landscapes: "Adaptive evolutionary paths The number of adaptive mutational paths through sequence space is limited and often a relatively small fraction of the theoretical possibilities [4–8••]. This is one of the most strongly supported conclusions among the studies carried out so far. Adaptive pathways through sequence space are limited largely by sign epistasis, in which a path is inaccessible because one or more steps would entail a decrease in fitness [4,6,8••]. Adaptive reversions are possible in which a favorable substitution incorporated early in a pathway becomes unfavorable and is reversed at a later stage [8••,38], but see also Ref. [6]. Adaptive reversions allow indirect routes to attain fitness peaks that may not be directly accessible. While the number of mutational paths through sequence space is constrained, there may nevertheless be enough alternative mutational pathways that the predictability and repeatability of evolutionary trajectories is limited " https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4254422/ Notice the findings here. Basically adaptive mutational pathways are VERY limited. And a favorable (beneficial) mutation eary on, then becomes unfavorable (harmful) at a later stage. This is why N-K fitness landscapes become rugged. Fitness pathways are "constrained" and this becomes one of the limiters to evolution. Of course, the author is still hopeful that there will be ways alternative mutational pathways.
  2. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    N-K Fitness This is not a "limiter" per se. But you will often find evolutionary experiments which refer to N-K fitness or fitness landscapes. You will find many research articles on N-K fitness as it is a mathematical way to model fitness and, of course, evolutionary change is all about mutational pathways that make an organism "more fit". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NK_model Here is a short summary from one paper: "What can we learn from fitness landscapes?" "A combinatorially complete data set consists of studies of all possible combinations of a set of mutant sites in a gene or mutant alleles in a genome. Among the most robust conclusions from these studies is that epistasis between beneficial mutations often shows a pattern of diminishing returns, in which favorable mutations are less fit when combined than would be expected. Another robust inference is that the number of adaptive evolutionary paths is often limited to a relatively small fraction of the theoretical possibilities, owing largely to sign epistasis requiring evolutionary steps that would entail a decrease in fitness." In other words, evolutionary change stalls. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1369527414001209 I would recomment to anyone who wants to take a realistic look at evolution and what the research is actually demonstrating...is read papers on N-K fitness landscapes. Do you find mostly rugged landscapes? Landscapes that reach a plateau? How many have linear fitness pathways and how far do they go? Hint: rugged is bad.(the valleys represent less fit) ..plateaus are bad (change has stalled), or linear fitness pathways (that means progress for evolution). If you can find linear fitness pathways...how far do the go?
  3. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    I agree
  4. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    Thanks Mike. BTW, I like your new meme much better than the smiling potato. As a Brit, what do you think about Brexit and Trump? (sorry...maybe that should be a topic for its own thread?)
  5. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    True. Because so many people seem to think that since small adaptive changes can be made to an organisms by evolution (little "e"), then time solves the problem for big "E", Evolution. This is really just simplistic logic, but falls apart when one digs deeper into the biologic research. I thought I would compile this "list" of known, observed phenomena in biology that effectively "limit" the ways that Evolution proceeds. I hope this helps those who "believe" Evolution to be true, to understand why it is much more difficult and problematic than they imagine.
  6. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    To continue on to more biologic "limiters"... Clonal Interference "Clonal interference is a phenomenon in evolutionary biology, related to the population genetics of organisms with significant linkage disequilibrium, especially asexually reproducing organisms. The idea of clonal interference was introduced by American geneticist Hermann Joseph Muller in 1932[1]. It explains why beneficial mutations can take a long time to get fixated or even disappear in asexually reproducing populations." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clonal_interference "clonal interference causes some beneficial mutations to be outcompeted by more-fit mutations that occur in the same genetic background." http://www.genetics.org/content/180/4/2163 In other words...just because a "beneficial" mutation occurs, doesn't mean it will ever become "fixed" in a population.
  7. Gneiss girl

    Anthropogenic Climate Change, True or not?

    Sounds like we are in basic agreement. But I would still stress the importance of the ocean, its currents, and the atmosphere with its wind patterns. I realize that overall they are redistributing the heat that the Earth receives. But you will often find in the literature and media about "record summer heat in Europe," or driest season in Southern California, or heat wave hit Australia...when these are examples of regional effects due to wind/ocean patterns. It is misleading.
  8. Gneiss girl

    The Absurdity Of Theistic Evolution

    ID would be good to add to the list.
  9. Gneiss girl

    The Absurdity Of Theistic Evolution

    Killerbluff, the character in the picture is the Elven King of the Hobbit movie. A movie which I like. One of his famous lines (as he speaks to the Hobbit) is "Where does your journey end?" It seems a fitting question we could all ask ourselves. To those who do not see all the evidence that there is indeed a Creator, where does their life's journey end?
  10. Gneiss girl

    The Absurdity Of Theistic Evolution

    I just wanted to say that when I first signed up for this chat room, it made me pick a category...Atheist, Theistic Evolutionist, Creationist...etc. Why does this forum make us label ourselves? I didn't expect the question and just picked one.
  11. Gneiss girl

    Anthropogenic Climate Change, True or not?

    Maybe at a latter point in this discussion we can talk about Europe's politics and policies on climate change. We hear about it some here in the States, but overall it seems that Europe takes a stronger stance. The US under Trump seems to be reversing some of Obama's policies and we have even dropped out of the Paris Accord. Overall, in the last election, most people put climate change as a low priority compared to other issues. But it is still a controversial topic for some. From what I know of weather, I would put the leading controlling factors something like this: Sun...definitely the greatest driver of Earth's climate. We often take it for granted that it is highly stable. But we know about the 11 year sun spot cycle, the Maunder minimum, Milankovic cycles, etc. There are some scientist that are linking periods of reduced solar magnetic activity with increased cosmic bombardment, that has a cooling effect. Basically, we agree here. Ocean currents and wind patterns. I would place this high on the list of climate drivers. There are general patterns, but also cycles and shifts. Water Vapor. I would place this separately from other greenhouse gases because it make up a much higher percent of Earth's atmosphere and in varying quantities. Plus it plays a duel role in the climate as both warming, and cooling. Overall, I would say that more water vapor in the atmosphere is good. It increases the water cycle (better for life) and of course it produces more clouds...which increases reflectivity. (Albedo) Albedo - important for how much sunlight Earth absorbs. I would say that increased clouds would have more impact that would melting of the polar ice caps. This is because more W/m2 reach low latitudes than the poles. Natural events - Volcanoes, Forest Fires, etc. One large event can produce more CO2 that a year's worth of human output. Greenhouse gases - I weigh this further down the list because CO2 and methane make up such a tiny percentage of Earth's atmosphere. The evidence suggest that CO2 follows warming, as I mentioned before. And the climate is not as highly sensitive to increased levels of CO2 as IPCC models show. More CO2 would actually be a good thing. Other Human causes - I would put human activity far down the list of factors that affect the climate. I don't think that there is no effect. I just think it is very small relative to natural factors...particulary regarding CO2. Aerosols and other pollutants have a negative impact on our environment. And I think deliberate attempts to manipulate the climate like the HAARP program, are a bad idea. This is the part of human climate change that I would be worried about.
  12. Gneiss girl

    Anthropogenic Climate Change, True or not?

    Interesting interview...
  13. Gneiss girl

    "limiters" To Evolution

    Time for listing another "limiter" to evolutionary change: "Pleiotropy refers to the condition where a single mutation causes more than one observable phenotypic effect or change in characteristic. " https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/biochemistry-genetics-and-molecular-biology/pleiotropy Pleiotropy also causes compromises among adaptations of different traits, because a genetic change beneficial to one trait may be deleterious to another "Pleiotropic genes are widely believed to be evolutionarily conserved because they are subject to purifying selection acting on multiple traits and are less likely to experience beneficial mutations" http://www.genetics.org/content/173/4/1885 You can find numerous references to pleiotrophy and diseases. You can also find articles discussing how pleiotrophy constrains changes. Can anyone find articles where it helps support the case for the ToE?
  14. Gneiss girl

    Anthropogenic Climate Change, True or not?

    I think we are getting off on a tangent here that is not very productive. The 97% "consensus" is disputed and misleading as well. And does it really matter? It is probably the case that if you had polled scientists 200 years ago, you would have had 90% of them believing in the aether theory. Science is not a popularity contest. That is best saved for politics. And it seems that the whole climate change topic has become very political I think it would help if we made a list of all the factors which drive the climate. And maybe even list them in order of importance. This might be a good thought experiment. Maybe we can find some common ground here. Glad you found this forum. Sure beats the quality of what you find in Youtube comments, eh? Lol.
  15. Gneiss girl

    Anthropogenic Climate Change, True or not?

    Ah...the often quoted 97% consensus defense. You do realize that was a flawed survey, don't you? I think I discussed this subject with someone else in a different forum. And remember...the IPCC isn't exactly unbiased on this topic. "The 97% consensus claim is total science FRAUD based on selective editing of the survey data" https://www.naturalnews.com/052317_climate_change_scientific_consensus_fraudulent_science_survey.html Debunking the Climate Consensus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uma-w6caJhY The Myth of the 97% Consensus https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJujb-VnaCM&t=108s Fact Checking The Claim Of 97% Consensus On Anthropogenic Climate Change https://www.forbes.com/sites/uhenergy/2016/12/14/fact-checking-the-97-consensus-on-anthropogenic-climate-change/#42557b131157 So if we use the "consensus" argument, it is really a type of logic fallacy. Let's just try to evaluate what science is showing us and why. Just out of curiosity, is this you? sairassiili If so, welcome to the forum. Glad to have you here.
×

Important Information

Our Terms