Welcome, Guest: Join Nairaland / LOGIN! / Trending / Recent / New
Stats: 2,773,979 members, 6,606,771 topics. Date: Sunday, 28 November 2021 at 08:58 AM

Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry - Religion - Nairaland

Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry (3455 Views)

A Much Needed Explanation of Evolution / Evolution And The Seagull Dance. / Chris Oyakhilome’s Theory Of Alcoholism And Smoking (2) (3) (4)

(1) (2) (3) (Reply) (Go Down)

Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 1:09pm On Dec 01, 2014
Taxonomy started out as an exercise in categorizing organism by similarity in form -- morphology.

Heredity was determined as the mechanism which explained why similar structures could be found in different species.

This led Darwin to propose common ancestry and a possible ultimate common ancestor -- "last universal ancestor".

This is really a problem in information transfer. How does information (like structure) transfer from one organism to another. Just because we see this information transfer, does it demonstrate heredity?

Take a look at these..



http://www.pbase.com/image/103530756

This is not a wasp. Its structural similarities to a wasp are not inherited. It is a moth.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elysia_viridis

This slug contains "genes" found in plant cell nucleii. This transfer of information is not by inheritance.

Therefore evidence for transfer of information, morphological or genetic, does not imply heredity.

This puts into question the taxonomical basis for common ancestry.

[Please ignore the trolls.

They will obfuscate by ignoring the point, repeating how "science works", regurgitating the Theory of Evolution for no reason, and copying and pasting irrelevant essays on the NON-inheritance mechanisms (like mimicry in natural selection) that may account for the examples above (just to give the impression that they are clued up and nobody else is). Meanwhile, their essay will not address the point of the thread. Please ignore them -- the usual suspects.]

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Nobody: 2:25pm On Dec 01, 2014
Lol

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Nobody: 2:34pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:
Taxonomy started out as an exercise in categorizing organism by similarity in form -- morphology.

Heredity was determined as the mechanism which explained why similar structures could be found in different species.

This led Darwin to propose common ancestry and a possible ultimate common ancestor -- "last universal ancestor".

This is really a problem in information transfer. How does information (like structure) transfer from one organism to another. Just because we see this information transfer, does it demonstrate heredity?

Take a look at these..



http://www.pbase.com/image/103530756

This is not a wasp. Its structural similarities to a wasp are not inherited. It is a moth.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elysia_viridis

This slug contains "genes" found in plant cell nucleii. [size=18]This transfer of information is not by inheritance.[/size]

Therefore evidence for transfer of information, morphological or genetic, does not imply heredity.

This puts into question the taxonomical basis for common ancestry.

[Please ignore the trolls.

They will obfuscate by ignoring the point, repeating how "science works", regurgitating the Theory of Evolution for no reason, and copying and pasting irrelevant essays on the NON-inheritance mechanisms (like mimicry in natural selection) that may account for the examples above (just to give the impression that they are clued up and nobody else is). Meanwhile, their essay will not address the point of the thread. Please ignore them -- the usual suspects.]

My goodness what have I missed in my biology class. Please what causes transfer of information? I am eager to learn from you. smiley

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by plaetton: 2:39pm On Dec 01, 2014
Dapo777:
Lol
Lol indeed.

Hilarious, isn't it?.
Start a discussion by begging everyone to ignore the relevant points of opponents.
This is quite ingenious.

grin

3 Likes

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by plaetton: 2:44pm On Dec 01, 2014
Well,
I am going to be the first to throw in the towel and say that I don't what the op is talking about.

I am eager to learn something new today.
I hope the op will give us all a simple lesson on biology and hereditary today.

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Nobody: 2:47pm On Dec 01, 2014
plaetton:

Lol indeed.

Hilarious, isn't it?.
Start a discussion by begging everyone to ignore the relevant points of opponents.
This is quite ingenious.

grin

By default he has won the argument already even before the argument starts,since he has asked the audience to ignore all the opponents' points

3 Likes

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Nobody: 2:49pm On Dec 01, 2014
plaetton:
Well,
I am going to be the first to throw in the towel and say that I don't what the op is talking about.

I am eager to learn something new today.
I hope the op will give us all a simple lesson on biology and hereditary today.

Now you know how to handle him. Just say you don't know the answer(that's what he wants ) and watch him give us the correct answer

2 Likes

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by davien(m): 2:51pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon can you provide the genetic variation between the two organisms?
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 3:00pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:
Taxonomy started out as an exercise in categorizing organism by similarity in form -- morphology.

Heredity was determined as the mechanism which explained why similar structures could be found in different species.

This led Darwin to propose common ancestry and a possible ultimate common ancestor -- "last universal ancestor".

This is really a problem in information transfer. How does information (like structure) transfer from one organism to another. Just because we see this information transfer, does it demonstrate heredity?

Take a look at these..



http://www.pbase.com/image/103530756

This is not a wasp. Its structural similarities to a wasp are not inherited. It is a moth.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elysia_viridis

This slug contains "genes" found in plant cell nucleii. This transfer of information is not by inheritance.

Therefore evidence for transfer of information, morphological or genetic, does not imply heredity.

This puts into question the taxonomical basis for common ancestry.

[Please ignore the trolls.

They will obfuscate by ignoring the point, repeating how "science works", regurgitating the Theory of Evolution for no reason, and copying and pasting irrelevant essays on the NON-inheritance mechanisms (like mimicry in natural selection) that may account for the examples above (just to give the impression that they are clued up and nobody else is). Meanwhile, their essay will not address the point of the thread. Please ignore them -- the usual suspects.]

I may be wrong, but I believe what you're asking is, how are phylogenetic trees constructed if genes can be transferred horizontally?
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 3:05pm On Dec 01, 2014
davien:
sinequanon can you provide the genetic variation between the two organisms?

Between the slug and the moth?

I am sure there is no database of slug or moth genomes, let alone slug vs moth.

And what were you looking for, exactly? A list of tens of millions of base pairs?
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by davien(m): 3:06pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


Between the slug and the moth?

I am sure their is no database of slug or moth genomes, let alone slug vs moth.

And what were you looking for, exactly? A list of tens of millions of base pairs?
We could atleast know if its just a molecular vestige with that..

Irrespective of that,the slug has a subcellular endosymbiotic relationship with the alga Codium fragile....
so how do you expect not to find plant genes on the slug when it has a subcellular symbiotic relationship with a plant?

Humans also have genes from different viruses....does that make a human a virus?

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 3:19pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:


I may be wrong, but I believe what you're asking is, how are phylogenetic trees constructed if genes can be transferred horizontally?

Nope. That question is not in the OP. Neither does a similar gene imply transfer of that gene.

The question is why are you ASSUMING gene transfer and heredity (a phylogenetic tree) from the actual observation, which is INFORMATION TRANSFER.

The actual observation is information transfer.

The ASSUMPTION in the vast majority of cases is HEREDITY, usually without any consideration of other mechanisms.

For example, the mass of evidence in the fossil record is simply ASSUMED to be cause by heredity.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by plaetton: 3:22pm On Dec 01, 2014
Dapo777:


By default he has won the argument already even before the argument starts,since he has asked the audience to ignore all the opponents' points

grin
In Basketball, they would call that a slam dunk, in baseball they would call it the perfect game, in soccer, I think they would call it the Maradonic dribble.
grin

3 Likes

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 3:22pm On Dec 01, 2014
davien:
We could atleast know if its just a molecular vestige with that..

Irrespective of that,the slug has a subcellular endosymbiotic relationship with the alga Codium fragile....
so how do you expect not to find plant genes on the slug when it has a subcellular symbiotic relationship with a plant?

Humans also have genes from different viruses....does that make a human a virus?

This is the sort of nonsense post I warned about in the OP.

Yes, we can all quote "subcellular endosymbiotic relationship with the alga Codium fragile" from wikipedia, well done.

The rest of your post is junk.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by davien(m): 3:30pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


This is the sort of nonsense post I warned about in the OP.

Yes, we can all quote "subcellular endosymbiotic relationship with the alga Codium fragile" from wikipedia, well done.

The rest of your post is junk.
Did I deny not quoting from wikipedia? The point is that you aren't interested in anything that contradicts your preconceptions....
If I begin explaining anything else it would be a non sequitor...

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Nobody: 3:40pm On Dec 01, 2014
davien:
Did I deny not quoting from wikipedia? The point is that you aren't interested in anything that contradicts your preconceptions....
If I begin explaining anything else it would be a non sequitor...

Lol

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 3:42pm On Dec 01, 2014
The OP is about the ASSUMPTION OF HEREDITY.

a) Any post that does not address this is junk.

b) Any post that addresses it merely using rhetorical questions is junk.

A valid post either:

i) refutes that HEREDITY is an independently unproven assumption in most cases (e.g fossil record).

ii) discusses WHY it is valid not to independently verify the assumption.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 3:58pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


Nope. That question is not in the OP. Neither does a similar gene imply transfer of that gene.

The question is why are you ASSUMING gene transfer and heredity (a phylogenetic tree) from the actual observation, which is INFORMATION TRANSFER.

The actual observation is information transfer.

The ASSUMPTION in the vast majority of cases is HEREDITY, usually without any consideration of other mechanisms.

For example, the mass of evidence in the fossil record is simply ASSUMED to be cause by heredity.

Wait a minute. You do know that the horizontal gene transfer is responsible for the algal dna found in the slug, right?

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 4:09pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:


Wait a minute. You do know that the horizontal gene transfer is responsible for the algal dna found in the slug, right?


From the OP

..irrelevant essays on the NON-inheritance mechanisms (like mimicry in natural selection) that may account for the examples above..

Now, can you answer the correct question.

[size=18pt]NOT[/size] "what other mechanisms are there, apart from heredity" -- the OP even gives examples, for you!

BUT -- [size=16pt]GIVEN THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER MECHANISMS, WHY IS HEREDITY ACCEPTED IN MOST CASES, WITHOUT PROOF.[/size]

e.g Similar morphology in fossils is usually explained by heredity, without considering other possibilities, even though there is no independent proof of heredity in that specific instance.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by davien(m): 4:10pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:


Wait a minute. You do know that the horizontal gene transfer is responsible for the algal dna found in the slug, right?

That doesn't count, horizontal gene transfer is an assumption...lol cheesy
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 4:21pm On Dec 01, 2014
davien:
That doesn't count, horizontal gene transfer is an assumption...lol cheesy

You are so locked into ToE defence mode, that you are totally clueless and incapable of following the OP. I even predicted your behaviour.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by davien(m): 4:32pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


You are so locked into ToE defence mode, that you are totally clueless and incapable of following the OP. I even predicted your behaviour.
You can check if I mentioned the theory of evolution so far...

Any point/evidence given to you will be met with a "why"....so you could shift the goal post virtually forever...

The ridiculous thing however is that the professionals who devise taxonomic hierarchies haven't come across the stumbling block you are proposing....which begs the question.....is taxonomy flawed by this point? or is it your basic understanding of it that is flawed?

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 4:34pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:
The OP is about the ASSUMPTION OF HEREDITY.

a) Any post that does not address this is junk.

b) Any post that addresses it merely using rhetorical questions is junk.

A valid post either:

i) refutes that HEREDITY is an independently unproven assumption in most cases (e.g fossil record).

ii) discusses WHY it is valid not to independently verify the assumption.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 4:43pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


From the OP



Now, can you answer the correct question.

[size=18pt]NOT[/size] "what other mechanisms are there, apart from heredity" -- the OP even gives examples, for you!

BUT -- [size=16pt]GIVEN THAT THERE ARE MANY OTHER MECHANISMS, WHY IS HEREDITY ACCEPTED IN MOST CASES, WITHOUT PROOF.[/size]

e.g Similar morphology in fossils is usually explained by heredity, without considering other possibilities, even though there is no independent proof of heredity in that specific instance.

Your slug shares an endosymbiotic relationship with a certain type of green algae. It says that right in the wiki link you provided. The slug ingests chloroplasts from the algae and keeps them alive inside its body.

Show me a similar phenomenon which was attributed to the hereditary transfer of information, and not horizontal gene transfer.

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 4:52pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:
Show me a similar phenomenon which was attributed to the hereditary transfer of information, and not horizontal gene transfer.

The OP is about TAXONOMY in general.

Answer the question in the OP and stop trying to change it into a subjective and meaningless squabble about whether one phenomenon is similar/similar enough to another.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 5:00pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


The OP is about TAXONOMY in general.

Answer the question in the OP and stop trying to change it into a subjective and meaningless squabble about whether one phenomenon is similar/similar enough to another.

You have a certain aggression about you. What's the point of opening a thread if you're going to behave like a spoiled child who has just conceded a goal?

What's the point of mentioning the slug in the OP, if I'm expected to completely ignore it?

2 Likes

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 5:12pm On Dec 01, 2014
I told you what I thought the OP was asking. You denied it, only to come repeating the same question.

How does phylogenetics address the issue of horizontal gene transfer? That's your question, and a pretty good one at that.
I suggest you read up on your material before posting. Some of these answers are readily available online.

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 5:12pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:


You have a certain aggression about you. What's the point of opening a thread if you're going to behave like a spoiled child who has just conceded a goal?

What's the point of mentioning the slug in the OP, if I'm expected to completely ignore it?

uh-oh, who is the spoiled child, here?

The point of the slug example is to demonstrate that there are mechanisms, other than heredity that can give rise to morphological or genetic similarities in different species.

If you wish to reference the example, all you have to do is relate it to the question OP, and not to some circular and irrelevant argument about whether another example is similar enough to be deemed the same phenomenon.
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 5:17pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:
I told you what I thought the OP was asking. You denied it, only to come repeating the same question.

How does phylogenetics address the issue of horizontal gene transfer? That's your question, and a pretty good one at that.
I suggest you read up on your material before posting. Some of these answers are readily available online.

"Readily available online" is not an answer.

You obviously have a comprehension problem, too.

"HOW do you justify an ASSUMPTION of HEREDITY" is a totally different question to "How does phylogenetics address the issue of horizontal gene transfer?"
Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by ooman3: 5:20pm On Dec 01, 2014
OP, am certain you dropped out of primary school.

What a shame.

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by Weah96: 5:55pm On Dec 01, 2014
sinequanon:


"Readily available online" is not an answer.

You obviously have a comprehension problem, too.

"HOW do you justify an ASSUMPTION of HEREDITY" is a totally different question to "How does phylogenetics address the issue of horizontal gene transfer?"

Just so we're clear, you're saying that there is no basis to assume a hereditary relationship between two organisms because genes can be transferred by non hereditary means.

If that is true, than DNA tests that determine paternity are flawed, since heredity can only be assumed.

1 Like

Re: Theory Of Evolution And Common Ancestry by sinequanon: 6:03pm On Dec 01, 2014
Weah96:


Just so we're clear, you're saying that there is no basis to assume a hereditary relationship between two organisms because genes can be transferred by non hereditary means.

Answer the question. Don't try to twist it into an assertion. That is troll behaviour.

How do you justify HEREDITY AS A DEFAULT ASSUMPTION without independent proof, when other mechanisms exist?

Weah96:
If that is true, than DNA tests that determine paternity are flawed, since heredity can only be assumed.

Stop twisting and using rhetoric. If you have a point, you can phrase it directly..

e.g DNA testing is perfect, therefore heredity can be relied on to confirm immediate parentage in a custody case, therefore fossils with similar morphology have a common ancestor.

When you word it directly, instead of using some half-baked rhetoric, we can see where you are going, and that it is rubbish.

(1) (2) (3) (Reply)

Radical Muslims Kill Over 100 Muslims At Mosques In Sanaa, ..what Else Is New? / Brain Or Spirit: What Makes A Man A Living Being? / Yes, I Believe In The Holy Coconut

(Go Up)

Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health
religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket

Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)

Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2021 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 350
Disclaimer: Every Nairaland member is solely responsible for anything that he/she posts or uploads on Nairaland.