Renowned paleontologist Jack Horner has spent his career trying to reconstruct a dinosaur. He's found fossils with extraordinarily well-preserved blood vessels and soft tissues, but never intact DNA. So, in a new approach, he's taking living descendants of the dinosaur (chickens) and genetically engineering them to reactivate ancestral traits — including teeth, tails, and even hands — to make a "Chickenosaurus".
*Jack Horner: Building a dinosaur from a chicken* http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0QVXdEOiCw8&feature=related On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 2:14 PM, Axil Axil <[email protected]> wrote: > The trait or change must be permanent. In other words, the change must > not revert back or disappear once the stress is removed. If it does, it > will not be additive and hence can not result in a complex organ like an > eye. This will result in natural selection only for a few generations > and then that advantage dissappears and other individuals can compete again > which will result in a dilution of that trait in the general population. > > Not true. > > > > The genome not only contains future possible expressions of new species > but also retains past species that the organism has evolved from. > > See > > *Chickenosaurus Rex - Chicken Dinosaur* > > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2j9O82J2Zow > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 3, 2012 at 8:27 AM, Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> wrote: > >> ** >> Hello gang, >> >> In honor of my bet with Terry, this is my first post on the Fallacies of >> Darwinian Evolution. Before I continue, I would like to lay the ground >> work and define a few basic terms that we will be using in my series of >> posts. Hopefully, people read this post so that I do not have to redefine >> my terms repeatedly. I do hope Jed engages me in a Debate between >> Darwinian Evolution and Intelligent Design. Maybe I'll learn something. I >> hope that if you decide to engage in this discussion, that you would keep >> the exchange civil. I will not initiate an Ad hominem attack unless >> attacked first. Let's discuss your ideas and why you absolutely believe in >> Darwinian Evolution and I'll discuss my belief in Intelligent Design. But >> if you want to exchange insults, I can surely accomodate you. >> >> What is Darwinian Evolution? >> >> Darwinian Evolution is the theory of evolution espoused by Charles Darwin >> in his book "The Origin of Species". Later he wrote "The Descent of Man" >> specifically to address man's evolution from lower life forms. The basic >> Tenet of Darwinian Evolution is a random mutation process that results in >> "features" that allow an individual animal or plant life to survive a >> stress in its environment. When it survives, it passes down this "Trait" >> to its progeny thereby allowing its progeny to successfully live in this >> new stressful environment thereby passing this trait down to its progeny >> also. The trait enables the individual to survive hence the term "Survival >> of the Fittest", or "Natural Selection". Darwin then takes this idea of >> Natural Selection one step further and hypothesizes that this natural >> selection process is the means by which variouis species emerge. Hence >> species A mutates, survives, passes on its traits, then after several >> generations. becomes another species B - hence the term "The origin of >> Species". The nature or origin or mechanism of the mutation was unknown >> to Darwin. DNA was not discovered in his lifetime. >> >> Darwinian Evolution presupposes that the mutation or the change is small, >> and the mutation process in passed down only via the mechanism of natural >> selection. In other words, a new trait must not be so complex and the >> change so huge as to cause people to suspect that there might be some >> directed process, or an Intelligence causing the change; other than >> natural selection that would cause the change. In other words, Darwinian >> Evolution says that it is impossible to evolve a complex organ like a fully >> developed human eye in a single generation. The development of a complex >> organ must take place slowly, one minor change at a time, one minor change >> per generation. This also implies that the minor changes must be >> commulative, or additive. One small minor change within each generation >> that adds up generation after generation until it becomes an organ as >> complex as an eye. >> >> Darwinian Evolution implies the following: >> >> 1. The change must be small and minor and slow in an individual. The >> mutation results in a small change or small feature. If the change is big, >> there must be some other mechanism or directed Intelligence behind that >> change. Darwin recognized this and said so in his book. >> >> 2. The change or the new trait or feature must confer to that individual >> a survival advantage. Otherwise, that useful trait will simply die with >> that individual. A trait that may be useful but does not confer a survival >> advantage is a trait that does not result in natural selection hence >> Darwinian Evolution is NOT in operation here. >> >> 3. The trait must not cause any impairment or susceptibility to the >> individual. In other words, a trait that confer an increased survival >> advantage but also causes an increased susceptibility to some other >> stress will not result in natural selection. For example, a trait that >> results in an individual to survive a drought in food must not make that >> same individual be more susceptible to Cold weather. If it does, the >> chances of the trait being sucessfully passed down commulatively generation >> after generation is minimized and the survival of that individual will not >> be any better statistically compared to another individual without that >> mutated trait. >> >> 4. The trait or change must be permanent. In other words, the change >> must not revert back or disappear once the stress is removed. If it does, >> it will not be additive and hence can not result in a complex organ like an >> eye. This will result in natural selection only for a few generations and >> then that advantage dissappears and other individuals can compete again >> which will result in a dilution of that trait in the general population. >> >> 5. Each successive additive change must confer a survival advantage each >> and every step until a complex organ results. To illustrate, lets say it >> takes 5 steps to develop an eye. Change A, Change B, Change C, Change D >> and Change E results in a fully developed eye. (I am using only 5 steps to >> simplify the discussion. In reality, the steps required to develop a human >> eye requires billions of steps.) Change A must confer a survival >> advantage to the individual. An additive change B is added to change A >> that results in his children having a survival advantage also. Change C is >> added and must also confer a survival advantage to his grandchildren. >> Change D must also confer a survival advantage to his great grandchildren >> and change E results in a fully developed eye conferring a survival >> advantage also. Each additive change must confer a survival advantage for >> natural selection to work. If only one step in the chain does not confer a >> sruvival advantage, the entire series of changes previous to the change >> could be lost when that individual does not outperform the rest of the >> population. All the hard work and useful changes will simply be diluted in >> the population again. Natural selection is broken and a complex organ can >> not develop. >> >> 6. The evolution process occurs and operates over many generations. An >> evolution or mutation that occurs in one individual is NOT Darwinian >> Evolution, since no Natural selection is in operation. >> >> 7. The change or trait must not affect an individual's reproductive >> ability. If there is no reproduction, there is no natural selection, hence >> no Darwinian Evolution. >> >> 8. The change must have a random mechanism. If the cause of the change >> is not random, that evolution is NOT Darwinian Evolution by definition. >> >> 9. Natural Selection is the only mechanism that will differentiate one >> change from another change. In other words, within an individual we can >> not say a change is useful or not, until it enables that individual to have >> a survival advantage. Hence, natural selection operates between >> generations, not within a single generation. There is not natural >> selection process within a generation or within an individual. Natural >> selection can not be invoked within a generation to explain what mutation >> is useful and what is not useful. A process that operates within a >> generation is NOT natural selection. A process that does not confer a >> survival advantage is NOT natural selection. Survival is the criteria for >> natural selection. An individual has no mechanism wherein it can decide >> which change to retain or to not retain. The change is retained and acts >> only if the individual survives. I can not emphasize this enough. >> >> 10. The change must enable the individual to "outsurvive" other >> individuals in his group. It is not enough to merely allow the individual >> to survive, but it must cause that individual to "outsurvive" others. If >> it is not outsurviving other individuals, the change will merely get >> diluted in the gene pool and lost. >> >> >> In the next post, I will define the difference between Microevolution >> (aka Adaptation) and Macroevolution (aka Darwinian Evolution). >> >> >> Enjoy >> >> Jojo >> >> >> > >
