It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: Ksihkehe
a reply to: Blue_Jay33
Radiation does not cause evolution.
On to the next inane theory.
originally posted by: underwerks
a reply to: Blue_Jay33
Sounds like adaptation due to the environment, which is evolution.
DNA repair is a collection of processes by which a cell identifies and corrects damage to the DNA molecules that encode its genome. In human cells, both normal metabolic activities and environmental factors such as radiation can cause DNA damage, resulting in as many as 1 million individual molecular lesions per cell per day. Many of these lesions cause structural damage to the DNA molecule and can alter or eliminate the cell's ability to transcribe the gene that the affected DNA encodes. Other lesions induce potentially harmful mutations in the cell's genome, which affect the survival of its daughter cells after it undergoes mitosis. As a consequence, the DNA repair process is constantly active as it responds to damage in the DNA structure. When normal repair processes fail, and when cellular apoptosis does not occur, irreparable DNA damage may occur, including double-strand breaks and DNA crosslinkages (interstrand crosslinks or ICLs).
originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: Ksihkehe
I do not endorse the OP since I have not looked into it, but you misstate his post.
His post states that mutations are not causing evolution.
originally posted by: Blue_Jay33
I give you the animals of Chernobyl.
So in 1986 Cheynobyl had a cataclysmic radiation event, what followed was the death and mutations of animals in the region.
It seems 33 years later and despite large scale mutations the animal populations are stabilizing, even prospering.
So what happened, the badly effected just died, but those that got dosed just enough to mutate but not die did not pass there exact mutations onto the next generation, the damaged DNA was either too damaged to pass to the next generation as in they couldn't reproduce. Or in succeeding generations it self-corrected. So you might get bigger catfish but they are still catfish.
This was a long term mutation test in the wild that reminds us of the old fruit fly tests from last century, no matter what mutations have been unable to unlock the DNA/RNA codes to make major changes that stay permanent.
Mutations do not support evolution, and the animals of Chernobyl prove that.
It isn't the mutations that force anything it is the habitat which filters who prospers and who dies off.