Can't Believe in Human Evolution From Chimps, page 6
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 2 times


reply posted on 10-5-2007 @ 02:21 PM by Heronumber0
Raso I have checked out your link:

en.wikipedia.org...

Of the plausiible hypotheses for the self organisation of life there are several. However, please note that in hot primeval waters the catalysis of the breakdown of amino acids is facoured - not their synthesis.

In the Miller -Urey Model (Miller-Urey 1953). There are amino acids formed but are likely not to favour the build up of proteins spontaneously for the reasons mentioned above. Assitionally inhibitory ciompounds would have also formed to negate their experimental hypothesis.


Eigen's Hypothesis: Hypercycle Theory

RNA which has miraculously formed in the organic soup from nucleotides (which incorporate phosphates and sugars which are already pre-formed) produces an enzyme which catalyses other reactions and the final reaction product then catalyses the first reactions of an information system. Objections: RNA needs nucleotides, nucleotides need phosphates and there was a lack of phosphate at the time of the primeval soup. Also ligase enzymes would be needed to join nucleotides up and UV light can make RNA unstable.

In short unlikely events lead to likely events. Bot really plausible to my uneducated mind.

More to come when I think about some of the other hypotheses. Gunter Wachtershauser's is the best by far and evolutionists can rejoice with this theory for origins of metabolic cycles.


reply posted on 13-5-2007 @ 01:26 AM by kegs
Originally posted by Gorman91
It's Like This: Some Dumb pre-ape has a baby that happend to have a mutation of no hair. The other dumb pre-chimp had a baby that had hair.
The dumb hairless pre-chimp no longer can succed in it enviorment, it is clearly colder without fur, and realizes that the savana has more sun for heat rather then a forest, meanwhile, the dumb pre-chimp with hair is still warm, so it stays. The dumb pre-chimp with no hair has a kid with another pre-chimp. half their kids have hair, the others don't, and it splits. So blah blah blah blah (Inser technical stuff here) and after a few thousand generations, you get a hairless pre-chimp that happens to walk up all of the sudden from a mutation, it walks and goes forth. It's simple knolege that all creatures evolve to fit their nitch (niche?). The straight up hairless dumb pre-chimp is no longer a pre-chimp, it has changed slightly over thousands of generations to become a pre-man. Likewise, they split up into all the Homo (insert ghey second name like Erectus or Sapien) species. so on and so forth and then you get a dumb guy win PJs that fits its niche. There is my laymans turms of evolution

Seconfdly, they say that man and spe regrouped their species a while ago, before they were too far down the evo chart to not mate with each other (creatures can mate with mutant creatures until they evolve to the extent that they're sexual organisims don't match)

Got it, get it, go get it boy!




And there you have the theory of evolution as sponsored by the State of Kentucky.

[edit on 13-5-2007 by kegs]


reply posted on 18-5-2007 @ 03:54 PM by melatonin
Originally posted by Heronumber0
Secondly - I believe that there is ample objective truth to call Natural Selection the Law of Natural Selection. However, the mutations selected for in bacteria are in pre-existing genes. If you know better please post me a reply. All I can point to is constitutive (continuous) gene expression in the lac operon in bacteria after mutation when most metabolites are tightly regulated. Even in bacteria mutations are not always favourable.


I guess what you are stating here is that many mutations just alter already existing genes and slightly alter function (e.g. deletion mutation and frameshift in the nylon bug). Of course, that is not the only method of producing variation and new function.

Abstract
Annual Review of Genetics
Vol. 38: 615-643 (Volume publication date December 2004)
(doi:10.1146/annurev.genet.38.072902.092831)

First published online as a Review in Advance on June 26, 2004
DUPLICATION AND DIVERGENCE: The Evolution of New Genes and Old Ideas

John S. Taylor1 and ­ Jeroen Raes2­
1Department of Biology, University of Victoria, Victoria, British Columbia, V8W 3N5, Canada; email: taylorjs@uvic.ca

2Department of Plant Systems Biology, Flanders Interuniversity Institute for Biotechnology (VIB), Ghent University, B-9052 Gent, Belgium; email: jeroen.raes@psb.ugent.be

Over 35 years ago, Susumu Ohno stated that gene duplication was the single most important factor in evolution (97). He reiterated this point a few years later in proposing that without duplicated genes the creation of metazoans, vertebrates, and mammals from unicellular organisms would have been impossible. Such big leaps in evolution, he argued, required the creation of new gene loci with previously nonexistent functions (98). Bold statements such as these, combined with his proposal that at least one whole-genome duplication event facilitated the evolution of vertebrates, have made Ohno an icon in the literature on genome evolution. However, discussion on the occurrence and consequences of gene and genome duplication events has a much longer, and often neglected, history. Here we review literature dealing with the occurence and consequences of gene duplication, begining in 1911. We document conceptual and technological advances in gene duplication research from this early research in comparative cytology up to recent research on whole genomes, "transcriptomes," and "interactomes."


We have formerly seen that parts many times repeated are eminently liable to vary in number and structure; consequently it is quite probable that natural selection, during the long-continued course of modification, should have seized on a certain number of the primordially similar elements, many times repeated, and have adapted them to the most diverse purposes.
Charles Darwin, 1859 (23)

arjournals.annualreviews.org...




[edit on 18-5-2007 by melatonin]
Pages: <<  3    4    5    6    7    8    9  >>    ^^TOP^^



How Are Plants Aware of the World Around Them?
  Posted 1 days ago with 5 member flags
The Genesis Code
  Posted 8 days ago with 4 member flags
Explain Diversity Reloaded
  Posted 9 days ago with 3 member flags
Tree of Life and Tree of Knowledge
  Posted 3 days ago with 3 member flags
The carrot (chicken or egg , vegetable version)
  Posted 3 days ago with 3 member flags
A theory of proof of a God
  Posted 9 days ago with 2 member flags
Eden: The Double Sided Coin
  Posted 3 days ago with 2 member flags
We are all connected with nature and The Universe IMO
  Posted 3 days ago with 2 member flags