Evolution Confirmed (Again); Single Celled Organism Evolves Into Multicellular , page 2


Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>
ATS Members have flagged this thread 9 times


reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 12:45 AM by edmc^2
Originally posted by Confusion42


An evolutionary transition that took several billion years to occur in nature has happened in a laboratory, and it needed just 60 days. Under artificial pressure to become larger, single-celled yeast became multicellular creatures. That crucial step is responsible for life’s progression beyond algae and bacteria, and while the latest work doesn’t duplicate prehistoric transitions, it could help reveal the principles guiding them.

Multicellular Life Evolves in Laboratory

So, what does everybody think? Doesn't this simply confirm what most of us have known?

IMO It seems like science is progressing exponentially fast.... And confirming Evolution along the way...


Confusion42 - I say you're getting yourself confused here.

Like most had suspected already this is not evolution. What you've just observed is a natural process.

Notice:

“What we’re doing right here, engineering via artificial selection, is something we’ve done for centuries with animals and agriculture.”


Nothing new.

Besides they started with a yeast then ended up with what --- tada - a yeast.

In fact they admitted that:

true multicellularity remained elusive.


SO how is this proof of evolution again?

Fact is - what they did is prove the basic rule / principle of creation - that is:

Life can only arise from pre-existing life.


back to the drawing board.


reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 01:10 AM by Confusion42
reply to post by edmc^2



It also says,

“Multicellularity is the ultimate in cooperation,” said Travisano, who wants to understand how cooperation emerges in selfishly competing organisms. “Multiple cells make make up an individual that cooperates for the benefit of the whole. Sometimes cells give up their ability to reproduce for the benefit of close kin.”

If yeast can go from single celled to multicellularity, and than cooperate for the benefit of the whole BETTER THAN WE HUMANS CAN, in 60 days, it proves evolution true on a number of fronts...

The evolution part

This also brings a death blow to the morality argument used by religion folks...



reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 05:48 AM by xxsomexpersonxx
Originally posted by edmc^2

“What we’re doing right here, engineering via artificial selection, is something we’ve done for centuries with animals and agriculture.”


Nothing new.


Yes, evolution and natural selection(Which encompasses artificial selection and sexual selection), is nothing new. Been happening for a very long time.


Originally posted by edmc^2
In fact they admitted that:

true multicellularity remained elusive.


SO how is this proof of evolution again?


I'll say this straight up, without regards to if it'll sound rude.

You are a liar, and a very poor one at that. You're attempting to quote mine from an article we all have right here to read. It's painfully dishonest.

If you would have posted the full sentence, it was that a few other flawed experiments on the topic, failed to cause the multicellularity. It remained elusive until now. This experiment did cause true multicellularity.

Each strain had evolved to be truly multicellular, displaying all the tendencies associated with “higher” forms of life: a division of labor between specialized cells, juvenile and adult life stages, and multicellular offspring.


Before I read the article, you had me actually believing that there was something about these cells that weren't truly multicellular. It's absolutely disrespectful to use lies to decide what people will see as truth. I want to see the truth, to see the truth. I don't want to be lied to, and no one else here does either.,

Originally posted by edmc^2

SO how is this proof of evolution again?

Fact is - what they did is prove the basic rule / principle of creation - that is:

Life can only arise from pre-existing life.



I believe you're holding a fundamental misunderstanding here. "Life can only arise from pre-existing life." means nothing as far as evolution goes. This experiment, and topic, has nothing to do with life coming from inorganic matter.

Try an Abiogenesis topic for trying to make a claim, otherwise it's completely irrelevant.

~
As far as the topic. People get overly worked up over the word "artificial". Anything that can happen in a lab, can happen in nature. It's just a matter of likelihood.

And all that was artificial was the pressure to grow. Which is a pressure that occurs in nature as well.

The things this proves, is that the mutations that cause growth and multicellularity , can happen on their own, easily. That's the point of the experiment. It could of easily happened in nature as well. It did happen easily in nature as well.

We already knew that it happened already in nature. This is just another, of many, piece of conformitory evidence.
edit on 19-1-2012 by xxsomexpersonxx because: (no reason given)



reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 06:00 AM by strafgod
Reply to post by Confusion42


"i am the Original Poster. The Original Post does not mention God. The title does not mention God"

Thats why I asked the question you replied to. I see the discussion of god as off topic to your OP.



Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com



reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 02:07 PM by Xcalibur254
reply to post by Viking9019



Once again what this shows is that the evolution from unicellular to multicellular is possible. Creationists for some reason believe that there is some magical barrier that prevents such things as this and speciation from occurring. However, now we have observed both in the lab. Of course now the hardcore Creationists are once again moving the goal posts because they don't like what the science actually shows.


reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 02:27 PM by nixie_nox
reply to post by randomname



We create artificial diamonds in a lab but its still a diamond and has all the same properties.

Doesn't say much for a creator if we can recreate evolution in a lab.


reply posted on 19-1-2012 @ 02:31 PM by analalienprobe
reply to post by randomname


It was under lab conditions so yes they applied artificial external pressure but the universe is a hostile environment constantly exerting external pressure on everything.evolution.
Evolution is scientific fact alive or dead matter i.e energy is evolves in to more complex forms it's the nature of the universe in which we live.
I don't think belief in god / Religion has anything to do with how life originated it's about the psychology of the people who believe and how it is then used to shape and control them within a social framework.
Basically exploiting a weakness to further the goals of specific groups through compliance.
And it's only basis is belief , completely unprovable and solely based on uneducated interpretation and fear.
A thread on Religion as a Social Control
It's a shame society has yet to move beyond religion.
Pages: <<  1    2    3    4    5  >>    ^^TOP^^



Bill Nye: Creationism is not appropriate for children.
  Posted 15 days ago with 20 member flags
Satan hid the fossils to trick everyone!
  Posted 18 days ago with 11 member flags
Just ONE question on evolution
  Posted 15 days ago with 5 member flags
M U T A T I O N - Friend or Foe of Evolution?
  Posted 8 days ago with 5 member flags
When a Child is Born...the Evolution begins
  Posted 5 days ago with 5 member flags
Denisovans
  Posted 15 days ago with 3 member flags
Are Humans the result of Hybridization?
  Posted 14 days ago with 3 member flags