It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Evolution has yet to be describe to me in a way that sticks in my head. Can someone explain IN LAYMAN'S TERMS what I am about to ask. In evolution I would expect to find many samples of a species with gradual changes that has taken place over millions of years.
One year two of the moth mothers are affected by the cosmic rays from a solar flare and a random mutation occurs in each.
Very quickly then, the black moths dominate in the forest, the white ones on the ice, and the brown ones on the mud.
Originally posted by BASSPLYR
reply to post by Noinden
Hey I found the part about chimps almost never getting cancer fascinating. What do you think lead to humans being extremely prone to developing cancer? During our evolution what do you think happened that mutated our genome so that we develop cancer so easily? Do certain variances of the human genome get cancer in higher numbers than other humans?
How much of a factor do you feel mans exposure to chemicals in quantities it never would in the wild effects cancer if at all in humans. Do other animals that live side by side with humans develop cancer as easily as we seem to? We appear to get cancer more than any other animal on earth.
Just thought the mention of the chimps never getting cancer was really interesting and something I've never heard before. Thanks for teaching me something for today!
Is random mutation an acceptable theory within evolution? Or, sudden metamorphosis?
You make it sound like each moth CHOSE the safest environment. Is that possible?
*
Man has had an increase in cancer rates from industrialization onward, so yes chemicals and radiation are a factor.
Originally posted by Astyanax
reply to post by Noinden
I hope you won't mind if I pick a nit.
Man has had an increase in cancer rates from industrialization onward, so yes chemicals and radiation are a factor.
I would not necessarily come to this conclusion. The incidence of carcinogens and other dangerous substances in urban environments has been high since Roman times at least, and almost certainly earlier. Indeed, some mediaeval and early modern environments were probably more toxic than their equivalents today. People cooked in lead pots, ate mercury to cure their diseases and did all kinds of crazy things.
The low incidence of cancer in former times is more likely to do with the fact that cancer is mainly a disease of late maturity and old age, and until fairly recently most people did not live long enough to experience it.
This is not to dispute that epigenetic factors are important in the aetiology of cancers; but equally, one should not be too quick to explain away the apparent relative immunity of chimpanzees. Cancer is a scourge that most, if not all, many-celled animals and even plants suffer; perhaps the chimps have some special evolutionary secret.
Originally posted by Astyanax
Well done, jiggerj. These two questions of yours go right to the heart of the second most important problem people tend to have with the theory of evolution – how random changes, usually very small ones, can bring about such vast and apparently nonrandom results. The answer is that mutation is random but natural selection is not.
I think these apparently naive question threads of yours do wonders to further people's understanding of controversial scientific topics. And I choose to believe that is why you start them.
Huh? You make it sound like each moth CHOSE the safest environment. Is that possible?
Is random mutation an acceptable theory within evolution? Or, sudden metamorphosis?
We have a common ancestor with chimps who lived 6 million years ago. If you imagine holding the hand of your mother, who holds the hand of her mother, who holds the hand of her mother, and you go on and on to the common ancestor, the line would stretch a few hundred miles. And in its other hand the grand ancestor holds her daughter’s hand who holds her daughter’s hand, and you go forward to modern chimps. As you go back, every one of those mother-daughter relationships would include members of the same species. Source
Originally posted by DaesDaemar
Maybe slightly off topic, sorry if it is OP, but while we are talking in layman's terms, could someone explain to me what the Cambrian explosion is? My current understanding is that millions of species appeared 'overnight'.
Originally posted by BASSPLYR
reply to post by Noinden
So basically, the chimps get less cancer because their genome is more stable due to living in a rather static environment for the last thousands of generations. Where as humans moving from one type of environment to the other constantly changing locals etc lead to higher degrees of stress on our genome making it more prone to developing cancer?
Interesting.