1. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    13 Jan '15 09:02
    I'd like someone to talk about physical changes in a life form through DNA.
    Explain the details that would allow both a physical change to be built so
    that it would give rise to a new body part, and how would that new body
    part know to function correctly?

    For example why would a heart not only form, but know to beat? Why
    would any new part of a life form get not only its form, but also its
    function. Keep in mind that some where within DNA without direction all
    of the mutations need to build upon one another in such away that they
    will put everything where it is needed, and have them do what is
    required as well.

    What makes this new something in DNA possible?
  2. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    13 Jan '15 09:20
    Organs generally form bit by bit over time. They do not appear suddenly fully formed. They also frequently change function over time.

    The formation of organs is largely accidental. It does not 'know what is needed' ahead of time. In fact, the assumption that something is needed in the first place is somewhat flawed.

    Its a pity that the full version of this article is not free, but even the summary might give you an idea of how the heart evolved:

    This review provides an overview of the evolutionary path to the mammalian heart from the beginnings of life (about four billion years ago ) to the present. Essential tools for cellular homeostasis and for extracting and burning energy are still in use and essentially unchanged since the appearance of the eukaryotes. The primitive coelom, characteristic of early multicellular organisms ( approximately 800 million years ago), is lined by endoderm and is a passive receptacle for gas exchange, feeding, and sexual reproduction. The cells around this structure express genes homologous to NKX2.5/tinman, and gradual specialization of this "gastroderm" results in the appearance of mesoderm in the phylum Bilateria, which will produce the first primitive cardiac myocytes. Investment of the coelom by these mesodermal cells forms a "gastrovascular" structure. Further evolution of this structure in the bilaterian branches Ecdysoa (Drosophila) and Deuterostoma (amphioxus) culminate in a peristaltic tubular heart, without valves, without blood vessels or blood, but featuring a single layer of contracting mesoderm. The appearance of Chordata and subsequently the vertebrates is accompanied by a rapid structural diversification of this primitive linear heart: looping, unidirectional circulation, an enclosed vasculature, and the conduction system. A later innovation is the parallel circulation to the lungs, followed by the appearance of septa and the four-chambered heart in reptiles, birds, and mammals. With differentiation of the cardiac chambers, regional specialization of the proteins in the cardiac myocyte can be detected in the teleost fish and amphibians. In mammals, growth constraints are placed on the heart, presumably to accommodate the constraints of the body plan and the thoracic cavity, and adult cardiac myocytes lose the ability to re-enter the cell cycle on demand. Mammalian cardiac myocyte innervation betrays the ancient link between the heart, the gut, and reproduction: the vagus nerve controlling heart rate emanates from centers in the central nervous system regulating feeding and affective behavior.


    http://www.pubfacts.com/detail/16093481/Evolution-of-the-heart-from-bacteria-to-man.

    The important things to note are:
    1. Practically every stage of the evolution of the heart can be found and studied in existing living animals today.
    2. Features of the existing hearts betray the common ancestry, and the 'family tree' of their evolution.
    3. The mamalian heart evolved over hundreds of millions of years, and evolved bit by bit, not all at once.
    4. The evolution of the genes necessary for the mammalian heart can be traced in detail if necessary.
  3. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    13 Jan '15 09:37
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    ...how would that new body
    part know to function correctly?

    ?
    What is "correctly"

    Maybe 998 out of 1,000 new body parts don't function at all.
    1 out of 1,000 does nothing except hum "Abide With Me"
    1 out of 1,000 does something very, very slightly advantageous to the organism.

    Guess which adaptation gets passed down to the grand kids?
  4. Standard memberRJHinds
    The Near Genius
    Fort Gordon
    Joined
    24 Jan '11
    Moves
    12694
    14 Jan '15 07:22
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    Organs generally form bit by bit over time. They do not appear suddenly fully formed. They also frequently change function over time.

    The formation of organs is largely accidental. It does not 'know what is needed' ahead of time. In fact, the assumption that something is needed in the first place is somewhat flawed.

    Its a pity that the full version ...[text shortened]... e evolution of the genes necessary for the mammalian heart can be traced in detail if necessary.
    This evolution idea of a heart or any other organ is pure fantasy. These parts of the body are obviously designed for their purpose by an intelligent being more intelligent than human beings. You may enjoying repeating this fairy tale for grownup atheists if you like, but don't expect any intelligent person to actually believe such nonsense. 😏
  5. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Infidel
    Dunedin
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    14 Jan '15 09:02
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    These parts of the body are obviously designed for their purpose by an intelligent being more intelligent than human beings.
    If it is obvious then you can explain it.
  6. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    14 Jan '15 09:16
    Originally posted by RJHinds
    This evolution idea of a heart or any other organ is pure fantasy. These parts of the body are obviously designed for their purpose by an intelligent being more intelligent than human beings. You may enjoying repeating this fairy tale for grownup atheists if you like, but don't expect any intelligent person to actually believe such nonsense. 😏
    That is a fair point just because you get a heart why would it beat? Just
    because you get an eye why would it see? The form is just the form the
    function is quite another topic all together, the evolutionist seem to think
    that it just goes with the form an eye automatically means sight.
  7. Joined
    31 Aug '06
    Moves
    40565
    14 Jan '15 09:20
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    I'd like someone to talk about physical changes in a life form through DNA.
    Explain the details that would allow both a physical change to be built so
    that it would give rise to a new body part, and how would that new body
    part know to function correctly?

    For example why would a heart not only form, but know to beat? Why
    would any new part of a life ...[text shortened]... d, and have them do what is
    required as well.

    What makes this new something in DNA possible?
    It's been explained to you many times now. I guess the most important thing to remember is that there is no forethought involved in evolutionary development, so when those first few cells for what would evolve into a heart formed, they were either useful to the organism in some other way, or they got to piggy ride with other traits that made the organism in question successful. But they weren't "meant to be" the beginnings of a heart specifically. Every biological change is of this nature. There's no direction or end goal to evolution.

    Well, as a religious person you may think that it's a guided process, and personally I'm fine with that. Many scientists believe this to be the case. All I can say as an atheist is that guided evolution is indistinguishable from natural selection on random mutations.
  8. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14576
    14 Jan '15 09:241 edit
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    That is a fair point just because you get a heart why would it beat? Just
    because you get an eye why would it see? The form is just the form the
    function is quite another topic all together, the evolutionist seem to think
    that it just goes with the form an eye automatically means sight.
    The idiots seem to think that an eye or a heart just *poof* comes into existence without many, many prior steps.

    Are you really so dim to not understand that all body parts - large and small - have gradually developed from the simplest of structures?

    Can you not imagine the eye is the result of a simple molecule or cell that was a little bit more sensitive to light, giving the organism having that cell a slight advantage and thus giving its offspring a slight advantage?

    Why are you so desperate to cling to the idea that body parts must have come into existence wholly formed?

    Which messed up science books have you been reading??
  9. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    14 Jan '15 09:30
    Originally posted by C Hess
    It's been explained to you many times now. I guess the most important thing to remember is that there is no forethought involved in evolutionary development, so when those first few cells for what would evolve into a heart formed, they were either useful to the organism in some other way, or they got to piggy ride with other traits that made the organism in q ...[text shortened]... theist is that guided evolution is indistinguishable from natural selection on random mutations.
    No, nothing has answered what I've just started asking! You build a form,
    but getting the form to function is done how? Seriously, getting an eye does
    not mean sight automatically, yet with you it does, why? Getting the thing
    to form and getting it to act in some fashion are two completely different
    topics all together!

    You wish to just assume that a nerve will behave the way it is supposed
    to under the conditions it finds itself in, so why? The nerves in fingers are
    not the same ones going to my eyes for sight, so exactly when they were
    being formed and one went one way and the other acted in another fashion
    those are not just random choices, they served a purpose as do all the
    various functions within living systems. I get it if we are talking about
    design, there is nothing at all that would guide a random mutations to
    slowing turn an eye something that has sight, there is nothing that would
    allow a light sensitive spot to send or receive information making it both
    understood and useful, those are mutations with purpose or they are
    impossible given no fore thought or guiding hand. You really do need
    evolution eyes to believe that!
  10. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    14 Jan '15 09:37
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    The idiots seem to think that an eye or a heart just *poof* comes into existence without many, many prior steps.

    Are you really so dim to not understand that all body parts - large and small - have gradually developed from the simplest of structures?

    Can you not imagine the eye is the result of a simple molecule or cell that was a little bit mor ...[text shortened]... have come into existence wholly formed?

    Which messed up science books have you been reading??
    Thank you for the insult, but it isn't just the eye it is every function within
    every living system! Even the simple cell has various forms and functions
    within it, those were coded to form that way through DNA, coded means it
    didn't just happen it was molded as it was being reproduced. The changes
    happen in the code not while the body was under going some outside
    pressure or other stress. The only way these changes could ever happen
    would be in DNA, and they would either be good for the life form or bad
    and more happen that are bad or useless than good. On top of the rare
    exception of the good ones you'd have these good ones repeating over and
    over again producing systems, organs, and so on. It is laughable when
    you look at all the things that can go wrong inside DNA and the world the
    life form finds itself in that such complex building blocks of would occur
    over time.
  11. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14576
    14 Jan '15 09:38
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    No, nothing has answered what I've just started asking! You build a form,
    but getting the form to function is done how? Seriously, getting an eye does
    not mean sight automatically, yet with you it does, why? Getting the thing
    to form and getting it to act in some fashion are two completely different
    topics all together!

    You wish to just assume that a ...[text shortened]... sible given no fore thought or guiding hand. You really do need
    evolution eyes to believe that!
    One simple mutation in a plant, a mutation of one SINGLE nucleotide - a SNP, or Single Nucleotide Polymorphism - can cause a plant to become slightly more or wholly resistant to a certain virus, giving that particular plant a major boost in survival chances compared to its neighboring plants. These mutations can and do happen without "intelligent guidance", for instance under the influence of the sun's rays.

    There was no "goal" set for this mutation, yet it happening has a major influence on the plant, and possibly for the entire population simply because the plant and its offspring will have a higher chance of survival.

    Are you really saying this can not happen?
  12. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    14 Jan '15 09:40
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    One simple mutation in a plant, a mutation of one SINGLE nucleotide - a SNP, or Single Nucleotide Polymorphism - can cause a plant to become slightly more or wholly resistant to a certain virus, giving that particular plant a major boost in survival chances compared to its neighboring plants. These mutations can and do happen without "intelligent guid ...[text shortened]... s offspring will have a higher chance of survival.

    Are you really saying this can not happen?
    A plant is a fully functioning living system! The plant for all you know were
    designed to behave that way! I want to know from you why things behave
    the way they do! Give me that answer and I'll look at what you have to say
    about it.
  13. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14576
    14 Jan '15 09:43
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    Thank you for the insult, but it isn't just the eye it is every function within
    every living system! Even the simple cell has various forms and functions
    within it, those were coded to form that way through DNA, coded means it
    didn't just happen it was molded as it was being reproduced. The changes
    happen in the code not while the body was under going s ...[text shortened]... orld the
    life form finds itself in that such complex building blocks of would occur
    over time.
    You deserve the insult. Every bit of it.

    Read a "Science for dummies" book for crying out loud.

    On top of the rare exception of the good ones you'd have these good ones repeating over and over again

    You don't understand why "good" or "beneficial" mutations have a higher chance of remaining in a population than a "bad" mutation?

    In the case of the plant and the mutation giving higher virus resistance, you really don't understand why, after a significant number of generations, the "mutated" genome might be far more prevalent than the "wildtype" genome?

    This does not compute for you?
  14. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14576
    14 Jan '15 09:46
    Originally posted by KellyJay
    A plant is a fully functioning living system! The plant for all you know were
    designed to behave that way! I want to know from you why things behave
    the way they do! Give me that answer and I'll look at what you have to say
    about it.
    What have you done to find the answers yourself??

    Which science books have you read that discuss the development of cellular structures and more complex structures?

    Which lectures have you followed?

    I know you read the bible to tell you how to live your life, but how about you stop expecting be spoon fed everything, and actually do some leg work yourself?
  15. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    148425
    14 Jan '15 09:53
    Originally posted by Great King Rat
    You deserve the insult. Every bit of it.

    Read a "Science for dummies" book for crying out loud.

    [b]On top of the rare exception of the good ones you'd have these good ones repeating over and over again


    You don't understand why "good" or "beneficial" mutations have a higher chance of remaining in a population than a "bad" mutation?

    In t ...[text shortened]... genome might be far more prevalent than the "wildtype" genome?

    This does not compute for you?[/b]
    I'm sure you feel that way, after all I disagree with you.
Back to Top