This is only relevant to your case if they are random.
I have zero expectation that random change to DNA can create a novel morphological feature.
1 Like
Is this testable? Anyone?? Or would this just be speculation?
1 Like
Just look at the complexity of the biochemistry.
How other then planned changes are you going to generate the splicing codes to build a human cerebellum.
Can you point to a single DNA difference between species that random mutations could not produce? That might help us narrow in on what you are thinking.
Judging by previous posts, you have zero expectation that any change to DNA sequence will cause a change in morphology, no matter how that DNA change came about.
Through random changes that are then filtered through natural selection. In this way the detrimental mutations are filtered out, the beneficial mutations are kept, and the neutral mutations are fixed by chance.
This is a burden shift.
It is your claim that random mutation is responsible for the morphologic changes that explain the diversity of life.
Can you show that a single morphological change was the result or random change.
a circulation system
a central nervous system
the eye
the skeletal muscular system
the placenta
echolocation in bats and aquatic mammals
If the change is planned and guided I agree a morphological change corresponding to that genetic change is possible.
And why would this process generate an organ as complex as a cerebellum?
I can show that the DNA differences between species is consistent with the known mechanisms of mutation.
Testing Common Ancestry: Itâs All About the Mutations
I donât understand what you are trying to say here.
What if a random mutation caused that same DNA sequence change. Are you saying that it wonât cause a morphological change?
You are exaggerating IDâs contributions to science and the advance of human reasoning, thought and technology. What do you mean that ID identified the only known mechanism that can create a functional sequence of any length reliably? The only organism with conscious intelligence are member of the genus Homo and probably emerged in the brains of H. Erectus 1 to 2 millions of years ago.
Because those changes were beneficial.
Why would you expect it would?
Look at the evolution of the cerebellum, it goes back tens of millions of years in primates and mammals.
I got it but this is your attachment to materialism. Inductive reasoning is telling us we are not the only conscious intelligence. This is not a trivial hypothesis.
Because the mechanisms that make RNA and proteins could care less if a DNA change is âplannedâ or random with respect to fitness. All they do is react to the DNA sequence that is there no matter how it got there.
Letâs use something really simple. Letâs start with this sequence:
AATGTACCGTATTAAGGGC
I make a planned mutation at the first base and it causes a morphological change:
TATGTACCGTATTAAGGGC
In another population, a random mutation makes the same DNA change:
TATGTACCGTATTAAGGGC
What do you think the result of that random mutation will be? Will it cause the same morphological change as the âplannedâ mutation?
My expectation is that random mutation will break down a sequence to non function given time. I can demonstrate this by randomly mutating this sequence.
Me thinks it is like a weasel.
What about negative selection of deleterious mutations? Wouldnât this prevent deleterious mutations from building up?
How many nucleotides to you think it takes for a morphological change like an eye?
Of course they can but what the cant do is change general direction of the degradation. What we are observation is that purifying selection contains the degradation.
This functional information problem is real. We know how to lose it biologically we donât know how to sustainably gain it.
DNA is a sequence and as far as I can tell it is the largest mathematical space in the universe. The human version has 4^3.2 billion ways to arrange it and a extremely limited arrangement can generate a human.
For the simple ability to sense light? Probably very few. Any subsequent mutations that improve the ability to sense light and the direction it is coming from would be selected for after that point if they improve fitness.
Why not?
A species of japanese flower has a genome 50 times larger than the human genome, and the lungfish has a genome 40 times larger than ours.
Also, I would love to see your calculations for the total number of base combinations that could produce a human. Donât forget to use different codon tables for amino acids since those are an option at that point.