Devolution Redux

[Michael_Okoko]

@colewd

@Rumraket

What is the essence of a “new function at the sequence level”?

A broad definition would be changes from SNP’s in a DNA sequence that generates a new function. This could be from a gene duplication, a NC sequence. or a modification of an existing gene.

Nice Bill!

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Rumraket

I have to say I get the experience that as I try to ask for more clarification, I end up with less of an understanding of what principles you use to classify functions as gained vs lost or modified. It is still not obvious to me at what level of resolution I am supposed to be looking at the “outputs”.

I got it.

Functions have many levels. If I lose the function of my right arm thousands of sub functions involved in operating that arm are lost. This is what’s interesting about Mike Behe’s method of detecting design. It can be used at any level of function from the overall organism to the specific cellular function.

[Rumraket (Mikkel R.)]

@colewd

I got it.

Functions have many levels. If I lose the function of my right arm thousands of sub functions involved in operating that arm are lost. This is what’s interesting about Mike Behe’s method of detecting design. It can be used at any level of function from the overall organism to the specific cellular function.

Well I think that actually renders his argument quite problematic because then we end up exactly in the situation where different levels of observation can produce conflicting results.

Now a genetic “loss” of function can result in a gain of function at the phenotypic level. A mutation that renders a regulatory element incapable of binding where it did previously, can have the effect of altering some morphological structure, like a limb, so it allows an organism to swim and adapt to life in water or whatever. Then whales can “devolve” from terrestrial mammals and things to that effect.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@Rumraket

Now a genetic “loss” of function can result in a gain of function at the phenotypic level. A mutation that renders a regulatory element incapable of binding where it did previously, can have the effect of altering some morphological structure, like a limb, so it allows an organism to swim and adapt to life in water or whatever. Then whales can “devolve” from terrestrial mammals and things to that effect.

This is an interesting point.

Would the case you made require other new functions in addition to what is lost? How many morphological changes are required to make this transition?

If the argument is this is a unique new design than it fits Behe’s method. The whale contains a purposefully arranged set of parts in order to live in an aquatic environment.