- The evolution of irrigation in Egypt's Fayoum Oasis.
- Les enfants de lindicible peur. Nouveau regard sur lautisme (La psychanalyse prise au mot) (French Edition)!
- Finding Your Next Job in a Week: Teach Yourself Ebook Epub (TYW).
In , Durrett and Schmidt estimated in the journal Genetics that for a single mutation to occur in a nucleotide-binding site and be fixed in a primate lineage would require a waiting time of six million years. The same authors later estimated it would take million years for the binding site to acquire two mutations, if the first mutation was neutral in its effect.
THE WRECKARD PERCEPTION AND DOCUMENT PDF Original - Free E-Book Download
Facing Facts But six million years is the entire time allotted for the transition from our last common ancestor with chimps to us according to the standard evolutionary timescale. Two hundred and sixteen million years takes us back to the Triassic, when the very first mammals appeared. At most, a new binding site might affect the regulation of one or two genes. Why is it insulting to ask her to be held to the same standard when discussing science?
BA77 — most of the mutations that occur in humans are selectively neutral — this is why mutational load has not caused our extinction.
If nature is allowed to run her full course, without outside intervention, humans, as well as all other life on earth, is headed for extinction! The evidence for the detrimental nature of mutations in humans is overwhelming for scientists have already cited over , mutational disorders.
Recent versions of HGMD describe more than 75, different disease causing mutations identified to date in Homo-sapiens. Systems biology: Untangling the protein web — July Excerpt: Vidal thinks that technological improvements — especially in nanotechnology, to generate more data, and microscopy, to explore interaction inside cells, along with increased computer power — are required to push systems biology forward. But when it comes to figuring out the best way to explore information flow in cells, Tyers jokes that it is like comparing different degrees of infinity.
DNA codes for the building of proteins, but proteins must be arranged into distinctive circuitry to form distinctive cell types. Cell types have to be arranged into tissues. Tissues have to be arranged into organs. Organs and tissues must be specifically arranged to generate whole new Body-Plans, distinctive arrangements of those body parts. We now know that DNA alone is not responsible for those higher orders of organization.
DNA codes for proteins, but by itself it does not insure that proteins, cell types, tissues, organs, will all be arranged in the body. And what that means is that the Body-Plan morphogenesis, as it is called, depends upon information that is not encoded on DNA. Which means you can mutate DNA indefinitely. You are not, by mutating DNA alone, going to generate higher order structures that are necessary to building a body plan. So what we can conclude from that is that the neo-Darwinian mechanism is grossly inadequate to explain the origin of information necessary to build new genes and proteins, and it is also grossly inadequate to explain the origination of novel biological form.
It leaves out of the picture entirely the higher-level components — tissues, organs, the whole body plan that draws all the lower-level stuff together into a coherent, functioning form. What we should really be talking about is not a lone piano but a vast orchestra under the directing guidance of an unknown conductor fulfilling an artistic vision, organizing and transcending the music of the assembly of individual players. It also, in an instant, gives a peak at the phenomenal processes at work in biology. Nope, there is no evidence that the majority of mutations are slightly deleterious.
A point mutation to most intron and intergenic sequences will not have fitness effects. Well regardless of what you wish to be true for your preferred hypothesis of neo-Darwinism, the fact is that there is much evidence to support the position that the vast majority of mutations in coding AND in non-coding regions are slightly deleterious:.
Unexpectedly small effects of mutations in bacteria bring new perspectives — November Excerpt:,,, using extremely sensitive growth measurements, doctoral candidate Peter Lind showed that most mutations reduced the rate of growth of bacteria by only 0. No mutations completely disabled the function of the proteins, and very few had no impact at all.
Even more surprising was the fact that mutations that do not change the protein sequence had negative effects similar to those of mutations that led to substitution of amino acids. A possible explanation is that most mutations may have their negative effect by altering mRNA structure, not proteins, as is commonly assumed. By its very existence, a nucleotide position takes up space, affects spacing between other sites, and affects such things as regional nucleotide composition, DNA folding, and nucleosome building.
If a nucleotide carries absolutely no useful information, it is, by definition, slightly deleterious, as it slows cell replication and wastes energy. Shoddy Engineering or Intelligent Design?
- Empowerment zur Förderung der Selbstständigkeit und des Verantwortungsbewusstseins (German Edition);
- Money 911:Tested Strategies to Survive Your Financial Emergency!
- News-herald ( 05-26-12222 ).
- House Session;
This chromatin-based convex focusing lens is so well constructed that it still works when lattices of rod cells are made to be disordered. Normal cell nuclei actually scatter light. Arriving At Intelligence Through The Corridors Of Reason Part II — April Excerpt: ,,, since junk DNA would put an unnecessary energetic burden on cells during the process of replication, it stands to reason that it would more likely be eliminated through selective pressures.
Genic regions are transcribed on average in five different overlapping and interleaved ways, while UTRs are transcribed on average in seven different overlapping and interleaved ways. The data compression of some stretches of human DNA is estimated to be up to 12 codes thick 12 different ways of DNA transcription Trifonov, This is well beyond the complexity of any computer code ever written by man. John Sanford — Genetic Entropy.
Moreover, the DNA can easily unfold and refold during gene activation, gene repression, and cell replication. Moreover the complexity and fidelity of DNA replication is beyond human capacity, and almost beyond human comprehension in its complexity:. Bennett Van Houten — of note: A bacterium has about 40 team members on its pothole crew. That allows its entire genome to be scanned for errors in 20 minutes, the typical doubling time.
The answer is almost too ludicrous to express. For what it is worth, every typists would have to have an error rate of about one in a trillion; that is, he would have to be accurate enough to make only a single error in typing the Bible , times at a stretch.
A good secretary in real life has an error rate of about one per page. This is about a billion times the error rate of the histone H4 gene.
- The Decatur Herald from Decatur, Illinois · Page 1.
- Bonjour tout le monde !.
- Trading Full Circle: The Complete Underground Trader System For Timing and Profiting in All Financial Markets (Wiley Trading).
- Modern Hamster : October and November.
A line of real life secretaries without a correcting reference would degrade the text to 99 percent of its original by the 20th member of the line of 20 billion. By the 10, member of the line less than 1 percent would survive. The point near total degradation would be reached before Richard Dawkins — The blind watchmaker — Page Dysfunctioning mutation protection, however, is the origin of cancer and hereditary diseases, which reduce the capacity to live and to reproduce.tornado.burnsforce.com/la-gua-clnica-a-laboratorio-prueba-3e.php
Similar authors to follow
Our mutation protection perspective of the evolutionary dynamics of digital and nucleotide codes thus reveals the presence of a paradox in evolutionary theory between the necessity and the disadvantage of dysfunctioning mutation protection. This mutation protection paradox, which is closely related with the paradox between evolvability and mutational robustness, needs further investigation. The Darwinism contradiction of repair systems Excerpt: The bottom line is that repair mechanisms are incompatible with Darwinism in principle.
Since sophisticated repair mechanisms do exist in the cell after all, then the thing to discard in the dilemma to avoid the contradiction necessarily is the Darwinist dogma. Thus paulmc, you claim that most purely random mutations are not slightly deleterious yet we have several lines of very suggestive evidence indicating functionality for the entire genome and on top of that we have multiple layers of error correction preventing purely random mutations from ever happening in the first place.
This position that you are holding that a very large portion of mutations are not slightly deleterious, is not a realistic position for you to hold, nor is your position realistic that a large portion of the genome is junk. Also of interest is the information content that is derived in a cell when working from a thermodynamic perspective:. Lucky, Ex. Moleular Biophysics — Information theory. Relation between information and entropy: — Setlow-Pollard, Ed. Addison Wesley Excerpt: Linschitz gave the figure 9.
Thus two quite different approaches give rather concordant figures. Information and entropy — top-down or bottom-up development in living systems?
McINTOSH Excerpt: This paper highlights the distinctive and non-material nature of information and its relationship with matter, energy and natural forces. It is proposed in conclusion that it is the non-material information transcendent to the matter and energy that is actually itself constraining the local thermodynamics to be in ordered disequilibrium and with specified raised free energy levels necessary for the molecular and cellular machinery to operate. There is no known reason why the DNA is able to combine the way it does, and from a current theoretical standpoint this feat should be chemically impossible.
The existence of genetic diseases does not prove that all mutations are slightly deleterious. If you read what I wrote above, I am well aware that there are slightly deleterious mutations, and that inefficient selection does result in some accumulating and can result in species extinction. We know this because we exist. If there was an unbearable mutational load we would be extinct.
For the characteristics were not acquired evolutionarily, but existed from the very beginning due to the greater adaptability. In many species only the genetic functions necessary for coping with the corresponding environment have been preserved from this adaptability potential. Evolutionists Are Losing Ground Badly: Both Pattern and Process Contradict the Aging Theory — Cornelius Hunter Excerpt: Contradictory patterns in biology include the abrupt appearance of so many forms and the diversity explosions followed by a winnowing of diversity in the fossil record.
It looks more like the inverse of an evolutionary tree with bursts of new species which then die off over time. Creation Calls — are you listening? Begging the question. Perhaps you can clarify how a point mutation in a broken transposon affects fitness?