Evolution: the Facts.

[Dr Adequate]

The [swiki]Genetic Code[/swiki]

I'm sleepy, so I hope that's in English.

English it may have been, but it contained some real howlers. No-one noticed?

 

[The Atheist]

Can I write to Lizzie and nominate you for a knighthood?

Legendary stuff again. (sorry I can't help with the mRNA question)

 

[arthwollipot]

Agreed. I have a rocket scientist on my friends list on LiveJournal, but not a molecular biologist. Sorry I can't help.

Dr A, you are a gentleman and a scholar and your work is very much appreciated by those of us who have neither the technical knowledge nor the flair with words that you have.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Mmm ... praise ... nice.

I've put together a main page on [swiki]Genetics[/swiki]

As I point out, you should be able to read the thing as a textbook, if anyone wants to let me know how that works out ...

The one thing that's definitely missing that would go in any textbook on Genetics for Dummies is introns, which get passed over in a line or two. I'll come back to that.

For the facts about evolution, what's needed is to flesh out Part V. Who was it thought they might do an article on ERVs?

 

[Olowkow]

I've put together a main page on [swiki]Genetics[/swiki]
As I point out, you should be able to read the thing as a textbook, if anyone wants to let me know how that works out ...

This is very nicely done, extremely clear to a beginner like me. I find all the sections to be an easy and enjoyable read. Not too much, not too little information for us "dummies".

Thanks. Don't let it [praise] go to you head....

 

[Dr Adequate]

I finally got round to ading a piece on [swiki]splicing[/swiki] and introns and so forth.

I've not proof-read it carefully yet, 'cos it never works proof-reading things just after you've written them.

As always, any comments or criticisms are welcome.

 

[Walter Wayne]

I finally got round to ading a piece on [swiki]splicing[/swiki] and introns and so forth.

I've not proof-read it carefully yet, 'cos it never works proof-reading things just after you've written them.

As always, any comments or criticisms are welcome.

After reading that article I went to the [swiki]Selfish Genes[/swiki] article. At the bottom of that page in the Example: genes that cause extinction section I assume you meant Acraea encedon when you wrote Ancea encredon. If so, the most recent articles (2000) I found on a quick google search linked the population imbalance to a bacteria, like this article rather than a defective X chromosome.

Walt

 

[steenkh]

After reading that article I went to the [swiki]Selfish Genes[/swiki] article. At the bottom of that page in the Example: genes that cause extinction section I assume you meant Acraea encedon when you wrote Ancea encredon.

In the same article, I noted that in the last paragraph, "The proportion of males in Ancea encredon is not down to about 3%", the "not" should probably be a "now".

 

[Dr Adequate]

Thanks. I'm evidently misinformed or out of date.

 

[CurtC]

While petting my cat yesterday, I had a thought for a new rebuttal to the common creationist objection that they accept microevolution but not macroevolution. They often go on to say that a cat never gives birth to a cow or something similarly inane. They often bring up the evolution of new structures like the eye as why they think humans and monkeys don't have a common ancestor.

But my question back to them would be: what differences are there between humans and cats, or cows and monkeys, that could not be explained by the microevolution that they already accept? All the familiar mammals have the same parts, just slightly rearranged. There is no novel feature that would have to be evolved for any of them, simply resizing and tweaking the already existing parts of any of them would be enough to explain all the differences we see.

Has anyone tried this? It seems like it would completely deflate their argument on the spot.

 

[six7s]

I spot one minor yet significant flaw in your reasoning: it's reasonable

Woo floats around on hot air and refuses to be pinned down by cold hard facts grounded in reality

 

[jimbob]

CurtC, because there isn't enough time in six thousand years to get all these changes...

You might consider this as evidence that the Earth is older than that, but I refer you to Southwind's reasoning.

 

[arthwollipot]

It goes something like this:

Of course features of humans and worms are different. Anyone can see that. Random mutation can't create new features, otherwise we'd see worms growing legs all the time. We don't see this because evolution is a faith-based religion and bla bla bla.

 

[Dr Adequate]

[swiki]Beneficial Mutations[/swiki].

 

[steenkh]

[swiki]Beneficial Mutations[/swiki].

Thank you! This was just what I needed in a current debate.

Of course, I do not expect my creationist opponents to cave in and concede that they were wrong. In fact, I expect them to slink away, only to pop up in a few weeks with exactly the same claims as if nothing had happened. Perhaps supported by a list of scientists who think there is something wrong with evolution.

Oh well!

 

[Dr Adequate]

[swiki]Mutations and Information[/swiki]. Another smackdown of creationist nonsense.

---

Steenkh --- I'm glad the stuff on [swiki]Beneficial Mutations[/swiki] was helpful.

 

[Dr Adequate]

I've added a piece on [swiki]Creationists and Genetics[/swiki] to discuss the common vague claim that genetics proves them right in some way.

 

[sphenisc]

I've added a piece on [swiki]Creationists and Genetics[/swiki] to discuss the common vague claim that genetics proves them right in some way.

There seems to be a stray apostrophe at the start of "Without evolutionary theory..."

I'm sure I should be able to edit this myself, but I can't see any way to register - despite the information in help.

 

[bob_dezon]

I believe we all sprang forth fully formed, from a jar of peanut butter. I believe our creator was a peanut and made us in his image. For my proof I would suggest taking a look around you, there are plenty of nuts, and usually posting in anti evolution/creationist debates.

 

[Dr Adequate]

There seems to be a stray apostrophe at the start of "Without evolutionary theory..."

I'm sure I should be able to edit this myself, but I can't see any way to register - despite the information in help.

Thanks, fixed.

For those that wish to have a new account, please email skepticwiki AT gmail DOT com and include your first and last name, location, and your requested moniker for your account.