Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!

Liste des GroupesRevenir à t origins 
Sujet : Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!
De : maycock (at) *nospam* gmail.com (Vincent Maycock)
Groupes : talk.origins
Date : 18. Mar 2024, 02:47:32
Autres entêtes
Organisation : University of Ediacara
Message-ID : <3r6fvid1pnklfsm092q46n6cihj29u6qu3@4ax.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
User-Agent : ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
On Sun, 17 Mar 2024 19:25:07 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

Ernest Major wrote:
On 16/03/2024 22:37, Ron Dean wrote:
Explain how if eyes evolved independently about 40 times, how is it
that the same master control gene exist in fruit flies, mice and
humans. The eye gene (Pax6 gene) was taken from a mouse and placed
into a fruit fly embryo and the mouse gene produced eyes in the fruit
fly, but not mouse eyes, but fruit fly eyes. . Furthermore, some of
the first complex organisms ie certain species of trilobites had
highly complex functioning eyes. Is there reason to think the same
Pax6 gene was not involved in the eyes of trilobites with vision?
 
One of the functions of DNA binding regulatory proteins is to "specify"
parts of the body. For example the Hox proteins divide the bilaterian
body into regions along the anterior/posterior axis. Some MADS box genes
in plants divide the developing flower along the proximal/distal access
into the floral whorls of calyx, corolla, androecium and gynoecium.
 
There is an obvious hypothesis for the role of Pax6 genes in
independently evolved eye development - that Pax6, among it's other
roles, specifies a forward facing region of the head, which is where
eyes usually developed, and has been pressed into service as a switch in
the early stages of eye development. One possible test for this
hypothesis is look at the control of eye development in organisms with
non-cephalic eyes - is the claim that Pax6 is a "master control gene"
for eye development across all Bilateria an overly hasty generalisation?
>
Ok, but the pax6 gene function is a function of eyes and part of the
brain. But the fact that a mouse gene function controlling or switching
on the downstream fly genes suggest it's the same gene. What seems
amazing is that this gene remains "fixed" or unchanged back into deep
time,100s of millions of years. I think deliberate and purposeful design
is a better explanation than random, unguided blind natural forces for
what is observed.

Why couldn't the apparatus for the formation of eyes and related
structures evolve once early on and then be inherited by distantly
related branches of the animal kingdom?

The most vexing problem I have with evolution is the dogma of a blind,
random, unguided process. I'm an engineer. In engineering we never see
this, there no chance that a complex program can undergo random changes
without dire consequence. There might possibly be on rare occasion where
an unguided change might have no effect. Engineering starts out with an
objective or goal,  so must evolution. If there's no goal, then what
distinguishes a beneficial mutation from a bad mutation. Survival one
might say? But no! offspring with bad mutations can do frequently
survive, protected by the mother. And they can have offspring; only the
worst die out.
>
The members that usually survival depends largely upon luck, surviving
to adulthood without being eaten by other beast while at rest or asleep
at night and living long enough to reproduce is real. The fittest is in
reality survival of the luckiest. In other cases massive numbers of eggs
are laid. Sea turtles for example, lay eggs by thousands and they hatch
and rush forwards into the sea, except for the large numbers that become
food for birds and other animals. Another consideration is the fact that
each cell has it's own DNA proofreading and repair systems, a defective
cell can repair itself or it is destroyed.
>
Another vexing issue for me is the will to survive. In the case of the
turtles, it's as if they _know_ they are in danger, and seek the
protection of the sea. How do the know. Instinct where did instinct come
from. Going back the first living cell. What was the impetuous of dead
inorganic chemicals to created a living cell. Did the first living cell
have the will to survive? Where did this will come from?
>
>
Having conceived of this issue, I identified a group of organisms with
non-cephalic eyes, i.e. Pectinidae (scallop), and asked a question of
the web. The reply was Wang et al, Scallop genome provides insights into
evolution of bilaterian karyotype and development, Nature Ecology and
Evolution 1: 0120 (2017), which reports that eye development in
Patinopecten yessoensis does not utilise Pax6, nor several other genes
involved in eye development in Homo.
 
I can accept that there are exceptions, but where commonality exist I
think this is valid. According to some sources the homo eye gene is the
same as the mouse eye gene. I can accept that there or other genes in
addition to the Pax6 gene involvement in the development of the homo eye.


Date Sujet#  Auteur
13 Mar 24 * Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!142Ron Dean
13 Mar 24 `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!141jillery
14 Mar 24  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!140Ron Dean
15 Mar 24   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!139jillery
17 Mar 24    `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!138Ron Dean
17 Mar 24     +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!22erik simpson
17 Mar 24     i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!21Dexter
18 Mar 24     i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!20Ron Dean
18 Mar 24     i  +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!6John Harshman
18 Mar 24     i  i+- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Kerr-Mudd, John
18 Mar 24     i  i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4Ron Dean
18 Mar 24     i  i +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Kerr-Mudd, John
18 Mar 24     i  i i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1J. J. Lodder
18 Mar 24     i  i `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1John Harshman
18 Mar 24     i  +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!8jillery
18 Mar 24     i  i+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!6erik simpson
18 Mar 24     i  ii+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4Bob Casanova
18 Mar 24     i  iii+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Athel Cornish-Bowden
19 Mar 24     i  iiii`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Bob Casanova
20 Mar 24     i  iii`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1JTEM
20 Mar 24     i  ii`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
18 Mar 24     i  i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
19 Mar 24     i  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!5Dexter
19 Mar 24     i   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4Ron Dean
20 Mar 24     i    `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3jillery
20 Mar 24     i     `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Ron Dean
21 Mar 24     i      `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
17 Mar 24     +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!28Ernest Major
18 Mar 24     i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!27Ron Dean
18 Mar 24     i +- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Vincent Maycock
18 Mar 24     i +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!10jillery
18 Mar 24     i i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!9Ron Dean
20 Mar 24     i i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!8jillery
20 Mar 24     i i  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!7Ron Dean
20 Mar 24     i i   +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Kerr-Mudd, John
21 Mar 24     i i   i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
21 Mar 24     i i   +- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
21 Mar 24     i i   +- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Mark Isaak
22 Mar 24     i i   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Burkhard
23 Mar 24     i i    `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
19 Mar 24     i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!15Mark Isaak
19 Mar 24     i  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!14Ron Dean
19 Mar 24     i   +- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ernest Major
20 Mar 24     i   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!12Mark Isaak
20 Mar 24     i    `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!11Ron Dean
21 Mar 24     i     +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4jillery
21 Mar 24     i     i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3Ron Dean
22 Mar 24     i     i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2jillery
22 Mar 24     i     i  `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1erik simpson
21 Mar 24     i     `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!6Mark Isaak
21 Mar 24     i      `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!5Ron Dean
22 Mar 24     i       +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Mark Isaak
23 Mar 24     i       i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
22 Mar 24     i       `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Burkhard
22 Mar 24     i        `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ernest Major
18 Mar 24     `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!87jillery
20 Mar 24      `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!86Ron Dean
21 Mar 24       `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!85jillery
21 Mar 24        `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!84Ron Dean
22 Mar 24         +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!5jillery
23 Mar 24         i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4Ron Dean
23 Mar 24         i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3jillery
25 Mar 24         i  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Ron Dean
25 Mar 24         i   `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
22 Mar 24         +- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Burkhard
22 Mar 24         +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!58Ernest Major
23 Mar 24         i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!57Ron Dean
23 Mar 24         i `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!56Mark Isaak
24 Mar 24         i  +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!53Ron Dean
24 Mar 24         i  i+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!39*Hemidactylus*
24 Mar 24         i  ii+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2DB Cates
24 Mar 24         i  iii`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
24 Mar 24         i  ii+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!10Athel Cornish-Bowden
24 Mar 24         i  iii`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!9Ron Dean
24 Mar 24         i  iii `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!8*Hemidactylus*
24 Mar 24         i  iii  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!7Ron Dean
24 Mar 24         i  iii   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!6*Hemidactylus*
24 Mar 24         i  iii    `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!5Ron Dean
24 Mar 24         i  iii     +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3*Hemidactylus*
25 Mar 24         i  iii     i`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2jillery
25 Mar 24         i  iii     i `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
25 Mar 24         i  iii     `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
25 Mar 24         i  ii`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!26Mark Isaak
25 Mar 24         i  ii `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!25Ron Dean
26 Mar 24         i  ii  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!24Mark Isaak
26 Mar 24         i  ii   +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3*Hemidactylus*
26 Mar 24         i  ii   i+- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
27 Mar 24         i  ii   i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
26 Mar 24         i  ii   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!20Ron Dean
28 Mar 24         i  ii    `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!19Mark Isaak
28 Mar 24         i  ii     +* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!11Athel Cornish-Bowden
28 Mar 24         i  ii     i+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3erik simpson
28 Mar 24         i  ii     ii+- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Martin Harran
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1jillery
28 Mar 24         i  ii     i+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!6Martin Harran
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii`* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!5Ron Dean
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!4Martin Harran
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!3Ron Dean
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii   `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2Martin Harran
29 Mar 24         i  ii     ii    `- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ernest Major
29 Mar 24         i  ii     i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Ron Dean
29 Mar 24         i  ii     `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!7Ron Dean
24 Mar 24         i  i+* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!12Burkhard
25 Mar 24         i  i`- Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!1Mark Isaak
24 Mar 24         i  `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!2*Hemidactylus*
23 Mar 24         `* Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!19Chris Thompson

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal