darkstarangel said:
Mutated genes wont survive because 1. benefical mutations as mentioned above are rarer than disadvantageous or fatal mutations.
While it's true that they are rarer (simply because of their random nature), that doesn't mean they don't survive. On the contrary. A mutated gene might be the edge over othe other members of its species an animal needs to procreate. In time, this trait might even become one of the main marks of its species' local population.
2 theyre recessive, being drowned out by the healthier counterpart
Recessive doesn't mean they're "drowned out". The chances to transmit it are actually the same as for a dominant allele. It just means that the allel isn't expressed if a dominat allele is present as well. This is why dark-haired people can have blonde children if they had blonde grandparents or similar.
3. Polymerase 3 enzyme is a protein in all living organisms from the simplest of bacteria to humans. This is the genomes fail safe against mutations. If a nucleotide base is missing or where it shouldnt be this protein will correct the copying mistake.
True, but as all biological systems, it's prone to errors. And some mutations are resistant to repair.
Think of cancer. It's based on genetic changes as well but the body can't repair the damage.
I really like this as an example because it shows the ability of adaption in nature very well. Cancer isn't static, it changes over time.
Apply medication (i.e. pressure) and the cancer will retreat, be killed off. But some cells often survive (unfortunately) because of some random mutation. So the cancer comes back, this time with a resistance to the medication used beforehand.
These conditions are due to one single base change.
So? You basically just said it yourself: Some mutations are advantageous.
I don't see the problem. There are helpful and destructive ones.
If hypothetically a new gene 'mutated' it would need a copy or pseudogene to tell the cell to translate the new gene into a protein. Or is an existing protein mutated into another type, its pseudogene copy would need to mutate the same sequence (what are the chance???)
I guess you're talking about epigenetics. You don't require another DNA-copy, though, what you need is an RNA-copy which is created whenever a proteine is to be produced. Yes, epigenetics control which proteines are produced in which cell but it's on a different level than the actual amino-acid code.
Even if what you said about pseudogenes was true, the chances might be slim but that wouldn't matter if you apply enough time.
Why do we have everything we need to survive?
Because otherwise our non-human ancestors wouldn't have survived to this day and wouldn't have had the chance to adapt and change into us.
And we are far from perfect, mind, loads of vestigials and weak points in our body. But they haven't been hampering our procreation so they didn't die off.
How could we have survived before it evolved? eg. breathing, digesting, defaecating, reproducing etc.
Well, some small organisms survive by diffusion (they don't breathe with lungs or take in food through a mouth) through their cell membranes.
However, you'd first have to accept the possibility that we evolved from bacteria to consider the evidence.
Let's just say: While your body may take in food, munch it and digest it, the actual absorbtion of food still works the same way it did with bacteria: Diffusion, sometimes carrier proteines.
As for cellular breathing, we even have bacteria to do the job for us! Mitochondria!
Why are all enzymes of digestion in our digestive systems?
Because our digestive enzymes are quite aggressive. They do not differentiate between our body or food. We can see this with pancreatitis: Dying cells release the enzymes in the wrong place and the pancreas basically digests itself. Obviously, it's an evolutionary advantage to keep our digestive tract and the rest of our body separated. And not only because of the enzymes but also because of bacteria in our food and so on.
Why are our bones not only designed to lock in place but are of a shape to accomedate muscles, nerves, arteries & veins?
Again, you'd have to start earlier in evolution for this, because bone structures have been a part of land-dwelling animals for a long, long time.
Anyway, let me just say that even this isn't perfect at all. Impingement syndrome, discus prolaps, degenerative arthritis and so on...
Why do birds have all the features neccessary for flight eg. Feathers, sternum, tail feathers, hollow bones & preening gland (for lubricating feathers)?
Ask the dinosaurs, they started the whole feather tomfoolery. I'd assume it started off as a way to protect from cold and changed its uses over time (as body parts often do).
Why are a snakes venom glands around the fangs & not ontop of its head or tail end or on its butt?
Because any snake with its glands on its butt couldn't poison its prey and die of starvation?
Random chance mutations (the supposed driving force for evolution) cannot give one creature all the features it needs gradually over millions of years for survival let alone put them in the right place & especially if they cannot survive before those features are complete.
See, this is the problem right here. It's
gradual change. It's not some giant leap in mutation like X-Men suggests. You start off with a functioning animal and introduce/remove aspects through random mutation. These mutations may or may not be advantageous, nature selects.
Those that live get to procreate and keep their mutation intact (either because it was advantageous or didn't matter either way) while the others die off over time (again, it takes thousands of generations).
If we mutated from an ape how is it that as the apes foot with prehensile toe mutates to a human foot that the other foot conveniently mutates exactly to a human foot? Why not one foot then one hoof, claw or fin.
This is actually part of nature. When looking at the various embryos of different species, you not only see our close relation to them (human babies look like fish for quite a while) but also the way they grow: They start off as a single cell, then a ball. The ball becomes hollow and stretches into a long line. The various extremeties or then grown, split and moved to the lateral sides, if I remember correctly. Symmetry has always been a big part of nature because it
works in the animals' favour and is simpler than the alternative.
The key to random chance mutations is theyre random. Unlike a design evolution is unintentional, an accident.
But add selective pressure to random mutation and suddenly you get evolution. In its basic form, the concept of evolution is actually very simple and logical.
Look at all the machines in the world today. Look at your car (if you have one) is its mechanics & performance due to intelligent design or merely a colossal 'lucky' accident?
Well, some inventions were accidents, but that's not the point.
A machine can't change over time because it's static. It can only rust and break down.
It can't reproduce.
But mutation and reproduction are essential for any kind of evolution.
