Evolution is a joke pt V

allele frequency...in population genetics, the fraction that a given allele represents out of all the alleles of a single gene (or chromosome type).

genetic drift...an evolutionary process in which the average genotype of a small population changes quickly....often in a non-selective direction....owing to random events.


Just a definition of terms...and I have no idea why I posted it.

It might be...just to keep the battle moving.

 

He or she's done... I can't see how I can show him/her the posts then the NEXT FLIPPIN POST he/she states that they never posted it...

Question - do you think Allelic drift and Allelic frequency are different?

http://www.suite101.com/content/genetic-drift-a124881

 

An allele is one alterative form of a gene. I do not see how it could "drift". It can be dominant, recessive,or co-dominant. If you have a chicken with black and white feathers...that is usually co-dominant. A person with blue eyes has two recessive genes. A brown eyed person can have both a blue gene (recessive) and a brown gene (expressed). Or a person with brown eyes can have two dominant brown eyed genes.

I would have to say that alleles don't drift. It is just a gene expression.

But genes can mutate...they do all the time...but DNA is very good at self-repair.

The study of biology without evolution makes no sense.

 

Allelic drift and genetic drift are synonyms. Allelic frequency is what is affected by allelic drift/genetic drift. Look it up.

 

Wow. You posted a link that says exactly what I've been saying, what a surprise

 

Would you not consider drifting is how it is related to how "frequent" it appears? By the means of "drift", wouldn't you equate that to frequency? As if it drift is the means of frequency? To me I equate them equally. Can you see why? Gene frequency and genetic drift are equivalent (in my opinion) since they both can be defined as how frequent a certain gene sequence appears within a population of life by replication or reproduction.

You know this whole thing about common ancestors... One of the problems I have within this, is how come all the genes from previous species all life has evolved from are not non-existent and not appearing to be dormant, thus appearing randomly within a population of life? From your own example - our previous ancestor had yellow eyes and red... Why is it completely null and void within our own population? Why can't we see this within life, if not our own, within other life on the planet?

Per what we have learned, every blue moon we should see a lizard with feathers, or something of that sort due to recessive genes...

Are you suggesting that drift is more or less than gene expressions being pass from one lifeform to another? I am not following this completely... Can you explain more. I think I am having problems with the "gene expression" part... Because I was under the assumption that drift was gene expressions that drift over a population after replication or reproduction.

I agree with the first, and not so much with the later. What happens in cultures without a large evolutionary influence like here - let's say India or Saudi Arabia where there is a huge religious contingent that basically "won't" allow hypocrisy (as they "might" put it) against their religious beliefs... I still think they have a wonderful understand of life and biology...

 

You've been arguing against me because it is your OPINION? Too bad we don't go by your opinions in science, huh?

And that isn't how genetic drift is defined. Genetic drift is a random occurrence that changes the frequency of allele frequency. This is in contrast to natural selection which is NOT a random occurrence.

 

DBM...you may want to google atavistic traits. These are genetic throwbacks.

hind legs in snakes
extra toes in horses
teeth in chickens...etc.

 

YES... I have heard of this. I was wondering though. Have you heard of this happening with only ONE of the offspring?

Recessive genes would suggest that this would occur and often. The randomness of somone looking exactly like a grandfather is about as random of someone being born looking like an (whatever it was we came from) at any given time.

 

I will always let you post retarded posts and point out the retardation within...

Because it's funny...

Why don't you explain what the "frequency" of "allele frequency" is? I can't wait for you response!

Grasping you make me laugh OFTEN!!!

 

I added an extra word. Wow, great job pointing that out. Why don't you even recognize that you were completely wrong?

 

I can't help it folks... I have to apologize that I can't help myself!

Okay then here is the sentence....

Now let's take that word out shall we! Yes we shall...

Please explain this that is what you said without your "added word"...

 

Explain what? That is the definition of genetic drift. Without the word "of", of course. Also, add in "of a population" to the end.

 

Which shows evolution on a micro level. I want to see fish growing feet and walking out of the ocean!

Seriously, its micro, almost all those crazy right wing whack-a-job Christians agree that animals adapt.

 

So over long periods of time, why cant mircoeveolution add up to macroevolution?

 

So, since your Mr. Professor, if it did not occur on an individual level where did it start? That is what I'd like to know!

 

I'm not saying it can't, I'm asking where it has been documented(observed and studied) . You seem to know a lot about this subject, any suggestions for research?

 

Birth of New Species Witnessed by Scientists

Scientists Witness Evolution in Action

You wont find many speciations that have been witnessed.

Distraff has an awesome post on whales:

http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/199380-evolution-joke-pt-v-12.html#post4254786

 

Just to let you know there is a group of the "believers" who sit in wait... I call them the Peanut Gallery since they have nothing of use on the subject to add except calling people Morons and Idiots when they FAIL to answer the questions on their beliefs.

How they still get to post after breaking rules hourly - I do not know.

But, good luck to you. You have just quoted a card carrying member of the Gallery of Peanuts. Be prepared for the onslaught!!

 

Different breed of the same species... A hound and a coon hound are not different species and neither is a different beak size in the same species.

Do you know the difference? I don't think you do or you wouldn't be posting such ridiculous links..

You didn't even READ this one...

Just another example of why you are in the Peanut Gallery...

That is ridiculous... It's a bunch of cartoons... No evidence of this - nothing doing... Also, keep reading from rs199 links everyone!

A recap for others... I love how the religious Darwinist make up cartoons and say that is evidence of evolution!

 

Obviously mutations start at the individual level, but mutations alone aren't evolution.

 

The united states is the joke of the educated world because of our handling of evolutionary theory in schools. It is the best attempt at truth we have. they even teach it at christian colleges. Anyone who could take a truley objective look at the theory and remove your religeon from your interpretation, and still say evolution is not a sound scientific theory either has brain damage or is not intelligent enough to understand the content of what they are looking at(which im sure many of you are not). The church has warped your patterns of thinking into shuting out anything that does not jive with the christian idea of truth. Science is not ''truth" its our best attempt at understanding truth. The bible as a work of literature is completly valid, but as text used to validate rejecting reason!? how can creationists enjoy modern life using so many personal items, modes of transportation, industrial practices and health practices ALL of which were derived using the same basic scientific method which produce the theory of evolution?? yet denying one of the core concepts of a MULTITUDE of scientific disciplines. The fact that it was derived from scientific method, and that a large number of other core theories came from this method, does not make it inherintly correct. But over 100 years of standing up to blistering scruteny and never once faltering does make it the best interpretation of our physical world.Claiming the data is flawed or skewed is not valid. Peer review removes this problem. Having oppisition to the theory which is not based on empirical data is a pathetic.

If you deny evolution how can you explain fossil fuels? Pre modern humans? Life that occured beyond the scope of the bible?

Galileo galilei ? subjected to massive persecution for challenging what the church held as truth. resistence is expected.

I truely challenge all of you who have the audacity ( or incompitence) to deny evolutionary theory to go to your local university and try and listen in on a few lecture with an open mind, placing aside what was indoctrinated into your mind, drilled into your thought.

 

Do you know how species are defined? Usually by their reproduction habits. So, yes, it is a different species.

Lol, oh shutup. You're right, they are just "cartoons", they aren't drawings of ACTUAL organisms. Some scientist just made them up and now every scientist agrees with these cartoons! That must be how science works, it's all a big "cartoon" conspiracy. Grow up, and learn how to think abstractly.

 

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwX3fx0Zg5o&feature=related"]Does evolution explain the rapid development of an organ as complex as the eye? - YouTube[/ame]

 

That being said, evolution was 'drilled' into my mind. That was the only thing taught at the 4 High Schools I attended. There was no creationism, no intelligent design, nothing else. I was indoctrinated into believing it. They pried our eyes open and made us watch/listen/learn!