Re: Can any old earther refute common genetic ancestry?

Steven J. wrote:
On Dec 7, 6:06 pm, Danwood <nore...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Greg Guarino wrote:
On Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:53:54 -0500, Danwood <nore...@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
It is most
similar between humans and chimpanzees, a bit less similar between
humans (or chimps) and gorillas, and still less similar between apes
and macaques. Again, this is just the pattern of similarities and
differences we would expect from common descent, but not at all
something we would expect from common design and separate creations.
And why not? If it works why not use it. Engineers very often utilize
the same basic design in different constructs and modify the design to
fit the application or meet different requirements. This is called
variations upon a common theme. Also this is called economy in design.
I don't think you understand the example well enough. Economy of
design would dictate leaving out the gene altogether, not merely
disabling it.
>
I responded to the above statement about similarities between humans and
chimps/gorillas. Y
>
Leaving non-functioning stuff in a design is the
OPPOSITE of economy. But OK, God is lazy, so he leaves the gene in and
disables it instead.
>
The human body contains some 20,000 - 25,000 genes which express for
75 trillion of cells organized into hundreds of kinds of cells and
places them in their proper place in the body. Cells which make up
such intricacies as liver, heart, kidney, eyes and the human brain with
100 billion neutrons and trillions
of connections. So virtually all gene are almost certain to be
pleiotropic meaning each gene expresses for a whole host of traits
and characteristics. The same gene for example expresses for eye color
and certain enzymes which are produced by the liver. the same gene
expresses for a nerve which controls the anal muscles just mention a
few: the list goes on and on. Genes also turn other genes off and on.
So, my point is even though some function of one gene might by
disabled it is indispensable in the whole scheme of thing.

There are some pseudogenes that are known to have functions, but the
GULO pseudogene is not, AFAIK, one of them. I would suppose that
pleiotropy is normally the result of a protein that serves multiple
roles in development or metabolism, but we know that the GULO
pseudogene doesn't produce the GULO enzyme, because, after all, humans
can get scurvy. Perhaps the pseudogene (and presumably the functional
version of the gene in other animals) does something, but you're
assuming that it does without evidence.
>
You're right, but I do know that some pseudo(genes) have function as
regulatory genes. I recall reading about taking a gene that did not
express for a protein from Drosphilia and transferring it into a
mouse. Even though it was an pseudogene and had no known function
it was discovered that it disrupted the expression of another gene.
>
But that's not all. Those disabled (now pseudo-) genes, are they
identical? No. So God didn't just disable the gene for producing
Vitamin C, he also CHANGED each NON-FUNCTIONING gene such that each
species has a slightly different (but still non-working) version.
Are we done yet? No. Are the pseudogenes for orangs, gorillas, chimps
and humans changed in random ways? Nope. God made some changes common
to all the great apes, then some that only gorillas, chimps and humans
share, then some that only chimps and humans share, then some unique
to humans, exactly as would have happened if a nonessential gene
accumulated mutations as species split off from one another. That's a
lot of unneeded effort, with only one purpose I can think of: to
create the ILLUSION of common descent.
Wait, there's more. God also created other animals who eat a lot of
fruit and thus don't need to manufacture Vitamin C, including guinea
pigs. He decides to disable their GULO gene as well. Doe he use the
same method he used for the primates? No. It's an entirely different
method.
See my statement above

Your statement above doesn't address the point made, which is that we
don't observe, in primates and guinea pigs, "the same basic design."
We observe differences in design, arrange in the nested hierarchy we
would expect if species acquired changes to the pseudogene at random,
over time, and passed them on to their descendants born after the
mutation was acquired. What plausible function is more similar
between humans and gorillas than between orangutans and gorillas, for
example -- because the GULO pseudogene does show that pattern of
similarities and differences.
>
I don't have an answer. I wish I had taken more biology, but I hated
labwork. I thought it was utterly disgusting. But I chose a profession
that was just as disgusting even more nasty to make my living.
But even so, since I finished college things in biology have advanced
so much that maybe I'm probably just as well off not having taking more biology. These Pseudogenes homeobox etc was totally unknown then.
>
>> How about an analogy?,

I design cars (not really, as will no doubt become obvious in this
discussion). In fact, I design all the cars for Nissonda Motors. We
are developing a line of hydrogen cars. We'll have several, including
a compact, a family sedan and an SUV.
>
> Our cars will no longer need catalytic converters, but I have decided
to leave them in. My design calls for a pipe to bypass the converters.
Out of perversity, or perhaps for job security, I have decided to
redesign the internal workings of the UNUSED catalytic converter
slightly for each car.
I'm really busy now. We've been so successful the directors of the
company have decided we need some new models. The compact and the
sedan will each now be available in a coupe as well. We'll also have a
pickup, based on the SUV design. Well, you know me; I just can't
resist tinkering with those converters.
I've decided not to design three new converters, though. For the
compact coupe, I've modified the compact 4-door's unit a bit. I've
tinkered a little with the mid-size's converter for it's coupe and
reshaped a few internal parts from the SUV's part for the pickup.
You've modified you converters etc to meet specific needs rather than
throw them out and start over. Good move.

He's specifically stated that the new cars don't need catalytic
converters. They burn hydrogen, not gasoline; there are no toxic
waste products to convert. Their function is not needed, so if one
threw them out, there would be no need to start over. You may object,
as you did above with the remarks on pleiotropy, that this analogy
does not correspond to how you think nature works, but in the analogy,
the catalytic converters are kept on even though they serve no purpose
whatsover.
Our hydrogen cars are selling like gangbusters now. So much so that
Forvrolet has decided to come out with their own line. They're keeping
the catalytic converters too (why mess with success?), but instead of
the bypass pipe, they're disabling theirs by ripping out most of the
internal parts.
Economy of design indeed.
>
Do this and a living organism dies. Rip out the gene controlling the
manufacture of vitamin C we become extinct because the isotropically
gene expressed bot just for vitamin C but also for other indispensable
organs or functions or who knows some brain neutrons.

There are at least four genes involved in the production of vitamin C,
but the GULO gene is not known to have any other function. Again,
whatever the pseudogene does, it isn't "expressed" in the sense that
functional genes are; if it were, we couldn't get scurvy.
DanWood

Greg Guarino

-- Steven J.


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Can any old earther refute common genetic ancestry?
    ... humans and gorillas, and still less similar between apes ... something we would expect from common design and separate creations. ... design would dictate leaving out the gene altogether, ... My design calls for a pipe to bypass the converters. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Can any old earther refute common genetic ancestry?
    ... humans and gorillas, and still less similar between apes ... Engineers very often utilize the same basic design in different constructs and modify the design to fit the application or meet different requirements. ... So virtually all gene are almost certain to be pleiotropic meaning each gene expresses for a whole host of traits ... resist tinkering with those converters. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Long distance running in some human populations recent
    ... which shows that a genetic mutation that boosts muscle endurance has spread ... There are two types of skeletal muscle fibers. ... protein at all due to mutations in both their copies of the gene ACTN3, ... humans, who migrated out of Africa into Europe and Asia beginning about ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Duplicate genes help humans dive deep distances
    ... A good illustration of the usual savanna biases: ... & sugar into cells" are interpreted as proving enducrance running... ... Humans have inactivated masticatory musculature as compared to ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Duplicate genes help humans dive deep distances
    ... A good illustration of the usual savanna biases: ... & sugar into cells" are interpreted as proving enducrance running... ... Humans have inactivated masticatory musculature as compared to ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)