• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Evolution Of Tuskless Elephants?

nPeace

Veteran Member
I don't know why you're alerting me.
Sorry.
Why are the loss of eyes and wings not due to natural selection...
No Wings

No Eyes
eyeless.gif

fruitfly.jpg
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I don't know that they aren't due to that.
Such things happen in caves, eg, loss of eyes.
The researcher tell us these are all mutations. They are mutant flies being studied in laboratories. The eyes are not just there and useless. They are none - completely gone, like the wings.
 

Revoltingest

Pragmatic Libertarian
Premium Member
The researcher tell us these are all mutations. They are mutant flies being studied in laboratories. The eyes are not just there and useless. They are none - completely gone, like the wings.
I'm not familiar with these critters.
But I acknowledge that mutations do occur.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Sorry.
Why are the loss of eyes and wings not due to natural selection...
Because these are actual mutations, not sexual variation. Nature did not select and propagate these features. In the wild they'd be eliminated immediately.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Because these are actual mutations, not sexual variation. Nature did not select and propagate these features. In the wild they'd be eliminated immediately.
Do you mean a combination of variation and reproduction?
So basically reproduction is all we need. Just mixing genes, and we get more variation.

So you are saying that the mutant fly would not survive in the wild. Why do you believe tusk-less elements would?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Do you mean a combination of variation and reproduction?
So basically reproduction is all we need. Just mixing genes, and we get more variation.
I mean reproduction of offspring different from the parents creates variation in a population, enabling faster adaptation to changing conditions than an invariant population.
Most variation is the result of gene mixing during reproduction, not embryonic mutations.
I'm one of four children. All of us were different. None of us were mutants.
So you are saying that the mutant fly would not survive in the wild. Why do you believe tusk-less elements would?
Haven't you been reading these posts and links? There have always been tuskless elephants. It's not a new thing. All that's happening is an increase in their percentage in the population, due to the tusked ones being culled by ivory hunters.

It's just like farmers breeding chickens or dogs. Breed the ones with features you want and eliminate the others. Over generations the selected features will increase in the population. That's how we got mastiffs and chihuahuas from wolves. That's what we're doing to the elephants.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
I mean reproduction of offspring different from the parents creates variation in a population, enabling faster adaptation to changing conditions than an invariant population.
Most variation is the result of gene mixing during reproduction, not embryonic mutations.
I'm one of four children. All of us were different. None of us were mutants.
Thank God you and your family are not mutants.

Haven't you been reading these posts and links? There have always been tuskless elephants. It's not a new thing. All that's happening is an increase in their percentage in the population, due to the tusked ones being culled by ivory hunters.

It's just like farmers breeding chickens or dogs. Breed the ones with features you want and eliminate the others. Over generations the selected features will increase in the population. That's how we got mastiffs and chihuahuas from wolves. That's what we're doing to the elephants.
...and the flies.
This is my point.
Okay, so tell me, what is the difference between the flies and the elephants. Both reproduce, in controlled conditions. Both product variations - In fact the flies produce faster, and in more quantity. Both have mutations. Both would be in some way affected by selection.

Just be patient with me.
What makes the difference?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Thank God you and your family are not mutants.
truth be told, I have been called a freak, though...:confused:
...and the flies.
This is my point.
Okay, so tell me, what is the difference between the flies and the elephants. Both reproduce, in controlled conditions. Both product variations - In fact the flies produce faster, and in more quantity. Both have mutations. Both would be in some way affected by selection.

Just be patient with me.
What makes the difference?
The fly variations are mutations, caused by a de novo genetic defect in a single individual. This particular variation is so dysfunctional that it would never be passed on in Nature.

The tuskless elephants are normal variations, like red hair or left handedness. They are not mutations.

Selection is the process by which variations are sorted out. It can be either natural or human engineered.
Organisms born with variations that help them in their particular environment are more likely to thrive, breed and raise young to adulthood. They not only tend to leave more offspring, but their offspring are more likely to have the helpful variation -- to pass on in turn.

Thus the helpful variation increases in frequency among the population, over many years.
Of course, if the variation is dysfunctional -- like a trunkless elephant or eyeless fruit fly, it's quickly weeded out of the population.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
truth be told, I have been called a freak, though...:confused:
Who hasn't?

The fly variations are mutations, caused by a de novo genetic defect in a single individual. This particular variation is so dysfunctional that it would never be passed on in Nature.
Evidence?

The tuskless elephants are normal variations, like red hair or left handedness. They are not mutations.
Evidence?

Selection
is the process by which variations are sorted out. It can be either natural or human engineered.
So when does selection work in nature? a) sometimes b) every time c) random ?

Organisms born with variations that help them in their particular environment are more likely to thrive, breed and raise young to adulthood. They not only tend to leave more offspring, but their offspring are more likely to have the helpful variation -- to pass on in turn.
Evidence?

Thus the helpful variation increases in frequency among the population, over many years.
Of course, if the variation is dysfunctional -- like a trunkless elephant or eyeless fruit fly, it's quickly weeded out of the population.
Evidence?
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Who hasn't?
Evidence?
Do you seriously believe blind flies would last long in Nature? Are you aware of such a population?
Evidence?
They're a normal variation in the population.
Consider: Exactly the same de novo mutation occurring that often, at a stable percentage, in so widespread a population, over centuries? Seriously?

What evidence is there that blue eyes or red hair aren't mutations?
So when does selection work in nature? a) sometimes b) every time c) random ?
It's always working.
Evidence?
There are whole libraries of evidence!
This has been observed in Nature and in human agriculture and husbandry for centuries. It's easily reproduced in vitro.

Do you seriously believe every current plant and animal has existed unchanged from the beginning? Chihuahuas? 'Fancy' goldfish? Dwarf goats? Jersey cattle? Cabbage? Maize? Potatoes? Nylon-eating bacteria?
Evidence?
Oh come off it. You're just flinging poo.

Now my turn.
The mechanisms proposed by biologists are observable and testable. We see them at work all the time. They can fully account for the variation we observe.
You're proposing an unnecessary, never observed and fantastical extra step in an empirically well known system. You're positing magic as a reasonable and common occurrance.

Magic poofing has never been observed, obviously can't be tested and, in the light of known mechanisms, is an extraneous, unneeded step in an already functional process.
 

nPeace

Veteran Member
Do you seriously believe blind flies would last long in Nature? Are you aware of such a population?
So you have no evidence.
I am not obligated to consider nor accept your claim.
Blind fish - Wikipedia

They're a normal variation in the population.
Consider: Exactly the same de novo mutation occurring that often, at a stable percentage, in so widespread a population, over centuries? Seriously?

What evidence is there that blue eyes or red hair aren't mutations?
You have not given me any evidence. You just repeat claims, which I am under no obligation to consider, or accept.
Please note. The information below is not mine. I saved the best for last.

A genetic mutation that codes for the blond hair
The single mutation was found in a long gene sequence called KIT ligand (KITLG) and is present in about one-third of Northern Europeans. People with these genes could have platinum blond, dirty blond or even dark brown hair.

"There's a half dozen different chromosome regions that influence hair color," said study co-author David Kingsley, an evolutionary biologist at the Howard Hughes Medical Institute and Stanford University in California. "This is one, but not the only one.


A tiny mutation gifts a person with golden locks, scientists find
a new study shows that many can thank a tiny genetic mutation—a single letter change from an A to a G among the 3 billion letters in the book of human DNA—for their golden locks.

Blonde Hair Mutation Identified

7 beautiful mutations

I think most people know that red hair is a recessive trait; meaning that if you’re a ginger (term used with lots of love), you have two variant copies of a gene called MC1R on each of your 16th chromosomes. This mutation results in generally fairer skin, freckles (we’ll get to them), light-coloured eyes, issues dealing with UV light and, recent studies have suggested, a unique pain tolerance.

Red Hair, Blue Eyes, and Other Genetic Mutations in Humans

@Valjean Sorry, I misread your question as What evidence is there that blue eyes or red hair aren't mutations?
However, that causes me to ask the question, What really is your argument. Why are you arguing that that the tuskless elephant could not be due to mutations?


It's always working.
So it doesn't catch and fix all problems apparently.

There are whole libraries of evidence!
This has been observed in Nature and in human agriculture and husbandry for centuries. It's easily reproduced in vitro.

Do you seriously believe every current plant and animal has existed unchanged from the beginning? Chihuahuas? 'Fancy' goldfish? Dwarf goats? Jersey cattle? Cabbage? Maize? Potatoes? Nylon-eating bacteria?
Many things appear to have existed unchanged from the beginning, However, I believe everything has adapted in one way or other, even if not noticeable to the human eye.

Oh come off it. You're just flinging poo.
What??? o_O
That's rude. No further comment on that. :nomouth:

So you just want to make claims, and people are supposed to accept them, because they sound like they are coming from someone who knows what they are talking about?
It doesn't work that way. No one is obligated to accept your claims V. I don't.
No evidence, same as the previous.

Now my turn.
The mechanisms proposed by biologists are observable and testable. We see them at work all the time. They can fully account for the variation we observe.
You're proposing an unnecessary, never observed and fantastical extra step in an empirically well known system. You're positing magic as a reasonable and common occurrance.

Magic poofing has never been observed, obviously can't be tested and, in the light of known mechanisms, is an extraneous, unneeded step in an already functional process.
I don't even know what mechanism you are talking about, since you can't seem to begin to explain or show any working. So I am not sure how to respond.
Magic poofing? What are you talking about? :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Top