What convinced you that Evolution is the truth?

[leroy]

Evidence that any are significant?

How do you determine significance?........ you most provide and justify your own standards, at what point woudl you say that the discordanc eis significance?.........



well anyway

Parallel Evolution of Auditory Genes for Echolocation in Bats and Toothed Whales

The ability of bats and toothed whales to echolocate is a remarkable case of convergent evolution. Previous genetic studies have documented parallel evolution of nucleotide sequences in Prestin and KCNQ4, both of which are associated with voltage motility ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This article talks about a remarkable case where dolphins and bats share genetic material (same genetic variations) that absent in closer relatives.

(this is pretty much like finding a mammal with feathers)

This would imply that bats and dolphins independently had the exact same random mutations sin the same locations hundreds of times………(which is unlikely)

 

[Subduction Zone]

How do you determine significance?........ you most provide and justify your own standards, at what point woudl you say that the discordanc eis significance?.........



well anyway

Parallel Evolution of Auditory Genes for Echolocation in Bats and Toothed Whales

The ability of bats and toothed whales to echolocate is a remarkable case of convergent evolution. Previous genetic studies have documented parallel evolution of nucleotide sequences in Prestin and KCNQ4, both of which are associated with voltage motility ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This article talks about a remarkable case where dolphins and bats share genetic material (same genetic variations) that absent in closer relatives.

(this is pretty much like finding a mammal with feathers)

This would imply that bats and dolphins independently had the exact same random mutations sin the same locations hundreds of times………(which is unlikely)

I think that you are misinterpreting that article. Can you quote anywhere that it says that the exact same random mutations occurred? I can see it saying that the same parts of genes evolved in similar ways, but I did not see anything about the mutations being the same. If that was the case to me it would seem that you really had something.

For example one of the ways that we know that we are related to chimpanzees and other great apes is that their gene to make Vitamin C is broken as well. But Guinea pigs also have a broken gene and cannot make vitamin C either. So why does that not show that we are related to them? The answer is that it goes beyond the same gene being broken. The breakage is in the same place in all Great Apes and it is in a different place in Guinea pigs. The same gene evolving is no big deal. But if the evolution is identical down to which mutations where, then you can start to talk about a Common Designer.

 

[Pogo]

How do you determine significance?........ you most provide and justify your own standards, at what point woudl you say that the discordanc eis significance?.........



well anyway

Parallel Evolution of Auditory Genes for Echolocation in Bats and Toothed Whales

The ability of bats and toothed whales to echolocate is a remarkable case of convergent evolution. Previous genetic studies have documented parallel evolution of nucleotide sequences in Prestin and KCNQ4, both of which are associated with voltage motility ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

This article talks about a remarkable case where dolphins and bats share genetic material (same genetic variations) that absent in closer relatives.

(this is pretty much like finding a mammal with feathers)

This would imply that bats and dolphins independently had the exact same random mutations sin the same locations hundreds of times………(which is unlikely)

No, it is as the paper shows, an example of parallel evolution with different mutations in each lineage. This is exactly what one expects to find in different species that evolve to develop useful solutions independently. They are both mammals with binaural hearing and sound production capability so it is not at all surprising that the same genes and structures which already exist in both of them are involved in extensions of ancestral capability.
As another example of convergent evolution, Humans can echolocate too.

To the original question this most definitely is not an example of a problem with the theory of evolution.

The world is still safe from domination.

 

[Pogo]

I think that you are misinterpreting that article. Can you quote anywhere that it says that the exact same random mutations occurred? I can see it saying that the same parts of genes evolved in similar ways, but I did not see anything about the mutations being the same. If that was the case to me it would seem that you really had something.

For example one of the ways that we know that we are related to chimpanzees and other great apes is that their gene to make Vitamin C is broken as well. But Guinea pigs also have a broken gene and cannot make vitamin C either. So why does that not show that we are related to them? The answer is that it goes beyond the same gene being broken. The breakage is in the same place in all Great Apes and it is in a different place in Guinea pigs. The same gene evolving is no big deal. But if the evolution is identical down to which mutations where, then you can start to talk about a Common Designer.

Not only that, you can do a phylogenetic tree of mutations in the non-functional vitamin c genes and it matches the morphological tree.

 

[leroy]

I think that you are misinterpreting that article. Can you quote anywhere that it says that the exact same random mutations occurred? I can see it saying that the same parts of genes evolved in similar ways, but I did not see anything about the mutations being the same. If that was the case to me it would seem that you really had something.

For example one of the ways that we know that we are related to chimpanzees and other great apes is that their gene to make Vitamin C is broken as well. But Guinea pigs also have a broken gene and cannot make vitamin C either. So why does that not show that we are related to them? The answer is that it goes beyond the same gene being broken. The breakage is in the same place in all Great Apes and it is in a different place in Guinea pigs. The same gene evolving is no big deal. But if the evolution is identical down to which mutations where, then you can start to talk about a Common Designer.

Well we are talking about the same variations in the same genes

This is like having 2 texts written by different students, with the same spelling mistakes in the same words and sentences , no teacher would conclude that it happened by chance.

The echolocation abilities of bats and whales, though different in their details, rely on the same changes to the same gene – Prestin. These changes have produced such similar proteins that if you drew a family tree based on their amino acid sequences, bats and toothed whales would end up in the same tight-knit group, to the exclusion of other bats and whales that don’t use sonar.

Echolocation in bats and whales based on same changes to same gene

The echolocation abilities of bats and whales, though different in their details, rely on the same changes to the same gene – Prestin. This is one of the most dramatic examples yet of ‘convergent evolution’, with physical changes mirrored by genetic ones.

www.nationalgeographic.com

..

but I did not see anything about the mutations being the same

Well same variations in the same genes = same mutations ...... or feel free to provide an alternative explanation. ....

 

[Maninthemiddle]

I watched my former mother in laws evolve from a woman to a monster.

 

[leroy]

No, it is as the paper shows, an example of parallel evolution with different mutations in each lineage. This is exactly what one expects to find in different species that evolve to develop useful solutions independently. They are both mammals with binaural hearing and sound production capability so it is not at all surprising that the same genes and structures which already exist in both of them are involved in extensions of ancestral capability.
As another example of convergent evolution, Humans can echolocate too.

To the original question this most definitely is not an example of a problem with the theory of evolution.

The world is still safe from domination.

You didn't answer the question..... what level of discordance would you consider relevant ? And why ?


How could it be that dolphins and bats have the same variations in the same genes ? ( this variations are absent in closer relatives)

Did they suffer from the same random mutations independently or what other alternative do you suggest?

 

[Pogo]

You didn't answer the question..... what level of discordance would you consider relevant ? And why ?


How could it be that dolphins and bats have the same variations in the same genes ? ( this variations are absent in closer relatives)

Did they suffer from the same random mutations independently or what other alternative do you suggest?

Maximum parsimony tree is generally the method AIUI but your assumption that this is really some new feature that is specific to dolphins and bats is in error. As I demonstrated humans do it too, in fact location is a basic function of having two ears and a brain which mammals use to determine the relative location of sounds. The other part is basically a tongue click to produce a sharp sound to locate the reflection of. None of these are new functions, they are just enhancements in some lineages vs others.

As to the same mutations as opposed to changes in the same biological systems, think about it, putting a modified dolphin ear in a bat isn't going to work, there are lots of ways to configure echolocation. for example;

Echolocation
About 70% of all bat species worldwide have this ability. Also, bats aren't the only animals that use echolocation. Whales, dolphins, porpoises, oilbirds and several species of shrews, tenrecs, and swiftlets use a similar technique. Most bat echolocation occurs beyond the range of human hearing.

Oilbirds is a new one on me, they are not even mammals, but they still have binaural hearing and make sound and as they are nocturnal and live in caves echolocation is probably a useful function.

If you want to demonstrate discordance you need to learn enough about evolution to know what it is. Then when you actually find it, you publish a paper and get a Nobel prize.
Even if you do that, doesn't make goddidit the answer.

Back to you.

 

[Pogo]

I watched my former mother in laws evolve from a woman to a monster.

That is just metamorphosis, adult forms of homo Sapiens are quite varied internally.

 

[Pogo]

Well we are talking about the same variations in the same genes

This is like having 2 texts written by different students, with the same spelling mistakes in the same words and sentences , no teacher would conclude that it happened by chance.


..

Well same variations in the same genes = same mutations ...... or feel free to provide an alternative explanation. ....

No, popsci articles from Nat Geo behind a info wall are not evidence, they might give you an idea but that's it.

Without even reading it, it is not what is the case. they are mutations/changes in the same structures and in certain identified genes.
If you wish to argue that they are the same, it is up to you to present the sequence data since nothing you have posted has indicated this data exists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Well we are talking about the same variations in the same genes

This is like having 2 texts written by different students, with the same spelling mistakes in the same words and sentences , no teacher would conclude that it happened by chance.


..

Well same variations in the same genes = same mutations ...... or feel free to provide an alternative explanation. ....

It does not say the same changes in the same gene. It only says that the same genes evolved. That only merits a "So what?". I even gave you an example where the changes in the same gene were identical in our close relations and where the changes in the same gene were different in a distant relative.

 

[leroy]

Maximum parsimony tree is generally the method AIUI but your assumption that this is really some new feature that is specific to dolphins and bats is in error. As I demonstrated humans do it too, in fact location is a basic function of having two ears and a brain which mammals use to determine the relative location of sounds. The other part is basically a tongue click to produce a sharp sound to locate the reflection of. None of these are new functions, they are just enhancements in some lineages vs others.

As to the same mutations as opposed to changes in the same biological systems, think about it, putting a modified dolphin ear in a bat isn't going to work, there are lots of ways to configure echolocation. for example;

Oilbirds is a new one on me, they are not even mammals, but they still have binaural hearing and make sound and as they are nocturnal and live in caves echolocation is probably a useful function.

If you want to demonstrate discordance you need to learn enough about evolution to know what it is. Then when you actually find it, you publish a paper and get a Nobel prize.
Even if you do that, doesn't make goddidit the answer.

Back to you.

You are still avoiding a direct answer.

Small summery

1 I said, there are discordances in the tree of life

2 you answered, yes, but they are not relevant

3 I ask , how do you determine relevance…… how do you know if a discordance is relevant?

How big should a discordance be in order for you to say “hey this is an issue” and why?

s a basic function of having two ears and a brain which mammals use to determine the relative location of sounds. The other part is basically a tongue click to produce a sharp sound to locate the reflection of. None of these are new functions, they are just enhancements in some lineages vs others.

that is irrelevant,
The issue is that bats and dolphins have the same genetic variations in the same genes, these variations are suppose to be caused by random point mutations. ……….. how come 2 independnet linages had the exact same mutations in the exact same location?

The issue is not “echolocation” perse, the issue is that we have the same genetic variations 2 different linages that are not supposed to be closely related.

Imagine that you and I are said to rewrite a book (leter by letter) …… obviously we are expected to make typos mistakes every once in a while…………. But imagine that we both have the exact same mistakes in the exact same words and sentences…………….my point is that nobody would say that these are random typo mistakes, because it would be unlikely that by chance alone we both made the exact same mistakes in the exact same places………. (other hypothesis for such a coincidence would be proposed)

 

[leroy]

It does not say the same changes in the same gene. It only says that the same genes evolved. That only merits a "So what?". I even gave you an example where the changes in the same gene were identical in our close relations and where the changes in the same gene were different in a distant relative.

Nope, we are talking about same variations in the same genes.

These are genes that are present in all mammals………. it simply happened to be that case that the specific variation in dolphins is more similar to the bat´s than to other animals that are more closely related.

We are talking about the same spelling mistake in the same words and sentences. ……….. in the case of the guinea pigs that you mentioned, we are talking about a different spelling mistake in the same sentence………. This is why pigs and primate is not analogous to bats and dolphins

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are still avoiding a direct answer.

Small summery

1 I said, there are discordances in the tree of life

2 you answered, yes, but they are not relevant

3 I ask , how do you determine relevance…… how do you know if a discordance is relevant?

How big should a discordance be in order for you to say “hey this is an issue” and why?


that is irrelevant,
The issue is that bats and dolphins have the same genetic variations in the same genes, these variations are suppose to be caused by random point mutations. ……….. how come 2 independnet linages had the exact same mutations in the exact same location?

The issue is not “echolocation” perse, the issue is that we have the same genetic variations 2 different linages that are not supposed to be closely related.

Imagine that you and I are said to rewrite a book (leter by letter) …… obviously we are expected to make typos mistakes every once in a while…………. But imagine that we both have the exact same mistakes in the exact same words and sentences…………….my point is that nobody would say that these are random typo mistakes, because it would be unlikely that by chance alone we both made the exact same mistakes in the exact same places………. (other hypothesis for such a coincidence would be proposed)

You were shown to be wrong again. Your specific questions were answered.

 

[leroy]

No, popsci articles from Nat Geo behind a info wall are not evidence, they might give you an idea but that's it.

Without even reading it, it is not what is the case. they are mutations/changes in the same structures and in certain identified genes.
If you wish to argue that they are the same, it is up to you to present the sequence data since nothing you have posted has indicated this data exists.

Your position is not clear to me, what are you claiming exactly

1 They are not the same variations in the same genes

2 yes they are the same variations in the same genes, (but that is not a problem)

3 something else

 

[Subduction Zone]

Nope, we are talking about same variations in the same genes.

These are genes that are present in all mammals………. it simply happened to be that case that the specific variation in dolphins is more similar to the bat´s than to other animals that are more closely related.

We are talking about the same spelling mistake in the same words and sentences. ……….. in the case of the guinea pigs that you mentioned, we are talking about a different spelling mistake in the same sentence………. This is why pigs and primate is not analogous to bats and dolphins

No we are not. The article never said that. I gave you a specific example of what we see in the guinea pig gene for vitamin C and what we see in the ape gene for vitamin C. The article did not say or even imply that it was the sort of change we see in apes. As I told you, if that was the case you would have something.

 

[Pogo]

You are still avoiding a direct answer.

Small summery

1 I said, there are discordances in the tree of life

2 you answered, yes, but they are not relevant

3 I ask , how do you determine relevance…… how do you know if a discordance is relevant?

How big should a discordance be in order for you to say “hey this is an issue” and why?


that is irrelevant,
The issue is that bats and dolphins have the same genetic variations in the same genes, these variations are suppose to be caused by random point mutations. ……….. how come 2 independnet linages had the exact same mutations in the exact same location?

The issue is not “echolocation” perse, the issue is that we have the same genetic variations 2 different linages that are not supposed to be closely related.

Imagine that you and I are said to rewrite a book (leter by letter) …… obviously we are expected to make typos mistakes every once in a while…………. But imagine that we both have the exact same mistakes in the exact same words and sentences…………….my point is that nobody would say that these are random typo mistakes, because it would be unlikely that by chance alone we both made the exact same mistakes in the exact same places………. (other hypothesis for such a coincidence would be proposed)

1 they don't have the same genetic variations, only variations is genes involved in the same function in both species.

2 they have the same genes in them because they are actually closely related in evolutionary terms. They along with us humans have the same inner ear structure that is used for the reception of these high frequency sounds.
As to your pop sci article, here is the abstract from the actual paper;

Abstract​

Cases of convergent evolution - where different lineages have evolved similar traits independently - are common and have proven central to our understanding of selection. Yet convincing examples of adaptive convergence at the sequence level are exceptionally rare [1]. The motor protein Prestin is expressed in mammalian outer hair cells (OHCs) and is thought to confer high frequency sensitivity and selectivity in the mammalian auditory system [2]. We previously reported that the Prestin gene has undergone sequence convergence among unrelated lineages of echolocating bat [3]. Here we report that this gene has also undergone convergent amino acid substitutions in echolocating dolphins, which group with echolocating bats in a phylogenetic tree of Prestin. Furthermore, we find evidence that these changes were driven by natural selection.

If you limit your view to only the Prestin protein, you see convergent evolution, ie different pathways to the same outcome.
That said, that myopic view is why you use maximum parsimony for creating phylogenetic trees and singe genes are only used for things like the Apo A1milano tree I referenced where the individual ancestor is relevant.

 

[leroy]

1 they don't have the same genetic variations, only variations is genes involved in the same function in both species.

same genetic variations , that is what the paper says

2 they have the same genes in them because they are actually closely related in evolutionary terms. They along with us humans have the same inner ear structure that is used for the reception of these high frequency sounds.
As to your pop sci article, here is the abstract from the actual paper;

Granted, the question is not , why dolphins and bats have the same gene. (all mammals have it)

The question is why do bats and dolphins have the same variations in that gene, to the exclusion of animals that are more closely related.

If you limit your view to only the Prestin protein, you see convergent evolution, ie different pathways to the same outcome.

same pathway, according to the article

That said, that myopic view is why you use maximum parsimony

maximum parsimony doesn’t explain ,, nor provides a metric on weather if a discordance is relevant or not

Imagine that we have a mutation presentent in humans and gorillas but not in chimps, (this would be a discordance).. now imagine that we have 2 mutations or 3 or 10 or 20 or 100………… at what point would you say that the discordances are relevant?

 

[leroy]

No we are not. The article never said that. I gave you a specific example of what we see in the guinea pig gene for vitamin C and what we see in the ape gene for vitamin C. The article did not say or even imply that it was the sort of change we see in apes. As I told you, if that was the case you would have something.

from the article

"We previously reported that the Prestin gene has undergone sequence convergence among unrelated lineages of echolocating bat [3]. Here we report that this gene has also undergone convergent amino acid substitutions in echolocating dolphins, which group with echolocating bats in a phylogenetic tree"

According the research the exact same Ts where substituted by the same As (and so on) in the exact same gene, in the exact same location.

this is not like the Guinea Pig

Vitamine C : 2 different clades had a different "spellling mistake" in the same sentence

Echolocation: 2 different clades had the same "spelling mitakes" in the same sentence in the same letter

do you see the difference..............? do you see why is this a "problem" for evolution by random mutations + natural selection?

 

[Pogo]

from the article

"We previously reported that the Prestin gene has undergone sequence convergence among unrelated lineages of echolocating bat [3]. Here we report that this gene has also undergone convergent amino acid substitutions in echolocating dolphins, which group with echolocating bats in a phylogenetic tree"

According the research the exact same Ts where substituted by the same As (and so on) in the exact same gene, in the exact same location.

this is not like the Guinea Pig

Vitamine C : 2 different clades had a different "spellling mistake" in the same sentence

Echolocation: 2 different clades had the same "spelling mitakes" in the same sentence in the same letter

do you see the difference..............? do you see why is this a "problem" for evolution by random mutations + natural selection?

Come back when you have actually learned enough biology to understand why this tiny little coincidence is not the bomb you think it is.