Evolution (Pls read post â??1â?� b4 posting)

[Delta9 UK]

Mitochondria and chloroplasts are actually thought to be symbiotic bacteria living in our cells. they have lived their so long that they nor us could live without the other.

Yep, you are talking about Endosymbiotic theory, here is a Wiki about it :: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endosymbiotic_theory

[Delta9 UK]

As Mitochondrial DNA passes down maternally there is a whole school of thought based around tracing the evolution of humans through this phenomena.

The so called Mitochondrial Eve - here is another Wiki :: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitochondrial_Eve

[Delta9 UK]

Now for an example (if you can call it that) of mutation in action - a real evolution driving force that you can see right now.

In Africa a certain genetic mutation - leading to a sickle cell trait in hemoglobin actually infers a degree of immunity to malaria.

You can see this as natural selection in action. Those living in the lowland areas (subjected to more mosquito and therefore malaria exposure) have a much higher occurance of the sickle cell trait. The Malaria parasite has effectively selected out those not genetically advantaged to defeat the disease.

This is admittedly not 'typical' darwinian evolution, more an example of balanced polymorphism - just a chance mutation that happens to be REALLY useful. A useful mutation that keep Malaria from wiping you out will get passed on and expressed - this is the essence of at least one arm of the theory of evolution. In a different environment this mutation may not have been so advantageous, key to the understanding that evolution is tied to environment.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaria...on_human_genes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plasmodium_falciparum

[harris7]

I am familiar with that example, I guess most people who take biology are.
I think iv’e mentioned it somewhere.

I was wondering what you though of my first few posts. Accurate to your level of knowledge?

[Delta9 UK]

I was wondering what you though of my first few posts. Accurate to your level of knowledge?

Totally

It has been a few years since gradutation and to be honest some of my knowledge is pretty patchy now, but this is always a fun debate.

I was more in the Microbiology area so I'm a biased that way - your ecology knowledge probably serves you better to be fair as the whole area of Macro evolution (imho) is closely tied.

But I need to cut down on the vaporizer before I get into these threads LOL :stoned:

[harris7]

Lets talk about the human knee,

It has a very poor structure, everyone must admit. It truly isn’t a very intelligent design (he he).

Human kinesiologists could easily design a knee which would serve the same function but get better “mileage”. This is true of many natural machines.
They truly are not the best possible design.

Under the light of Intelligent Design, this doesn’t make sense. (I know most believers will just brush off this, but it really is a problem with the theory)

Under the light of Evolution, it makes perfect sense.
Because:
Evolutionary forces don’t “design” organisms, they “tinker” with them.
So when an organism faces a new pressure, natural selection tinkers with the existing structure of that organism (through mutations) and accepts the best solution that Arises.

-if the best possible solution doesn’t arise through mutation, that natural selection cannot select it.
-Natural selection is also bared by it’s starting point. Evolution cannot stop, think things over and start from a different angle to better solve the problem. It must always continue down the same path. This is unlike humans who, when designing something are able to stop and start over again from a different approach, this is why we are able to design a better knee than evolution did.


I post this as just another example of some data which fits seamlessly with evolutionary theory but leaves supporters of intelligent design baffled.