This was alot easier to code than it was to debate.
CryonoDisney (12:46:20 AM): i know how evolution works. i just disagree that the mutations in DNA are ALWAYS fuckups.
Nomaken (12:47:14 AM): they are fuck ups because during DNA replication it is supposed to be a perfect copy.
CryonoDisney (12:47:30 AM): no, it's not
CryonoDisney (12:47:35 AM): you are fusing two types of dna
CryonoDisney (12:47:37 AM): not copying
Nomaken (12:47:49 AM): meiosis is a two step process
Nomaken (12:48:03 AM): DNA replication, and then combining
CryonoDisney (12:48:04 AM): how can it be a perfect copy of either, when you only have half the dna from either person
CryonoDisney (12:48:25 AM): 16 part from each person to create the 32 needed for life
Nomaken (12:48:38 AM): the double helix only uses 1 side of the heliz
Nomaken (12:48:44 AM): helix
CryonoDisney (12:48:50 AM): your point?
Nomaken (12:49:18 AM): the completed DNA strand is a perfect melding of the two different DNA strands
Nomaken (12:49:48 AM): one half of a single helix and another half of a single helix
CryonoDisney (12:50:16 AM): right, combining the two strans in various places to create a 3rd, entirely new strand that resembles both strands, but is a copy of neither
Nomaken (12:50:18 AM): a combined DNA strand of the mother and father is not a mutation.
Nomaken (12:51:08 AM): the new DNA strand combines so that it is identical to both the parents in function.
Nomaken (12:51:45 AM): DNA will only combine at a very specific point in the DNA strand
CryonoDisney (12:52:14 AM): not at all. if that was true we'd be asexual and the children would be getting all 32 parts from one parent
CryonoDisney (12:52:35 AM): the combining of the two strands makes a whole new strand that resembles the original two
CryonoDisney (12:52:39 AM): RESEMBLES
Nomaken (12:53:41 AM): meiosis is not the cause of genetic mutations. If the mutations did not occur during DNA replication, animals would never evolve. If the DNA strand didnt
combine perfectly then the animal would most likely miscarrige
Nomaken (12:54:26 AM): Asexual animals evolve too.
Nomaken (12:54:32 AM): they dont need meiosis.
Nomaken (12:55:07 AM): this is because mutations happen during DNA replication, not during meiosis.
CryonoDisney (12:55:16 AM): yes, combining perfectly must happen, but copying is not what goes on. that only leaves me to believe that when the child recieves the
better traits from each parent, then that child passes it's better traits to it's children with the better traits with it's partner, that another kind of evolution is occuring
Nomaken (12:55:51 AM): meiosis does not cause evolution, it just causes vareity.
Nomaken (12:56:33 AM): and those are two different things
CryonoDisney (12:56:44 AM): the situation i just described would be considered evolution
CryonoDisney (12:57:37 AM): if a child recieves the better traits of one parent, and the better traits of another, leaving behind the not so good traits, then taking those
good traits and passing them to it's kid, along with the better traits of a partner, you have a kind of evolution
CryonoDisney (12:58:11 AM): even if it's only in how well your immune system works
Nomaken (12:58:31 AM): to evolve means to change, not for better or worse, but to change. however the way meiosis works, if there were no mutations in DNA replication, humans
would just continue to change in eye color, and various physical appearance, however there would never be anything more than that.
CryonoDisney (12:59:29 AM): not true
CryonoDisney (12:59:31 AM): not at all
Nomaken (12:59:42 AM): meiosis does work perfectly. It does, mutations do not occur during meiosis.
CryonoDisney (1:00:32 AM): there are a lot more things than just the color of eyes or hair that change in birth
Nomaken (1:00:41 AM): the changes necessary to make humans have, say antenne, do not exist in the current generations gene pool. And no amount of meiosis will bring about that
CryonoDisney (1:01:19 AM): that is true, but you are talking about extreme changes, whereas i'm talking about basic evolution
CryonoDisney (1:01:42 AM): the thing that makes us taller as a human race
CryonoDisney (1:01:49 AM): than we were 100 years ago
Nomaken (1:02:34 AM): the only things that change during meiosis are semi-unique physical appearence, the difference between me, you, john, george bush, or sadam husane are less than
a a tenth of a percent of the DNA coding
Nomaken (1:03:09 AM): have you read what i wrote yet?
CryonoDisney (1:03:54 AM): yes, i agree with some, but not on others. the kind of evolution your talking about is very extreme.
Nomaken (1:04:12 AM): sexual replication is not the cause of evolution, if it was ameobas couldnt exist.
Nomaken (1:04:19 AM): because they dont reproduce sexually.
CryonoDisney (1:04:35 AM): they also haven't evolved
Nomaken (1:04:39 AM): yes they have
CryonoDisney (1:04:42 AM): they have remained unchanged
Nomaken (1:04:46 AM): we were once ameobas
CryonoDisney (1:04:56 AM): yes, then something fucked up happened
CryonoDisney (1:05:06 AM): i agree, that for extreme changes you need mutation
Nomaken (1:05:07 AM): it just took a long time to get where we are
CryonoDisney (1:05:20 AM): but you do not ALWAYS need mutation for evolution
Nomaken (1:05:25 AM): yes you do.
CryonoDisney (1:05:34 AM): the small things, like growing taller, does not require mutation
Nomaken (1:05:52 AM): no, if you do not understand that, you just dont know the theory of evolution.
Nomaken (1:05:59 AM): you NEED mutations for evolution.
CryonoDisney (1:06:03 AM): i understand it perfectly
CryonoDisney (1:06:15 AM): i think your closing your mind to what i have to say
Nomaken (1:06:29 AM): any time a species can be said to have evolved, it was because of a mutation.
CryonoDisney (1:06:46 AM): because having grown on average a foot taller than we were 100 years ago, is a perfect example of evolution without mutations
Nomaken (1:07:15 AM): no it is not, every time you have a child, that child has a mutation.
Nomaken (1:07:28 AM): mutations occur EVERY time
Nomaken (1:07:44 AM): they are just insignifigant,
CryonoDisney (1:07:57 AM): what relevancy did that statement just have?
Nomaken (1:08:10 AM): over the last 100 years we have been evolving
Nomaken (1:08:15 AM): due to mutations
CryonoDisney (1:08:32 AM): and in ways that were not effected by mutations
Nomaken (1:08:53 AM): no animal is ever really directly affected by a mutation
Nomaken (1:09:10 AM): mutations do not have to be noticable at all.
Nomaken (1:09:40 AM): a mutation is when a base pair is misplaced, deleted, or added where it was not supposed to be.
CryonoDisney (1:10:41 AM): this is true. they usually arent noticeable. and yes, mutations always happen, but that doesn't mean that the mutations necisarilly have an
effect on us having grown taller (which is just my example for now)
Nomaken (1:11:41 AM): we dont know enough about ourselves to confirm exactly which mutations brought about us growing generally taller.
CryonoDisney (1:12:25 AM): it wasn't necissarilly mutations. it could very well be that parents were passing down their "tallness" gene to their children, who passed it
down to their gradualy making us taller than we were
Nomaken (1:12:51 AM): without mutations, there would never be a "tallness" gene to pass down.
CryonoDisney (1:13:09 AM): you know... i thought we were done with this at the party
Nomaken (1:14:07 AM): your smart mike, but you dont understand how evolution works. You got it down in general, but there are so many specific vital points that you either dont know,
or are confused about.
CryonoDisney (1:14:32 AM): that last one just didn't make sense. you don't need mutation at ALL to have a gene that makes you tall
Nomaken (1:15:18 AM): You cant be tall unless the gene for being tall exists in the gene pool. you dont make NEW genes through meiosis, you make NEW genes through mutations.
CryonoDisney (1:16:11 AM): this is true. but then passing that gene that exists down to your chilren who in turn pass that down to their children, etc., etc., can have the
gradual effect of making the human race as a whole taller than they once were
Nomaken (1:16:48 AM): passing the gene down doesnt have the effect stack. Its not a "taller" gene, its just a "tall" gene.
Nomaken (1:17:51 AM): that gene would not keep making you tall until it gets to "the best height" its existances just makes a protein which helps you grow taller than you would otherwise
Nomaken (1:18:56 AM): the information inside of the DNA strand is only used to make proteins.
CryonoDisney (1:19:01 AM): you're still looking at this too big. i said "the human race as a whole taller". i never said kids being taller than their parents
CryonoDisney (1:19:28 AM): the short old people eventually die, and the kids who recieved the tall gene live making the human race as a whole, taller
Nomaken (1:20:44 AM): what reasons that have made it so humans are taller, i dont know. However the point i am making with you is that mutations caused this.
CryonoDisney (1:21:43 AM): see? now you just want to ignore everything i just said.
CryonoDisney (1:21:59 AM): you can not deny that that would be a form of evolution
Nomaken (1:22:11 AM): no. Its just you are wandering away from my point of arguement
CryonoDisney (1:23:03 AM): not at all. that IS the point. when the parents passed down their tall gene to the kids making them tall, and the short parents died making
the human race taller as a whole, that is evolution. not significant mind you, but evolution none the less.
Nomaken (1:23:16 AM): the causes for us getting taller are not because people mated, and kept doing this until their DNA combined to create a Taller gene. Each time they mated they
followed along a gradual path of mutations that brought about the existance of a protien which promotes taller growth.
CryonoDisney (1:23:35 AM): no no no. see you're changing my words again.
CryonoDisney (1:24:03 AM): let me simplify this
Nomaken (1:24:13 AM): your thinking of evolution existing in only meiosis. Evolution has existed since mitosis, which came before meiosis.
CryonoDisney (1:24:28 AM): your changing my words AGAIN!
CryonoDisney (1:24:50 AM): i said i agree with you. that for significant evolution, you need mutation
CryonoDisney (1:25:03 AM): but for insignificant things like in my example, you dont
Nomaken (1:25:09 AM): you have said that in the past 100 years we have grown taller without the use of mutations. That is what i am arguing.
CryonoDisney (1:25:17 AM): here, let me explain
CryonoDisney (1:26:42 AM): A tall man and a short woman have a kid. The kid, recieving the tall gene from the dad, is tall. The same thing happens with another
couple. these two tall kids have a kid and the tall gene is passed down and that kid is tall. the short mothers eventually die making the ration of tall people to short
people much greater.
CryonoDisney (1:26:57 AM): it's a small and insignificant form of evolution
Nomaken (1:27:33 AM): yes, but 100 years ago, the tall gene didnt exist.
CryonoDisney (1:27:42 AM): i'm sure it did
CryonoDisney (1:27:56 AM): you can't seriously say that all people were short back then
Nomaken (1:28:00 AM): if it did, than they would be tall then.
CryonoDisney (1:28:14 AM): there were just less tall people
CryonoDisney (1:28:19 AM): the ratio was reversed
CryonoDisney (1:29:00 AM): but once again, you are straying from my point. you are looking for the source of the gene, and i agree that for a significant change like
making the gene, you need mutation
CryonoDisney (1:29:13 AM): but for the small insignificant things like in my example, you odn't
CryonoDisney (1:29:16 AM): dont*
CryonoDisney (1:29:19 AM): don't*
CryonoDisney (1:29:22 AM): grr!
Nomaken (1:29:30 AM): A short man and a short woman have a kid. That boy is short, that boy and another short girl have a kid. This kid (girl) is short. It keeps going.
Nomaken (1:29:48 AM): The way evolution works, however is like this:
CryonoDisney (1:29:57 AM): no no no
CryonoDisney (1:30:06 AM): what the hell did that have anything to do with what i said?
Nomaken (1:31:01 AM): A short man and a short woman have a kid. That boy is short, that boy and another short girl have a kid. This kid is tall? Why? because during their parents and
grandparents stages of meiosis, gradual insignifigant mutations occured until they added up and created the Tall gene.
CryonoDisney (1:31:56 AM): you're not very good at debates, no offense. you just blow off a persons arguments with some irrelevant statment then go back to stating
your initial statement as if it was fact
Nomaken (1:32:09 AM): 100 years ago the "tall" gene was created through mutations
Nomaken (1:32:31 AM): my statements are not irrelevant.
CryonoDisney (1:32:37 AM): false. if that was true, everyone on the planet would have been short
Nomaken (1:32:43 AM): they were.
CryonoDisney (1:32:51 AM): what planet do you live on?
CryonoDisney (1:32:56 AM): tall people did live back then
CryonoDisney (1:33:02 AM): they just had fewer numbers
CryonoDisney (1:33:12 AM): the ration was highly in favor of short people
CryonoDisney (1:33:16 AM): ratio*
Nomaken (1:33:40 AM): we are generalizing to believe that tall genes and short genes exist.
CryonoDisney (1:34:33 AM): well... yeah.
Nomaken (1:34:45 AM): however the reason that people have become generally taller over the last 100 years is because of the mutations that were occuring over the last 100 years have
been creating better and better proteins that are causing taller people.
Nomaken (1:35:16 AM): (better proteins for causing taller people, not abstractly better)
CryonoDisney (1:35:18 AM): that may be what happened, but you can't deny that the example i gave is an insignificant form of evolution
Nomaken (1:36:18 AM): passing traits down is what causes dominant new species
Nomaken (1:36:32 AM): however mutations allow that trait to be created.
CryonoDisney (1:36:42 AM): you're changing the subject again
CryonoDisney (1:36:46 AM): stop doing that
Nomaken (1:36:47 AM): no im not
Nomaken (1:36:51 AM): let me finish
CryonoDisney (1:36:55 AM): i'm not talking about the creation of a gene
CryonoDisney (1:37:02 AM): i'm talking much less significant
Nomaken (1:37:22 AM): mutations are even less signifigant than passing traits down.
CryonoDisney (1:37:42 AM): the creation of a new gene, while not significant at first, becomes significant
Nomaken (1:37:43 AM): evolution is different than passing traits down, so that that trait becomes the dominant species
CryonoDisney (1:38:04 AM): *sight* i'm done. you're really just ignoring what i'm saying
Nomaken (1:38:08 AM): no im not
Nomaken (1:38:22 AM): CryonoDisney (1:26:42 AM): A tall man and a short woman have a kid. The kid, recieving the tall gene from the dad, is tall. The same thing
happens with another couple. these two tall kids have a kid and the tall gene is passed down and that kid is tall. the short mothers eventually die making the ration
of tall people to short people much greater.
CryonoDisney (1:38:43 AM): you blow off everything i say and go back to the creation of the gene, or some significant change like antennae.
Nomaken (1:38:45 AM): when a mutation occurs signifigantly enough to create a new trait that is what happens.
Nomaken (1:39:10 AM): no, the anteneae was a bad example, i could have said longer thumbs to the same effect
CryonoDisney (1:39:14 AM): i have said nothing about the creation of a gene, nor some significant change. i said i agree that that needs mutation
CryonoDisney (1:39:25 AM): but that's not what i'm talking about
Nomaken (1:39:40 AM): CryonoDisney (1:35:18 AM): that may be what happened, but you can't deny that the example i gave is an insignificant form of evolution - what
were you talking about?
CryonoDisney (1:39:50 AM): and since you repeatedly seem to ignore that fact, debate becomes impossible, and i am frustrated and finished
Nomaken (1:40:04 AM): what were you talking about there?
Nomaken (1:40:19 AM): what was the example?
Nomaken (1:40:26 AM): was it the tall man and short woman?
CryonoDisney (1:40:30 AM): yes
Nomaken (1:40:58 AM): that example was not an example of evolution. It was an example of natural selection.
Nomaken (1:41:19 AM): taller people were apparently better and more suited to reproduce for some reason
CryonoDisney (1:41:44 AM): evolution comes from natural selection. you said that yourself at the party. even with mutations, if it is a bad mutation, the person will die
Nomaken (1:42:03 AM): yes, but im not arguing natural selection, im arguing evolution
CryonoDisney (1:42:24 AM): YOU'RE THE ONE THAT BROUGHT IT UP!
Nomaken (1:42:25 AM): natural selection occurs because of the enviroment, evolution occurs inside of the cell
CryonoDisney (1:42:55 AM): then it has nothing to do with my example and you are once again stating irrelevant facts
Nomaken (1:43:48 AM): evolution causes the creation of a better protein that produces the taller man. Natural selection causes it so that taller man passes on the taller mutation to his
children becoming the dominant trait.
Nomaken (1:44:17 AM): your example was not evolution, it was natural selection of an evolved person.
CryonoDisney (1:44:31 AM): wrong
Nomaken (1:44:40 AM): right.
CryonoDisney (1:44:43 AM): you missed it entirely
CryonoDisney (1:44:46 AM): you are way off
Nomaken (1:44:53 AM): no, you are confusing things.
CryonoDisney (1:44:59 AM): nope, i'm really not
Nomaken (1:45:11 AM): and i dont state irrelevant info, you just cant understand how it works all at once.
CryonoDisney (1:45:32 AM): i understand it perfectly. i have taken the classes.
CryonoDisney (1:45:57 AM): you are still looking at it in way too big of a picture
Nomaken (1:46:16 AM): high school teachers do not teach their students the correct infomation - the college level information.
CryonoDisney (1:46:34 AM): hello? i'm in college
CryonoDisney (1:46:47 AM): have been in college for 3 years now
Nomaken (1:46:49 AM): in natural selection, and evolution the pictures size does not matter
Nomaken (1:47:03 AM): well apparently your teachers are not reaching you like they should be
CryonoDisney (1:47:15 AM): it does though. a person with a bad trait can reproduce.
Nomaken (1:47:24 AM): they can
CryonoDisney (1:47:27 AM): natural selection wont always stop a trait immediately
Nomaken (1:47:58 AM): yes, luck can cause a "better" trait to die, or a "worse" trait to live
CryonoDisney (1:48:41 AM): or if you look at it on a smaller level, an animal with a bad trait can have a kid and pass that trait to their child
CryonoDisney (1:49:01 AM): luck would not have a whole lot to do with that
CryonoDisney (1:49:07 AM): nor would natural selection
CryonoDisney (1:49:14 AM): but the overall surviving of that trait
CryonoDisney (1:49:19 AM): that's natural selection
Nomaken (1:49:32 AM): its up to nature to judge if a trait is bad or not
CryonoDisney (1:49:58 AM): very good. i'm glad you understand that
Nomaken (1:51:42 AM): the point i was originally arguing still isnt settled yet
Nomaken (1:52:01 AM): the reason i keep going back to it is because it never settles
CryonoDisney (1:52:08 AM): your point is that evolution ALWAYS needs mutation
Nomaken (1:52:41 AM): yes, it does. Unless a mutation occurs no new traits can be introduced into the gene pool.
CryonoDisney (1:53:06 AM): i have just proven that wrong. whether you choose to accept that or not, on a very VERY small level, evolution can occur without mutation
Nomaken (1:54:18 AM): the people reproducing to have more taller people is natural selection, not evolution. Their reproducing never caused the new trait to be created, and without a
mutation that new trait would have never been introduced into the gene pool.
CryonoDisney (1:54:45 AM): a new trait does not need to be created for evolution
Nomaken (1:54:54 AM): evolution creates new traits
Nomaken (1:55:10 AM): natural selection propagates those traits if they are "better"
CryonoDisney (1:55:32 AM): you seem to forget your own words "natural selection and evolution go hand in hand"
CryonoDisney (1:55:55 AM): my example of the ratio of tall to short people growing is a small form of evolution
CryonoDisney (1:56:01 AM): WITHOUT mutation
Nomaken (1:56:20 AM): that is not evolution
CryonoDisney (1:56:23 AM): if that example happened worldwide
CryonoDisney (1:56:34 AM): the human race would gradually, as a whole, become taller
CryonoDisney (1:56:41 AM): the short people would go bye bye
Nomaken (1:56:53 AM): that is not evolution, that is natural selection
CryonoDisney (1:57:04 AM): natural selection would be the stopping of the short trait from going on
CryonoDisney (1:57:14 AM): that's not my example
Nomaken (1:57:28 AM): natural selection doesnt just kill those species which dont work,
Nomaken (1:58:15 AM): the laws of natural selection work so that if a creature survives to the point where it can reproduce, it apparently works, maybe not the best, but well enough to
continue the species
CryonoDisney (1:58:58 AM): i know how natural selection works
Nomaken (1:59:15 AM): if a mutation occurs, so that it can reproduce more quickly, and survive better, then it will probably kill off the previous generation in some way or another -
through starving it, just working better in general, getting more mates, ect.
CryonoDisney (1:59:34 AM): and if natural selection didn't stop the tall trait from becoming far dominant over the short trait, than the human race has in a small way
evolved to become slightly taller as a whole
Nomaken (2:00:40 AM): at the stage, when the new creatures become the dominant species, that itself is not evolution
CryonoDisney (2:01:32 AM): the shift from a species being tall from short is, though
Nomaken (2:03:02 AM): the shift is natural selection, the creation of that possiblity is evolution
CryonoDisney (2:03:49 AM): no, the process of changing is natural selection. the outcome would be a form of evolution.
CryonoDisney (2:04:08 AM): the human raced evolved to become taller THROUGH natural selection
Nomaken (2:04:52 AM): no, the human race evolved to become taller through mutations, taller people became the dominant species through natural selection
CryonoDisney (2:05:11 AM): oy vey...
CryonoDisney (2:05:26 AM): fuck it. i'm done
Nomaken (2:06:02 AM): okay, i know it is obvious we have evolved from apes into humans,
CryonoDisney (2:06:18 AM): you're talking way too significant agian
Nomaken (2:06:22 AM): wait wait wait
Nomaken (2:06:27 AM): work with me here
CryonoDisney (2:06:33 AM): dude, i agreed with you on that stuff
Nomaken (2:06:51 AM): how do you think that apes changed into humans?
CryonoDisney (2:07:03 AM): mutations in the genes. duh.
Nomaken (2:07:08 AM): right
CryonoDisney (2:07:21 AM): well, that isn't what i was talking about
CryonoDisney (2:07:34 AM): and if i have to say that one more time, i'm going to kill you
CryonoDisney (2:07:39 AM): j/k
Nomaken (2:08:43 AM): they could mate and pass on harier genes, or better grip genes or change simple like that. However the big changes that evetunally created humans was because
of a long series of mutations. followed by natural selection. I am saying that on a smaller scale, even within 100 years that we can have enough mutations to bring about taller people
Nomaken (2:09:22 AM): if you need to kill me i would ask that it be using a large rusty iron pole through my chest
Nomaken (2:09:33 AM): pleaaaaaasee?
CryonoDisney (2:09:41 AM): i think that can be arranged
Nomaken (2:09:44 AM): yay!
CryonoDisney (2:09:49 AM): but only if you let the subject drop now
Nomaken (2:10:06 AM): damn, okay, look over my last statement and think about it please
CryonoDisney (2:10:51 AM): by saying "on a smaller scale" i don't mean on a timeline. i mean small changes
CryonoDisney (2:11:01 AM): not the human race growing taller
CryonoDisney (2:11:07 AM): but the ration being taller
CryonoDisney (2:11:11 AM): ratio*
Nomaken (2:11:11 AM): yes i know, please be patient i know you are frustrated but i think i am close
CryonoDisney (2:11:33 AM): i really don't think you are
Nomaken (2:12:23 AM): okay, so 100 years ago, if even 1 person with the "tall" gene existed, that he passed that gene onto the people and people became generally taller?
Nomaken (2:13:06 AM): 1 or 2 people, i imagine alot of people with the "tall" gene could have simultaneously existed
CryonoDisney (2:13:42 AM): yes
Nomaken (2:14:14 AM): okay, now i want to know, back 100 years ago, when only a few people were tall, how did those people get their "tall" trait?
CryonoDisney (2:14:16 AM): and since natural selection dictated that this happen, than the human race evolved through natural selectoin
Nomaken (2:14:33 AM): did they get their tall trait from their parents?
CryonoDisney (2:15:25 AM): i see where you're going with this. and once again you are going back to the source. the creation of the tall gene, which is the form of
evolution i am NOT talking about
CryonoDisney (2:15:48 AM): i am talking about the spreading of that mutated gene to evolve the human race as a whole
Nomaken (2:15:50 AM): you are confusing evolution with natural selection
CryonoDisney (2:16:03 AM): the human race evolves THROUGH natural selection
Nomaken (2:16:24 AM): no it doesnt, it evolves through mutations
CryonoDisney (2:16:31 AM): you have one evolved person, who through natural selection passes their gene to evolve the people as a whole
Nomaken (2:16:47 AM): yes but that evolved person needed to evolve
Nomaken (2:16:54 AM): he is the mutation
CryonoDisney (2:17:08 AM): yes, that is mutation. after the mutation, natural selection evolves the people as a whole
Nomaken (2:17:24 AM): that mutation survives to become the dominant species through natural selection but if you only had natural selection people would never change
Nomaken (2:17:53 AM): you need mutations for natural selection to "work with"
CryonoDisney (2:18:05 AM): i never denied that. but the evolution that occurs throughout the masses is through natural selection and not mutation
CryonoDisney (2:18:19 AM): the mutations only evolve a select number
Nomaken (2:19:00 AM): okay, so the taller person passes on that trait to the world and alot of the world is now taller, what next?
CryonoDisney (2:19:11 AM): what is so hard about that to understand?
Nomaken (2:19:21 AM): i pose the same question to you
Nomaken (2:19:46 AM): everyone is the same, the taller people are dominant, all the short people died off in favor of the taller person
Nomaken (2:19:49 AM): what now?
CryonoDisney (2:20:12 AM): who cares? the evolution has happened, the rest is irrelevant
Nomaken (2:20:27 AM): without a new mutation, to be approved or denied by natural selection people would never change ever again.
CryonoDisney (2:21:28 AM): there you go back to the source again. the evolution of only a few individuals through mutation, when what i'm talking about is the
evolution of a species through passing that trait down and natural selection
Nomaken (2:21:47 AM): maybe people will have many dominant genes, that will cause the people to continue to change but eventually everyone will be the same. Without new mutations,
no one will ever change again.
Nomaken (2:23:05 AM): you just need to change your definitions here. Evolution is NOT the propagation of the "better" species. It is NOT the passing on of a trait. It IS the mutation.
CryonoDisney (2:23:38 AM): yeah... whatever
Nomaken (2:24:08 AM): the reason it IS the mutation is because people would NEVER evolve if there were no new mutations
CryonoDisney (2:25:00 AM): that's what STARTS evolution though
Nomaken (2:25:11 AM): the start is the most important thing
CryonoDisney (2:25:29 AM): but it is NOT evolution. it is only the start
CryonoDisney (2:26:01 AM): from there, the species evolves through natural selectoin and the passing of genes. with mutation, you only have one evolved person.
Nomaken (2:26:34 AM): it goes mutation, then natural selection judges it, if its the better, it becomes the dominant, and from that dominant species another mutation occurs and is judged by
natural selection. Without mutations then all life would be stuck at one point and never change.
CryonoDisney (2:27:07 AM): for the most part yes. but there are small insignificant things that can change
CryonoDisney (2:27:42 AM): the whole of a species having more blue eyes for one.
Nomaken (2:27:42 AM): yes, thats why the process takes so long, but if the creature is judged to be "worse" it WILL stop eventually.
Nomaken (2:28:08 AM): using this animals will never evolve to be worse, only better.
CryonoDisney (2:28:31 AM): or die off...
CryonoDisney (2:28:38 AM): the dodo is a pretty good example of that
Nomaken (2:28:54 AM): it is true that over the last 100 years VERY little has changed, but it requires that intial mutation to start.
CryonoDisney (2:28:57 AM): the lemming isn't looking too good either
CryonoDisney (2:29:41 AM): i agree. for that gene to exist, you need the mutation to create it. but once it's there, evolution through the people does not require any
CryonoDisney (2:30:59 AM): 3. Biology a. Change in the genetic composition of a population during successive generations, as a result of natural selection acting on
the genetic variation among individuals, and resulting in the development of new species. b. The historical development of a related group of organisms;
Nomaken (2:31:05 AM): evolution has two parts, which go hand in hand, mutations and natural selection. Without natural selection, the mutations would have no direction, without
mutations, the animals would never change. However at this point, where we have animals who can survive right now, if there were no mutations they would never ever evolve.
CryonoDisney (2:31:28 AM): funny, that dictionary definition sounds JUST like what i've been saying
CryonoDisney (2:32:40 AM): yes, but with mutation you only get one or two evolved people. that's not evolution of a species. evolution of a species comes with
passing traits from those evolved people and through natural selection
Nomaken (2:33:05 AM): CryonoDisney (1:26:42 AM): A tall man and a short woman have a kid. The kid, recieving the tall gene from the dad, is tall. The same thing
happens with another couple. these two tall kids have a kid and the tall gene is passed down and that kid is tall. the short mothers eventually die making the ration
of tall people to short people much greater. - I argued that this is not evolution because you seem to be telling me that evolution can occur without mutations
CryonoDisney (2:33:33 AM): say in your family that you were all short.
Nomaken (2:33:55 AM): ok
CryonoDisney (2:33:56 AM): you have sex with a tall woman and have a tall kid
Nomaken (2:34:00 AM): yah
CryonoDisney (2:34:22 AM): being tall at this time is strange, and she became tall through mutation
CryonoDisney (2:34:34 AM): so in other word's, you have a kid with a freak
Nomaken (2:34:35 AM): there, im happy now
Nomaken (2:34:49 AM): this time you described both halves of evolution
CryonoDisney (2:34:54 AM): evolution has occured in your bloodline without mutation
Nomaken (2:35:09 AM): she became tall through mutation
CryonoDisney (2:35:18 AM): she did, but she's not in your bloodline
Nomaken (2:35:29 AM): the child is in your bloodline
CryonoDisney (2:35:43 AM): yes, and there was no mutation in the child to make it tall
CryonoDisney (2:35:47 AM): it was a passed trait
Nomaken (2:35:57 AM): yes, but the woman was a mutation
CryonoDisney (2:36:05 AM): yes, and that was her form of evolution
CryonoDisney (2:36:23 AM): the evolution of your bloodline comes with passing traits and natural selection
Nomaken (2:36:27 AM): evolution NEVER occurs on one generation
Nomaken (2:36:38 AM): it can only be described through 2 or more
CryonoDisney (2:36:39 AM): yes yes. that's not the point though
Nomaken (2:37:28 AM): the man didnt evolve, the woman only had a mutation, but the fact that that mutation survived, and if it continues on passing that trait to become the dominant
species, then THAT whole thing would be evolution
Nomaken (2:38:07 AM): evolution requires both natural selection, and mutations, it cannot occur without both.
CryonoDisney (2:38:56 AM): true. now consider this if you will
Nomaken (2:39:04 AM): yup
CryonoDisney (2:39:07 AM): we as a people are taller than we used to be
CryonoDisney (2:39:08 AM): right?
Nomaken (2:39:12 AM): yes
CryonoDisney (2:39:20 AM): that occured through a mutation being passed through natural selection
Nomaken (2:39:24 AM): yes
CryonoDisney (2:39:29 AM): but short people still exist
CryonoDisney (2:39:31 AM): correct?
Nomaken (2:39:33 AM): yes
CryonoDisney (2:40:16 AM): that means the short trait still exists. if natural selection were to dictate that we should be short again, that would be the evolution of the
human race through natural selection
CryonoDisney (2:40:48 AM): the mutation has occured, but there was not a mutation to trigger it
Nomaken (2:41:09 AM): well, if it were required by nature that humans become short again, even if all short people were dead, eventually a mutation would occur that contained a short
CryonoDisney (2:41:47 AM): a mutation wouldn't have to occur though.
CryonoDisney (2:42:00 AM): if it were just that more people were passing on their short traits
CryonoDisney (2:42:12 AM): people would eventually become shorter as a whole
Nomaken (2:42:43 AM): however, it can still be said that it required a mutation in the first place because you must remeber not to generalize with the "short" and "tall" traits, that a long time
ago the proteins which created shorter people had to have been created
CryonoDisney (2:43:35 AM): yes. it required the creation of the short trait through mutation, but it was completely and utterly triggered and spread through the passing
Nomaken (2:43:41 AM): it may go back very far thou, the shorter people traits, if you assume that being tall is a trait that was only recently invented ever.
Nomaken (2:44:23 AM): yes, it required the mutation, and the natural selection
CryonoDisney (2:44:56 AM): and since I'm tall, i must be more evolved than people shorter than me... which means i must sleep with as many people as possible to
help evolve my species
CryonoDisney (2:44:58 AM): hee hee
Nomaken (2:45:01 AM): find me a situation where you wouldnt need a mutation to cause an evolutionary change
Nomaken (2:45:11 AM): sounds good
Nomaken (2:46:08 AM): all evolutionary changes, regardless if the mutation is already "oh hand" required the mutation to be created, even if it was created millions of years ago
CryonoDisney (2:46:58 AM): you need the mutation for the change to be possible, but the evolution itself doesn't come from mutation
CryonoDisney (2:47:14 AM): it's the spreading of the mutated trait
Nomaken (2:47:29 AM): the evolution comes from both the mutation and natural selection, however it cannot be JUST either one
CryonoDisney (2:47:39 AM): and the combining of that trait with our non mutated traits
Nomaken (2:48:16 AM): for evolution to continue it needs both mutations and natural selection
CryonoDisney (2:48:23 AM): true. if the traits already exist though, evolution can be triggered back and forth between them an infinite number of times and be
CryonoDisney (2:48:36 AM): WITHOUT any new mutations
Nomaken (2:48:49 AM): yes, but the "old" mutations need to have been created
CryonoDisney (2:49:04 AM): right.
CryonoDisney (2:49:31 AM): i'm starting to get the feeling that we're looking at the same thing from different angles here...
Nomaken (2:49:37 AM): also in a world without any NEW mutations eventually the species would become stagnant
Nomaken (2:50:32 AM): i already started thinking about it that way at - damn i cant find it
CryonoDisney (2:50:37 AM): not necissarilly. there's a lot of traits that could be changed and switched and stuff. we still have the traits in us that we could revert back
to neanderthals and nearly apes
CryonoDisney (2:51:16 AM): that doesn't sound real stagnant
Nomaken (2:51:57 AM): well, nature may change and the old traits may become useful again, but if nature ever changes in a way that a new trait could make an animal better than any
already existing mutations, then a new mutation will eventually occur
CryonoDisney (2:53:10 AM): that's arguable too, but then too many things become relative
Nomaken (2:53:43 AM): well, as of right now, we dont need any mutations to keep on living
Nomaken (2:54:27 AM): however, apparently mutations in certain microorganisms are starting to make them better than us. Like HIV, and SARS
CryonoDisney (2:54:39 AM): ah ha!
Nomaken (2:54:54 AM): so if we do not keep on mutating to match them and beat them, they will eventually beat us.
CryonoDisney (2:55:16 AM): i just thought of evolution without mutation at all!
Nomaken (2:55:32 AM): ?
CryonoDisney (2:56:17 AM): certain diseases, they created vaccines for. we'd be injected with these vaccines to make us immune to them. over time people just
started being born immune rather than needing the vaccine
CryonoDisney (2:56:32 AM): so, medically induced traits
Nomaken (2:57:01 AM): actually diseases like polio we just killed off, polio and the boubonic plague
CryonoDisney (2:57:18 AM): i didn't specify
CryonoDisney (2:57:34 AM): buonbonic plague killed people off too quickly
Nomaken (2:57:55 AM): the common cold we have never been able to vaccinate and have never stopped being vulnerable to
CryonoDisney (2:57:56 AM): didn't really have a chance to spread. especially when you quarentine a whole friggen country when there's a case of it
CryonoDisney (2:58:17 AM): whooping cough though.
CryonoDisney (2:58:35 AM): and certain strains of small pox
Nomaken (2:58:53 AM): exactly, we killed off the diseases we couldnt beat, and have vaccinatons for ones that are still out there, and the common cold and other minor ones just dont kill
CryonoDisney (2:59:51 AM): no no. i mean those two people kept getting vaccinated for, and it was like the 8th generation or something of vaccinations for that, that
people started just being born immune
CryonoDisney (2:59:59 AM): it was a lot of once too
CryonoDisney (3:00:08 AM): at once*
Nomaken (3:00:11 AM): either we develop a vaccination for SARS or we'll have to quarenteen the infected and wait until the disease dies off
Nomaken (3:01:01 AM): if it was 8 generations there was alot of time for a mutation to occr
CryonoDisney (3:01:03 AM): well... they aren't quarentining SARS patients all that much anymore. there's a 98% survival rate (higher than the common flu), and it's
treated just like a cold
Nomaken (3:01:22 AM): yeah, SARS isnt that nasty its just media hypes it up
Nomaken (3:01:41 AM): but that is how we deal with virluent plagues
CryonoDisney (3:01:47 AM): the disease had been around a lot longer than 8 generations. it was around since the pioneering days
CryonoDisney (3:02:04 AM): we gave the indians small pox, in fact
CryonoDisney (3:02:25 AM): not the ones from India, mind you
Nomaken (3:03:38 AM): yes, but there could be 2 reasons that after 8 generations of vaccinations people were just immune, one, that practically no one ever got it again since they were all
vaccinated, or that during those 8 generations someone had a mutation that made them immune
Nomaken (3:04:23 AM): you may debate such a signifigant mutation however micro-organisms, and our immune systems are about on the same level, if they were they would have beaten
us by now
CryonoDisney (3:04:38 AM): or, that the trait of immunity induced by medical science was passed down to the children
Nomaken (3:04:41 AM): if they werent*
CryonoDisney (3:05:25 AM): http://www.albinoblacksheep.com/text/bloodninja.php
CryonoDisney (3:05:31 AM): read that stuff. it's hilarious
Nomaken (3:05:34 AM): okay, very basic rule - you cannot pass your immunity thorough vaccine down to your children
Nomaken (3:05:43 AM): the vaccine does not alter the DNA
Nomaken (3:05:53 AM): it cannot be passed down
CryonoDisney (3:06:20 AM): no, but you have anti-bodies in your blood then, which you share with the child. just just herpes can be spread from mother to child in the
womb, yet it's not in the DNA
CryonoDisney (3:07:10 AM): mind you, that i didn't mean from the father
Nomaken (3:07:15 AM): you have anti-bodies in the blood but immunity from a disease comes from T cells and B cells inside of the thyroid gland
Nomaken (3:07:51 AM): those cells are created in the thyroid gland
CryonoDisney (3:08:02 AM): what do you think a vaccine is? it's just a solution of the disease and the antibodies to get your system going and making those itself
CryonoDisney (3:08:34 AM): if the mother has that going, it is shared with the child and the child will start developing it itself
Nomaken (3:08:35 AM): yes, but the DNA of the child will not make the T cells and B cells itself
Nomaken (3:08:57 AM): no, the child will not develop them, since it had no vaccination to work with
CryonoDisney (3:09:05 AM): the fluids that the mother share with the child will be like the childs own vaccine getting it going
CryonoDisney (3:09:14 AM): just like with herpes
Nomaken (3:09:58 AM): if you vaccinate a pregrant mother then the child will also develop anti bodies, but an already vaccinated mother does not alter the thyroid gland of the child
Nomaken (3:10:45 AM): the mother does not "lend" or give her T cells and B cells as a gift to the child
CryonoDisney (3:11:03 AM): you didn't hear me or something. the mother and child share blood.
CryonoDisney (3:11:13 AM): that blood will act as a vaccination for the child
CryonoDisney (3:11:21 AM): not always mind you, but sometimes
CryonoDisney (3:11:39 AM): that's what happened with whooping cough
CryonoDisney (3:11:48 AM): *poof*
Nomaken (3:11:57 AM): vaccination promotes the thyroid gland to develop antibodies to the disease, however the vaccinated mother will NOT give that ablity to the child
CryonoDisney (3:12:17 AM): you sound like a broken record. you just said that 3 times in a row
CryonoDisney (3:12:20 AM): PROVE IT
Nomaken (3:12:33 AM): the T cells and B cells from the mother do not enter the child
CryonoDisney (3:12:48 AM): yes, actually they do. anything that is in the mother, is in the child
CryonoDisney (3:12:50 AM): ANYTHING
Nomaken (3:13:06 AM): they share blood, plasma and foods, the T cells and B cells never go to the Thyroid gland and bitch at it to start making copies of themselves
CryonoDisney (3:13:37 AM): the T and B cells are spread through the blood, which they share
CryonoDisney (3:13:56 AM): the blood passes through the thyroid gland
Nomaken (3:14:13 AM): the child must depend on its own DNA to build the T cells and B cells
CryonoDisney (3:14:41 AM): no. if that was true, then vaccinations wouldn't work period.
CryonoDisney (3:14:51 AM): it would be the same for adults
Nomaken (3:15:10 AM): the vaccinations "irritate" the thyroid gland into creating new T cells and B cells
CryonoDisney (3:15:25 AM): it doesn't change the DNA though.
Nomaken (3:15:30 AM): exactly
Nomaken (3:15:39 AM): vaccinations only work for that one person
CryonoDisney (3:16:08 AM): it has nothing to do with DNA
Nomaken (3:16:22 AM): right, which is why the "trait" doesnt get passed to the child
CryonoDisney (3:16:29 AM): since the child and mother are sharing ALL the same fluids, the child is recieving these cells
CryonoDisney (3:16:35 AM): it's not a trait
CryonoDisney (3:16:39 AM): well... kinda
Nomaken (3:17:15 AM): okay, assume that the T cells and B cells do get transfer to the child, unless that child is female, the "vaccination" wont continue
CryonoDisney (3:17:21 AM): the child recieves the blood from the mother. that's where it comes from
CryonoDisney (3:17:53 AM): since the mothers blood is immune, then the childs blood is immune. that works as a vaccination
CryonoDisney (3:18:01 AM): once the child starts developing its own blood
CryonoDisney (3:18:15 AM): that vaccination will not all of a sudden become useless
Nomaken (3:18:20 AM): that still doesnt change the DNA
Nomaken (3:18:44 AM): unless the child is female, to be passed on to thier child, the vaccination will end
CryonoDisney (3:19:03 AM): why do you keep bringing up dna?
Nomaken (3:19:20 AM): because the DNA describes which T cells and B cells are produced
CryonoDisney (3:19:33 AM): oh wait... you're still on evolution
CryonoDisney (3:19:36 AM): i forgot all about that
Nomaken (3:19:43 AM): *smack face*
CryonoDisney (3:19:46 AM): lol
Nomaken (3:20:10 AM): okay, just agree with me that we will NEVER EVER talk about this in public, its been like 2 hours now
CryonoDisney (3:20:19 AM): agreed.
CryonoDisney (3:20:30 AM): lol
Nomaken (3:20:31 AM): its fun debating with you, but there just isnt enough time in the day
CryonoDisney (3:20:36 AM): no, there isn't
CryonoDisney (3:20:47 AM): i've been talking out my ass this whole time anyways
CryonoDisney (3:20:49 AM): lol
At this point we started talking about Pez and other softer, less complicated forms of enjoyment. If you know how evolution really works, and can explain it better than me, please enlighten me, maybe im wrong. ^_^