ATS Library of Scientific Evidence for Evolution - Open to All Members

CATEGORY

ORIGINS

Self Assembly:

1. Link to board discussion: www.abovetopsecret.com...
2. Summary: The self-organization properties of DNA-like molecular fragments four billion years ago may have guided their own growth into repeating chemical chains long enough to act as a basis for primitive life.
3. www.sciencedaily.com...
4. www.nature.com...
5. www.science20.com...

GENOMICS

1. Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

2. www.abovetopsecret.com...

3. www.genome.gov...

4. science.nasa.gov...

DEVELOPMENTAL EVOLUTION

1. Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

2. www.washingtonpost.com...

3. Developmental Plasticity and the Origin of Tetrapods
www.nature.com... 5DI4S1NeV2yxE7_gEI11m4Xs9v5VT3MMEx27bkZz2E6-VNa6yzuzed3HbeTLGgkXC5Oozxl95i-VUSOh-fv4LhgruzPs8n8pXPRxQ-tPXI0v4FYDSVEQcOMRFoV2liRWbu33EcFXO3oOnLl20JXGg5 7zmSmz1kKSjscpvuRCVAfl9I2USCqlIbYp8BSETqUKC9vYMB5culdnGMycGTAMvXmGby8%3D&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com

4. Your Brain Evolved from Bacteria
www.scientificamerican.com... on+%28Topic%3A+Evolution%29

5. From fish to man: Research reveals how fins became legs
www.eurekalert.org...

6. 10 Popular Fallacies and Misconceptions About Evolution
Thread link: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Contributed by krazysh0t

Evidence for Evolution - www.google.com...
C-14 dating is unreliable and therefore cannot be trusted - en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution Violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics - en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution doesn't adequately explain the origin of life - atheism.about.com...
Mutations are only harmful -
en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution has never been observed - en.wikipedia.org...
www.cdc.gov...
Evolution doesn't answer such and such question about the universe and the origin of life - No scientific theory answers 100% of the questions in science. Sorry I don't have a link for this one, but it is just so absurd that it doesn't really need one. If you find a theory or idea that claims to answer every question imaginable (religion) then it is HIGHLY suspect. The idea of science is that it works to answer a question, but then when that question is answered many new questions appear that the scientists then work to answer. It is an infinite process, but it certainly doesn't discredit the information gained and answers to questions that it does answer.
Evolution is just a theory - www.livescience.com...
Evolution doesn't explain the diversity of life on the planet - www.nhm.ac.uk...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
Any number of hoaxes about evolution (ex: piltdown man) -
Ok, unfortunately this one won't have any links either because it is rather obvious. Thanks to the peer review process once a hoax is identified, it is removed from the scientific knowledge base and is no longer regarded as evidence for anything. HOWEVER, because a hoax exists is NOT proof that the prevailing theory that is for is also untrue. In order for that to be the case, ALL the evidence for that theory would have to be exposed as fradulent, and this is simply not the case for evolution. In fact new evidence surfaces all the time that proves evolution is true, while literally zero evidence surfaces that completely contradicts it.

Every now and then there is some evidence that shows that evolution doesn't work EXACTLY how we originally thought, but in this case we just modify the theory to account for the new information. An example of this would be the punctuated equilibrium idea that I posted in the last point. Originally evolution was thought to happen at the same rate across the species, but evidence kept surfacing that contradicted this account. So now, the theory was updated to include this and show that not all species evolve at the same rate. What DIDN'T happen however is that evolution was completely discredited by this new evidence.

7. From chicken to dinosaur: Scientists experimentally reverse the evolution of the perching toe
22 May 2015 Universidad de Chile
www.alphagalileo.org...
Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Contributed by flyingfish

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Phantom423

Have to make a separate post for videos as citation update post getting too long - thanks to all who are contributing great stuff.

VIDEOS

There was no first human
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

Minds Blown: Scientists Develop Fish That Can Walk on Land
Contributed by Akragon

Evolution in Action
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

Evolution: It's a Thing – Crash Course Biology #20
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

How Evolution Works
Contribued by flyingfish

Sea Slugs that Eat the Sun
Contributed by sapien2

Leonard Susskind: Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life?
Contributed by Phantom423

Bio116 Crash Course Evo Devo
Contributed by flyingfish

originally posted by: Isurrender73
Things that science needs to prove before a natural cause and evolution past Class/Phylum is anything more than your imagination.

1. Abiogenesis
2. Single Cell to Multi Cell
3. Physically observe cross Kingdom - a plant physically observed to become an animal. Since plants and animals are both DNA based, either they have a common creator or common ancestor.
4. Physically observe the separation of cellular organisms from asexual to male/female
5. Physically observe an animal cross Phylum
6. Physically observe an animal cross Class
7. Physically observe an animal cross Order
8. Physically observe an animal cross Family
9. Physically observe an organism cross Genius

SIgh.

Yet again, the word "evolution" is completely misunderstood.

Plants don't "become" animals. Animals don't "become" plants. That isn't evolution.

"Evolution" is the name we give to the long, long VERY LONG natural process of one organism's mutations over thousands of generations. You cannot observe it in real time -- only in the fossil record.

But hey - why believe empirical scientific process? Apart from medications, technology, weather, the computer you're typing on and the clothes you wear, what GOOD has it done?

No, best to say, "Nope - God did". Because... that isn't the cop out, is it?

a reply to: Phantom423

Right - except South Park points out all of the ridiculosity in our society and although some people don't "appreciate" the humor, others do. It helps us stay sane.

Hope you don't mind I added it.
I agree with you it is definitely CHILD ABUSE.

a reply to: noonebutme

dont dignify that argument. proponents of creationism often demand evidence of evolution in the form of real-time observation, but the magic of intervening supernatural forces is granted merit via marginal plausibility and warm fuzzies. in english, thats called a double standard. they move the goalposts and laugh because we dont move ours.

and then they cry foul when they are disqualified.

Ill just throw this here

Wing Evolution
www.dinosaur-world.com...


I think a little of both evolution and creation intelligent design ,

and No God Is needed , we should look within ourselves or itself for
the Answers instead of looking out & UP or some thinking of
Imaginary Being ( ___ place God / Deity here ___)
or perhaps a Civilization type III being that did come another
place, a placethat is not from here form our Solar System ,
whether another solar system or dimension

Look at Us Humans of What we are Doing NOW!

In BIO Mechanics , BIO Engineering, BIO Computing ,
and BIO PRINTING!!! Gene Splicing , Modification ,
Altering Flora and Fauna and we are not even on the Civilization
Type 1 Scale yet.

and you may think if there is Solar Systems out there
way Older then our solar system ,
and that's a thousand to Millions of years Start ( Ahead)

Evolution is a Game Change for Cells Adapting to the
Surrounding Environment .

and for creationism !

we have useless parts still remaining from our
Ancient Ancestral Past, where if we were Creation from
scratch we shouldn't have any of the slightest left overs, nor
have any Genetic deformity's, mentally or physically
they should not exist Period! yet they do.

Humans have Useless Body parts some partial function or
or some Dormant, and some non functioning ,
able to movie Ears , sinus , growing tail , a fraction
of third eyelid, etc

10 Useless Human Body Parts: What You Do And Don't Need
www.medicaldaily.com...

Useless Body Parts
What do we need sinuses for, anyway?
discovermagazine.com...



Dino-Chicken Gets One Step Closer
by Laura Geggel, Staff Writer | May 19, 2015 12:50pm ET
www.livescience.com...


Images: How the Bird Beak Evolved
by Jeanna Bryner, Live Science Managing Editor | May 12, 2015 06:19am ET
www.livescience.com...





Chickens with DINOSAUR feet: Birds grown to have prehistoric legs reveal how running reptiles morphed into perching fliers

Read more: www.dailymail.co.uk... iers.html#ixzz3knPZYcip
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

www.dailymail.co.uk... iers.html
www.livescience.com...

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: OpenEars123

Do you have ANY idea how laughably hilarious this post is....

" I starred and flagged this thread, because of all the people who will supply the irrefutable and overwhelming evidence that hasn't been supplied yet".


ROTFLMAO....

Jaden

You're not rolling on the floor, you're not laughing your ass off, in fact you didn't even laugh or crack a smile when you read my post.

You just got really angry because someone disagreed with your nonsense.

originally posted by: Phantom423



CATEGORY

ORIGINS

Self Assembly:

1. Link to board discussion: www.abovetopsecret.com...
2. Summary: The self-organization properties of DNA-like molecular fragments four billion years ago may have guided their own growth into repeating chemical chains long enough to act as a basis for primitive life.
3. www.sciencedaily.com...
4. www.nature.com...
5. www.science20.com...

GENOMICS

1. Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

2. www.abovetopsecret.com...

3. www.genome.gov...

4. science.nasa.gov...

DEVELOPMENTAL EVOLUTION

1. Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...

2. www.washingtonpost.com...

3. Developmental Plasticity and the Origin of Tetrapods
www.nature.com... 5DI4S1NeV2yxE7_gEI11m4Xs9v5VT3MMEx27bkZz2E6-VNa6yzuzed3HbeTLGgkXC5Oozxl95i-VUSOh-fv4LhgruzPs8n8pXPRxQ-tPXI0v4FYDSVEQcOMRFoV2liRWbu33EcFXO3oOnLl20JXGg5 7zmSmz1kKSjscpvuRCVAfl9I2USCqlIbYp8BSETqUKC9vYMB5culdnGMycGTAMvXmGby8%3D&tracking_referrer=www.washingtonpost.com

4. Your Brain Evolved from Bacteria
www.scientificamerican.com... on+%28Topic%3A+Evolution%29

5. From fish to man: Research reveals how fins became legs
www.eurekalert.org...

6. 10 Popular Fallacies and Misconceptions About Evolution
Thread link: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Contributed by krazysh0t

Evidence for Evolution - www.google.com...
C-14 dating is unreliable and therefore cannot be trusted - en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution Violates the Second Law of Thermodynamics - en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution doesn't adequately explain the origin of life - atheism.about.com...
Mutations are only harmful -
en.wikipedia.org...
Evolution has never been observed - en.wikipedia.org...
www.cdc.gov...
Evolution doesn't answer such and such question about the universe and the origin of life - No scientific theory answers 100% of the questions in science. Sorry I don't have a link for this one, but it is just so absurd that it doesn't really need one. If you find a theory or idea that claims to answer every question imaginable (religion) then it is HIGHLY suspect. The idea of science is that it works to answer a question, but then when that question is answered many new questions appear that the scientists then work to answer. It is an infinite process, but it certainly doesn't discredit the information gained and answers to questions that it does answer.
Evolution is just a theory - www.livescience.com...
Evolution doesn't explain the diversity of life on the planet - www.nhm.ac.uk...
en.wikipedia.org...
en.wikipedia.org...
Any number of hoaxes about evolution (ex: piltdown man) -
Ok, unfortunately this one won't have any links either because it is rather obvious. Thanks to the peer review process once a hoax is identified, it is removed from the scientific knowledge base and is no longer regarded as evidence for anything. HOWEVER, because a hoax exists is NOT proof that the prevailing theory that is for is also untrue. In order for that to be the case, ALL the evidence for that theory would have to be exposed as fradulent, and this is simply not the case for evolution. In fact new evidence surfaces all the time that proves evolution is true, while literally zero evidence surfaces that completely contradicts it.

Every now and then there is some evidence that shows that evolution doesn't work EXACTLY how we originally thought, but in this case we just modify the theory to account for the new information. An example of this would be the punctuated equilibrium idea that I posted in the last point. Originally evolution was thought to happen at the same rate across the species, but evidence kept surfacing that contradicted this account. So now, the theory was updated to include this and show that not all species evolve at the same rate. What DIDN'T happen however is that evolution was completely discredited by this new evidence.

7. From chicken to dinosaur: Scientists experimentally reverse the evolution of the perching toe
22 May 2015 Universidad de Chile
www.alphagalileo.org...
Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Contributed by flyingfish

CATEGORY

DINOSAURS



Board discussion link: www.abovetopsecret.com...
Dinosaur World
www.dinosaur-world.com...
Contributed by Wolfenz

Dino Chicken Gets One Step Closer
www.livescience.com...
Contributed by Wolfenz

How the Bird Beak Evolved
www.livescience.com...
Contributed by Wolfenz

Chickens with DINOSAUR Feet: Birds grown to have prehistoric legs reveal how running reptiles morphed into perching fliers
www.dailymail.co.uk... iers.html
Contributed by Wolfenz

SECTION II

ATS Library of Scientific Evidence for Evolution


CATEGORY

MUTATIONS: The Raw Material of Evolution

A MUTATION is defined as the process by which a gene changes from one allele to another and the end result of that allelic change.

Major changes can take place with only a small rearrangement of base pairs on the DNA strand, either due to errors in DNA replication or from outside damage to the DNA.

The difference between adaptation and evolution!

1. Adaptation is short-term change (via gene expression) in response to environmental factors; it does not (usually) involve permanent genetic change. (Caution: recall epigenesis!)
2. Organic Evolution is a shift in allele frequencies in a population (microevolution) which can ultimately lead to speciation (macroevolution) under certain circumstances.

Individuals ADAPT. (They do not evolve.)
Populations EVOLVE.

Only evolution involves overall change in allele frequencies and genetic composition of the main unit of evolution: the population.


Key ideas:

mutations can occur "spontaneously" due to errors in DNA replication or other "spontaneous" DNA damage.
mutations can also be induced by outside factors.
A mutagen is an agent which increases the frequency of mutagenesis (the generation of mutations), usually by changing the DNA. (note: a carcinogen is a mutagen which causes a carcinoma--a cancer of the epithelial tissues)
Also note that there's a big difference in the consequences of SOMATIC (body cell) mutations and GERMLINE (reproductive cell) mutations.

Germline Mutations:
Mutations affecting the germ (spermatogonial or oogonial) cells are the only mutations with evolutionary consequences.

Somatic mutations:
Mutations that occur in the somatic cells may disrupt the function of that particular cell, causing it to die, or causing it to become cancerous (highly proliferative and nasty!).

Contributed by Phantom423

a reply to: Phantom423

I can't wait for the next "prove evolution there is no proof" thread .

a reply to: boymonkey74

The library is coming along well - people are making good contributions. Hope it can be used as a "teaching moment" for some who are still stuck in the Creationist mud pit!

I just wanted to point out this...


Well for Human Evidence of Evolution ,

Im not sure if I am Exactly accurate in this ,

One of the Most intriguing evidence i have seen so far

is when they did a research on some people in china that had the
same genetic disorder , as a Famous Singer and Dancer of the early to mid 19th century
with a major deformity that resembled an early human ( hominid )
she had the face and looks of an Ape ,

Her name was Julia Pastrana .

The Studied the DNA Sequence ( Chromosomes & Genes )
of this Group that had the same systems as julia pastrana
in China , and what they found is that there were missing
Genes in some places in some of the chromosome's
and Some genes were Doubled. and this caused her appearance
to look like a Hominid ,

in other Words Her DNA reverted to her to Ancestral makeup,

the Study showed that She was 100% Human and NOT A HOMINID
she was genetically a Mexican Native American aka INDIAN

but as we all know not that some humans on this planet has those
Neanderthal Genes within us and that is a fact and Science Proved this .

the possibility that because Missing Genes that Julia Had
the Dormant Neanderthal genes became activated to replace the missing
genes?? or the Gere were always activated and the missing genes
stopped the process in development , pretty much of what
Jack Horner has explained in his Dino chicken theory
of Back engineering a chicken to a DINO as the Genes are still there to
grow arm & hand Limb's instead of wings Snouts instead of Beaks
long tails instead of a feathered flight tails. etc..


So here is a link to Julia Pastrana and her Genes


Genes of 'Bearded Lady' Revealed
by Live Science Staff | May 21, 2009 08:03am ET
www.livescience.com...

After analyzing the genomes of members of three Chinese families with CGHT and one person with CGHT and gingival hyperplasia, researchers pinpointed the genetic defects to chromosome 17. In the three families, members had DNA deletions on this chromosome, meaning they were missing pieces in their genes. On the other hand, the individual with enlarged gums had extra pieces of DNA, called DNA duplications, a type of mutation in which sequences of DNA appear multiple times. These genetic abnormalities affected four to eight genes on chromosome 17.

New Study Uncovers Genetics Behind “Bearded Lady Syndrome”
Read more at blog.23andme.com...

Since the Middle Ages, when this condition was first reported, there has been much speculation over the root causes of CGH. Some have argued that CGH is an example of atavism, or an evolutionary ‘throwback’ to a more primitive ancestor. Others have reasoned (incorrectly) that individuals suffering from CGH represented the missing link between apes and humans, and thus further evidence to support Darwin’s theory of evolution. Read more at blog.23andme.com...

AAAS.org
Solving the Mystery of the Bearded Lady
news.sciencemag.org...

CGHT is an extremely rare but highly heritable disorder. Scientists are unsure how many people have the condition, but there are at least 30 cases in China's billion-strong population. Affected men and women develop excessive dark hair across their bodies and faces. Some sufferers also have a broad, flat nose, large ears, a large mouth, and thick lips, and, occasionally, an enlarged head and jaw.

Jack Horner: Building a dinosaur from a chicken
www.youtube.com...



so lets look at the word atavism

atavism
www.merriam-webster.com...

a : recurrence in an organism of a trait or character typical of an ancestral form and usually due to genetic recombination

What is an Atavism?
science.howstuffworks.com...


Atavisms: medical, genetic, and evolutionary implications
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

originally posted by: Phantom423

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Phantom423

Have to make a separate post for videos as citation update post getting too long - thanks to all who are contributing great stuff.

SECTION II

VIDEOS

There was no first human
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

Minds Blown: Scientists Develop Fish That Can Walk on Land
Contributed by Akragon

Evolution in Action
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

Evolution: It's a Thing – Crash Course Biology #20
Contributed by BoyMonkey74

How Evolution Works
Contribued by flyingfish

Sea Slugs that Eat the Sun
Contributed by sapien2

Leonard Susskind: Is the Universe Fine Tuned for Life?
Contributed by Phantom423

Bio116 Crash Course Evo Devo
Contributed by flyingfish

Jack Horner: Building a Dinosaur from a Chicken
Contributed by Wolfenz


Neanderthal Man with Svante Paabo - Conversations with History
Contributed by Phantom423

a reply to: Wolfenz

The condition is called generalized hypertrichosis. It's a pathogenic copy-number mutation and is a trisomy 17 genomic disorder. Similar to Down's Syndrome which is a trisomy 21 disorder, there are 2 copies of chromosome 17 which is the root of the disorder. So instead of 46 chromosomes, the person has 47 chromosomes. Here's a research paper describing the disorder: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I didn't see anything in the literature to suggest that hypertrichosis is an "atavistic" disorder, i.e. a throwback to earlier evolutionary models. I think it's just a chromosomal disorder where the physical expression of the extra genetic component is very "apelike". But the person is totally human. The condition also exists in primates - but the primate physical appearance looks more like Down's Syndrome (to me anyway). Would have been really strange if the primate expression of the gene disorder caused them to look more human (good subject for a sci fi novel!)

Interesting stuff - thanks for posting.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Wolfenz

The condition is called generalized hypertrichosis. It's a pathogenic copy-number mutation and is a trisomy 17 genomic disorder. Similar to Down's Syndrome which is a trisomy 21 disorder, there are 2 copies of chromosome 17 which is the root of the disorder. So instead of 46 chromosomes, the person has 47 chromosomes. Here's a research paper describing the disorder: www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

I didn't see anything in the literature to suggest that hypertrichosis is an "atavistic" disorder, i.e. a throwback to earlier evolutionary models. I think it's just a chromosomal disorder where the physical expression of the extra genetic component is very "apelike". But the person is totally human. The condition also exists in primates - but the primate physical appearance looks more like Down's Syndrome (to me anyway). Would have been really strange if the primate expression of the gene disorder caused them to look more human (good subject for a sci fi novel!)

Interesting stuff - thanks for posting.

The Reason why you havent seen anything, as its still a 50 / 50 Debate between
Scientist about the Missing genes let alone the double up of genes

here some links .. ( legit Sites )

Modern 'Wolfmen' May Have Inherited Ancient Gene
By NATALIE ANGIER
Published: May 31, 1995
www.nytimes.com...

US National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Now Get this Phantom 423 , this Sounds just like Julia Pastrana
same description and everything , even her nationality Mexican ( I placed in bold, the key points )

X-linked congenital generalized hypertrichosis (Online Mendelian Inheritance in Man 307150) is an extremely rare condition of hair overgrowth on different body sites.

We previously reported linkage in a large Mexican family with X-linked congenital generalized hypertrichosis cosegregating with deafness and with dental and palate anomalies to Xq24-27. Using SNP oligonucleotide microarray analysis and whole-genome sequencing,

Inherited hypertrichoses are rare human disorders characterized by excessive hair growth that does not depend on androgen stimulation and is independent of age, sex, and ethnicity (1). Hypertrichosis syndromes fall under the larger umbrella of ectodermal dysplasias, or abnormal development of the hair, skin, nails, teeth, and/or eccrine glands, and are often associated with additional anomalies including gingival hyperplasia, deafness, cardiomegaly, and bone abnormalities (2).

It has been suggested that inherited hypertrichoses represent examples of atavisms, or the recurrence of an ancestral phenotype, where the genes that promote a full coat of hair in other mammals and were silenced throughout evolution have become “reactivated” in human hypertrichosis, invoking unusual genetic mechanisms to explain their occurrence

( see above Paragraph )
Remember this came from US National Library of Medicine
National Institutes of Health own Site!

Ancient throwback trait ? it the same condition of Julia Pastrana


a few more links


(Very interesting a must read )
HYPERTRICHOSIS, CONGENITAL GENERALIZED; HTC2

Alternative titles; symbols
CHROMOSOME Xq27.1 INTERCHROMOSOMAL INSERTION SYNDROME
CGH
HCG
www.omim.org...

Researchers are familiar with other atavistic genetic behavior. Some rare examples include additional nipples, and small tail-like extrusions at the end of the spine. The defective gene in CGH is passed by both sexes, to 50% of their offspring. Typically, fetuses lose their fine body hair, called lanugo, by the end of the seventh and eight month of gestation. Babies afflicted with CGH are born with this body hair intact, which occasionally fades in adulthood, but typically lastis a lifetime. Currently, the best known cases of CGH occurs in a family living in Mexico. Sadly, much of this family has resorted to working in circuses and “freak” shows to earn a living. This Mexican family grows an even thicker, darker body hair than their Asian, and European counterparts. Men have thicker and denser hair than the women in this family, suggesting an X-linked dominant pattern of inheritance, cardiagra.blogspot.com reports. - See more at: english.pravda.ru...

english.pravda.ru...

just a few links. so the debate is still on

a reply to: Wolfenz

Atavism isn't reverse evolution. There's obviously a mutation event occurring, but I don't think it's a reversion to some pre-existing organism. I don't think you can label it reverse evolution. It's just like a human being born with a small tail - we know the code is there in the genome, but it takes a mutation and a whole cascade of events for it to appear. But that doesn't imply that the human is reversing evolutionary course. Remember - evolution is a population event, not an individual event. If whole populations started to breed ape-like characteristics, then we would be looking at a whole new dynamic. But these are very isolated events which suggest that it's a mutation which can be either inherited or occur in a single individual.

Humans and primates have about 98% genetic similarity.
Trisomy 17 occurs in primates too. If the chromosome 17 duplicate was a normal genetic configuration in the primate genome, then you wouldn't expect it to turn up as an "anomaly", or genomic abnormality. It would be considered normal. But it isn't. So whatever triggers the Trisomy 17 mutation in humans - whether it's inherited or a single generation - isn't duplicating some normal condition that existed previously in primates. It's an abnormal mutation.
At least that's how I would interpret the research.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Wolfenz

Atavism isn't reverse evolution. There's obviously a mutation event occurring, but I don't think it's a reversion to some pre-existing organism. I don't think you can label it reverse evolution. It's just like a human being born with a small tail - we know the code is there in the genome, but it takes a mutation and a whole cascade of events for it to appear. But that doesn't imply that the human is reversing evolutionary course. Remember - evolution is a population event, not an individual event. If whole populations started to breed ape-like characteristics, then we would be looking at a whole new dynamic. But these are very isolated events which suggest that it's a mutation which can be either inherited or occur in a single individual.

Humans and primates have about 98% genetic similarity.
Trisomy 17 occurs in primates too. If the chromosome 17 duplicate was a normal genetic configuration in the primate genome, then you wouldn't expect it to turn up as an "anomaly", or genomic abnormality. It would be considered normal. But it isn't. So whatever triggers the Trisomy 17 mutation in humans - whether it's inherited or a single generation - isn't duplicating some normal condition that existed previously in primates. It's an abnormal mutation.
At least that's how I would interpret the research.

Atavism isn't reverse evolution. There's obviously a mutation event occurring, but I don't think it's a reversion to some pre-existing organism. I don't think you can label it reverse evolution.

is that you Opinion or is it a fact ?
I showed Legit Sites in Science saying it is,
Atavism is a revert back to what we originally were
in the DNA coding Sequence aka Add ons
as i see it when the interruption of Missing Genes.
perhaps those dormant genes , become active to to replace
those missing genes. in julia Pastrana's case.
and that is basically what Scientist are debating.

like Whale Dolphins have leg stubs and snakes with leg stub
all from what they original had !

Atavism a Perfect example is what jack Horner explained

about the Embryo fetus stages of a Bird
it grows Tail but stops and most of the tail is adsorbed
, a fingered like limb then fuses to a wing
he explained this on TED. that in that process.
there is something stopping it in the Genes.

its the Same for Humans.

There is some left over parts aka useless parts
from our ancestors that proved evolution within our selves
as in tails, body hair, 3rd eyelid, wiggle in the ears controlled
muscle movement extra ribs , extra neck bone etc..
evidence we are not 100% created !

Humans and primates have about 98% genetic similarity.

but what gets me that the chromosome 2
what science proved that it actually 2 chromosome fused to one
end for end of the telomers. making it 46 instead of 48
like our primate cousins Chimps %98 Orangutan 97%
Gorilla 96-97% and Gibbons 95% shared makeup.
so the closest of the highest percentage in the great apes is
the chimpanzee..


I never mention that the Human Race is reversing back to its
ancestral course , it just sometimes the traits come out from
usually ways a genetic distorter.

Right evolution is a Population event from a Group
from a certain locations from the effect of the species surroundings
like one group of ( for example ) Big cats like the Tiger
but theirs multiple from all over in Asia from Siberia to a Bengal and
to the extinct Caspian. all different sizes some stronger or weaker
some thicker or thinner coat . all adapted to their environment it lives in
over the thousands of years.

Tiger Subspecies (image)
blogs.evergreen.edu...
species of tiger

for individual that's called mutation but also can lead to a Group
causing a Heredity trait.

what i referring too, isn't the duplication but the Missing genes
and what is missing , what is replacing it ? or just the plain gap
is causing it .

Phantom 423 im not the perfect apple in the bunch
but i try to related and make sense of it .

Creation and evolution gotta love it ,

love to know what cause that fusion of
chromosome 2

Origin of human chromosome 2: an ancestral telomere-telomere fusion.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.

originally posted by: Wolfenz

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Wolfenz

Atavism isn't reverse evolution. There's obviously a mutation event occurring, but I don't think it's a reversion to some pre-existing organism. I don't think you can label it reverse evolution. It's just like a human being born with a small tail - we know the code is there in the genome, but it takes a mutation and a whole cascade of events for it to appear. But that doesn't imply that the human is reversing evolutionary course. Remember - evolution is a population event, not an individual event. If whole populations started to breed ape-like characteristics, then we would be looking at a whole new dynamic. But these are very isolated events which suggest that it's a mutation which can be either inherited or occur in a single individual.

Humans and primates have about 98% genetic similarity.
Trisomy 17 occurs in primates too. If the chromosome 17 duplicate was a normal genetic configuration in the primate genome, then you wouldn't expect it to turn up as an "anomaly", or genomic abnormality. It would be considered normal. But it isn't. So whatever triggers the Trisomy 17 mutation in humans - whether it's inherited or a single generation - isn't duplicating some normal condition that existed previously in primates. It's an abnormal mutation.
At least that's how I would interpret the research.

Atavism isn't reverse evolution. There's obviously a mutation event occurring, but I don't think it's a reversion to some pre-existing organism. I don't think you can label it reverse evolution.

Atavism is the development of on ancestor traits
and then the modern traits take control ( Game change )

wiki terms

he he

Evolutionarily, traits that have disappeared phenotypically do not necessarily disappear from an organism's DNA. The gene sequence often remains, but is inactive. Such an unused gene may remain in the genome for many generations.[4] As long as the gene remains intact, a fault in the genetic control suppressing the gene can lead to it being expressed again. Sometimes, the expression of dormant genes can be induced by artificial stimulation.

en.wikipedia.org...

I showed Legit Sites in Science saying it is,
Atavism is a revert back to what we originally were
in the DNA coding Sequence aka Add ons
as i see it when the interruption of Missing Genes.
perhaps those dormant genes , become active to to replace
those missing genes. in julia Pastrana's case.
and that is basically what Scientist are debating.

like Whale Dolphins have leg stubs and snakes with leg stub
all from what they original had !

Atavism a Perfect example is what jack Horner explained

about the Embryo fetus stages of a Bird
it grows Tail but stops and most of the tail is adsorbed
, a fingered like limb then fuses to a wing
he explained this on TED. that in that process.
there is something stopping it in the Genes.

its the Same for Humans.

There is some left over parts aka useless parts
from our ancestors that proved evolution within our selves
as in tails, body hair, 3rd eyelid, wiggle in the ears controlled
muscle movement extra ribs , extra neck bone etc..
evidence we are not 100% created !

Humans and primates have about 98% genetic similarity.

but what gets me that the chromosome 2
what science proved that it actually 2 chromosome fused to one
end for end of the telomers. making it 46 instead of 48
like our primate cousins Chimps %98 Orangutan 97%
Gorilla 96-97% and Gibbons 95% shared makeup.
so the closest of the highest percentage in the great apes is
the chimpanzee..


I never mention that the Human Race is reversing back to its
ancestral course , it just sometimes the traits come out from
usually ways a genetic distorter.

Right evolution is a Population event from a Group
from a certain locations from the effect of the species surroundings
like one group of ( for example ) Big cats like the Tiger
but theirs multiple from all over in Asia from Siberia to a Bengal and
to the extinct Caspian. all different sizes some stronger or weaker
some thicker or thinner coat . all adapted to their environment it lives in
over the thousands of years.

Tiger Subspecies (image)
blogs.evergreen.edu...
species of tiger

for individual that's called mutation but also can lead to a Group
causing a Heredity trait.

what i referring too, isn't the duplication but the Missing genes
and what is missing , what is replacing it ? or just the plain gap
is causing it .

Phantom 423 im not the perfect apple in the bunch
but i try to related and make sense of it .

Creation and evolution gotta love it ,

love to know what cause that fusion of
chromosome 2

Origin of human chromosome 2: an ancestral telomere-telomere fusion.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

We conclude that the locus cloned in cosmids c8.1 and c29B is the relic of an ancient telomere-telomere fusion and marks the point at which two ancestral ape chromosomes fused to give rise to human chromosome 2.

I also want to point out phantom423
im going into detail for those reading this post
that are not in the know

edit on 12015MondayfAmerica/Chicago9249 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

edit on 12015MondayfAmerica/Chicago9249 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

edit on 12015MondayfAmerica/Chicago9249 by Wolfenz because: (no reason given)

a reply to: Wolfenz

I see what you're driving at. But expressing genes that are already in the genome, whether dormant or not, seems to me just playing an old record - it gets played once in a while for unknown reasons.

I'm not sure what you mean by "missing genes" - do you mean the reduction from 48 chromosomes in the primates to 46 in humans? It's interesting to consider that nature may be reducing the number of chromosomes during the evolutionary process and concomitantly increasing the complexity - sort of like an artificial intelligence or self programming computer that reduces waste, increases efficiency and complexity.

It's an interesting topic - I want to do more reading and research. The fusing on chromosome 2 is intriguing mainly because of the outcome. Genetic fusing has been identified in a number of cancers and other disease processes.

Chromosomal translocations that encode fusion oncoproteins have been observed consistently in leukemias/lymphomas and sarcomas but not in carcinomas, the most common human cancers. Here, we report that t(2;3)(q13;p25), a translocation identified in a subset of human thyroid follicular carcinomas, results in fusion of the DNA binding domains of the thyroid transcription factor PAX8 to domains A to F of the peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor (PPAR) γ1. PAX8-PPARγ1 mRNA and protein were detected in 5 of 8 thyroid follicular carcinomas but not in 20 follicular adenomas, 10 papillary carcinomas, or 10 multinodular hyperplasias. PAX8-PPARγ1 inhibited thiazolidinedione-induced transactivation by PPARγ1 in a dominant negative manner. The experiments demonstrate an oncogenic role for PPARγ and suggest that PAX8-PPARγ1 may be useful in the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid carcinoma.

www.sciencemag.org...

Keep digging this stuff up! Very intriguing and worth researching.

originally posted by: Phantom423
a reply to: Wolfenz

I see what you're driving at. But expressing genes that are already in the genome, whether dormant or not, seems to me just playing an old record - it gets played once in a while for unknown reasons.

I'm not sure what you mean by "missing genes" - do you mean the reduction from 48 chromosomes in the primates to 46 in humans? It's interesting to consider that nature may be reducing the number of chromosomes during the evolutionary process and concomitantly increasing the complexity - sort of like an artificial intelligence or self programming computer that reduces waste, increases efficiency and complexity.

It's an interesting topic - I want to do more reading and research. The fusing on chromosome 2 is intriguing mainly because of the outcome. Genetic fusing has been identified in a number of cancers and other disease processes.

Chromosomal translocations that encode fusion oncoproteins have been observed consistently in leukemias/lymphomas and sarcomas but not in carcinomas, the most common human cancers. Here, we report that t(2;3)(q13;p25), a translocation identified in a subset of human thyroid follicular carcinomas, results in fusion of the DNA binding domains of the thyroid transcription factor PAX8 to domains A to F of the peroxisome proliferator–activated receptor (PPAR) γ1. PAX8-PPARγ1 mRNA and protein were detected in 5 of 8 thyroid follicular carcinomas but not in 20 follicular adenomas, 10 papillary carcinomas, or 10 multinodular hyperplasias. PAX8-PPARγ1 inhibited thiazolidinedione-induced transactivation by PPARγ1 in a dominant negative manner. The experiments demonstrate an oncogenic role for PPARγ and suggest that PAX8-PPARγ1 may be useful in the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid carcinoma.

www.sciencemag.org...

Keep digging this stuff up! Very intriguing and worth researching.

what i meant is there is Missing genes in the Chromosome itself
in the genetic distorter that julia pastrana and other had.

( placing in bold key points ) ( underlined of just a few genes can cause a major difference )

After analyzing the genomes of members of three Chinese families with CGHT and one person with CGHT and gingival hyperplasia, researchers pinpointed the genetic defects to chromosome 17. I n the three families, members had DNA deletions on this chromosome, meaning they were missing pieces in their genes. On the other hand, the individual with enlarged gums had extra pieces of DNA, called DNA duplications, a type of mutation in which sequences of DNA appear multiple times. These genetic abnormalities affected four to eight genes on chromosome 17.

www.livescience.com...

I'm not sure what you mean by "missing genes" - do you mean the reduction from 48 chromosomes in the primates to 46 in humans? It's interesting to consider that nature may be reducing the number of chromosomes during the evolutionary process and concomitantly increasing the complexity - sort of like an artificial intelligence or self programming computer that reduces waste, increases efficiency and complexity.

Interesting you say this.

just think of machine language vs Basic language on a IBM PC
in the Genome Sequence code in the DNA G-A-T-I-C O-M

reduce waste ? as in reduce Space.
just think of it as a compressed program aka a Zip file.

any how. that how i see it,
the 2nd Chromosome fusion of cause by the telomeres
to make the program work and for us not to mate with primates! ???

if its cause by mutation the fusion then
there would of been another group ancient primates/hominids
having the same type of mutation is my guess and just they happen
to find each other and mate with each other .
OMG it sounds LIKE ADAM & EVE Love Story lol..

and what are the Odds to that.. and the creationist are going wild!

Shoot me now!

but.. perhaps something happened something came in contact
and infused with our dna sequence. changed it altered it modified it
and that could be a Virus , Bacteria , some kind of chimera effect.
as we humans can do that now in science but what if it occurred naturally.
if that even remotely possible .

still scientist have got all the info on junk DNA of what that is.

Now Scientist are in the process of unraveling a new discovery
a 2nd layer of code in Human DNA. of what it means and may have
better understanding of junk DNA ,

my personal Opinion

humans are a group of different Humanoid species .

and Science has proved there is a Percentage of modern man
that is walking around the planet with Neanderthal genes
so there may be more just haven't look through it yet.


I tend to think there is Evolution with
a Boost of Creation Intelligent design of something.

I cant relate on Solely on one or the other
it has to be both in degrees !

what causing it ? a Super Being from a
distant planet , Dimension , or a humanoid being
millions of years ahead of us or is it just our cells our DNA
making the game change of all the beings on this planet
adapting to the environment for survival ?

as how does a plant cell know make a parachute
so it can be carried in the wind to seed

how does a Fauna and Flora know how to camouflage themselves (blend in )
in their environment and place that in the DNA Sequence permanently

why do, plants produce foods ,
herbal healing plants that cure for Animal kingdom?

those are the Questions of Debate with Evolution and Creationism

but please provide links as this Thread is for a Library research tool.
thanks .