1 registered members (Russ),
1,075
guests, and 36
spiders. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
Only The Best Herbs!
Your best source of world-class herbal information! More... |
#1 Book We've Found!
"Silver" fillings, mercury detox, & much more. More... |
For Mercury Detox
Prevent mercury reabsorption in the colon during detox. More... |
Softcover & Kindle
Excellent resource for mercury detox. More... |
For Mercury Chelation
For calcium chelation and heart health. More... |
Must for Every Parent
The most complete vaccine info on the planet. More... |
Finally.
Relief! More... |
Dr. Sherri Tenpenny
Get the info you need to protect yourself. More... |
What everyone's talking about!
Safe, powerful, timely! More... |
There is a difference!
A powerful brain antioxidant for use during Hg detox. More... |
This changed my life!
This book convinced me remove my fillings. More... |
This is what we use!
The only multi where you feel the difference. More... |
Hair Tests Explained!
Discover hidden toxicities, easily. More... |
Have Racing Thoughts?
Many use GABA for anxiety and better sleep. More... |
Help Them!
Natural health for pets. More... |
The Bible We Use!
King James with study notes by Bullinger. More... |
The Bible We Use!
King James with study notes by Bullinger. More... |
Food Additives
Protect your family from toxic food! More... |
|
|
|
|
Clonal Variation
#51322
06/25/09 07:08 AM
06/25/09 07:08 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
There is a myth about clonal reproduction that says the clones are all the same, except for the inevitable handful of mutations that accompany any reproduction event. When I started preparing this post, I was aware this idea had been shown false in the 1970's. I learned something during my research. Escherichia coli is a clonal species. The best-understood components of its clonal variation are the flagellar (H) and polysaccharide (O) antigens, both well documented since the mid-1930s because of their use in serotyping. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12700273Some of the mechanisms of clonal variation have been studied, naturally, but investigation is continuing. Research in this field is really only beginning. Clonal variation is not some oddball exception, either. Anywhere clonal reproduction is found, you'll find it. The myth relies on the misconception that lifeforms only carry a single blueprint. In reality, plans for variations of many parts are always present. We know that variety is good for life, and even "clonal" lifeforms possess toolkits for producing it. The Escherichia coli phosphate (PHO) regulon includes 31 (or more) genes arranged in eight separate operons. All are coregulated by environmental (extra-cellular) phosphate and are probably involved in phosphorus assimilation. Pi control of these genes requires the sensor PhoR, the response regulator PhoB, the binding protein-dependent Pi-specific transporter Pst, and the accessory protein PhoU. During Pi limitation, PhoR turns on genes of the PHO regulon by phosphorylating PhoB that in turn activates transcription by binding to promoters that share an 18-base consensus PHO Box. When Pi is in excess, PhoR, Pst, and PhoU together turn off the PHO regulon, presumably by dephosphorylating PhoB. In addition, two Pi-independent controls that may be forms of cross regulation turn on the PHO regulon in the absence of PhoR. The sensor CreC, formerly called PhoM, phosphorylates PhoB in response to some (unknown) catabolite, while acetyl phosphate may directly phosphorylate PhoB. Cross regulation of the PHO regulon by CreC and acetyl phosphate may be examples of underlying control mechanisms important for the general (global) control of cell growth and metabolism. © 1993 Wiley-Liss, Inc. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/107626599/abstractVariation in "clonal" worms: The worm Caenorhabditis elegans has historically been used as a powerful model to study organismal aging. After a brief reproductive period, an adult worm consists of 959 post-mitotic cells. Telomeres, the natural ends of linear chromosomes, have long been implicated in the aging process of mitotic cells, and telomere shortening has been proposed to be a limiting factor in cell division. The authors show that telomere length of C. elegans chromosomes is independent of organismal aging. Worm telomeres were characterized in detail, and found to vary considerably in individual clones. These differences were conserved over several populations, suggesting that telomere length is controlled by similar mechanisms in worms and mammals, emphasizing the value of C. elegans as a model for telomere biology. However, telomere length has not been found to determine the potential life span of the animals, since worms with short telomeres lived as long as worms with long telomeres. http://www.plosgenetics.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pgen.0010030 In Tobacco Sister clones isolated from the same cloned line of crown-gall cells obtained by transformation with the pTiT37 plasmid showed an up to eight-fold difference in their ZR and IPA content (30–230 and 21–77 pmol/g fresh weight, respectively). This variation could not be accounted for by differences in the time course of cytokinin accumulation. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/119517164/abstractIn the germs that attack our mouths Periodontal disease is an infectious disorder caused by a small subset of periodontal pathogens including Porphyromonas gingivalis. Accumulated evidences show that the expression of P. gingivalis heterogenic virulence properties is dependent on its clonal diversity. http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118757850/abstractDefenders of the myth frequently resort to redefining 'mutation'. This merely concedes defeat. If one equivocates and classifies all adaptation as "mutation", doing so does not even defend the notion that all this variety is the result of random mistakes. Such a "defense" does not deny the work of adaptive mechanisms; it simply tries to steal credit for their work. They may try to let on that all this variety should have been detected, and thoroughly documented by now. This is just a play on ignorance. We don't live in a sci-fi realm, where a cell can be inserted into a machine, and the machine will generate a full report on every detail about its composition. Although many strain typing methods exist for pathogenic Escherichia coli, most have drawbacks in terms of resolving power, interpretability, or scalability. For this reason, multilocus sequence typing (MLST) is an appealing alternative. However, its applicability to different pathogens in specific epidemiologic contexts is not well understood. http://journal.shouxi.net/html/qika...24312/wzjh/20080831204312705_193400.htmlOne has to actively search in order to find most of these things out, and the search is not easy, even with 21st century gadgetry. It even appears that clonal cells doing what they do, changing from one generation to the next, is an inconvenient for some researchers. We have developed an E.coli strain with a non-reverting allele of pyrF that is also suitable for cloning. http://www.wikigenes.org/e/gene/e/947170.htmlNext time someone presents a wonderful study claiming they "evolved a clonal lifeform", take a few minutes and fire up your search engine. Enter the name of the lifeform, and "clonal variation". You probably won't have the time or the inclination to read all the results.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51323
06/25/09 08:09 AM
06/25/09 08:09 AM
|
|
Who are the "defenders of the myth"? Any particular scientists claiming that there is no clonal variation? That would be odd since it is well known that the sex of an alligator is dependent upon temperature in the nest which means that DNA can be changed by something as simple as heat or cold.
What does this have to do with Creation vs Evolution?
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51352
06/26/09 02:37 AM
06/26/09 02:37 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Alligators aren't clones.
I guess there's more than one term the defenders can misinterpret. Please don't fault me, folks, for failing to account for all possibilities. I never claimed I did, if anyone cares to review.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51431
06/29/09 05:57 AM
06/29/09 05:57 AM
|
|
Alligators aren't clones.
I guess there's more than one term the defenders can misinterpret. Please don't fault me, folks, for failing to account for all possibilities. I never claimed I did, if anyone cares to review. Wow! Way to miss the whole point! Sorry, I forgot about your poor reading comprehension skills. How about providing some reference showing biologists defending the "myth of clonal reproduction".
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51439
06/29/09 11:29 AM
06/29/09 11:29 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Nah. Everyone's seen it. Even you. Are we to gather you "just don't remember"? Wouldn't be the first time.
Anyhow, if you want to try & bluff folks that's fine. An highly cherished evolie dead without a fight? That's not bad news from my perspective!
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51476
06/30/09 08:21 AM
06/30/09 08:21 AM
|
|
Nah. Everyone's seen it. Even you. Are we to gather you "just don't remember"? Wouldn't be the first time.
Anyhow, if you want to try & bluff folks that's fine. An highly cherished evolie dead without a fight? That's not bad news from my perspective! If "[e]veryone's seen it" then you could easily provide the evidence and show me to be in error. However, you would rather bluster and spout innuendo about my intellectual capacity. Why is that? Does it provide some sort of titillating satisfaction in your "holier than thou" mind to treat people with disdain? I realize that most of the people on this board are not well versed in science and, because of their desire to believe, are willing to lap up the garbage that you spout out. However, your responses and unwillingness to provide support for your quote-mine conclusions indicate that you are somewhat aware of the dearth of evidence for your assertions. And what happens when the children you are teaching grow up, realize that you have misrepresented actual science and they drift from Christianity because you told them that belief in Christ depends on a literal Genesis? Got Millstones?
Last edited by LinearAq; 06/30/09 08:22 AM.
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51480
06/30/09 12:58 PM
06/30/09 12:58 PM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Nah. Everyone's seen it. Even you. Are we to gather you "just don't remember"? Wouldn't be the first time.
Anyhow, if you want to try & bluff folks that's fine. An highly cherished evolie dead without a fight? That's not bad news from my perspective! If "[e]veryone's seen it" then you could easily provide the evidence and show me to be in error. And you could easily pretend not to see whatever I might present, just as you are now pretending you have not witnesses disputes over the issue of clones being identical. However, you would rather bluster and spout innuendo about my intellectual capacity. Why is that? That's a silly loaded question. Just what do you say for my intellect when you ask me to argue against myself? If there are good arguments, go find them. If not, let the bad ones fall. And what happens when the children you are teaching grow up, realize that you have misrepresented actual science If I misrepresent science, it shouldn't be all that hard to figure out. And if you could show where I've done so, you might look less like someone who just slings mud when they don't like the facts. Now here's the fact: clones ain't all identical. If that's a misrepresentation, get busy. Show the error of the science I've presented. As for concerns about children learning false ideas, folks who oppose efforts to remove lies from school textbooks ain't got much room to talk. By their actions, we can discern their true concerns.
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51519
07/01/09 08:52 AM
07/01/09 08:52 AM
|
|
You claim that there are "defenders of the myth" that all clones are identical. You also provide examples of organisms that reproduce asexually or are being stimulated to reproduce asexually (worms, tobacco cells). Are those clones in the same sense that Dolly (the sheep) is a clone produced by inserting a particular sheep's DNA into an emptied egg cell?
So, we are back to the original question. What current biologists have claimed that all clonal reproduction will result in identical individuals? I could try to prove there are no biologists that are "defenders of the myth" by interviewing every biologist in the world. However, it would be easier for you, since you have done the research already, to produce one that does defend that myth.
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51555
07/02/09 06:20 AM
07/02/09 06:20 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Are you saying the evidence against the myth is compelling? That it deserves no defense?
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51643
07/06/09 07:36 AM
07/06/09 07:36 AM
|
|
Are you saying the evidence against the myth is compelling? That it deserves no defense? I am saying that no biologist says that the clonal (asexual) reproduction you describe should always produce identical individuals. You indicate in the first post that this "myth" is a widespread phenomenon. So, I am asking you to provide evidence that biologists are stating that clonal (asexual) reproduction always produces identical individuals. You can't do it because you are using semantics to misrepresent the truth. You are using the popular meaning for "clone" and then providing quotes that use the word "clonal", which in the context of the research means asexual reproduction. Clones are identical in their DNA to the individual from which the DNA was collected. However, "clonal reproduction" is not the making of clones. BTW: What does this have to do with the truth or falseness of evolution?
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51661
07/06/09 06:34 PM
07/06/09 06:34 PM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
Are you saying the evidence against the myth is compelling? That it deserves no defense? I am saying that no biologist says that the clonal (asexual) reproduction you describe should always produce identical individuals. You indicate in the first post that this "myth" is a widespread phenomenon. So, I am asking you to provide evidence that biologists are stating that clonal (asexual) reproduction always produces identical individuals. You can't do it because you are using semantics to misrepresent the truth. You are using the popular meaning for "clone" and then providing quotes that use the word "clonal", which in the context of the research means asexual reproduction. Clones are identical in their DNA to the individual from which the DNA was collected. However, "clonal reproduction" is not the making of clones. BTW: What does this have to do with the truth or falseness of evolution? I consistently use the terms 'clone' and 'clonal' in the very same sense they are used in the literature I cited. It is you who introduced the "popular meaning for clone" to the discussion for the very first time. It's a tad late for any attempts to reverse-confuse the readership. If they have read this far, it's a pretty safe bet they understand. I asked you if you agree to a statement that is perfectly consistent with your contention, and you refused. You have access to the evidence; you can evaluate it. What then prevents you from agreeing with my statement?
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: CTD]
#51674
07/07/09 09:44 AM
07/07/09 09:44 AM
|
|
I consistently use the terms 'clone' and 'clonal' in the very same sense they are used in the literature I cited. Really? The very first line from the introductory post states: There is a myth about clonal reproduction that says the clones are all the same. Where in the literature you cited is the indication that all clones are the same? It is you who introduced the "popular meaning for clone" to the discussion for the very first time. It's a tad late for any attempts to reverse-confuse the readership. If they have read this far, it's a pretty safe bet they understand. Your first sentence introduced the idea that all clones are the same. I asked you if you agree to a statement that is perfectly consistent with your contention, and you refused. You have access to the evidence; you can evaluate it. What then prevents you from agreeing with my statement? I agree that clonal reproduction doesn't always result in identical individuals. I don't agree that biologists have claimed that it does. Could you show me where they have claimed this? Additionally, this seems to have nothing to do with whether all life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor or not.
A faith that connot survive collision with the truth is not worth many regrets. -- Arthur C. Clarke
|
|
|
Re: Clonal Variation
[Re: LinearAq]
#51805
07/11/09 06:28 AM
07/11/09 06:28 AM
|
OP
Master Elite Member
|
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,315
|
|
I consistently use the terms 'clone' and 'clonal' in the very same sense they are used in the literature I cited. Really? The very first line from the introductory post states: There is a myth about clonal reproduction that says the clones are all the same. Where in the literature you cited is the indication that all clones are the same? I employed the term exactly as my sources did. You said I employed different meanings, but you cannot even begin to demonstrate such a difference in anything I posted. How cheesy! It is you who introduced the "popular meaning for clone" to the discussion for the very first time. It's a tad late for any attempts to reverse-confuse the readership. If they have read this far, it's a pretty safe bet they understand. Your first sentence introduced the idea that all clones are the same. I addressed the existence of the myth, yes indeed. I then proceeded to debunk it. Perhaps you should specify what you mean by "popular meaning", since you're claiming it differs from the use in the links I presented. Or are you just bluffing & wasting time? I asked you if you agree to a statement that is perfectly consistent with your contention, and you refused. You have access to the evidence; you can evaluate it. What then prevents you from agreeing with my statement? I agree that clonal reproduction doesn't always result in identical individuals. I don't agree that biologists have claimed that it does. Could you show me where they have claimed this? Why should I bother? If you agree that the idea is false, why are you so bent on seeing "biologists" support it? Is this a trick to get me to call someone a "biologist" who has no business being labeled as such? Life is designed to adapt. If you can live with that, and the loss of claims that the results of such built-in adaptive mechanisms represent evolution of novelties, then please do so. Additionally, this seems to have nothing to do with whether all life on Earth evolved from a common ancestor or not. So? Why not let it go? What harm is done if people learn a fact or two? I think those who can have connected the dots, and I don't think I have any outstanding obligation regarding those who cannot. If you're so unfamiliar with the claims of your fellow evolutionists that you haven't heard any of these lines, great! You don't really need to learn how to employ these defective "arguments", at least in my opinion. Where's the up-side to presenting them?
Dark Matter + Dark Energy = Dark Truth"We find that such evidence demonstrates that the ID argument is dependent upon setting a scientifically unreasonable burden of proof for the theory of evolution." - Judge Jones Kitzmiller case http://www.talkreason.org/articles/Falsify.cfm"To Compel A Man To Furnish Funds For The Propagation Of Ideas He Disbelieves And Abhors Is Sinful And Tyrannical." - Thomas Jefferson "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with his wrath?" - Thomas Jefferson
|
|
|
|