Inference and its role in NS (General)

by David Turell , Monday, January 17, 2011, 15:41 (5057 days ago) @ dhw
edited by unknown, Monday, January 17, 2011, 15:47


> David seems to see epigenetics as the answer ... certainly a more satisfactory solution than chance mutations ... but is there any evidence that epigenetic changes (a) produce new organs, (b) produce new species, and (c) are anything but short-term? (This is a genuine question, not a criticism.)-The best example I've seen is Reznick's study of guppies. Small guppies changed their size when presented to danger in a two year period, rapid by any theory. Large guppies did the same. Small to large, large to small. Same species but an 'immediate' adaptation. Does a series of 'dangers' or challenges finally cause the epigenetic 'rapid response team' genetics to drive the species to a new species? That is the 64 dollar question. Current research is looking at methods of rapid change, methylation, recombination,etc., not requiring mutation. These seem to cause only small adaptations, not a jump in species type. I'm not aware of other Reznick-like studies.-Of greater importance is that the genomic researchers have no idea why one series of amino acids is functional and when altered is not. It appears that most mutations lab-created are deleterious. Lab research trying to mimic evolution doesn't work. With 20 amino acids that are essential, available,and all used in various sequences, and with functional segments using 100 amino acids or more, the odds (according to one reviewer) are 10^170 against finding a new functional segment de novo.