Re: Evolution of DNA and Code.
- From: John Edser <edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 2 May 2009 02:13:37 -0400 (EDT)
MicroTech <Henry.KO.Norman@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:-
I am NOT a creationist (far from it), but available evidence strongly
suggests that something in addition to natural selection is at play
here.y
JE:-
A critical missing element has always been the vastly larger amount
of information that can be coded via heritable _geometric_ gene
associations. Huge amounts of multiplicative (non additive) information
can be packed into just a tiny genome. Contrast this to the relative
paltry amounts of information provided by additive gene associations
which require overly huge genomes. The type of heritable variation on
which selection can act is almost as critical as selection itself. Non
additive genetic associations provide what is termed "genetic epistasis"
(many genes code for one phenotype) and "pleiotrophic effects" (one gene
codes for many phenotypes). Both employ NON additive, heritable
information. Neither have been incorporated within oversimplified Neo
Darwinian models of Darwinism (which include them). The result of such a
momentous omission is that heritable multiplicative effects, which
pioneering researchers such as Waddington discovered in the 1960's
conserve phenotypes against a tide of genetic change (canalization) OR
provide the opposite effect: many times faster than additive effects,
evolve a phenotype using a minimal level of mutation. IOW, heritable non
additive effects, which are not included within Neo Darwinism, play a
major role in gene regulation via genes regulating each another in such
a way that one gene cannot be mapped to one phenotype only CORRELATED to
it. The one to one mapping that is empirically required to allow
additive gene associations is only provided by one gene mapped to one
polypeptide. Phenotypes and their regulation require much more than just
the one polypeptide. Not a single polypeptide fitness exists in nature
which is not mapped to at least one other in a non additive way making
all fitnesses epistatic no matter how you define fitness. Since what is
selected can only be determined by relative fitness, it matters.
It is phenotypes and not the genotypes which code them that remain
important because only phenotypes can be naturally selected FOR within
nature (even if individual genes as genotypes and not phenotypes are
allowed to be heuristically selected for using uncorrected Neo
Darwinistic models of Darwinism). Because non additive phenotypes can be
either high geared (producing assimilation) or low geared (producing
canalization) heritable multiplicative effects provide a critical base
level of gene regulation within Darwinian bodies (fertile forms). The
slow plod of the additive effects allowed within Neo Darwinism are
simply not up to the task of explaining the tiny size of the human
genome (a gene centric dilemma was created after the solution to
Haldane's Dilemma was provided by the infinitesimal difference in human
and chimp coding genomes), the much faster (assimilation) AND slower
(canalization) rate of evolution observed in nature or even the most
basic aspects of gene regulation.
Haldane and Fisher provided just one reason as to why they deleted all
non additive effects as "inherited but not heritable": they simply
ASSUMED that epistasis/pleiotrophic effects cannot survive meiosis.
Nature has subsequently provided a very different story.
Regards,
John Edser
Independent Researcher
edser@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
.
- Prev by Date: Re: Evolution of sleep
- Next by Date: Re: Evolution of DNA and Code.
- Previous by thread: Re: Evolution of DNA and Code.
- Next by thread: Re: Evolution of DNA and Code.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
