Article <4magvi9b50bgt3jf3kaohi5s8e6odfgqke@4ax.com>

Warning: mysqli::__construct(): (HY000/1203): User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\includes\artfuncs.php on line 21
Failed to connect to MySQL: (1203) User howardkn already has more than 'max_user_connections' active connections
Warning: mysqli::query(): Couldn't fetch mysqli in D:\Inetpub\vhosts\howardknight.net\al.howardknight.net\index.php on line 66
Article <4magvi9b50bgt3jf3kaohi5s8e6odfgqke@4ax.com>
Deutsch English Français Italiano
<4magvi9b50bgt3jf3kaohi5s8e6odfgqke@4ax.com>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article
Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!paganini.bofh.team!news.killfile.org!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: jillery <69jpil69@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: CONTRARY EVIDENCE (WASRe: Evide)nce!
Date: Mon, 18 Mar 2024 07:56:24 -0400
Organization: What are you looking for?
Lines: 107
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <4magvi9b50bgt3jf3kaohi5s8e6odfgqke@4ax.com>
References: <hleoui5fr9lhkuk3at87j8nepa0cob8hb5@4ax.com> <86le6rvetn.fsf@example.com> <qqiouipguu6qv08k5uiuj5lmged9a6scic@4ax.com> <p_0HN.545269$xHn7.365886@fx14.iad> <dtqquippo9sdpp0g234gl44ru4hpraaq6c@4ax.com> <LM8IN.701577$p%Mb.613681@fx15.iad> <5vl2vilpidbokkqrd0v635aoudh42ql3u2@4ax.com> <DiuIN.572243$xHn7.66749@fx14.iad> <fa08vitrlk8u0dicb4lvi3e0044k8512rf@4ax.com> <8bpJN.709697$p%Mb.210946@fx15.iad> <ut6ol3$3ha7j$1@dont-email.me> <oZKJN.525905$c3Ea.150518@fx10.iad>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="69231"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: ForteAgent/8.00.32.1272
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:UdCgj60XL/BSWETbD5abCm2A2PQ=
Bytes: 7349

On Sun, 17 Mar 2024 19:25:07 -0400, Ron Dean
<rondean-noreply@gmail.com> wrote:

>Ernest Major wrote:
>> On 16/03/2024 22:37, Ron Dean wrote:
>>> Explain how if eyes evolved independently about 40 times, how is it=20
>>> that the same master control gene exist in fruit flies, mice and=20
>>> humans. The eye gene (Pax6 gene) was taken from a mouse and placed=20
>>> into a fruit fly embryo and the mouse gene produced eyes in the fruit=
=20
>>> fly, but not mouse eyes, but fruit fly eyes. . Furthermore, some of=20
>>> the first complex organisms ie certain species of trilobites had=20
>>> highly complex functioning eyes. Is there reason to think the same=20
>>> Pax6 gene was not involved in the eyes of trilobites with vision?
>>=20
>> One of the functions of DNA binding regulatory proteins is to =
"specify"=20
>> parts of the body. For example the Hox proteins divide the bilaterian=20
>> body into regions along the anterior/posterior axis. Some MADS box =
genes=20
>> in plants divide the developing flower along the proximal/distal =
access=20
>> into the floral whorls of calyx, corolla, androecium and gynoecium.
>>=20
>> There is an obvious hypothesis for the role of Pax6 genes in=20
>> independently evolved eye development - that Pax6, among it's other=20
>> roles, specifies a forward facing region of the head, which is where=20
>> eyes usually developed, and has been pressed into service as a switch =
in=20
>> the early stages of eye development. One possible test for this=20
>> hypothesis is look at the control of eye development in organisms with=
=20
>> non-cephalic eyes - is the claim that Pax6 is a "master control gene"=20
>> for eye development across all Bilateria an overly hasty =
generalisation?
> >
>Ok, but the pax6 gene function is a function of eyes and part of the=20
>brain. But the fact that a mouse gene function controlling or switching=20
>on the downstream fly genes suggest it's the same gene. What seems=20
>amazing is that this gene remains "fixed" or unchanged back into deep=20
>time,100s of millions of years. I think deliberate and purposeful design=
=20
>is a better explanation than random, unguided blind natural forces for=20
>what is observed.
> >
>The most vexing problem I have with evolution is the dogma of a blind,=20
>random, unguided process. I'm an engineer. In engineering we never see=20
>this, there no chance that a complex program can undergo random changes=20
>without dire consequence. There might possibly be on rare occasion where=
=20
>an unguided change might have no effect. Engineering starts out with an=20
>objective or goal,  so must evolution. If there's no goal, then what=20
>distinguishes a beneficial mutation from a bad mutation. Survival one=20
>might say? But no! offspring with bad mutations can do frequently=20
>survive, protected by the mother. And they can have offspring; only the=20
>worst die out.
>
>The members that usually survival depends largely upon luck, surviving=20
>to adulthood without being eaten by other beast while at rest or asleep=20
>at night and living long enough to reproduce is real. The fittest is in=20
>reality survival of the luckiest. In other cases massive numbers of eggs=
=20
>are laid. Sea turtles for example, lay eggs by thousands and they hatch=20
>and rush forwards into the sea, except for the large numbers that become=
=20
>food for birds and other animals. Another consideration is the fact that=
=20
>each cell has it's own DNA proofreading and repair systems, a defective=20
>cell can repair itself or it is destroyed.
>
>Another vexing issue for me is the will to survive. In the case of the=20
>turtles, it's as if they _know_ they are in danger, and seek the=20
>protection of the sea. How do the know. Instinct where did instinct come=
=20
>from. Going back the first living cell. What was the impetuous of dead=20
>inorganic chemicals to created a living cell. Did the first living cell=20
>have the will to survive? Where did this will come from?
>
>
>> Having conceived of this issue, I identified a group of organisms with=
=20
>> non-cephalic eyes, i.e. Pectinidae (scallop), and asked a question of=20
>> the web. The reply was Wang et al, Scallop genome provides insights =
into=20
>> evolution of bilaterian karyotype and development, Nature Ecology and=20
>> Evolution 1: 0120 (2017), which reports that eye development in=20
>> Patinopecten yessoensis does not utilise Pax6, nor several other genes=
=20
>> involved in eye development in Homo.=20
>>=20
>I can accept that there are exceptions, but where commonality exist I=20
>think this is valid. According to some sources the homo eye gene is the=20
>same as the mouse eye gene. I can accept that there or other genes in=20
>addition to the Pax6 gene involvement in the development of the homo =
eye.


Here's a link that shouldn't tax your comprehension:

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PAX6>
**************************************
It acts as a "master control" gene for the development of eyes=20
AND OTHER SENSORY ORGANS [emphasis mine]
***************************************

--
To know less than we don't know is the nature of most knowledge