Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 193 Guests and 1 Spider online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Topic Options
#46804 - 12/15/12 11:39 PM Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
This is for Paul in response his apparent attacks on my post about the neat experiment. I said I didn't want to start a discussion of evolution, at least not in General Science, so I am bringing it over here.

Originally Posted By: Paul
24 years !
I thought that evolution required millions of years.

now it only requires 24 years !

what does that say about evolution?


Well, it says that a lot of people thought wrong. Keep in mind that bacteria live a lot faster than large animals. So that the evolution of the ability to metabolize citrates occurred after 30,000 generations. If you count the number of generations since the start of the evolution of man from his split with the rest of the apes, about 7 million years ago, then we are talking about 350,000 generations. There were a lot of evolutionary changes in those years, so one major mutation (actually it took 2) in 30,000 generations isn't too fast.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
.
#46806 - 12/15/12 11:51 PM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
citrates = citric acid !



we eat citric acid all the time , the bacteria in our stomachs
digest citric acids all the time.

whats so special about a bacteria that eats citrates?

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46807 - 12/16/12 12:00 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
so one major mutation (actually it took 2) in 30,000 generations isn't too fast.


so why aren't there any bacteria that have evolved into a
larger species?

why don't we have neighbors that are bacteria's.

if they keep doing the experiment are they expected to use tools before long , maybe they need to make the room colder and give them some wood and matches.

I am sorry bill but I have a comical view of this
I suppose I should not ask question's when the topic is about
evolution.






_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46808 - 12/16/12 12:02 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: paul]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
whats so special about a bacteria that eats citrates?


Probably not a lot, unless that particular genus has not been able to do so in the past.

possibly your next question would be "how do we know that genus has not done so before?"

I think the answer to that would have to be that we don't, which is one of the reasons for studies like this.

BTW, "bacteria" is plural.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46809 - 12/16/12 12:11 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill S.]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
possibly your next question would be "how do we know that genus has not done so before?"


that is actually a very good point.

what if that genus is only found in the gut of an animal
that never eats foods that contain citric acids or citrates?

and now in the experiment the bacteria are exposed to
citrate's.

it appears that the the Bc251 strain is a
phage lambda sensitive derivative that was "made" by transducing the malB from the K-12 strain W3110.3-5

http://books.google.com/books?id=gG45ab2...251&f=false

so the strain was manufactured !
it was not a naturally occurring bacteria.










_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46812 - 12/16/12 12:40 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: paul]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
what if that genus is only found in the gut of an animal
that never eats foods that contain citric acids or citrates?


Again, this is something that should be covered in the full account of the experiment. I've not managed to explore that yet, Have you?

Possibly we should do that before attempting further discussion of the experiment.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46813 - 12/16/12 12:47 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill S.]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
Again, this is something that should be covered in the full account of the experiment. I've not managed to explore that yet, Have you?

Possibly we should do that before attempting further discussion of the experiment.


I've read whats on wiki already , and I have found something
very interesting about the original bacteria used in the experiment.

I found that pretty quick , and I'm wondering if the bacteria
used should have been advertised as never metabolizing citrates before , given that the bacteria was made in a laboratory.

peer review?

this isn't proof of anything but making a bacteria strain
in a laboratory then testing it for 24 years , then
claiming that it never had metabolized citrates before
might be considered slightly underhanded.





_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46814 - 12/16/12 01:04 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Paul, it just occurred to me that you asked another question about the experiment that I failed to answer. You asked if this was proof of evolution or another demonstration. It isn't proof. There is no further need for proof of evolution because it has been so thoroughly demonstrated that we don't need more proof. So it is one more demonstration of evolution in action.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#46816 - 12/16/12 01:11 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
So it is one more demonstration of evolution in action.


so this proof or demonstration , kind of says that the other proof wasn't proof.

in fact it pretty much say's that if we change bacteria around
we might make a strain of bacteria that will metabolize citrates.

we might make a strain.

it doesn't say that a strain evolved.


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46817 - 12/16/12 01:44 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Originally Posted By: Paul
we might make a strain.


Which brings us back to creation - which is certainly not denied by all those who are prepared accept that evolution might have something of value to say.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46819 - 12/16/12 02:46 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: paul]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Paul
given that the bacteria was made in a laboratory.

Yep, and Man-of-War (a famous race horse) was made in a stable using the same techniques. It is called selective breeding. It works wonderfully for developing strains of life forms that have very well documented characteristics. That way you know where they started off and can easily determine what changes are taking place.

Originally Posted By: Paul
this isn't proof of anything but making a bacteria strain
in a laboratory then testing it for 24 years , then
claiming that it never had metabolized citrates before
might be considered slightly underhanded.

Well, it only did it in one of 12 strains, and it took 30,000 generations before it started doing it. That doesn't seem too underhanded. In fact it seems like a really good test. It came up with something unexpected, but which matched the theory of evolution extremely well.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#46821 - 12/16/12 04:22 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
It is called selective breeding.


I agree , the horse selected his mate.

even though there was only one to select from.

I don't think that bacteria do any selecting , so like
the horse the selection was made for it.

it was denied everything except what it was provided.

nothing relating to natural selection or evolution involved.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46822 - 12/16/12 04:24 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill S.]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
Which brings us back to creation
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46824 - 12/16/12 03:04 PM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: paul]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
And so gentle readers once again we see that the creationists refuse to accept experiment as a valid way to learn about how the world works. They require that all science conform to their idea that the world, including all life, was created all in one fell swoop around 6000 years ago. When somebody inconveniently points out that there are many facts that cannot possibly be brought in to alignment with their beliefs they then start finding fault with studies/experiments that show them to be wrong. They do this by picking on things that have already been taken care of in the design of the experiment and are totally not germane to the subject.

This exchange with Paul is not anything new. He is using the same tactics that creationists use continually. They deny facts that can be easily seen to be true, they bring up things that have nothing to do with the facts, in many cases they promulgate out and out lies about the horrid scientific method. And so it goes apparently forever.

I do have hope that someday there will be found a way to educate all the people enough that they will quit being taken in by the creationists, but I don't expect it to happen very soon.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#46828 - 12/16/12 06:11 PM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Ok, just to be fair I will provide a couple of links.

This one is to a Creationism site. It supplies what purports to be evidence for creationism.

All about Creation

This one is to a site that supports evolution from Berkeley. This particular link is to the evidence for evolution page.

What is the evidence for evolution?

If you will just make a quick check of the 2 links and open your mind just a little bit you will probably realize that there really is no evidence for creationism, in contrast to the large amount of evidence for evolution.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#46830 - 12/16/12 10:09 PM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
The second link is obviously going to take a bit more time to digest than the first, but a couple of comments about the first that come immediately to mind are:

1. It reads like something that was written by someone who did not believe in his/her own arguments; so might not make the strongest case.

2. It seems to assume that a belief in creation is synonymous with belief in the Genesis account of creation. This is not surprising as the most vocal defenders of creationism are usually religious fundamentalists of Judeo/Christian provenance, but it does leave some important ground uncovered.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46837 - 12/17/12 02:19 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill S.]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#46839 - 12/17/12 02:59 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill S.]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill S.

1. It reads like something that was written by someone who did not believe in his/her own arguments; so might not make the strongest case.

The problem is that all of the evidence against evolution is about at that level. I checked out one of Paul's links, pretty much at random. The in it I picked out one person who had signed some kind of statement questioning evolution.

William S. Harris: Prof. of Basic Medical Sciences: U. of Missouri, Kansas City has published in the following journals.

The Journal of heart and lung transplantation : the official publication of the International Society for Heart Transplantation (3)
American heart journal (1)
American heart journal (1)
Circulation (1)
Circulation (1)
JAMA : the journal of the American Medical Association (1)
Journal of the American College of Cardiology (1)
Lancet (1)
Texas Heart Institute journal / from the Texas Heart Institute of St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital, Texas Children's Hospital (1)
The American journal of cardiology (1)

I don't see anything in that list that would make him an expert on evolution. He seems to be very much embedded in cardiac research.

By the way, almost all of Paul's links are from the same web site. He doesn't seem to have found very many web sites that don't agree with evolution.

Bill Gill


Edited by Bill (12/17/12 03:00 AM)
Edit Reason: Forgot something
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#46840 - 12/17/12 03:16 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Quote:
He seems to be very much embedded in cardiac research.


Gets him to the heart of the matter. :P

Seriously, though, most of the creationist sites I have looked at produce such feeble arguments that an intelligent creationist like Paul would probably find them cringe-worthy.
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#46842 - 12/17/12 03:30 AM Re: Reply to Paul re Neat Experiment [Re: Bill]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
By the way, almost all of Paul's links are from the same web site. He doesn't seem to have found very many web sites that don't agree with evolution.

Bill Gill


yes there are 10 links and 8 are different web site's

I can see how you determined that , Bill.

lets see if anyone else will agree that you are right.

I will admit that 3 are of the same web site , but that
doesn't constitute "most" of the web sites being the same.

unless they have evolved into the same web sites!







_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.