Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for Darwinism

[Bob Duncan]

Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
Darwinism
by David Coppedge

Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.

<https://evolutionnews.org/2022/09/gene-sharing-is-more-widespread-than-thought-with-implications-for-darwinism/>

--
God exists, uncreated and transcendental to space and time.
.

[Cloud Hobbit]

From your link: Figure 1 in this open-access paper shows nine photos of creatures where “gene flow” has been inferred. They include vastly different organisms, from bacteria to birds, fish, and mammals — including humans. The authors strive to maintain Darwinism in their explanation, but this realization undermines what previously was explained by convergence or by independent origins of traits:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So they learned something new. Good for them. It will be added to the store of knowledge we alreeady have and will probably help in the future.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Instead of waiting for a beneficial mutation to arise, gene flow can instead introduce variation that has been ‘pre-tested’ by selection, allowing species to evolve rapidly. For instance, alleles causing brown winter coat color in snowshoe hares (Figure 1E), early flowering time in sunflowers or serpentine soil tolerance in Arabidopsis have introgressed from closely related species, which has facilitated adaptation to new environments.

No matter how you try to spin it, they are still talking about evolution, unless you think that being "pretested by selection" means something else.

Abolish qualified immunity.

There no gods.

[Bob Duncan]

I'll only do this one time. Try keeping up.

Every scientist knows that micro-evolution happens. That was proved by
the Finch beaks on Galapagos Islands. But not every scientist believes
that macro-evolution happens. I'll leave it up to you to figure out
which one they're talking about.

HTH.

Don't bother me any more.

[Siri Cruise]

In article
<bfaa3a02-c3cf-4f4f...@googlegroups.com>,

Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Instead of waiting for a beneficial mutation to arise, gene flow can
> instead introduce variation that has been ‘pre-tested’ by selection,
> allowing species to evolve rapidly. For instance, alleles causing brown
> winter coat color in snowshoe hares (Figure 1E), early flowering time in
> sunflowers or serpentine soil tolerance in Arabidopsis have introgressed
> from closely related species, which has facilitated adaptation to new
> environments.

Darwin didn't need mutations or DNA. He assumed inheritted
descriptions of what we become and that variations occur.

Then he proposed that by mechanical means favourable
variations tend to become dominant and unfavourable
tend to disappear.

I don't really understand biochemistry but the glimpses
I get boggle my brain. It's hard for me to believe this
can all happen randomly. Then again reality is not
constrained by what I can believe.

--
:-<> Siri Seal of Disavowal #000-001. Disavowed. Denied. Deleted. @
'I desire mercy, not sacrifice.' /|\
Discordia: not just a religion but also a parody. This post / \
I am an Andrea Chen sockpuppet. insults Islam. Mohammed

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/22/2022 1:31 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article
> <bfaa3a02-c3cf-4f4f...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Instead of waiting for a beneficial mutation to arise, gene flow can

>> instead introduce variation that has been ‘pre-tested’ by selection,

>> allowing species to evolve rapidly. For instance, alleles causing brown
>> winter coat color in snowshoe hares (Figure 1E), early flowering time in
>> sunflowers or serpentine soil tolerance in Arabidopsis have introgressed
>> from closely related species, which has facilitated adaptation to new
>> environments.
>
> Darwin didn't need mutations or DNA. He assumed inheritted
> descriptions of what we become and that variations occur.
>
> Then he proposed that by mechanical means favourable
> variations tend to become dominant and unfavourable
> tend to disappear.
>
> I don't really understand biochemistry but the glimpses
> I get boggle my brain. It's hard for me to believe this
> can all happen randomly. Then again reality is not
> constrained by what I can believe.

Not even what you believe through common sense?

I believe that God gave us common sense so that we could figure
out a few things for ourselves, so we wouldn't need a book or a
professor.

I could be wrong. But common sense tells me I'm not.

[aaa]

On 2022-09-22 01:31, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article
> <bfaa3a02-c3cf-4f4f...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Instead of waiting for a beneficial mutation to arise, gene flow can
>> instead introduce variation that has been ‘pre-tested’ by selection,
>> allowing species to evolve rapidly. For instance, alleles causing brown
>> winter coat color in snowshoe hares (Figure 1E), early flowering time in
>> sunflowers or serpentine soil tolerance in Arabidopsis have introgressed
>> from closely related species, which has facilitated adaptation to new
>> environments.
>
> Darwin didn't need mutations or DNA. He assumed inheritted
> descriptions of what we become and that variations occur.
>
> Then he proposed that by mechanical means favourable
> variations tend to become dominant and unfavourable
> tend to disappear.

The word favourable is by definition a scientific bias. There is no
favor in the study of science. Favor or grace is only found in philosophy.

>
> I don't really understand biochemistry but the glimpses
> I get boggle my brain. It's hard for me to believe this
> can all happen randomly. Then again reality is not
> constrained by what I can believe.
>


--

God's spiritual evidence:

Truth, love, wisdom, compassion, knowledge, consciousness, intelligence,
happiness, faith, courage, justice, peace, freedom, and life itself.

God's spiritual evidence is evident in everyone.
Find it and treasure it because it's the covenant of God.
It's the reason why we are given this life on earth.
It's the foundation why we can have meaning in life.

Let's all honor our personal spiritual evidence of God for the sake of
Christ!

[Ted]

On Thu, 22 Sep 2022 08:47:40 -0400, Bob Duncan <bob7d...@gmail.com>
wrote:

Stupid assholes like you don't have any common sense, moron.

[Siri Cruise]

In article <almarsoft.2350...@news.easynews.com>,

Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Stupid assholes like you don't have any common sense, moron.

My education is mathematics. Common sense will always lead you
wrong in mathematics.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s86-Z-CbaHA
The Banach­Tarski Paradox

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/25/2022 8:54 PM, Siri Cruise wrote:
> In article <almarsoft.2350...@news.easynews.com>,
> Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Stupid assholes like you don't have any common sense, moron.
>
> My education is mathematics. Common sense will always lead you
> wrong in mathematics.

And that's just your unsubstantiated opinion.

What else is new?

[Ted]

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 17:54:42 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <almarsoft.2350...@news.easynews.com>,
> Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:


> > Stupid assholes like you don't have any common sense, moron.


> My education is mathematics. Common sense will always lead you
> wrong in mathematics.


> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s86-Z-CbaHA
> The Banach�Tarski Paradox

Thanks Siri.

[Ted]

DNA that effectively duplicates itself tend to outcompete those that
don't. I'm sure that's what she meant.

[Siri Cruise]

In article <almarsoft.4507...@news.easynews.com>,

Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The word favourable is by definition a scientific bias. There is no
> > favor in the study of science. Favor or
> > grace is only found in philosophy.
>
>
>
> DNA that effectively duplicates itself tend to outcompete those that
> don't. I'm sure that's what she meant.

Increases probability of survival long enough to reproduce.

[Ted]

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 21:20:41 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <almarsoft.4507...@news.easynews.com>,
> Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:


> > > The word favourable is by definition a scientific bias. There
is no
> > > favor in the study of science. Favor or
> > > grace is only found in philosophy.
> >
> >
> >
> > DNA that effectively duplicates itself tend to outcompete those
that
> > don't. I'm sure that's what she meant.


> Increases probability of survival long
> enough to reproduce.

Ah yes. Thank you, Siri.

[Ted]

On Sun, 25 Sep 2022 21:33:02 -0700, Siri Cruise
<chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In article <almarsoft.2041...@news.easynews.com>,

> Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:


> > > > My education is mathematics. Common sense will always lead you
> > > > wrong in mathematics.
> >
> >
> > > And that's just your unsubstantiated
> > > opinion.
> >
> >

> > No it isn't, you stupid asshole. She cited a url
> > explaining it. Which you dishonestly deleted
> > from your reply. Because you're a fucking
> > liar.


> The video involves nondenumerable infinite sets (a larger
> infinity than the infinity of natural numbers). Such sets are
> notoriously non-intutitive. Or common insensible.


> So it is an example of rigorously logic which is difficult for
> anyone to understand, and people depending on common sense are
> not going to understand why some of the steps are described the
> way they are.


> The little I know of biochemistry is that common sense is that it
> cannot arise at random. I don't believe randomness can result in
> such an integrated success. I also don't have an alternate
> explanation. I don't demand reality honour
> my common sense.


You're a kewl lady, Siri, thanks.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/26/2022 12:33 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:

> Common sense will always lead you wrong in mathematics.

I can prove you are wrong.

I don't use anything other than common sense to know that
1 + 2 = 3. I'm holding up one finger on my left hand and two
fingers on my right hand. If I hold both hands together I see
three fingers. Nothing but common sense tells me that one
plus two equals three.

So your assertion above is a lie.

If you had left out the word "always" you would have been right.

See how that works?

[Frank Lee]

Bob Duncan <bob7d...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 9/26/2022 12:33 AM, Siri Cruise wrote:
>
> > Common sense will always lead you wrong in mathematics.
>
>
> I can prove you are wrong.
>
> I don't use anything other than common sense to know that
> 1 + 2 = 3. I'm holding up one finger on my left hand and two
> fingers on my right hand. If I hold both hands together I see
> three fingers. Nothing but common sense tells me that one
> plus two equals three.

So counting on your fingers is your concept of
theoretical mathematics.

You didn't prove anything. It's pointless to explain to
you why that is.

[Frank Lee]

Siri Cruise <chine...@yahoo.com> wrote:

> In article <almarsoft.2041...@news.easynews.com>,
> Ted <tedsm...@gmail.com> wrote:
>

> > > > My education is mathematics. Common sense will always lead you
> > > > wrong in mathematics.
> >
> >
> > > And that's just your unsubstantiated
> > > opinion.
> >
> >

> > No it isn't, you stupid asshole. She cited a url
> > explaining it. Which you dishonestly deleted
> > from your reply. Because you're a fucking
> > liar.
>
> The video involves nondenumerable infinite sets (a larger
> infinity than the infinity of natural numbers). Such sets are
> notoriously non-intutitive. Or common insensible.
>
> So it is an example of rigorously logic which is difficult for
> anyone to understand, and people depending on common sense are
> not going to understand why some of the steps are described the
> way they are.
>
> The little I know of biochemistry is that common sense is that it
> cannot arise at random. I don't believe randomness can result in
> such an integrated success. I also don't have an alternate
> explanation. I don't demand reality honour my common sense.

The classic example of the failure of "common sense" is
quantum mechanics. This very newsgroup has people who
deny the facts because they don't fit their rules.

[aaa]

That is only the evidence of intelligent design other than the aimless
random chance that is physically impossible to establish a new DNA
structure under the second law of thermodynamics in this universe.

Favor only belongs to the intelligence which is again a study of
philosophy. When talking about life, it's all philosophy. This is why
the evolutionary science should shut the fuck up already. Failing to do
so is only the evidence of ignorant arrogance.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/27/2022 7:35 AM, Attila wrote:

> Common sense says gods make it rain so they require sacrifices.
> Common sense says the Earth is flat.
> Common sense says the Earth is the center of the universe.
> Common sense says a witch made me sick.
> Common sense says the Sun goes around the Earth.
> Common sense says gods run everything.


Yours might, but not mine.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/27/2022 9:33 AM, Attila wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 07:44:57 -0400, Bob Duncan
> <bob7d...@gmail.com> in alt.atheism with message-id

> <tgunnp$1tpa$1...@gioia.aioe.org> wrote:
>
>> On 9/27/2022 7:35 AM, Attila wrote:
>>
>>> Common sense says gods make it rain so they require sacrifices.
>>> Common sense says the Earth is flat.
>>> Common sense says the Earth is the center of the universe.
>>> Common sense says a witch made me sick.
>>> Common sense says the Sun goes around the Earth.
>>> Common sense says gods run everything.
>>
>>
>> Yours might, but not mine.
>

> Based upon the comment you carefully removed I would surmise
> you find just about anything acceptable as "common sense".


That's just another one of your unsubstantiated opinions, that you
cannot prove, i.e. just another one of your lies.

Thanks for once again proving you're a totally depraved liar.

<smirk>

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/27/2022 1:06 PM, Attila wrote:

> There is nothing there to "prove".

Nor is there anything to believe.
I believe it's just your way of getting attention.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/27/2022 4:42 PM, Attila wrote:

> Belief is irrelevant. If I wanted attention I would post a
> lot more.


You're a liar. I don't believe you.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/27/2022 8:50 PM, Attila wrote:
> On Tue, 27 Sep 2022 17:55:59 -0400, Bob Duncan

> <bob7d...@gmail.com> in alt.atheism with message-id

> <tgvrhf$8ud$1...@gioia.aioe.org> wrote:
>
>> On 9/27/2022 4:42 PM, Attila wrote:
>>
>>> Belief is irrelevant. If I wanted attention I would post a
>>> lot more.
>>
>>
>> You're a liar. I don't believe you.
>

> OK.


Now you're agreeing you're a liar.
That's a step in the right direction.

[Bob Duncan]

On 9/28/2022 1:47 AM, Attila wrote:

> You don't believe me.


No. As usual, you took it out of context.

It's always for the last thing you've posted.

Try keeping up, and not taking everything out of context.

Only idiots do that sort of thing.

[tesla sTinker]

On 9/27/2022 2:55 PM, Bob Duncan scribbled:

> On 9/27/2022 4:42 PM, Attila wrote:
>
>> Belief is irrelevant. If I wanted attention I would post a
>> lot more.
>
>
> You're a liar. I don't believe you.
>

cannot expect more from an Attila, God kicked its ass once already.
huns my ass. this person is of the devil. I suggest you watch it, or
you will wind up thinking like he does.

Attila \"at-el-e, e-"til-e\, byname Flagellum Dei \fla-"jel-um-"da-'e\
(Latin: “Scourge of God”), also called Etzel \"et-sel\, Atli \"at-le\,
or Attila the Hun (d. 453) King of the Huns from 434 to 453 (ruling
jointly with his elder brother Bleda until 445). He was one of the
greatest of the barbarian rulers who assailed the Roman Empire, invading
the southern Balkan provinces and Greece and then Gaul and Italy. In
legend he appears under the name Etzel in the Nibelungenlied and under
the name Atli in the Icelanders’ sagas.

(C)1996 Zane Publishing, Inc. and Merriam-Webster, Incorporated. All
rights reserved

A real fucking ass hole. Problem is, the Pope prayed to God, and the
son of bitch died. oops. End of story devil. But, he is of his
reincarnation now, in some stupid son of a bitch,....

[JWS]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 5:11:06 PM UTC-5, Bob Duncan wrote:
> Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
> Darwinism
> by David Coppedge
>
> Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
> horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
> neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.
>
> <https://evolutionnews.org/2022/09/gene-sharing-is-more-widespread-than-thought-with-implications-for-darwinism/>

Foreign genetic material infecting GOB's own
perfect genetic code? Say it isn't so!

[JWS]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 9:05:59 PM UTC-5, Bob Duncan wrote:
> On 9/20/2022 9:11 PM, Cloud Hobbit wrote:

> > On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:11:06 PM UTC-7, Bob Duncan wrote:
> >> Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
> >> Darwinism
> >> by David Coppedge
> >>
> >> Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
> >> horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
> >> neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.
> >>
> >> <https://evolutionnews.org/2022/09/gene-sharing-is-more-widespread-than-thought-with-implications-for-darwinism/>
> >>

> >> --
> >> God exists, uncreated and transcendental to space and time.
> >> .

> > From your link: Figure 1 in this open-access paper shows nine photos of creatures where “gene flow” has been inferred. They include vastly different organisms, from bacteria to birds, fish, and mammals — including humans. The authors strive to maintain Darwinism in their explanation, but this realization undermines what previously was explained by convergence or by independent origins of traits:
> > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > So they learned something new. Good for them. It will be added to the store of knowledge we alreeady have and will probably help in the future.
> > --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

> > Instead of waiting for a beneficial mutation to arise, gene flow can instead introduce variation that has been ‘pre-tested’ by selection, allowing species to evolve rapidly. For instance, alleles causing brown winter coat color in snowshoe hares (Figure 1E), early flowering time in sunflowers or serpentine soil tolerance in Arabidopsis have introgressed from closely related species, which has facilitated adaptation to new environments.
> >

> > No matter how you try to spin it, they are still talking about evolution, unless you think that being "pretested by selection" means something else.
> I'll only do this one time. Try keeping up.
>
> Every scientist knows that micro-evolution happens. That was proved by
> the Finch beaks on Galapagos Islands. But not every scientist believes
> that macro-evolution happens. I'll leave it up to you to figure out
> which one they're talking about.
So now you are admitting to the viral
genetic codes in the human genome?

And also, describe the functional differences
between micro and macro evolution.

[Oko Tillo]

On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:11:06 PM UTC-7, Bob Duncan wrote:
> Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
> Darwinism
> by David Coppedge

//

> Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
> horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
> neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.

Late breaking news ... which I read about in New Scientist fourteen years ago.


Sri

[Oko Tillo]

On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 11:59:26 AM UTC-7, Oko Tillo wrote:
> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:11:06 PM UTC-7, Bob Duncan wrote:
> > Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
> > Darwinism
> > by David Coppedge
> //

//

> > Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
> > horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
> > neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.

> Late breaking news ... which I read about in New Scientist fourteen years ago.

This issue:
https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921-600-why-darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life/

[Christopher A. Lee]

On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 10:59:24 -0800 (PST), Oko Tillo
<f.spl...@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:11:06 PM UTC-7, Bob Duncan wrote:
>> Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
>> Darwinism
>> by David Coppedge
>
>//
>
>
>> Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
>> horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
>> neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.
>
>Late breaking news ... which I read about in New Scientist fourteen years ago.

...and how does it affect Darwinism, which was the label given to
Darwin's explanation in 1859, long before genes were discovered>
Natural selection still applies, even to gene transfer.

It's one of the many discoveries since then, which have been
incorporated into the modern synthesis.

[John Baker]

On Sun, 22 Jan 2023 09:48:34 -0800 (PST), JWS <jld...@skybeam.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 5:11:06 PM UTC-5, Bob Duncan wrote:
>> Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
>> Darwinism
>> by David Coppedge
>>
>> Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
>> horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
>> neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.

Yes it does, Boob, but you have no idea what those implications might
be, nor would you understand them if you did. Let's just suffice it to
say they don't support creationism.

[Andrew]

"Oko Tillo" wrote in message news:b17cb0cd-dba2-441b...@googlegroups.com...

> On Sunday, January 22, 2023 at 11:59:26 AM UTC-7, Oko Tillo wrote:
>> On Tuesday, September 20, 2022 at 3:11:06 PM UTC-7, Bob Duncan wrote:
>> > Gene Sharing Is More Widespread than Thought, with Implications for
>> > Darwinism
>> > by David Coppedge
>

>> > Evidence is growing that organisms share existing genetic information
>> > horizontally, not just vertically. This has immense implications for
>> > neo-Darwinian theory that are not yet fully recognized.
>
>> Late breaking news ... which I read about in New Scientist fourteen years ago.
>
> This issue:
> https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg20126921-600-why-darwin-was-wrong-about-the-tree-of-life/

Although you talk about the role of genetic information
in the context of evolution, you won't consider its prime
origin.

Why?

We know why.