Evolution reversed

[Ekstasis]

Reversing evolution

"The scientific revelation of 'rewinding' evolution could pave the way for scientists altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate.
It has also been claimed that the breakthrough could eventually help eliminate birth defects in human children"

How is this evolution in reverse? Better, how can such a claim be made? They once altered the DNA on chickens (egg farms) in Israel to be born without feathers - 'cause the heat killed many chickens. Were chickens once without feathers?

 

[copacetic]

Reversing evolution

"The scientific revelation of 'rewinding' evolution could pave the way for scientists altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate.
It has also been claimed that the breakthrough could eventually help eliminate birth defects in human children"

How is this evolution in reverse? Better, how can such a claim be made? They once altered the DNA on chickens (egg farms) in Israel to be born without feathers - 'cause the heat killed many chickens. Were chickens once without feathers?

The article is pretty clear, not sure what you don't understand about it.

I think the evolution nutters are going too far. This begs the next question: Is this progress or playing God?

It is progress.

 

[Nick333]

Reversing evolution

"The scientific revelation of 'rewinding' evolution could pave the way for scientists altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate.
It has also been claimed that the breakthrough could eventually help eliminate birth defects in human children"

How is this evolution in reverse? Better, how can such a claim be made? They once altered the DNA on chickens (egg farms) in Israel to be born without feathers - 'cause the heat killed many chickens. Were chickens once without feathers?

I think the evolution nutters are going too far. This begs the next question: Is this progress or playing God?

Well, "reversed" seems to be your choice of word and "rewinding" seems to be the authors choice so who exactly should be defending what claims?

If this research eliminates birth defects in human children it is unquestionably progress. Whether it's "playing God" is a question for the religious nutters. Although, if your idea of God is one of a being who seeks to minimise suffering then I guess it is a case of playing God.

 

[Geriatrix]

Reversing evolution

"The scientific revelation of 'rewinding' evolution could pave the way for scientists altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate.
It has also been claimed that the breakthrough could eventually help eliminate birth defects in human children"

How is this evolution in reverse? Better, how can such a claim be made? They once altered the DNA on chickens (egg farms) in Israel to be born without feathers - 'cause the heat killed many chickens. Were chickens once without feathers?

I think the evolution nutters are going too far. This begs the next question: Is this progress or playing God?

Hi, please take it to PD. This is the science section. Thanks.

 

[copacetic]

Hi, please take it to PD. This is the science section. Thanks.

It's an article about evolution, I see nothing whatsoever about religion within it.

Ekstasis, stay here.

If you want to pawn this off to PD, then help get that sticky sorted.

 

[Ekstasis]

It's an article about evolution, I see nothing whatsoever about religion within it.

Ekstasis, stay here.

If you want to pawn this off to PD, then help get that sticky sorted.

I've edited out the last comment - where confusion maybe came from

 

[empirex]

Well it's all in the title isn't it. Rewinding evolution: Scientists alter chicken DNA to create embryo with 'alligator-like' snout.

It's the manipulation of existing genetic code.

 

[Ekstasis]

Well it's all in the title isn't it. Rewinding evolution: Scientists alter chicken DNA to create embryo with 'alligator-like' snout.

It's the manipulation of existing genetic code.

Hence, why you cannot say it's evolution in reverse - It's merely as you say, manipulation of DNA which are being done for a lng time. Just because the DNA has been manipulated, doesn't mean they're going back in time. Which take me back to the featherless chickens. Were they featherless before in the evolution of chickens?
So then they should be able to create Neanderthals... LOL

 

[porchrat]

Basically Ekstasis if they're looking into eventually trying to remove genetic defects from children. Those defects are there as a result of genetic mutation anyway. A lot of them exacerbated by inbreeding in isolated communities like the Amish. This is evolution.

In removing those defects they will in essence be rewinding evolution of those genes to before they emerged and certainly to before they became polymorphisms.

 

[porchrat]

Hence, why you cannot say it's evolution in reverse - It's merely as you say, manipulation of DNA which are being done for a lng time. Just because the DNA has been manipulated, doesn't mean they're going back in time. Which take me back to the featherless chickens. Were they featherless before in the evolution of chickens?
So then they should be able to create Neanderthals... LOL

No there were no featherless chickens. If an animal naturally developed to genetically not have feathers it wouldn't be classified as a chicken. What a stupid question.

Feathers developed waaaaaaaaay before birds themselves anyway.

 

[empirex]

Basically Ekstasis if they're looking into eventually trying to remove genetic defects from children. Those defects are there as a result of genetic mutation anyway. A lot of them exacerbated by inbreeding in isolated communities like the Amish. This is evolution.

In removing those defects they will in essence be rewinding evolution of those genes to before they emerged and certainly to before they became polymorphisms.

Well obviously "altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate", is not evolution though.

In this instance it depends on how we define evolution (a term readily used to describe multiple processes); genetic mutation resulting from microevolutionary processes, yes.

 

[porchrat]

Well obviously "altering DNA in the other direction and use the same process to create species better able to adapt to Earth's climate", is not evolution though.

In this instance it depends on how we define evolution (a term readily used to describe multiple processes); genetic mutation resulting from microevolutionary processes, yes.

Evolution is the passing of inheritable genetic traits from one generation to the next. If evolution gave children a particular genetic defect and we remove it we are rewinding evolution.

It is sensationalist to be true but not without some truth.

 

[empirex]

Evolution is the passing of inheritable genetic traits from one generation to the next. If evolution gave children a particular genetic defect and we remove it we are rewinding evolution.

It is sensationalist to be true but not without some truth.

All aboard the semantics roundabout Of course we inherit genetic traits through vertical gene transfer; but surely Evolution is defined as "natural selection acting upon random mutations"? So yeah I guess we agree, albeit it in a somewhat circuitous manner.

 

[porchrat]

All aboard the semantics roundabout Of course we inherit genetic traits through vertical gene transfer; but surely Evolution is defined as "natural selection acting upon random mutations"? So yeah I guess we agree, albeit it in a somewhat circuitous manner.

Mutation is an inherent part of genetics. If you have DNA you have mutations. I should have explicitly mentioned it though you're right.

As to your proposed definition I disagree with it. You need inheritance or else your mutation counts for squat in terms of evolution.The only time evolution occurs is when inheritance is happening.

I agree with you though that this is largely semantics. We definitely seem to be in agreement here but are just unhappy with each others choice of words

 

[empirex]

Mutation is an inherent part of genetics. If you have DNA you have mutations. I should have explicitly mentioned it though you're right.

As to your proposed definition I disagree with it. You need inheritance or else your mutation counts for squat in terms of evolution.The only time evolution occurs is when inheritance is happening.

I agree with you though that this is largely semantics. We definitely seem to be in agreement here but are just unhappy with each others choice of words

Yeah one of the problems is that "evolution" has become an overused undefined blanket description for so many processes these days....

 

[porchrat]

Yeah one of the problems is that "evolution" has become an overused undefined blanket description for so many processes these days....

Worse I have people telling me that the theory of evolution says they evolved from rocks.

I haven't even got started on when I had to tutor 1st and 2nd year med students on biochemistry. Some seriously stupid people studying to become doctors these days. :erm:

I don't know if our low cost of access to rapid communication systems across the Internet is making humanity dumber as more and more people are exposed to and accept stupid ideas or if it is just allowing the idiots in humanity that were always there to get their stupid ideas out into the light of day and exchange their pre-existing stupid opinions on said stupid ideas.

In other words: Is the Internet making us stupid or just bringing our stupidity into sharp relief?

 

[Geriatrix]

I've edited out the last comment - where confusion maybe came from

Indeed thanks.

 

[empirex]

Worse I have people telling me that the theory of evolution says they evolved from rocks.

Well a rock certainly is an evolutionary masterpiece is it not! Durable, perfect homeostasis, rugged defense mechanism and minimal predators

 

[killadoob]

How close are we to creating life in a lab?

 

[porn$tar]

What came first, The chigator or the allicken?