Evolution proven right yet again

[Iason Ouabache]

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14094-bacteria-make-major-evolutionary-shift-in-the-lab.html?DCMP=ILC-hmts&nsref=news1_head_dn14094

Twenty years ago, evolutionary biologist Richard Lenski of Michigan State University in East Lansing, US, took a single Escherichia coli bacterium and used its descendants to found 12 laboratory populations.

The 12 have been growing ever since, gradually accumulating mutations and evolving for more than 44,000 generations, while Lenski watches what happens.

Mostly, the patterns Lenski saw were similar in each separate population. All 12 evolved larger cells, for example, as well as faster growth rates on the glucose they were fed, and lower peak population densities.

But sometime around the 31,500th generation, something dramatic happened in just one of the populations – the bacteria suddenly acquired the ability to metabolise citrate, a second nutrient in their culture medium that E. coli normally cannot use.

Indeed, the inability to use citrate is one of the traits by which bacteriologists distinguish E. coli from other species. The citrate-using mutants increased in population size and diversity.

"It's the most profound change we have seen during the experiment. This was clearly something quite different for them, and it's outside what was normally considered the bounds of E. coli as a species, which makes it especially interesting," says Lenski.

The even funnier part of this is that human stain/founder of Conservapedia Andy Schlafly accused Lenski of fraud and demanded to see all of the raw data.  He promptly got pwned in the face!!!

http://acandidworld.wordpress.com/2008/06/24/beneficial-mutations-in-bacteria-wherein-conservapedia-is-pwned-take-ii-andy-schlaflys-lawyer-gambit-fails/

[Adios]

Interesting indeed. I just point at the Galapagos for proof.

[Iason Ouabache]

Interesting indeed. I just point at the Galapagos for proof.

You would think that that would be enough evidence for most people...

[P3nT4gR4m]

Fight fire with fire. If some faithfool wants to argue the toss just tell them you need to have faith in evolution - we know evolution is true because we evolved from monkeys and we know that we evolved from monkeys because evolution is true  Cue, Eee and fucking Dee 

[Vene]

Fight fire with fire. If some faithfool wants to argue the toss just tell them you need to have faith in evolution - we know evolution is true because we evolved from monkeys and we know that we evolved from monkeys because evolution is true  Cue, Eee and fucking Dee 

It's my right as a man to be a monkey!

And I'm honestly surprised that this is news-worthy.  Considering that speciation has been observed E. Coli evolving really isn't that special.

[Cain]

Don't many of the pro-creationism crowd shift the goalposts by claiming that this is micro-evolution whereas they dispute macro-evolution?  Because they noticed evolution in the case of British moths a good long time ago as well (white moths who lived on white trees, pollution made the trees black, the white moths all got eaten but the strange black moth mutation that occasionally cropped up survived and that became the majority of the species.  Ironically, anti-pollution measures have now allowed the trees to go white again and all the black moths are getting wiped out by predators).

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Don't many of the pro-creationism crowd shift the goalposts by claiming that this is micro-evolution whereas they dispute macro-evolution?  Because they noticed evolution in the case of British moths a good long time ago as well (white moths who lived on white trees, pollution made the trees black, the white moths all got eaten but the strange black moth mutation that occasionally cropped up survived and that became the majority of the species.  Ironically, anti-pollution measures have now allowed the trees to go white again and all the black moths are getting wiped out by predators).

Yep. This is the usual fight, the difference between evolution of a species and evolution into a new species... of course, the whole argument lies in LABELS. "Species" exist only because we make up the words and make up the taxonomic models. Hell, most biologists I know consider the Taxonomic Tree a convenient tool to compare similarities between groups, but not some hard and fast truth. Creationists, on the other hand, confuse the map and the territory

Kingdom, Phylum, Order, Family, Genus, Species <----- Pretend Order we stuck over Chaos

[Iason Ouabache]

Don't many of the pro-creationism crowd shift the goalposts by claiming that this is micro-evolution whereas they dispute macro-evolution?  Because they noticed evolution in the case of British moths a good long time ago as well (white moths who lived on white trees, pollution made the trees black, the white moths all got eaten but the strange black moth mutation that occasionally cropped up survived and that became the majority of the species.  Ironically, anti-pollution measures have now allowed the trees to go white again and all the black moths are getting wiped out by predators).

Hell, there are some Creationists who are saying that the peppered moths were a complete hoax.

http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v21/i3/moths.asp

[Vene]

Don't many of the pro-creationism crowd shift the goalposts by claiming that this is micro-evolution whereas they dispute macro-evolution?  Because they noticed evolution in the case of British moths a good long time ago as well (white moths who lived on white trees, pollution made the trees black, the white moths all got eaten but the strange black moth mutation that occasionally cropped up survived and that became the majority of the species.  Ironically, anti-pollution measures have now allowed the trees to go white again and all the black moths are getting wiped out by predators).

Yep. This is the usual fight, the difference between evolution of a species and evolution into a new species... of course, the whole argument lies in LABELS. "Species" exist only because we make up the words and make up the taxonomic models. Hell, most biologists I know consider the Taxonomic Tree a convenient tool to compare similarities between groups, but not some hard and fast truth. Creationists, on the other hand, confuse the map and the territory

Kingdom, Phylum, Order, Family, Genus, Species <----- Pretend Order we stuck over Chaos

Yeah, species are... confusing.  There is only a barrier in sexually reproducing organisms.  And the vast majority of life doesn't reproduce sexually (bacteria and archaea).  Hell, there's even life out there that steals the genes of other organisms.  They're called bdelloid rotifers.

By the way, biologists tend not to worry about whether something is microevolution or macroevolution because the mechanism is the same damn thing.

[Cain]

Oh yeah, I know that...I'm just saying the Fundies wont be happy until you make one creature turn into a totally different one in front of their eyes.

And then they will charge you with devil sorcery.

[Vene]

Oh yeah, I know that...I'm just saying the Fundies wont be happy until you make one creature turn into a totally different one in front of their eyes.

And then they will charge you with devil sorcery.

I don't think they'll be happy with that.  I've had a creationist say to me that scientists could build up a human being from scratch and it wouldn't make a bit of difference.  Mind you, this is also the guy who says that "reality can take a hike."

[Cain]

Well, if they respected facts and evidence, they wouldn't be Fundies, would they....?

[Thurnez Isa]

many of them describe evolution as if species can cross over into different linages, and use that idea as proof against evolution ... ie and dog/penquin
and i suspect many of them know thats misrepresenting the theory and i really believe many of them know they are wrong
and you know what I dont think they care
when you have so much of your emotions and life invested in an abstraction truth and rational doesn't even factor into the equation

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

many of them describe evolution as if species can cross over into different linages, and use that idea as proof against evolution ... ie and dog/penquin
and i suspect many of them know thats misrepresenting the theory and i really believe many of them know they are wrong
and you know what I dont think they care
when you have so much of your emotions and life invested in an abstraction truth and rational doesn't even factor into the equation

Oh no, I have to disagree... having once been a Fundie. I was a good student in school, I got good grades in Science, but I was sure that Evolution was a crock of shit. I absolutely thought that "Missing Link" was a valid argument and that there was no real evidence of one animal turning into another. Of course, I also believed that Carbon Dating was a fraud and that pillow lava had been found on Mt. Ararat proving that it was once covered in water.

Oh and I absolutely believed that there was secular evidence for Jesus.

The Reality Tunnel I lived in saw plenty of evidence to support these positions and no evidence to support the reverse. At this point, I've decided that evolution seems likely to be a key mechanism, but I wouldn't be surprised to learn 100 years from now that we're missing some huge hunks of what really happened (panspermia,  bdelloid rotifers carrying DNA from one entity to another playing Lincoln Logs with DNA, accidental trash dump from a passing space ship...) but that, I think, is because I fully expect to get another major surprise like I got when I suddenly stumbled on the supporting evidence for evolution.

In my experience, most fundies aren't fooling themselves... they simply have a very restrictive reality tunnel.

[Thurnez Isa]

Oh no, I have to disagree... having once been a Fundie. I was a good student in school, I got good grades in Science, but I was sure that Evolution was a crock of shit. I absolutely thought that "Missing Link" was a valid argument and that there was no real evidence of one animal turning into another. Of course, I also believed that Carbon Dating was a fraud and that pillow lava had been found on Mt. Ararat proving that it was once covered in water.

you actually proved my point
what their evidence states is unrealistic cause having bearing in reality will never be part of the thought process
God is all
having fundies except evidence is like having Pushtruns march for womens right
it just doesn't factor into the equation
they don't need to fool themselves cause this life means nothing to what they see as the "ultimate truth"