The Official Perfection KOs Creationism Thread Part Two: The Empiricists Strike Back!

[El_Machinae]

Why would they suffer genetic damage any more than any other bacteria?

Well, other bacteria have more room to breed, and thus natural selection has more to work with. The mitochondria in my cells get worse off over time - in fact, mitochondrial aging is implicated in actual aging.

There's only room for a couple hundred mitochondria in a cell, even in a gamete. So there's only room for a few hundred to undergo natural selection to maintain their health. Since the female gametes degrade over time, why aren't the degredations cummulative?

You'll note that the Bible has a good answer to the question (mitos were better then, and they are degrading). Gradual mt degredation fits the bible theory.

yep, rarely it may happen. Very rarely

Yeah, it's rare. But I included the information up front, so that I didn't look like an idiot.

 

[Samson]

Well, other bacteria have more room to breed, and thus natural selection has more to work with. The mitochondria in my cells get worse off over time - in fact, mitochondrial aging is implicated in actual aging.

There's only room for a couple hundred mitochondria in a cell, even in a gamete. So there's only room for a few hundred to undergo natural selection to maintain their health. Since the female gametes degrade over time, why aren't the degredations cummulative?

Do you mean cummulative over the course of many generations, or over the course of the life of the woman?

I do not know moch about this field, but I can imagine that;

A population of a few hundred is enough to provide enough natural selection to prevent major problems.
Natural selection between cells could help the proccess.
Since female gametes are largely inactive for most of their life there is little genetic damage going on.
The very rare transfer of mitocondria from the male could again help the process of natural selection.

This is all conjecture, and I expect someone will come along with an authorative answer.

 

[El_Machinae]

I mean over the course of many generations. Here's my original question.

Okay ... I've got one.

Why isn't our mitochondria genome degrading?

The egg contains mtDNA that degrades over time. It has error-correcting measures in place, but they're not perfect. This is one reason why a 20 year old gamete (in 20 year old mother) is superior than one from a 30 year old mother.

Again, the anti-degredation measures are not perfect.

So, the mitochondria in my body came from my mother. They were 20 years old (but well preserved), but slightly damaged from natural abuse. Now, when I have a daughter, those mitochondria will be 20 years old (from my mom) plus 20 years from me. So - forty years of good preservation (but not perfect).

Why isn't my daughter worse off, mtDNA-wise, than I was?

Now, you'll say that there's natural selection within the cell, and poor mitochondria are out competed by healthy ones. This I get. Yet this natural selection is insufficient to prevent the gradual weakening of the mitochondria quality ... because a 30 year old'ss mtDNA is worse of than a 20 year old's.

(I get that the repair mechanisms are superior (more 'on') when we're younger)
(I get that there is natural selection among the mitochondria to preserve the line)

So why isn't my daughter's mitochondria worse than mine? Or, even better, why isn't my great-great-great granddaughter's mitochondria MUCH worse than mine (since she has my mitochondria)?

With creationism, we can assume that Noah's wife had 'pretty good' mtDNA, and that our 'worse' DNA is a result of accumulated damage - but that eventually there is an endpoint where the mitochondria is not viable.

PS: it was poor phrasing. Don't assume I'm a woman based off of my hypothetical

 

[Samson]

I mean over the course of many generations. Here's my original question.

OK, I understand your question. I cannot answer it with any authority, but that has never stoped me before

I have previously thought that the prosess of the female forming all her eggs in utero (as opposed the the male way of doing it) could be to reduce exactly this problem. If the inactivety of the eggs reduces the genetic damage by say, 3 orders of magnitude, the mitocondria you got from your mother have an effective age of 3 months (about when the eggs form?) + 20 years / 1000. Your daugters then have an effective age of 6 months + 40 years / 1000. I can imagine that the selection I talked about before (within the cell, between the cells of the blastocyst, added to the minimal flow of genetic matterial from the father) could be enough to maintain a healthy enough population to allow life to continue.

[EDIT] And could easily have caused the evolution of mitocondria from the free living bacteria they once were to the obligate intra cellular comensal they are today.

 

[ironduck]

You can ask but I will be going to bed now so you will have to wait for an answer.

Ok, you said that the answer to my two questions was that 'no, there was no rain before the flood', and 'no there were no rainbows before the flood'.

So my subsequent questions are:

1) Did water not evaporate and form clouds?

2) Was it impossible for rainbows to be formed, or was it just that no one had seen any? Because there's no need for rain to form rainbows. Any source of drops will do. A waterfall is a good example. In other words, were the laws of physics different to prevent rainbows from forming, or was it just that no one had actually seen a rainbow for some reason?

 

[warpus]

Ok, you said that the answer to my two questions was that 'no, there was no rain before the flood', and 'no there were no rainbows before the flood'.

So my subsequent questions are:

1) Did water not evaporate and form clouds?

2) Was it impossible for rainbows to be formed, or was it just that no one had seen any? Because there's no need for rain to form rainbows. Any source of drops will do. A waterfall is a good example. In other words, were the laws of physics different to prevent rainbows from forming, or was it just that no one had actually seen a rainbow for some reason?

Dude, God can do whatever he wants. If something in the Bible doesn't make sense, we simply assume that God willed it - that way we don't have to think.

 

[ironduck]

Dude, God can do whatever he wants. If something in the Bible doesn't make sense, we simply assume that God willed it - that way we don't have to think.

You're not being very constructive. I'm trying to understand the logic (or lack of) that takes place here.

 

[warpus]

You're not being very constructive. I'm trying to understand the logic (or lack of) that takes place here.

What logic?

 

[Sidhe]

Iron duck are you really asking for logic based on faith, good luck with that

Even the lack of logic isn't consistent, what did you expect?

 

[ironduck]

I'm just trying to learn how they think, I find it interesting

 

[Hotpoint]

Maybe we can entice Arthur Biele to come back.

Well it would give me the opportunity to once again demand the apology he owes me from a year ago if nothing else

 

[Rik Meleet]

Moderator Action: 1000 posts reached - thread closed.