3 ms·

The interesting thing about gene ARHGAP11B is that it is a truncated version of ARHGAP11A, meaning that it was caused by a degenerative mutation, which goes tot

The interesting thing about gene ARHGAP11B is that it is a truncated version of ARHGAP11A, meaning that it was caused by a degenerative mutation, which goes totally against creationist arguments that degenerative mutations can never lead to improvements, let alone the development of new species. This should be mentioned in every textbook about evolution to counter the arguments of creationists.

for_i_in_range 6y ago
Creationists are convinced by stories, not facts.
yread 6y ago
I don't get your argument about degenerative mutations. All nonsilent mutations change a perfectly fine working protain so they are all 'degenerative'? Conversely, insertion of random garbage in the middle of a an exon does not delete anything so it's not 'degenerative'?
- fjfaase 6y ago
  Some creationist are reasoning that because mutations in genes usually have a negative effect, evolution can not lead to improvements. Here we have an example of a gene that became shorter (probably due to a mutation (deletion, change or insertion) in the middle causeing a stop to be encoded) and lead to a significant improvement, even to the extend that it resulted in a new species. Even if creationist accept that evolution is possible to some extend like we see in dogs, they argue that it cannot lead to the development of new species. Now some people, especially those from pro-life camps who usually support the idea of evolution, are having ethical problems, because they feel that due to a generative mutation a new species of ape has been created.
  - yread 6y ago
    Oh you want to argue science with creationists? We could just point them to oncogenes then - genes that are a bit "broken" normally, so they don't get expressed or don't make a viable protein but a mutation can "fix" them so that they can perform their "normal" function. Unfortunately, that normal function causes cancer.
chuckdarwin 6y ago
Evolution vs Creationism is such a false dichotomy! There are MANY scientists who make this claim. That doesn't mean they are creationists. They simply aren't accepting that mutations are sufficient. Which is a perfectly reasonable and scientific claim to make.

for_i_in_range 6y ago

Creationists are convinced by stories, not facts.

yread 6y ago

I don't get your argument about degenerative mutations. All nonsilent mutations change a perfectly fine working protain so they are all 'degenerative'? Conversely, insertion of random garbage in the middle of a an exon does not delete anything so it's not 'degenerative'?

fjfaase 6y ago
Some creationist are reasoning that because mutations in genes usually have a negative effect, evolution can not lead to improvements. Here we have an example of a gene that became shorter (probably due to a mutation (deletion, change or insertion) in the middle causeing a stop to be encoded) and lead to a significant improvement, even to the extend that it resulted in a new species. Even if creationist accept that evolution is possible to some extend like we see in dogs, they argue that it cannot lead to the development of new species. Now some people, especially those from pro-life camps who usually support the idea of evolution, are having ethical problems, because they feel that due to a generative mutation a new species of ape has been created.
- yread 6y ago
  Oh you want to argue science with creationists? We could just point them to oncogenes then - genes that are a bit "broken" normally, so they don't get expressed or don't make a viable protein but a mutation can "fix" them so that they can perform their "normal" function. Unfortunately, that normal function causes cancer.

chuckdarwin 6y ago

Evolution vs Creationism is such a false dichotomy! There are MANY scientists who make this claim. That doesn't mean they are creationists. They simply aren't accepting that mutations are sufficient. Which is a perfectly reasonable and scientific claim to make.