LGF

more options

  

Advertisement

  

Link address:
Link title:
Description: 
Remaining:

Science: Bacterial Evolution Observed in Laboratory

Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 3:42:47 pm PDT

In an experiment that has been underway for 20 years at Michigan State University, biologist Richard Lenski has actually observed evolution at work in E. Coli bacteria.

A major evolutionary innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers’ eyes. It’s the first time evolution has been caught in the act of making such a rare and complex new trait.

And because the species in question is a bacterium, scientists have been able to replay history to show how this evolutionary novelty grew from the accumulation of unpredictable, chance events.

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.

1750 comments

  • Comments are open and unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Little Green Footballs.
  • Obscene, abusive, silly, or annoying remarks may be deleted, but the fact that particular comments remain on the site in no way constitutes an endorsement of their views by Little Green Footballs.
  • Posts that contain phone numbers, street addresses, email addresses or other personal information will also be deleted, as will posts that consist only of a variation on the word, "First!"
  • Comments that advocate violence will be cause for immediate banning with no appeal.
  • REMEMBER: posting comments at LGF is a privilege, not a right. Abuse that privilege, and your account will be blocked.

Hide comments | Jump to bottom

1 WrathofG-d  6/18/08 3:44:48 pm reply quote 2

This again?

bee in someones bonnet?

2 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 3:45:19 pm reply quote 0

But because they have not yet evolved exoskeletons, the ID crowd will reject these findings.

3 Shug  6/18/08 3:45:34 pm reply quote 3
it’s outside what was normally considered the bounds of E. coli as a species, which makes it especially interesting

you should get out more often

4 Charles  6/18/08 3:45:53 pm reply quote 13

re: #1 WrathofG-d

This again?

bee in someones bonnet?

Uh no. It's an article on a scientific subject that I happen to be interested in.

5 Shug  6/18/08 3:46:01 pm reply quote 9
The citrate-using mutants increased in population size and diversity.

change !

6 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:46:33 pm reply quote 3

it stands to reason that in 32,500 generations, humans will loose the need for toes.

7 GregInSeattle  6/18/08 3:46:40 pm reply quote 16

Yes, God uses evolution.

8 frodolives  6/18/08 3:46:55 pm reply quote 1

a topic of interest, shall we say.

mutants are not new, yes exciting to see it happen, but doesn't really change the discussion. ie, it doesn't disprove ID

9 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 3:46:58 pm reply quote 5

re: #6 Eowyn2

it stands to reason that in 32,500 generations, humans will loose the need for toes.

No mean feet, that.

10 Ash_  6/18/08 3:47:28 pm reply quote 2

Bugs are getting better and better. The bugs that can create crude oil are pretty awesome.

11 WrathofG-d  6/18/08 3:47:36 pm reply quote 4

re: #4 Charles

As I have always said....its your site....you can do with it what you want.

I do fear however that you might chase off some of your wonderful Creationist "lizardoids" however, as these types of threads seem to be a bit aggressive against them.

Just looking out for a site I enjoy.

12 godfrey  6/18/08 3:47:37 pm reply quote 0

Cool.

13 Shug  6/18/08 3:47:39 pm reply quote 1

re: #8 frodolives

a topic of interest, shall we say.

mutants are not new, yes exciting to see it happen, but doesn't really change the discussion. ie, it doesn't disprove ID


but aren't random mutations are the heart of the discussion ?

14 pat  6/18/08 3:47:42 pm reply quote 18

Now if only liberals could evolve.

15 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:47:48 pm reply quote 1

re: #2 buzzsawmonkey

But because they have not yet evolved exoskeletons, the ID crowd will reject these findings.

I accept the findings and wonder where the human race will be in 31,000 generations.

16 opnion  6/18/08 3:47:51 pm reply quote 0

re: #6 Eowyn2

it stands to reason that in 32,500 generations, humans will loose the need for toes.


Wait a minute! How do you think that we will count then we finish with our fingers?

17 BignJames  6/18/08 3:47:55 pm reply quote 0

re: #6 Eowyn2

it stands to reason that in 32,500 generations, humans will loose the need for toes.


Not my little piggies!?! Say it ain't so!

18 dave fitz  6/18/08 3:48:07 pm reply quote 1

*nod@Wrath*
I was going to say, I really don't think the "intelligent design vs. evolution vs. basically everybody" argument does any good for anyone.

I'll care a lot more about the cranks on either side when they're actually talking someone out of money or planting bombs in biolabs. In the meantime, it's refereeing a skunk fight to bring it up.

Dave

19 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 3:49:06 pm reply quote 0

In the Year 2525

BTW, one of the worst songs ever.

20 Charles  6/18/08 3:49:12 pm reply quote 14

re: #8 frodolives

a topic of interest, shall we say.

mutants are not new, yes exciting to see it happen, but doesn't really change the discussion. ie, it doesn't disprove ID

You cannot disprove ID, because it's not falsifiable. This, by the way, also shows that it is not science.

21 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:49:31 pm reply quote 1

re: #9 buzzsawmonkey

No mean feet, that.


less stinky feet
eliminates sock lint and sweat between the toes

22 frodolives  6/18/08 3:49:43 pm reply quote 0

re: #13 Shug

but aren't random mutations are the heart of the discussion ?

ah, but how do you know it's random?

23 Shug  6/18/08 3:50:27 pm reply quote 0

re: #22 frodolives

How do I know something is random ?

because it's random

24 opnion  6/18/08 3:51:46 pm reply quote 0

re: #19 buzzsawmonkey

25 BignJames  6/18/08 3:51:46 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 Shug


random pattern

26 Charles  6/18/08 3:52:13 pm reply quote 18

re: #11 WrathofG-d

As I have always said....its your site....you can do with it what you want.

I do fear however that you might chase off some of your wonderful Creationist "lizardoids" however, as these types of threads seem to be a bit aggressive against them.

Just looking out for a site I enjoy.

I don't know why it should chase anyone off if I link to articles about valid scientific experiments.

27 JKWEST  6/18/08 3:53:13 pm reply quote -1

re: #7 GregInSeattle

Yes, God uses evolution.

Amazing innit?

28 Mich-again  6/18/08 3:53:18 pm reply quote 1

This isn't just a random mutation, but evolution because the new bacteria is better equipped to survive than the original one. Pretty cool that it all happened in a lab. It would be interesting to see if the same thing happens to the other 11 sets or if something totally different happens.

29 Anthony (Los Angeles)  6/18/08 3:53:43 pm reply quote 0
A major evolutionary innovation has unfurled right in front of researchers’ eyes.

But how does this discussion help Michelle Obama's daughters?

30 ryannon  6/18/08 3:53:49 pm reply quote 3

Change We Can Believe In.

31 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:54:10 pm reply quote -2

re: #20 Charles

You cannot disprove ID, because it's not falsifiable. This, by the way, also shows that it is not science.

But the same goes for evolution. We can only go so far to prove it and so far to disprove it.

I am a creationist, I do not think that ID should be taught in the classrooms but I think that evolution should be taught as a theory rather than a proven scientific truth. I like the exactness of math and physics.

32 Shug  6/18/08 3:54:21 pm reply quote 9

re: #26 Charles

Non computer people could say the same thing about your code threads. they don't interest me, but really I just don't understand it. Likewise I don't usually get into these ID discussions. same reason

the best thing about your forum is the wide variety of topics and discussions occurring simultaneously.

I don't understand how somebody can claim that any particular topic(s) is going to drive people away.

SCIENCE!

/dolby out

33 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 3:54:24 pm reply quote 0

And if you look deep in the bacterial mix you can see relatives of Ben Stein!

/Bacterium Bunny

34 godfrey  6/18/08 3:54:58 pm reply quote 1

Reza is offended.

35 Wookieelips  6/18/08 3:55:14 pm reply quote 0

E. coli smells like dirty wet dog.

36 Mich-again  6/18/08 3:55:29 pm reply quote 9

These aren't the same bacteria I knew.

37 Charles  6/18/08 3:55:30 pm reply quote 8

re: #31 Eowyn2

But the same goes for evolution. We can only go so far to prove it and so far to disprove it.

I am a creationist, I do not think that ID should be taught in the classrooms but I think that evolution should be taught as a theory rather than a proven scientific truth. I like the exactness of math and physics.

No, it's not even remotely comparable, sorry. There are many parts to the theory of evolution that are falsifiable; people have been trying to do it for many years. And the theory has only survived and gotten stronger.

Like these bacteria.

38 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:55:35 pm reply quote 0

re: #16 opnion

Wait a minute! How do you think that we will count then we finish with our fingers?


hair folicles?

39 calvin coolidge  6/18/08 3:55:54 pm reply quote 0

Wake me up when the Spartans actually win a football game against Meeechigan.

40 Shug  6/18/08 3:56:10 pm reply quote 0

re: #39 calvin coolidge

Wake me up when the Spartans actually win a football game against Meeechigan.

OK Mr van Winkle

41 Thanos  6/18/08 3:56:49 pm reply quote 0

The bacteria can't have my OJ! Not now, not ever!

:)

This is highly interesting, thanks.

42 Pshawalaw  6/18/08 3:57:06 pm reply quote 4

My interest will really peak when they figure out how evolution led to consciousness.

43 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 3:57:20 pm reply quote 2

I know that i've evolved from somewhere.

Stick a monkey in an armchair, give him a remote control and some peanuts or chips and ask him to pick the channel.

Who knows? you may find the monkey has better taste in TV viewing than any spouse, partner or extra being you've ever met !

/Broadband Bunny

44 frodolives  6/18/08 3:57:22 pm reply quote 0

re: #23 Shug

But you don't know all the factors involved. That's why the scientist is going back to see what "laid the groundwork" for the later mutation

The replays showed that even when he looked at trillions of cells, only the original population re-evolved Cit+ – and only when he started the replay from generation 20,000 or greater. Something, he concluded, must have happened around generation 20,000 that laid the groundwork for Cit+ to later evolve.
Lenski and his colleagues are now working to identify just what that earlier change was, and how it made the Cit+ mutation possible more than 10,000 generations later.

45 WrathofG-d  6/18/08 3:57:48 pm reply quote 0

re: #26 Charles

its the inevitable "anyone that belives in G-d, or anything other than straight evolution from monkeys is a myth loving idiot, with not enough brain power to not believe in cloud people" comments that would upset people.

Overall my 2c was stated, and concern expressed. I appologize for repeating myself but it is your site and you should, and will do what you would like.

I know what I know and believe what I believe, and luckily for me it doesn't require others to agree.

46 Eowyn2  6/18/08 3:58:05 pm reply quote 1

re: #32 Shug

Non computer people could say the same thing about your code threads. they don't interest me, but really I just don't understand it. Likewise I don't usually get into these ID discussions. same reason

the best thing about your forum is the wide variety of topics and discussions occurring simultaneously.

I don't understand how somebody can claim that any particular topic(s) is going to drive people away.

SCIENCE!
/dolby out

I will have to be deleted by the infamous stinky before I will allow myself to be driven off because of a topic. Unless of course, someone is really really mean, and makes me really really sad, and like, hurts my feelings.

47 frodolives  6/18/08 3:58:13 pm reply quote 2

re: #20 Charles

how do you figure it shows that it's not science?

48 Antilles  6/18/08 3:58:19 pm reply quote 0

Bravo Charles!

Keep up the good fight!

49 bellamags  6/18/08 3:58:27 pm reply quote 0

re: #35 Wookieelips

Does it really? and also, how did you find out?

50 frodolives  6/18/08 3:59:13 pm reply quote 0

re: #44 frodolives

oops. sorry about the bold.

51 Charles  6/18/08 3:59:35 pm reply quote 6

re: #47 frodolives

how do you figure it shows that it's not science?

[Link: en.wikipedia.org...]

52 Pshawalaw  6/18/08 3:59:39 pm reply quote 0

When it comes to e coli, I don't believe it until /www.med.umich.edu/microbio/bio/mobley.htm" target="_blank">Harry says it is so.

53 Dar ul Harb  6/18/08 3:59:41 pm reply quote 0

Here's the abstract from Proceedings Of The National Academy of Sciences.

54 Shug  6/18/08 3:59:57 pm reply quote 2

re: #44 frodolives

I've always subscribed to the Chariots of the Gods scenario, combined with evolution and the existence of a higher power.

In short, I enjoy looking at a tree and a sunset. I don't worry so much about who made the tree, or who made the eyeball that allows me to see the sunset. I just enjoy it

It's all so amazing that I think it's like that Box guy in Star Trek.

If you look at it you will go insane.

So I don't but I don't bother about people that want to know or not know but have faith.

55 Dar ul Harb  6/18/08 4:01:45 pm reply quote 1

re: #35 Wookieelips

E. coli smells like dirty wet dog.

Smells like poo.

Not to be confused with Obama's national security adviser.

56 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:01:49 pm reply quote 1

Charles

I think the clincher to the whole deal is an experiment the Russians did a while back with foxes. They stuck foxes in cages and tried to domesticate them. After about 16-20 generations .. the foxes were 'pseudo' domestic. But the remarkable thing was .. after that .. they started to change their COATS from the pure black they had been before.

Google it .. it was about 8 years ago since i heard the story. But its well worth finding out more about. Its basically along the same lines.

/Breeder Bunny

57 Pshawalaw  6/18/08 4:02:01 pm reply quote 0

Harry

Try this link thing again, I will.

58 ploome hineni  6/18/08 4:02:10 pm reply quote 0

re: #9 buzzsawmonkey

No mean feet, that.

result of cruel shoes

59 see bs  6/18/08 4:02:40 pm reply quote 0

Did one of the bacteria develop the ability to turn into ice, shoot lasers from its eyes, have psychic abilities, have wings, have "beast" like hands or have a mentor that was confined to a wheel chair?

Maybe control magnetism or become immovable?

Pop 3 claws from its hands? Control the weather? Have a steel skin? Teleport?

60 Agahnim  6/18/08 4:03:13 pm reply quote 1

I remember when we worked with plasmids in lab to give E. Coli the glow in the dark properties of jellyfish. That was pretty freakin' sweet.

61 Nevergiveup  6/18/08 4:03:17 pm reply quote 0

re: #4 Charles

Uh no. It's an article on a scientific subject that I happen to be interested in.

Ah Ha.

62 Cicero05  6/18/08 4:03:30 pm reply quote 1

I use citrate myself. So what's the big deal?

63 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:04:31 pm reply quote 0

re: #59 see bs

Did one of the bacteria develop the ability to turn into ice, shoot lasers from its eyes, have psychic abilities, have wings, have "beast" like hands or have a mentor that was confined to a wheel chair?

Maybe control magnetism or become immovable?

Pop 3 claws from its hands? Control the weather? Have a steel skin? Teleport?

Sure they did. I saw a movie from the 50s where all that happened.

And it was REAL too .. i tells ya.

/B & W Bunny

64 brickthruplateglasswindow  6/18/08 4:04:32 pm reply quote 1

Replicate and repeat, then it's scientific.

65 JohnH  6/18/08 4:05:09 pm reply quote 7

I do not know a single creationist who would have any problems with what occurred.

I will observe that if it took 31,500 generations for what appears to be one change to occur in a protected environment, extrapolating this to humans and assuming a generation averages 20 years, this one change would take 630,000 years.

'Jes sayin'......

66 Eowyn2  6/18/08 4:05:17 pm reply quote 1

re: #37 Charles

No, it's not even remotely comparable, sorry. There are many parts to the theory of evolution that are falsifiable; people have been trying to do it for many years. And the theory has only survived and gotten stronger.

Like these bacteria.

I firmly believe that man has evolved. Else we would still be worshipping black moon rocks ... oh wait we are. well some humans are. Currently public schools are not teaching that evolution is a theory that has had some parts proven. We all know that animals adapt to diffent conditions. Rather than teach kids to search out questions and answers about evolution, they teach kids that there are no questions left unanswered. I firmly object to that.

I do not, however, object discussing super germs or super bacteria.

67 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 4:05:26 pm reply quote 8

re: #31 Eowyn2

I am a creationist, I do not think that ID should be taught in the classrooms but I think that evolution should be taught as a theory rather than a proven scientific truth. I like the exactness of math and physics.

I don't understand--really--why people have such a problem comprehending that there is no such thing as "proven scientific truth" in the sense that it is used above.

There are observations; cells behave in such and such a way, mutations occur in such and such a way; species come into being, and disappear, in such and such a way. All of these things are recorded and documented.

The overarching description of these observed phenomena is called a theory. Theories alter over time; as species mutate and alter, so theories change as new information is added to the existing body of knowledge.

Theories can be wrong; scientific observation, and the explanation of data, has the right to be wrong. The whole of science is predicated upon the right to be wrong. That does not mean that a theory does not, at any given moment, reflect the sum total of the current scientific knowledge; that does not mean that people who are discomfited by the current theory have the right to argue for the substitution of that theory in its current form with a faith-based belief.

68 ploome hineni  6/18/08 4:05:41 pm reply quote 0

re: #56 Buster Bunny

[Link: findarticles.com...]

69 WhiteRasta  6/18/08 4:06:57 pm reply quote 0

re: #11 WrathofG-d

It's interesting to have an intelligent debate.........

70 Eowyn2  6/18/08 4:07:04 pm reply quote 0

re: #44 frodolives

But you don't know all the factors involved. That's why the scientist is going back to see what "laid the groundwork" for the later mutation

The replays showed that even when he looked at trillions of cells, only the original population re-evolved Cit+ – and only when he started the replay from generation 20,000 or greater. Something, he concluded, must have happened around generation 20,000 that laid the groundwork for Cit+ to later evolve.
Lenski and his colleagues are now working to identify just what that earlier change was, and how it made the Cit+ mutation possible more than 10,000 generations later.

I think it was the dogs and cats living together.

71 Dar ul Harb  6/18/08 4:07:18 pm reply quote 0

This just in:
E. coli more evolved than Islamic terrorists

Biofilm at 11.

72 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 4:07:31 pm reply quote 0

re: #70 Eowyn2

I think it was the dogs and cats living together.

But were they playing poker?

73 Charles  6/18/08 4:07:35 pm reply quote 2

re: #66 Eowyn2

Rather than teach kids to search out questions and answers about evolution, they teach kids that there are no questions left unanswered. I firmly object to that.

You're going to have to prove that, because it's certainly not what I was taught in science class.

74 Cicero05  6/18/08 4:08:08 pm reply quote -3

re: #65 JohnH

I do not know a single creationist who would have any problems with what occurred.

<blockquote>I will observe that if it took 31,500 generations for what appears to be one change to occur in a protected environment, extrapolating this to humans and assuming a generation averages 20 years, this one change would take 630,000 years.</blockquote>

'Jes sayin'......

Your logic is sooo misguided I hardly know where to start.

75 Agahnim  6/18/08 4:08:18 pm reply quote 0

I'm really, really interested in seeing the different pathways that allowed this to occur, and the implications of the mutation in the E. Coli strain compared to other features. Very interesting. I love science.

76 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:08:26 pm reply quote 0

re: #65 JohnH

I do not know a single creationist who would have any problems with what occurred.

I will observe that if it took 31,500 generations for what appears to be one change to occur in a protected environment, extrapolating this to humans and assuming a generation averages 20 years, this one change would take 630,000 years.

'Jes sayin'......

Actually change will take place in a relevant stream within a single generation if the circumstances are far removed from the known previous parameters.

Think of those lizards in Crete who changed and adapted within 20 years. All that was necessary there is a total upheaval of their known environment.

/Blatent Bunny

77 ploome hineni  6/18/08 4:09:01 pm reply quote 1

re: #62 Cicero05

I use citrate myself. So what's the big deal?

you a germ?

78 Charles  6/18/08 4:09:10 pm reply quote 5

re: #75 Agahnim

I'm really, really interested in seeing the different pathways that allowed this to occur, and the implications of the mutation in the E. Coli strain compared to other features. Very interesting. I love science.

Really? Then why are you dinging down all the pro-evolution comments?

79 karmic_inquisitor  6/18/08 4:09:15 pm reply quote 2

Alright.

It is E. Coli. It is evolution as opposed to intelligent design.

Only one comment is appropriate: Holy Shit.

80 Cicero05  6/18/08 4:10:03 pm reply quote 0

re: #77 ploome hineni

you a germ?

I've been called worse.

81 Eowyn2  6/18/08 4:11:03 pm reply quote 0

re: #56 Buster Bunny

Charles

I think the clincher to the whole deal is an experiment the Russians did a while back with foxes. They stuck foxes in cages and tried to domesticate them. After about 16-20 generations .. the foxes were 'pseudo' domestic. But the remarkable thing was .. after that .. they started to change their COATS from the pure black they had been before.

Google it .. it was about 8 years ago since i heard the story. But its well worth finding out more about. Its basically along the same lines.

/Breeder Bunny


could it have been a result of inbreeding?

82 Agahnim  6/18/08 4:11:03 pm reply quote -1

re: #73 Charles

You're going to have to prove that, because it's certainly not what I was taught in science class.

That's actually how I was taught in my Zoology class the first day. Everything had been proven, it was a fact, and if anyone had any questions about it they could leave the class. He was a great teacher though, and actually believed in some latent psychic abilities.

I miss him. =(

83 vapig  6/18/08 4:11:20 pm reply quote 4

Sorry - not as exciting to me as the oil pooping bugs.....

84 Pyroskank  6/18/08 4:11:24 pm reply quote 4

This whole idea of teaching "ID" in schools seems so ridiculous to me. It's all supposition and honestly has NOTHING to do with the theory of evolution. Science does not, and never has, claimed to explain the philosophical reasons for WHY the world behaves as it does. It simply tries to describe, in the most accurate way possible, HOW it happens. Religion supplies the "why" and rarely provides the "how".

As a brief example, the bible tells us that G-d created light. He said "let there be light" and there was light. How? The bible doesn't say. And honestly, it doesn't matter in a religious sense. It just happened.

The bible tells us why G-d created humans. Darwinism tells us how human beings came to be as they are today. These concepts cannot, by definition, contradict one another. This is why any idea like "ID" that attempts to explain "why" rather than "how" is not science, and has no place in a public classroom.

What is so hard to understand about this?

85 right wing zephyr  6/18/08 4:11:39 pm reply quote 1

re: #69 WhiteRasta

It's interesting to have an intelligent debate.........

Yeah. Let me know when you see one.

86 schneidballs  6/18/08 4:11:48 pm reply quote -4

My question would be, did the mutation result from an increase of DNA information (required for evolution) or a re-shuffling of what was already there, or removing information a that was there previously.

If it was an actual increase in DNA information, then I would be inclined to call it evolution (from less DNA information to more DNA information), if shifting of current DNA or removal of DNA then it is devolution, heading in the wrong direction to support Darwin's theory.

ID does not say changes will not happen, but mutations to date (that I am aware of) have all been moving around existing DNA or removing parts of existing DNA, not adding information to the DNA. You need to add volumes of information to go from "goo in a pond" to humans...so claiming things change without showing it adds information does not help disprove anything.

There have been many headlines saying "look at the evolution" but after the headlines they show themselves to be using information that was already there...time will tell on this one.

87 Pshawalaw  6/18/08 4:11:54 pm reply quote 0

Tell me, isn't ID different from just believing there is a Creator?

88 WrathofG-d  6/18/08 4:11:55 pm reply quote 0

re: #69 WhiteRasta

Please do not misunderstand my statement. I am in no way against deate on this, or any other issue. I am not saying that this should not be brought up on LGF. (for many reasons, including the biggest which is that it isn't up to me) I was only wondering if bringing this contentious issue up so often in the last couple days, when everyone involved (with an "i" not "e" ;) ) will have noticed that some are not as open to a difference of opinion as others, and instead choose to mock and degrade those who believe in Creation. I am never bothered by anything anyone here says about any topic, but came very close to it because of the manner of which some people disagreed with Creationism.

Again, I'll repeat that overall it doesn't matter what I think on this subject as its no my site, and I have no, to very very little say over what happens on this site. I just wished to get my 2c out. Which thanks to LGF was I able to.

89 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:12:24 pm reply quote 0

Ire: #68 ploome hineni

[Link: findarticles.com...]

Thanks for that ploome .. i knew it was out there.

Charles .. there u go .. another prime example of that evo-looting stuff happening in the real world.

Hey you know .. you could make that into a whole topic !

/Bolshoi Bunny

90 Nevergiveup  6/18/08 4:12:48 pm reply quote 1

So how about them Knicks?

91 buzzsawmonkey  6/18/08 4:13:31 pm reply quote 0

re: #90 Nevergiveup

So how about them Knicks?

Get a new razor blade, and you needn't worry about them.

92 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:13:46 pm reply quote 0

re: #90 Nevergiveup

So how about them Knicks?

The Knicks evolved?

93 Charles  6/18/08 4:13:55 pm reply quote 7

re: #86 schneidballs

My question would be, did the mutation result from an increase of DNA information (required for evolution)...

This is a Discovery Institute talking point, and it is simply not true.

94 Agahnim  6/18/08 4:14:48 pm reply quote 0

re: #78 Charles

Really? Then why are you dinging down all the pro-evolution comments?

First thread I looked at there was a -9 ding on a guy who stated his opinion for ID, and didn't deserve any dings. I've since dinged down jerky comments, and up-dinged things I happen to agree with or good points made.

95 gibsonz  6/18/08 4:14:48 pm reply quote 12

I have personally witnessed` 50 years of reverse evolution - it is called the democratic party!

96 schneidballs  6/18/08 4:15:12 pm reply quote 0

By the way, that was my first post after reading for years...love the site Charles!

Go E. Coli!

97 ploome hineni  6/18/08 4:15:22 pm reply quote 0

OT

Drudge could not find an uglier picture?

98 Wookieelips  6/18/08 4:15:26 pm reply quote 0

re: #49 bellamags

Does it really? and also, how did you find out?


Microbiology course.

The lab always smelled like. Had to smell it 4 mornings a week.

*barf*

100 Ringo the Gringo  6/18/08 4:15:38 pm reply quote 2

I have no problem with ID being taught in the classroom, so long as it is in a philosophy class and not a science class.


Science should inform philosophy, but not the other way around.

101 A Kiwi Infidel  6/18/08 4:15:51 pm reply quote 2

There is nothing new, here, given that the influenza virus mutates/evolves/changes from year to year. All part of God's creation.

102 schneidballs  6/18/08 4:16:20 pm reply quote -6
This is a Discovery Institute talking point, and it is simply not true.

Why is it not true? It seems reasonable to me that you need more DNA to evolve...

103 Nevergiveup  6/18/08 4:16:22 pm reply quote 0

re: #97 ploome hineni

OT

Drudge could not find an uglier picture?

Well at least she is wearing a USMC pin.

104 ploome hineni  6/18/08 4:16:27 pm reply quote 0

{Cicero05}

awwwww

105 Buster Bunny  6/18/08 4:16:39 pm reply quote 0

re: #94 Agahnim

First thread I looked at there was a -9 ding on a guy who stated his opinion for ID, and didn't deserve any dings. I've since dinged down jerky comments, and up-dinged things I happen to agree with or good points made.

I'm anti-dingian in my beliefs. I believe that to ding you must ding for a reason. Note : the Buddhists also believe in this.

/Bong on Bunny

106 Eowyn2  6/18/08 4:16:58 pm reply quote -1

re: #67 buzzsawmonkey

Depends on what your definition of science is.

Physics is a provable science - gravity exists, acceleration exists (deceleration is only negative acceleration) torque exists. It took some pretty brilliant minds to see that and prove it.

Mathmatics is provable 1 plus 1 = 2 in any language. Imaginary numbers are a bit freaky.

107 Gordon Marock  6/18/08 4:17:42 pm reply quote 2

Let's see, scientists use years of research, mapping of DNA, and studies of observable mutations of simple organisms to create bacteira that produce, among other things, oil, human hormones, etc, and the ID people still want to debunk the theory of evolution? What a bunch of dunces.

108 A Kiwi Infidel  6/18/08 4:18:05 pm reply quote 0

re: #99 WrathofG-d

109 gameover  6/18/08 4:18:10 pm reply quote 0

Nano-evolution rules!

110 jelo  6/18/08 4:18:34 pm reply quote -10

Just wait, believe what you want ...upon death you will all know the answer.

Just make sure you made the right choice!

111 NonNativeTexan  6/18/08 4:18:35 pm reply quote 1

Should have also done Antibiotics in parallel, then we could have
mixed them and let em "duke it out"

112 A Kiwi Infidel  6/18/08 4:18:54 pm reply quote 1

re: #110 jelo

Just wait, believe what you want ...upon death you will all know the answer.

Just make sure you made the right choice!


We have a winner!

113 Agahnim  6/18/08 4:18:59 pm reply quote 0

re: #105 Buster Bunny

I'm anti-dingian in my beliefs. I believe that to ding you must ding for a reason. Note : the Buddhists also believe in this.

/Bong on Bunny

I was searching the world for the ding, but the ding was inside me the whole time?

114 Charles  6/18/08 4:19:00 pm reply quote 10

re: #102 schneidballs

Why is it not true? It seems reasonable to me that you need more DNA to evolve...

Uh, it may "sound reasonable" but it is not true. You don't need "extra DNA" for species to evolve. In fact, sometimes, mutations involve the LOSS of DNA.

115 VegasRick  6/18/08 4:19:28 pm reply quote 1

re: #107 Gordon Marock

Let's see, scientists use years of research, mapping of DNA, and studies of observable mutations of simple organisms to create bacteira that produce, among other things, oil, human hormones, etc, and the ID people still want to debunk the theory of evolution? What a bunch of dunces.

Nice.

116 Pshawalaw  6/18/08 4:19:52 pm reply quote 7

I'm not ready to give up on the possibility that a supreme being could have brought all of this into existence, including evolution; I don't see a conflict between the two ideas. Both could be true.

117 Boogberg  6/18/08 4:19:55 pm reply quote 0

re: #78 Charles

Really? Then why are you dinging down all the pro-evolution comments?

Aaaahahahaha! Busted! :D

118 brickthruplateglasswindow  6/18/08 4:20:01 pm reply quote 0

Evolution- syn. Change

Obama is the Evolution candidate. Just sayin'.

119 WrathofG-d  6/18/08 4:20:09 pm reply quote</