carlos11 (2014-03-31 16:19:45)

---

Snapple- As long as you understand that evolution did happen...

---

HanShotFirst (2014-03-31 17:59:58)

---

I just want to point out your German Shepherd analogy is wrong on the basis that the German Shepherd, while classified as a breed, is difficult to consider a species on it's own because of how Dog breeding actually works, not because of mutations.

German Shepherds have a laundry list of other dogs breeds in it's ancestry, who in turn, tend to have laundry lists of their own. Because of this, and the selective breeding that goes into creating a dog breed, none of the features this breed has is actually a result of descent with modification. No dog breed would ever work for this example, because all (Non-extinct) breeds have gone through the same process, with some (Like the German Shephard) more so than others.

In the cases of German Shepherds having Labrador pups, there is also the dog's lineage to consider. Were both dogs purebred in this example? If not, then that discredits it even further, because mutts really are a breed of their own.

The dog example also comes back to bite you, as dog breeds tend to have breed-specific health problems. Why? Because occasionally, selectively breeding results in a generation or two out of incest, which then carries on to their offspring and further. Eventually it becomes less prominent as there is more diversity, but as many dog breeders know, It's still seen enough even today that it warrants extra caution when breeding and moreso on owners who own said breed.

---

ConnorRonnoc (2014-03-31 20:53:50)

---

Did anybody else read this as "Muttations" and assume it was a Hunger Games Thread?

---

HanShotFirst (2014-03-31 22:13:33)

---

Again

Dog Breeds =/= Species.

The German Shepherd breed was made in a controlled environment through selective breeding. One of the dogs in it's lineage that wad used was Labrador. The Labrador breed itself has it's own list of dogs in it's ancestry because it too was made in a controlled environment through selective breeding. For a German Shepherd to eventually become a Labrador, you'd have to do the selective breeding process again to breed out the other lineages, but in doing so, It becomes it's own breed rather than becoming a Labrador, because It was bred through a different means and ultimately may not even have all the traits of a Labrador.

You can't get an existing Dog breed out of a another on it's own, because all (Non-extinct) breeds are results of selective breeding themselves, unless the dog you used was also used to A ) Make the breed in the first place, and B ) bred in a controlled environment through selective breeding.

You can get German Shepherds through Labradors and other dogs, but the process is neither reversible, meaning you can't get Labradors through German Shepherd, nor natural since it's through selective breeding, not mutation or descent with modification.

Ergo, The dog example falls flat, because it doesn't work that way. Ask anyone with decent knowledge on Dog-breeding.

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-01 13:39:41)

---

You missed the part where I pointed out how Inbreeding has led to severe health defects in some Dog breeds. Assuming just two dogs, of any breed, bred a bunch of litters, and these same litters continued to breed, you'd get severe defects that actually exists as a result of the same thing being done in the selective breeding process

If you want examples.

-Many Dog breeds are prone to a form of cancer, some are actually prone to several. This is one of the more common ones.

-Coronary issues

-Hip Dysplasia

-Osteoporosis.

-Lung Issues

-Behavioural Issues, such as Dalmatians (who are normally complacent) being incredibly aggressive.

-Many Heart issues.

-The Irish Wolfhound breed as a whole suffers from growing way too fast for it's internal organs, and suffering from a heart that is too small to fully support their 9 foot long body. In addition, Osteoporosis, Hip Dysplasia, and some cases being suspectible to cancer.

-More prone to heatstrokes

-Weaker immune systems

-Arthritis

-Certain organs being prone to infection/failure

-Dental issues

These are all, of course, the most common issues. Let's ignore neuralogical defects, blindness, deafness, and all the other uncommon but still prevalent defects.

The healthiest, and least prone to defects is the German Shepherd, but that's because it has so many different dogs in it's lineage that a generation or two out of incest did very little harm to it's genetic diversity. For God's sake, even wild wolves, of all things, are in the German Shepherd's ancestry.

Two dogs also aren't going to give you more breeds, because a Dog breed is not the same as a species. Notice how it's two different words?

This whole example is based on the fact that Dogs can survive in the wilderness. (Hint: Upwards of 80% of all Dog breeds have little to no chance.)

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-01 19:02:58)

---

I do understand the point you were intending to make, and using the same example you did, I'm arguing that it doesn't work that way. You need more than two of any animal to get a stable level of genetic diversity, and incest actually reduces genetic diversity and causes defects to become more prominent as a result.

Consider this point for a second. Normally, a baby is born with 50% of the mother's genetic code. That would the second generation, following the second generation is the third, which bred out of incest leads every baby to be born with 63% of the mother's genetic code. This number only increases further down the road, to the point where everyone more or less has the exact same genetic code, assuming they all haven't died by that point.

This is once again where I bring up the dogs, because this is still a common practice where they occasionally inbreed purebred dogs to maintain their purebred status, and several of the health defects I've listed are extremely common in many dog breeds.

Yes, dogs have a common ancestor, who numbered in the tens of thousands, and that ancestor in turn shares a common ancestor with Bears, who also numbered in the tens of thousands.

---

TREEhugger101 (2014-04-02 02:30:54)

---

Still Too Long; Did not Read!.
Snapapple, think of tailoring your posts to your audience. Got a website full of children? Post something they can understand.


I'd read it but I'm busy.

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-02 11:22:33)

---

You know, your claim that it's a result of mutation is incorrect, right? It's actually the result of Homozygous offspring inherting recessive traits easily easily, leading to the inheretence of Genetic Didorders.

Reduced mental and physical development, as well as certain organ defects are perfect examples of this.

And you wanna know the funny thing about Genetic disorders? They're natural sequences of genetic code that tells Cell X to function in Y manner, just like any other. Funnily enough, in Functioning in Y manner, the being has reduced survival capability, making the gene recessive in the normal population.

You're carrying these same codes right now, but you never notice. If you had a kid with a girl, chances are she has a completely different set of recessive genes, meaning the chances of your child being born with these faults is slim.

Have a kid with your sister, and you guarantee they'll have it because she's carrying the exact same recessive genes you are.

This post has been edited one or more times, the last time was:
2014-04-02 11:58:21

---

TFDFrance (2014-04-02 15:14:06)

---

I was ok reading the first posts. Not really long. Then I saw more posts. Then, my brain exploded due to overload.

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-02 21:31:52)

---

What's 'Cosmos', and what network is it even running on?

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-03 12:24:53)

---

1) I get that you're entitled to your beliefs and everything, but you just made the biggest mistake. Which is expecting to use science to back up your religion. The two systems simply do not mix, under all but one circumstance, which is the basis for both of these systems being the same at their center, but the focus for this center shifts dramatically between the two.

2, I did not describe a mutation. A better example would be an online game that ocassionally updates, for why there are defects in children when they're from inbreeding parents. No computer game's programming is absolutely perfect, so there are bound to be bugs in the system as a result. When dealing with smaller systems, one bad line of code can make the whole thing tumble down, but in larger systems, these lines may be buried under everything else. They're still there, just unnoticed.

Now take this and apply it to organisms. Humans are a complex being, made of smaller beings working together (Organs) , in turn made of layers of even smaller beings (Cells). But, in such a system, there are bound to be a few bad lines of code in there somewhere, but their presence is negligible. In inbreeding, however, when it's time for the baby to adopt genetic coding, guess who suddenly comes up again and bugs up the system? It's hereditary issues, not mutations.

---

carlos11 (2014-04-05 03:16:13)

---

Open, because this thread is very much alive.

---

HanShotFirst (2014-04-05 06:07:52)

---

"Scientific Discoveries may provide supporting evidence for my world view"

Again, you made the same mistake. They're two completely different systems that cannot mix. Under no circumstance can Science be used to support religious views, because one observation from System A cannot support another observation from System B; since they cannot convert between systems in that manner, nor can religious views be applied to a scientific study, because it goes against the scientific process by having an observation prior to collecting data.

---