Freethought & Rationalism Archive

MrDarwin · 06-19-2003, 06:51 AM

A couple of interesting articles have come out recently. From Organelle's Discovery Challenges Theory, Could Alter Approach To Disease Treatment:

Quote:

Researchers looking inside a pathogenic soil bacterium have found an organelle, a subcellular pouch, existing independently from the plasma membrane. The discovery within a prokaryotic organism challenges the theory on the origin of eukaryotic organelles and suggests a targeted approach to killing many disease-causing organisms.

...The existence of discrete organelles is a defining component of unicellular eukaryotes, which have membrane-bound nuclei and specialized structures in their cell boundaries. The evolution of eukaryotic organelles "is a matter of extensive debate," Docampo said. The principle of endosymbiosis says that as microorganisms engulfed others, then new, membrane-surrounded organelles emerged in eukaryotes.

"It appears that this organelle has been conserved in evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, since it is present in both. This argues against the belief that all eukaryotic organelles were formed when early eukaryotes swallowed prokaryotes"

and from Some 400 'Fragile Regions' Of Genome More Vulnerable To Evolutionary Breaks; New Theory Could Have Implications For Cancer Research:

Quote:

Researchers from the University of California, San Diego (UCSD) Jacobs School of Engineering have uncovered evidence that major evolutionary changes are more likely to occur in approximately 400 'fragile' genomic regions that account for only 5 percent of the human genome. The findings, reported in the June 24 issue of the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS), undercut the widely held view among scientists that evolutionary breakpoints -- disruptions in the order of genes on chromosomes -- are purely random.

Predictably, the creationists and IDers are already crowing about how these are two more nails in the coffin of evolutionary theory:

Organelle's Discovery Challenges Theory

ID Evolutionary Hypotheses

Darwinists wrong about DNA big time-again

Xeluan · 06-19-2003, 07:18 AM

When I see these new discoveries I think "Wow. We have learned something new. This is great evolution isn't quite what we thought it was. Science goes forward."

From reading around, creationists/IDists knowledge of the philosophy of science has not gone beyond Popper and it is a twisted from of popperism at best.

You gotta love RFH over at Arn though. I believe his approach to science is "If I keep repeating that Darwinism is dead enough I don't need to actually support my ideas."

Peez · 06-19-2003, 08:06 AM

Note that the article carefully states:

Quote:

Bacteria and other prokaryotes generally lack an endomembrane system.

(my emphasis)
The cyanobacteria (blue-green algae) have photosynthetic membranes inside the cell, making structures called thylakoids or lamellae. These may well be the sort of structure from which the thylakoids of chloroplast in eukaryotes evolved. So, while the new findings are very interesting, they are causing less of a fundamental change in our view of prokaryote/eukaryote evolution than might be implied.

Peez

Roland98 · 06-19-2003, 08:16 AM

Hmm, I don't really see how these are even remotely any evidence against evolution. In the first article, for example:

Quote:

"It appears that this organelle has been conserved in evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, since it is present in both. This argues against the belief that all eukaryotic organelles were formed when early eukaryotes swallowed prokaryotes"

THe key word is bolded. So what if ALL organelles didn't evolve this way? Certainly the evidence is quite strong that mitochondria and chloroplasts did. I guess I didn't realize that ALL eukaryotic organelles were thus predicted to originate this way.

Silly. But can't wait until ICR/AIG et al. get their "official" statements up on their websites...heh heh...

RufusAtticus · 06-19-2003, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roland98
THe key word is bolded. So what if ALL organelles didn't evolve this way? Certainly the evidence is quite strong that mitochondria and chloroplasts did. I guess I didn't realize that ALL eukaryotic organelles were thus predicted to originate this way.

Let me put it this way: I've never heard a single person advocate that all organelles arose from endosymbosis.

Valentine Pontifex · 06-19-2003, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Roland98
Hmm, I don't really see how these are even remotely any evidence against evolution. In the first article, for example:

"It appears that this organelle has been conserved in evolution from prokaryotes to eukaryotes, since it is present in both. This argues against the belief that all eukaryotic organelles were formed when early eukaryotes swallowed prokaryotes"

THe key word is bolded. So what if ALL organelles didn't evolve this way? Certainly the evidence is quite strong that mitochondria and chloroplasts did. I guess I didn't realize that ALL eukaryotic organelles were thus predicted to originate this way.

Silly. But can't wait until ICR/AIG et al. get their "official" statements up on their websites...heh heh...

And if anything I don't think the idea of virtually everything being descended from prokaryotes was ever close to being a majority position almong relevant experts. It sounds like more like the views of Lynn Margulis than the mainstream consensus. Now there is a consensus that mitochrondria and chloraplasts are former prokaryotes (and in one case a former eukaryote with a chloroplast).

I don't think this change much other than one idea among many has been presented with some possibly contrary evidence.

Roland98 · 06-19-2003, 05:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Valentine Pontifex
And if anything I don't think the idea of virtually everything being descended from prokaryotes was ever close to being a majority position almong relevant experts. It sounds like more like the views of Lynn Margulis than the mainstream consensus. Now there is a consensus that mitochrondria and chloraplasts are former prokaryotes (and in one case a former eukaryote with a chloroplast).

I don't think this change much other than one idea among many has been presented with some possibly contrary evidence.

I agree. Sounds like science in action to me!

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-19-2003, 07:18 AM	#2
Xeluan Senior Member Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Some Pub In East Gosford, Australia Posts: 831	When I see these new discoveries I think "Wow. We have learned something new. This is great evolution isn't quite what we thought it was. Science goes forward." From reading around, creationists/IDists knowledge of the philosophy of science has not gone beyond Popper and it is a twisted from of popperism at best. You gotta love RFH over at Arn though. I believe his approach to science is "If I keep repeating that Darwinism is dead enough I don't need to actually support my ideas."

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.