The Origin of the Human DNA

[interlagos]

"The Origin of the Human DNA"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2YnC0JmVfA

If you choose the first answer "Natural evolution", please describe how "random mutations" increase genetic information as opposed to actually destroying it. What is the force behind evolution that attempts to decrease entropy as opposed to the laws of thermodynamics, which state that isolated systems eventually evolve towards the state of maximum entropy (complete lack of order). Is there an external influence on our system then? What might that be?

[1713460932]

1713460932

[1713460932]

1713460932

[1713460932]

1713460932

[Ekaros]

Not from apes, but common ancestor... I can't really pick that one...

[Lethn]

I can give you an answer on what I believe but it doesn't match the polling options you put out, we already know that humanity evolved from apes because of scientific evidence but there's a theory out there I find very interesting where scientists think that we are actually evolved from a foreign organism in an asteroid crashing into Earth, this would also go to some way explaining why after all this time we haven't had other species on this planet evolving into sentient life and developing the same brains and thought process we have.

So far I think this is one of the most intelligent theories I've heard yet, much better than all this created out of nothing bullshit we keep hearing about from religious people etc. it might also go to explaining why we haven't seen any other sentients in our galaxy unless of course we've already made contact and our governments are doing their thing of keeping it from us.

[Akka]

Not from apes, but common ancestor... I can't really pick that one...

Me neither.

So I don't pick any.

If you choose the first answer "Natural evolution", please describe how "random mutations" increase genetic information as opposed to actually destroying it. What is the force behind evolution that attempts to decrease entropy as opposed to the laws of thermodynamics, which state that isolated systems eventually evolve towards the state of maximum entropy (complete lack of order). Is there an external influence on our system then? What might that be?

Earth is not an Isolated system as it constantly receives Energy from the sun. And in this case the complete evolutionary process. So there is nothing to explain as you start with flawed assumptions.


Also this thread belongs into Off-Topic as it has nothing to do with Bitcoin.

[Mike Christ]

Choice 1: Fallacious; humans and apes, according to evolutionary theory, evolve from a common ancestor.
Choice 2: Mystery answers a mystery; how did the advanced civilization originate?
Choice 3: Mystery answers a mystery; how did God originate?
Choice 4: I don't even.

The moral of the story is: I don't know.  The only natural choice, then, is choice 1 (if you would fix the fallacy), because it's as close to "I don't know" as it has gotten to something that could be true.

The better question is: which theory is most useful?

[knight22]

Does God could have created human through evolution?

[edd]

Does God could have created human through evolution?

If you believe evolution is a logical, natural process of certain genetic mutations flourishing due to their suitability in a given environment, why would you need a god to guide it?

[knight22]

Does God could have created human through evolution?

If you believe evolution is a logical, natural process of certain genetic mutations flourishing due to their suitability in a given environment, why would you need a god to guide it?

i.e. Satoshi wrote a bunch a mathematical rules and laws that happen to "evolve" just as it is supposed to be (for now on).
So why not a God could not have created a bunch of mathematical rules and laws that make things evolve over time just as it is supposed to be.

[edd]

Does God could have created human through evolution?

If you believe evolution is a logical, natural process of certain genetic mutations flourishing due to their suitability in a given environment, why would you need a god to guide it?

i.e. Satoshi wrote a bunch a mathematical rules and laws that happen to "evolve" just as it is supposed to be (for now on).
So why not a God could not have created a bunch of mathematical rules and laws that make things evolved over time just as it is supposed to be.

The analogy isn't the best, but I understand what you mean.

The problem is, you are asking a hypothetical question that cannot possibly be answered with any amount of certainty. What's the point of asking? Couldn't the physical laws of the universe be the result of a omnipotent flying spaghetti monster having one too many beers and sparking the Big Bang on a lark? There's just as much evidence supporting either scenario.

[knight22]

Does God could have created human through evolution?

If you believe evolution is a logical, natural process of certain genetic mutations flourishing due to their suitability in a given environment, why would you need a god to guide it?

i.e. Satoshi wrote a bunch a mathematical rules and laws that happen to "evolve" just as it is supposed to be (for now on).
So why not a God could not have created a bunch of mathematical rules and laws that make things evolved over time just as it is supposed to be.

The analogy isn't the best, but I understand what you mean.

The problem is, you are asking a hypothetical question that cannot possibly be answered with any amount of certainty. What's the point of asking? Couldn't the physical laws of the universe be the result of a omnipotent flying spaghetti monster having one too many beers and sparking the Big Bang on a lark? There's just as much evidence supporting either scenario.

Well, that's the whole point about beliefs. One way or another you cannot prove it and that’s why they are called “beliefs”. The only thing we can do is extrapolate. Because of this I think it is a good thing to always doubt on a certain level because chances are good that you and I are wrong.

[msc]

please describe how "random mutations" increase genetic information as opposed to actually destroying it.

That's my problem with evolution.  Chaos doesn't lead to order in the absence of intelligence.  Ape to man can be probably be explained, but the question is how non-life would give rise to life.

I believe that God exists in a form that we don't expect.  Rather than a "being", maybe an intelligence inherent in the construction of the Universe that's beyond our level of comprehension.

[pedrog]

@interlagos

Here: http://evolution.berkeley.edu/

And our external influence is the Sun.

I can give you an answer on what I believe but it doesn't match the polling options you put out, we already know that humanity evolved from apes because of scientific evidence but there's a theory out there I find very interesting where scientists think that we are actually evolved from a foreign organism in an asteroid crashing into Earth, this would also go to some way explaining why after all this time we haven't had other species on this planet evolving into sentient life and developing the same brains and thought process we have.

It's the Panspermia Hypothesis.

And there were other "sentient" life similar to humans, probably a lot, like the Neanderthal, but we were the ones who survive.

Does God could have created human through evolution?

If you believe evolution is a logical, natural process of certain genetic mutations flourishing due to their suitability in a given environment, why would you need a god to guide it?

i.e. Satoshi wrote a bunch a mathematical rules and laws that happen to "evolve" just as it is supposed to be (for now on).
So why not a God could not have created a bunch of mathematical rules and laws that make things evolve over time just as it is supposed to be.

You're entering in the deistic perspective here, the problem is this hypothesis makes more questions than gives answers, where did this God came from? Is it conscious? Did it evolve? Is it alone? Are there more like it? Questions that we can't even think how to begin testing...

That's my problem with evolution.  Chaos doesn't lead to order in the absence of intelligence.  Ape to man can be probably be explained, but the question is how non-life would give rise to life.

God of the Gaps Fallacy.

[Ekaros]

It's really interesting how evolution isn't accepted, but breeding is. That is the micro and macro evolution...

And the outside force always have the problem of where did it come and how it came to existence. And I can't really accept either always existed or randomly popped out nowhere...

[DobZombie]

Loaded answer in the poll.

We didn't evolve from apes. Humans and apes evolved from a common ancestor.

[Wilikon]

I believe there is a God and I am perfectly OK if He is made out of String Theory Spaghetti living in the 10th dimension.

Does pure chaos even exist?

We try all kind of Zen meditation to be more in tune with the universe. Why not simply be a rock and never evolve? There is nothing more in tune with the universe than simple elements.

So far we have gravitational, electromagnetic, strong nuclear, and weak nuclear forces. What is the name of that fundamental force that pushes simple elements into the shape and interaction of the DNA structure?

[Slab Squathrust]

If you choose the first answer "Natural evolution", please describe how "random mutations" increase genetic information as opposed to actually destroying it. What is the force behind evolution that attempts to decrease entropy as opposed to the laws of thermodynamics, which state that isolated systems eventually evolve towards the state of maximum entropy (complete lack of order). Is there an external influence on our system then? What might that be?

Evolution is a process that occurs on a species level.  However one of its driving forces is the natural selection of favorable traits of individuals of that species.  Mutations within DNA can arise from many pathways.  Obviously damage is an easy example such as UV light.  Another is a a mistake during replication that is not caught by a repair enzyme.  Finally, there can be major mutations such as duplication of entire segments of DNA.  These are probably the most useful from an evolutionary standpoint.  If a mutation occurs in a duplicated segment, a new product may arise that confers a benefit to the individual.  The kicker is, that this mutation does not damage the initial gene, yielding a loss of function.  In such a case it may pass to subsequent generations.  However, many mutations are deleterious and may result in the death of the mutant individual.  These mutations naturally remove themselves from the gene pool.  Ultimately, mutation as a means of evolution is a shotgun approach.  

At the molecular level the laws of entropy are perfectly applicable to the process of mutation.  The addition of a base is a chemical reaction and heat is lost, increasing general disorder.  However, like I mentioned evolution occurs at a level much higher than molecules.  It is an incorrect to extend the laws of thermodynamics to the process of evolution.  At best you could say it is terribly inefficient because only a small proportion of mutations will be beneficial.  Many deaths for one improvement.  That sounds like a decrease in order to me.    

[solex]

As has already been pointed out, all 4 poll options are false.

Human DNA has origins from the earliest cells and RNA replication between 2 and 3 billion years ago. What is really interesting is that fossils of the earliest stages of evolution are within us today. Mitochondria were once a separate single-celled organism which was engulfed by a different cell type and became symbiotic. This happened in the early oceans which were hot water. The moon's orbit was much closer so the continents were swept with hundred meter tides every day. The Earth was a giant washing machine of organic chemicals for a billion years. Human cells have thousands of mitochondria which are essential for energy production. Human nuclear DNA has slowly absorbed most of the mtDNA such that only a dozen proteins are encoded by them now.

Ape to man can be probably be explained, but the question is how non-life would give rise to life.

Easy. non-life can give rise to life incrementally because there is a vast range in between: viruses. Viruses are half alive, especially the most primitive ones which are complex organic molecules. They replicate but only by using other organic material from the environment.

[edd]

What is the name of that fundamental force that pushes simple elements into the shape and interaction of the DNA structure?

Evolution.

Countless variations and permutations amino acids came into being and faded away until one worked: "the shape and interaction of the DNA structure".

I guess somebody could calculate the likelihood of such machines being assembled without conscious help.

Why? There was no time limit. The universe existed for billions of years before life evolved on earth. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that the right combination of circumstances needed for life to develop occurred during within that time frame.

Even if you do believe that ten billion years isn't long enough, consider that this might not be the first incarnation of the universe. Perhaps the universe cycled through several Big Bangs and Big Crunches, existing empty and lifeless before we came along.

[Ekaros]

What is the name of that fundamental force that pushes simple elements into the shape and interaction of the DNA structure?

Evolution.

Countless variations and permutations amino acids came into being and faded away until one worked: "the shape and interaction of the DNA structure".

I guess somebody could calculate the likelihood of such machines being assembled without conscious help.

Why? There was no time limit. The universe existed for billions of years before life evolved on earth. It doesn't seem unreasonable to me that the right combination of circumstances needed for life to develop occurred during within that time frame.

Even if you do believe that ten billion years isn't long enough, consider that this might not be the first incarnation of the universe. Perhaps the universe cycled through several Big Bangs and Big Crunches, existing empty and lifeless before we came along.

Also one must consider the scale of universe... There is 10^(22-24) stars in universe. And next consider that we even now know 170 systems with exoplanets. From which I consider that there is quite many systems with planets. My understanding that our current discovery method doesn't work quite well for small rocky planets such as Earth. So there is likely large number of suitable planets around in universe.

In scale of Universe the life doesn't seem very unlikely when you combine the size and the lifespan...

[hashman]

"The Origin of the Human DNA"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2YnC0JmVfA

If you choose the first answer "Natural evolution", please describe how "random mutations" increase genetic information as opposed to actually destroying it. What is the force behind evolution that attempts to decrease entropy as opposed to the laws of thermodynamics, which state that isolated systems eventually evolve towards the state of maximum entropy (complete lack of order). Is there an external influence on our system then? What might that be?

The best way to tell this is bullshit spewed by narcissists is the emphasis on Homo Sapiens Sapiens.  The question of the origin and structure of DNA is one that applies to all kingdoms of life in Gaia.