Evolution in action--right before the camera

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.slate.com/blogs/bad_astronomy.html

Bacteria vs lethal levels of antibiotics. In 11 days they had successfully invaded the 1000x lethal dose zone.

 

[untermensche]

This is adaptation, a part of evolution.

But it is not the entirety of evolution.

And of course this is asexual reproduction.

But it is a fascinating video and clearly shows the problems we are facing with antibiotics.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

This is adaptation, a part of evolution.

But it is not the entirety of evolution.

And of course this is asexual reproduction.

But it is a fascinating video and clearly shows the problems we are facing with antibiotics.

With asexual organisms there is no line that you can clearly define what is a new species vs merely adaption.

 

[James Brown]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a Creationist would argue that somewhere in the first batch of bacteria was one or two individuals that happened to be resistant to the maximum dosage of antibiotic. When all the others died out at each antibiotic barrier, these lucky individuals were able to dominate the wide-open field. Ergo this isn't about evolution but about winnowing the weakest organisms out of the herd.

 

[untermensche]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a Creationist would argue that somewhere in the first batch of bacteria was one or two individuals that happened to be resistant to the maximum dosage of antibiotic. When all the others died out at each antibiotic barrier, these lucky individuals were able to dominate the wide-open field. Ergo this isn't about evolution but about winnowing the weakest organisms out of the herd.

This can easily be refuted.

Just put them all in the high concentration augur immediately.

They will all die.

 

[James Brown]

"That they didn't do exactly that suggests that they are hiding something!"</Creationist>

Furthermore, saith one Creationist I know, you can't do that variation twice. Drop another batch of bacteria into the highest antibiotic zone right away, and you might have selected a batch that happened to not have those lucky individuals that were already resistant to the full antibiotic.

At any rate, saith another Creationist, doing this experiment in a lab is "injecting intelligence" into the equation and thus is not a true test of evolution.

 

[untermensche]

"That they didn't do exactly that suggests that they are hiding something!"</Creationist>

Furthermore, saith one Creationist I know, you can't do that variation twice. Drop another batch of bacteria into the highest antibiotic zone right away, and you might have selected a batch that happened to not have those lucky individuals that were already resistant to the full antibiotic.

At any rate, saith another Creationist, doing this experiment in a lab is "injecting intelligence" into the equation and thus is not a true test of evolution.

Why is it every time you do it the first way you get the same result but when you try it with the high concentration they all die?

After a certain number of trials the odds of that happening become astronomical.

 

[James Brown]

"That they didn't do exactly that suggests that they are hiding something!"</Creationist>

Furthermore, saith one Creationist I know, you can't do that variation twice. Drop another batch of bacteria into the highest antibiotic zone right away, and you might have selected a batch that happened to not have those lucky individuals that were already resistant to the full antibiotic.

At any rate, saith another Creationist, doing this experiment in a lab is "injecting intelligence" into the equation and thus is not a true test of evolution.

Why is it every time you do it the first way you get the same result but when you try it with the high concentration they all die?

After a certain number of trials the odds of that happening become astronomical.

Ah, there's the rub. How many times did they run this experiment? To a Creationist, the answer will always be, "Not enough; need more evidence."

 

[untermensche]

Why is it every time you do it the first way you get the same result but when you try it with the high concentration they all die?

After a certain number of trials the odds of that happening become astronomical.

Ah, there's the rub. How many times did they run this experiment? To a Creationist, the answer will always be, "Not enough; need more evidence."

They can hide their eyes to the statistics but they can't refute them in any way.

 

[Valjean]

With asexual organisms there is no line that you can clearly define what is a new species vs merely adaption.

I'd say this applies to sexual organisms, as well.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe a Creationist would argue that somewhere in the first batch of bacteria was one or two individuals that happened to be resistant to the maximum dosage of antibiotic. When all the others died out at each antibiotic barrier, these lucky individuals were able to dominate the wide-open field. Ergo this isn't about evolution but about winnowing the weakest organisms out of the herd.

Then why did the growth stop at the line for a while?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With asexual organisms there is no line that you can clearly define what is a new species vs merely adaption.

I'd say this applies to sexual organisms, as well.

With sexual organisms we define a species as two groups that do not interbreed, either because they can't or because they don't normally see each other at partners.

 

[Valjean]

A definition of convenience, which doesn't always correspond to degree of genetic divergence or morphological difference.