I just started into this one last night, but words fail me as to why this experiment should be remotely compelling. Is this what passes for evidence these days? The study is headed by Richard Lenski, and purports to demonstrate the evolution of complex features using digital code. Here's the abstract:
A long-standing challenge to evolutionary theory has been whether it can explain the origin of complex organismal features. We
examined this issue using digital organisms—computer programs that self-replicate, mutate, compete and evolve. Populations of
digital organisms often evolved the ability to perform complex logic functions requiring the coordinated execution of many
genomic instructions. Complex functions evolved by building on simpler functions that had evolved earlier, provided that these
were also selectively favoured. However, no particular intermediate stage was essential for evolving complex functions. The first
genotypes able to perform complex functions differed from their non-performing parents by only one or two mutations, but differed
from the ancestor by many mutations that were also crucial to the new functions. In some cases, mutations that were deleterious
when they appeared served as stepping-stones in the evolution of complex features. These findings show how complex functions
can originate by random mutation and natural selection.
Here is the link:
http://myxo.css.msu.edu/papers/nature20 ... omplex.pdf
More to come.
- Nathan
Digital evolution... Really?
-
musician
- Recognized Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sat Nov 13, 2010 8:44 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Digital evolution... Really?
The atheist says to his wife at night: "Darling, inasmuch as it is merely an expression made imperative by my brain chemistry; "I LOVE you!"
-
MarcusOfLycia
- Senior Member
- Posts: 537
- Joined: Sat Jun 12, 2010 7:03 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Location: West Michigan, United States
- Contact:
Re: Digital evolution... Really?
Correction. These 'findings' show that this computer simulation allows for functions to originate by random mutation and natural selection. If this program were even as good as our best meteorological tools, I would expect an accuracy of about 10%... kind of joking here but this study just seems silly. I'll read more when I can.musician wrote:These findings show how complex functions can originate by random mutation and natural selection.
-- Josh
“When you see a man with a great deal of religion displayed in his shop window, you may depend upon it, he keeps a very small stock of it within” C.H. Spurgeon
1st Corinthians 1:17- "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel””not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power"
“When you see a man with a great deal of religion displayed in his shop window, you may depend upon it, he keeps a very small stock of it within” C.H. Spurgeon
1st Corinthians 1:17- "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel””not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power"
-
jlay
- Ultimate Member
- Posts: 3613
- Joined: Fri Feb 13, 2009 2:47 pm
- Christian: Yes
- Sex: Male
- Creation Position: Young-Earth Creationist
Re: Digital evolution... Really?
Hmmm, evolution is true because an intelligent designer programmed something to evolve. just what is he trying to prove? 
-“The Bible treated allegorically becomes putty in the hands of the exegete.” John Walvoord
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious
"I'm not saying scientists don't overstate their results. They do. And it's understandable, too...If you spend years working toward a certain goal and make no progress, of course you are going to spin your results in a positive light." Ivellious