Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 76 posts

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#31

Post by mikeash »

barking wrote: post #28
mikeash wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You clearly are criticizing the theory. You state that there is an absence of intermediate forms, give an example of an intermediate between apes and chimpanzees, and conclude by stating that you'd expect a continuum. These aren't qualified with any of the humility you demand from others, they're just stated as bare "facts." This is typical, though. State a bunch of nonsense, then when called on it say you're just as…

Are you sure that you actually read what i wrote?

Quite sure. What do you think I got wrong, exactly?

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#32

Post by barking »

mikeash wrote: post #20
barking wrote: post #3

The black moths could still mate with the peppered variety so they're still the same species just different 'breeds', perhaps, so is this really evolution? I am a layman but one criticism of the theory of evolution that seems sensible to me is the absence of intermediate forms. For example types of ape that could mate with say gorillas and chimpanzees. All the species seem very well defined when you'd expect a contin…

Continuous sorts of things exist: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species Living things evolve in groups which is why it's more common to have clearer lines between them, but it's not always like that.

There are no known examples of ring species it seems

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/there-ar...

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#33

Post by barking »

tremon wrote: post #30
barking wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Criticism of evolution isn't sensible, it's ignorant I am not criticising evolution. I'm not qualified to do that. It seems like it is the best explanation yet to explain the diversity of life on this planet. Personally, I attach no credibility whatsoever to the creationists' explanations. I do think that people, even those of us who do not know a lot about it, should be entitled to ask questions without having our…

I thought that scientific theories should always be open to criticism. They should be open to valid criticism, yes. But when their results are constantly under attack with baseless and unverifiable arguments, scientists grow weary and distrustful. That page has four examples but then goes on to suggest that there is doubt as to whether these are actually examples of ring species. This is an example of the kind of dis…

Well this author says that there are no ring species

https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/there-ar...

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#34

Post by tremon »

barking wrote: post #33
tremon wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought that scientific theories should always be open to criticism. They should be open to valid criticism, yes. But when their results are constantly under attack with baseless and unverifiable arguments, scientists grow weary and distrustful. That page has four examples but then goes on to suggest that there is doubt as to whether these are actually examples of ring species. This is an example of the kind of dis…

Well this author says that there are no ring species https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/there-ar...

But that was not your original statement, now was it?

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#35

Post by mikeash »

barking wrote: post #32
mikeash wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Continuous sorts of things exist: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ring_species Living things evolve in groups which is why it's more common to have clearer lines between them, but it's not always like that.

There are no known examples of ring species it seems https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/there-ar...

Interesting. Do I understand correctly that this is more about how they're formed and exactly how continuous the variation is within them, rather than the general idea that you can end up with a population of animals with non-transitive mating viability?

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#36

Post by barking »

mikeash wrote: post #31
barking wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you sure that you actually read what i wrote?

Quite sure. What do you think I got wrong, exactly?

The lack of intermediate species was something that i had thought was a big flaw in the theory of evolution. In my question, I don't think that I stated that as a fact but certainly suggested that I thought it was true.

As a result of reading the answers on this thread and other internet readings I still believe that there is a lack of intermediate species but I no longer consider that to be evidence against evolution.

If you consider my musings and questions as a bunch of nonsense and that I was stating them as facts and without humility, well I wouldn't agree with you.

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#37

Post by knodi123 »

tim333 wrote: post #24
Amygaz wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Depends on your angle: In term impact to the field of biological science, definitely Drosophila melanogaster . Lots of genetics, and now even brain research. In term of most beneficial to humans: bees (direct economical benefits) and ants (largest environmental benefits, so indirect benefit to human) In term of biggest threat, the debate is open, and always changing: before mosquitoes ( Anopheles and Aedes ), housefl…

Mucking about with Google Trends the winner seems to be 'mosquito' for most searched.

There's a difference between famous and infamous. Mosquitos are definitely the most infamous insect..

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#38

Post by splawn »

barking wrote: post #22
tremon wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not sure I fully understand your question, but probably this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Speciation The point is that as long as two minimally diverse populations remain in close contact and can interbreed, most of their mutations will cross the population boundary and we will probably classify them as one species, even though both populations may look nothing like their ancestors of 10,000 years earlier. Muta…

That makes sense to me. Take two groups of animals from one species and put them in different environmental conditions, isolated from the other for long enough (maybe millions of generations?) and eventually you will end up with 2 distinct species.

yes, that is true. However even if you take a single group in one environment and gradually change it over long period of time you can end up with something completely different even though the individual changes were extremely small.

Imagine a RGB LED that very slowly goes through the full color spectrum over a year. From day to day the colors would look almost identical to the point that you could swap them and no one would notice. You would probably call all the colors during January "red". Once you got into July you would call the colors "green" and would never be able to swap those hues with their "ancestors" from January.

This was a convoluted analogy to explain the concept of "gradual change", but hopefully it makes sense.

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#39

Post by barking »

tremon wrote: post #34
barking wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well this author says that there are no ring species https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2014/07/16/there-ar...

But that was not your original statement, now was it? http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Moving_the_goalposts

I am not trying to have an argument with anyone. I'd never even heard of ring species before today

Re: The mutation that famously turned moths black during Industrial Revolution

#40

Post by 0xfeba »

barking wrote: post #3

The black moths could still mate with the peppered variety so they're still the same species just different 'breeds', perhaps, so is this really evolution? I am a layman but one criticism of the theory of evolution that seems sensible to me is the absence of intermediate forms. For example types of ape that could mate with say gorillas and chimpanzees. All the species seem very well defined when you'd expect a contin…

> The black moths could still mate with the peppered variety so they're still the same species just different 'breeds', perhaps, so is this really evolution?

Yes. Evolution is just change in phenotypes over time. Speciation is a whole other ballgame, and there's no definitive answer as to what delineates species from one another. Some different species of fish will interbreed when forced together.

That is: Species are not well defined. They are only defined for human convenience, for categorization. But in reality, it's all one continuum. Interbreeding is only one factor in categorizing it. The big thing about being able to interbreed is chromosonal alignment, not necessarily whether they are differing species.

The humans of today aren't the same as the humans from 500 or 1,000 years ago. Prevalence of sickle-cell disease, lactose intolerance, skin pigmentation all these little things add up. If your substantiation of evolution consists of when speciation occurs, you're limiting yourself.

Take dog breeds for example. The changes we've implemented using the tool of evolution are drastic. What's to prevent this process from continuing? From eventually causing 'speciation', in the sense that two dog breeds can no longer interbreed? There are already subtle differences between dog breeds that make producing offspring difficult, and in the wild this difference would be magnified greatly.

Post reply on HN