Don't you think that for us to evolve from a single-celled organism, it would have taken much longer if only chance mutations are attributed to evolution? Considering the fact that most of the mutations are harmful and the number of mutations that must have been needed to change a single-celled organism into a complex human being, dont you think that there must be some underlying mechanism by which the genes adapt themselves to create a new organism, alongwith the chance-mutation theory?
Also, since most of our DNA is non-coding, maybe it's just a matter of switching on of certain genes from the non-coding part of DNA which makes a new species??
PS: Just a suggestion :-)
2006-12-10 12:32:11 · 7 answers · asked by Natasha 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
random mutation is just one of the theories as to how evolution works. Evolution most likely works from many different mechanisms, mutation being one. And given the amount of time evolution has been working, the number of species is not only possible, but inevitable. We're talking billions of years here.
2006-12-11 03:24:19 · answer #1 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The underlying mechanism with random mutation is natural selection. It had more than enough time to come from single cell to human. Go here.
http://www.talkorigins.org
This will help you to start clearing it up in your mind.
PS Random is a better word than chance, as there will be mutation, just not in any numerical order.
2006-12-10 20:43:00 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi. The real problem with understanding the process it trying to understand the really VAST time these things take. The supposition that life started on this planet in "only" a few hundred million years seems innocent enough. But we simply can NOT comprehend it. The non-coding DNA once coded for some feature that is now (or temporarily) not needed, in my opinion.
2006-12-10 20:38:25 · answer #3 · answered by Cirric 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The answer to your first question would be yes. It would take longer if only chance mutations occur. The more mutations you would have, the faster evolution would take place. Evolution usually occurs due to changes in environment. For example, apelike people in Egypt migrated to Europe and became Neanderthol's due to being in a different environment.
As for the non-coding regions, I think they are still important for the making of different protein isoforms. The one gene makes one protein hypothesis is false. One gene can make several different portien isoforms, possibly due to information in non-coding intron regions.
2006-12-10 20:45:06 · answer #4 · answered by jason e 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
You are talking about point mutations. There are larger changes caused by gene duplication and beneficial mutations are more common that you might believe.
2006-12-10 22:18:37 · answer #5 · answered by novangelis 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
What worked is the fact that MILLIONS of cells were taking MILLIONS of mutation changes. MOST died out, a few survived, and of those few survivors, a smaller few reproduced and slowly developed into all life today. Reproduction success thru millions of cells and millions of years.
2006-12-10 20:36:51 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
*cough* the theroy of evolution is a fake *cough*
2006-12-10 20:40:20 · answer #7 · answered by bolla 3 · 0⤊ 4⤋