English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070218/ap_on_fe_st/four_legged_duck

I think this clearly shows that some mutations 1. happen. 2. can be beneficial.

Amazing!

2007-02-18 05:11:49 · 19 answers · asked by GobleyGook 3 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

19 answers

Does life "evolve" (adapt to the environment)? Yes. Did humans come from monkeys? No.

Is a four legged duck a mutation OR a genetic mishap much like Siamese twins? Wouldn't a TRUE mutation occur when an existing animal/plant transforms into something else as it grows? Is there a difference between a mutation and a birth defect?

(I really don't know the answer to the last question I ask but I think the answer is, Yes. I am open to the correct answer to this.)

2007-02-18 05:14:46 · answer #1 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1 4

No. That's not evidence. There is (a) no indication that this is beneficial, and (b) no evidence that it is inheritable. (I.e., this may not even be a mutation at all, but an absorbed siamese twin.)

But in any case, a single individual cannnot constitute evolution. Evolution is something that happens to populations (like species), not just a single individual.

You want evidence? I have filled up pages ... but here's just one:

The fact that you need a different flu shot every year. This is evidence that mutation 1. happens (this year's flu viruses have evolved, through mutation (as that is the only way can evolve) to be resistant to last year's shot; and 2. can be beneficial (becoming resistant to antibodies is certainly beneficial for the virus).

So evolution occurs. But little stumpy here is not evidence.

2007-02-18 05:28:18 · answer #2 · answered by secretsauce 7 · 0 0

Chi Guy said: “Wouldn't a TRUE mutation occur when an existing animal/plant transforms into something else as it grows?”

Speciation – that is the transition from one species to another – can only occur after a number of generations. Positive traits are being passed on to the offspring and they evolve stronger.

Skunkgrease said : “Mutations are quite random and amazing. Think of all the mutations and random events that happened in order for life to evolve. We are here by chance and luck.”

Mutations aren’t quite random; some are, but one must remember that only the mutations that are successful are being passed on to the offspring. We are not here by chance and luck, the building blocks of life were formed by trillions of errors and trials; further, only beneficial mutations are allowed; others are being routed out, as they only appear on a small scale, such as the random mutation of the duck Stumpy.

To answer the question, I am sorry to say that the mutation is quite random, as it is not a beneficial mutation. There are two quotes in the text that point to this:

-- “Stumpy would probably not survive in the wild …”

-- “One duckling named Jake was born in Queensland, Australia, in 2002 with four legs but died soon after.”

It does indeed prove that mutations occur, but the mutation is not beneficial. If the duck were successful in the wild, it would create an offspring and eventually maybe a new species (speciation). This will most likely not happen and that’s why it does not prove speciation. There exist, however, plenty of other evidence that evolution exists:

-- Speciation has been proven so far:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB910.html

-- And what do you think of this?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gs1zeWWIm5M&NR

-- 29+ evidences that macroevolution exists:
http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/

-- A short enumeration of evidence for evolution:
http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CA/CA202.html

2007-02-18 07:57:21 · answer #3 · answered by stevevil0 3 · 0 1

Evolution needs no additional proof. There is evidence of it all around us, in everything from our pets and plants (how could we create different breeds without taking advantage of evolution?) to flu vaccines that need to be re-engineered every year to keep up with the rapid evolution of that virus.

The only real debate about evolution is in the specifics. We don't know for example, what the predecessors of humans are going back to the time of the dinosaurs. We know that humans share common ancestors with the apes, but we don't know what those ancestors are. We know that evolution is still taking place, and our influence on the environment is causing another mass extinction that may end with our own extinction. We also know that life on earth will continue even after we're gone, but we don't know what it will be like.

2007-02-18 05:36:30 · answer #4 · answered by nospamcwt 5 · 1 0

It clearly shows how a single mutation can lead to a major change in body form. In this case the mutation may not be beneficial, but something similar to this could be under the right circumstances.

2007-02-18 05:17:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

I'm an evolutionist but you are wrong to say that this evidence of evolution or of a beneficial mutation (it could also be an error in development). There is no evidence that this mutation is beneficial. Moreover, this is not evolution (a change in allelic frequency in a population). You are correct, however, that it is amazing and thank you for bringing it to my attention.

2007-02-18 05:19:25 · answer #6 · answered by ivorytowerboy 5 · 0 0

No, God wanted that duck to have four legs. Just like he makes a new flu virus every year just to keep us on our toes. Obviously that was known about mutation before this story. This just makes it cute so hopefully more kids will realize that evolution is real.

By the way, the best part of that story is:
"It was absolutely bizarre. I was thinking 'he's got too many legs' and I kept counting 'one, two, three, four,'" Janaway said.

LOL. Why would they need to keep counting? Once would be enough for me.

2007-02-19 02:58:29 · answer #7 · answered by Take it from Toby 7 · 0 0

The 4-legged duck is not evolution - in the sense of goo-to-you.

It is the result of copying errors in the DNA. No *new* information has been added in the process.

Natural Selection will most likely lead to this mutation *not* being selected, and not staying in the gene pool.

Goo-to-you evolution hypothesises that mutations have added genetic information. However this has *never* been observed. All observed mutations are either information neutral or result in the loss of information.
Evolution requires the creation of vast amounts of new genetic information, and is contrary to the observed evidence.
Mutations are the enemy of evolution!

http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3026/

2007-02-18 09:14:05 · answer #8 · answered by a Real Truthseeker 7 · 0 1

Depends on two factors:

Does the mutation actually increase the likelyhood of having surviving offspring?

Is the mutation heritable?

2007-02-18 05:17:14 · answer #9 · answered by marbledog 6 · 1 0

Mutations are quite random and amazing. Think of all the mutations and random events that happened in order for life to evolve. We are here by chance and luck.

2007-02-18 05:14:51 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 1 1

fedest.com, questions and answers