This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab

Bacteria make major evolutionary shift in the lab - Comments

JackR's Avatar Comment 1 by JackR

Haven't we had this posted already elsewhere? Maybe I saw it in the forum...?

Damned cool, though.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:25:00 UTC | #181510

InfuriatedSciTeacher's Avatar Comment 2 by InfuriatedSciTeacher

I believe it was linked in the forum somewhere, I've seen it recently, too.

edit: for those inclined to scoff at the word 'believe', it's use here is meant to convey the probable inaccuracy of my statement.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:41:00 UTC | #181522

Vendetta's Avatar Comment 3 by Vendetta

Ya, but we all know that micro-evolution is fine but macro-evolution is a lie, right? Lol. Religious nutters.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:53:00 UTC | #181531

InfuriatedSciTeacher's Avatar Comment 4 by InfuriatedSciTeacher

Ugh, what was I thinking? The bacteria didn't become jellyfish or frogs, so natural selection must be false... HILARIOUS

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:58:00 UTC | #181538

UncleJJ's Avatar Comment 5 by UncleJJ

Haven't we had this posted already elsewhere? Maybe I saw it in the forum...?


Yes, it was posted here on June 3rd entitled "A New Step In Evolution" although they are different articles the subject matter is the same.

However, it's a very interesting development and strong evidence of evolution, as though we didn't have enough already.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:30:00 UTC | #181555

MarcLindenberg's Avatar Comment 6 by MarcLindenberg

Very interesting, I hope that evolves into a something that is useful to our argument. Not sure how accepted that would be from the creationist world view...

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 06:38:00 UTC | #181558

Azven's Avatar Comment 7 by Azven

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 07:17:00 UTC | #181582

mordacious1's Avatar Comment 8 by mordacious1

Josh

Summer re-runs already?

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 08:56:00 UTC | #181632

skip's Avatar Comment 9 by skip

But there must be a transitional bacterium between these transitional bacterium! then we'll know evolution is true! And yet another transition between those transitions. They'll never prove evolution at this rate. Durn those gaps!

hee hee...

I love science!

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:10:00 UTC | #181642

Ubiquitous Che's Avatar Comment 10 by Ubiquitous Che

That's fantastic. I know it's already been proven, but it's always good to put another nail in the coffin of the 'benign mutations are impossible' argument.

Very glad it got reposted.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 12:57:00 UTC | #181749

mandrellian's Avatar Comment 11 by mandrellian

This "god" all the kids are talking about must be very, very tiny to be able to hide in such a gap ...

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 14:54:00 UTC | #181797

black wolf's Avatar Comment 12 by black wolf

This "god" all the kids are talking about must be very, very tiny to be able to hide in such a gap ...


Not only that, he must be the exact size to fit the gap perfectly. And able to change his shape when the gap changes. The only logical conclusion can be that wittle goddy is designed.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:10:00 UTC | #181801

twiddler's Avatar Comment 13 by twiddler

God created the new bacteria! for some un-godly known reason.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:45:00 UTC | #181810

acs's Avatar Comment 14 by acs

I regularly debate with a group of baptists on a saturday night. Its fun, its public and the audience usually gets some understanding of how religion corrupts.

I presented the Lenski findings to the theists last Saturday (I had previously sent to article to their leader). They really didnt like it and for the first time they yelled, screamed and lost all civility. They had lost one of the tennets of their faith.

It was the best night of "fundie bashing" I have had in a long time.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 15:48:00 UTC | #181811

Ubiquitous Che's Avatar Comment 15 by Ubiquitous Che

acs: If you haven't yet, check out PZ's article on this subject over at Pharyngula. There's already creationists out and about attempting to twist the results to look like Theistic Evolution. Here's an exerpt of Myers':

This is simply baffling. Behe claims that he has shown in his book that the result observed by Lenski and colleagues could not occur without intelligent intervention…yet it did. He is trying to argue that an experiment that showed evolution in a test tube did not show evolution in a test tube. Behe's claims are comparable to someone living after the time of Kepler and Newton trying to claim that because Copernican circular orbits don't fit the data cleanly, the earth must be stationary - in response to research that shows the earth is moving. That is how backward Behe's claims are.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 17:51:00 UTC | #181833

EvidenceOnly's Avatar Comment 16 by EvidenceOnly

One can wonder whether Behe has read the article or understands its true impact in support of evolution.

The one thing we can be certain of is that he and his cohort IDiots will keep lying for Jesus until they return to the same state as before they were born.

Tue, 10 Jun 2008 23:21:00 UTC | #181881

Vaal's Avatar Comment 17 by Vaal

Very interesting experiment. Evolution in action, fascinating. Experiments like this are the reason I love science. Those gaps are really getting smaller, except of course for the wilfully ignorant and deluded.

Listening to some of the comments of the most obstinate theists who sometimes populate this site, it is self evident that they will find no evidence that could ever persuade them. Unless of course God visited them to say that he doesn't exist!

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:13:00 UTC | #181905

hungarianelephant's Avatar Comment 18 by hungarianelephant

I missed this last time round.

This is bad news if you like to cold-cook your beef by marinating it in lemon juice.

Although, I suppose, we could always start buying meat that has been properly butchered and doesn't have shit in it.

(That whooshing noise was the sound of the point missing me.)

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 01:48:00 UTC | #181915

bugaboo's Avatar Comment 19 by bugaboo

18. Comment #191453 by Vaal

Hi Vaal

If you like this check out the experiments done by Joshua Lederberg in the 60's.(replica plating) He plated bacteria out on petri dishes and then took prints of them (using velvet)and plated these out on multiple plates always in the same orientation. When he applied an antibiotic to the plates the colonies that grew (resistant bacteria)always appeared in the same place on each of the plates. Thus showing that the mutations leading to resistance were present before the selection pressure. If the mutations had arisen after selection the colonies would have grown in random spots. A simple elegant experiment to show Darwinian selection at work. Selection working on pre-existing mutations.

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 02:25:00 UTC | #181931

Azven's Avatar Comment 20 by Azven

Does anyone have a web reference to any Creationists who have comented on this - I'd love to read it!

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 03:54:00 UTC | #181955

Vaal's Avatar Comment 21 by Vaal

Thanks for that bugaboo. That is the great thing about this site, that I can find links to other resources that I would hardly ever find for myself, thanks to some great contributors.

Azven, of course they will ignore it, or just say it is incorrect, and spout the usual Behe inspired discredited nonsense.

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:27:00 UTC | #181966

wagnerpe's Avatar Comment 22 by wagnerpe

Anyone else hear about the strains of bacteria that feed on antibiotics? It's was a great story on NPR recently. Fortunately, none of the strains they found are infectious to humans...but given their proclivity towards rapid evolution and adaptation I would say it's not too far off. Love this stuff...

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:26:00 UTC | #182890

bugaboo's Avatar Comment 23 by bugaboo

23. Comment #192505 by wagnerpe

Yes but dont know too much about it. An article appeared in "Science" a couple of months ago stating that not only were the bacteria resistant but actually metabolised the antibiotics. I dont think the worry was that they could infect humans or other animals but that they could actually be used to "soak up" antibiotic contamination in the environment which is causing problems. Bear in mind also that antibiotics (from eg fungi)have been around for perhaps as long as bacteria and co-evolved with them.

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 07:46:00 UTC | #182898