How mutation adds information to a population genome

[The Barbarian]

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

Let's start with a worm. A simple organism. It has a mouth, anus, heart, basic nerve chord, gizzard, etc...no thyroid gland, no teeth or appendix, no eyes or ears, no arms or legs, etc.

That's a fairly complex worm.   Shouldn't we start with something simpler?  Worms don't have gizzards, BTW.    But we can go with a worm.   Which phylum of worms would you like to learn about?

10 hours ago, SwordMaster said:

Now, go back to the worm...in a population of worms, one incurs a mutation that causes a small mass of hard matter to be coded for.

You're wandering off in the wrong direction already, depending on which phylum you're speaking of.  Let's go with onychophorans and see.   They are mainly marine or aquatic, and some are small enough that they get oxygen directly through their skins, but others have some bumps on each segment that stick out a bit and expose blood vessels to the water to more efficiently exchange gases.   These primitive gills tend to become flatter and expose more surface.    Annelids also frequently have bumps at the bottom of the body which help it to move against a surface.   These lobopods are very ancient, being found on tartigrades and  annelid worms as well.  

So we have on each segment of the body, a biramous appendiage with gills on the upper side and lobopods on the lower.   The evidence from fossil record, genetics and embryology is that onychophorans gave rise to arthropods like crabs and insects, with the upper appendages developing into wings and the lower into legs.   In the late Precambrian, we see the beginning of hard parts on the outside of such animals, and by the early Cambrian, we have totally covered arthropods.  

But that's where it stops.   Arthropods become all sorts of other things, but they never become vertebrates.    We can follow the evidence for arthropods if you want, but you seem to be interested in vertebrates.  

So we have to go back to early chordates like Pikaia.    Would you like to learn about that?

 

Edited August 18, 2022 by The Barbarian

[The Barbarian]

14 minutes ago, B-B said:

Our Lord didn’t mince His words. Neither was He passive aggressive, which unfortunately is a common occurrence in these Forum debates and is often overlooked and ignored.

By being passive aggressive, folks get away with their hostility.

Unfortunately, my problem is not being passive-aggressive.  I know I'm often too blunt and I have to constantly work on that.   With God's help, I do try to keep it under control.

 

[The Barbarian]

And I think I've got the Gish Gallop pretty well reined in.   If I missed anything, let me know and I'll see what the facts say about it.

 

[ayin jade]

2 hours ago, B-B said:

I agree with you.

We are to respond appropriately when appropriate.

Our Lord didn’t mince His words. Neither was He passive aggressive, which unfortunately is a common occurrence in these Forum debates and is often overlooked and ignored.

By being passive aggressive, folks get away with their hostility.

 

However, our God won’t be mocked.

Our Lord had no problem calling out the hypocrites and false teachers of His day, as they were leading people astray.

I suppose those who He called Brood of Vipers and White washed tombs probably felt rather insulted too….

Just my thoughts…

He is Jesus, Lord. 

You are not.

One can tell the truth directly, bluntly, without calling people morons. Jesus spoke about that too.