Re: mutations
the Lederberg experiment reallly clears everything up. and it’s super easy to understand. for anyone interested:
Re: mutations
To post #19: Okay. I don't know what most of what you said means.
To post #20: You didn't explicitly say mutations aren't acquired characteristics, but when cdg said "hmm I think both. Some mutations positive and are passed on from generation to generation and others don't go past the first generation.", to which you responded, "acquired characteristics during a person's life time are not passed on.", it seemed like you took mutation and acquired characteristic to be the same thing.
As far as your definition based argument, you chose to define characteristic. But I think you'll agree when talking about evolution, Darwinism or Lamarckism, an acquired characteristic is referred to as one that is developed through life. Getting big biceps for instance from weight training, for example.
In both definitions you chose to define characteristc or character. And well ofcourse a change resultic from a mutation is a characteristic but it certainly isn't an "Acquired" one.
and LOL I totally knew you were gonna try argue the technicality between characteristic and acquired characteristic and I was thinking I make it clear but I thought nah lets see how this plays out.
Getting predictable philo.
Re: mutations
Ok did not read other answers per Dr. Phil.
Hint was useful. I believe antibiotics used to treat bacterial infections. Bacteria adapt.
So mutations probably are adaptiveeeeeee.
Re: mutations
lol. looks like you justt wanna argue with me or something. once again. 
if this is some sort of a debate for you…you win?
southie…nahhh from what i know, they’re non-adaptive : D
Re: mutations
Nah it isn't a debate for me. This is actually not my field. Haven't done anything bio related since high school. If this is your field I'm sure my argument seems childish to you.
One more point though, arent you kind of contradicting yourself?
You said acquired charactertistics can't be passed on but then go on to say that characteristics that arise from mutations are in the same camp as "acquired charactertistics". But charactertistics that arise FROM mutations CAN be passed on.
Re: mutations
it shows that it’s not your field. you’re over-complicating it. do your research, g’luck! : ) :notsurewhatallthatsaysbutitsuredoesntmakesense:
Re: mutations
To post #19: Okay. I don't know what most of what you said means.
To post #20: You didn't explicitly say mutations aren't acquired characteristics, but when cdg said "hmm I think both. Some mutations positive and are passed on from generation to generation and others don't go past the first generation.", to which you responded, "acquired characteristics during a person's life time are not passed on.", it seemed like you took mutation and acquired characteristic to be the same thing.
As far as your definition based argument, you chose to define characteristic. But I think you'll agree when talking about evolution, Darwinism or Lamarckism, an acquired characteristic is referred to as one that is developed through life. *Getting big biceps for instance from weight training, for example. *
In both definitions you chose to define characteristc or character. And well ofcourse a change resultic from a mutation is a characteristic but it certainly isn't an "Acquired" one.
and LOL I totally knew you were gonna try argue the technicality between characteristic and acquired characteristic and I was thinking I make it clear but I thought nah lets see how this plays out. Getting predictable philo.
Getting big biceps from weight training is just that. Weight training does not cause genetic mutation. Someone's genetic potential for muscle size won't change because he trains with weights.
Re: mutations
and yes, you still win! brownie?
Re: mutations
Getting big biceps from weight training is just that. Weight training does not cause genetic mutation. Someone's genetic potential for muscle size won't change because he trains with weights.
but you said big biceps are due to weight training. weight training is an acquired characteristic ? but characteristics are not acquired? big biceps cause mutations? woah.
Re: mutations
lol, he said they don’t and that’s what coughcough said as well. 
Re: mutations
Sorry Philo, didn't mean to step on your tail. Although I admit I totally knew it was gonna happen.
Like I said, predictable.
Re: mutations
Okay I read the post I commented on and I got it all wrong. Dang!
And now I got whooped by philo.
Why me no have huge biceps 
Re: mutations
nooo. i was kidding 
Re: mutations
Ok so what is answer to 2 nd questionn- something about s cell type.
Re: mutations
Ok so what is answer to 2 nd questionn- something about s cell type.
from what i know, germ cell mutations! and not somatic cells. : D
Re: mutations
So first question answer - non adaptive because mutations are random. I think I get the logic now.
I don't know what somatic cells are.
Germs - are they different from bacteria. From virus. Or is one a subset of the other.
Are ALL germ cells mutative.
( TLK has title Funds man. I think you are the Funda lady. Without sounding corny hats off to your thirst to spread knowledge - love ur enthusiasm)
Re: mutations
Wait ill explain it when I'm on my laptop.
But I lime your signature :D
Re: mutations
Nope, not definitely. Not all mutations are random. Some are addaptive and have a higher tendency to get to live on, compared to the random ones, which will die...the latter one being the case which occurs more often than the first one though.
Gametes.