| happydolphin said: You probably just copy-pasted the article, as that's pretty much all your limited intelligence allows you to do. You must've missed this part: "Step two, called actualization, was much more obvious; a stretch of DNA containing a dormant gene for moving citrate into cells was copied and the copy was inserted near the original gene. The copied and pasted version of the gene started producing the citrate-pumping protein again. Before the duplication, E. coli couldn’t bring citrate into their cells to eat it." You, my friend, are a tart. EDIT: Saying inbreeding and cross-breading don't have anything to do with evolution doesn't make it true. It doesn't answer my concern at all, not in any way. When it comes to speciation (the generation of new species via evolutive processes), these constraints pose a BIG problem imho. |
You attributed one of three steps to the entirety of the process which shows a fundamental ineptitude to reason.
Furthermore, "dormant gene" does not mean even remotely close to the implications you've drawn. Again, another gross misunderstanding.
Wow, if you think cross-breeding has anything to do with evolution, you are quite slow. That shows a fundamental lack of understanding. Grab a book on phylogeny or a source I've provided and start reading. You're clueless.
Don't comment until you understand phylogeny as it is paramount to ending your nonsensical questions.
