This Paper Explains How Potassium Channels Evolved

In a perfect world Jerry, the forensic trail would be easily accessible.

In today's imperfect world, the forensic trail is available. And each year it gets easier. So it is testable. jerry

In a perfect world, AVS, people claiming to have solved the problem of protein evolution would make their source code freely and publicly available. That would be in the interest of science. Perhaps we'll find potassium channels that are less than optimal. Or perhaps they evolved prior to the advent of the eukaryota and then were just inherited. Or perhaps there were multiple less than optimal solutions out that that then converged over time. Repeated miracles. Which of the above does evolutionary theory predict, and why? Mung

In a perfect world Jerry, the forensic trail would be easily accessible. The problem is that most of these genomes have been wiped out due to extinction and the ones that remained are also continually undergoing evolution. Science does the best it can with what it has, we'll get there eventually, don't worry. AVS

The paper doesn't really explain how potassium channels evolved. CH was being sarcastic. :) Doesn't seem like the source code for the program is online. shame. I'm sure it's just another glorified weasel program. Mung

This is the first time I posted since the new editing function became available. Looks like a great feature. jerry

I have not read the paper but if in fact it happened the way they suppose, it would leave a forensic trail in various genomes. Some genomes would have the coding region generating the protein and some would have similar but not a functional coding region. In other words similar genomes would have similar DNA sequences that would code for the protein in one but not in another. This should be true for all proteins if natural evolutionary process are dominant. This is the testable hypothesis for Darwinian processes. I am sure there will be a couple of positive examples but my guess is that most proteins will not show this forensic trail of development. But it must be there for Darwin's ideas to be valid. jerry

The "jackprot" is a didactic tool to demonstrate how mutation rate coupled with natural selection suffices to explain the evolution of specialized proteins, such as the complex six-transmembrane (6TM) domain potassium, sodium, or calcium channels... The Jackprot Simulation illustrates in a computer model that evolution is not and cannot be a random process as conceived by design creationists.

Evolution is not a random process sounds just like what intelligent design theory would predict. Mung

In other words, all that is needed are millions of years and roughly a mutation per nucleotide and, there you have it, a potassium channel gene emerges.

This isn't anything new. We've known this for decades now, ever since DNA was discovered. One wonders how this paper got through peer review. What's original? Mung

#2 follow-up sometimes that powerful formula may include multiverse, alien civilizations, dumb luck and creative imagination. But in any case it always work. Besides that, it's guaranteed by the 'n-D e' fairness rule: head they win, tail we lose. Dionisio

#1 follow-up Here's another case that can be easily explained with the magic formula RV+NS+T=E: https://uncommondesc.wpengine.com/evolution/a-third-way-of-evolution/#comment-536666 Dionisio

"Nothing more than mutations and natural selection are sufficient to explain the origin of highly specialized proteins such as potassium channels."

of course! that's obvious :) Dionisio