That is an argument from incredulity. I don't need to explain your difficulty in accepting reality.
Reality is the big issue. How can we know it?
The way we humans "know" (or at least reassure ourselves that we know) Reality is by our discover, recognition, and elucidation of Truth, forming various models in our head of parts of the Truth we call Facts.
In other words, we gather Facts, or small parts of the larger ideal we call Truth. We use these small pieces of the Truth to support our imagination concerning how they might be useful in describing Realty.
The way we come to establish a Fact is by means of the Scientific Method. This method requires that under experimental conditions, all observers will experience that same conclusions concerning various Cause/Effect matters.
Genesis 1:26 infers the same thing. Man was made capable of imaging the almighty external forces of Natural Laws in the continuously changing, ever unfolding entity we call Reality.
. . . . . . .
God is all there is, ie; Reality itself... the whole external existence beyond our mind is the almighty God to which all life must bow:
...Truth inside our head, is the Holy Spirit, the image of God, is present inside our mind when our thinking correctly images the TRUTH, or the picture of Reality inside our mind.
We have reached the point where we behave as if we are deaf to each other. Theoretic arguments have not any impact. I think it is better to talk with examples: elongated girrafes neck, being first an epigenetic change, then it came mutations that increased the number of spondyls etc. According to classic theory the mutations that increased the number of spondyls and all accompanying features (long first legs, loss of corns,etc) came one after the other randomly, without any regard to epigenetic reality and environmental pressure, untill they fit to existing phenotype, through natural selection. But again that means phenotype ( as the result of envionmental effect, is the real moto for evolution, the guiding force .
Firstly, Giraffe's have exactly the same number of vertebrae has other mammals. They're lengthened to produced the longer neck, not multiplied.
Secondly, classical theory does not suggest that giraffes first acquired a long neck, then long legs, then lost corns, etc. It suggests that these different features evolved alongside each other, stepwise genetic changes altering one increased selective pressures for the other features alongside the existing environmental pressures.
Thanks for the information on the number of vertebrae in giraffe's neck.I would like to have your's and others opinion of what they think of giraffe's long neck and long front legs etc. Are they changes due to epigenetic mechanisms or to DNA sequence changes? and also to what degree they are epigenetic and what was the critical point that they had changed to deep DNA sequence alteration?
Epigenetic changes do not change into DNA changes.
You surely mean ..."DNA sequence changes". Becouse DNA changes through epigenetics by histone and methylation mechanisms,and the numerous regulation mechanisms are well established.But this was not my question.My question is:Are giraffe's neck and front legs elongation etc epigenetic in nature, or due to DNA sequenc change? And at which point of evoljtion the inevtable initial epigenetic effect was zeroed and was replaced by the DNA sequence change?
Surely there was a degree of epigenetic change. It exists to all animals. It is a fact. Nobody can deny this.
Where did you show that epigenetics caused the giraffe ancestor to have a longer neck?
Do you really think that natural selection, which surely works, acts against or in cocordance with existing phenotype, that is partly respnsible to epigenetic effect. This last is a fact i think.
What evidence led you to this conclusion?
Natural selection selects for mutations that improve the fitness of the population. It doesn't matter if these mutations act against or in concordance with epigenetic changes. Also, I have already shown that epigenetic changes can be detrimental such as in the case of type II diabetes and fetal alcohol syndrome.
I don't say so. What i am saying is that epigenetic changes pave the way( so guide) DNA sequence change.
And how does it do that? What reason is there to think it does? You're making really quite an outlandish claim here. Epigenetics is not a wonder solution capable of all kinds of wonders; although it's true that epigenetics is still a field in its infancy we already have a decent idea about the generalities.
It is your belief.
No, it's my informed opinion. Should you be able to provide evidence why I should change that opinion I will.
You don't answer my question.
Which question in particular do you think I haven't answered? Do you mean this?
My question is:Are giraffe's neck and front legs elongation etc epigenetic in nature, or due to DNA sequenc change? And at which point of evoljtion the inevtable initial epigenetic effect was zeroed and was replaced by the DNA sequence change?
Perhaps I wasn't clear. The elongation of a giraffe's neck are primarily due to DNA sequence changes* and there's no real reason to think epigenetics has any real role to play at all. This means your second question is essential moot.
* - By the way, this contrast between DNA sequence change and epigenetics is kinda wrong-headed. Epigenetic capacity for change depends on the underlying DNA sequence. For example effective methylation requires CpG dinucleotide pairings at the very least, and appears only truly effective with CpG islands.