No genetic bottleneck proves no global flood

It would still require hypermutation to produce so many pseudogenes. The overwhelming majority of pseudogenes are the product of MANY mutations, usually not just one. Also, most estimates put the number of pseudogenes between 20k and 100k compared to around 30k functional genes.What would we expect in the introns of functional genes for the above scenario?

I'm not an expert on population genetics, but I think all you would really need is:1. The mutation rate.
2. Genetic variation within the population.
3. Stretches of genomic DNA that are not under strong selection (e.g. pseudogenes).

It was rare because it was produced by a mutation, so it was found in only one individual to start with.

How so? The black lava fields could have been around for 1 million years before a mutation happened to produce the population we see today. The black lava fields themselves are more than a million years old. Per the topic, the sequence variation for the black fur allele is quite low which would point to a more recent emergence of the dark allele as part of a founder-flush model. Let's see your calculations.

I guess you didn't read my response showing why the argument was wrong.

Where are your calculations?Added by edit:To help you along with those calculations, here are some of the variables you need to include.First, you need find all of the mutations that would lead to dark fur in the light fur population. According to the oft cited paper, there are 80 genes involved in fur color phenotype:"Approximately 80 genes have been identified that affect coat color in the laboratory mouse, and more than one-quarter of these have been molecularly characterized (11)."
Just a moment...The first thing you need to do is identify every sequence change, both in the translated protein and promoter regions, that would result in dark fur in those 80 genes. Second, you need to include the mutation rate in mice, their population numbers, and the odds of one of those mutations occuring in a mouse close to the lava fields.Since you claim that the odds are way too high, surely you have already done these calculations, right?Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

This isn't required, as we have shown you multiple times already. There are 80 genes that affect coat color in mice. Those are all candidates for mutations for black fur, and there is the possibility for many mutations in each gene producing black fur. Of course it isn't a neutral mutation. It affects fitness. Why is that a problem? You figured? As if that somehow adds credence to your argument?The black allele is selected against and is removed from the population when there is no black lava field. Since it is dominant, it can not escape selection in heterozygotes like recessive alleles can. Your figuring is refuted by the evidence. It recurs because of mutations, not because it was there from the very start. That is an empty assertion since you have not produced the calculations.

Some are beneficial. You keep ignoring that. They were unable to find a single dark mouse in the areas that were 100's of kilometers from the black lava fields despite free interbreeding between the dark and light mice at the lava fields. The dark allele is incapable of spreading into the light colored desert despite interbreeding. There is no guarantee that it will be dominant for every single mutation, but it is dominant in the two populations that they looked at. False. The D allele would be removed from the population by selection in the absence of a dark lava field. We have shown you this multiple times now.

Here are the terms that geneticists use.A silent mutation is a mutation that does not significantly alter the phenotype.Synonymous mutations are mutations in coding regions that do not alter the amino acid sequence of the protein.Non-synonymous mutations are mutations that change the amino acid sequence.Neutral mutations are mutations that do not change the fitness of the organism.Deleterious mutations lower fitness.Beneficial mutations increase fitness.Silent mutations are going to be neutral since not changing the phenotype will not change fitness.Mutations that do alter phenotype can be neutral, deleterious, or beneficial, depending on how they change fitness in a defined environment. Non-synonymous mutations can be silent or not silent. Non-synonymous mutations that are not silent can be neutral, deleterious, or beneficial.To simplify this a bit, there are three stages of questions. First, does a mutation occur in a position that could change phenotype, that is does it occur in functional DNA and change gene expression or function. Second, does it change phenotype. Third, does it change fitness.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Being the most common is not the same as being the only type of mutation.