|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Why is evolution so controversial? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: One thing is certain you do not want to count indel divergence as autosomal segment divergence. It is clear now that secular scientists have caught up to the fact that a human chimp divergence of 1.5% is nonsense. At this point I do not even know what you point is. Is it because you think there is not enough indels to count? If that is your point, it is in direct contradiction to my citations (I have at this point provided 6) that implicitly added them to substitution rates. I have tried and failed to correct your perspective of what constitutes a site as it relates to mutation. You have repeatedly mixed up (u) and (k) in the calculation I was using. That is rate and percentage divergence. I used .8% autosomal divergence in one calculation (even though I suspect it is more) and you still don’t buy it, that was a concession to the evolutionist perspective. I will, at this point, let you name the additional divergence you think is acceptable. If you claim it is zero, argue with the secular scientists who say that it is more than zero. Indel inclusion does not violate the neutral model as provided by Kimura’s neutral theory of evolution. It is his calculation for neutral mutation that is the basis of the calculation I used. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Specifically.. Why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: In the spirit of defining the other white meat, yes.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
You mean To be termed scientific, a method of inquiry must be based on empirical and measurable evidence subject to specific principles of reasoning (wiki)
I guess that leaves out the evolutionist by definition.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: If they are added correctly, then I can use them as autosomal divergence, right.
quote: I am using 70 because the current measurement is a average of 70 new mutations per generation (mutation rate of 1.1 x 10^-8), a base number change of 250 bases per generation is not reasonable. As I suggested earlier a mutation rate of 250 mutations per site per generation yields a deleterious rate of U = (250 x .017) = 4.25. A U of 4.25 is unacceptable. Genome load would exceed 99%. I do not know how you calculated 250 new mutations per generation without specifying time since divergence (t x 20). You must use the formula I used to derive a mutation rate then calculate the number of mutations needed per generation. t= number of generations since divergence (Generation =20 years) = 300,000 and 6 million years since divergence.k= percentage of autosomal sequence divergence Estimated at 5% Ne= effective size of population ~10^5 (u)=mutation rate to be calculated u = k/(2t + 4Ne) from Estimate of the Mutation Rate per Nucleotide in Humans | Genetics | Oxford Academic With a 5% autosomal sequence divergence between a human and chimp you need a mutation rate of ~5 x 10^-8 for 6 million years. That would be 320 new mutations per generation. Impossible. Even 250 new mutations per generation is impossible.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
You can believe in magic, superstition, wishful thinking, old wives tales, folklore, what the stars foretell and what the neighbors think, omens, public opinion, astromancy, spells, Ouija boards, anecdotes, Da Vinci codes, tarot cards, sorcery, seances, sore bunions, black cats, divine revelation, table tipping, witch doctors, crystals and crystal balls, numerology, divination, faith healing, miracles, palm reading, the unguessable verdict of history, magic tea leaves, new age mumbo-jumbo, hoodoo, voodoo and all that other weird stuff.
You missed one EVOLUTION
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
That is just funny...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Please do not let the following chase you away from the conversation it has just started.
Examining the DNA sequences from their experimental animals (a total of over 4 million base pairs!), and comparing them with the controls, turned up a total of 30 mutations. 17 of these were insertions or deletions ("indels') ◦ 7 in exons all but 2 of which produced frameshifts and a premature STOP codon. ◦ 10 in introns or between genes 13 of these were single base substitutions ("point" mutations) ◦ 3 in exons : one "silent" producing a synonymous codon; two that changed the encoded amino acid. ◦ 10 in introns or between genes Calculating Mutation RateFrom these results I have pooled their data to calculate an approximate rate at which spontaneous mutations occur throughout the genome. Mutation Rate = # of mutations observed [30] (# of experimental lines [198]) x (average # of generations [339]) x (average # of base pairs sequenced [~21,000]) yielding a rate of 2.1 x 10-8 mutations per base pair per generation. The total C. elegans genome contains some 108 base pairs so this tells us that two new germline mutations occur somewhere in each of C. elegans's two haploid genomes in each generation. http://users.rcn.com/...Mutations.html#MeasuringMutationRate
That is how you calculate mutation rate using indels and SNPs.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Now knowing the combined (u) (1.1 x10^-8) we can calculate the combined (k) for humans or what it should be.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote:Thanks for your patients. quote: The point that I am highlighting, at this time, is that the 70 new mutations include the indels and substitutions. See the break down for the mutations above the calculation of mutation rate.
quote: Most indels (for average of papers) in the examined segments were 1 to 4 bp in length (that is dependent on the segments examined).
quote: Not at all. The 70 is the total number used in the mutation rate figure. Look at the break down for that particular example above. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Which does not have anything to do with mutation rate scratch the 1/7u again. (Also, I suspect the reason he's tried to denigrate the chimp genome paper and suggest it's been superseded is that he knows I'm one of the authors.) Sincerely, I have the utmost respect for you and your work. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
quote: Settling this once and for all a rate of 1.1 x 10-8 mutations per base pair per generation. http://users.rcn.com/...Mutations.html#MeasuringMutationRate Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Good post... and it is that time of the evening.
CHEERS!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Now do you see that mutation rate (u) and autosomal divergence (k) both have the same units and they include (indels). At least where they were counted (the paper I cited).
So you can not only use indels in the divergence calculation, you must use indels when you use the empirical value for mutation rate in humans, that of (1.1 x 10^-8 mutations per base pair per generation). Remember the ratio of k/u must yield units of generation. If I apply both the autosomal divergence percentage of (5%) and observed mutation rate (70 new mutations per generation) the time of human chimp common ancestor is beyond 40 million years... You accept that? Edited by zaius137, : No reason given. Edited by zaius137, : add units to mutation rate. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given. Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
zaius137 Member (Idle past 3437 days) Posts: 407 Joined: |
Here is the simple version of divergence time used in calculating difference between species Without Ne. A simple approximation. I like simple.
d = 2*r*t or t = .5(d/r)where d = DNA differences between two individuals r = the measured mutation rate in the species or lineage t = time of origin derived from each origins model (in generations) Time in years equals (t x years per generation).
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024