Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 0/13 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Why is evolution so controversial?
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 781 of 969 (740060)
10-31-2014 11:51 AM
Reply to: Message 778 by zaius137
10-31-2014 2:31 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
A complete misrepresentation of my posts. I never claimed any of this.
You used indel count in an equation which required a mutation count, and then insisted that others provide peer reviewed documentation that you were wrong. That's pretty solid evidence that you don't understand the subject.
As for population growth, I agree that Taq has oversimplified your errors by saying that you are requiring population to grow at a constant rate. What you actually are claiming is that population always grows at an exponential rate where you've allowed for some small variation in the exponent.
Still pretty clear that you don't know what you are talking about. But keep on tilting zaius137.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 778 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 2:31 AM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 783 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 11:15 PM NoNukes has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


Message 782 of 969 (740064)
10-31-2014 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 778 by zaius137
10-31-2014 2:31 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
A complete misrepresentation of my posts.
Why did you pick 5% divergence for estimating the number of mutations needed for humans and chimps to evolve from a common ancestor?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 778 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 2:31 AM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 784 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 11:19 PM Taq has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 783 of 969 (740088)
10-31-2014 11:15 PM
Reply to: Message 781 by NoNukes
10-31-2014 11:51 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
quote:
You used indel count in an equation which required a mutation count, and then insisted that others provide peer reviewed documentation that you were wrong. That's pretty solid evidence that you don't understand the subject.
As for population growth, I agree that Taq has oversimplified your errors by saying that you are requiring population to grow at a constant rate. What you actually are claiming is that population always grows at an exponential rate where you've allowed for some small variation in the exponent.
Yes, I used indel count of 95%, here are half a dozen papers promoting just that issue, similarity between 93% and 95%:
Just a moment...
Just a moment...
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/...020924_dnachimp_2.html
Characterization and potential functional significance of human-chimpanzee large INDEL variation | Mobile DNA | Full Text
Comparative Genomic Analysis of Human and Chimpanzee Indicates a Key Role for Indels in Primate Evolution | SpringerLink
An initial map of insertion and deletion (INDEL) variation in the human genome
I showed that even if you use 98.7% similarity and the new "measured mutation" rate of 1.1 x 10^-8, you get about a 13 million year divergence of humans and chimps (calculated via accepted calculations). That number is proposed by several authorities in the field of genetics, that confirms the calculation I use.
I accept your assessment of Taq’s comments. Just to clarify my position:
I advocated using the simple exponential growth formula with a local growth percentage to estimate human population growth. I did this because humans alter their environments caring capacity yielding a good short term estimate (local estimate). I also noted the exponential growth rate can be normalized to to end population found here:
Error Page
Yes, that derived calculation is far better than the simple one I used. I do not dispute that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 781 by NoNukes, posted 10-31-2014 11:51 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 787 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2014 1:24 AM zaius137 has replied
 Message 804 by Taq, posted 11-03-2014 1:13 PM zaius137 has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 784 of 969 (740089)
10-31-2014 11:19 PM
Reply to: Message 782 by Taq
10-31-2014 12:52 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
See above...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 782 by Taq, posted 10-31-2014 12:52 PM Taq has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 785 of 969 (740092)
10-31-2014 11:43 PM
Reply to: Message 771 by Dr Adequate
10-30-2014 1:34 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
The good lawyer example for putting down creationism. I like it. Except all the good lawyers are also the best liars.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 771 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-30-2014 1:34 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 791 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-01-2014 2:11 PM zaius137 has replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 786 of 969 (740093)
11-01-2014 12:03 AM
Reply to: Message 779 by New Cat's Eye
10-31-2014 9:51 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
quote:
Humans are apes.
"However, science tells us that animals can have cognitive faculties that are superior to human beings."
Read more at: http://phys.org/...2-humans-smarter-animals-experts.html#jCp
This could explain my frustration as it relates to evolutionists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 779 by New Cat's Eye, posted 10-31-2014 9:51 AM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 788 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-01-2014 9:13 AM zaius137 has not replied
 Message 958 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-11-2014 12:25 PM zaius137 has replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 787 of 969 (740094)
11-01-2014 1:24 AM
Reply to: Message 783 by zaius137
10-31-2014 11:15 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
I also noted the exponential growth rate can be normalized to to end population found here:
And the problems with that normalization were also pointed out by dwise1. Since populations do not always grow and indeed do not always change at exponential rates, when you adjust the exponent so that the end population is matched, the expression fails to match intermediate points.
Anyone can link any initial population to any end population with an exponential expression. But if the values in between are wrong, that is an indication that the model is wrong.
Yes, I used indel count of 95%, here are half a dozen papers promoting just that issue, similarity between 93% and 95%:
You are introducing a red herring. What is being questioned is not the particular indel count, but the use of the count in an equation that was expecting a mutation count. You have yet to justify doing that or to give a satisfactory response to anyone who has questioned you.
Go back and take a look at the last question Taq put to you with this point in mind.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 783 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 11:15 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 789 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 1:55 PM NoNukes has replied

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 788 of 969 (740104)
11-01-2014 9:13 AM
Reply to: Message 786 by zaius137
11-01-2014 12:03 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
quote:
Humans are apes.
"However, science tells us that animals can have cognitive faculties that are superior to human beings."
Read more at: http://phys.org/...2-humans-smarter-animals-experts.html#jCp
This could explain my frustration as it relates to evolutionists.
What, gross and utter misunderstanding? What you replied with has nothing to do with what you replied to.
Humans being apes has nothing to do with other animals having cognitive faculties that are superior to humans.
"Ape" is just another classification like primate, mammal, chordate, and animal... all of which humans are.
How familiar are you with the scientific classification system for species?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 786 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 12:03 AM zaius137 has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 789 of 969 (740138)
11-01-2014 1:55 PM
Reply to: Message 787 by NoNukes
11-01-2014 1:24 AM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
quote:
You are introducing a red herring. What is being questioned is not the particular indel count, but the use of the count in an equation that was expecting a mutation count. You have yet to justify doing that or to give a satisfactory response to anyone who has questioned you.
Maybe we should discuss this further.
Your argument says that indels do not count as divergence percentage between humans and chimps (countable mutations) because they are not SNPs. I get that and got that. What you do not understand is that stand alone SNPs can not account for the differences between chimps and humans. I could reduce this to a simple logic point by saying that we are genetically closer to the HCLCA than to chimps.
Now does the HCLCA look more like a chimp or a human? Paleoanthropology would most defiantly say a chimp. But our genes would say that human genes have to be closer to the HCLCA than a chimp. Do you see a dichotomy here?
If you like, ignore that point
Even if you count each indel as a single mutation because those mutations affect coding (my citations) you get ~125 million mutation events (~45 million in chimp and ~45 million in humans the rest exist in both) regardless of bp lengths. This gives you a best similarity of .125/6.4 or ~2%.
I regress back to Nachman, Crowell.
t= number of generations since divergence (Generation =20 years)
k= percentage of sequence divergence Estimated at 2%
Ne= effective size of population ~10^5
(u)=mutation rate 1.1 x10^-8
t= .5(k/u-4Ne) from Estimate of the Mutation Rate per Nucleotide in Humans | Genetics | Oxford Academic
You still get a divergence time of ~14 million years.
That is giving concessions to the evolutionist. Further differences must be noted in the regulation segments of DNA. Epigenetic’s is just one of those differences.
Your right doc...
My mistake you must add this to the SNPs
2% + 1.3% gives 3.3% recalculating gives 26 million years since divergence.
Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.
Edited by zaius137, : Needed revision.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 787 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2014 1:24 AM NoNukes has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 790 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-01-2014 2:10 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 794 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2014 4:15 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 798 by sfs, posted 11-02-2014 5:23 PM zaius137 has replied
 Message 821 by RAZD, posted 11-03-2014 5:25 PM zaius137 has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 790 of 969 (740140)
11-01-2014 2:10 PM
Reply to: Message 789 by zaius137
11-01-2014 1:55 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
Nah, you still don't get it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 789 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 1:55 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 792 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 2:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 285 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 791 of 969 (740141)
11-01-2014 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 785 by zaius137
10-31-2014 11:43 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
A non sequitur is not an argument.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 785 by zaius137, posted 10-31-2014 11:43 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 793 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 2:18 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 792 of 969 (740142)
11-01-2014 2:12 PM
Reply to: Message 790 by Dr Adequate
11-01-2014 2:10 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
Good post...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 790 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-01-2014 2:10 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 793 of 969 (740145)
11-01-2014 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 791 by Dr Adequate
11-01-2014 2:11 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
Good post...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 791 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-01-2014 2:11 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 794 of 969 (740151)
11-01-2014 4:15 PM
Reply to: Message 789 by zaius137
11-01-2014 1:55 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
Even if you count each indel as a single mutation because those mutations affect coding (my citations) you get ~125 million mutation events (~45 million in chimp and ~45 million in humans the rest exist in both) regardless of bp lengths. This gives you a best similarity of .125/6.4 or ~2%.
I yield. Counting an indel as single mutation is exactly what you cannot do because a single mutation can remove or insert lots of indels. I believe the second reference on that list you provided actually says that explicitly. And at least three people here have asked you about that point repeated.
So I have not challenged the similarity percentage at all. Maybe I would get to that point once I get you to see your initial error.
Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)
I have never met a man so ignorant that I couldn't learn something from him. Galileo Galilei
If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass

This message is a reply to:
 Message 789 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 1:55 PM zaius137 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 795 by zaius137, posted 11-01-2014 8:38 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
zaius137
Member (Idle past 3410 days)
Posts: 407
Joined: 05-08-2012


Message 795 of 969 (740155)
11-01-2014 8:38 PM
Reply to: Message 794 by NoNukes
11-01-2014 4:15 PM


Re: Any real evidence for evolution, point on point.
quote:
Counting an indel as single mutation is exactly what you cannot do because a single mutation can remove or insert lots of indels. I believe the second reference on that list you provided actually says that explicitly.
Don’t quit yet. If you could cite the exact passage of that second reference you mention that says that explicitly you can prove your point. If I am wrong about this whole thing, I would rather you point it out now.
Maybe I missed something in the citations or I need to study this more.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 794 by NoNukes, posted 11-01-2014 4:15 PM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024