And the award for the post most packed with question-begging-epithets goes to...............
Read any peer review journal on the relevant scientific subjects. Find out for yourself what the scientific consensus is.
What you will find is that no one is presenting any research on a Young Earth, a recent global flood, a recent origin of fossil and living species, or the separate creation of species groups. None. Nada. Zip. Those subjects are dead, and it is backed by the simplest of PubMed or Google Scholar searches.
Re: Not trashed at all, in fact falling more clearly into place
What led me to the two-allele gene was the recognition that it is sufficient to produce all the diversity that exists and then some.
That is disproven by the multiple alleles for HLA-B that have different functions against different diseases.
And if this is the illusion I think it is, based on the fact that it so far manages not to be overtly and immediately destructive, and that its displacement of an original better system is hidden by these facts, even though it actually allows more diseases than it protects against, you can go along being deceived by it for quite some time.
A less fit system would not replace a fitter system. It's called natural selection.
But I will make one point: if all those mutant alleles really contribute to protection against many diseases it's rather odd that we seem (to me anyway) to have a lot more immune deficiency diseases than ever before.
Again, the multiple gene systems still exist, so there is no way to blame this all on mutant alleles. Secondly, "seems to me anyway" with an anecdote or two is not really evidence. We have no idea what immune deficiency diseases people died from 6000 years ago. And of course, pathogens evolve two.
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)
History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend. Thomas Jefferson
Not really, it is a theory that is imposed on nature so consistently that you think you are observing it. -- Faith
Some of us are worried about just how much damage he will do in his last couple of weeks as president, to make it easier for the NY Times and Washington post to try to destroy Trump's presidency. -- marc9000
Haven't seen any evidence that all these alleles do anything new, so I assume they just do whatever the original alleles did for any given gene.
We have already shown you that different alleles have different activities against different diseases. That is something new, times 100.
All that's needed to create all the known diversity since the Ark is two alleles per gene shared by all individuals.
That's disproven by the hundreds of HLA-B alleles that are observed in the human population. The existence of these alleles isn't theoretical. It is a fact.
If there are too many mutations to have occurred in the last 4500 years since the Ark, what can I do but assume that for some reason they occurred a lot faster than usual since then, at least in the immune system which appears to be unusual for its great number.
You could take a second and realize that you are trying to force your theory onto reality, and ignoring the evidence that falsifies your theory.
You don't need selection to increase the number of a certain allele in the population if it does the same thing as the original alleles or SOME original allele somewhere in the original system. Anything that actually functions is going to be passed on no matter what because there's no reason for it not to be.
Then we should see the same amount of genetic drift in other genes, but we don't. There is simply not enough time for these neutral mutations to reach such a high percentage of the population.
But I will make one point: if all those mutant alleles really contribute to protection against many diseases it's rather odd that we seem (to me anyway) to have a lot more immune deficiency diseases than ever before. I note mention of them here and there, but I also have personal experience of it: A friend of mine suddenly acquired one a few years ago and was dead within six months of his first symptoms, a rare muscle-wasting immune deficiency disease that hit him out of the blue in the midst of what had seemed like a condition of robust health.
In what world does your anecdotal account of two friends with immune related disease equal a worldwide increase in immune related diseases?