|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Oh Good - Bart is back | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
I see, Page is already involved in another personal attack. What else is new.
However, since we are all Panomo's let's have a look at your brilliant analysis concerning your utmost evidence of common descent: http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignmentgam.htm I have a couple of remarks and questions about your analysis: Let start here: 1) Did you notice the sudden transition between Tob and Cap. Could you please indicate what it means according to you? Best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Dear Admin,
As promissed 6 months ago, I registered to bring down evolutionism. Not Page. I didn't even know Page. But, since he is the authority in the field I have to attack his visions. It is nothing personally, though. I wished Page understood that, it would definitely improve the discussions. Best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Page,
In response to: --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Schraf: So, it would seem to me that the way to "bring down evolution (ism)" (whatever "evolutionism" is) would be to publish some work in the professional literature. Why should we bother listening to what you have to say until you have produced some good peer-reviewed publications? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Page says: Indeed. Instead, we have denials of counter-evidence, refusals to accept refutations, etc. All part and parcel of the creationist bag-o-tricks. PB: Yeah, you would like to peer review my papers that question your methods, isn't it? Best wishes, and keep up the appearance, Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Hi Page,
You say: "Must be that genetic redundancy and the creatons...." Since you require a bit of a read-up, why don't you go to the library and get the Nature (=leading scientific journal) paper by Gu et al, 2 January 2003. Hopefully it will give you a bit of an understanding of genetic redundancies. Best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Role of duplicate genes in genetic robustness against null mutations
ZHENGLONG GU, LARS M. STEINMETZ, XUN GU, CURT SCHARFE, RONALD W. DAVIS & WEN-HSIUNG LI. Nature, Vol 421, No 6918, P63.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Dear Page,
Page: "There are only two groups of people that I can't stand:Those who hate groups of people based solely on their heritage or culture, and the Dutch." -Nigel Powers PB: What about Hans Thewissen and Fred Spoor? They're Dutch too. Just another of your generalism. Ever heard of nuance? Anyway, have a nice day. And when you have scientific commments be my guest. Otherwise be silent. best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Page says:
Pity that Borger is so humorless. PB: Yes, you are one of the biggest laughs ever. Always nice and always funny. Best wishes, Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Hi WJ,
Borger says in message #4 quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- However, since we are all Panomo's let's have a look at your brilliant analysis concerning your utmost evidence of common descent: http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignmentgam.htm I have a couple of remarks and questions about your analysis: Let start here: 1) Did you notice the sudden transition between Tob and Cap. Could you please indicate what it means according to you? -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SLPx provided his answer at message #9. Borger, are you going to provide your alternative meaning for the "sudden transition"? Are you going to move on and provide question 2? PB: I am still waiting for Page. He is going to provide the full terms for all abbreviations and a phylo-tree. [Still waiting Page] best wishes,Peter [This message has been edited by peter borger, 02-25-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
dear Page,
Either you provide this board with all codes and a tree, or this is another one of your defeats. I don't mind it is up to you, Best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
dear WJ,
WJ: PB, as you have not previously asked for the data on this thread, despite the fact that you felt informed enough to start discussion on the Tob and Cap discontinuity, I suggest you ask for the codes and phylogenic tree nicely. PB: I askes several times in several threads to provide more information, in particular the codes and the tree. Next I will have a careful look at it. WJ: Your threat to deem this as a defeat for SLPx is laughable. PB: Yep, but it is an easy victory as well. WJ: It is clear that you started the discussion ignorant of basic information and then cry foul because someone else will not do your homework for you. PB: Get real. It was Page to post this ultimate proof of common descent, not me. Why doesn't Page simply give all information. It would improve the discussion. WJ: In the meantime, since you initiated the discussion, where is your explanation for the Tob / Cap discontinuity? PB: I did not initiate the discussion. Page posted his best evidence months ago. Now, I respond. Top and Cap are distinct MPGs, so I do not see a problem for NRM on distinct spots. NRM is dependent on the DNA sequence, so disctinct sequences will give distinct NRM that line up in similar MPGs. As soon as I have Page's info I will discuss this example in detail. That's why I wanna know what the codes stand for. It is also important to note that certain regions in the genome are not in accord with common descent (as discussed), while others are. Both are however in accord with NRM. Thus GUToB rules, while common descent is questionable for such regions. best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Hi WJ,
WJ: So, old world primates and new world primates are distinct multipurpose genomes?So. is this your position or not? PB: From these sequences it is clear that they are pretty distinct, and probably comprise disctinct super-MPGs. Although I do think that MPGs are determined at another level, [and probably involving a higher organisation of genomes]. Best wishes,Peter
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peter borger Member (Idle past 7665 days) Posts: 965 From: australia Joined: |
Hi page,
In response to: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- For Borger's perusal, a "phylo-tree":http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/phylo-tree.htm Cebus apella would be in the collective branch at the top, labeled Platyrrhini. It is the maximum likelihood tree. The numbers present are likelihood branch lengths, converted (loosely) to percent. PB says:Thanks a lot for providing (half of) the tree. I will have a look at the data. Tobecontinued. best wishes,peter
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024