Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
138 online now:
DrJones*, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus) (2 members, 136 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 869,836 Year: 1,584/23,288 Month: 1,584/1,851 Week: 224/484 Day: 0/42 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Oh Good - Bart is back
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 37 of 51 (33437)
02-28-2003 10:47 AM
Reply to: Message 36 by Admin
02-28-2003 10:26 AM


declaration?
I am not declaring anything. I am just pointing out the increasing lunacy in Borger's posts.

This most recent issue involves two species that I generated sequence data for. I had posted a link to the alignment:

http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignmentgam.htm

I had originally posted a link to this alignment when Borger asked for some evidence for NDT. One familiar with DNA sequence data will immediately see why that is. It came up again in this thread.

Borgern then thought he had stumbled onto something, and asked about two of the species in the alignment, coded as Tob and Cap.
He wondered why there was such a difference between them, implying that evolution 'couldn't explain it.'

I pointed out that one was a New world primate, the other an Old World primate, separated by at least 40 million years.

He ignored my response for some time, but has now again tried to make it an issue for some reason, by claiming that he needs the "phylo-tree" in order for him to assess it. Funny - he didn't seem to need it when he was trying to declare it a problem for evolution.

More later...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Admin, posted 02-28-2003 10:26 AM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by derwood, posted 02-28-2003 1:28 PM derwood has not yet responded
 Message 39 by Admin, posted 03-01-2003 8:28 AM derwood has responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 38 of 51 (33444)
02-28-2003 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by derwood
02-28-2003 10:47 AM


Re: declaration?
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.

[This message has been edited by SLPx, 02-28-2003]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by derwood, posted 02-28-2003 10:47 AM derwood has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by peter borger, posted 03-02-2003 10:32 PM derwood has not yet responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 40 of 51 (33478)
03-01-2003 11:42 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by Admin
03-01-2003 8:28 AM


Re: declaration?
Trust me - I am under no illusion that Borger will ever change his mind about anything.

However, his bizarre tactics and conclusions, I think, should be pointed out - repeatedly, if necessary - for the benefit of those that may be fooled by the typical overconfident bluster inherent in so many of the creationist's posts.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Admin, posted 03-01-2003 8:28 AM Admin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Admin, posted 03-01-2003 1:34 PM derwood has not yet responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 46 of 51 (33530)
03-03-2003 9:12 AM


MPG advocates not good at detecting patterns
Fortunately, there are many phylogeny programs that are.
Even more fortunately, there are systematists that can present data for which computer analysis need not be required. My linked to alignment, for example.

I guess a 40 million year split wasn't quite good enough...


Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by Admin, posted 03-03-2003 10:08 AM derwood has responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 47 of 51 (33531)
03-03-2003 9:15 AM


And another thing...
I suggest that Borger take a gander at the links Dr.Caporale presented in regards to the topic of 'non-random mutation' affecting phylogenetic analyses.

As has been so often been shown to be the case, the issue is not quite what Borger insisted it is.


Replies to this message:
 Message 49 by Admin, posted 03-03-2003 10:15 AM derwood has responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 50 of 51 (33613)
03-04-2003 9:12 AM
Reply to: Message 48 by Admin
03-03-2003 10:08 AM


Re: MPG advocates not good at detecting patterns
One can go here:

http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignment1.htm

for a quick primer.

Basically, the 'letters' you can see represent the nucleotides in the sequence that differ from the top sequence (reference sequence).
At 21 sites in, you can see a number of species have an 'A', for example. All of them happen to be Old World monkeys.
Such patterns can be found throughout the alignment.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Admin, posted 03-03-2003 10:08 AM Admin has not yet responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 265 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 51 of 51 (33614)
03-04-2003 9:15 AM
Reply to: Message 49 by Admin
03-03-2003 10:15 AM


Re: And another thing...
The abstracts linked to by Dr.Caporale deal with the potential difficutlis in phylogenetic analyses due to non-random mutations and other occurrances that can obscure 'true' phylogentic reconstruction. The abstracts, however, iindicate that while there are potential problems, sufficiently large datasets and programs that take such possibilities into account can compensate.

That is, it "non-random mutation" is only aproblem for phylogeny if one does not take it into account. Unfortunately for Borger, who claims that NRM essentially falsify all phylogenetic reconstructions, it is at best a minor problem.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by Admin, posted 03-03-2003 10:15 AM Admin has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2020