Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 88 (8987 total)
38 online now:
AZPaul3, kjsimons, PaulK, xongsmith (4 members, 34 visitors)
Newest Member: Robert Smith
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 878,011 Year: 9,759/23,288 Month: 774/1,544 Week: 166/322 Day: 20/66 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   a graph for borger to explain
monkenstick
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 43 (20955)
10-28-2002 5:56 PM


someone posted this on infidels, I thought it was quite interesting


Figure C1. Distribution of genetic distances between human and mouse genes. The histogram is the actual data from 2,019 human and mouse genes. The solid curve shows the expected distribution of genetic distances assuming only a constant rate of background mutation (~10^-9 substitutions per site per year) (reproduced from Figure 3a in Kumar and Subramanian 2002).

(originally from http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/camp.html)

[The src attribute value was missing a close quote. --Admin]

[This message has been edited by Admin, 10-29-2002]


Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by peter borger, posted 10-29-2002 7:16 PM monkenstick has not yet responded
 Message 17 by peter borger, posted 10-31-2002 5:53 AM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
monkenstick
Inactive Member


Message 2 of 43 (20956)
10-28-2002 5:57 PM


bummer it didn't work

anyway, this is the image adress

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/images/evo_dist.gif

and the legend:

quote:
Figure C1. Distribution of genetic distances between human and mouse genes. The histogram is the actual data from 2,019 human and mouse genes. The solid curve shows the expected distribution of genetic distances assuming only a constant rate of background mutation (~10^-9 substitutions per site per year) (reproduced from Figure 3a in Kumar and Subramanian 2002).

Replies to this message:
 Message 3 by TrueCreation, posted 10-29-2002 1:01 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 43 (21036)
10-29-2002 1:01 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by monkenstick
10-28-2002 5:57 PM


What you wanna do to display an image is use the address and use this code:

[img src="address"]
--Replace [ & ] with < & >

Your address = http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/images/evo_dist.gif

So:

--Quotes are not necessarelly required in an img src html tag.

------------------

[This message has been edited by TrueCreation, 10-29-2002]


This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by monkenstick, posted 10-28-2002 5:57 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 6222 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 4 of 43 (21048)
10-29-2002 7:16 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by monkenstick
10-28-2002 5:56 PM


dear Monkenstick,

It seems to me as a nice Gaussian curve, i.e. normal distribution.

best wishes,
Peter


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by monkenstick, posted 10-28-2002 5:56 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
monkenstick
Inactive Member


Message 5 of 43 (21058)
10-29-2002 10:20 PM


yes, normal distribution, a common shape when the variables are random

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by Mammuthus, posted 10-30-2002 3:33 AM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 6 of 43 (21076)
10-30-2002 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by monkenstick
10-29-2002 10:20 PM


quote:
Originally posted by monkenstick:
yes, normal distribution, a common shape when the variables are random


******

Good one


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by monkenstick, posted 10-29-2002 10:20 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 11:17 AM Mammuthus has responded

  
Fred Williams
Member (Idle past 3412 days)
Posts: 310
From: Broomfield
Joined: 12-17-2001


Message 7 of 43 (21115)
10-30-2002 11:17 AM
Reply to: Message 6 by Mammuthus
10-30-2002 3:33 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Mammuthus:
quote:
Originally posted by monkenstick:
yes, normal distribution, a common shape when the variables are random


******

Good one


Uh, why is this a "good one"? Have you looked at the study? Even if we assumed the study is entirely accurate, it would not be evidence against adaptively directed (non-random) mutations. Not even remotely. Do you know why?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by Mammuthus, posted 10-30-2002 3:33 AM Mammuthus has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by derwood, posted 10-30-2002 12:12 PM Fred Williams has not yet responded
 Message 9 by wj, posted 10-30-2002 5:37 PM Fred Williams has not yet responded
 Message 15 by Mammuthus, posted 10-31-2002 3:40 AM Fred Williams has responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 432 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 8 of 43 (21119)
10-30-2002 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Fred Williams
10-30-2002 11:17 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Fred Williams:
quote:
Originally posted by Mammuthus:
quote:
Originally posted by monkenstick:
yes, normal distribution, a common shape when the variables are random


******

Good one


Uh, why is this a "good one"? Have you looked at the study? Even if we assumed the study is entirely accurate, it would not be evidence against adaptively directed (non-random) mutations. Not even remotely. Do you know why?


Tell us Fred! tell us!

Of course, we must not assume that the study is accurate. Only creationist assertions are to be presumed accurate - not to mention beyond reproach....


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 11:17 AM Fred Williams has not yet responded

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 9 of 43 (21128)
10-30-2002 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by Fred Williams
10-30-2002 11:17 AM


Fred, while you're here, will you be responding to numerous outstanding questions which have previously been asked of you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 11:17 AM Fred Williams has not yet responded

  
monkenstick
Inactive Member


Message 10 of 43 (21131)
10-30-2002 5:49 PM


fred is correct in a way, because the graph represents differences between neutral positions within genes. What the graph does show however, is that random mutation does act within genes. If he wants to draw some invisible boundary for random mutations between redundant codon positions and those that cause a.a changes, well go ahead, but it sounds like a very "magical" and far-fetched explanation to me.

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 6:52 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
Fred Williams
Member (Idle past 3412 days)
Posts: 310
From: Broomfield
Joined: 12-17-2001


Message 11 of 43 (21136)
10-30-2002 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by monkenstick
10-30-2002 5:49 PM


quote:
fred is correct in a way, because the graph represents differences between neutral positions within genes.

Why am I not surprised the resident post-hole digger didn't figure this out.

Specifically, the study only considers synonymous mutations in the 3rd codon position where any base will still yield the same amino acid (called four-fold degenerate site). Thus, the study will have nothing to say whatsoever of mutations with selective value (such as adaptively directed mutations, which is what this particular debate is all about).

quote:
What the graph does show however, is that random mutation does act within genes.

So? I don't think anyone has disputed this.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by monkenstick, posted 10-30-2002 5:49 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by peter borger, posted 10-30-2002 8:18 PM Fred Williams has not yet responded
 Message 19 by derwood, posted 10-31-2002 11:44 AM Fred Williams has not yet responded

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 6222 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 12 of 43 (21142)
10-30-2002 8:18 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Fred Williams
10-30-2002 6:52 PM


dear All,

End of the story, I guess.

Peter


This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 6:52 PM Fred Williams has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 14 by Mammuthus, posted 10-31-2002 3:33 AM peter borger has responded

  
monkenstick
Inactive Member


Message 13 of 43 (21149)
10-30-2002 10:36 PM


so how do you propose that random mutations act only on fourfold degenerate sites, and not all sites within the gene?

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by Fred Williams, posted 10-31-2002 12:23 PM monkenstick has not yet responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 14 of 43 (21159)
10-31-2002 3:33 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by peter borger
10-30-2002 8:18 PM


quote:
Originally posted by peter borger:
dear All,

End of the story, I guess.

Peter


*****************

Yes you are both wrong and niether of you understand random mutation. Glad we cleared that up finally.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by peter borger, posted 10-30-2002 8:18 PM peter borger has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by peter borger, posted 10-31-2002 4:53 AM Mammuthus has responded

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 5032 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 15 of 43 (21160)
10-31-2002 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 7 by Fred Williams
10-30-2002 11:17 AM


quote:
Originally posted by Fred Williams:
quote:
Originally posted by Mammuthus:
quote:
Originally posted by monkenstick:
yes, normal distribution, a common shape when the variables are random


******

Good one


Uh, why is this a "good one"? Have you looked at the study? Even if we assumed the study is entirely accurate, it would not be evidence against adaptively directed (non-random) mutations. Not even remotely. Do you know why?


******************

No Fred, enlighten me with your thus far non-apparent wisdom of mutation mechanisms.

Here is a Dloop from an individual from China, where will all the pre-adaptive non-random mutations occur exactly? You cannot answer, do YOU know why?

1 ttctttcatg gggaagcaga tttgggtacc acccaagtat tgactcaccc atcaacaacc
61 gctatgtatt tcgtacatta ctgccagcca ccatgaatat tgtacggtac cataaatact
121 tgaccacctg tagtacataa aaacccaatc cacatcaacc cccccccccc atgcttacaa
181 gcaagtacag caaccaaccc tcaactatca cacatcaact gcaactccaa agccacccct
241 cacccactag gataccaaca aacctaccca cccttaacag tacatagtac ataaagccat
301 ttaccgtaca tagcacatta cagtcaaatc ccttctcgcc cccatggatg acccccctca


This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Fred Williams, posted 10-30-2002 11:17 AM Fred Williams has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 21 by Fred Williams, posted 10-31-2002 12:41 PM Mammuthus has 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