Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 78 (8960 total)
93 online now:
PaulK (1 member, 92 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Upcoming Birthdays: AlexCaledin
Post Volume: Total: 869,795 Year: 1,543/23,288 Month: 1,543/1,851 Week: 183/484 Day: 1/105 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Genetics and Human Brain Evolution
derwood
Member (Idle past 264 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 151 of 157 (463997)
04-22-2008 2:45 PM


Some of you may (or may not) be interested to know that eggasi (aka Mark Kennedy) is arguing the EXACT SAME THINGS on the CARM forum now, and is claiming that people 'run away' form his claimes, especially those involving indels.

Insane? Or just really dumb?

http://www.christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?p=2721039#poststop


Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Wounded King, posted 04-22-2008 4:44 PM derwood has responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2483 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 152 of 157 (464019)
04-22-2008 4:44 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by derwood
04-22-2008 2:45 PM


Wow, I didn't realise he was actually still arguing the same ridiculous point about how mutation rates are measured, I thought you just meant arguing about human brain evolution.

How dumb do you have to be to still think you are right and everyone else is wrong when dozens of independent people on disparate sites point out exactly the same flaws in your reasoning.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by derwood, posted 04-22-2008 2:45 PM derwood has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by derwood, posted 07-08-2008 2:04 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 264 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 153 of 157 (474441)
07-08-2008 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by Wounded King
04-22-2008 4:44 PM


Oh yeah...

And even after his disastrous tenure here was linked to, he just STILL keeps making the same claims.

Truly pathetic.

http://www.christiandiscussionforums.org/v/showthread.php?t=118361


This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by Wounded King, posted 04-22-2008 4:44 PM Wounded King has not yet responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 154 of 157 (474529)
07-09-2008 6:27 AM


Oh Yes ...
Ah, I remember this. Rarely is so much pwnage visited on one creationist, because they so rarely make any specific claims.

This poor sap tried to appeal to science ... BWAHAHAHAHA!!!

Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by Wounded King, posted 07-09-2008 11:47 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2483 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 155 of 157 (474573)
07-09-2008 11:47 AM
Reply to: Message 154 by Dr Adequate
07-09-2008 6:27 AM


These ones should get points for trying at least.
I think this is slightly unfair. After all we want IDists and creationists to be trying to make coherent arguments with reference to the scientific literature. At least Eggasai and Randman seem to have some idea of what the right approach should be even if they do fall down on the details.

I think part of the problem is that they go straight to more recently published literature before they actually have a good understanding of evolutionary theory, genetics, or molecular biology. The problem is that they are often unwilling to admit that they don't know the basics.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 154 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-09-2008 6:27 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
b00tleg
Junior Member (Idle past 2908 days)
Posts: 11
Joined: 08-18-2008


Message 156 of 157 (478704)
08-19-2008 8:41 PM


Hi, I'm new here. I was reading this thread and just when it was getting good it ended. I didn't get much of an education regarding biology and genetics beyond highschool. I had a couple questions relating to the OP's stance on the issue that he was debating.

It seemed to me that he basically trying to state that to many mutations had occured in the time that humans and chimps diverged from a common ancestor to account for the evolution of the human mind. Was that what he was trying to say? What was he wrong about?

Thanks in advance,
b00tleg


Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by Wounded King, posted 08-20-2008 6:04 AM b00tleg has not yet responded

  
Wounded King
Member (Idle past 2483 days)
Posts: 4149
From: Edinburgh, Scotland
Joined: 04-09-2003


Message 157 of 157 (478733)
08-20-2008 6:04 AM
Reply to: Message 156 by b00tleg
08-19-2008 8:41 PM


It seemed to me that he basically trying to state that to many mutations had occured in the time that humans and chimps diverged from a common ancestor to account for the evolution of the human mind. Was that what he was trying to say?

That was essentially the argument he was making, although he had some other side arguments as well about any mutation affecting neural development having to be detrimental.

What was he wrong about?

A lot of different things.

The principle thing in the mutation rate argument was that, even though he was aware of the existence of insertion/deletion mutations that could change lengths of DNA by deleting or inserting between 1 to several thousand base pairs, he insisted on treating the genetic difference caused by insertion/deletion events as if they should be accounted for by the single base substitution mutation rate as if they were substitutions. Therefore a 1 kilobase insertion would represent 1000 mutational events. Consequently he produced a massive overestimation of the necessary fixation rate of mutations as he was really only estimating the average fixation rate of individual diverging nucleotides and ignoring the fact that thousands could be fixated at a time.

When he started talking about actual genetic changes to specific genes he got almost everything wrong, including what the genes actually were, what types of mutations were seen and how widespread they were and even the way proteins are produced.

He was wrong about a lot of other things too.

TTFN,

WK


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by b00tleg, posted 08-19-2008 8:41 PM b00tleg 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