Expressing bad attitudes to historians and critical scholarship without realizing it

You said God reusing building blocks would produce a nested hierarchy. If you understood what a nested hierarchy is you wouldn’t make that claim. Only someone uninformed about biology would claim that.

I understand all of the concepts involved. Which concepts do you think I don’t understand?

I do know. It comes in during mutation, the creation of genetic variation.

And this is a problem how?

The concept you don’t seem to understand is that the beneficial changes will be selected for and the deleterious changes will be selected against. This is how lineages adapt over time. It isn’t by chance but by selection.

You can think of it like gravel being passed over a sieve. The rocks smaller than the wholes in the sieve pass through while the rocks larger than the holes in the sieve don’t pass through. You end up with two piles of non-randomly distributed sizes. Chance alone can’t do that. You need a filter. Natural selection acts as a filter, kicking out bad mutations and amplifying good ones. The mutations that are neither good nor bad fix at random. If there was no natural selection then both beneficial and deleterious mutations would fix at random as well, and this would result in a lack of adaptation, or at least rates of adaptation that are way, way slower than what we see.

Take the rock pocket mouse.


https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0431157100

The black phenotype is due to 1 to 4 mutations in a gene called mc1r. When we look at the geographic distribution of those mutations they are non-random. The mutations for the black phenotype are limited to small volcanic areas with black basalt. Why? Natural selection.

And I’m the one who doesn’t understand concepts? Really???

Here are a few excerpts from the chimp genome paper where they compared the chimp and human genomes.

If 35 million substitutions represents a 1.23% of the genome, then that would be 2.8 billion bases. That represents the number of bases they sequenced in the chimp genome for the 2005 paper. At that point in time, that represented about 95% of the total chimp genome. The actual size for both the human and chimp haploid genome is right around 3 billion. The diploid genome would be double that, so about 6 billion.

I have.

Take a part away and the system stops functioning. Not that hard to understand.

I understand these concepts just fine. I even understand the mechanisms that cause random mutations, something you claimed science doesn’t know.

Dominance and recessive doesn’t matter when you are comparing the sequence differences between species. Perhaps you don’t understand these concepts?

Then show me why I need to know the function of a stretch of DNA in order to count the number of differences that separate them.

That’s what the evidence demonstrates.

False. You don’t understand the concepts.

It isn’t simple similarity. It is a nested hierarchy.

On top of that, I have shown you the differences between the human genome and the genomes of other primates. There is an excess of transition mutations. This is also evidence of common ancestry. It is both the differences and the nested hierarchy that demonstrate relatedness.

Again, from 140 years ago a person who understands these concepts better than you do:

I do not value your claims because they are either unsupported by evidence or contrary to known facts.

4 Likes