// Required code

Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A whale of a tale

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • A whale of a tale

    Whale evolution, says Jerry Coyne, is one of the best examples of evolution we have. But how does that pan out?

    Here is a video about whale evolution, which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors.



    Blessings,
    Lee
    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

  • #2
    And a response to some criticisms...

    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

    Comment


    • #3
      Can you come up with anything better than silly cartoons used in churches? Maybe peer reviewed research other than the Discovery Institute and Behe, he, he, he.

      This is about a slow as you can go.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • #4
        He may, but do not expect The Lurch to respond to cartoons.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
          Whale evolution, says Jerry Coyne, is one of the best examples of evolution we have. But how does that pan out?

          Here is a video about whale evolution, which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors.

          Blessings,
          Lee
          Didn't you already post this incredibly stupid and science-free cartoon propaganda video? The DI produced it for naive children and those with a child-like mentality. Looks like they hit one mark.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
            Whale evolution, says Jerry Coyne, is one of the best examples of evolution we have. But how does that pan out?

            Here is a video about whale evolution, which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors.
            For one, let me once again object to your approach to this stuff. You basically throw garbage at us and say no more than "here, look at this!", forcing us to sink the time involved in following up on whatever you are excited about. Your summaries don't include any details of the arguments, and they never include any consideration of whether the arguments are accurate or not. For you, the ONLY standard that matters is whether they help bolster your mistaken beliefs.

            You're being lazy, and you're disrespecting everyone else here.

            The second is that the argument you're parroting, and hence the entire video, is wrong. The video's garbage.

            It doesn't know the difference between the occurrence of a mutation and it being fixed. And it assumes all mutations must happen sequentially, when evolution acts in parallel - something that's come up here OFTEN, so you know that. The fact that you can't recognize those as problems once again highlights the fact that you don't know enough biology to even comment on evolution intelligently.

            Why do you continue to do so?
            "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
              Your summaries don't include any details of the arguments, and they never include any consideration of whether the arguments are accurate or not.
              I did check two references. And I said "which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors."

              It doesn't know the difference between the occurrence of a mutation and it being fixed.
              Yes, it does, it uses population genetics to estimate the time of two mutations being fixed.

              And it assumes all mutations must happen sequentially, when evolution acts in parallel ...
              No, independently, not sequentially.

              Blessings,
              Lee
              "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

              Comment


              • #8
                And for those who don't watch videos, here is an article with about the same information (though you have to subscribe to a free newsletter to read it).

                Blessings,
                Lee
                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                  I did check two references. And I said "which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors."


                  Yes, it does, it uses population genetics to estimate the time of two mutations being fixed.


                  No, independently, not sequentially.
                  The time for two mutations to be independently fixed is identical to the time required to fix one.

                  You really are this stupid, aren't you?
                  "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                    And for those who don't watch videos, here is an article with about the same information (though you have to subscribe to a free newsletter to read it).

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    Still making everyone else do your work for you, i see.
                    "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      And for those who don't watch videos, here is an article with about the same information (though you have to subscribe to a free newsletter to read it).

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      The article in the newsletter is no more a scientific reference than the children's cartoons. It has already been demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt that your ID sources are not science, and trash.
                      Last edited by shunyadragon; 09-12-2020, 07:05 PM.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                        I did check two references. And I said "which mentions, among other things, that population genetics shows that there is not enough time for even two(!) beneficial mutations to become fixed in the population of whale ancestors."


                        Yes, it does, it uses population genetics to estimate the time of two mutations being fixed.


                        No, independently, not sequentially.

                        Blessings,
                        Lee
                        Your objecting to The Lurch who has the qualifications. You have none.
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                          The time for two mutations to be independently fixed is identical to the time required to fix one.
                          Source: Genetics

                          Consistent with recent experimental observations for Drosophila, we find that a few million years is sufficient, but for humans with a much smaller effective population size, this type of change would take >100 million years. ... Our previous work has shown that, in humans, a new transcription factor binding site can be created by a single mutation in an average of 60,000 years, but, as our new results show, a coordinated pair of mutations that first inactivates a binding site and then creates a new one is very unlikely to occur on a reasonable timescale.

                          To be precise, the last argument shows that it takes a long time to wait for two prespecified mutations with the indicated probabilities.

                          Source

                          © Copyright Original Source


                          So about 60,000 years for one mutation, and > 100 million years for two.

                          To show that the authors are applying their results to independent mutations, note that the writers then go on to discuss Behe and Snoke's paper, with two independent mutations, with the writers' calculations based on the equations derived in their paper.

                          Source: Genetics

                          Arguing that (i) there are 1 trillion parasitic cells in an infected person, (ii) there are 1 billion infected persons on the planet, and (ii) chloroquine resistance has arisen only 10 times in the past 50 years, he concludes that the odds of one parasite developing resistance to chloroquine, an event he calls a chloroquine complexity cluster (CCC), are ∼1 in 1020. Ignoring the fact that humans and P. falciparum have different mutation rates, he then concludes that “On the average, for humans to achieve a mutation like this by chance, we would have to wait a hundred million times ten million years” (Behe 2007, p. 61), which is 5 million times larger than the calculation we have just given.

                          © Copyright Original Source


                          All right, so a hundred million times two million years for humans, for a CCC (two mutations), so maybe half that for whales?

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            I pretty much stopped paying attention to what Young Earth Creationists (YEC) have to say about the evolution of Cetaceans after AnswersinGenesis' Jonathan Sarfati (who used to post here as "Socrates") offered an incredibly fraudulent critique of the PBS series Evolution (aired in 2001) targeting the segment on whale evolution specifically.

                            Among a virtual avalanche of obviously false statements the one that stood out for me was how he dishonestly pretended that Ambulocetus' pelvic girdle hadn't been found and any comments about it were nothing but baseless speculation. He used the following illustration saying that the yellow parts in the lowest picture are the only pieces recovered.


                            This is unmitigated balderdash at the very least. Here is a picture of the fossils that actually existed based on what was known at the time the PBS show aired.


                            Sarfati's claim that the pelvic girdle hadn't been found and anything said about it was nothing more than speculation was absolutely poppycock that even a cursory examination would have exposed. Either he was incredibly sloppy and incompetent or he was trying to fool those he knew would never bother to look at the evidence themselves.



                            Meanwhile, for those interested, here is a very short video (under 7 minutes) presenting the evidence for the evolution from a terrestrial mammal of a different type of marine mammal -- manatees. It has recently totally vanished from YouTube for some reason but is still available on Godtube https://www.godtube.com/watch/?v=DWYY7LNX (click "resume this video")

                            Pretty much an open and shut case
                            Last edited by rogue06; 09-13-2020, 05:03 AM.

                            I'm always still in trouble again

                            "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                            "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                              Source: Genetics

                              Consistent with recent experimental observations for Drosophila, we find that a few million years is sufficient, but for humans with a much smaller effective population size, this type of change would take >100 million years. ... Our previous work has shown that, in humans, a new transcription factor binding site can be created by a single mutation in an average of 60,000 years, but, as our new results show, a coordinated pair of mutations that first inactivates a binding site and then creates a new one is very unlikely to occur on a reasonable timescale.

                              To be precise, the last argument shows that it takes a long time to wait for two prespecified mutations with the indicated probabilities.

                              Source

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              So about 60,000 years for one mutation, and > 100 million years for two.

                              To show that the authors are applying their results to independent mutations, note that the writers then go on to discuss Behe and Snoke's paper, with two independent mutations, with the writers' calculations based on the equations derived in their paper.

                              Source: Genetics

                              Arguing that (i) there are 1 trillion parasitic cells in an infected person, (ii) there are 1 billion infected persons on the planet, and (ii) chloroquine resistance has arisen only 10 times in the past 50 years, he concludes that the odds of one parasite developing resistance to chloroquine, an event he calls a chloroquine complexity cluster (CCC), are ∼1 in 1020. Ignoring the fact that humans and P. falciparum have different mutation rates, he then concludes that “On the average, for humans to achieve a mutation like this by chance, we would have to wait a hundred million times ten million years” (Behe 2007, p. 61), which is 5 million times larger than the calculation we have just given.

                              © Copyright Original Source


                              All right, so a hundred million times two million years for humans, for a CCC (two mutations), so maybe half that for whales?

                              Blessings,
                              Lee
                              Terrible unethical and dishonest citing of scientific references that definitely do not agree with your conclusions.
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-17-2020, 05:11 PM
                              7 responses
                              31 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post rogue06
                              by rogue06
                               
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-09-2020, 09:25 PM
                              0 responses
                              21 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by rogue06, 10-09-2020, 03:29 PM
                              6 responses
                              50 views
                              1 like
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 10-07-2020, 12:11 PM
                              0 responses
                              10 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post shunyadragon  
                              Started by Sherman, 10-06-2020, 03:31 PM
                              33 responses
                              212 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Leonhard  
                              Working...
                              X