0
   

When evolution requires more sex than anybody could stand...

 
 
Reply Fri 23 Dec, 2005 05:14 pm
Scoping Out Signs of Human Evolution

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2005/1220/2?eaf

A friend noted:

Quote:

Now these Darwinists are claiming that 1800 genes have changed in humans in 50,000 years or 2,500 generations. That is a gene change in the population every 2 generations. Haldane's Dilemma states that there is not enough time to cycle the genetic changes through the population and here is a perfect example. It is amazing that the Darwinists believe this stuff. Ancient Egypt is generally estimated to be 5000 years ago. That would therefore be enough time for 180 genetic changes between them and us. Wow, it is hard to believe that they look anything like us!


The only way I know of to effect a gene change in a whole population in one or two generations is for a guy with a genetic mutation to be the only person in the country who's fathering any kids. Apparently the evos are now putting themselves in the position of having to claim that was the normal situation for thousands of years.

Pretty amazing, isn't it.
  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 0 • Views: 2,887 • Replies: 31
No top replies

 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Dec, 2005 06:13 pm
I remember my great grandfather saying that theyd never perfect the radio .

Similarly Haldane is about as relavent today as was my great grandfathers opinion.Haldanes book"The CAuses of Evolution" was written in 1932 He didnt understand the molecular chemistry makeup of the genome nor how modifications get entered. He assumed that only one Mendelian mod could be made at a time, yet we have these huge Alu proteins that are thousands of nucleotides long.

Also, a lot goes on in the inbetween coding sites where the STR alleles live. Evolution Lives, your AIG and anti-evo lunks are just wasting precious air time retracing stuff that has been solved years ago.To continue this rot that Haldanes dilemma is a dark secret of evolution is just an example of an untrained mind
Haldane himself said
"Im aware that my conclusions will need drastic revision as new information(implying about the structure of genes) is made available"
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Dec, 2005 09:13 pm
Like I say, the math of this one isn't complicated. It requires that for a very long period of time, thousands of years in fact, in every generation, there must be one guy who's basically servicing all the women of the world, and nobody else is getting any.

What about you, Farmer? You gonna volunteer for that??
0 Replies
 
engineer
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Dec, 2005 10:08 pm
No it doesn't, it just means that all the genes don't get evenly spread through the population. There are plenty of recessive genes out there. Some are bad (higher tendency to heart problems for example) others are very bad. We are studying those now. There are probably some that are good and some that are very good. We don't study those since there's no money in it for drug companies. Hopefully those with those genes are getting lots of action as you suggest. Actually, all of these gene differences tend to support evolution to me.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Fri 23 Dec, 2005 10:11 pm
The Haldane dilemma is recognized as a major problem for evolutionites even without these kinds of numbers. There are basically two problems which Gould et. al. were trying to resolve with their "punctuated equilibrium" formulation, i.e. the lack of intermediate fossils and the Haldane Dilemma and the impossible amounts of time it would take to spread genetic variations throughout large herds of animals. These kinds of numbers make the thing into a joke, i.e. they seem to require that thousands of years go by in which in every generation one guy is servicing all the women of the world and nobody else is having any luck at all. I mean, I've known people I thought were sex maniacs along the way but I've never met anybody who'd volunteer for that...
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 12:51 am
In the wilds dominant males hold on to their harems so do humans.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 02:28 am
"Haldane's Dilemma" is a joke which proceeds from an illicit premise based on the false assumption that only one gene is "fixed" at a time, with no other coincident and/or inter-ralational gene fixing going on simultaneously, and entirely overlooks the fact the bearer of a gene is itself the bearer of genes from two other gene bearers, themselves each the product of yet 2 more gene bearers etc etc etc ... a factual happenstance which exponentially alters the math behind Haldane's proposition. Genetic drift is not an explosive single event, its is the inexorable result of the action of winds of change upon entire populations. One raindrop is not a flood, but get enough raindrops together at roughly the same time and place, give 'em some time, and you've got a flood.



Somehow fitting though, that the ID-iot crowd would sieze on a "proof" founded on an invalid assumption as a validation for the invalid assumption which is their proposition.


Oh, btw, did you catch this?
Quote:
Evolution takes science honours
By Paul Rincon
BBC News science reporter
Last Updated: Friday, 23 December 2005, 09:07 GMT

Research into how evolution works has been named top science achievement of 2005, a year that also saw fierce debate erupt over "intelligent design".

The prestigious US journal Science publishes its top 10 list of major endeavours at the end of each year.

The number one spot was awarded jointly to several studies that illuminated the intricate workings of evolution.

The announcement comes in the same week that a US court banned the teaching of intelligent design in classrooms ...


Top 5 Science Magazine breakthroughs of 2005"

Winner: Evolution in action. Genome sequencing and painstaking field observations shed light on the intricacies of how evolution works.

Runner up: Planetary blitz. Europe's Huygens probe touched down on Saturn's moon Titan in January. It was joined by a fleet of other explorers, including Nasa's Deep Impact, which smashed a hole in a comet.

3) In bloom. Molecular biologists pinned down several of the molecular cues responsible for spring's vibrant burst of colour.

4) Neutron stars. Satellites and ground telescopes shed light on the violent behaviour of neutron stars; city-sized corpses of stars that pack matter into an extreme state.

5) Miswiring the brain. Researchers gained clues about the mechanisms of disorders such as schizophrenia, dyslexia and Tourrete's syndrome.
0 Replies
 
Terry
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 02:32 am
Re: When evolution requires more sex than anybody could stan
gungasnake wrote:
A friend noted:

Quote:

Now these Darwinists are claiming that 1800 genes have changed in humans in 50,000 years or 2,500 generations. That is a gene change in the population every 2 generations. Haldane's Dilemma states that there is not enough time to cycle the genetic changes through the population and here is a perfect example. It is amazing that the Darwinists believe this stuff. Ancient Egypt is generally estimated to be 5000 years ago. That would therefore be enough time for 180 genetic changes between them and us. Wow, it is hard to believe that they look anything like us!


The only way I know of to effect a gene change in a whole population in one or two generations is for a guy with a genetic mutation to be the only person in the country who's fathering any kids. Apparently the evos are now putting themselves in the position of having to claim that was the normal situation for thousands of years.

You have failed to consider that genetic changes occur in parallel, not in series. You don't have to complete the spread of one change before starting on the next one. Different combinations of genetic changes may be spreading in separate lineages, only to be combined when the groups intermarry. You can never achieve a completely homogenous population since there are as many varations of the genome as there are individuals, due to mutations and reshuffling in the process of reproduction.

As for not looking like us, the 1800 genes are only 7% of the genome and are not particularly connected with appearance:
Quote:
Genes that aid protein metabolism - perhaps related to a change in diet with the dawn of agriculture - turn up unusually often in Moyzis's list of recently selected genes. So do genes involved in resisting infections, which would be important in a species settling into more densely populated villages where diseases would spread more easily. Other selected genes include those involved in brain function, which could be important in the development of culture.


More importantly, how does your belief system account for so much genetic variation in fewer than 200 generations (based on Biblical genealogies), if we are NOT evolving?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 07:03 am
gunga sez
Quote:
The Haldane dilemma is recognized as a major problem for evolutionites even without these kinds of numbers. There are basically two problems which Gould et. al. were trying to resolve with their "punctuated equilibrium" formulation, i.e. the lack of intermediate fossils and the Haldane Dilemma



This statement is utter bullshit. Ive attended lectures and seminars in which Gould presented his and Nile Eldregdes reasons for adopting their hypothesis.
1 The fossil record of most long lived species indicate the usual evidence of proceeding along nicely until , at some point, stasis (which he defined as a significant period of time elapsing with no measurable change in the morphology <{maybe this is where you get the assumed reliance on Haldane because Haldane and Huxley were 2 major proponents of "the fossil record" yet didnt have avaiklable to them the vast amounts of new data we now have}. Then Gould invoked what he called "Cordelias Dilemma" (after Lears daughter who kept her mouth shut because she was honest and Lear thought that actually his daughter hated him , and anyway we all know the rest). Basically Cordelias dilemma is where Gould and Ekdredge stated that weve failed to recognize "whats in front of us or "Lost in plain sight" when talking about stasis (all this occured while such things as the roles of stasis and extinction were just beginning to get studied in depth)
If someone invoked Haldanes dilemma for Gould's thinking , it was a vast error because Gould himself states in his works that (and I paraphrase) HAldane is still respected as a giant in the field even though most of his populational conclusion have been superceded by results that are genically bound)
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 07:07 am
where do I apply for the screwing everyone job?
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 24 Dec, 2005 07:25 am
Timber, Im lately interested in the work that Lollie and others have done in "Non-Mendelian Inheritance of Extra Genomic Information". This work begins to shed some light on how some environmental conditions affect subsequent generations by a gradual(or sudden) incorporation of information outside the genome through the cell walls.
This has an impact on creating specialized organismsthat can munch down toxics or extract economically valuable things from their matrix. The boutique bacteria we have now that can do these things are the result of combing through the extremophilic conditions in which life has evolved to live.
0 Replies
 
g day
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Dec, 2005 03:53 pm
I have always wondered if there can be developed genetic inflection points in a racial stock, that act as genetic catalysts to occassionally produce significant change - for better or worse.

It's not my field of science but I visual genetic fault planes, where a trigger can cause an abrupt change at some discernible level.

I still find very interesting the study in now re-unified Germany - how from the same racial stock East Germans practically don't have asthma whilst West Germans do. Meaning over 60 years a genetic change has slipped in and it looks like asthma is a first world disease (or cocktail of diseases) that doesn't significantly affect the third world. Makes for an interesting study in immune system changes.

PS

Gunga - you seem to take a radical view increasingly now. By sprouting the outcomes you wish to be treated as serious facts, whilst ignoring the frailities of the thinking and logical framework that lead folk to their flawed models and serious science far behind. What is causing this abberation?
0 Replies
 
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Dec, 2005 06:39 pm
Could be the diet. Third world would still eat the traditional meals and food-stuffs while the first world would eat the artificial non-nutritional "good stuff" like "junk food", candy, processed foods, canned and jarred foods with preservatives, cookies with loads of transfat, unhealthy quantities of liquor, beer, soft drinks,etc.
0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 02:33 pm
Re: When evolution requires more sex than anybody could stan
gungasnake wrote:
Scoping Out Signs of Human Evolution

http://sciencenow.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/2005/1220/2?eaf

A friend noted...


What friend? Did he know what he was talking about, or was he like you?
0 Replies
 
Anon-Voter
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 02:38 pm
"When evolution requires more sex than anyone could stand ..."

That's hilarious! Since when is there such a thing as too much sex??

Anon
0 Replies
 
husker
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 02:38 pm
g__day wrote:

I still find very interesting the study in now re-unified Germany - how from the same racial stock East Germans practically don't have asthma whilst West Germans do. Meaning over 60 years a genetic change has slipped in and it looks like asthma is a first world disease (or cocktail of diseases) that doesn't significantly affect the third world. Makes for an interesting study in immune system changes.


think that can be found anywhere else like that?
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 03:09 pm
husker wrote:
g__day wrote:

I still find very interesting the study in now re-unified Germany - how from the same racial stock East Germans practically don't have asthma whilst West Germans do. Meaning over 60 years a genetic change has slipped in and it looks like asthma is a first world disease (or cocktail of diseases) that doesn't significantly affect the third world. Makes for an interesting study in immune system changes.


think that can be found anywhere else like that?


Sure. Here ya go:

http://www.princeton.edu/~rvdb/JAVA/election2004/3d_viewpoint0.gif

Clearly, urban congestion is a major factor in the psychosis of Democratic Party support Mr. Green
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 03:12 pm
Urban congestion is I believe also statistically correlated with scientific thinking and science based industries.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 03:20 pm
Anon-Voter wrote:
"When evolution requires more sex than anyone could stand ..."

That's hilarious! Since when is there such a thing as too much sex??

Anon


If you had to pork all the women in the world and nobody else was getting any at all, even somebody like Slick KKKlinton would figure that was too much.

Like I noted, that's what the evolosers are now proposing.
0 Replies
 
au1929
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Dec, 2005 03:25 pm
blueveinedthrobber wrote
Quote:
where do I apply for the screwing everyone job
?

Consider running for political office. :wink:
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Evolution 101 - Discussion by gungasnake
Typing Equations on a PC - Discussion by Brandon9000
The Future of Artificial Intelligence - Discussion by Brandon9000
The well known Mind vs Brain. - Discussion by crayon851
Scientists Offer Proof of 'Dark Matter' - Discussion by oralloy
Blue Saturn - Discussion by oralloy
Bald Eagle-DDT Myth Still Flying High - Discussion by gungasnake
DDT: A Weapon of Mass Survival - Discussion by gungasnake
 
  1. Forums
  2. » When evolution requires more sex than anybody could stand...
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 04/21/2021 at 08:33:33