It's the Darwin crowd that lacks the facts in evolution debate

Mar 15, 2009 Read more: Asheville Citizen-Times 141,211
I would like to respond to the letter 'Recent letter offered no examples of Darwinian disingenuousness,' . He responds to an article with, 'He says evolution is 'so riddled with holes,' yet fails to provide a ... Read more

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120200 Jul 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
I understand and accept that all species affected by the flood would have experienced the same bottleneck.

So where is it?

This would seem to be the kind of thing that "creation scientists" would love to research. They could prove the flood in one easy step.

Why do I not expect to see this sort of research in my lifetime?

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120201 Jul 25, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>That would be all species on the planet, at the same time. It says here.
Are you claiming that this in fact occurred?
Because if so, you're the one needs to provide data.

Post #120157.

Lets make a note of that puppy.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120202 Jul 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Don't forget the African buffalo and at least 8 carnivores besides the cheetah.

Don't forget that this is a non-non sequitur as the dates don't line up.

I do hope you will get past this run of assertions that you are on and will someday supply us with some DATA that SUPPORTS your contention.

I guess I should get used to disappointment.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120203 Jul 25, 2013
macumazahn wrote:
<quoted text>That's still not data.
And, conceptually, if even ONE of those species is confirmed not to have experienced such a bottleneck at that time, your whole story is blown out of the *ahem* water.
Do you truly not see how this works?

AND (to make the what is obviously implied into what is explicitly stated) since we know there is NO bottleneck in humans and a number of other species at that time we can say for certain that the flood did not happen at the time KAB contends nor anywhere in the past, say, 70,000 years (at minimum).


“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#120204 Jul 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
We'll be happy to do it again as soon as you pull your head out of your ass.
What, huh? No. Just because he chooses not to defecate his cranium doesn't mean there's anything wrong with his memory or his ability to read. If he did manage to expunge his noggin it wouldn't be necessary to rehash the megabytes of text he pretends doesn't exist.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120205 Jul 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
Confirmed and confirming empirical evidence would trump the Bible if it directly and unavoidably conflicted with it. Now will you provide some?

Sloth be thy name.

Do you deny we have provided links that verify a human bottleneck in the 70000 ybp time frame?

Do you deny that an even more major die off much more recently would be even more obvious?

Do you deny that there is not evidence of a NEE in the human genetic record for this time period?

“Pissing people off since 1949”

Level 8

Since: Apr 08

Seffner, FL

#120206 Jul 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>What, huh? No. Just because he chooses not to defecate his cranium doesn't mean there's anything wrong with his memory or his ability to read. If he did manage to expunge his noggin it wouldn't be necessary to rehash the megabytes of text he pretends doesn't exist.
Point taken. I was just curious if it were possible for him to extricate his mind from his behind.

Probably not. They are likely fused together by now.

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120207 Jul 25, 2013
KAB wrote:
<quoted text>
First we need to consider the details of how bottlenecks are determined. I don't suppose you want to contribute to that effort in defense of your position.

I don't know how much you really know (seriously). Bottlenecks are marked by a period of rapid decrease in genetic diversity due to die off within and between groups of the species. Obviously, for example, a group of native americans (prior to 1492) were more similar to each other than they were to Europeans of the same time period.

Just on the superficial level we know humans have encountered more of a bottleneck problem than chimps at some point after our lineages split due to the fact that humans have much LESS genetic diversity than Chimps. There is more genetic diversity in a single troop of chimps than there is in the entire human species!

There have been 2 major and 2 minor human bottlenecks going back to 130,000 years ago. By analysis of the Y chromosome (& mtDNA) we can estimate the number of breeding females existed at the time of a bottleneck. If we estimate the number of males to be the same we can get a pretty good idea of the total remaining population (at lease within a factor of 2 or 3 if not better). Since we (humans) had not migrated out of Africa at the time of these 4 bottlenecks anything that happened that affected the content of Africa affected the entire human species.

If you want to see the math:
http://www.tiem.utk.edu/~gross/bioed/bealsmod...

Here is an interesting looking (I have not read it) article that is related to this subject.
http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/content/17/1/2....

Of course there is the wiki entry:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Population_bottl...

It is short and looks like it needs some updating and bulk added.

I am now tendering my resignation as your research assistant.



“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120208 Jul 25, 2013
Subduction Zone wrote:
So now that KAB has the data that he asked for it's all over, right?
I mean he wouldn't lie or ignore data of well respected scientists, would he?

You crack me up, man!

“I am Sisyphus”

Since: Nov 07

Location hidden

#120209 Jul 25, 2013
ChromiuMan wrote:
<quoted text>What, huh? No. Just because he chooses not to defecate his cranium doesn't mean there's anything wrong with his memory or his ability to read. If he did manage to expunge his noggin it wouldn't be necessary to rehash the megabytes of text he pretends doesn't exist.

Clearly KAB's ignore-ance is intentional and even premeditated. He abjectly ignores anything and everything he cannot respond to (which seems to be most of what we post to him). He does not see this as lying (I am serious when I tell him JW's have no morals). He is really not even trying to win (not that he ever could), but rather sound plausible enough to think himself still in the game. I wonder if he really believes in lurkers? Not that he would really go away if we could prove there aren't any. He has too much invested in this.

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#120210 Jul 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Point taken. I was just curious if it were possible for him to extricate his mind from his behind.
Probably not. They are likely fused together by now.
Which must make his medical visits truly bizarre. "Your prostrate is slightly enlarged and one of your fillings needs replaced, but your tonsils seem ok. Let's up your regimen 2.5 minutes of prayer twice a day and come back in 2 weeks."

“See how you are?”

Level 5

Since: Jul 12

Earth

#120211 Jul 25, 2013
MikeF wrote:
<quoted text>
Point taken. I was just curious if it were possible for him to extricate his mind from his behind.
Probably not. They are likely fused together by now.
Honestly, isn't it obvious to everyone that he's just playing a variant of the "But why?" game we all learned when we were 2 or 3 years old? He's like the annoying neighborhood kid that not only hasn't outgrown it, but thinks he invented it, too.

“H-o-o-o-o-o-o-ld on thar!”

Level 7

Since: Sep 08

The Borderland of Sol

#120212 Jul 25, 2013
Dogen wrote:
<quoted text>
AND (to make the what is obviously implied into what is explicitly stated) since we know there is NO bottleneck in humans and a number of other species at that time we can say for certain that the flood did not happen at the time KAB contends nor anywhere in the past, say, 70,000 years (at minimum).
Yes.

One is still baffled by obstinate denial of demonstrable facts.
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120213 Jul 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
You still have not shown how you can claim some bottlenecks are not detectable.
Lets be clear - its not the bottleneck we "see", its the absence of genetic diversity. When a population is forced to very low numbers, the genetic diversity decreases, as I hope you can see logically.
When the population gets to recover, say after a worldwide flood that reduced it to a single pair, its takes a long time for genetic diversity to re-emerge. It can only happen by mutation creating variations on existing DNA.
When we are discussing the mt-DNA haplotypes, in the context of a Flood we are asking HOW LONG it must take for the haplotype variation we see to develop and disperse through the world's populations.
As it is, there is no known way for the haplotype diversity we see to have developed in a mere 5000 years from a few human individuals. The same goes for the vast majority of animals. Their genome is too diverse to account for descent from a handful of individuals 5000 years ago. Why this is so was what we were trying to explore earlier.
And in case you missed it, scientists are not in the least concerned about some mythical global flood when they engage in these studies. You are simply unaware of how lunatic and off the planet your worldview is, as far as science is concerned. Not even rated, any more that Greek or Indian mythology would be.
Science's concern with low diversity is about the future of endangered species. Even when their numbers recover, the loss of genetic diversity, which will take many thousands of years to re-establish itself, makes those species highly vulnerable for a long time to come. Firstly inbreeding magnifies the effects of any genetic weaknesses and secondly a homogenous population is more vulnerable to pathogens etc.
I understand completely your line of reasoning. Now are you going to provide data confirming that observed genetic diversity cannot have occurred in the past 5000 years, or are you just going to stubbornly continue to only assert that it is so?
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120214 Jul 25, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You are claiming a catastrophic event which doesn't care whether a population is moving to extinction or stable. Stable as used in Chimney's post does not mean invulnerable to catastrophe.
You are so much fun when you are trying to use something you don't understand. Unless you are now claiming that there is a only a single mechanism for extinction. Even in the cheetah data that you so brilliantly disfigure with your ignorance, O'Brien notes a more recent bottleneck caused by habitat destruction and hunting in the last 200 years. So there you go, two mechanisms of extinction already.
You might want to get a CT scan, I believe your cerebrospinal fluid has eroded some of the rocks in your head. All that sediment is clouding your thoughts. Maybe HTS on another thread can help. He is a neurogeologist.
It's getting harder all the time to know what point to be considering at any point in time since your side increasingly and seemingly randomly shifts gears from post to post.
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120215 Jul 25, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>You provided the data, dipshit.
That is correct. I provided data acknowledging there could have been a cheetah bottleneck 4500 years ago. I hoped your side would not cherry pick its way into not accepting that.
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120216 Jul 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Then you should understand and accept that the majority of the carnivores in the study you presented, who showed far greater genetic diversity than the cheetah, are evidence against the Flood. If most showed greater diversity, then THEY did not suffer a massive population reduction 5000 years ago and therefore any Flood would have to be local at best.
And we all know about LOCAL "middle east" floods that have occurred in the last 10,000 years. One example is the flooding of the Persian Gulf after the last ice age raised sea levels. Another is the sudden flooding of the Black Sea about 6000 years ago when the barrier with the Mediterranean broke. Even more recent floods of the Euphrates wiping out settlements. These big floods could easily have entered regional folklore and obviously there would be "divine intervention" and probably the anger of the Gods or God as the only reason they could imagine back then. Eventually such tales made their way into the myths of the Israelites. Its to be expected.
Can I expect you to provide data any time soon confirming any of your suppositions are the correct explanation?
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120217 Jul 25, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The data is there and I have sent links to haplotype libraries for you. But you need to understand the mechanism too. Science is not JUST data, its logical reasoning based on data (and predicting the existence of new data, that is how scientific theories are tested).
So first, we need to finish exploring HOW haplotype variation can arise and disperse through populations. THEN you can look at a haplotype library and understand the issues, and something like this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haplogroup
will make sense.
I agree with your comments about the scope of science. Now let's finish exploring HOW haplotype variation can arise and disperse through populations. Please understand that any reasoning you provide which is not confirmed with data will be viewed as possibly not correct. Let's see how much common ground we can find regarding the fundamentals, and build on that. This is what I have been seeking to pursue for every topic.
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120218 Jul 25, 2013
DanFromSmithville wrote:
<quoted text>I notice you say "would have experienced." I see that it is finally dawning on you that there was no global flood. How "about" that.
Would that it were so.
KAB

Asia/Pacific Region

#120219 Jul 26, 2013
Chimney1 wrote:
<quoted text>
here is data
http://www.phylotree.org/tree/main.htm
Each of the eight major groupings break down further into scores or hundreds of sub types.
Rate of dispersal of a new subtype depends on total population, but as we started to explore, would take at least 24 generations even in a small, stable population of only 1000 females, and that is best case scenario. A new haplotype has far more chance of simply disappearing over that time frame.
If you scroll into the trees in the link provided e.g. by clicking on "L" or "N", you will start to get some idea of why your 4500 years cannot even be in the ballpark and why scientists estimate the most recent common ancestor on the female side lived 200,000 years ago.
The number of levels in the tree, which looks to be about 20, could be read as the mathematical absolute minimum number of generations required to generate the diversity. Do you agree?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Evolution Debate Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 2 min Cheech the Conser... 159,588
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 1 hr An NFL Fan 18,440
News Darwin on the rocks (Sep '14) 1 hr Paul Porter1 1,052
News Should evolution be taught in high school? (Feb '08) 2 hr Aura Mytha 178,500
Humans DID evolve from apes! (Oct '14) Fri Chimney1 68
Poll How Do You View The New Millerite Adventist Inv... Apr 13 Zog Has-fallen 1
Genetic 'Adam' and 'Eve' Uncovered - live science (Sep '13) Apr 13 Denisova 360
More from around the web