Why is evolution so controversial?

quote:

---

(u) for substations is ~70 per generation. 1/7 (u) makes (u’) = 10 mutation per generation in humans for indels only. (u’) is calculated by (10/6.4x10^9 ~ 2x 10^-9). (u’) for indels is ~ 2x10^-9

---

Or just take 1.1e-8 and divide by 7, giving 1.6e-9 mutations/bp/generation.

quote:

---

With repeats and low complexity DNA is excluded

​

2.37% -1.52% Gives ~.8% for human and chimp divergence concerning indels this seems low but it must be true.

​

Subbing in for indels gives:

​

t= number of generations since divergence (Generation =20 years)
k= percentage of sequence divergence Estimated at .8% (for indels)

---

Sorry, but this is just wrong. As others have pointed out, you're comparing apples and oranges. The mutation rate measures the number of mutations, while the divergence you're using measures the total number of bases changed. Since indels frequently change more than 1 base, you cannot use the Nachman and Crowell formula to predict the divergence (or calculate the number of generations). Not unless you know the mean length of an indel.Note that the estimate I gave for the indel mutation rate comes from the chimpanzee genome paper, in which there are 1/7th as many indel events seen as single-base substitutions. Comparing human and chimpanzee divergence at indels will just give you that 1/7th rate back again, since the mutation rate and divergence are coming from the same data.

quote:

---

sfs has confused the (k) with the (u), sfs can correct me if I am wrong.

---

Consider yourself corrected.

quote:

---

All you have to do is go back a few generations in your own family. Your paternal grandfather's mother (your great grandmother) contributed just as much DNA to your autosomal genome as any other great grandparent (as averaged across all births), and yet she did not give you your mitochondrial DNA. Your mothers', mother's, mother did that. So you carry a lot of DNA from other women that were not your great-grandmother responsible for your mitochondrial DNA.

---

I am confused, here is a question you can answer about mitochondrial Eve.If Neanderthals interbred with humans 40,000 to 60,000 years ago but diverged from humans 200,000 to 250,000 years ago.That means they lived before mitochondrial eve who was around ~100,000 years ago. Would there be a reintroduction of ancestral mitochondria at that interbreeding?There should not be a mitochondrial Eve, since the humans and Neanderthals remixed ancestral mitochondria around 40,000 years ago.How can that be?

quote:

---

The mutation rate measures the number of mutations, while the divergence you're using measures the total number of bases changed.

---

That is number of mutations per generation. not total. The (u).Divergence is the total percentage of number of bases changed. The (k).Maybe we are talking about the same thing and you are not labeling them.No I am not comparing apples against oranges. All my variables are in terms of indels. Which by current thinking must be accounted for under a neutral modeling.I know you would like to reject indels altogether, all evolutionists would.

We do know what the location and nature of the indels is. It is found in the chimp genome paper. There are 5 million indels combined between the human and chimp lineages, 1/7th the number of substitutions."Through comparison with the human genome, we have generated a largely complete catalogue of the genetic differences that have accumulated since the human and chimpanzee species diverged from our common ancestor, constituting approximately thirty-five million single-nucleotide changes, five million insertion/deletion events, and various chromosomal rearrangements. . .On the basis of this analysis, we estimate that the human and chimpanzee genomes each contain 40—45 Mb of species-specific euchromatic sequence, and the indel differences between the genomes thus total ~90 Mb. This difference corresponds to ~3% of both genomes and dwarfs the 1.23% difference resulting from nucleotide substitutions; this confirms and extends several recent studies63, 64, 65, 66, 67. Of course, the number of indel events is far fewer than the number of substitution events (~5 million compared with ~35 million, respectively)."(Supplementary Information ‘Genome evolution’ and Supplementary Fig. S5)."
Initial sequence of the chimpanzee genome and comparison with the human genome - PubMedSo there are about 5 million indels with an average of ~20 bases per indel. If you change the divergence from 5% to 1.4%, this won't change anything in the calculations?Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

Already, you have a conflict. A single mutation can change 10 bases, or even 10,000 bases.

Only if modern human men mated with neanderthal women. We would only see their mitochondrial DNA if there is an unbroken chain of women from present time back to that neanderthal mother. If there is a man in that chain, the the mitochondrial DNA chain is broken. However, the rest of the neanderthal genome passed down from that neanderthal mother can still be passed down.I am sure you can find examples of how mitochondrial lineages go extinct in families that you know. All you need is a mother or grandmother who does not have any daughters or grandaughters. Over time, lineages die off which just leaves one dominant lineage.Added in edit: Always have a tough time finding this photo, but it has always been the best one for explaining the difference between mtDNA and the rest of your genome. Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

quote:

---

That is number of mutations per generation. not total. The (u).
Divergence is the total percentage of number of bases changed. The (k).

---

Quite. And what you're doing is counting the total number of mutations that have occurred (u x total number of generations since human/chimpanzee chromosomes diverged) and assuming it should give you k, the total number of bases different between the two chromosomes. That only works if each mutation changes one base; that's the assumption in the Nachman & Crowell paper. It's not true for indels. Your equation is wrong for indels.

quote:

---

I know you would like to reject indels altogether, all evolutionists would.

---

Get stuffed. It's possible that you will someday post an accurate statement about genetics or evolution, but if you do, it will be by accident.

quote:

---

Quite. And what you're doing is counting the total number of mutations that have occurred (u x total number of generations since human/chimpanzee chromosomes diverged) and assuming it should give you k, the total number of bases different between the two chromosomes. That only works if each mutation changes one base; that's the assumption in the Nachman & Crowell paper. It's not true for indels. Your equation is wrong for indels.

---

No, (u) and (k) are related by:u = k/(2t+4Ne)You measure the (k) and calculate a (u). if you have (k) and (u) you can back calculate (t).P.S. indels are quantifiable under a neutral mutation regiment. Otherwise there would not be a 1/7 (u) relationship. Get it?

As you are using them, (u) and (k) do not have the same units. That's the problem. Number of mutations and number of bases changed are different units. You need to put them in the same units.

Seeing as both branches diverge from the Human-Chimp Last Common Ancestor it is logical that each is more closely related to the HCLCA than each other. This would be true for all species descendant from a common ancestor, so this should not be a problem. Not really: Sahelanthropus tchadensis | The Smithsonian Institution's Human Origins Program

quote:

---

Sahelanthropus tchadensis

​

Where Lived: West-Central Africa (Chad)
When Lived: Sometime between 7 and 6 million years ago

​

Sahelanthropus tchadensis is one of the oldest known species in the human family tree. This species lived sometime between 7 and 6 million years ago in West-Central Africa (Chad). Walking upright may have helped this species survive in diverse habitats, including forests and grasslands. Although we have only cranial material from Sahelanthropus, studies so far show this species had a combination of ape-like and human-like features. Ape-like features included a small brain (even slightly smaller than a chimpanzee’s), sloping face, very prominent browridges, and elongated skull. Human-like features included small canine teeth, a short middle part of the face, and a spinal cord opening underneath the skull instead of towards the back as seen in non-bipedal apes.

​

How do we know Sahelanthropus walked upright?

​

Some of the oldest evidence of a humanlike species moving about in an upright position comes from Sahelanthropus. The foramen magnum (the large opening where the spinal cord exits out of the cranium from the brain) is located further forward (on the underside of the cranium) than in apes or any other primate except humans. This feature indicates that the head of Sahelanthropus was held on an upright body, probably associated with walking on two legs.

---

Seeing as this is very close to the time of divergence we would expect this ape/hominid to be very very close to the last common ancestor with chimps, and it may even BE the last common ancestor species.Sahelanthropus - Wikipedia

quote:

---

​

Sahelanthropus tchadensis is an extinct hominine species that is dated to about 7 million years ago, possibly very close to the time of the chimpanzee/human divergence, and so it is unclear whether it can be regarded as a member of the Hominini tribe.[1] ...

---

That is what I would expect the HCLCA skull to look like. Nope. Do you?Enjoy.

quote:

---

As you are using them, (u) and (k) do not have the same units. That's the problem. Number of mutations and number of bases changed are different units. You need to put them in the same units.

---

Exactly. Multiply the mutation rate (= (number of mutations)/bp/generation) by the mean size of the mutation (= (number of bases changed)/mutation) and you'll get (number of bases changed)/bp/generation. Multiply that by the number of generations, and you've got k, the fraction of bases that differ (= (number of bases changed)/bp). For single-base substitutions, it doesn't matter, since it's 1 (base changed)/mutation.

quote:

---

As you are using them, (u) and (k) do not have the same units. That's the problem. Number of mutations and number of bases changed are different units. You need to put them in the same units.

---

Well I guess you better notify Michael W. Nachman, and Susan L. Crowell that the units do not match in the equation they used for this paper. By the way do you know the units of (k) and (u)?My guess is the following, might save you some embarrassment.k = is mutations (%)
u = is mutations per generation (rate)k/u = generationt = generationand 20 years per generationThe problem is where?(t) x 20 years = yearsEdited by zaius137, : No reason given.Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.

RAZD,I really like your posts, but this one is a bit far out.

quote:

---

Although we have onlycranialmaterial fromSahelanthropus, studies so farshow thisspecies had a combination of ape-like and human-like features.

---

Only cranial material? Keep in mind I am a narrow minded creationist who needs more proof than a speculation.I think I will use this one in future debates thanks.Edited by zaius137, : No reason given.

quote:

---

Only if modern human men mated with neanderthal women. We would only see their mitochondrial DNA if there is an unbroken chain of women from present time back to that neanderthal mother. If there is a man in that chain, the the mitochondrial DNA chain is broken. However, the rest of the neanderthal genome passed down from that neanderthal mother can still be passed down.

---

Are you claiming interbreeding populations (by the way the populations at this point were relatively large) did not have a female female linage? That is what would have to happen again and again.You accuse me of having improbable mechanisms? That is total nonsense.I think the average human would find the Neanderthal woman very attractive. You know the Elmer Fud types.