Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Evolutionists improbable becoming probable argument
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


(3)
Message 76 of 80 (907922)
03-02-2023 9:03 AM
Reply to: Message 62 by sensei
03-01-2023 1:07 PM


sensei writes:
Nobody is talking about a single sequence here. That is a straw man and you know it.
You might be misinterpreting where Taq agreed with you that "the longer a sequence is the less probable any single sequence is." This is all part of the sharpshooter analogy. To briefly explain it again, the new nucleotide sequence resulting from a beneficial mutation is highly unlikely, but it is no more unlikely than the original sequence.
The sharpshooter analogy comes into play when someone claims that only a specific beneficial mutation, i.e., a specific sequence in a specific gene, is necessary for improved adaptation in the existing environment, but that's not true. There are thousands of genes and hundreds or thousands or millions or billions or trillions of reproductive events every day, depending upon the reproductive rate of the organism in question. Almost every reproductive event includes random mutations, and some tiny percentage of them will produce improved adaptation.
But a tiny, tiny percentage of a huge, huge number is still a healthy number. For example, about 400,000 human babies are born every day, and on average each has about 50 mutations, mostly SNP's. That's a total of 2 million random human mutations every day. What percentage of all possible mutations would produce improved adaptation? I don't know, but let's say that a beneficial mutation has only a 1 in a billion chance, or 1 in 10-9. This means that the likelihood of a beneficial mutation in a human baby on any given day is 1 - (1-10-9)(2 × 106) = .2%. There are 365 days in a year, so the probability of a beneficial mutation in any given year is 1 - (1-.002)365 = .52. So there's a 52% probability of a beneficial mutation somewhere in the human population every year.
And that's using a probability of 1 in a billion for a beneficial mutation. According to Population Genetics Made Simple the probability is much higher than that.
Funny how you always work towards nested hierarchy. Biased much?
A nested hierarchy is what is observed in nature. Accepting observations of the real world isn't bias.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by sensei, posted 03-01-2023 1:07 PM sensei has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Parasomnium, posted 03-04-2023 4:10 AM Percy has replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


(1)
Message 77 of 80 (907971)
03-04-2023 4:10 AM
Reply to: Message 76 by Percy
03-02-2023 9:03 AM


Percy writes:
That's a total of 2 million random human mutations every day.
Percy, not to detract from your argument, but you're off by a factor of 10, because 400,000 x 50 = 20 million, not 2 million. If you do the same calculation with the correct number your result of 52% shoots up to 99.9%. So the maths is even more in your corner than you thought.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Percy, posted 03-02-2023 9:03 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Percy, posted 03-04-2023 9:23 AM Parasomnium has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 78 of 80 (907972)
03-04-2023 7:22 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by Theodoric
03-01-2023 7:13 PM


Mikes participation is irrelevant. Anyone who reads the dialogues within the thread and who learn anything useful makes the thread relevant. Mike could be off playing hopscotch for all we know!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Theodoric, posted 03-01-2023 7:13 PM Theodoric has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 79 of 80 (907975)
03-04-2023 9:23 AM
Reply to: Message 77 by Parasomnium
03-04-2023 4:10 AM


Parasomnium writes:
Percy writes:
That's a total of 2 million random human mutations every day.
Percy, not to detract from your argument, but you're off by a factor of 10, because 400,000 x 50 = 20 million, not 2 million. If you do the same calculation with the correct number your result of 52% shoots up to 99.9%. So the maths is even more in your corner than you thought.
Oh, right. Here's that paragraph again with correct figures:
But a tiny, tiny percentage of a huge, huge number is still a healthy number. For example, about 400,000 human babies are born every day, and on average each has about 50 mutations, mostly SNP's. That's a total of 20 million random human mutations every day. What percentage of all possible mutations would produce improved adaptation? I don't know, but let's say that a beneficial mutation has only a 1 in a billion chance, or 1 in 10-9. This means that the likelihood of a beneficial mutation in a human baby on any given day is 1 - (1-10-9)(2 × 107) = 1.98%. There are 365 days in a year, so the probability of a beneficial mutation in any given year is 1 - (1-.0198)365 = .999. So there's a virtual certainty of at least one beneficial mutation somewhere in the human population every year.
Thanks for the correction.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Parasomnium, posted 03-04-2023 4:10 AM Parasomnium has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 80 by Parasomnium, posted 03-04-2023 9:34 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Parasomnium
Member
Posts: 2224
Joined: 07-15-2003


Message 80 of 80 (907976)
03-04-2023 9:34 AM
Reply to: Message 79 by Percy
03-04-2023 9:23 AM


My pleasure.

"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science." - Charles Darwin.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 79 by Percy, posted 03-04-2023 9:23 AM Percy has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024