Chimp/ Human DNA Comparison- Bad News for EvoTards
-
The evotard bullshit lie is that chimp and human DNA is 98.X% similar. What the evotards do not tell you is that is based on a small sample of similar DNA. And it doesn't take into account that there should be similarities based on the fact that the majority of the expressed genes are used for every day maintenace and sustaining of the cell/ organism. Meaning there should be similarities because those daily chores are also very similar.
But anyway now that both the chimp and human genomes have been sequenced scientists are now seeing a much greater genetic difference between chimps and humans. What's the point? Well at 1% difference that would be about 32,000,000 base differences and for 10% it would be about 320,000,000 base differences.
What does that mean? Well for 10% if the split occurred 7.5 million years ago, that would mean that a great number of mutations would have to become fixed each year. Even at 1% there will still be a need to fix mutations on a regular basis.
7.5 million years since divergence* = 15 million years tip-common ancestor-tip
10 year generation = 1.5 million generations in that 15 million years
80,000 indels / 1.5 million generations = 18.75 generations per fixed indel
Nothing in any peer-reviewed literature supports that. And that is only for indels.
10% is the theory of evolution killer though, as that is just too much diversity for accumulations of random mutations to overcome. And yes there are studies that demonstrate the human/ chimp genomes are over 10% different.
Only imagination can get evotards out of that mess. Can't wait to see what their high priests have to say about it-> should be interesting.
*generous number as the literature has it anywhere from 4 million-7 million years ago
So at 4 million years ago = 8 million @ 10 years/ generation = 800,000 generations and with 80,000 indels that would be 1 fixed every 10 generations.
The evotard bullshit lie is that chimp and human DNA is 98.X% similar. What the evotards do not tell you is that is based on a small sample of similar DNA. And it doesn't take into account that there should be similarities based on the fact that the majority of the expressed genes are used for every day maintenace and sustaining of the cell/ organism. Meaning there should be similarities because those daily chores are also very similar.
But anyway now that both the chimp and human genomes have been sequenced scientists are now seeing a much greater genetic difference between chimps and humans. What's the point? Well at 1% difference that would be about 32,000,000 base differences and for 10% it would be about 320,000,000 base differences.
What does that mean? Well for 10% if the split occurred 7.5 million years ago, that would mean that a great number of mutations would have to become fixed each year. Even at 1% there will still be a need to fix mutations on a regular basis.
7.5 million years since divergence* = 15 million years tip-common ancestor-tip
10 year generation = 1.5 million generations in that 15 million years
80,000 indels / 1.5 million generations = 18.75 generations per fixed indel
Nothing in any peer-reviewed literature supports that. And that is only for indels.
10% is the theory of evolution killer though, as that is just too much diversity for accumulations of random mutations to overcome. And yes there are studies that demonstrate the human/ chimp genomes are over 10% different.
Only imagination can get evotards out of that mess. Can't wait to see what their high priests have to say about it-> should be interesting.
*generous number as the literature has it anywhere from 4 million-7 million years ago
So at 4 million years ago = 8 million @ 10 years/ generation = 800,000 generations and with 80,000 indels that would be 1 fixed every 10 generations.
posted by Joe G @ 7:27 AM
40 Comments:
At 7:56 AM,
The whole truth said…
What's your point, joe? Are you claiming that humans and chimps don't have a common ancestor? Are you claiming that humans and chimps are not related in any way at all? Are you claiming that humans are specially created by your chosen imaginary god, in its image?
And why are you blocking some of my comments? What are you afraid of?
At 8:14 AM,
Joe G said…
Your comments do not published because they are substance-free lying spewage.
What's my point? That your position is total unscientific bullshit.
And evotards confirm that on a daily basis.
At 8:43 AM,
The whole truth said…
No matter how hard I look I don't see any "data, logic and Intelligent Reasoning" in your response, joe. All I see is your usual cowardly evasion, blustering tirade, and hypocritical accusations.
You are really afraid of me, aren't you joe-boi? In fact, you are really afraid of anyone who doesn't agree with you or questions you.
You live in fear 24/7 because you know that all of your claims are bullshit and have already been CRUSHED, and you know that as time goes on your claims will be continually CRUSHED by more and more evidence against them.
You block me and others because the last thing you want to do is to let me or others show just how ridiculous your claims are, here on your blog. Like the other IDiots, you obviously think that you can just preach your non-evidential, non-scientific, insane sermons and all the people of the world will come to worship you.
You also obviously believe that you and the other IDiots hold the default "position" and that you don't have to produce any positive evidence, research, publication, or anything else that science accepts and/or requires. You couldn't be more wrong.
If you're confident of your "position", what are you afraid of? Why don't you face all comers and back up your claims with real science, not blustering bullshit, dishonesty, false accusations, and pseudo-science?
Oh, by the way joe, I can't help it that you're not a biologist and can't keep up with real science. Maybe some humility, the shedding of your religious dogma, and the willingness to learn would do you some good.
When did you ever contribute anything positive to science?
At 8:59 AM,
Joe G said…
TWiT,
You are a proven ignorant fuck who wouldn't know evidence if it slapped your head.
And for all of your ignorant spewage you still can't produce anything that would support your position.
You are a liar, a coward and a piece-of-shit.
Good-bye and good riddance...
At 10:18 AM,
NickM said…
Joe -- wow, that's just so wrong it's ridiculous. The 10% number (or whatever it is, that's not the one I remember) comes if you include "indels", which are INsertions or DELeletions between two sequences.
Indels happen through duplication or loss of big chunks of DNA (sometimes including genes, often not). Each of these can happen in a single step e.g. through unequal crossing over, where the chromosomes don't line up perfectly.
So in a single "mutation" you can get a "difference" of 100s or 1000s of DNA base pairs (even if the "difference" is just the fact that the mutant has say 3000 bases twice next to each other on the chromosome, and the nonmutant has those 3000 bases once.
To take the rate of point mutation (the type of mutation from A to T or C to A or whatever) and then make conclusions using the difference statistics which include indels is wildly, hopeless illegitimate. To then build upon this wild misunderstanding vicious insults and cussing at evolutionists is ridiculous.
At 10:31 AM,
Joe G said…
NickM:
Indels happen through duplication or loss of big chunks of DNA (sometimes including genes, often not). Each of these can happen in a single step e.g. through unequal crossing over, where the chromosomes don't line up perfectly.
Hi Nick. I know all about indels and that they are one-step changes.
There are some 80,000+ that have to 1) occur and 2) become fixed. And they- indels- don't represent the entirety of the differences.
Also notice that my OP never said nor implied anything aboug about point mutations. Not one thing.
Yet here you are frothing at the mouth like some rabid chimp wannabe about that strawman you invented.
And that 10%+ number isn't one you will remember, but it is one that you won't forget.
BTW accounting for the genetic differences is one thing. Linking those to the phenotypic differences is something else and you don't appear to be able to do either.
So until you can it is all a bullshit lie as the truth would be "we don't know".
At 12:09 PM,
Joe G said…
7.5 million years since divergence = 15 million years tip-common ancestor-tip
10 year generation = 1.5 million generations in that 15 million years
80,000 indels / 1.5 million generations = 18.75 generations per fixed indel
Nothing in any peer-reviewed literature supports that.
At 1:43 PM,
Joe G said…
It is all about the number of independent events (ie) and the number of generations (g)-> ie/g= number of generations to get one indepedent event fixed.
Haldane said it would be 300 generations and recent experiments with fruit flies has it over 600.
So you could imagine some kind of xfinity bundled package in which many indels become fixed per X generations, or you could just start admitting the truth.
At 12:22 AM,
NickM said…
Way to edit your post to make it look like you weren't totally clueless! Your original claim was:
==========
But anyway now that both the chimp and human genomes have been sequenced scientists are now seeing a much greater genetic difference between chimps and humans. What's the point? Well at 1% difference that would be about 32,000,000 base differences and for 10% it would be about 320,000,000 base differences.
What does that mean? Well for 10% if the split occurred 7.5 million years ago, that would mean that a great number of mutations would have to become fixed each year.
==========
You said there were 320 million base differences, and "that would mean that a great number of mutations would have to become fixed each year", which can only mean that you are only using point mutations.
On your own math in your (revised) post, you don't need "a great number of mutations...fixed each year", you need one mutation fixed every 18.75 generations, i.e. one mutation fixed every 187.5 years.
So, your original claim was wrong, but rather than be a man (and a scientist) and admit it, you just cuss and insult and pretend you didn't make a mistake. Who are you trying to impress? What do you think God would think of this behavior, by the way?
Anyhow -- another thing you obviously don't understand at all is that even under completely neutral conditions, with no natural selection acting at all, and with nothing but genetic drift going on, *the substitution rate equals the mutation rate*.
If the genome size is 3.2 billion bases, if the human-chimp divergence time is 6 my ago, and if the generation size is 15 years, 1% divergence in point mutations takes 32 million mutations. That's 40 mutations/generation.
Which is roughly equal to the per-generation mutation rate measured by other means:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation_rate
1.1 x 10^-8 mutations per site per generation * 3.2 billion sites = 35.5 mutations per genome per generation
There is some uncertainty in all these numbers, but the discrepancy isn't huge.
So where's the problem again?
At 6:56 AM,
Joe G said…
NickM:
Way to edit your post to make it look like you weren't totally clueless!
Fuck you Nick, you are an asshole liar.
You said there were 320 million base differences, and "that would mean that a great number of mutations would have to become fixed each year", which can only mean that you are only using point mutations.
No, it doesn't mean I was referring only to point mutations. You are an imbecile and are forced to make shit up to try to cover your ass.
Ya see moron I read Britten's paper and even had discussions with one Scott Page who informed me all about indels being one-step events. And I also know all about other types of mutations other than point mutations.
On your own math in your (revised) post, you don't need "a great number of mutations...fixed each year", you need one mutation fixed every 18.75 generations, i.e. one mutation fixed every 187.5 years.
You are a fucked up dumbass- tha only refers to those 80,000 indels. Not only that but the science says you only have 4 million years which is 10 generations and 100 tears FOR THOSE INDELS ONLY.
Anyhow -- another thing you obviously don't understand at all is that even under completely neutral conditions, with no natural selection acting at all, and with nothing but genetic drift going on, *the substitution rate equals the mutation rate*.
Fixation rate Nick- not substitution rate. And guess what? Experiments put the fixation rate at over 6oo generations.
If the genome size is 3.2 billion bases, if the human-chimp divergence time is 6 my ago, and if the generation size is 15 years, 1% divergence in point mutations takes 32 million mutations. That's 40 mutations/generation.
Fixation rate Nick, not substituion rate.
The problem is you cannot account for the diversity, you think substitution rates = fixation rates and you still can't link the genetic differences to the phenotypic differences. And the fixation rate had to be higher tahn anything we have ever observed.
But I have said all of that and you haven't responded to any of it.
At 7:09 AM,
Joe G said…
oops my bad- I take it that you think the substitution rate = fixation rate-> that is unsupportable bullshit.
Yes I know the math but until the rubber meets the road the math is worthless- that means the math needs some confirming evidence from the real world.
At 7:20 AM,
Joe G said…
320,000,000 base differences given a 10% difference and a genome of 3.2 billion base pairs.
About 4% of that are indels which = 12,800,000
320,000,000-12,800,000=307,200,000 still unaccounted for.
Neutral mutations will only account for a small % of that. And neutral mutations cannot explain the physiological and anatomical differnces observed between chimps and humans.
So we are still well over 100 million differences left unexplained.
At 9:27 AM,
Joe G said…
OK I gave a generation time of 10 years and Nick says 15.
So if we take 15 years and 4 million years since the divergence
8 miilion years at 15 years per generation = 533,333 generations.
80,000 indels would mean 1 would have to be fixed every 7 generations- and that is just the indels.
At 10:45 AM,
Joe G said…
Neutral theory says, and Nick does, that the rate of substitution = the rate of mutation.
However that does not mean that 35- 40 will become fixed in each generation, as Nick would have us believe.
35-40 will become fixed, ie substituted, in many, many generations-> whatever the mutation rate is.
IOW the substitution per generation would be 1.1 x 10^-8
Got that Nick?
At 2:34 PM,
The whole truth said…
Let's see, you try to dishonestly get away with changing your post and Nick catches you, but you call him a liar.
Scruples are completely foreign to you, aren't they, joe-boi?
At 2:43 PM,
Joe G said…
TWiT:
Let's see, you try to dishonestly get away with changing your post and Nick catches you, but you call him a liar.
If taht is what you think happened then you are about as ignorant as your shit, ie the stuff you eat.
1- NickM tried to dishonestly erect a strawman and attack it
2- I exposed Nick
3- Nick persisted in his false accusation
4- I exposed that too
5- Dipshit TWiT chimes in and shits itself
Life is good...
At 3:04 PM,
The whole truth said…
Ya know, joe, it's a shame that you haven't turned your air of superiority into actual accomplishments.
At 3:14 PM,
Joe G said…
Hmm, let's see. the Statue of Liberty was closed on 9/11/2001 and it opened on 8/2/2004.
On 7/8/2004 I was given a personal, private guided tour of the Statue, including go up into the big lady.
The reason for the tour was for some of my accomplishments.
Go figure...
At 3:32 PM,
The whole truth said…
Wow, I'm impressed, joe. It only took you 49 years longer to get to the top of the statue of liberty than it took me.
At 3:38 PM,
Joe G said…
Dumbass TWiT-
1- That wasn't the first time I was in the Statue
2- Only a small handful of people were allowed in the statue between 9/11/01 and 8/2/04, I was one of them
At 3:45 PM,
Joe G said…
Ya see TWiT dumbass white trash wankers such as yourself would not be allowed in the Statue between 9/11/2001 and 8/2/2004.
At 4:27 PM,
The whole truth said…
Hey joe, while you were allegedly in the statue of liberty I was getting an all expense paid grand tour of the outer plants of our solar system in a new top secret spacecraft, and they threw in a couple of close orbits of the sun and a steak dinner. A Bigfoot family came along for the ride too. You believe me, don't you?
At 4:49 PM,
Joe G said…
Yes I believe that as much as I believe all of the other lying bullshit you spew.
Ya see moron I have evidence of my experience- photos and verifying personnel. Something taht you will never have to support anything you say.
At 5:54 PM,
The whole truth said…
In that case I'm sure you won't mind posting some pictures of you in the statue of liberty, along with the verifying personnel, eh joe?
At 6:15 PM,
Joe G said…
You are under the mistaken impression that I care what you think or say.
But if you ever feel froggy just jump on over and I will show you what i have.
At 6:47 PM,
The whole truth said…
In other words, you have no evidence of your claim, like always.
At 6:51 PM,
Joe G said…
I have it right here. I don't have anything to prove to a lowlife piece-of-shit TWiT.
However it is funny that you think you are someone....
At 7:19 PM,
The whole truth said…
Well, contrary to what you think, no one has to prove anything to you, joe-boi. Believe it or not, science doesn't give a rusty fuck what you think, expect, or demand. You're just a joke, and a chew toy.
At 7:30 PM,
Joe G said…
Well science agrees with me and you are a fucking piece-of-shit loser.
At 7:42 PM,
The whole truth said…
joe said:
"Well science agrees with me"
In your dreams.
I know that you don't like pharmaceuticals but there may be some that would help to diminish your massive delusions. See a shrink.
At 8:00 PM,
Joe G said…
Yes, the truth is painful to the wilfully ignorant and will always result in personal attacks.
Strange that is all this TWiT has to offer.
So seeing that you have never added anything and you don't have any intention of adding anything beyond your ignorant driven belligerence you can crawl back to the slime that will have you.
At 8:13 PM,
The whole truth said…
Of course you never personally attack anyone, do you joe?
At 8:18 PM,
NickM said…
Neutral theory says, and Nick does, that the rate of substitution = the rate of mutation.
However that does not mean that 35- 40 will become fixed in each generation, as Nick would have us believe.
35-40 will become fixed, ie substituted, in many, many generations-> whatever the mutation rate is.
IOW the substitution per generation would be 1.1 x 10^-8
Got that Nick?
You seem to think that you start out with a population with no mutations. But mutations are happening in humans now, they are happening in chimps now, and they were happening in basically the same way in the common ancestor of chimps and humans, and their common ancestor with gorillas, etc.
Mutations have been happening in each generation the whole way through, there is no "time zero where there are no mutations".
Basically a population is like a pool -- a gene pool, in fact. Mutations are "pouring" in via the process of mutation, and they are "pouring" out through drift (either going to frequency 0%, or becoming fixed at frequency 100%).
If the two weren't equal, the population would either continually increase in genetic diversity, or continually decrease in genetic diversity until there was zero diversity and everything was clones.
At 8:31 PM,
Joe G said…
NickM:
You seem to think that you start out with a population with no mutations.
No, I don't. I don't care what the diversity is in the population of common ancestors.
All I know is that the mutations have to accumulate and that means becoming fixed or becoming isolated enough to where they can accumulate, as is done with artificial selection. However artificial selection does demonstrate a limit on phenotypic plasticity.
But anyway nice try with your new strawman.
Better luck next time...
At 8:33 PM,
Joe G said…
Hey dumbass TWiT-
Attacking is ALL you do. You flail away like a wounded faggot.
You can't even stay on topic.
So fuck off until you have something to say- or go say it some place else.
At 9:07 AM,
Joe G said…
And NickM,
What do you think is meant by "common ancestor"?
Are you suggesting that the common ancestor wasn't common?
Ya see if there was a common ancestor then we would start out at zero mutational difference and start accumulating from there.
However I am OK with a common population with say 1% genetic difference(s) and chimps and humans diverging from that.
You still can't account for the differences via accumulations of random mutations.
At 3:24 PM,
NickM said…
What do you think is meant by "common ancestor"?
Are you suggesting that the common ancestor wasn't common?
Ya see if there was a common ancestor then we would start out at zero mutational difference and start accumulating from there.
Well, actually, any two randomly-selected humans will have something like 0.1% (IIRC) difference in point mutations. For chimps it would be somewhat higher, if you compared two chimps from different populations/subspecies.
That within-population diversity at any locus on the chromosome has accumulated since the last common ancestor of that locus, just a few hundred thousand years in the case of humans. And yet you think 1% divergence over ~6 million years of divergence is impossible. Weird.
At 3:36 PM,
Joe G said…
NickM:
Well, actually, any two randomly-selected humans will have something like 0.1% (IIRC) difference in point mutations. For chimps it would be somewhat higher, if you compared two chimps from different populations/subspecies.
Non-sequitur and irrelevant if you had actually read the post you are responding to.
NickM:
And yet you think 1% divergence over ~6 million years of divergence is impossible.
Strange that I never said, implied nor thought such a thing.
What is your problem and why do you need to hump so many strawmen?
Weird indeed...
At 3:37 PM,
Joe G said…
For the record I am saying that a 10% or better divergence is impossible via accumulations of random mutations.
Just read the OP.
Or is that too much to ask of evotards?
At 6:53 PM,
Unknown said…
Way to go Joe. Kick that evotard's ass back into the 19th century he's still a slave to! We the anti-darwingnuts of Youtube would like to invite you to join us in exposing, mocking and ridiculing these chimp-wannabes at the video "How To Shut Up Pesky Creationists". Loads of fun for one and all with a brain. That means you!
Post a Comment
<< Home