NickM and Zachriel, Unable to Support Their Claim, Abuse Kimura
-
Yup life is good and evotards are a bunch of dishonest losers. The latest gaff is by NickM and Zachriel who think that 40 previously occurring neutral mutations will become fixed in a population each generation.
To supprt their claim they cite Kimura and his neutral theory. Unfortunately for them Kimura never says what they do. However it is in the literature that it takes 4N generations, where N = population size, for a neutral (that's ONE) mutation to become fixed. And seeing NickM suggested a population of 10,000 that would mean 40,000 generations.
So seeing that it is obvious that they are abusing Kimura I asked for experimental evidence that would support their claim.
Did they provide any? Nope. In typical cowardly evotard fashion NickM had a hissy-fit, falsely accused me of misunderstanding population genetics and ran away. OTOH Zachriel kept on bloviating as if his unsupported diatribe would be supported by his dishonesty.
And all that because a 10% difference between chimps and humans is way too much for their position to account for in the number of generations alotted.
(NickM doesn't care because he sez they were fixed- question-begging 101)
As I already posted:
Look, all I am asking for is evidence to support your claim:
"That means if the rate is 40 neutral mutations per birth per generation, then the expect value is 40 (previously occurring) mutations becoming fixed across the population in each generation."
I have provided references that say 4N generations for 1.
NickM started out with a population of 10,000. Do you understand what that means?
Yup life is good and evotards are a bunch of dishonest losers. The latest gaff is by NickM and Zachriel who think that 40 previously occurring neutral mutations will become fixed in a population each generation.
To supprt their claim they cite Kimura and his neutral theory. Unfortunately for them Kimura never says what they do. However it is in the literature that it takes 4N generations, where N = population size, for a neutral (that's ONE) mutation to become fixed. And seeing NickM suggested a population of 10,000 that would mean 40,000 generations.
So seeing that it is obvious that they are abusing Kimura I asked for experimental evidence that would support their claim.
Did they provide any? Nope. In typical cowardly evotard fashion NickM had a hissy-fit, falsely accused me of misunderstanding population genetics and ran away. OTOH Zachriel kept on bloviating as if his unsupported diatribe would be supported by his dishonesty.
And all that because a 10% difference between chimps and humans is way too much for their position to account for in the number of generations alotted.
(NickM doesn't care because he sez they were fixed- question-begging 101)
As I already posted:
Look, all I am asking for is evidence to support your claim:
"That means if the rate is 40 neutral mutations per birth per generation, then the expect value is 40 (previously occurring) mutations becoming fixed across the population in each generation."
I have provided references that say 4N generations for 1.
NickM started out with a population of 10,000. Do you understand what that means?
posted by Joe G @ 7:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home