# Cornelius Hunter: Arguments Against Common Descent

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741>\
**Category:** Office Hours\
**Tags:** Design\
**Created:** [July 21, 2018, 7:55pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741 "2018-07-21T19:55:54Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 7\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 21, 2018, 7:55pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/1 "2018-07-21T19:55:54Z")

</div>

Continuing the discussion from [Winston Ewert: The Dependency Graph of Life](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/winston-ewert-the-dependency-graph-of-life/728/19):

> [@Winston Ewert: The Dependency Graph of Life](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/winston-ewert-the-dependency-graph-of-life/728/19):
>
> If you would like, we can set up a different thread for your arguments.

So @Cornelius_Hunter, if you’d like you can put forward something else to discuss here, where you can be the focal point. Thanks for joining us. We are please to have you here. Peace.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Cornelius\_Hunter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e495f1/32.png) [@Cornelius\_Hunter](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Cornelius_Hunter)\
**Post date:** [July 21, 2018, 7:41pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/2 "2018-07-21T19:41:38Z")

</div>

> [@Winston Ewert: The Dependency Graph of Life](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/winston-ewert-the-dependency-graph-of-life/728/14):
>
> Instead, I’m referring to, for example, synonymous mutations in proteins. It seems (though I could be wrong), you’ve restricted this to gene families. If that is the case, you are glossing over mutations more likely to be neutral. That seems to be a real problem. As this is actually where the nested clade evidence is stronger (at least from my assessment).
> 
> If I am right (and I may not be), it seems this is a direct falsification of the conceptual argument being put forward. It seems that “design modules” must be defined to be non-neutral, and you _ **may** _ have an explanation for why they almost fit in a nested tree. However, that _ **does not** _ explain why more neutral mutations (it is a relative term) might fit more tightly in a nested three than design modules. That seems to be a looming problem for your proposal. I don’t think you can make your case without dealing with this head one. It seems to be a direct falsification of your proposal, unless I’m missing something here.

Well, the important restriction here is not gene families, but rather the presence/absence of genes. There is no sequence alignment at play here. So, no, this concern is is not applicable to Ewert’s paper. The paper uses standard model selection and nine genetic databases to demonstrate that the dependency graph model is superior to common descent, with respect to the presence/absence data. That’s it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 21, 2018, 7:43pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/3 "2018-07-21T19:43:50Z")

</div>

Welcome @Cornelius_Hunter! It is good to see you again.

> [@Winston Ewert: The Dependency Graph of Life](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/winston-ewert-the-dependency-graph-of-life/728/17):
>
> Well, the important restriction here is not gene families, but rather the presence/absence of genes. There is no sequence alignment at play here. So, no, this concern is is not applicable to Ewert’s paper. The paper uses standard model selection and nine genetic databases to demonstrate that the dependency graph model is superior to common descent, with respect to the presence/absence data. That’s it.

@Cornelius_Hunter, with all due respect, [you originally posted this] on @Winston_Ewert’s thread. We are not interested in your arguments on his behalf [on his thread]. He can make his own case. [We set up this] thread for your arguments. To be clear, you (or anyone else) can feel free to jump in to clarify and add important and relevant information [on the main thread]. We, however, are engaging @Winston_Ewert [there].

As I have pointed out before:

> [@Winston Ewert: The Dependency Graph of Life](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/winston-ewert-the-dependency-graph-of-life/728/4):
>
> Someone at DI should tell @Cornelius_Hunter to back off. He is not helping @Winston_Ewert.

Your case is actually hurting his argument. Just let @Winston_Ewert do his thing. He is making progress. He doesn’t appear to need your help.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 22, 2018, 2:51am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/4 "2018-07-22T02:51:43Z")

</div>

@Cornelius_Hunter, any time you want to put something forward, we would be happy to engage. This thread will close 24 hours after the last post, but we can open it whenever you like.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 23, 2018, 2:51am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/5 "2018-07-23T02:51:45Z")

</div>

This topic was automatically closed 24 hours after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:11am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/6 "2018-07-24T06:11:41Z")

</div>



---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![swamidass](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/swamidass/32/3_2.png) [@swamidass](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/swamidass)\
**Post date:** [July 24, 2018, 6:13am UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/cornelius-hunter-arguments-against-common-descent/741/7 "2018-07-24T06:13:40Z")

</div>

@Cornelius_Hunter Looks like you’ve been making your case on the BioLogos forum. That’s great. When I get some time later I’ll start reviewing where left things off last time, and clarifying your arguments. You are welcome to join in too. I’ll look forward too it.