Dr. Joshua Swamidass and TMR4A: Some Major Modeling Problems for Young Earth Creationism

[thoughtful (Valerie (non-scientist))]

@RonSewell

Did all those papers which have been linked demonstrating Y-chromosome and mtDNA data in keeping with evolutionary timelines - just disappear? vamoosh?

I guess so. Please show me where they have been linked.

I checked back when I came here and literally knew not a thing about genetics and asked about Jeanson’s y-chromosome work back in July.

Now I see @evograd gave me this mess with a rate that probably wasn’t pulled directly from a y-chromosome study. No one has shown me that there are more than 4 y-chromosome studies - maybe he can show me where the rate is in one of those studies.
Testing Jeanson's Model: Y Chromosome Mutation Rates - #32 by evograd

And then @swamidass basically rebuts him and says, we calculate the rate based on the evolutionary time scale

Testing Jeanson's Model: Y Chromosome Mutation Rates

That’s not true @r_speir. Mt-Eve and Y-Adam are expected to be a few hundred thousand years in the past. We get the mutation rate, however, this way: The formula is pretty simple: Rate x Time = Distance.

I finally realize that @swamidass is concentrating on the genome and ask him why. Testing Jeanson's Model: Y Chromosome Mutation Rates - #25 by thoughtful

I finally realize maybe no one here is getting why anyone would focus on the y-chromosome. Valerie: Questions about TMR4A - #39 by thoughtful

And then recently @Rumraket asked about this, and I said Jeanson tested both the evolutionary time scale and a creationist time scale. Valerie: Questions about TMR4A - #225 by thoughtful

And he never replied to rebut it.

So what am I left with? All I can tell is that @GutsickGibbon has given me the best argument so far on why Jeanson and Carter are wrong, and that it’s this:

@GutsickGibbon

Jeanson uses bad sampling and has incredible error bars.
Carter falls prey to the same issues by citing many of the same folks Jeanson uses.