Experimental Evidence of 'Taking the Bait'

[John_Harshman]

Three unsupported claims:

@colewd

At the fossil level there is a lack on transitional fossils and at the molecular level the changes are greater than what we know about reproductive variation.

@colewd

we cannot even reconcile deer common ancestry based on the genetic differences.

Try again.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

The genetic claims were discussed with over 1000 comments. Where is the model presented that reconciled deer common ancestry?

Do all deer share a common ancestor?

In the discussion “Bills math class” @Rumraket introduced a paper including a tree diagram showing the genetic relationship of several deer species which tried to reconcile the large variation in chromosome counts. [image] Can we reconcile the common ancestry of deer based on population genetics for chromosome variation and gene family variation? Is it possible that some deer have separate points of origin?

[Tim]

@colewd

Behe’s value added was putting up to date empirical evidence in the models. David Stoke (Pitt physics professor) helped him with the model.

“Up to date evidence” does not automatically make a model correct. It also requires that the evidence is correctly interpreted and that good assumption are made – which requires expertise in the subject matter – expertise that both Behe and Snoke appear to lack.

Behe in fact has a very long track record of making grandiloquent and erroneous claims about subjects he has little expertise in – in his books, in his Dover testimony, and in his claims about that court case.

[CrisprCAS9]

@colewd

Where is the model presented that reconciled deer common ancestry?

Right here…

@colewd

[John_Harshman]

@colewd

The genetic claims were discussed with over 1000 comments. Where is the model presented that reconciled deer common ancestry?

You claim to know that deer common ancestry can’t be reconciled with the data. You have to show your work. You can’t expect other people to do it for you.

[Roy (30-year veteran)]

He can’t show his work, because he didn’t do any. Just like he can’t show his work in this thread either, because he hasn’t done any.

[Mercer (John Mercer)]

@John_Harshman

Because they’re two different and unconnected “waiting time problems”.

I stand corrected.

[John_Harshman]

@Mercer

I stand corrected.

In case it’s unclear, Haldane’s Dilemma is all about the number of excess deaths required under Haldane’s model in order to fix a novel mutation by selection. That is, it’s about the cost of selection. (There are of course alternative models of selection, e.g. soft or truncation selection, under which this cost isn’t incurred.) If I recall, he comes up with a maximum of around 3000 selective fixations since separation between humans and chimps, because a population could not sustain a greater reproductive cost without extinction. Given the millions of differences between the taxa, neutral evolution of most of the genome would seem the solution.

Nothing at all to do with whatever Bill is talking about.

[Tim]

@colewd

The genetic claims were discussed with over 1000 comments. Where is the model presented that reconciled deer common ancestry?

Where was there in that singularly-unproductive thread a ‘problem’ demonstrated with deer common ancestry that required ‘reconciliation’? All that was ever demonstrated was Bill’s Personal Incredulity about genetics. That is not a problem. Of course a thread that never demonstrates a problem, but instead mostly consisted of people trying to get you to demonstrate one, will never produce a ‘reconcilation’ of this non-existent problem.

The only real problem here appears to be that (in spite of his claims about “experience evaluating economic and physics models”) it would appear that Bill cannot do math. (I would note that he only claims to evaluate models – not to have any experience or competence actually creating them – which strikes me as a major red flag.) And the fact that he frequently bases his claims on those (like Behe and Snoke – but I suspect it also applies to a large number of other ID advocates) who demonstrate no expertise in Biology.

[Roy (30-year veteran)]

@John_Harshman

In case it’s unclear, Haldane’s Dilemma is all about the number of excess deaths required under Haldane’s model in order to fix a novel mutation by selection. That is, it’s about the cost of selection. (There are of course alternative models of selection, e.g. soft or truncation selection, under which this cost isn’t incurred.) If I recall, he comes up with a maximum of around 3000 selective fixations since separation between humans and chimps, because a population could not sustain a greater reproductive cost without extinction.

IIRC that wasn’t Haldane, that was Walter Remine (ab)using Haldane’s theory. Haldane himself didn’t set such hard limits, and his original paper included an example with a lower cost of fixation (antelopes?)

I can’t check easily from my phone, but again IIRC I wrote this up on the Talk: page for Haldane’s dilemma at CreationWiki, and since no-one there ever bothered with tge Talk: pages it’s probably still there.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@John_Harshman

You claim to know that deer common ancestry can’t be reconciled with the data.

The op simply asked the question could the difference between deer genetics be reconciled using population genetics mathematics.

Assuming Behe’s model is even moderately accurate it appears gene duplication and divergence is not a viable mechanism for explaining the differences.

[John_Harshman]

@colewd

Assuming Behe’s model is even moderately accurate it appears gene duplication and divergence is not a viable mechanism for explaining the differences.

Of course it isn’t. The deer data involve chromosomal mutations, not gene duplication. Whatever do you think you’re talking about? Behe’s model is irrelevant.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@John_Harshman

Of course it isn’t. The deer data involve chromosomal mutations, not gene duplication. Whatever do you think you’re talking about? Behe’s model is irrelevant.

Chromosome variation and gene variation were part of the discussion. If you remember you posted a paper that also showed the gene variation.

@Do all deer share a common ancestor?

[image] Can we reconcile the common ancestry of deer based on population genetics for chromosome variation and gene family variation? Is it possible that some deer have separate points of origin?

[John_Harshman]

@colewd

Chromosome variation and gene variation were part of the discussion. If you remember you posted a paper that also showed the gene variation.

Behe’s model isn’t about gene duplication and divergence either, is it? It’s about coordinated fixation of individually deleterious point mutations. How is it relevant? And need we mention the Texas sharpshooter fallacy again?

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@John_Harshman

Behe’s model isn’t about gene duplication and divergence either, is it? It’s about coordinated fixation of individually deleterious point mutations. How is it relevant? And need we mention the Texas sharpshooter fallacy again?

Behe and Lynch’s are both about testing a model for the viability of gene duplication as an evolutionary mechanism.

The Texas sharp shooter fallacy is a label. There no empirical basis for this label accurately describing reality.

We are observing functional sequences (genes) not random sequences.

[John_Harshman]

We have reached peak futility.

[CrisprCAS9]

Every time I think he can’t dig deeper, he finds a bigger shovel.

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

@John_Harshman

We have reached peak futility.

I agree this argument is futile based on the defence of the single origin strategy being based on burden shifts and labels.

The facts are overwhelming that we have no model or even a concept of a model, based on currently proposed mechanisms, that can show us how the genetic changes occurred by the process of reproduction and “natural” variation.

When is it time to re think the viability of the single point of origin model?

This could lead to more interesting discussions. You already posted a paper with this idea.

[John_Harshman]

@colewd

You already posted a paper with this idea.

???

[colewd (Bill Cole)]

I will try to find it…