swamidass
(S. Joshua Swamidass)
October 24, 2018, 9:55pm
1
Continuing the discussion from RTB's unnecessary high stakes with neanderthals :
@SueD , I think this is an important comment to dig into with @AJRoberts too.
I have my own thoughts on this, mainly involving concerns about assumptions made in genetic modelling, particularly if a neutral model is used, without taking into account the unique, rapid migration of modern humans into divergent environments, entailing rapid accelerations in mutations and stark divergences in alleles due to extremely different pathogen/environmental adaptation requirements in different areas. But I’m not able to get into a discussion on that right now, indeed, much research needs to be done still on inheritance mechanisms, and how viruses/pathogens and other environmental challenges are at the root of mutations to the human proteome/genome (some researchers suggest 30% of mutations are caused by viruses, for instance, which would mean that these mutations would be rapid AND specified - not neutral/random). We need to await further research. Suffice it to say that I believe that most molecular clocks overestimate the number of generations back in time to the origin of our species.
@glipsnort is a Christian and and important scientist in this area. I am here too, and you both know me. There are other scientists here, of many types. We can answer your questions, and see if any of your concerns weaken the certainty of the consensus view. If you have a point, we will certainly concede and let you know.
Can you expand more on this topic and engage with us?
1 Like
SueD
October 25, 2018, 3:44am
2
Hi Josh,
I’m battling with meeting deadlines on 3 papers right now so will sadly need to bow out of the discussion for the foreseeable future.
Thanks for the opportunity.
Kind regards
Sue.
1 Like