The genes would follow the tree pattern. Your claim that the pattern looks like common descent alone is false.
It looks like common descent + noise. This has always been the claim about how these kinds of diagrams should look. When we say it matches what is predicted by common descent perfectly, we’re obviously including the noise into the prediction to some extent.
I can’t stress enough that no one has ever predicted a 100% consistent phylogenetic pattern in this kind of data.
2 Likes
You cannot establish deletion as the cause you can only assert it. You cannot model random deletion.
Deletion mutations are an observed mechanism, are they not?
What pattern would vertical inheritance of gene deletions produce in our trees?
1 Like
since when design is by chance? isnt it the opposite?
of course it can, but how much? also what is your scenario to loss say 100 genes? if these genes were so adaptive so they got fixed in the population how much time it will take to loss them? does it was also adaptive to loss them or neutral?
I will repeat my question: What do you expect that diagram to look like if common descent was true? How would it be different?
If you have no intention of answering, I guess that is fine. It’s long been clear that educating you is a lost cause. Tthe point of this exercise is just to demonstrate the degree of ignorance and intellectual dishonesty required to believe in ID Creationism, for which you provide a perfect illustration. Plus some others may benefit from the discussion.
2 Likes
If you say it matches it perfectly then that is a claim of no noise. Noise is a deviation from the pattern. There is lots of noise we are observing and there is only s happens to explain it. The claim that the pattern looks exactly like common descent is false.
Ah. So are you admitting that, once one acknowledges the expected degree of noise, the evidence clearly demonstrates common descent?
1 Like
I would expect the genes in Zebra fish to be in chickens and mice as well as humans. Is that specific enough?
All of them? Why would you expect that?
1 Like
Lots of noise? I have yet to see you quantitate anything. The claim is that there is strong statistical support for these trees, and you have yet to give us a single calculation demonstrating this to be false.
legend: Figure 1.2.1. A plot of the CI values of cladograms versus the number of taxa in the cladograms . CI values are on the y-axis; taxa number are on the x-axis. The 95% confidence limits are shown in light turquoise. All points above and to the right of the turquoise region are statistically significant high CI values. Similarly, all points below and to the left of the turquoise region are statistically significant low values of CI. (reproduced from Klassen et al . 1991, Figure 6).
2 Likes
Inheritance passes genes forward from generation to generation. That is a model that is understood and tested.
Why wouldn’t you expect some of those genes to be lost in different lineages?
2 Likes
Are you saying that deletions do not occur? Who taught you that?
What model do you base this on?
I am asking for your model. What model shows that not a single gene will be lost in any lineage over 400 million years?
Show me your deletion model that accounts for the pattern you are observing? What does it predict in the future?
You are proposing a model in which deletions and gene loss never occur. It is up to you to demonstrate this model has any bearing on reality. Please do so.
Evolutionary theory does not purport to predict what mutations will occur in the future. This is understood to be a stochastic process. This is why your question only further demonstrates your ignorance of basic biology.
The pattern is explained by a design pattern. It simply is re using components. A mind easily accounts for the pattern of fish genes appearing in humans and not in mice or chickens.
That’s not what was asked of you. We are asking YOU what pattern common descent and evolution would produce. You think our claims are wrong, so we are asking YOU what the pattern should really look like if common descent and evolution are true, and how it deviates from what we have been saying.
In YOUR model of common descent and evolution, is there a complete lack of gene deletion? If so, why?
1 Like