Here’s one I wonder about. Where did the supposed flood sediments come from? Were there thousands of meters of unconsolidated sediments sitting around? If so, what possible source rocks could they have come from? Or were they somehow eroded from pre-flood rocks during the flood itself? Neither option is credible. There’s just too much to account for in a couple of thousand years, much less a single year.
3 Likes
I do want to thank you for posting this. You should know, however, that this is not the first time I’ve attempted to discuss GE on this forum. And if you peruse the comments here, you’ll see a pattern (the same pattern I found previously): no one is willing to address the actual arguments. Instead they want to create smokescreens and fake “analogies” that have nothing to do with the premises of my argument. It’s tiresome, which is why I don’t usually spend time on this forum. I have not found anybody yet who is willing to deal with any of this material in an honest fashion.
There are a finite number of states at which a sequence N nucleotides in length can exist. If we, as Dr. Sanford does, assume an optimal starting state, and, as Dr. Sanford does, assume fixed fitness effects for each possible mutation, then we start with up to 3N possible deleterious mutations (considering only single-base substitutions). As those deleterious mutations occur, the number of possible subsequent deleterious mutations decreases, and the number of possible neutral and/or beneficial mutations increases. Ignoring selection, eventually such a sequence will reach equilibrium, at which point deleterious mutations will no longer net increase.
Do you understand everything I just wrote? Do you disagree with any of it?
Can you explain the exquisite stratification of marine microfossils?
1 Like
Tell us again why not a single pterosaur of the hundreds of species known managed to fly to higher ground above the K-Pg boundary while no fossil examples of extant species of bird and bats are found below the K-Pg boundary. Were the pterosaurs all so dumb they just sat there and drowned in the slowly rising water instead of flying to escape?
1 Like
That’s pretty funny since you have ducked every last rebuttal and every last bit of refuting evidence presented to you. Now how about those last 700,000 years of genetic data showing no signs of your claimed GE?
1 Like
This is a list of anomalies that seem to defy our intuition about what a flood would and should produce. Now, what we must do is first realize that we are dealing with an unprecedented event a scale that our intuition cannot begin to contain. Then, one by one, we must deal with these kinds of anomalies and start thinking outside the box about how a global flooding event might have left stray indications that defy explanation.
- they are stray events
- the global flood was and is unprecedented
- some of these have already been well-explained. We need to sort this list
- the remainder? Well, we still have some work to do…but one thing we know for sure
…these anomalies exist and surprisingly, they exist after and largely due to Noah’s Flood. Sounds like fun research to me.
There are dinosaurs the same size as mammals, who lived in the same climates as mammals, and displayed the same mobility. Given the volume of fossils, that is a completely ad hoc explanation.
But it is not just dinosaurs. Where are the whales with plesiosaurs, the pterosaurs with buzzards, the trilobites with scallops, the mammoths with dimetrodons? Microfossils such as foraminifera and nanofossils which are also segregated? And why the general progression?
1 Like
If you have 1000 loci in a perfectly adapted population, you have 3000 possible deleterious mutations, ignoring indels and assuming no loci have multiple ‘best’ alleles, and 0 possible beneficial mutations. If you mutate one, you have 1 possible beneficial mutation, 2997 possible deleterious mutations, and 2 mutations that may be either beneficial, neutral, or deleterious. So to take the worst case, you would at least increase the relative proportion of beneficial mutations from 0% to 0.03%. Which is an increase.
And yet the chance of one occurring must increase as the population of mutated loci increases, mathematically necessitating that the proportion of beneficial alleles changes over time, even under your model. Which makes your assumption of linear accumulation necessarily wrong. Because of math.
I’ll take this as an admission that the likelihood of back mutations increases as more of the genome is mutated, and as an admission that you now understand why your assumption of linear accumulation is necessarily wrong.
Mutations being more likely to happen at particular sites and/or certain mutations being more likely than others increases the likelihood of backmutations.
Which means that the fitness effect of a given mutation is not fixed, invalidating your other assumption. And suggests again that the relative probability of a beneficial mutation changes over time, further invalidating your first assumption. If you’d like, I can stop responding and just let you argue against yourself uninterrupted.
3 Likes
I’m actually digging one out of the demopolis chalk right now. About 75mya.
2 Likes
Cool! Now that I’m retired I’ve often though of volunteering at a fossil recovery dig. Not too many of them in northern CA though.
2 Likes
I just want to highlight and cosign this. Emphasis mine. The problem with GE that @CrisprCAS9 and I are harping on here is not a biology problem, nor a genetics problem. It’s a math problem. The GE model leads to self-contradictory outcomes, and this has never, to my knowledge, been satisfactorily addressed.
7 Likes
Pulled its crest and some wing fragments out. The rest is in there somewhere. It’s right at a slope so it’s going to be fairly spread out from rain water taking it.
Pterosaurs are annoying because their fragments look like inoceramus (huge bivalve) fragments. So you get excited thinking you found more of it. Then you look at it through your hand lens and it’s that stupid clam
1 Like
Why do you think they are self contradictory?
But my list includes more than mobility. And I have told you people time and again the reason for the sorting of dinosaurs and mammals - my list included bio thermal regulators, remember? Now, remember the drop in global temperature after the fallout produced by the asteroids strikes? This would have applied to flying beasts as well.
Your bias prohibits you from doing real and actually very easy research at times regarding this very issue of sorting. Drop your bias momentarily and you will surprisingly start finding real answers to the dilemmas you invent.
Yet the clams were smart enough to outrun the rising Flood waters while all those silly trilobites just sat there and got buried in sediment. Go figure. 
3 Likes
You haven’t told us the reason for the sorting of pterosaurs and extant birds, or pterosaurs and bats. In fact you seem to be studiously ignoring the problem. 
2 Likes
I’m especially confused by the way that some plants were better able to outrun the flood waters than other plants. And also, you know, frogs. Or birds.
2 Likes
I’m curious about basilosaurs and mosasaurs. Both abundant in my backyard. Separated by 30 million years. I would like to know why we don’t find them together.
1 Like
Deciduous trees had legs back in the pre-Flood days, they were great sprinters. Later they lost their legs just like cetaceans did. Also there’s a joke in there somewhere about trees and The Fall…
1 Like