Is the Human Brain a Null Hypothesis for Darwinian Evolution?

[mark kennedy]

Please outline the particular mutations and the deleterious effects they would have had.

The are several noted including epilipsee and autism. This scenario doesn't even have to be negated based on the deleterious effects of mutations since the burden of proof is on getting two to four duplications in such a highly conserved region and then add multiply exons with perfect protein translslation in such a highly conserved gene.

 

[AdamSK]

The are several noted including epilipsee and autism.

Mutations in the chimpanzee's SRGAP2 cause epilepsy and autism? I don't think the evidence backs up your claim.

 

[mark kennedy]

Please outline the particular mutations and the deleterious effects they would have had.

I don't think so, it sounds like a fairly typical red herring. What I will tell you is that I will continue to do the reading which is something I strongly encourage you to pursue. The burden of proof is on the positive argument for a duplication resulting in an almost perfectly developed protein product. The assumption that this must have happened is not only unsatisfactory, it's illusory. What you lack is a molecular mechanism producing the requisite amino acid sequences and exon development. These burdens are cumulative when you finally realize the enormity of the required steps required. It speaks volumes of the presuppositional nature of Darwinian logic.

I suggest you come up with something a little more substantive then pedantic one liners. Skepticism regarding gene duplication does exist and the fact is you are begging the question of proof here:

Although many scientists assume that Darwinian processes account for the evolution of complex biochemical systems, we are skeptical. Thus, rather than simply assuming the general efficacy of random mutation and selection, we want to examine, to the extent possible, which changes are reasonable to expect from a Darwinian process and which are not. We think the most tractable place to begin is with questions of protein structure. (Simulating evolution by gene duplication of protein features that require multiple amino acid residues. Protein Sci. 2004)
​

I don't need a positive argument because the burden of proof is on whoever might think gene duplication is a viable explanation. Even if it's the case the gene duplication is viable getting the requisite protein product is riddled with deleterious effects, with no developmental pathways producing the alternate and requisite developed gene you have nothing but presupposition and speculation.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

Mutations in the chimpanzee's SRGAP2 cause epilepsy and autism? I don't think the evidence backs up your claim.

That's not what I said, I pointed out that, "Early infantile epileptic encephalopathy associated with the disrupted gene encoding Slit-Robo Rho GTPase activating protein 2 (SRGAP2)". That's not my opinion, that is a known effect of a mutation in the SRGAP2 gene:

We report on a female patient with early infantile epileptic encephalopathy and severe psychomotor disability possessing a de novo balanced translocation t(1;9)(q32;q13). The patient showed clonic convulsions of extremities 2 days after birth. Electroencephalogram (EEG) transiently showed atypical suppression-burst pattern.(Am J Med Genet A. 2012)
​

Autism is related subject matter:

Because disruptions in these critical connections would have detrimental effects on brain development, Polleux will now collaborate with clinicians at UNC to determine whether mutations in the srGAP2 gene are involved in autism or in other forms of mental retardation in addition to the 3p- syndrome. His laboratory is also interested in determining the function of approximately 25 other genes containing F-BAR-like domains, many of which are expressed in the developing brain. (Researchers identify critical gene for brain development, mental retardation)
​

You really ought to be doing more reading before you start jumping in with these pedantic criticisms. This is developing into a pretty solid argument against common descent.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[AdamSK]

You claimed that the mutations of the chimp gene that would lead to the human differences were associated with disorders. I don't believe that is true.

 

[mark kennedy]

You claimed that the mutations of the chimp gene that would lead to the human differences were associated with disorders. I don't believe that is true.

Mutations are always associated with disease and disorder, when they have an effect it's deleterious the vast majority of the time. That's not even the problem here, there have to be three to four duplications just to get started, with such a highly conserved gene with such a vital function it's dubious at best, but not unreasonable. Then the rest of the gene has to be built producing the human specific elements producing a functional and adaptive allele. The first problem would be that the duplicate would be antagonistic to the ancestral gene, that is before the gene is even expanded. The duplication just gets you a copy, I see no suggestion of was would have had to happen next except to describe the supposed duplicate genes which have been expanded considerably.

What you believe doesn't matter, the hazards are legion, the processes are presumed and with every human specific novel gene the burden of proof grows ever higher. I'm going to have a lot of fun with this one.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[AdamSK]

Mutations are always associated with disease and disorder,

You claimed that the particular mutations necessary to move from the chimp SRGAP2 to a human SRGAP2 will result in disorder. Please provide evidence for your claim.

 

[mark kennedy]

You claimed that the particular mutations necessary to move from the chimp SRGAP2 to a human SRGAP2 will result in disorder. Please provide evidence for your claim.

No I said mutations do cause disease and disorder:

We report on a female patient with early infantile epileptic encephalopathy and severe psychomotor disability possessing a de novo balanced translocation t(1;9)(q32;q13). The patient showed clonic convulsions of extremities 2 days after birth. Electroencephalogram (EEG) transiently showed atypical suppression-burst pattern. (Early infantile epileptic encephalopathy associated with the disrupted gene encoding Slit-Robo Rho GTPase activating protein 2 (SRGAP2) Am J Med Genet A. 2012)
​

Posted that two posts back and you didn't even read it. Then you demand it again, it's called arguing in circles. You are making this increasingly difficult to take you serious. You could start by at least reading the evidence you demand before demanding it again.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[AdamSK]

You said, referring to SRGAP2:

That is highly accelerated evolution of a highly conserved gene. The deleterious effects would have been devastating, unless you get to assume everything and have to prove nothing.

Please provide evidence for the claim you made. Mutations in the evolution from chimp to human SRGAP2 would have devastating deleterious effects. Provide evidence, please.

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

No I said mutations do cause disease and disorder:

We report on a female patient with early infantile epileptic encephalopathy and severe psychomotor disability possessing a de novo balanced translocation t(1;9)(q32;q13). The patient showed clonic convulsions of extremities 2 days after birth. Electroencephalogram (EEG) transiently showed atypical suppression-burst pattern. (Early infantile epileptic encephalopathy associated with the disrupted gene encoding Slit-Robo Rho GTPase activating protein 2 (SRGAP2) Am J Med Genet A. 2012)
​

Posted that two posts back and you didn't even read it. Then you demand it again, it's called arguing in circles. You are making this increasingly difficult to take you serious. You could start by at least reading the evidence you demand before demanding it again.

Have a nice day
Mark

Lots of mutations come along that do bad things to those who are stuck with them. These mutations don't become part of the genes of the species precisely because the people stuck with them tend to not do so well reproducing.

SO THOSE BAD MUTATIONS DON'T BECOME PART OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE SPECIES.

Try to understand that bit.

 

[USincognito]

Mutations are always associated with disease and disorder,

Except for when they're not.

 

[mark kennedy]

You said, referring to SRGAP2:

Please provide evidence for the claim you made. Mutations in the evolution from chimp to human SRGAP2 would have devastating deleterious effects. Provide evidence, please.

You melted down quick, don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the reading I have been doing. The real problem is that you are asking the same question in circles and it's just too bad. Yet another evidence that the rise of the human brain from that of apes is a myth and you missed the inadvertent problems with the deleterious effects that would have inevitably had to have been mitigated and you respond with fallacious rhetoric.

That's just too bad and it's your problem. I will not answer the same question in circles because I know it's just a head trip game to you guys. Do a little reading and maybe we can talk some more, other then that you are wasting your time and mine. Thanks though, this has been an invaluable contribution to my ongoing interest in why the evolution of the human brain from that of apes is impossible. You didn't even have an argument, that is priceless.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

Lots of mutations come along that do bad things to those who are stuck with them. These mutations don't become part of the genes of the species precisely because the people stuck with them tend to not do so well reproducing.

SO THOSE BAD MUTATIONS DON'T BECOME PART OF THE EVOLUTION OF THE SPECIES.

Try to understand that bit.

I understand you are making an assumption that this was the case. The mutations are not really the problem here, it's starting with a duplication and then getting the requisite modifications with no known molecular mechanism for such an event. Add to that the fact that there is almost no discussion of the fossil record which is the first thing the researchers wanted to document and so much of the scenario is based on.

I understand just find, I just disagree with the presuppositions that eliminate God as cause a priori. It's a fascinating part of the ongoing research and as usual you missed the boat because you think it comes down to fallacious rhetoric with no reference to actual evidence. Sad really, because since I have always given the alternative scenario due consideration I know exactly what you could do with this. It wouldn't be that hard if you were not so addicted to these faulty arguments that inevitably focus on the person rather then the specifics.

Notice, you have abandoned the actual evidence. I still don't know why, nor do I care.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[mark kennedy]

Except for when they're not.

Which is the rarest of effects from a mutation. That's it? Fish in a barrel, hard to believe that's the best you can do after all the time you have spent on this issue.

Have a nice day
Mark

 

[Paul of Eugene OR]

I understand you are making an assumption that this was the case. The mutations are not really the problem here, it's starting with a duplication and then getting the requisite modifications with no known molecular mechanism for such an event.

Mutations are the known molecular mechanism for the event of getting requisite modifications.

Add to that the fact that there is almost no discussion of the fossil record which is the first thing the researchers wanted to document and so much of the scenario is based on.

You expect to see a DNA mutation in the fossil record?

I understand just find, I just disagree with the presuppositions that eliminate God as cause a priori.

Science is not allowed to discuss God, and therefore science doesn't eliminate God.

It's a fascinating part of the ongoing research and as usual you missed the boat because you think it comes down to fallacious rhetoric with no reference to actual evidence. Sad really, because since I have always given the alternative scenario due consideration I know exactly what you could do with this. It wouldn't be that hard if you were not so addicted to these faulty arguments that inevitably focus on the person rather then the specifics.

Your arguments about bad mutations being a problem are simply fallacious and you have never explained why you don't understand they are simply eliminated over time precisely because their own badness makes them go away

Notice, you have abandoned the actual evidence. I still don't know why, nor do I care.

The evidence for evolution remains stronger than ever. The tree of life showing common descent of all life is confirmed every time a new species is discovered, whether still alive or extinct.

Every science has areas on the cutting edge where more is still being discovered. You find these in biology and think you've found where mystery trumps established facts.

It is no more going to succeed than those who find discussion of the mysteries of the trinity to be mysterious are going to be able to bring down Christianity.

 

[USincognito]

Which is the rarest of effects from a mutation. That's it? Fish in a barrel, hard to believe that's the best you can do after all the time you have spent on this issue.

 

[VirOptimus]

Which is the rarest of effects from a mutation. That's it? Fish in a barrel, hard to believe that's the best you can do after all the time you have spent on this issue.

Have a nice day
Mark

the level of your science and discourse are astounding. or not.

 

[Gene2memE]

So, a small population Italian wall lizards (five breeding pairs) was deliberately isolated on the island of Pod Mrcaru in 1971.

When researchers revisited the island in the mid 2000s, they found following morphological changes:

Heads that are longer, wider and taller;
Increased bite strength;
Development of novel structures - cecal valves (the muscles between the large and small intestine) - slowing food digestion in fermenting chambers, which are unknown of in the parent population;
End of territorial defensive behaviors in males.
Radical change in diet - exchanging insectivorous predation for a predominately vegetative diet

Kenny'sID: What alternate hypothesis do you have that could rule out natural selection action on random mutation as the cause of these changes?

 

[USincognito]

So, a small population Italian wall lizards (five breeding pairs) was deliberately isolated on the island of Pod Mrcaru in 1971.

When researchers revisited the island in the mid 2000s, they found following morphological changes:

Heads that are longer, wider and taller;
Increased bite strength;
Development of novel structures - cecal valves (the muscles between the large and small intestine) - slowing food digestion in fermenting chambers, which are unknown of in the parent population;
End of territorial defensive behaviors in males.
Radical change in diet - exchanging insectivorous predation for a predominately vegetative diet

Kenny'sID: What alternate hypothesis do you have that could rule out natural selection action on random mutation as the cause of these changes?

Wrong thread.

 

[AdamSK]

You melted down quick, don't get me wrong, I have enjoyed the reading I have been doing. The real problem is that you are asking the same question in circles and it's just too bad. Yet another evidence that the rise of the human brain from that of apes is a myth and you missed the inadvertent problems with the deleterious effects that would have inevitably had to have been mitigated and you respond with fallacious rhetoric.

That's just too bad and it's your problem. I will not answer the same question in circles because I know it's just a head trip game to you guys. Do a little reading and maybe we can talk some more, other then that you are wasting your time and mine. Thanks though, this has been an invaluable contribution to my ongoing interest in why the evolution of the human brain from that of apes is impossible. You didn't even have an argument, that is priceless.

Have a nice day
Mark

So you don't have any examples, then? No evidence for your claim?