Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Which is a word that means identical. Sequences prone to mutation won't be. The fact is that the human genome is distinct, and that feature is underscored in this research.No, it underscores the fact that the insertions really aren't orthologous.
For me the fact that they make up some 5–8% of the human genome and what we know about HIV, the scenario is absurd. With more than 100 members, CERV 1/PTERV1 is one of the most abundant families of endogenous retroviruses in the chimpanzee genome. (Genome Biol. 2006). They can be found in African great apes but not in humans. Them being the result of germline invasions was the deal breaker for me, how many germline invasions into the human genome have been documented in modern times? The HIV invasions into white blood cells are devastating, how much more so germline invasions?even if those ervs are in a similar spot in the genome and not identical, it's almost the same. what is the chance that in a 3bilion bp we will get the same ervs in a tiny spots in that genome?
another point is the unique ervs. if human have about 100 unique non functional ervs, and a fixation time for a neutral mutation is about 1 my in a small population, then it will take about 100my to get 100 unique ervs. so those ervs may be functional. and if they are functional then it's a good evidence that they are the result of design and not evolution.
No, it means that they don't descend from a common ancestral insertion. The identical location is a sign that they're orthologous.Which is a word that means identical.
The fact is that ERVs in the same place in multiple species are distributed across species in exactly the way we would expect if they descend from a common ancestor. Why is that, Mark?The fact is that the human genome is distinct, and that feature is underscored in this research.
HIV is a close relative of SIV, which infects many monkey species. Guess what kind of effect SIV has on the health of the species that usually carry it. None.The HIV invasions into white blood cells are devastating, how much more so germline invasions?
It assumes common ancestry, suggesting it's a foregone conclusion. Actual proof would be directly connected to actual traits and these are protein coding grave yards.No, it means that they don't descend from a common ancestral insertion. The identical location is a sign that they're orthologous.
The fact is that ERVs in the same place in multiple species are distributed across species in exactly the way we would expect if they descend from a common ancestor. Why is that, Mark?
It's devastating for humansHIV is a close relative of SIV, which infects many monkey species. Guess what kind of effect SIV has on the health of the species that usually carry it. None.
So? The point is that not all retroviruses are devastating for the infected species. And different species are more or less susceptible to germ-line invasion at different times. Sooty mangabeys are currently much more likely to have new germ-line insertions than humans.It's devastating for humans
Steve seriously, I'm sure this all makes perfect sense to you on some level but higher primates are not mangabeys. This isn't an occasional germline invasion, the Chimpanzee germline would have had to be inundated with them. We are talking about nothing less them a million base pairs since the split. They are rare at the very least and becoming permanently fixed has to be orders of magnitude more unlikely, then add to the fact they have a tendency to remain active. Of course I'm just a novice with an active interest in casual conversation on the subject but if you squint a little, you might see how I'm just a little skeptical.So? The point is that not all retroviruses are devastating for the infected species. And different species are more or less susceptible to germ-line invasion at different times. Sooty mangabeys are currently much more likely to have new germ-line insertions than humans.
The Taung Child, that replaced the Piltdown hoax, is a chimpanzee, so is Lucy.
I can't believe Mark is still posting this garbage after all these years.
For a couple of reasons, not the least of which is that it doesn't explain the requisite adaptive evolution. I don't know why certain places in closely related species have mutations in similar places, I'm not even sure that it matters. The real causation is how you get from a common ancestor and that requires the evolution of brain related genes, why do you never answer those questions?The fact is that ERVs in the same place in multiple species are distributed across species in exactly the way we would expect if they descend from a common ancestor. Why is that, Mark? Why do you never answer that question? Why do genetic data look exactly like common descent is true? That's the case for ERVs, for LINEs, for SINEs, for pseudogenes, for chromosomal rearrangements, for single-base substitutions. Everything looks like common descent is true.
I can't believe you don't know anything about comparative genetics or the fossil evidence after all these years.I can't believe Mark is still posting this garbage after all these years.
I'm not. If there's one thing I've learned about creationist arguments, is that they don't tend to... evolve.
Did you read this one? With more than 100 members, CERV 1/PTERV1 is one of the most abundant families of endogenous retroviruses in the chimpanzee genome. (Genome Biol. 2006). They can be found in African great apes but not in humans. What is more the ERV virus is nearly extinct in the human genome with only a couple that actually work.
Deleterious effects, starting with SRGAP2.
Ever notice that there are no Chimpanzee ancestors in the fossil record? That’s because every time a gracial (smooth) skull, that is dug up in Asian or Africa they are automatically one of our ancestors.
No actually it's not a complicated formula, the subject me, the predicate something negative with no reference to anything substantive. Your practically addicted to them.Everything appears to be an ad hom to you. You're just sensitive.
How many times has it been explained to you that the table you keep posting are lineage specific ERVs and does not include the 203,000 shared ERVs that demonstrate common ancestry?
This is vintage Mark MO, you get introduced to something (in this case by me) and then figure out a way to totally twist or botch what you have learned. In this case it's not just SRGAP2 in a vacuum, but specifically the SRGAP2C allele that is responsible for an increase in the connections in our brains.
Human brain shaped by duplicate genes
>> The team then expressed the human form of SRGAP2C in the neurons of developing mice. The change didn’t cause the mice brains to enlarge, but their neurons produced denser arrays of brain cell structures, called dendritic spines, that forge connections with neighbouring neurons.
“If you’re increasing the total number of connections, you’re probably increasing the ability of this network to handle information,” Polleux says. "It’s like increasing the number of processors in a computer." <<
No actually it's not a complicated formula, the subject me, the predicate something negative with no reference to anything substantive. Your practically addicted to them.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?