ONCE BIG BANG SCIENCE IS KIND OF VERY UNSCIENTIFIC.

[The Barbarian]

And more and more "Christians are rejecting teh deity of Christ

Christians who accept evolution as consistent with God's creation, don't reject the deity of Christ. Sorry about those who do.

We are living in a time when many shall depart from the faith and give heed to seducing spirits and doctrines of demons.

That's wrong, too. God won't judge creationists for rejecting evolution; it's not how He will decide your eternal home. Most creationists are no less real Christians than the rest of us.

 

[The Barbarian]

See you have acccpeted the myth that evolution is a fact!

It's an observed fact. Perhaps you've forgotten what "evolution" means in biology? We see it happening every day. Many creationists have confused the observed phenomenon of evolution with consequences of evolution, like common descent.

As you know, even honest and informed creationists acknowledge that the fossil record is "very good evidence for macroevolutionary theory", but common descent of all living things on Earth, although well-documented by fossil record, genetics, geology, physics, etc., is not an observed phenomenon, just as low hills are not observations of mountains eroding into hills. Nevertheless, the evidence is compelling for that.

it is not science that collides with creation approx 6,000 years ago

It's not just science that rules out a 6,000 year old creation. Scripture itself tells us that it is not a literal account. Even many creationists readily recognize this fact:

RTB's mission is to spread the Christian Gospel by demonstrating that sound reason and scientific research—including the very latest discoveries—consistently support, rather than erode, confidence in the truth of the Bible and faith in the personal, transcendent God revealed in both Scripture and nature.

When the Bible speaks to an issue, it is the supreme authority. Thus, what the Bible has to say about the age of the Earth carries great significance. The Bible never specifies a date for creation, but the creation accounts in Genesis provide some guidance. The genealogies and the length of the creation days play key roles in any biblical assessment of Earth’s age. The genealogies place a hard constraint that Adam and Eve appeared no more recently than 6,000 years ago. Since those genealogies contain gaps, they cannot serve as timekeeping devices. However, it seems to stretch credulity to argue for anything much older than 100,000 years for Adam and Eve’s appearance on Earth.

Any other information on the Earth’s age must be inferred from the length of the creation days. The biblical word for day, yom, has four different literal meanings: 1) the daylight portion of a day, 2) part of the daylight hours, 3) an ordinary day (now 24 hours), and 4) a longer but finite period of time (no other word in biblical Hebrew carries this meaning). Although many Christians argue that those days represent ordinary calendar days, the biblical text indicates they lasted much longer. Days 1-3 cannot be ordinary days as humanity defines them because the Sun does not become visible until the fourth day. On the sixth day, Adam tends the garden, names all the animals, undergoes divine surgery, and marries Eve. These events seem too significant and long to happen in one ordinary day. The seventh day, in contrast to the first six, never closes with an evening and morning. In fact, Psalm 95 and Hebrews 4 indicate that we still live in the seventh day.

The Bible never declares an age for the Earth, but evidence derived from the text fits most comfortably with a date far older than a few thousand years. RTB holds the position that the six days of creation represent long time periods and that the creation accounts reconcile well with the scientific date for Earth’s formation 4.6 billion years ago.
Biblical Evidence for an Old Earth

 

[The Barbarian]

Another scientific method they use is that mutations always corrupt and never advance a genome in a creture population.

That's a false belief. For example, the mutation that allows Tibetans to thrive at very high altitudes is a rather recent mutation that strenthened their genome and made it less vulnerable. If you think that's "corruption", then we've located the problem.

And we have no emprical observable testable observation that mutations have ever added new and previously unrecorded information in the genome.

Actually, every mutation adds information to a population genome. I showed you the numbers once. Would you mind giving us your calculations on the amount of information that changes for a new mutation?

Would you like me to show you the numbers on how a new mutation increase genetic information in a population?

Those two proven tested facts in teh study of "baraminology" should be enough to topple th emyth of evolution by random undesigned, unplanned undesigned mutations.

As you learned, Darwin's big discovery was that it isn't random. And let's see what your fellow YE creationists have to say about the evidence:

Evolution is not a theory in crisis. It is not teetering on the verge of collapse. It has not failed as a scientific explanation. There is evidence for evolution, gobs and gobs of it. It is not just speculation or a faith choice or an assumption or a religion. It is a productive framework for lots of biological research, and it has amazing explanatory power. There is no conspiracy to hide the truth about the failure of evolution. There has really been no failure of evolution as a scientific theory. It works, and it works well.

I say these things not because I'm crazy or because I've "converted" to evolution. I say these things because they are true. I'm motivated this morning by reading yet another clueless, well-meaning person pompously declaring that evolution is a failure. People who say that are either unacquainted with the inner workings of science or unacquainted with the evidence for evolution. (Technically, they could also be deluded or lying, but that seems rather uncharitable to say. Oops.)

Creationist students, listen to me very carefully: There is evidence for evolution, and evolution is an extremely successful scientific theory. That doesn't make it ultimately true, and it doesn't mean that there could not possibly be viable alternatives. It is my own faith choice to reject evolution, because I believe the Bible reveals true information about the history of the earth that is fundamentally incompatible with evolution. I am motivated to understand God's creation from what I believe to be a biblical, creationist perspective. Evolution itself is not flawed or without evidence. Please don't be duped into thinking that somehow evolution itself is a failure. Please don't idolize your own ability to reason. Faith is enough. If God said it, that should settle it. Maybe that's not enough for your scoffing professor or your non-Christian friends, but it should be enough for you.
YE Creationist Dr. Todd Wood, The Truth About Evolution
The truth about evolution

 

[nolidad]

Christians who accept evolution as consistent with God's creation, don't reject the deity of Christ. Sorry about those who do.

So you have interviewed every one whgo claims to be Christian and believes in evolution as to whether or not they believe in the deity of Christ? My you are busy!

That's wrong, too. God won't judge creationists for rejecting evolution; it's not how He will decide your eternal home. Most creationists are no less real Christians than the rest of us.

I love your condescension! This one drips with it more than most! But Jews accepted a young earth. They even made a calander in teh OY that dates back to teh day of Creation according to them we are in the year 5780!

That's a false belief. For example, the mutation that allows Tibetans to thrive at very high altitudes is a rather recent mutation that strenthened their genome and made it less vulnerable. If you think that's "corruption", then we've located the problem.

They started as Tibetans and ended as Tibetans. And science has proven there is variation in the genome. Just like one becoming acclimated to high altitudes. That is not a mutation but simply teh genome acting like a genome does. It did not add by random mistakes new information that allowed tibetans to thrive.

Just like it is not a mutation that thins the blood of a New Englander who moves to South Carolina so they can adapt to teh much warmer climate!

But nice try!

It's an observed fact. Perhaps you've forgotten what "evolution" means in biology? We see it happening every day. Many creationists have confused the observed phenomenon of evolution with consequences of evolution, like common descent.

Well unless you are senile and forget from time to time, you and I both know I am speaking of Darwinian Evolution that goes from microbes to man over X millenia by random undesigned unplanned mutations preserved by natural selection. We are not talking horizontal changes that are more in line with simply following Mendels law than a mutation imprinitng previous unknown information into a genome. Try to keep that definition in mind than the generic term.

Actually, every mutation adds information to a population genome. I showed you the numbers once. Would you mind giving us your calculations on the amount of information that changes for a new mutation?

Would you like me to show you the numbers on how a new mutation increase genetic information in a population?

No, I want the science that shows that over X generations through random mutations that were preserved while fighting all the bad mutations (remember good mutations are outweighed by bad mutations by over 99-1) we can report empirically on the genetic information that was not there then appear! Please don't give us your croc-a duck failed effort again!

 

[The Barbarian]

So you have interviewed every one whgo claims to be Christian and believes in evolution as to whether or not they believe in the deity of Christ? My you are busy!

It's easier than that. Slightly over half of the world's Christians are Roman Catholics. They acknowledge that evolution is consistent with God's creation.

Second largest group are the Eastern Orthodox churches. So do they.

Then the largest group of Lutheran denominations acknowledge the same thing. (The Missouri Synod, I think, still dissents on that point)

As do Anglicans/Episcopalians.

So there you are.

God won't judge creationists for rejecting evolution; it's not how He will decide your eternal home. Most creationists are no less real Christians than the rest of us.

I love your condescension!

I fully accept creationists, even YE creationists, as being Christians like any other. How is that condescending?

But Jews accepted a young earth.

Some thought it was a flat one, with the sky a dome with windows in it through which rain fell.

But a young Earth was never Jewish orthodoxy:

The Hebrew calendar, presently standing at 5776, is, in theory, based on the creation of the world. Rabbi Slifkin again quoted the Rambam’s Guide to the Perplexed, in which the rabbinical scholar wrote, “The account of creation is not all to be taken literally.”

The Rambam went on to explain that the Six Days represent a conceptual rather than historical account of creation. Rabbi Slifkin cited Rabbi Dovid Tzvi Hoffman (1843-1921), a member of Agudath Israel’s Council of Torah Sages, who suggested that the Six Days of Creation were lengthy eras rather than 24-hour periods.
How Old is Earth: 6,000 Years, or 4 Billion? Rabbis Offer Biblical “Proof” - Israel News

 

[The Barbarian]

They started as Tibetans and ended as Tibetans.

No, that's wrong, too. They are genetically very like Han Chinese; they migrated to the Tibetan plateau a few thousand years ago. The mutation they have is in the EPAS1 gene; the allele they have allows them to use oxygen much more efficiently. But it's rarely found in the Han Chinese, who have interbred with Tibetans.

And science has proven there is variation in the genome.

A lot of variation. Most human genes have dozens of alleles. (different versions of the gene). Adam and Eve could have had, at most, 4 alleles between them. All the rest evolved by mutation. Some of those mutations added useful information to the population, such as the EPAS1 mutation did for Tibetans.

Just like one becoming acclimated to high altitudes.

No, you're confusing adaption of an individual (all humans can somewhat adjust to lower oxygen levels by producing more RBC, but that's not the same as having a gene that's adapted to high altitudes)

The EPAS1 mutation added new information that allowed Tibetans to thrive.

a mutation that thins the blood of a New Englander who moves to South Carolina so they can adapt to teh much warmer climate!

That's not a mutation. It's just the built-in variability of humans (and it's not "thinning blood.") The EPAS1 mutation changed the genome of the people born with it.

There are lots of other examples of mutations in humans that added information that turned out to be useful for survival. Should we talk about some more of them?

 

[The Barbarian]

No, I want the science that shows that over X generations through random mutations that were preserved while fighting all the bad mutations (remember good mutations are outweighed by bad mutations by over 99-1) we can report empirically on the genetic information that was not there then appear!

So let's look at that. Suppose we have a population of a million people. Most of us have dozens of mutations that were not present in either parent. Few of them do anything noticable, but a few are harmful. And a very few are useful. We'll use your 99 to 1 ratio.

So about 12,000,000 mutations each generation. About 120,000 of them will have some effect on survival. That means that about 1,200 useful ones will appear each generation. These will tend to be preserved because they enhance the ability of the organism to survive long enough to reproduce. And the 118,800 harmful ones will tend to disappear because they decrease the likelihood of those having them living long enough to reproduce.

So in a hundred generations, we have, according to your numbers, about 120,000 useful new mutations adding information to the population genome.

Actually, it's problably less than you think it is. But still a very significant number of useful new additions to the population genome. As you know, the formula for genetic information in a population is:

If you forgot how to do it, I'll be glad to show you again.

Please don't give us your croc-a duck creationist foolishness, again.

 

[nolidad]

A lot of variation. Most human genes have dozens of alleles. (different versions of the gene). Adam and Eve could have had, at most, 4 alleles between them. All the rest evolved by mutation. Some of those mutations added useful information to the population, such as the EPAS1 mutation did for Tibetans.

So it is your contention EPAS 1 was information not found in Tibetan genomes or han genomes and that it appeared and flourished? When did this happen. How do you know?

Normal Function
The EPAS1 gene, often known as HIF2A, provides instructions for making a protein called hypoxia-inducible factor 2-alpha (HIF-2α). This protein is one part (subunit) of a larger protein complex called HIF, which plays a critical role in the body's ability to adapt to changing oxygen levels.
https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/gene/EPAS1#:~:text=Normal Function,adapt to changing oxygen levels.
EPAS1 gene - Genetics Home Reference - NIH

Seems according to the NIH the EPAS 1 gene helpos the body change to differing oxygen levels. Seems you are in serious error!

No, you're confusing adaption of an individual (all humans can somewhat adjust to lower oxygen levels by producing more RBC, but that's not the same as having a gene that's adapted to high altitudes)

The EPAS1 mutation added new information that allowed Tibetans to thrive.

If you like, I can link you to the NIH research showing that no mutation exists to make people adapt to higher altitudes. it is all a normal function.

But you can show the studies showing the lack of information and then how the mutation altered the EPAS 1 gene. And also show the research that rules out normal variation and normal adaptative processes that bodies do!

 

[nolidad]

So about 12,000,000 mutations each generation. About 120,000 of them will have some effect on survival. That means that about 1,200 useful ones will appear each generation. These will tend to be preserved because they enhance the ability of the organism to survive long enough to reproduce. And the 118,800 harmful ones will tend to disappear because they decrease the likelihood of those having them living long enough to reproduce.

and what about teh offspring that have a "few" "useful" mutations in the midst of hundreds of not useful mutations. Those useful mutations die out. Remember that an offspring just doesn't get the one or two useful mutations that may happen and not receive any of the harmful mutations that reduce viability.

You need to calculate these into your mis as well- for that is real world.

But this still does nothing to prove Darwinian Evolution a fact. That brand new, previous unwritten information in a genome is ntroduced via mutations and alters firstthe species, then the genus, then the family then the order then the phyla then the kingdom!

 

[The Barbarian]

So it is your contention EPAS 1 was information not found in Tibetan genomes or han genomes and that it appeared and flourished? When did this happen.

When they moved from what is now China to the Tibetan highlands. The mutated allele of EPAS1 was not adaptive in China, but was essential in Tibet.

How do you know?

Genetics. They are closely related to Han Chinese, but have a few mutations that Han Chinese lacked. This EPAS1 mutation is rare in Han Chinese, and becomes more so, the farther one goes away from Tibet. So it shows that the mutated allele sometimes is spread by intermarriage, but is not retained, because it has no survival value in lower areas.

Normal Function
The EPAS1 gene, often known as HIF2A, provides instructions for making a protein called hypoxia-inducible factor 2-alpha (HIF-2α). This protein is one part (subunit) of a larger protein complex called HIF, which plays a critical role in the body's ability to adapt to changing oxygen levels.

EPAS1 gene - Genetics Home Reference - NIH

Seems according to the NIH the EPAS 1 gene helpos the body change to differing oxygen levels. Seems you are in serious error!

No, you've just gotten confused by the nomenclature. Everyone has an EPAS1 gene. Tibetans have an allele (mutated form of the gene) that lets them live at very high altitudes.

A high percentage of Tibetans carry an allele of EPAS1 that improves oxygen transport.
EPAS1 - Wikipedia

If you like, I can link you to the NIH research showing that no mutation exists to make people adapt to higher altitudes. it is all a normal function.

Again, you've confused the gene with the particular allele of that gene that is found in almost all Tibetans. Remember, an allele is a mutated form of a gene. Humans populations usually have dozens of such alleles for each gene locus.

But you can show the studies showing the lack of information and then how the mutation altered the EPAS 1 gene.

Sure.
PNAS June 22, 2010 107 (25) 11459-11464
Natural selection on EPAS1 (HIF2α) associated with low hemoglobin concentration in Tibetan highlanders
Abstract
...First, a genome-wide allelic differentiation scan (GWADS) comparing indigenous highlanders of the Tibetan Plateau (3,200–3,500 m) with closely related lowland Han revealed a genome-wide significant divergence across eight SNPs located near EPAS1. This gene encodes the transcription factor HIF2α, which stimulates production of red blood cells and thus increases the concentration of hemoglobin in blood. Second, in a separate cohort of Tibetans residing at 4,200 m, we identified 31 EPAS1 SNPs in high linkage disequilibrium that correlated significantly with hemoglobin concentration. The sex-adjusted hemoglobin concentration was, on average, 0.8 g/dL lower in the major allele homozygotes compared with the heterozygotes. These findings were replicated in a third cohort of Tibetans residing at 4,300 m. The alleles associating with lower hemoglobin concentrations were correlated with the signal from the GWADS study and were observed at greatly elevated frequencies in the Tibetan cohorts compared with the Han. High hemoglobin concentrations are a cardinal feature of chronic mountain sickness offering one plausible mechanism for selection.

The "normal adaptive processes" in humans with the normal EPAS1 allele reacts to low oxygen concentrations by making more RBC. This can happen in a week or two. (RBC, unlike WBC, take some time to increase) But increasing the level of hemoglobin will cause other disorders after certain level.

The mutated allele allows more efficient transport of oxygen, requiring lower levels of blood hemoglobin.

And also show the research that rules out normal variation

The mutated form is not normally distributed. It's almost universal in Tibetans, but rather rare elsewhere,even in Han Chinese who live near Tibet.

and normal adaptative processes that bodies do!

See above. The "normal adaptive processes" cause mountain sickness because of excessive numbers of RBC in the bloodstream. The mutated allele bypasses that problem.

 

[The Barbarian]

and what about teh offspring that have a "few" "useful" mutations in the midst of hundreds of not useful mutations. Those useful mutations die out.

Nope. What we observe is that those organisms with useful mutations are more likely to live long enought to reproduce, than those lacking them. And that's all that's necessary.

Remember that an offspring just doesn't get the one or two useful mutations that may happen and not receive any of the harmful mutations that reduce viability.

Given the numbers you gave me, the odds of them getting two mutations that do anything noticeable, is pretty small. It's about 0.014 for the population above, using your numbers. Less than 2 in a hundred, and the likelihood of getting a favorable and an unfavorable mutation is even less.

But this still does nothing to prove Darwinian Evolution a fact.

Direct observation of Darwinian evolution does that. Would you like some more examples?

That brand new, previous unwritten information in a genome is ntroduced via mutations and alters firstthe species, then the genus, then the family then the order then the phyla then the kingdom!

No. It merely affects the population in which it exists. There's nothing magical about new information.

In fact, as you learned some time ago, evolution doesn't even require new information. In fact, speciation usually involves a loss of information at first.

New species usually form allopatricly, with the geographic isolation of a relatively small population (with correspondingly less information than is present in the species itself)

Then, over time, mutation and natural selection produce more information. An example is Hawaiian fruit flies. Hawaii only formed a few million years ago. And it's far from other lands, so no insects initially. Then somehow, a couple of fruitfly species got blown there.

Initally those populations had a tiny fraction of the information present in the world's fruitflies. But all around them, were niches and opportunities with no competitors. Speciation exploded. Now, there is more information in the descendants of those two species in Hawaii, than there is in the fruit flies of all of Eurasia.

 

[nolidad]

When they moved from what is now China to the Tibetan highlands. The mutated allele of EPAS1 was not adaptive in China, but was essential in Tibet.

And yet it is in all people and is there to help all people adapt to higher altitudes, when they live in higher altitudes.

If you go and move to say Denver, you EPAS 1 gene will change so you can adapt to the higher clime of Denver from say sea level. That is what these things do- no mutation, no natural selection just a gene God designed doing its job.

Genetics. They are closely related to Han Chinese, but have a few mutations that Han Chinese lacked. This EPAS1 mutation is rare in Han Chinese, and becomes more so, the farther one goes away from Tibet. So it shows that the mutated allele sometimes is spread by intermarriage, but is not retained, because it has no survival value in lower areas.

Well maybe most Han Chinese do not need EPAS1 to adapt to living in high climes! Maybe you consider even normal actions of genes in adapting as they already have instructions for as mutations. Maybe that is why we do not speak on the same page. What I call built in ability to adapt you call a mutation that provides non encoded information to be coded. It is really not a mutation in that teh gene is already established to do this and is not acted upon by external forces. If teh Tibetans left the high ground and moved to teh lowlands- THe EPAS1 gene would once again adapt and allowe them to breather in lower climes normally like they did in the higher climes.

A high percentage of Tibetans carry an allele of EPAS1 that improves oxygen transport.
EPAS1 - Wikipedia

Maybe you should have read your article more. Not one word that this is a mutation. All mutations mentioned are harmful and not helpful. They did call it adaptive however, which is exactly what I said.

From the article you cited:

"Released in 2010 by UCLA at Berkeley, a study identified more than 30 genetic factors that make Tibetans' bodies well-suited for high-altitudes, including EPAS1. [19] Tibetans suffer no health problems associated with altitude sickness, but instead produce low levels of blood pigment (haemoglobin) sufficient for less oxygen, more elaborate blood vessels,[20] have lower infant mortality,[21] and are heavier at birth.[22]"

So EPAS 1 which helps all at higher altitudes adapt is but one of 30 genetic factors that hep Tibetans live at high altiudes. That is only 3.33% of the total.

"Mutations in this gene are associated with erythrocytosis familial type 4,[8] pulmonary hypertension and chronic mountain sickness.[17] There is also evidence that certain variants of this gene provide protection for people living at high altitude such as in Tibet.[9][10][18] The effect is most profound among the Tibetans living in the Himalayas at an altitude of about 4,000 metres above sea level, the environment of which is intolerable to other human populations due to 40% less atmospheric oxygen."

Again, you've confused the gene with the particular allele of that gene that is found in almost all Tibetans. Remember, an allele is a mutated form of a gene. Humans populations usually have dozens of such alleles for each gene locus.

That particular allele is found in Tibetans because they need that adaption of that particular allele.

Now please specifically define the term mutation you are using in this example.

I know with many in science, mutation is any change that takes place in any gene in any creature (even normal skin reproduction is a form of mutation.) But now prove that this allele in Tibetans was not already present in them within their code or was not already precoded to adapt.

Show that EPAS ! was not present in them and the ability for th ealleles to adapt to teh climate but was introduced from the outside to cause an adaptation.

Also explain how the genome knew to adapt that particular "mutation" versus the potential for many others. Also explain how the genetic load of going through many mutations to find the right one for the Tibetans gave them an advantage.

Nope. What we observe is that those organisms with useful mutations are more likely to live long enought to reproduce, than those lacking them. And that's all that's necessary.

Nope that does nothing to explain the Darwinian hypothesis of microbe to man evolution by mutation.

Then, over time, mutation and natural selection produce more information. An example is Hawaiian fruit flies. Hawaii only formed a few million years ago. And it's far from other lands, so no insects initially. Then somehow, a couple of fruitfly species got blown there.

Initally those populations had a tiny fraction of the information present in the world's fruitflies. But all around them, were niches and opportunities with no competitors. Speciation exploded. Now, there is more information in the descendants of those two species in Hawaii, than there is in the fruit flies of all of Eurasia.

Well first a few million years is way too long!

2. If they blew the thousands of miles and landed safely.

3. If the initial pairs only had a tiny fraction of information.

4. If there weren't several species of fruit flies that "blew over there somehow".

Lots of unprovable IFs'in your story!

 

[The Barbarian]

And yet it is in all people and is there to help all people adapt to higher altitudes, when they live in higher altitudes.

Nope. The mutated EPAS1 allele is found only in Tibet and rarely in surrounding areas. It would be a very useful mutation in the Andes, for example, but it hasn't evolved there; other mutated genes work there.

If you go and move to say Denver, you EPAS 1 gene will change

No, that's wrong. You're stuck with the genome you got from your parents, plus any mutations that happened in the fertilized egg.

so you can adapt to the higher clime of Denver from say sea level.

Nope. Your existing genes permit you to make more RBCs, which can to a degree, compensate for the lower oxygen level. But they can't make your oxygen transfer more efficient, which is what the mutated EPAS1 allele does.

Now, an international team of researchers has sequenced the EPAS1 gene in 40 Tibetans and 40 Han Chinese. Both were once part of the same population that split into two groups sometime between 2750 to 5500 years ago. Population geneticist Rasmus Nielsen of the University of California, Berkeley, his postdoc Emilia Huerta-Sanchez, and their colleagues analyzed the DNA and found that the Tibetans and only two of the 40 Han Chinese had a distinctive segment of the EPAS1 gene in which five letters of the genetic code were identical. When they searched the most diverse catalog of genomes from people around the world in the 1000 Genomes Project, they could not find a single other living person who had the same code.
Tibetans inherited high-altitude gene from ancient human

Genetic changes in the EPAS1 gene between Tibetan and Han ethnic groups and adaptation to the plateau hypoxic environment
PeerJ. 2019; 7: e7943.

Abstract
In the Chinese Han population, prolonged exposure to hypoxic conditions can promote compensatory erythropoiesis which improves hypoxemia. However, Tibetans have developed unique phenotypes, such as downregulation of the hypoxia-inducible factor pathway through EPAS1 gene mutation, thus the mechanism of adaption of the Han population should be further studied. The results indicated that, under plateau hypoxic conditions, the plains population was able to acclimate rapidly to hypoxia through increasing EPAS1 mRNA expression and changing the hemoglobin conformation. Furthermore, the mutant genotype frequencies of the rs13419896, rs1868092 and rs4953354 loci in the EPAS1 gene were significantly higher in the Tibetan population than in the plains population. The EPAS1 gene expression level was lowest in the Han population carrying the A-A homozygous mutant of the rs13419896 locus but that it increased rapidly after these individuals entered the plateau. At this time, the hemoglobin content was lower in the homozygous mutant Han group than in the wild-type and heterozygous mutant populations, and the viscosity of blood was reduced in populations carrying the A-A haplotypes in rs13419896 and rs1868092 Among Tibetans, the group carrying homozygous mutations of the three SNPs also had lower hemoglobin concentrations than the wild-type. The Raman spectroscopy results showed that exposure of the Tibetan and Han population to hypoxic conditions changed the spatial conformation of hemoglobin and its binding ability to oxygen. The Tibetan population has mainly adapted to the plateau through genetic mutations, whereas some individuals adapt through changes in hemoglobin structure and function.
Genetic changes in the EPAS1 gene between Tibetan and Han ethnic groups and adaptation to the plateau hypoxic environment

Maybe you're still having some trouble understanding what a gene is, and how alleles are mutations of those genes.

That's what an allele is. A mutated gene, producing a different variant of that gene. Thought you knew.

 

[The Barbarian]

I know with many in science, mutation is any change that takes place in any gene in any creature (even normal skin reproduction is a form of mutation.)

You're confusing somatic mutations (those that happen in the body tissues of an organism) with genetic mutations (those happening in egg and sperm cells that are passed on to offspring).

But now prove that this allele in Tibetans was not already present in them within their code or was not already precoded to adapt.

If that were so, Han Chinese would easily adapt to the high plateaus of Tibet. But few of them can, because they lack the mutated form of the EPAS1 gene.

Show that EPAS ! was not present in them and the ability for th ealleles to adapt to teh climate but was introduced from the outside to cause an adaptation.

In fact, the mutation is unknown outside of Tibet and the surrounding areas.

Also explain how the genome knew to adapt that particular "mutation"

Genes don't know anything. All that matters is that those who have the mutation live long enough at high altitudes to leave viable offspring. That's all that matters to evolution.

Also explain how the genetic load of going through many mutations to find the right one for the Tibetans gave them an advantage.

It didn't. When that particular gene mutated to the new allele, it made survival at very high altitudes possible. So the mutation occurred before the high plateau of the Himalayas was populated. Whether it was a mutation that occurred in the Han Chinese population, or was introduced to them by some other human population that had the mutated gene is not know for certain, but it doesn't matter. The mutation is very useful for those living at high altitudes.

 

[The Barbarian]

Then, over time, mutation and natural selection produce more information. An example is Hawaiian fruit flies. Hawaii only formed a few million years ago. And it's far from other lands, so no insects initially. Then somehow, a couple of fruitfly species got blown there.

Initally those populations had a tiny fraction of the information present in the world's fruitflies. But all around them, were niches and opportunities with no competitors. Speciation exploded. Now, there is more information in the descendants of those two species in Hawaii, than there is in the fruit flies of all of Eurasia.

Well first a few million years is way too long!

It comes down to evidence. Sorry about that.

If they blew the thousands of miles and landed safely.

Happens to insects a lot. That far is not as common as a few thousand miles, but it does happen. Would you like to learn about the evidence for that?

If the initial pairs only had a tiny fraction of information.

Which is a given. Remember, each one could only have 2 alleles for each gene. Yet there are hundreds or thousands of alleles for each gene locus in fruit fly populations.

If there weren't several species of fruit flies that "blew over there somehow".

Genetic analysis indicates two species. Would you like to learn how geneticists can know that?

Lots of unprovable IFs'in your story!

Well, they are there, and were there before humans got there, so we know it happened. ( I just noticed that further analysis suggests possibly more than two species.)

The Hawaiian drosophilids are broadly divided into two main groups: the Hawaii-endemic genus Idiomyia and the Scaptomyza genus. About 60 percent of Scaptomyza species are unique to the Hawaiian Islands, with the other 40 percent distributed around the world.
Hawaiian fruit flies had multiple ancestors

 

[nolidad]

Nope. The mutated EPAS1 allele is found only in Tibet and rarely in surrounding areas. It would be a very useful mutation in the Andes, for example, but it hasn't evolved there; other mutated genes work there.

Nope it is also found in African marathon runners who live above 8000 feet, though to a smaller variation that the tibetans.

It is also found in another smaller variation in Denverites!

It is also found in the Peruvian tribes who live in the highlands!

YOu simply cannot call a gene functioning as it is supposed to as a mutation! Also it is nothing in the path of Darwinian Evolution.

Well, they are there, and were there before humans got there, so we know it happened. ( I just noticed that further analysis suggests possibly more than two species.)

The Hawaiian drosophilids are broadly divided into two main groups: the Hawaii-endemic genus Idiomyia and the Scaptomyza genus. About 60 percent of Scaptomyza species are unique to the Hawaiian Islands, with the other 40 percent distributed around the world.

Well that they are there is the only thing that can pass the scientific method. Everything else is supposition unsupported by empirical evidence.

It didn't. When that particular gene mutated to the new allele, it made survival at very high altitudes possible. So the mutation occurred before the high plateau of the Himalayas was populated. Whether it was a mutation that occurred in the Han Chinese population, or was introduced to them by some other human population that had the mutated gene is not know for certain, but it doesn't matter. The mutation is very useful for those living at high altitudes.

So with the thousands of mutations occurring in genomes- this one survived intact and it happened before the people went into the highlands? Proof of that? And it is not a mutation but the EPAS 1 gene functioning as designed with the other factors required for people living in high altitudes need.

Genes don't know anything. All that matters is that those who have the mutation live long enough at high altitudes to leave viable offspring. That's all that matters to evolution.

And if the gene altered itself prior to teh people going into teh high regions- how did they survive. We know that when the EPAS 1 has produced the proteins to allow people in high altitudes to breathe and absorb oxygen better in thin air, it also can be quite harmful to those living closer to sea level.

Genetic analysis indicates two species. Would you like to learn how geneticists can know that?

No I want to know how they can empirically test that. Without suppositions plugged in to their research.

Happens to insects a lot. That far is not as common as a few thousand miles, but it does happen. Would you like to learn about the evidence for that?

Love to see how fruit flies can survive a multi thousand mile voyage over the pacific. From which continent do they hypothesize these adam and eve fruit flies came from?

When they searched the most diverse catalog of genomes from people around the world in the 1000 Genomes Project, they could not find a single other living person who had the same code.

And so? How big of a search was it? did they search similar heights and climates? did they compare sea level versus say 10,000 feet asl and see the slight variations in the EPAS 1 gene in each altitude?

Only the tibetans need that full EPAS 1 adaptation. Others do not need to have the EPAS 1 function the same way as the tibetans or the Kenyans or the Peruvians etc. Also there are twenty other factors involved that give the tibetans this specific genetic adaptation as is normal for genes to do per their design.

 

[The Barbarian]

Nope. The mutated EPAS1 allele is found only in Tibet and rarely in surrounding areas. It would be a very useful mutation in the Andes, for example, but it hasn't evolved there; other mutated genes work there.

Nope it is also found in African marathon runners who live above 8000 feet, though to a smaller variation that the tibetans.

No. Wrong mutation. But let's see what you have. Show us.

It is also found in another smaller variation in Denverites!

Nope. No sign of that mutation in anyone not of Han Chinese or Tibetan ancestry. You're still confusing variation due to mutation, with adaptation not caused by mutations. Every person responds to lower oxygen conditions by making more RBCs. Unless they have that particular mutation of the EPAS1 gene found only in Tibet and surrounding ares.

It is also found in the Peruvian tribes who live in the highlands!

No.

Around the world, populations have adapted to life at high altitude in different ways. One adaptation involves making more red blood cells, which transport oxygen to the body's tissues. Indigenous people in the Peruvian Andes have higher red blood cell counts than their countrymen living at sea level, for example.

But Tibetans have evolved a different method. "Tibetans have the highest expression levels for EPAS1 in the world," said co-author Dr Jian Wang of the Beijing Genomics Institute in Schenzhen, China, a research facility that collected the data. "For Western people, after two to three weeks at altitude, the red blood cell count starts to increase. But Tibetans and Sherpas keep the same levels," he said.

"I just summitted Everest a few weeks ago," added Dr Wang. He said the Sherpas and Tibetans were much stronger than the Westerners or lowland Chinese on the climb. "Their tissue oxygen concentration is almost the same as Westerners and Chinese but they are strong," he said "and their red blood cell count is not that high compared to people in Peru."

"The remarkable thing about Tibetans is that they can function well in high altitudes without having to produce so much haemoglobin," said Prof Nielsen. "The entire mechanism is not well-understood – but is seems that the gene responsible is EPAS1."
Mutation in key gene allows Tibetans to thrive at high altitude

They adapted to high altitudes with different mutations.

YOu simply cannot call a gene functioning as it is supposed to as a mutation![/quote]

It's a mutation because it's different allele of the EPAS1 gene. That's what alleles are. They are mutations of a gene. You have dozens of mutations that were present in neither of your parents. They (unless you were unlucky enough to get a bad one) function as they are supposed to do. If you were lucky enough to get a good one (based on your environment), they it functions better than it is supposed to do.

Also it is nothing in the path of Darwinian Evolution.

It's what Darwinian evolution does. A new mutation that enhances survival will tend to become widespread in a population, as it did among Tibetans.

 

[Dale]

No the red shift is simply showing that galaxies are moving away from us and approximated speeds.

But you forget that light travels as waves and matter and that light waves are subjected to the gravitational pull of bodies in space. So a galaxy that is 13.2 billion light years distant according to the theories of its place in space/time cannot take into account all the gravitational effects on that light wave as it travelled those 13.2 billion light years to reach us!

Also if the universe is c. 13.8 billion light years as the hypothesis goes- there is a very very serious problem with the big bang!

1.The big bang is said to have created the space time continuum and matter (time and space cannot exist without matter according to Einstein).

2, As soon as the big bang occurred- it created a coordinate in space where all matter of the universe was flung out omnidirectionally.

3. According to the hypotheses, as time progressed and matter cooled it clumped and formed moons, planets, stars and galaxies.

4. Big Bang astrophysicists are saying we can see fully formed galaxies 13. 2 billion light years out! Which means that that galaxy was at that point in space time 13.2 billion light years ago to shine that light that took 13.2 billion years to reach earth so we can observe it.

5. NOw the problem. How can a galaxy be 13.2 billion light years out when the universe was only 600 million years old 13.2 billion years ago???

6. That would mean from the point of the big bang (or whooosh or whatever they may call it now) that galaxy would have had to travel at 20 times the speed of light while the initial material was cooling, then clumping, (which is another problem all its own), then form bodies, then squish together to create one star after another until there were millions of stars, all the while travelling at speeds 20X faster than these same astrophysicists say is the limit of how fast anything can travel?

Nolidad: "No the red shift is simply showing that galaxies are moving away from us and approximated speeds."

It's not my fault if you refuse to draw the inevitable conclusion. As I pointed out, the first person on record to draw that conclusion is George Lemaitre, a Jesuit priest, certainly a person with no prejudice against Christianity.

Nolidad: "But you forget that light travels as waves and matter and that light waves are subjected to the gravitational pull of bodies in space. So a galaxy that is 13.2 billion light years distant according to the theories of its place in space/time cannot take into account all the gravitational effects on that light wave as it travelled those 13.2 billion light years to reach us!"

You don't understand how this works. There have been many attempts to disprove what the red shift shows and all attempts have failed.

Nolidad: "1.The big bang is said to have created the space time continuum and matter (time and space cannot exist without matter according to Einstein)."

That isn't exactly what science says. What science actually says is that before the singularity, before the Big Bang, the equations break down. It's not exactly that nothing existed but science gives us no way to find out what existed.

Nolidad: "5. NOw the problem. How can a galaxy be 13.2 billion light years out when the universe was only 600 million years old 13.2 billion years ago???"

You are not understanding this. First, you don't understand the Inflation theory, which I am not going to discuss here. Even starting from your greatly oversimplified view of things, you still aren't doing the arithmetic correctly. First, galaxies formed from large clumps of hydrogen gas, which were formed from particles expelled outward at the time of the Big Bang. The particles and gas were traveling away from other particles and other gas clouds before galaxies formed.

Suppose that Galaxy A forms from gas flung out from the Big Bang in one direction and Galaxy B forms from gas flung out 180 degrees in the other direction. They could easily be 26 billion light years apart. No problem with that.

 

[The Barbarian]

You are not understanding this. First, you don't understand the Inflation theory, which I am not going to discuss here.

This might work. I used something like this in a talk to 6th graders, and they all got it:

Big Bang Theory
The sections above are about some observational facts of the universe. Now, we discuss the most widely accepted evolution model of the universe, the Big Bang Theory. It is the simplest theory that agrees with the cosmological principles and most observational facts in our universe. It states that when the age of the universe was about just 1ms, the universe was very small, with very high density and temperature (about 1012K). From that time onward, the universe expanded and its temperature decreased. The cosmic microwave background at 3K is what was left.

In certain sense, the expansion is similar to the baking of bread. The size of the bread increases and the distances between the raisins also increase. If you sit on one of the raisins, you will see that all the raisins are receding from you. Besides, the farther away a raisin locates, the faster it recedes.

So if a raisin is one inch from another and two inches from one more, and the loaf doubles in size, then the distances will be 2 inches and 4 inches respectively. So the nearby one will be moving 1 inch/period, and the more distant one be moving 2 inches/period (as seen from the reference raisin. The same thing will be observed by every raisin in the loaf.

The farther away, the greater the velocity of recession.

 

[Jason0009]

in the beginning there was God and the word was with God. And then there were the elements he created of which everything was created out of hence let there be light and seas and every fowl and living thing he created. And then there was the fall of Man. And they evolved into what they are now. There are more live things than dead in this world and universe. Resources allow people to create things. Resources are supplied by Earth and Mother Nature. Without these resources people would not be able buy and sell and create things and produce and own money for an economy. Wealth in the human sense is derived from natural resources. Regardless of profession you work in it required resources to create that job and drive support and business for that industry. Evolution is in the broader sense the ability to become smarter and give back more to the source of your wealth and resources then take from it. Much like in Japan where Nature is treated like family and cared for and loved for. Or like how the first nations people cared for it. And that is why Western culture is trying to copy it and promote environmentalism and change it's way of heavy consumptionism but that is hard to do and to teach it's people of that after so long being the bug elephant in the room. It now supports slave labour in China. Virtue signals and hurts the country that sacrificed their futures for it. That cheap Walmart or Dollarama or Lululemon item was probably made by a wage slave in China working 16 hours a day 7-6 days a week to put food on thr table. While it cost pennies to produce that item they mark it up for hundreds of dollars. Overall evolution on one end of the scale tips it more on the devolution side. Hence China's horrible environment pollution problem. 1st world countries virtue signal like we are so good but don't care about their horrible sweatshops in China and overseas and how it affects the environment. They don't really care about being a Good Global Citizen in the business community and in the broader sense, member of the human race as an organization. And that comes back to monry, markup, greed. When this earth and resources run to <Staff Edit> they have alrwady gone to Space and raping and pillaging the next planet as a disease does. While taking all the fruits, glory and efforts of good honest hardworking people they don't deserve but took away from and left all those good people behind to fend for themselves. Such evil people at the top that must be stopped spreading their disease pain and death to others, particularly the innocent ones.