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.
In this thread, I offered two quite specific uses for common ancestry: determination of the ancestral allele at a variant locus, and determination of the range over which mutation rates remain similar. Both are practical, real-world uses of macroevolution.
Preferably comments more substantive than your accusation of lying turned out to be,
Great . Now if you have not been lying Please proceed to show us the practical real world macroevolution use for that besides knowledge of evolution and how it would not have been available for a real world use without darwinism.
I wouldn't think.
Sorry, but that doesn't wash. You accused me of lying because I posted videos that depended on microevolution, not macroevolution. Only I didn't post those videos. Your accusation was wrong, regardless of any other issues.Great . Now if you have not been lying Please proceed to show us the practical real world macroevolution use for that besides knowledge of evolution and how it would not have been available for a real world use without darwinism.
you know full well that i do not rest my case entirely on noble.(As it happens, Noble isn't an authority on evolution, so it's not clear why anyone should care about his opinion.)
The examples I've given of the usefulness of evolution depend entirely on macroevolution.
Thats already been established.
Sfs has not to this point presented a single practical application not related merely to the knowledge of Evolution unless he has no clue about what practical means.
The discovery of pervasive HGT . . .
As for the usefulness of the applications of macroevolution . . .
Use 1: determining the ancestral allele. We determine the ancestral allele at a locus by looking at closely related species (e.g. chimpanzee for humans). Knowing which allele is ancestral is very useful for a variety of reasons. For example, we use that information in searching for recent episodes of positive natural selection in the human genome. That, in turn, can tell us about important regions of the genome for various health-related traits. We used this approach to help identify candidate regions responsible for resistance to cholera (or for reduced severity) in this paper. We're currently using similar approaches to look for genetic variants conferring resistance to Lassa fever in West Africa.
Use 2: estimating variation in mutation rates. We also compared humans to closely related species in this paper, using the comparison to show that mutation rates don't stay the same over long stretches of genome. This enabled us to show, for the first time, that recombination in humans occurs primarily in "hotspots". This in turn meant it was possible to search for genetic risk factors for disease without sequencing the whole genome, and ultimately led to a massive program in whole-genome association studies, which have involved hundreds of thousands of patients and hundreds of millions of dollars.
Not with anything like the same accuracy for the first use, and probably not at all for the second. Too many mutations separate us from dog.Would you be able to get these results by comparing dog and human?
Not with anything like the same accuracy for the first use, and probably not at all for the second. Too many mutations separate us from dog.
Pretty much, yes, except that we already knew that either chimpanzees/bonobos or gorillas were our closest relative before we looked at any DNA.So if we compare genomes among different animals, the degree of differences is interpreted as the quantity of mutations happened on each one of them. So, the difference of genome between chimp and human is the smallest. It means chimp and human have the closest relationship.
Is that the idea?
So if we compare genomes among different animals, the degree of differences is interpreted as the quantity of mutations happened on each one of them. So, the difference of genome between chimp and human is the smallest. It means chimp and human have the closest relationship.
Is that the idea?
For example, we use that information in searching for recent episodes of positive natural selection in the human genome. That, in turn, can tell us about important regions of the genome for various health-related traits. We used this approach to help identify candidate regions responsible for resistance to cholera (or for reduced severity) in this paper. We're currently using similar approaches to look for genetic variants conferring resistance to Lassa fever in West Africa.
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?