Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Unrealized Genomes as the Ultimate Falsification of the Theory of Evolution
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="sfs" data-source="post: 73716317" data-attributes="member: 8727"><p>If you slow down and try to understand you may be able to avoid continuing to embarrass yourself -- the concepts are not hard. In this analogy, I am<em> not</em> saying that many of those 17,576 different sequences could code for the same phenotype. I am saying that, in addition to those 18k sequences, many of the sequences that you are <em>not </em>considering, by keeping 3 letters fixed, could also code for the same phenotype.</p><p></p><p>In your calculation, you are keeping 40% of positions fixed; only DNA that has the right sequence in those 1615 (=40% of 4038 positions) can possibly code for the phenotype. The other 60% of positions make no difference to the phenotype in your model and we can ignore them. You have no justification for thinking that 1615 positions with a unique sequence of DNA are required for this phenotype, and in reality that's not how proteins work -- there are typically an immense number of different proteins <em>with no sequence identity </em>-- that can perform the same function.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="sfs, post: 73716317, member: 8727"] If you slow down and try to understand you may be able to avoid continuing to embarrass yourself -- the concepts are not hard. In this analogy, I am[I] not[/I] saying that many of those 17,576 different sequences could code for the same phenotype. I am saying that, in addition to those 18k sequences, many of the sequences that you are [I]not [/I]considering, by keeping 3 letters fixed, could also code for the same phenotype. In your calculation, you are keeping 40% of positions fixed; only DNA that has the right sequence in those 1615 (=40% of 4038 positions) can possibly code for the phenotype. The other 60% of positions make no difference to the phenotype in your model and we can ignore them. You have no justification for thinking that 1615 positions with a unique sequence of DNA are required for this phenotype, and in reality that's not how proteins work -- there are typically an immense number of different proteins [I]with no sequence identity [/I]-- that can perform the same function. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Physical & Life Sciences
Creation & Evolution
Unrealized Genomes as the Ultimate Falsification of the Theory of Evolution
Top
Bottom