Replies

==The following is a phylogenetic tree of guinea pigs constructed from molecular evidence assuming conservation and variance based upon common descent. Notice how they warn about dependence upon too small a data set for construction of phylogenetic trees.

You were the one who said the shared errors in the respective GULO genes of humans and apes proves common descent. We have demonstrated that contrary to proving common descent, those shared errors are better explained by a common mechanism (ie hot spots). So it’s a tad hypocritical for you to now turn around and start complaining about undersized data sets when it was you who tried to use the GULO gene to prove common descent in the first place.

Proof? I stated no such thing. Science doesn’t deal in “proof”. It is you who thinks that amateurish manipulations of small data sets are sufficient to overturn scientific theories and call into question thousands of peer reviewed journal articles. I merely pointed out that it was one of many million points of data that indicate common descent.

Moreover my use of the data set was precluded by the warning that it was a small sample, but it was the one that your referenced source used. Is it an example of why one shouldn’t argue with idiots, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience? If I am taking lumps for engaging in a flawed model in an attempt to address the claims of the model, well you are the one who thinks the guy who made the model analysis deserves a Nobel Prize.

Your post#101: you asked for a “ coherent scientific argument for common descent”

My post#104: Endogenous Retro-viral Insertions.
Why is it that ERV’s that are common in some human populations but not in all humans have reverse transcriptase genes that are nearly perfect?

Why is it that ERV’s that are shared between all humans but not shared by chimpanzee’s are MORE preserved than ones that are common among all apes?

Why is the Vitamin C synthase gene broken in the exact same place in humans and apes? Why would an animal be designed with a broken Vitamin C synthase gene in the first place, and what theory could explain the fact that they are broken in the same place.

All these facts are consistent with common descent.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Please notice that nowhere did I say that one mutation shared in common between apes (but not guinea pigs or any other animal sequenced) was PROOF of common descent, only that it was consistent with it.

Please reference the Journal of Molecular Biology for how these phylogenetic trees are constructed.

http://mbe.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/reprint/11/4/593.pdf

Here is a good one that deals quite well with your assertion that because the guinea pig is divergent from rats it is somehow closer in relation to humans. They also adress the need for looking at data comprehensively and over as large a sample as reasonable. Notice also the lack of the word “proof”.

As far as mutational ‘hot spots’ you have not yet explained why these hot spots once mutated would tend to converge in related species and diverge in unrelated ones. Once again a detailed survey over 1000 bp’s and between five or more species would be a good place to start. Extraordinary claims need extraordinary evidence.