Evolution's “Molecular Clock”: Not So Dependable After All?

PLOS (Public Library of Science) ^ | 8/17/04 | Staff

[Ichneumon]

Is it unreasonable to believe in God?

Nice non sequitur you've got there.

[Ichneumon]

"Vowles and Amos estimate that as much as 30% of the genome may show evidence of convergent evolution, simply because microsatellites are so common." So genes are converging 30% of the time,

That's not what he said, try again.

that wreaks havoc on the idea that there is enough time for the divergent species we see.

No it doesn't.

Mantra: Long ago and far away we had 99% divergent evolution, despite what we see today.

You're not making any sense -- and if you think you're accurately paraphrasing something that science actually says, you're extremely mistaken.

[orionblamblam]

Non sequitur. The existence or lack thereof of God is as irrelevant in attemtping to discern the action of biological evolution as it is in trying to discern the motions of the planets or the decay of radiactive atoms. Equally, the action of evolution, the motions of the planets and the decay of radioactive atoms says nothing yea or nay aboutt he existence or lack thereof of God.

[AndrewC]

that the "clock tick rate" will vary from one species to another.

Doesn't that make "clock" a meaningless term.

[Ichneumon]

In English, “U” always follows “Q”

I'll bet twenty buqshas that isn't true.

[Michael_Michaelangelo]

How so? I was merely pointing out the contrast between the effect of purposeful mutations versus those of random mutations which "might lead to tumors." Doesn't evolution lean on random mutations to generate variation?

[Ichneumon]

Well, we are told that these 30,000 genes are smart little buggers and mutate all over the place.

How do you arrive at the conclusion that genes are *smart*?

We are never told how they got so smart.

...or even that they are.

We are never told how it all began.

Define "it".

[Ichneumon]

Doesn't that make "clock" a meaningless term.

No.

[Elsie]

Reasonable?

[Michael_Michaelangelo]

Why don't you leave science to people who know something about it?

Like Reiner Protsch von Zieten?

[Doctor Stochastic]

So, should we have invaded Iraqu then?

[Elsie]

Why don't you leave science to people who know something about it?

Only if YOU.. "..leave GOD to people who know something about HIM!"

---

Why lists of "people who doubt evolution" don't matter

Is there a corresponding 'List of "people who BELIEVE evolution"' that DO matter???

[js1138]

Iraqi bump.

[Elsie]

DNA is a chemical system (I'm a chemist).

Have you ever (in your 30 years experience) created anything useful by randomly mixing chemicals?

---

[I'm not a chemist]

[PatrickHenry]

Why not?
Evolution Ping! This list is for the evolution side of evolution threads, and maybe other science topics like cosmology.
See the list's description in my freeper homepage. Then FReepmail me to be added or dropped.

[Elsie]

Either that, or Hopeful Monsters.....

[Elsie]

YEA!!

The heavyweights are being called in!

---

[the Olympics are winding down anyway...]

Let the GAMES begin!!

[js1138]

Have you ever (in your 30 years experience) created anything useful by randomly mixing chemicals?

I'm also not a chemist, but I'd wager that many professional chemists have created useful things by making combinations whose properties were not known in advance. That IS what drives evolution, novel changes whose properties are not known in advance.

[null and void]

ACGT

I'd like to buy Vowles...

[Right Wing Professor]

I'm also not a chemist, but I'd wager that many professional chemists have created useful things by making combinations whose properties were not known in advance.

You would win your wager. Combinatorial chemistry is one of the hottest areas of chemistry at the moment, and it does exactly that; it creates libraries of moleucles by making every possible random combination of components, and then screens the library by looking for, say, activity against some disease.