[Liberal Classic]

Perhaps a scientist will be able to show how something OTHER than a copy manages to get into the strand.

Since this is the very essence of Evolution, THAT is what is needed now to blast the IDer's out of the water.

By this standard, ID has already been blown out of the water. The error rates of DNA replication and polymerase transcription are well known, as are the types of errors and how they occur. Errors occur in the transcription of one out of every 10^4 to 10^5 base pair. DNA replication has an error rate that is approximately the same, but the DNA strand is checked twice for errors which increases accuracy. Note that I am talking about errors in the chemical assembly of proteins and the duplication of DNA. This does not include damage from environmental sources such as chemical carcinogens or radiation exposure, only errors in the transcription and duplication process.

[Kelly_2000]

A good definition of the mutability statistic

[Elsie]

Errors occur in the transcription of one out of every 10^4 to 10^5 base pair.

AHhh....

Then why don't we see MUCH more variety in existing critters today???

Seems to me that if this error rate is true, MANY neutral (Neither aiding nor detracting from 'advantage in reproduction') things would be hanging around most every critter alive!

---

Why, out of a million individuals (10^6)there should be 10 to 100 of them with STUFF that does nothing at the present time.

[Sofa King]

Oops. Time to move the goalposts again.

[grey_whiskers]

DNA replication has an error rate that is approximately the same, but the DNA strand is checked twice for errors which increases accuracy.

There's GOT to be a pun in there about Santa Claus and mythological beliefs-- "making a list, checking it twice" etc.

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

DNA replication has an error rate that is approximately the same, but the DNA strand is checked twice for errors which increases accuracy. Note that I am talking about errors in the chemical assembly of proteins and the duplication of DNA.

More food for thought: has anyone looked into error rates of base pair substitution in DNA replication as a function of nearest neighbor or nearby sequence?

E.g. is there more likely to be an error in the nucleotide after every GTCGGA than after every GGGAAT?

Are some amino acids in the protein more "error prone" than others?

Full Disclosure: I mean in the original expression rather than in animals with these defects, which subsequently survive long enough to be tagged and/or breed...
Don't get the cart before the horse. :-)