dvunkannon
Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008
|
| Quote (Reg @ Nov. 17 2009,16:06) | | Quote (deadman_932 @ Nov. 17 2009,14:53) | | Quote (Reg @ Nov. 17 2009,13:51) | bornagain77 talks population genetics:
"Kimura’s distribution" is mentioned from 1:30 into video (a presentation by AiG's Andy McIntosh in the UK). What looks like the same slide is explained here by someone who saw one of McIntosh's presentations. McIntosh (the AiG guy) claims that it's well-known to all biologists and shows favorable mutations are greatly outnumbered by harmful ones and favorable mutations are never phenotypically expressed.
I am not a biologist but suspect misunderstanding or misrepresentation is in play. Insight from real biologists welcome. |
BatShitInsane77 is citing McIntosh, who is using John John Sanford's misrepresentation of Kimura's 1983 "The Neutral Theory of Molecular Evolution" (Cambridge U. Press), who in turn was trying to improve Fisher, Maynard Smith, etc...
Gah. ...
Sanford's asertions about distributions and effects of detrimental/neutral/beneficial mutations have been discussed a lot in threads here and elsewhere, and it's a pretty complex topic. Suffice it to say that Sanford hasn't been able to back his assumptions ... I can only say look at the materials that Talk Origins , Wiki, Panda's Thumb and this forum have to offer first.
|
Thanks for the intro and pointers. |
Pretty sad that besides AiG, the biggest reference to the Kimura distribution is one piece of research on mitochondrial RNA heteroplasmy. According to Google, that is.
--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima
|
