stevestory
Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
| Quote (Russell @ Oct. 27 2006,12:52) | W/R/T genetic degeneration since "the Fall": is there any fossil evidence of this? (e.g. fossil creatures being bigger, stronger, more symmetrical, any measure at all) as we go further back in time? Why not? | Quote | | They simply were genetically rich, meaning nothing more than they had a significant degree of heterozygosity. How much? I cannot say |
Perhaps not. But we can put a maximum on it, can't we? That would be 4 alleles for for each gene for every pair of animals represented by one male and one female (except, for instance, Y-chromosome genes in mammals, where only one allele would be represented). So according to Davism, this is the maximum number of non-degenerate alleles currently in circulation. So what about those hundreds of MHC alleles? All but four are degenerate? Any way to test this hypothesis? Or is it just "by definition"? (We'll restrict our discussion to the "unclean" animals, represented, if I recall correctly, by just one male/female pair. Same principle applies to the "clean" animals - 7 pairs? - but why complicate our task here?)
| Quote | "Were mutations caused by The Fall?"
That's a good guess. I'll tell you for sure when I meet God face to face in Heaven. |
How will you do that? Oh wait! Perhaps I'm being too literal; perhaps this is just a little joke. But then, is any of the "afdave" act not? |
Russell, haven't you ever heard of saber-toothed tigers? Those are waaaay more badass than modern devolved tigers.
|
