Mike PSS
Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006
|
| Quote (afdave @ Nov. 01 2006,18:59) | Mike PSS-- I followed your links and got nothing. I think you are primarily interested in the creationist explanation for the HLA-B locus, with 500 known alleles, right? Now you were saying you have a table somewhere that shows how similar the alleles of various groups worldwide are, or something, right? Could you reproduce that table here for us?
From reading Woodmorappe, my understanding is that, yes, there are 500 known alleles, but that in any one indigenous people group which has not been mixed with other groups, the number is much lower--maybe 40 or 50 alleles?
So if you have that table, it would help to clear this up. If you don't have it, I'm sure I can find one somewhere.
I'm surprised at the person who said that my "bottleneck chart" does not show how genetic diversity is maintained/regained. Can you explain in more detail why you think it does not? |
Right you are. The table is nested in some reference and I'm not savvy enough to reproduce it here.
Try this....
Click this underlined link to the front page.
On the left there is titled Pre-defined Queries.
Click on 'Class I Allele Frequencies' to get the table.
*************************
The table clearly shows that the Afro-Euro-Asia allelic presence is simalar (~90%) to North & South American allelic presence. These are the same alleles found in populations that have been isolated from each other since after the UCGH ice age.
AFAIK, there are only two ways to get this type of allelic distribution in the UCGH environment. You need either to mutate the alleles in exactly the same way over time in isolated populations, or the alleles need to travel with the foundation groups that settled North & South America. That is why I asked my timeline questions.
What time period in the UCGH did the foundation group that settled North & South America travel?
Also, relating this HLA-B gene to your table looks like this:
Before Flood: A1 through A?? (doesn't matter)
Immediately After Flood: A1 through A10
After Ice Age (NA and SA settled): A1 through A500
Click on this underlined link to get a full listing (as of last month) of the HLA-B gene. Also the front page of the same website has more references and information available (website found from Wikipedia link about the HLA-B gene).
I don't care about B, C, D or any other GENE in your table. Only A (the HLA-B GENE) and the numbers after A (the alleles of HLA-B). I don't deny that A1 through A10 could be represented in the entire population, but how did A11 through A500 show up in only 250 years?
Do you understand the point now?
Did the link work?
Mike PSS
|
