ericmurphy
Posts: 2460
Joined: Oct. 2005
|
Nice try, Dave.
| Quote (afdave @ Dec. 29 2006,19:50) | For those of us with faulty memories ... *ahem* ... Eric, the Original and Unparalleled Water-Muddier
| Quote | afdave
Posts: 1157
Joined: April 2006
(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 10 2006,10:38
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mike PSS... | Quote |
CONGRATULATIONS DAVE. You have successfully limited the discussion to only 61 out of 225 alleles for the HLA-B gene as it relates to this data table. Maybe I will need to search out another valid data set that has a larger sample size and also tests and lists ALL 500 HLA-B alleles.
Please explain to us in very good prose how 61 alleles appeared in 250 years. If you can explain this then your explanation should hold muster to ALL related HLA-B allele data available and we can test the explanation.
Good Luck,
Mike PSS |
Thank you.
Now that we have that behind us, let's just focus on these 61 alleles, shall we?
I guess my biggest question at this point would be ...
How in the world do you completely eliminate the possibility of admixture from Euro-Asia-Africa in the peoples listed in this citation??.. You're telling me that there was NO intermarriage (or hanky panky) between these groups and various Euro-Asia-Africa peoples?? Come on! |
|
What did you think the point of this pointless reposting of your conversation with Mike PSS was, Dave? Does this in any way refute my point that the discussion of the 61 alleles is pertinent only to how many alleles New and Old World populations had in common before reproductive isolation?
Even you seemed to understand this at the time, which is why you posted this:
| Quote | I guess my biggest question at this point would be ...
How in the world do you completely eliminate the possibility of admixture from Euro-Asia-Africa in the peoples listed in this citation??.. You're telling me that there was NO intermarriage (or hanky panky) between these groups and various Euro-Asia-Africa peoples?? Come on! |
This discussion has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with the total number of HLA-B alleles, and you know it. I will also note for the record that this specific quote from Mike, which you reproduced here, also states that the total number of HLA-B alleles is 500, and you did not dispute that number.
| Quote | You can download both my threads here ...
AFD_CGH1
AFD_CGH2
... then do a CTRL-F search of the above post date to see the discussion following this quote.
*************************************
Deadman owns me psychologically!  |
And given that I posted several quotes and permalinks from your threads, Dave, what was your purpose in posting links to downloads of your threads? Where do you think I got those quotes and permalinks from in the first place?
In other words, what was the point of any of this post, Dave, other than to suck up bandwidth and to make it harder to find your totally-discredited claims about the total number of HLA-B alleles?
You now have all the evidence you need that you were totally, completely wrong about the number of HLA-B alleles. The correct number is well north of 600. I personally don't care whether you want to handle the 61 alleles common to New World and Old World populations prior to reproductive isolation (less than 10% of the total) which must have arisen before your "ice age" ended, or whether you want to handle the 600+ alleles that have arisen sometime between the end of the flood and the present. Either way is fine, but you're not going to get away with claiming this isn't a problem for your "hypothesis," or alternatively, that you've already "dealt" with it.
--------------
2006 MVD award for most dogged defense of scientific sanity
"Atheism is a religion the same way NOT collecting stamps is a hobby." —Scott Adams
|
