quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

So, Hitler was Jewish, therefore he must have had a circumcised penis, which is why he was so CRAZY! 

It all makes so much sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You've repeatedly claimed that close breeding doesn't result in more frequent expression of genetic disease. You've also expressed the belief that close breeding will remove lethal recessives from the gene pool.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
Please supply quotes of these my statements, including post numbers if necessary.

post 106

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
This is where you go wrong and put the cart before the horse. Merely apply the evolution algorithm: any behavior that causes a disadvantageous reproductive effect, will be selected against by natural selection. The fact that these populations that are cursed with deleterious mutations are inbreeding, indicates conclusively that by not doing so they would be even worse off. They derive a huge reproductive benefit from inbreeding and it is quite obvious what that benefit is: the elimination of half of the deleterious alleles from their gene pool. Nevertheless that does not suffice to cleanse their gene pool, as compared to European Christian populations that do not circumcise their male offspring.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Of course there is no rate since there is no way to even predict which mutations are lethal. The rate of point mutations is about 2 x 10^-9 per site per year. but that doesn't tell you if the mutation occured in a gene, whether or not it was a lethal recessive etc.. Even knowing what percentage of the genome is actually genes doesn't help since you simply cannot predict which mutations will be lethal.

I quote: "the total number of mutations per offspring per generation is at least 175. If the functional genome percentage was actually 50% (instead of just 2%), the likely detrimental mutation rate (Ud) would be well over 30 instead of the usual estimates of ~3 noted above. This would increase the reproductive rate needed to avoid genomic decay from ~20 offspring per woman per generation to well over 10 trillion offspring per woman per generation - obviously an impossible hurdle to overcome".

(I do note that no scientific article should be trusted implicitly. Nevertheless, the book quoted above appears to be quite knowledgeable. I recommend reading the entire chapter "The Detrimental Mutation Rate and the Genetic Deterioration of Mankind", which is what I am doing now.)

Unbeknownst to me there appears to be a quite active field of genetics that studies mutation rates and the rate of deleterious mutations in humans. I am quite interested. These researchers are way beyond my feeble attempts at genetics.

Edited to add: The quoted part does not appear to be limited to recessive lethals only.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You've repeatedly claimed that close breeding doesn't result in more frequent expression of genetic disease. You've also expressed the belief that close breeding will remove lethal recessives from the gene pool.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
Please supply quotes of these my statements, including post numbers if necessary.

post 106

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
This is where you go wrong and put the cart before the horse. Merely apply the evolution algorithm: any behavior that causes a disadvantageous reproductive effect, will be selected against by natural selection. The fact that these populations that are cursed with deleterious mutations are inbreeding, indicates conclusively that by not doing so they would be even worse off. They derive a huge reproductive benefit from inbreeding and it is quite obvious what that benefit is: the elimination of half of the deleterious alleles from their gene pool. Nevertheless that does not suffice to cleanse their gene pool, as compared to European Christian populations that do not circumcise their male offspring.

So? This quote appears to have motivated the second of your assertions? In my original - later mod-censored - post I speak about lethal inherited diseases and the deleterious mutations that I speak off in this quote refer to these lethal recessives. I have shown that two individuals heterozygous for such an allele when mating will on average in their offspring eliminate half of the deleterious alleles as those end up in a homozygous individual.

Thus my statement was correct. In fact, repeating me, you have later argued the same. So what is your problem with this my quote?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
How many times do I have to say this, ... The math is incredibly simple. 1 in 4 offspring will be homozygous and die before reproducing, 1 in 4 will not carry the gene at all and 2 in 4 will be heterozygous just like their parents. Which means that 2/3 rds of the offspring that survive to reproduce will be heterozygous.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Sean Pitman is not a researcher in the field. He is a creationist. No claim he makes can be trusted and the numbers he uses seem to completely made up as they match no one elses.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
How many times do I have to say this, ... The math is incredibly simple. 1 in 4 offspring will be homozygous and die before reproducing, 1 in 4 will not carry the gene at all and 2 in 4 will be heterozygous just like their parents. Which means that 2/3 rds of the offspring that survive to reproduce will be heterozygous.

That is precisely what I said first in my post 104 and what you keep repeating. I have no idea why you superfluously keep asserting that I do not get this your point when clearly I demonstrated in post 104 for anyone who cares to read it, that I did.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Stop trying to squirm.

quote:

ORIGINAL: kittinSol

So, Hitler was Jewish, therefore he must have had a circumcised penis, which is why he was so CRAZY! 

It all makes so much sense.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

There is far more to Hitler and WWII than meets the eye. There are undisputable facts and there are false truths that have been presented to the world as truths.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

Care to answer my comment upthread about German culture not being completely destroyed by the second world war, NG?

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
To make clear how unlikely it is that the exact same mutation occurs and gets into the population I point you to this study of the origins of the sickle cell mutation which indicates that the mutation has occurred and survived only 3 times in the last 6000 or so generations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
To make clear how unlikely it is that the exact same mutation occurs and gets into the population I point you to this study of the origins of the sickle cell mutation which indicates that the mutation has occurred and survived only 3 times in the last 6000 or so generations.

I have now read that tiny article and I read that at least four different sickle cell alleles arose. There is no telling how many thousands of times more these mutations occurred in populations that did not suffer from malaria and in which they were rapidly selected against.

Also presumably there must have been many other lethal recessive mutations to the hemoglobin genes that were and are selected against.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You were claiming that lethal recessive mutations occurred at a predictable rate

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You were claiming ... that size of population and gene frequency were not related.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Until you understand that you were wrong on both points you won't be able to understand population genetics in a useful fashion.

quote:

I do know that one Hindu wise man visited all the heavens of the various pagan gods and that he concluded that it was better to not end up in those heavens - but to reincarnate on Earth again - because they, each in his or her own unique way, were all crazy.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You were claiming that lethal recessive mutations occurred at a predictable rate

Indeed, they do. Ask any statistician.
Edited to add: Well actually that is a wrong quote as well. I quote from my post 111: ""(Spontaneous deleterious mutations do not distinguish between populations, they occur at the same frequency.)" I literally state here that the cause of inherited diseases are spontaneous deleterious mutations that in each population occur at the same frequency".

quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
You were claiming ... that size of population and gene frequency were not related.

Pfff, you cannot quote me on that.

I have said that new mutations will occur at the same frequencies in both small and large populations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: NorthernGent

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

There is far more to Hitler and WWII than meets the eye. There are undisputable facts and there are false truths that have been presented to the world as truths.

By the far the biggest popular misconceptions surrounding the Nazis are the so-called economic miracle and the illusion of order. Those who know better understand that there was style and then there was reality and the whole pack of cards would have tumbled down in the '50s (had there not been a war).

Another popular misconception is that the German people were unwilling assistants. In actual fact large areas were overseen by small numbers of Gestapo - and they relied heavily on willing informants (recent studies into letters and archives suggest that the whole thing was bottom up rather than top down).