Re: Floyd, This Is My Repsonse

On Tue, 2 Dec 2003 07:50:53 +0000 (UTC),
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nowhere Man) did some sarious
thank'n and scribbled:

>It only seems that way because you have not put alot of thought into
>the subject. It is okay because we all have to start somewhere. There
>is no problem like you see it. Mutation do cause damage. 

DNA damage causes mutations, which may or may not cause
damage. Most of the mutations that occur, 1 per generation
per individual do not cause any damage, they are simply a
change. 

You think of mutations like this

10,000 mutations

 9,900 neutral mutations no effect
    99 disgenic mutations, negatively selection most of time
     1 advantageous mutation, positively selected. 

Each individual in primative society produce an average to 3
kids say, but only 2 go onto reproduce and 1 does not,
within this 1/3 of offspring a small percent of the time the
reason is that he/she carries a disgentic mutation. 
This is an idealized version. 

>That is
>because they are mutations.

You watch to many cartoons on T.V. mutations are not 'bad'
mutations are single nucleotide polymorphisms. That is all
they are, nothing more, nothing less. The can result in a
change in promotor, coding etc, but they also may not. 
If they change a genes structure they can be disgenic or
advantageous. If they are disgenic they will be eliminated
overtime via selective/competitive mechanisms. If they are
advantageous they expand. 


>That's what mutations do.

No.

> God did not design mutations.

Selection of evolution rate in competitive species
determines the mutation rate. It is possible to have perfect
replicative machinary that makes not mistakes; however
selection apparently does not bear that much pressure on the
DNA polymerases and DNA proof-reading machinary. In some
species of bacteria selection has created almost perfect,
mutation free replication. 

> Mutations are part of our imperfection that comes from sinning.

DNA polymerases do not Sin. DNA proofreading machinary do
not SIN. Individuals pass on mutations every generation,
visible or invisible irregardless of SIN. The analogy that
you make regarding SIN and physical defect is an analogy
that even Christ rejected, so why do you still accept this? 

> Adam sinned and passed sin onto all of us. 

Can you show me the specific leasion in DNA polymerase or
proofreading machinary that changed as a result of adam's
sinning. In science a postulate reguires some supporting
data, you have postulated an association of a specific
person sinning and leasions in DNA replicative machinary,
the machinary that allows mutations to occur. Since Eve and
adams sons wives did not have this mutation it should be
easy enough to pMRCA this genetic lesion back to middle east
6000 years ago. Prove it. 

> Normal change
>like hair color and hieght do not come from mutations. 

Lighter pigment hair colors come from loss of function
mutations in the pigment genes. In other animal model
systems these loss of function mutations are the easiest to
generate since as you say deleterious mutations out number
advantageous ones. Loss of function mutants are basically
mutations that turn off a gene, so that the phenotype is as
if the gene does not exist. Black hair pigment, gene is on,
white hair (no pigment) gene is off. 

>They are part
>of the original variation that was programmed into us from the start.
>So there are two types of change.

So when did God create 50 different Adam and Eves in south
america? Those positively selective HLA variants are not
found anywhere else in the world but there, so if your
theory is true, Adam and eve are not the only creations of
god. How about all the deep mtDNA variants in africa, God
must have created a whole bunch of Adams and Eves in africa,
1000s. 
  Towere of babel, descendants of 8 people on a boat, Noahs
ark. How do you get from 8 peoples

300+ HLA B alleles
300+ HLA DRB1 alleles

Of those 300+ alleles most are under positive of
heterozygous selection, most of them show regional origin
and expansion. Explain there existence. 

Tissue Antigens 2000. Nomenclature of the HLA System 1999.
http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/servlet/useragent?func=synergy&synergyAction=showFullText&doi=10.1034/j.1399-0039.2002.600509.x&area=production&prevSearch=allfield%3A%28Nomenclature%29

Tissue Antigens 
Volume 60 Issue 5 Page 407  - November 2002 

Table 12. 
Locus Number of alleles
HLA-A    250
HLA-B    490
HLA-C    119
HLA-E      6
HLA-F      1
HLA-G     15
HLA-DRA    3
HLA-DRB1 315
HLA-DRB2   1
HLA-DRB3  38
HLA-DRB4  12
HLA-DRB5  15
HLA-DRB6   3
HLA-DRB7   2
HLA-DRB8   1
HLA-DRB9   1
HLA-DQA1  22
HLA-DQB1  53
HLA-DPA1  20
HLA-DPB1  99
HLA-DOA    8
HLA-DOB    8
HLA-DMA    4
HLA-DMB    6
TAP1       6
TAP2       4
MICA      54

> Mutations that are usually harmful
>and change that is build into our genetics.

Mutations are usually neutral. Some are harmful, very few
are advantageous. Some nascent alleles as some loci, for
example HLA are generally benificial and under positive
selection. 

> There are not mutations
>that build anything new.

Wrong, or there were 200 Adams of 200 Eves. 

> Noone has seen one.

See above, 100s.

> Only designers can build
>new things.

Then the designers name is "gene conversion, mutation and
recombination"

> You think you know that mutations can cause changes like
>hair color and blood type but this is only speculation. 

So there were 200 Adams and 200 Eves, right. Which
speculation would you like me to make, that from 2
individuals we get 400 alleles most advantageous in one way
or another and yet all mutations are disadvantageous. 

Your choice

200 adams, 200 eves [I've got the population for you in
africa, it can deliver the goods]

-or-

Sometime in the passed advantageous mutations must have
occurred. 

Choose one or admit you are wrong. 

>It is a wild shot.

Wild shot as in shotting wild baby ducks in a backyard
swimming pool with a double barrelled sawed-off shot gone. 

Explain 490 HLA-B variants few negatively selective, on a
locus that has strong heterozygous selection?

Explain 315 HLA-DRB1 variants few negatively selective most
of the variants functional implicitly positively selected at
some point, from 2 individuals without positive mutations?

> It is much more reasonable that these changes were designed than
>to say they happened by mistake.

Someone must have made alot of mistakes because 488 alleles
have been redesigned since the putative creation. Is it god
that made these mistakes and then corrected them? Busy dude.

> I understand this must be hard for you accept.

Yes, completely heart broken to find out there must have
been a minimum of 490 adams and Eves instead of 2. Someone
told a big lie in Genisis, what do you think? 

> It is different from what others have told you but if you
>think about it you'll start to see how it only makes sense this way.

I see, so how do you make sense of Table 12.