RE: [asa] Theo-Neo-Darwnian Synthesis

From: Dick Fischer <dickfischer@verizon.net>
Date: Thu Apr 17 2008 - 11:23:12 EDT

Hi John:
 
A chromosomal fusion is like any other genetic marker, a retroposon, or
a processed pseudo gene. For whatever may be lurking in our DNA, if it
exists in all humans, it likely originally happened to only one
individual somewhere early in the long chain of hominids from which we
all descended. Some genetic traits appear in a percentage of humans who
descended from one individual and only affect a percentage of the
population. Hemophilia and some early onset Alzheimer's are a couple of
examples. We can't infer a selective advantage to our surviving
population due to any particular single event. A retro viral sequence
common to all primates only indicates mutual shared common ancestry. We
can't infer that it would have any benefit just because we all have it.
 
Dick Fischer. author, lecturer
Historical Genesis from Adam to Abraham
www.historicalgenesis.com
 
-----Original Message-----
From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of John Walley
Sent: Wednesday, April 16, 2008 9:15 PM
To: 'Dennis Venema'; 'Gregory Arago'; 'David Opderbeck'; 'Alexanian,
Moorad'
Cc: 'Bethany Sollereder'; 'Jack'; 'George Murphy'; 'ASA list'
Subject: RE: [asa] Theo-Neo-Darwnian Synthesis + Chromosome Fusion WAS
Who do Adam & Eve represent? (Was: Was Adam a real person?)
 
Dennis,
 
Thanks for this very enlightening response.
 
Please note I did not deny a naturalistic mechanism or suggest that one
did not exist, just that I was ignorant of one if so and had not been
able to piece together how it might have happened naturalistically. And
as opposed to Gregory, I am not threatened by the possibility that there
may be one and now I am forever enriched by this new understanding of
this scenario that could explain it. I do have this follow-up question
however if I may.
 
Assuming this fusion happened only once in a local population and single
fused sample left only half of his offspring in this hybrid state and
they in turn did the same, it seems it would take 3-4 generations to
have even a hundred or more samples hybrid samples among the entire
population. Then assuming two hybrids did mate, only 1/4 of their
offspring would have 46 which now means only a tiny fraction of the
overall population would be 46 while the vast majority were still 48 and
47.
 
It seems to me that it is stretching to assume that a population
bottleneck would fix this unless we imagine the interventionism of ID
and believe it came down to a single pair that were chosen just-so, so
that is why I suggested that this 46 configuration must give those
specimens some kind of selection advantage. If not and they were all the
same as far as breeding goes then wouldn't we expect to see at least a
trace sample left of the 47's and 48's that were once the predominant
portion of the population? I am assuming we don't see this trace in any
significant number in either chimps or humans, right?
 
This question seems to be complicated to me by all the remaining 48's
being chimps but all the new 46's being human. What can explain this
transition? Assuming that the original hybrid 47 and all his hybrid 47
descendants and even the double hybrid 46's were all chimps or a common
ancestor of chimps and humans, and then you had a population bottleneck
shortly thereafter to keep the 47's from gaining a significant
representation in the overall population, how can we explain that all
the 46's evolved into modern day humans other than a selection
advantage?
 
Thanks
 
John
 

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Apr 17 11:25:55 2008

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.8 : Thu Apr 17 2008 - 11:25:55 EDT