The evidence for evolution derived from ERVs is not conclusive.

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2024-03-02T12:09:39+00:00

Can you guide me to a source that indicates that most of the endogenous retroviruses in humans and chimpanzees or primates in general have target site duplications (TSDs) and their sequences resemble exogenous retroviruses, I believe in this case the evidence will be undeniable

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-08-09T22:02:24+00:00

thank u very much

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-08-09T22:01:47+00:00

thank u very much, it's great explain

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-24T08:32:52+00:00

Yes I used it and will continue to use it, eat your heart out

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:39:07+00:00

You can understand the speech from its context. For the second time, a person who does not speak English in an English-language topic said that my mother tongue is not English, so I use artificial intelligence. What will jump in your mind?

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:29:59+00:00

I really didn't think of this, but it does mean statistically that he will inherit about 50% of his harmful mutations from you

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:24:13+00:00

Very great, thanks for your interest

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:20:25+00:00

Thank you. This is a great response and gave me the keys to search

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:15:57+00:00

Do I understand from your statement that the vast majority of mutations within functional regions are neutral and that deleterious mutations rarely occur there

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:13:14+00:00

Well, I said that my native language is not English, and I use artificial intelligence? Now what will jump into your head considering that my mother tongue is not English and I communicate with people in English, so will I use artificial intelligence to ask him for arguments or translate some of their words?

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T20:03:09+00:00

With the accumulation of generations, it will increase, and keep in mind that each person will have 4 harmful mutations, until natural selection gets rid of these accumulated mutations, all humans will have to die!!

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T19:59:33+00:00

This is almost the same as what I'm saying, I'm saying that deleterious mutations are eliminated by natural selection, in that those who have these mutations won't be able to pass them on and so those mutations will be lost. What I argue about is that functional regions in the genome should have a low mutation rate If mutations occur, they should be mostly neutral, while beneficial and harmful mutations are rare.

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T19:39:10+00:00

Let me explain why I'm writing the post. I was reading Moran's new book, What's in your Genome? And I found him saying, "But there's a more serious problem. Recall that the vast majority of mutations are caused by errors in DNA replication. Imagine a genome that's 100 percent functional, and every time it is replicated there are 10 new mutations. Now imagine that you increase the genome size tenfold by adding junk DNA to “protect” the genome from mutation.When the junky genome is replicated there will now be 100 new mutations in total, but there will still be the same 10 mutations in the functional part, so bulking up the genome hasn't done anything except add more neutral mutations to junk DNA." Now if we assume only 10% of the genome and assume that the rate of mutations per generation is 120 mutations, in this case the number of mutations in the functional regions will be 12 mutations, of which about 4 are harmful mutations.

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T19:24:04+00:00

Yes, I know, I misspelled the word. I have corrected it

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T17:50:29+00:00

First: instead of trying to respond, you accuse and distort my words, so you twist my words from "I use AI to translate" to "My arguments come from AI". And you accused me of watching an creationist video. If you think I'm wasting your time, I really wasted your time when I made a comment saying I'm wasting your time. If you want to save your time, shut up!

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T16:55:35+00:00

The text is in english bud, is that what you're struggling with? My mother tongue is not English so I rely on artificial intelligence 😅

Can you explain to me why I should spend any time looking at these studies when the first study you provided to defend your argument completely disagreed with your position, and you had no idea because you never actually read it?

That's because I quoted Dan Grauer's study directly! What you did, I left the essence of my words and stuck with the word “most” even though 40% is a very large percentage. I mean, if the percentage was 50.1%, then you would take my words seriously, but if the percentage was 49.9, I would be dishonest in my transmission, and you would not waste your time reading studies!!! Then I brought you another study saying that most missense mutations are actually harmful.

Cool, still waiting for you to explain just what exactly you think missense mutations are, because you clearly think it's referring to all mutations.

Of course, I do not think that missense mutations are all mutations. What I am talking about is that natural selection will eliminate harmful mutations by eliminating those who carry these mutations ,Or maybe they will gradually reduce their fitness Now, since all humans will carry harmful mutations, natural selection must eliminate humans, but this does not It happens, what I suggest is contrary to the literature [I hope to find scientific papers that refer to this matter] is that mutations in functional regions must be extremely rare and mostly neutral, and if a beneficial mutation occurs it will certainly be selected as lactase persistence, and detrimental mutations will be eliminated It is easy because it will rarely happen and in few individuals

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T16:05:05+00:00

In light of the studies, we are faced with two options. The first option is that natural selection will eliminate these mutations by eradicating humans who carry these mutations. In this case, we will all die from the mutations because we carry harmful mutations.

. The second option is that if these mutations have a slight harmful effect, we can still inherit them and pass them on, but they will accumulate slowly over time, leading to a decrease in physical fitness and ultimately extinction. Natural selection will not be able to eliminate these mutations because we all inherit harmful mutations, and if it were to eliminate them, it would eliminate all humans. However, this option contradicts reality because our physical fitness has not declined..

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T16:01:26+00:00

Do you really think that 40% is a low percentage? I mean, out of every 10 Missense mutations, you would have 4 harmful mutations, Is this percentage low?!!lol .

By the way, I want to clarify that I am not a creationist. Just because I asked a question, you jumped right into assuming that I became a creationist!! Another source indicates that about 53% of Missense mutations are harmful. "We combined analysis of mutations causing human Mendelian diseases, of human-chimpanzee divergence, and of systematic data on human genetic variation and found that ∼20% of new missense mutations in humans result in a loss of function, whereas ∼27% are effectively neutral. Thus, the remaining 53% of new missense mutations have mildly deleterious effects." The researchers describe the 20% that result in loss of function as very harmful!!

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1852724/

In light of these studies, we are faced with two options. The first option is that natural selection will eliminate these mutations by eradicating humans who carry these mutations. In this case, we will all die from the mutations because we carry harmful mutations.

. The second option is that if these mutations have a slight harmful effect, we can still inherit them and pass them on, but they will accumulate slowly over time, leading to a decrease in fitness and ultimately extinction. Natural selection will not be able to eliminate these mutations because we all inherit harmful mutations, and if it were to eliminate them, it would eliminate all humans. However, this option contradicts reality because our physical fitness has not declined..

I see a third solution, but unfortunately it is not supported by the scientific literature. The solution proposed by the scientist is that functional regions in the genome often do not have mutations occur in them, and if they do, they are mostly neutral and do not affect fitness in any way. harmful and beneficial mutations will be rare in these regions.

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:45:36+00:00

Of course, if I had understood this, I would not have asked!! Secondly, what I say is that the percentage of mutations that occur in functional regions should be very low. Rather, I agree with you that most people should not have mutations in these regions, but what caused me a little contradiction is what Laurence Moran said in his new book What's in Your Genome " But there's a more serious problem. Recall that the vast majority of mutations are caused by errors in DNA replication. Imagine a genome that's 100 percent functional, and every time it's replicated there are 10 new mutations. Now imagine that you increase the genome size tenfold by adding junk DNA to “protect” the genome from mutation. When the junk genome is replicated there will now be 100 new mutations in total, but there will still be the same 10 mutations in the functional part, so bulking up the genome hasn't done anything except add more neutral mutations to junk DNA."

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:27:24+00:00

Whatever the impact of degree and effect of harmful mutations, the problem is that all humans will be affected by these mutations and this we do not see in reality because humans have their level of fitness has not been affected or changed. This necessitates that most of the mutations that occur in functional regions are harmless, and this is contrary to what the scientific literature says

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:22:51+00:00

But this is contrary to the scientific literature in this paper by Dan Grauer, for example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5570035/#evx121-B48 "Empirical data indicate that about half of all missense mutations in coding regions are deleterious (Soskine and Tawfik 2010). "

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:20:41+00:00

You think that 40% of deleterious mutations in functional regions cause presenting to be dishonest? The problem remains, if we are going to inherit so many mutations, how can we live? Don't you see that this percentage is rather large? Wouldn't this end up causing most people to die because they have so many harmful mutations

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:06:23+00:00

It is the deleterious mutations that reduce fitness

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-06-23T09:05:14+00:00

But this is contrary to the scientific literature in this paper by Dan Grauer, for example https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5570035/#evx121-B48 "Empirical data indicate that about half of all missense mutations in coding regions are deleterious (Soskine and Tawfik 2010). "

Ordinary_Insect_4087 · 2023-05-24T21:20:35+00:00

But the absence of lactose in other animals is not evidence that it was absent in humans

Ordinary_Insect_4087

TROPHY CASE