Links to Human Genetics

[womanatwell]

Thanks for all the info but it’s waaaaaay over my head. I should’ve said that I want links that are simple enough to understand.

Population genetics tries to work out things like how many humans were in a bottleneck at what time in supposed evolution. Were there 10,000 individuals needed to form our species, or only 2? How long did it take? They try to work it out.

The problem is, population genetics has little to inform us about how proteins first form in our cells from our DNA (our genes) or how DNA even came about.Then there are different proteins for different species, and these are complex and would need vast numbers of hit-or-miss mutations (way beyond the number of organisms on earth so far, before they could even be tested for selection) to make them work. The DNA comes in a code to make proteins, which implies an intelligence behind it. This is what the Intelligent Design people use for their arguments.

I don’t agree with all the Intelligent Design premises, but they do a good job in their literature of exposing people to the complexity of biology and how it is not as easy as some people would believe for life to evolve by nature alone. Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer is a basic book in that category, meant to be understandable to the average reader.

 

[Faith1960]

Population genetics tries to work out things like how many humans were in a bottleneck at what time in supposed evolution. Were there 10,000 individuals needed to form our species, or only 2? How long did it take? They try to work it out.

The problem is, population genetics has little to inform us about how proteins first formed in our cells from our DNA (our genes) or how DNA even came about. The DNA comes in a code to make proteins, which implies an intelligence behind it. This is what the Intelligent Design people use for their arguments.

I don’t agree with all the Intelligent Design premises, but they do a good job in their literature of exposing people to the complexity of biology and how it is not as easy as some people would believe for life to evolve by nature alone. Signature in the Cell by Stephen Meyer is a basic book in that category, meant to be understandable to the average reader.

Does Signature in the Cell talk about Adam and Eve?

 

[womanatwell]

Does Signature in the Cell talk about Adam and Eve?

It’s been a while since I read it but I didn’t see anything in the index for them. The Discovery Institute Press put out Science and Human Origins by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe and Casey Luskin, where they discuss proteins, fossils and more of the same from Ann Gauger about the chromosomes for the genes which I mentioned earlier. Many of the Intelligent Design people believe in Old Earth evolution and don’t mention supernatural events because they want to stay scientific. But they believe there must have been an intelligent agent behind the evolution because biology is too complex for chance.

The reason I don’t agree with all the Intelligent Design theory is that it compares living things with non-living, and yet we believe as Christians that God made all things, including rocks and planets which are designed as rocks and planets. Therefore you can’t prove design comparing one design against another. However, there are great differences between living entities and non-living and this is where Intelligent Design Theory has done a good job in giving the contrasts.

I gave you some creationists links, because even if you believe in an old earth, the young earth creationists have some good things to say about biology (Answers in Genesis website, Kolbe Center website). I’ll try to think of something else you might be interested in as time goes by.

 

[NM505StKate]

Wow. Answers in Genesis. Just no. Granted we currently don’t know how life started but don’t go running to Ken “I have a book” Ham. Just no.

 

[edwest2]

It’s been a while since I read it but I didn’t see anything in the index for them. The Discovery Institute Press put out Science and Human Origins by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe and Casey Luskin, where they discuss proteins, fossils and more of the same from Ann Gauger about the chromosomes for the genes which I mentioned earlier. Many of the Intelligent Design people believe in Old Earth evolution and don’t mention supernatural events because they want to stay scientific. But they believe there must have been an intelligent agent behind the evolution because biology is too complex for chance.

The reason I don’t agree with all the Intelligent Design theory is that it compares living things with non-living, and yet we believe as Christians that God made all things, including rocks and planets which are designed as rocks and planets. Therefore you can’t prove design comparing one design against another. However, there are great differences between living entities and non-living and this is where Intelligent Design Theory has done a good job in giving the contrasts.

I gave you some creationists links, because even if you believe in an old earth, the young earth creationists have some good things to say about biology (Answers in Genesis website, Kolbe Center website). I’ll try to think of something else you might be interested in as time goes by.

Intelligent Design is not primarily about comparing living things to non-living things, although they do make such comparisons. Intelligent Design is about the fact that life was designed, not just a twist or turn here and there that led, by accident, to human beings.

Pope Benedict:

"Monod nonetheless finds the possibility for evolution in the fact that in the very propagation of the project there can be mistakes in the act of transmission. Because nature is conservative, these mistakes, once having come into existence, are carried on. Such mistakes can add up, and from the adding up of mistakes something new can arise. Now an astonishing conclusion follows: It was in this way that the whole world of living creatures, and human beings themselves, came into existence. We are the product of “haphazard mistakes.” [5]

“What response shall we make to this view? It is the affair of the natural sciences to explain how the tree of life in particular continues to grow and how new branches shoot out from it. This is not a matter for faith. But we must have the audacity to say that the great projects of the living creation are not the products of chance and error. Nor are they the products of a selective process to which divine predicates can be attributed in illogical, unscientific, and even mythic fashion. The great projects of the living creation point to a creating Reason and show us a creating Intelligence, and they do so more luminously and radiantly today than ever before. Thus we can say today with a new certitude and joyousness that the human being is indeed a divine project, which only the creating Intelligence was strong and great and audacious enough to conceive of. Human beings are not a mistake but something willed; they are the fruit of love. They can disclose in themselves, in the bold project that they are, the language of the creating Intelligence that speaks to them and that moves them to say: Yes, Father, you have willed me.”

Ed

 

[Faith1960]

It’s been a while since I read it but I didn’t see anything in the index for them. The Discovery Institute Press put out Science and Human Origins by Ann Gauger, Douglas Axe and Casey Luskin, where they discuss proteins, fossils and more of the same from Ann Gauger about the chromosomes for the genes which I mentioned earlier. Many of the Intelligent Design people believe in Old Earth evolution and don’t mention supernatural events because they want to stay scientific. But they believe there must have been an intelligent agent behind the evolution because biology is too complex for chance.

The reason I don’t agree with all the Intelligent Design theory is that it compares living things with non-living, and yet we believe as Christians that God made all things, including rocks and planets which are designed as rocks and planets. Therefore you can’t prove design comparing one design against another. However, there are great differences between living entities and non-living and this is where Intelligent Design Theory has done a good job in giving the contrasts.

I gave you some creationists links, because even if you believe in an old earth, the young earth creationists have some good things to say about biology (Answers in Genesis website, Kolbe Center website). I’ll try to think of something else you might be interested in as time goes by.

Actually I have the book Science and Human Origins. Just wanted more info.

 

[Faith1960]

This week I bought Evolution Still a Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton but it’s so hard to read, I just wasted my money. Not for the layperson, IMO.

How do all of you ignore the firm belief that there was never a population bottleneck fewer than 10,000 people?

 

[edwest2]

This week I bought Evolution Still a Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton but it’s so hard to read, I just wasted my money. Not for the layperson, IMO.

How do all of you ignore the firm belief that there was never a population bottleneck fewer than 10,000 people?

Where does the 10,000 number come from? Why does anyone consider that a fact?

Ed

 

[NM505StKate]

The author of that book doesn’t know what scientific theory is.

 

[cfauster]

The author of that book doesn’t know what scientific theory is.

Though not a big fan of Denton’s book myself, I see that the latest edition of that book looks like it’s much improved compared to the original edition.

 

[Faith1960]

Where does the 10,000 number come from? Why does anyone consider that a fact?

Ed

They use math and calibrate something considering the genetic variation among people. Or something. It, too, is over my head. It’s a lot of math and genetics.
It’s not like they pulled the number out of a hat.

 

[womanatwell]

This week I bought Evolution Still a Theory in Crisis by Michael Denton but it’s so hard to read, I just wasted my money. Not for the layperson, IMO.

How do all of you ignore the firm belief that there was never a population bottleneck fewer than 10,000 people?

Population genetics, where they have come up with this 10,000 bottleneck number, is based on the number and variety of alleles that humans have, then work backwards to how many people were needed so that they would come up with the number we have today. Perhaps we have no materialistic way to explain how the number in a bottleneck would be two instead of 10,000 (although, like I said, Dr. Gauger gives an explanation).

You have obviously read a lot and have a lot of knowledge. You probably know about unique genes which are not mathematically close to others and are found in virtually all species. There is no way to explain these either. I guess it takes imagination to think about how they got there. There are those who will endlessly try to figure out how they got there in a totally materialistic way, and those who believe God put them there.

There is a relatively new website called “The Third Way of Evolution.” This consists of a growing number of extremely influential biologists and other persons who have acknowledged that neo-Darwinian evolution has been proven false. They are now looking for other answers for evolution. On the site is Eugene Koonin, director of the NIH division of Comparative Genomics. This agency has compared full genome sequences of species since the mid-1990’s. It is on the forefront of biological comparisons, but has not found the answers they expected. I have a link to the persons involved in this new quest:

thethirdwayofevolution.com/people .

Those who believe in some direct supernatural creativity are often derided for using “God of the Gaps” method, but we have our own beliefs. I have written a post about my own GAPS theory called “Gain Application Probability Supposition.” It is based on the extreme improbability of the formation of working proteins from all the possible combinations of their sub-units, the amino acids:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/11/gaps.html .

I’ve also written a blog post called “Courage for the Gaps,” which encourages those of us who believe there are indeed gaps in totally materialistic explanations of life and speciation:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/12/courage-for-gaps.html .

This does not inhibit science as some claim. Christians who believe in some direct supernatural intervention still know what an atom is and can still research for cures for cancer, etc.

I’ve written a booklet about Creation Biology which takes you through cell metabolism of DNA and proteins and other subjects from the atom on. It’s not long and perhaps it would be helpful to give you some concepts that would help your continued efforts to understand.

womanatwell.blogspot.com/p/creation-biology.html .

 

[Faith1960]

Population genetics, where they have come up with this 10,000 bottleneck number, is based on the number and variety of alleles that humans have, then work backwards to how many people were needed so that they would come up with the number we have today. Perhaps we have no materialistic way to explain how the number in a bottleneck would be two instead of 10,000 (although, like I said, Dr. Gauger gives an explanation).

You have obviously read a lot and have a lot of knowledge. You probably know about unique genes which are not mathematically close to others and are found in virtually all species. There is no way to explain these either. I guess it takes imagination to think about how they got there. There are those who will endlessly try to figure out how they got there in a totally materialistic way, and those who believe God put them there.

There is a relatively new website called “The Third Way of Evolution.” This consists of a growing number of extremely influential biologists and other persons who have acknowledged that neo-Darwinian evolution has been proven false. They are now looking for other answers for evolution. On the site is Eugene Koonin, director of the NIH division of Comparative Genomics. This agency has compared full genome sequences of species since the mid-1990’s. It is on the forefront of biological comparisons, but has not found the answers they expected. I have a link to the persons involved in this new quest:

thethirdwayofevolution.com/people .

Those who believe in some direct supernatural creativity are often derided for using “God of the Gaps” method, but we have our own beliefs. I have written a post about my own GAPS theory called “Gain Application Probability Supposition.” It is based on the extreme improbability of the formation of working proteins from all the possible combinations of their sub-units, the amino acids:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/11/gaps.html .

I’ve also written a blog post called “Courage for the Gaps,” which encourages those of us who believe there are indeed gaps in totally materialistic explanations of life and speciation:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/12/courage-for-gaps.html .

This does not inhibit science as some claim. Christians who believe in some direct supernatural intervention still know what an atom is and can still research for cures for cancer, etc.

I’ve written a booklet about Creation Biology which takes you through cell metabolism of DNA and proteins and other subjects from the atom on. It’s not long and perhaps it would be helpful to give you some concepts that would help your continued efforts to understand.

womanatwell.blogspot.com/p/creation-biology.html .

Most of that is over my head.

 

[Faith1960]

Population genetics, where they have come up with this 10,000 bottleneck number, is based on the number and variety of alleles that humans have, then work backwards to how many people were needed so that they would come up with the number we have today. Perhaps we have no materialistic way to explain how the number in a bottleneck would be two instead of 10,000 (although, like I said, Dr. Gauger gives an explanation).

You have obviously read a lot and have a lot of knowledge. You probably know about unique genes which are not mathematically close to others and are found in virtually all species. There is no way to explain these either. I guess it takes imagination to think about how they got there. There are those who will endlessly try to figure out how they got there in a totally materialistic way, and those who believe God put them there.

There is a relatively new website called “The Third Way of Evolution.” This consists of a growing number of extremely influential biologists and other persons who have acknowledged that neo-Darwinian evolution has been proven false. They are now looking for other answers for evolution. On the site is Eugene Koonin, director of the NIH division of Comparative Genomics. This agency has compared full genome sequences of species since the mid-1990’s. It is on the forefront of biological comparisons, but has not found the answers they expected. I have a link to the persons involved in this new quest:

thethirdwayofevolution.com/people .

Those who believe in some direct supernatural creativity are often derided for using “God of the Gaps” method, but we have our own beliefs. I have written a post about my own GAPS theory called “Gain Application Probability Supposition.” It is based on the extreme improbability of the formation of working proteins from all the possible combinations of their sub-units, the amino acids:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/11/gaps.html .

I’ve also written a blog post called “Courage for the Gaps,” which encourages those of us who believe there are indeed gaps in totally materialistic explanations of life and speciation:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/12/courage-for-gaps.html .

This does not inhibit science as some claim. Christians who believe in some direct supernatural intervention still know what an atom is and can still research for cures for cancer, etc.

I’ve written a booklet about Creation Biology which takes you through cell metabolism of DNA and proteins and other subjects from the atom on. It’s not long and perhaps it would be helpful to give you some concepts that would help your continued efforts to understand.

womanatwell.blogspot.com/p/creation-biology.html .

Most of that is over my head.

 

[Faith1960]

Just using reason and logic we can see that at some point, there had to be one man and woman, even if you believe in macroevolution. At some point two humans had to evolve, that’s just rational thought. We call them Adam (meaning earth, or from the earth) and Eve (meaning life giving, life, mother of all.) That’s why it’s important to read that story not as a scientific treaty, but in the light of the kind of literature it is. Epic narrative is meant to show us not scientific fact but rather allegorically the relationship we have with God, the Father. That is it’s primary purpose.
.

But where did they evolve from? I mean how? Did an apelike being give birth to a human or, is it like I’m leaning, that there was a group of beings and God gave two of them souls, Adam and Eve?
If it’s the latter, is that poygenism?

 

[edwest2]

They use math and calibrate something considering the genetic variation among people. Or something. It, too, is over my head. It’s a lot of math and genetics.
It’s not like they pulled the number out of a hat.

I think they did.

Ed

 

[edwest2]

Population genetics, where they have come up with this 10,000 bottleneck number, is based on the number and variety of alleles that humans have, then work backwards to how many people were needed so that they would come up with the number we have today. Perhaps we have no materialistic way to explain how the number in a bottleneck would be two instead of 10,000 (although, like I said, Dr. Gauger gives an explanation).

You have obviously read a lot and have a lot of knowledge. You probably know about unique genes which are not mathematically close to others and are found in virtually all species. There is no way to explain these either. I guess it takes imagination to think about how they got there. There are those who will endlessly try to figure out how they got there in a totally materialistic way, and those who believe God put them there.

There is a relatively new website called “The Third Way of Evolution.” This consists of a growing number of extremely influential biologists and other persons who have acknowledged that neo-Darwinian evolution has been proven false. They are now looking for other answers for evolution. On the site is Eugene Koonin, director of the NIH division of Comparative Genomics. This agency has compared full genome sequences of species since the mid-1990’s. It is on the forefront of biological comparisons, but has not found the answers they expected. I have a link to the persons involved in this new quest:

thethirdwayofevolution.com/people .

Those who believe in some direct supernatural creativity are often derided for using “God of the Gaps” method, but we have our own beliefs. I have written a post about my own GAPS theory called “Gain Application Probability Supposition.” It is based on the extreme improbability of the formation of working proteins from all the possible combinations of their sub-units, the amino acids:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/11/gaps.html .

I’ve also written a blog post called “Courage for the Gaps,” which encourages those of us who believe there are indeed gaps in totally materialistic explanations of life and speciation:

womanatwell.blogspot.com/2013/12/courage-for-gaps.html .

This does not inhibit science as some claim. Christians who believe in some direct supernatural intervention still know what an atom is and can still research for cures for cancer, etc.

I’ve written a booklet about Creation Biology which takes you through cell metabolism of DNA and proteins and other subjects from the atom on. It’s not long and perhaps it would be helpful to give you some concepts that would help your continued efforts to understand.

womanatwell.blogspot.com/p/creation-biology.html .

You may wish to get a copy of Programming of Life by Donald E. Johnson. Information theory is another tool in examining the human gene.

Ed

 

[womanatwell]

Most of that is over my head.

Thanks for looking, and I’m sorry, I don’t want to speak over your head. It’s just that genes code for proteins, which do the work of our cells. These *functional *proteins have been found by researchers, and not just Creationist researchers, to be extremely rare, something like 1 in 10^70. They are more rare in the lineup of their sub-units than 1 star per the number of stars in our galaxy. This is what I’m trying to get at.

If you are leaning toward ensoulment of two individuals among many, it would take God’s intervening hand, in my opinion, to keep them from interbreeding if they are so close genetically.

 

[womanatwell]

Intelligent Design is not primarily about comparing living things to non-living things, although they do make such comparisons. Intelligent Design is about the fact that life was designed, not just a twist or turn here and there that led, by accident, to human beings.

Ed

When I said that Intelligent Design compares living with non-living but both are designed, I meant that atoms, the periodic table of elements, the stars and planets also take intelligence to be designed and produced. I understand the argument of the ID advocates, but since materialists believe non-living (and living) nature to have come about somehow without intelligence means there is *faith *involved to believe everything has come from intelligence.

 

[womanatwell]

You may wish to get a copy of Programming of Life by Donald E. Johnson. Information theory is another tool in examining the human gene.

Ed

I may look and see if I can get your suggestion on Inter-library loan. I have the book by John Pierce,* An Introduction to Information Theory*. Of course, William Dembski uses information theory in his theories and I have read the Design Inference.

I imagine you know of Hubert Yockey who used information theory to get an approximation of around 1 in 10^63 protein sequences of 100 amino acids as being functional. One of his articles is “On the information content of cytochrome c:”

sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0022519377900431 .

(This abstract of the article is free. I got the full article by inter-library loan.)