Re: More on Kitz/Dover

Zoe wrote:

> On 08 Jan 2006 07:13:02 GMT, poiuy@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric Rowley) wrote:
>
>
>>From: Zoe <muze10@xxxxxxx>:
>>
>>>On 07 Jan 2006 08:18:02 GMT, poiuy@xxxxxxxxxxxx (Eric Rowley)
>>>wrote:
>>
>> ______________A
>> |
>> ___Tetrapods___Y|
>> | |______________B
>> |
>>-------------X|
>> |
>> |__Ray_Finned_ Fishes_____________C
>>
>>
>>>>>Y is the last common ancestor to the lineage that led to A
>>>>>and B. >
>>>>
>>>>Wrong!
>>>>
>>>>Y is the last common ancestor of _A_and_B_!
>>
>>>okay, whatever. Some want touse the word "lineage" others want
>>>to make a direct connect between extant A and B and the last
>>>common ancestor. Doesn't change the results.
>>
>>No, but you are messing up the results by trying to make the
>>differances between two species be dependant on something other
>>than the length of time their linages have been separate.
>
>
> no, I am basing the differences on the supposed molecular clock that
> is part of evolutionary theory. The split does not stop the
> differences from accumulating at a regular molecular-clock rate, does
> it?
>

Let us call LCA of CARP C-H
let us call LCA of mice M-H
let us call LCA of humans H

C to M = 78% ( I and making up these number for examples_
C to H = 78%

H to M = 13%

Notice these are pairwise compares

Now when you talk about the clock, it is measuring the length of the
lineage between LCA-X and between C and M and between C and H Which are
the same.


Then the lesser LCA to leaf is M TO H. Why because they share LCA less
than LCA-Tetrapod.

then CH = CM
MH < CH

in English CARP TO HUMAN equals CARP TO MOUSE.

MOUSE TO HUMAN is less than CARP TO HUMAN. (OR CARP TO MOUSE)

josephus

>>How in the world can you think that two linages can be
>>accumulating differences between themselves during the period
>>before they split apart? Before they split they are identical,
>>one and the same, have no differences.
>
>
> agreed. And even after the split, A, B, and C, supposedly continue to
> accumulate differences at the same speed of the same molecular clock,
> right?
>
>>When they split (from each other) they obviously start with 0%
>>differences between them and the differences increase from then on,
>>how could it be otherwise? (within the evolutionary box)
>
>
> do these differences increase at different rates once the supposed
> splits have occurred?
>
> This is beginning to feel like isochron deja vu. Zero starting point
> and all...
>
>>And why would you think that the differences would be any less
>>just because their linages had split off from other linages along
>>the way? How in the world would that remove already existing
>>differences?
>
>
> it doesn't. That was my point, from an evolutionary point of view..
>
>>>>Their linages _start_, as do all linages, as far as we know, at
>>>>the very first lifeform, 3.5-4 billion years ago.
>>
>>>so are you saying that I am right that X is the last common
>>>ancestor to the lineages of Tetrapods and Ray-finned fishes,
>>>but wrong that Y is the last common ancestor to the lineages of
>>>A and B?
>>
>>Linages don't have ancestors (of their own), they _consist_ of
>>ancestors.
>>X is the last common ancestor of Tetrapods and Ray-finned fishes.
>>X is the last common ancestor of C and A.
>>X is the last common ancestor of C and B.
>>and Y is the last common ancestor of A and B.
>>The linages of A, B and C all existed at X (and way before).
>
>
> right, the lineages exist all the way back to the first common
> ancestor, and time runs exactly the same for all lineages.
>
>>>>Their linages _split_ at Y.
>>
>>>and split at X, and Q, and R, and wherever else evolutionists
>>>have decided to place the splits. So what then?
>>
>>I meant that Y is where they split apart from _each_other_,
>>Y is their last common ancestor and it is the distance from
>>A to Y to B that affects how different from each other they are.
>
>
> are you suggesting a change in the rate of the molecular clock's
> "ticking" after a split so that A and B begin accumulating differences
> at a different rate than the rate at which C continues to accumulate?
>
>>The splits at X, Q and R are irrelevant to how different they are
>
>>from each other.
>
>>The split at X affects how different they are from C.
>
>
> ah, that's the new question on the table. What is it about the split
> that affects the rate at which A and B accumulate differences compared
> to C?
>
>>The splits at Q and R affect their differences to some other
>>unnamed species.
>
>
> okay. How so?
>
>>But the split at Y is where their linages became separate (from
>>each other) so that they could start differing (from each other).
>
>
> yes, they start differing from each other, according to your theory,
> but at the same rate, right? The molecular clock continues to tick
> the same for A, B, and C, doesn't it?
>
> <snip until this newest and latest point is cleared up. I wonder if
> I'll ever get back to the trial, not to mention my laws of
> intelligence threads>
>

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: What Came Before Monkies?
    ... man is thought to have evolved from the great Ape about 130,000 years ... So whether you accept common descent or not, ... recent common ancestor was with chimps. ... -- to find the common ancestor of all the mammals. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Common ancestor between man and ape
    ... "...Genetic, in linguistics, means due to descent from a common ... ancestor language, rather than borrowing at some time in the past ... flea-scratching primate, specifically a member of Homo sapiens, since we ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Common ancestor between man and ape
    ... "...Genetic, in linguistics, means due to descent from a common ... ancestor language, rather than borrowing at some time in the past ... The "common ancestor" of a pair of related species is an ancestral ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Common ancestor between man and ape
    ... "...Genetic, in linguistics, means due to descent from a common ... ancestor language, rather than borrowing at some time in the past ... The "common ancestor" of a pair of related species is an ancestral ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading