From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 8/30/2025 12:06 PM, RonO wrote:   
   > On 8/29/2025 11:48 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >> On 29/08/2025 1:48 am, RonO wrote:   
   >>   
   >> ...   
   >>   
   >>>> My question then, is it reasonable, accurate and in good faith to   
   >>>> characterise this as "science doesn't know X therefore God"?   
   >>>>   
   >>> Yes it is.  God-of-the-gaps is just that no matter if the gaps are   
   >>> never going to be filled.  No one expects to figure out how life   
   >>> actually arose on this planet.  The best that we can do without a   
   >>> time machine is figure out the most likely way that life arose, and   
   >>> it could have actually arisen in a much more unlikely way.  The first   
   >>> organic conglomerate that produced the first self replicating   
   >>> molecules might have been created by a random asteroid impact instead   
   >>> of condensing in some crevice somewhere.   
   >>>   
   >>> Gaps like what caused the Big Bang may never be filled due to the   
   >>> singularity that we can't get past to see what existed before.   
   >>> Denton is happy with using this gap because he can never be   
   >>> demonstrated to be wrong.   
   >>>   
   >>> I was a genetics major as an undergraduate at Berkeley, and all the   
   >>> geneticists told me that genetics was over and that the future was   
   >>> molecular biology, so I did my PhD in molecular genetics.  During my   
   >>> graduate studies tools for genomic analysis like PCR and   
   >>> microsatellite genetic markers were created, and they had the promise   
   >>> of allowing the unsolved issues in genetics to be answered.  I went   
   >>> back into genetics because the new technology was opening up a new   
   >>> frontier in genetics. There was finally the possibility that things   
   >>> like why the infinite allele model worked so well in quantitative   
   >>> genetics.  Quantitative genetic analysis was well worked out, but we   
   >>> didn't understand why it worked.  I started my first post doc on   
   >>> looking for quantitative trait loci (QTL) in 1992.  I retired in 2024   
   >>> and we still do not know why the infinite allele model works for   
   >>> quantitative genetic analysis.  We can sequence whole genomes now,   
   >>> but somethings remain a mystery.  You do not see the ID perps   
   >>> claiming that their designer is responsible for the success of the   
   >>> infinite allele model in quantitative genetics.   
   >>>   
   >>> My guess for why it works is that due to the fall off in increased   
   >>> accuracy with the inclusion of more past generations of data (about 3   
   >>> past generations are enough to use for things like BLUP (best linear   
   >>> unbiased prediction) is that linkage is the reason for the infinite   
   >>> allele model working so well.  Most of it may be apparent linkage and   
   >>> not actual linkage on the same chromosome.  We have found that an LD   
   >>> (linkage disequalibrium) of only 0.3 within a population is   
   >>> sufficient to use markers spaced along the genome to improve the   
   >>> accuracy of predicting the best breeding values for individuals.  All   
   >>> the alleles segregating in the genome have a minimum linkage of 0.5   
   >>> (you inherit half of one parent's genome) in the first cross.   
   >>> Closely linked markers have a linkage close to 1.0.  This means that   
   >>> the whole genome can be considered to have a quantitative genetic   
   >>> value due to hundred or thousands of genetic variants in that genome,   
   >>> and these variants can be inherited together just by chance if they   
   >>> occur in the same individual even if they are not linked.  This would   
   >>> create pseudo haplotypes based on the whole genome, and not just   
   >>> haplotypes of the same chromosomes. In the first cross half the QTL   
   >>> segregate together in any individual. My guess is that this would   
   >>> create close enough to an infinite number of pseudo haplotypes of   
   >>> unlinked QTL.  Half the sires genome is inherited in the first cross,   
   >>> 25% in the next cross, but if we are talking genome equivalents (and   
   >>> things that sire is homozygous for) then all the homozygous alleles   
   >>> (1 genome equivalent) is inherited among the progeny of the first   
   >>> cross, half a genome equivalent in the second cross and 25% in the   
   >>> third cross. Statistically these pseudo haplotypes could persist for   
   >>> multiple generations.  Each individual starts with a new set of   
   >>> pseudo haplotypes that add to the haplotypes due to actual linkage,   
   >>> so you never see all the "alleles" possible in a single generation.   
   >>> There would be pretty much an infinite number of them.   
   >>>   
   >>> Ron Okimoto   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> How is retirement treating you?   
   >   
   > Just fine.  I find myself researching more science topics because I am   
   > no longer limited to what my job involved.   
   >   
   > God of the gaps is just that no matter if science is ever going to fill   
   > the gaps, and even if you can fill the OOL gap with some god, it is not   
   > the god described in the Bible.  When the ID perps have to resort to   
   > quote mining and ignoring catalytic alternatives in order to support   
   > Tour you should understand that gap denial is bogus.   
   >   
   >>   
   >> Based on your experience as described above (credit where due btw) I'd   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)