From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 12/27/2025 12:22 PM, RonO wrote:   
   > On 12/27/2025 5:27 AM, MarkE wrote:   
   >> On 24/12/2025 7:27 am, John Harshman wrote:   
   >>> On 12/22/25 11:16 PM, MarkE wrote:   
   >>>> This is a rejection of gene-centric causal supremacy, and an   
   >>>> argument for multi-level, bidirectional causation and information   
   >>>> sourcing. The cell (zygote in the first instance) in its entirety   
   >>>> e.g. proteins, RNA, sugars etc and their structural arrangement   
   >>>> (cytoplasm, organelles, membrane etc) and interactions regulate and   
   >>>> control gene expression. The distribution of these in the cell   
   >>>> represent essential "analogue" information. That's where I think the   
   >>>> unaccounted information is to be found.   
   >>>   
   >>> That doesn't work. For one thing, almost all the information about   
   >>> different sorts of cells doesn't reach the germ line, other than   
   >>> through the genome that gives rise to those sorts. The ovum does   
   >>> contain certain maternal proteins and transcripts that help to get   
   >>> development going, but those are specified by the maternal genome,   
   >>> and the rest of the zygote's cellular contents are quickly recycles   
   >>> using transcription and translation from the zygote's genome. Whether   
   >>> a zygote turns into a chimp or a human is determined by the contents   
   >>> of its genome, not all that other stuff.   
   >>>   
   >>> You're just avoiding the question, which I will repeat:   
   >>>   
   >>> But how many genetic changes do you think were necessary to turn the   
   >>> human-chimp ancestor into a modern human? Give me a ballpark.   
   >>>   
   >>   
   >> Much more than "a few thousand", i.e. orders of magnitude.   
   >>   
   >> But don't avoid the undergirding question I'm asking: what is the   
   >> total and necessary information content of the zygote to produce a human?   
   >>   
   >> You seem to be asserting that just the functional genome is   
   >> sufficient, i.e. ~80 megabytes. Am I understanding you correctly?   
   >>   
   >>   
   > There is no reason to wallow in IDiotic denial when you do not want to   
   > fill the gap with your designer.  This designer is not the Biblical   
   > designer.  It is a designer that did not create our mammalian lineage   
   > after the crop plants were designed during the 3rd period of time.   
   > Mammals existed before this 3rd period of time.  This designer took an   
   > ape genetic template and changed it little by little to evolve apes and   
   > then used the ape genetic template to evolve humans through a series of   
   > smaller brained bipedal intermediates.  This is not the designer   
   > described in the Bible, so there is no reason to deny reality in order   
   > to try to support your Biblical beliefs.   
   >   
   > Behe understands that chimps and humans share a common ancestor and that   
   > humans evolved by descent with modification from that ape common   
   > ancestor.  The molecular data just cannot be denied.  Just look how the   
   > reason to believe ex IDiots have had to try to account for reality with   
   > their constant recreation of new kinds from the existing kinds (they   
   > even claim that these new creations can interbreed with the previous   
   > creations).  They have to claim that this recreation is still going on   
   > today because biological evolution is just a fact of nature.   
      
   The numbers are that the 2,500 human genome paper identified 88 million   
   sequence variants among their 2,500 human genomes and they verified 80   
   million of the 100 million variants that existed in the dbSNP database.   
   These were mostly SNPs (single nucleotide polymorphisms) with some small   
   insertions and deletions.  That is nearly 3% of the human genome   
   segregating as variation within the 2,500 humans in the study.  When you   
   look at the same type of genetic variation existing between chimps and   
   humans you find 1.2% of the human genome varies between chimps and   
   humans.  That indicates the magnitude of the genetic variation that   
   exists within the human population that is currently still evolving   
   along with all the other extant species on earth.  As I noted humans   
   have only 1/3 the genetic variation that is segregating in the chimp   
   population and 1/5 of the variation of most species that exist on earth.   
     New species evolve from populations that have a lot of genetic   
   variation within them, and the new population takes some of that   
   variation with it, just as modern humans took only a subset of the   
   genetic variation that still exists in Africa when they left Africa   
   during the last ice age.   
      
   The numbers above do not count the large insertions and deletions, and   
   gene duplication events, nor the transposon events that differ between   
   humans, and between humans and chimps.  I should note that the 2,500   
   genomes had only 661 African sequences, and the African sequences had   
   over 25% greater sequence diversity than the outside of Africa sequences.   
      
   https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4750478/pdf/41586_2015_   
   rticle_BFnature15393.pdf   
      
   Ron Okimoto   
      
      
   >   
   > More genetic variation exists within the extant human population than   
   > exists as differences between chimps and humans.  You just have to look   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)