D = 21.6 (mutational differences found in mtDNA)

Is this a nigger's attempt at science?

I admit I know very little of biology, the following are my friend's findings that he emailed to me (yes, he is a Christian) I am not, I just want to know the objective truth, and his arguments are compelling and frightening

Is Biodiversity in a short amount of time possible? That is the question. I feel I have an answer. I've been trying to falsify a young-time scale, assume a global flood, and have come to this conclusion. It indicates something very contradicting. Am I missing something other than common descent phylogenetic positions from unknown taxa? Any help, if you have time, would be appreciated. Thank you.

Observance: Diseases, mutations, and quick morphological, yet segregated, epistasis are the result of initial inbreeding mutational load then geological splits. That is why the canine mutational load is so high and so morphologically diverse through out their phylogeny. (and so wonderfully documented).

Assumption: If we see this in dogs, pigs, horses, house cats, cattle, and lambs (domesticated artificial selection), then is it logical to assume natural inbreeding of all organisms in the past resulted in the same, such morphologically diverse, groupings; subsequently separated by geological areas? Once organisms (sexual not asexual) are bottlenecked into an area, and must mate with such closely related genetic phenotypes, the result is epistasis of that organism--which is why biodiversity is so geologically segregated. Only until a different organism from another geological segregation is introduced into the population (hybridization), will you see a phylogenic migration of subspecies.

Methods and Discussion: (a1.)The mechanisms for adaptation are: mutation, gene flow, and sex (including hybridization). (Prediction) This results in high mitochondrial diversity (zoologically observed in selecting traits). (a2.)The mechanism for stasis or epistasis is inheritance. (Prediction) This results in low (nil) mitochondrial diversity (zoologically observed in breeding those selective traits).

Sex, or introduction of a different epigenetic enhancer, initiates the variances we see sustained in the biodiversity. In non-hybrid sex, this is not a mitochondrial mutational change. It is an epigenetic change. It is either turned on, some what turned off, turned off, recessive, or missing completely due to mutational load. Those genes that are missing completely still have the enhancer genes working, causing cancer/disease/infertility/etc,. Could this also be known as "specialized?" In hybrid sex, we can measure the path (phylogeny of taxa studied, known, and witness the new trait inserted. If left to nature, those extremely "specialized" organisms, which have inbred diseases or extreme mutations will no longer be able to reproduce viably and go extinct. We are actually witnessing this now. Those that did not geologically separate would not survive. (a3.)Because of this "after-the-flood-inbreeding," mitochondrial mutation rates initially must have been extremely fast and have been slowing down due to closely related hybridization. Also, this would result in similar species that could mate in the past and can no longer today (Bonobos/Common, Artic Rabbit/Jack Rabbit, etc.) Also known as speciation, which inheritably leads to stasis/epistasis. Has this mitochondrial rate been calculated? Yes. We will test humans in this example.

Calculations:
This mutational rate of mitochondrial DNA tested out of 5140 people from all different haplogroups is:
200x10E-9xBpE-1xYrsE-1
The answer is:0.000996.
The mitochondrial diversity between any two humans the world over is:
(max) 44 for those non-closely related haplogroups. (as predicted above (a1.)).
(min) 0 for those closely related haplogroups. (as predicted above (a2.)).
The secular average as published is 21.6. Using the predictive secular d=2rt equation, where "d" equals diversity between any two organisms of the same species, "r" equals the mutation rate as observed, and "t" equals time in years, we should be able to answer the equation with the above data.
d = 21.6,
r = 0.000996,
t = ?
so: 21.6 = 2(0.000996) x t
or t = 21.6/0.001992
t = 10,843 years.

Objections:
Of course this equation is using a constant rate. However, with initial post-flood inbreeding, the rate should have been much faster than what we see in the remnant diversity today (as stated above in (a3.) and witnessed in selective breeding). Are there any other mitochondrial mutation rates studied in other organisms that can confirm this low diversity and such young time frame contradictions? Yes. The round worm, water flea, and fruit fly. All of which come to the same "less than 11,000 years" conclusion. These "4" organisms are separated by a secular timescale of 20million years of stratum. However, if their genetic clocks all conclude the same age, then this observance should recalculate the age of those particular stratum as being the same age as well. Are there any geological mechanisms that could stratify such extreme time quickly? We do observe localized major flooding resulting in dynamic stratification with short periods. So, could a global flood be inferred?

Conclusion:
Post-flood conditions could result in extremely low populations which could have facilitated inbreeding. Inbreeding causes severe genetic mitochondrial mutations rather quickly. These mutations cause morphological traits within a post-flood organism. In order to sustain reproduction viability, these organisms must have "scattered' (a4.) into different geological areas. In doing so, those organisms, now segregated, slowed their mitochondrial mutations and their successive inheritable traits reached epistasis. If given the time of millions of years for biodiversity, the extreme mutational rates observed and calculated with low mitochondrial diversity between any same two, all organisms would have completely replaced each mitochondrial nucleotide several times over and this would result in zero extant organisms today. However, since extant organisms exist, the accepted time scale must be recalculated to match the observed genetic clocks. Observed genetic clocks have the appearance of deep biodiversity resulting from shallow time and bottlenecked inbreeding. With these genetic calculations, should all extant organisms have their mitochondrial mutation rates and diversity studied? If correct, predictive young-time should be the same.

yeah, you can't use a genetic clock that's calibrated against a radiometric clock to disprove radiometric dating.

the genetic clock is dependent on the radiometric one, so if they don't match you've screwed up the calculation.

you could argue that radiometric dating is wrong, but this is just using radiometric dating to argue that radiometric dating is wrong.

So the mutational rate is something that cannot be determined by direct measurement, and must be assumed through radiometric dating?

>this thread

Yes.
it happens too slowly to measure in real time.

we measure it by comparing modern mtDNA to fossils that are radiometrically dated.

if the radio dating is off then the rate is off. If the rate is off then the radio date is off. But you can't use the rate to disprove the radio date because the radio date was used to establish the rate.

>I admit I know very little of biology, the following are my friend's findings that he emailed to me (yes, he is a Christian) I am not, I just want to know the objective truth, and his arguments are compelling and frightening

Are his arguments equally compelling of Islam?

If he manages to convince you, make sure to convert to Islam instead of Christianity, as Islam is newer and essentially C++.

If this horrifies your friend, ask him how mans common ancestor being at a given point in time is evidence that a woman can give birth without sex while, at the same time, NOT being evidence that an archangel talked to a sandnigger born 570 AD.

I see, thank you for your explanation.

>as Islam is newer and essentially C++.
kek

You're welcome.

a more sophisticated argument would be that radiometric dating is off either because of an anomaly in time or in background radiation or decay rate.

science doesn't have any answer to that except the inductive one- we haven't observed such a thing and have no basis for thinking it could happen.

that doesn't make it impossible, just less likely.

>NOT being evidence that an archangel talked to a sandnigger born 570 AD.

sure, because an illiterate orphan shepard could have pulled this off his ass:
>Have We not made the earth as a bed, and the mountains as pegs

pic related

or
>No! If he does not stop, We will take him by the naseyah (front of the head), a lying, sinful naseyah (front of the head)!
ref to the prefrontal cortex related to behavior such as lying

while fucking atheists needed MRI to study shit like this. He surely built an MRI between two shits

or
>He has set free the two seas meeting together. There is a barrier between them. They do not transgress.
>He is the one who has set free the two kinds of water, one sweet and palatable, and the other salty and bitter. And He has made between them a barrier and a forbidding partition.

arguably someone could have seen two seas /a river+a sea meet and told him about it, but highly doubtful

>Or (the unbelievers’ state) is like the darkness in a deep sea. It is covered by waves, above which are waves, above which are clouds. Darknesses, one above another. If a man stretches out his hand, he cannot see it....

he also had a hidden submarine between two sand dunes

>Have you not seen how God makes the clouds move gently, then joins them together, then makes them into a stack, and then you see the rain come out of it....

don't forget his sounding balloon. I even hear he attached a frog to it once

>Then We made him as a drop in a place of settlement, firmly fixed. Then We made the drop into an alaqah (leech, suspended thing, and blood clot), then We made the alaqah into a mudghah (chewed substance)...
(spine of an embryo looks like teeth marks btw)
well maybe someone had a miscarriage, or maybe they opened pregnant women to study them.

I'm sorry if I believe this couldn't be possible without a God or an Archangel. It's a matter of faith.

forgot pic

crust = bed
mountain = peg for crust

>not using units
>oh hey! 4 apple and 25 oranges! you are 4x25=100% autistic.

kys

>I'm sorry if I believe this couldn't be possible without a God or an Archangel. It's a matter of faith.

That's what I was saying you dumb sandnigger. If his friend manages to convince him God is real, he shouldn't convert to C, he should convert to C++.

>kek

Thank you.