http://www.tepapa.govt.nz/whales Whales are mammals whose ancestors lived on land. So how did they evolve into the sea creatures of today? Based on illustrations by Carl Buell and displayed as part of the Whales Tohorā exhibition.
Syncytin (which I misspelled above), a protein of the placenta, is coded by a retroviral env gene. In some cases, the viral promoter LTR substituted or added to the original starter of a human gene (salivary amylase). But there are no examples for a whole ERV, with all its genes and LTRs, fulfilling a task in the human genome.
hisham031170 asked for a test of macroevolution and I suggested ERVs. Then he asked me if ERVs have a function (he wants to prepare the creationist defense "ERVs have a function so they cannot be randomly inserted").
My answer is that they have as much function as mutations. Most are neutral, some deleterious, and one out of a billion is good for us.
Orthologous ERVs proof common ancestry, no matter what function they have.
@hisham031170 ERVs are like other mutations of the genome: most are neutral and have no function at all. The deleterious ones have been weeded out by natural selection and very few gained a function (syncityn).
But the function of ERVs is irrelevant for the proof that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. Do you agree that the ERVs in our DNA are relicts of virus attacks? Is there macroevolution at all between chimps and humans (there are no new genes AFAIK).
@gorilla199uncensored
Syncytin (which I misspelled above), a protein of the placenta, is coded by a retroviral env gene. In some cases, the viral promoter LTR substituted or added to the original starter of a human gene (salivary amylase). But there are no examples for a whole ERV, with all its genes and LTRs, fulfilling a task in the human genome.
kereng5 14 hours ago
@hisham031170
Define what you call macroevolution
"testable evidences that multiple microevolution leads to macroevolution."
Provide evidence evolution stops before what you call macroevolution.
gorilla199uncensored 17 hours ago
@kereng5
"ERVs have a function"
LOL thats so stupid, but they have to strech the lies even further.
"one out of a billion is good for us."
Do you have a reference for this, as I dont think this would happen.
gorilla199uncensored 17 hours ago
@gorilla199uncensored
hisham031170 asked for a test of macroevolution and I suggested ERVs. Then he asked me if ERVs have a function (he wants to prepare the creationist defense "ERVs have a function so they cannot be randomly inserted").
My answer is that they have as much function as mutations. Most are neutral, some deleterious, and one out of a billion is good for us.
Orthologous ERVs proof common ancestry, no matter what function they have.
kereng5 17 hours ago
@kereng5
"ERVs are like other mutations "
Well its clear you have no idea an ERV is let alone anything about it.
"But the function of ERVs is irrelevant for the proof that chimps and humans have a common ancestor."
Function? explain
Care to explain how the ERVs match up in humans and other great apes?
gorilla199uncensored 19 hours ago
Are you serious?!
Fusion840 1 day ago
@hisham031170 "How do you test (falsify) macroevolution? "
Find a Pre Cambrian rabbit, demonstrate no shared genes (especially spliced ones) humans with other apes.
Have fun.
ozowen 1 day ago
Whales have no sense of smell (no olfactory bulb) but they still have hundreds of pseudogenes for smelling in the air (olfactory receptor genes).
kereng5 1 day ago
@hisham031170 ERVs are like other mutations of the genome: most are neutral and have no function at all. The deleterious ones have been weeded out by natural selection and very few gained a function (syncityn).
But the function of ERVs is irrelevant for the proof that chimps and humans have a common ancestor. Do you agree that the ERVs in our DNA are relicts of virus attacks? Is there macroevolution at all between chimps and humans (there are no new genes AFAIK).
kereng5 1 day ago