Nested Hierarchy: Evidence for Evolution

This is a repost- its slower and has more info

(Video 1)
DonExodus2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=Izl5BB2AkZE

DonExodus's "challenge"
http://s262.photobucket.com/albums/ii119/DonExodus/?action=view&current=P...


(Video 2)
AronRa
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5MXTBGcyNuc

(Video 3)
DonExodus2
http://youtube.com/watch?v=-CvX_mD5weM&feature=PlayList&p=0FB1F085BD9...

(Video 4)
Cdk007
http://youtube.com/watch?v=rX_WH1bq5HQ

(Video 5)
Serpwidgets
http://youtube.com/watch?v=994fagrYlsE


Richard Dawkin's clip

http://youtube.com/watch?v=sb2fjftZrkE&feature=related

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Evolution
• Intelligent
• Design
• Creationism
• Nested
• Hierarchies
• Common
• Descent
• Micro
• Macro
• phylogenetic
• tree
• Macroevolution

[SlavaPiorun]

@MolecularBioVids2

Since the odds of ANY shared locus-specific ERV's is incredibly low, under 1%, does it really matter? The proof is in the pudding.

[jomen112]

@chinamanspeakenlis wrote "remove that music its so irritating..."

If you just had said "that music its so irritating..." I would had no problem with that, but you added "remove", and that I have a problem with. Therefore a thought for you: instead of asking for restrictions that fits your own needs i.e. try to alter the world to only pleasure yourself) why not use the mute button or do not look at all if it irritates you? Point is: do not enforce restrictions on other that suits yourself.

[chinamanspeakenlis]

arghh.. remove that music its so irritating... you ruined your own vid with that crap...

[Answerquestions1]

@MolecularBioVids2

or maybe the LTR disconituity is due because gorillas reproduce faster than chimps, more reproduction = more babies = more mutations that is way grollias LTR is more ´´mutated´´ that those also present in humans and chimps.

[MolecularBioVids2]

“[Show] me a [mathematical] model that correlates ‘time’ and percentage of shared ERVs. [For] example if X an Y diverged 5M years ago, how many ERVs [must] they share?”

I was not relating number of shared ERVs with time; I was relating the ratio of LTR-LTR discontinuity with the number of species that share an orthologous ERV. Again, the lack of consistency in rate of endogenization/fixation makes a specific number or equation unrealistic.

[MolecularBioVids2]

@Answerquestions1

“[Show] me the math… [These] kind of claims have to be represented in a mathematical (statistical) model. [That] way we can all make and test predictions.”

n ∝ d

where

n is the number of species that share an orthologous ERV

d is the ratio of LTR-LTR discontinuity

[MolecularBioVids2]

So yes, a specific number is unrealistic.

What can be said is that there should be a general trend of a decrease in shared ERVs as relatedness decreases, since the species in question have spent less time as the ancestral spices.

The prediction is that humans share more ERVs with other hominids than they do with canines.

[MolecularBioVids2]

“[What] percentage of ERVs should dogs and humans share? [You] have to predict; what most we find if we ever study dogs ERVs. [If] there is a correlation between shared ERVs and time, then answering to this should not be a problem.”

There is little consistency in rate of endogenization/fixation, given all the factors that can lead to differing rates in differing species over time (such as geography, viral climate, exposure due to niche, innate partial restriction ability or immunity, etc.).

[MolecularBioVids2]

Here, I’ll continue these predictions:

As we continue to sequence hominid genomes and compare their ERVs, we will find more and more shared ERVs, and the vast majority (if not all) of them will be precisely where the determined hominid phylogeny predicts them to be.

Today’s date: 12-29-10

[MolecularBioVids2]

The discontinuity correlation was found, as predicted; as were the shared mutations. Even the presence of nested hierarchy was found, and was arranged just as the one of distribution—again, just as predicted.