@DivinelyDesined Are you purposely lying about the paper? Or you are just too scientifically ignorant to understand the paper you are misrepresenting?

@ChallengeBelief If I got something wrong, I'm happy to hear a correction.

@DivinelyDesined First of all, you can't even properly cite a paper. Second of all, how do you explain ALL the other evidence that shows how humans diverged from previous common ancestors hundreds of thousands years ago but we had a common hominid ancestors millions of years back and it just

@ChallengeBelief Neither of those are corrections of the information presented.

@DivinelyDesined I'm demonstrably correct that you don't know how to properly cite a paper. And you cherry picking one part of a whole inter-related set of information and data that make up our current model, and just because you misunderstand the science that the whole model doesn't work is

@ChallengeBelief Still waiting for the part where you offer a helpful correction.

@DivinelyDesined If you are going to just ignore what I said, then why should I bother?

@ChallengeBelief You jumped into my post all hot-headed claiming I got something wrong. I respectfully gave you a chance to correct me. You haven't done anything but belittle and insult. Why should I take anything you say seriously?

@DivinelyDesined @ChallengeBelief Also you are misusing the conclusions from the 1997 study. You cannot apply short term mutation rates to the timescale you claim. This is because there is a selection bias (you know natural selection) that will tend to remove many of those mutations over time. Only a few get

@markgamache @ChallengeBelief I already addressed this objection in the thread, but here is some more detail on why this assumption is just speculation without evidence: https://x.com/DivinelyDesined/...

@DivinelyDesined @ChallengeBelief As I explained in a different post we don’t just have short term mutation rates we have longer term rates from human ancestors. Additionally you are handwaving away the fundamental mechanism of evolution which is selection from variation. This is essentially a smoothing function

@markgamache @DivinelyDesined The papers that he poorly cites (because he's never written anything that needed references) literally explains why the mtDNA should NOT be used for long term evolutionary modeling. And even one of the paper he cites, [Sigurðardóttir, S., Helgason, A., Gulcher, J. R.,

@ChallengeBelief @markgamache So glad you left this comment, proving you have no idea what you're talking about. Sigurðardóttir et al. indicated the mtDNA is HALF that of Parson based on a specific mtDNA control region segment (~360 base pairs), while Parsons et al. reported ~0.2 mutations per generation for

@DivinelyDesined @markgamache You ABSOLUTELY don't understand scale. Do you use a yardstick to measure the distance between the earth to the moon? Read the actual papers. You can't extrapolate mtDNA rate changes for millions of years. 🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️🤦‍♂️Read the science. You use the mtDNA for anthropology. Not for

@ChallengeBelief @markgamache See how you move the goalposts? So I didn't misrepresent the data, you just don't like the conclusions. "You can't extrapolate mtDNA rate changes for millions of years." Based on what data??? I'll tell you what data: None data - because you're repeating an ASSUMPTION, which

@DivinelyDesined @ChallengeBelief @markgamache Think about what kind of grave you are digging for yourself, @DivinelyDesined. We have a massive and growing database of aDNA to corroborate mutation rate estimates. Are you confident that you can hand-wave all of this data away? AADR (Allen Ancient DNA Resource, v54.1 as of

@modalsurrealist @ChallengeBelief @markgamache None of this is mutation rate data.

@DivinelyDesined @ChallengeBelief @markgamache All of it is. We can compare the mtDNA to 5000 ancient humans, 2000 ancient Y-chromosomes. You are making very specific predictions about what these samples should show.

@DivinelyDesined @modalsurrealist @markgamache You saying, "none of this is mutation rate data" pretty much says that you have NO idea what you are talking about.