On Fri, 9 Apr 2004 16:08:01 +0000 (UTC), 
John W Edser  wrote:
>Larry Moran wrote,

>>> In a theory you have to prove an allele is ONLY neutral.
>>> How do you do this?
> 
>> The easiest way is to check a large sample of a population to 
>> see if two alleles are in Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium. Did you 
>> not know that?
> 
> Yes I did.
> Did you know that the Hardy-Weinberg equilibrium
> requires an infinite population for such a proof and only
> indicates a random distribution i.e. a verified random
> PATTERN if such a proof ever existed?

No, I did not know that. I suggest you write a letter to
the editors of the major scientific journals and explain this
to them. They seem to be under the impression that a Hardy-
Weinberg distribution in real populations is evidence that
an allele is not affecting fitness. At least that how it
seems to me. These editors are constantly accepting
papers that make such statements.

> Assuming you did have an infinite population
> and had proven the allele distribution pattern was
> indeed neutal, what  type of PROCESS can validly
> be suggested to have caused this pattern?

The process by which neutral alleles *change* in frequency
in a population is called random genetic drift. Have you
heard of it? 

> I note that you just snipped the meat of my post which
> concerns the critical difference between a model
> and a theory.

I did. I'm not interested in your strange philosophy and
it has no relevance to sci.bio.evolution.

[snip]

>>> Mr Moran simply evaded my proposition, _entirely_.
>>> Since it is you and not me that insists that just a random
>>> drift process can contest an win against selection then
>>> it is you and not me that must answer this question:
>>> ___________________________________________
>>> Can drift without selection cause evolution because
>>> selection without drift definitely can?
>>>
>>> PLEASE ANSWER THIS QUESTION
>>> ___________________________________________
> 
>> The answer is yes.
> 
> Thank you for answering the question.

You're welcome. It's probably the fifth time that I've answered
your question but I understand that you have to hear things
many times before they start to sink in.
 
> How would you set up a real life experiment
> (not just a thought experiment) to test your proposition?

You start by accepting the standard minimal definition of
evolution - change in the frequency of alleles in a population.

Then you create a neutral allele; for example, a base substitution 
in the defunct coding region of a pseudogene in some green algae. 
Insert the mutation into a cell. Grow the culture until you have
lots and lots of green algae carrying the mutation.

Dump 1000 litres of this culture into ten different small lakes
that have a thriving population of the green algae (i.e. lots
of individuals with the original wild-type allele). Sample the
algae in each lake every year for 10-20 years to see if the
frequency of alleles in the population is changing.




Larry Moran
---
þ RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info{at}bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2áÿ* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 4/9/04 9:00:59 PM