Results 1 to 3 of 3

Thread: random mutation challenge by design

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    Celt
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z225
    mtDNA (M)
    WC1

    random mutation challenge by design

    It is the perceived wisdom that mutations are random and this is why we have I think it is fair to say there is total scientific acceptance of this so called unchallenged fact.

    I wish to challenge this by asking the project managers and administrators and genetic fraternity to look at their databases more carefully and to explain this phenomena to me:

    My work suggests to me that there is an ancestral pattern written into our DNA which has not been observed by the genetic community to date.

    This ancestral pattern is passed from father to son via the Y chromosome since the beginning of time and therefore is both observable and also therefore reverse engineer-able should someone seek to put back together the so called tree of life. This therefore needs to be explained.

    If you take your spreadsheet of values of say any specific surname and paste it into the spreadsheet I have linked to below in the way shown on the spreadsheet it will display the values of those names according to the ancestral pattern following rules using conditional formatting:

    In each case the conditional format will colour the cell blue where a marker follows the ancestral rule or red where it does not. The total percentage of markers following the ancestral rules can therefore be analysed and determined whether to be random or not on a large database as well as individuals.

    On marker DYS393 the value of repeats will be 13 or less
    390 will be 24 or less
    19 will be 14 or more
    391 will be 13 or less
    385a will be 11 or more
    385b will be 14 or more
    426 will be 12 or less
    388 will be 12 or more
    439 will be 12 or less
    389ii will be 12 or more
    392 will be 13 or less
    389i2 will be 28 or more
    458 will be 18 or less
    459a will be 9 or less
    459b will be 9 or more
    455 will be 11 or less
    454 will be 11 or less
    447 will be 25 or more
    437 will be 15 or less
    448 will be 19 or more
    449 will be 28 or more
    464a will be 15 or less
    464b will be 15 or less
    464c will be 17 or less
    464d will be 17 or less
    460 will be 10 or more
    GATA H4 will be 11 or less
    YCA iiA will be 19 or more
    YCA iiB will be 23 or less
    456 will be 16 or less
    607 will be 15 or less
    576 will be 19 or less
    570 will be 17 or more
    CDYa will be 36 or less
    CDYb will be 36 or more
    442 will be 12 or less
    438 will be 13 or less
    531 will be 11 or more
    578 will be 9 or less
    395SIa will be 15 or less
    395SIb will be 16 or less
    590 will be 8 or more
    537 will be 12 or less
    641 will be 10 or more
    472 will be 8 or more
    406Si will be 10 or less
    511 will be 10 or less
    425 will be 12 or less
    413a will be 23 or less
    413b will be 23 or less
    557 will be 16 or less
    594 will be 10 or more
    436 will be 12 or more
    490 will be 12 or more
    534 will be 15 or more
    450 will be 8 or more
    444 will be 12 or more
    481 will be 22 or more
    520 will be 20 or more
    446 will be 12 or more
    617 will be 12 or more
    568 will be 11 or more
    487 will be 13 or more
    572 will be 11 or less
    640 will be 11 or more
    492 will be 12 or more
    565 will be 12 or less

    This ancestral pattern assumes the use of samples who have had at east 67 markers analysed and assumes Adam had DNA that started from a set of values following these rules. As time passed a point is reached where the value of each marker changes according to the rule in a progressive manner ie not randomly but according to the rules.

    In consequence a marker such as DYS19 started its migration from a value which was in theoretical Adam is 14, then changed to 13 to his son and descendants, then to 12, then to 11, then to 10 etc according to the rule where the value today is either 13 or less.

    These ancestral changes may at some stage in the process move in subsequent generations in the opposite direction from the ancestral pattern handed down by theoretical Adam. The trigger for that change being either the time taken from the origination of the source branch of the tree and/or possible environmental changes (drought/famine etc). My reason for believing the former is because changes can be seen occuring in the global database of a number of surnames in cousins and close relatives across unconnected people in the same surname database at more or less the same time in the same haplogroup when there is no drought or adverse environmental condition that we know of. As a statement that is based upon general as to specific observation it looks like the trigger for the determination as to when the change may occur is time based since the origination of the source of any branch of the tree.

    Each surname is effectively a sub-branch of a haplogroup where the red markers are the identifying so called mutations that identify the subdivisional branch of the tree of life, because all surnames are following the same source rules as they are amended. As the tree of life develops each branch can be identified by the colours of the branches as they turn against the original Adam ancestral pattern. Suggesting that the whole of humanity will one day develop into a predetermined so called mutation and therefore this is not a random entity at all. Assumptions of randomness have been misplaced.

    This is confirmed by the fact that 90% or more of all markers follow the original ancestral pattern (Adams) without any changes whatsoever and in some cases 97.5% are the same value of repeats at a specific location where the surname has inherited its source pattern with little change. If those which have changed and flow against the original Adam ancestral pattern are also taken into account because they have formed an amended pattern that all ancestors of that branch follow the reduction of randomness falls to below 3% in most cases. The changed colours are either identifying a new branch that is following an amended Adam pattern or identifying a source outside of the surname (ie an adoption or change of name in the past).

    This pattern has been taken from my own DNA using the kit number 95673 (Y-Search UQCTD) which is currently undefined in the ISOGG tree at R-Z225 and I would expect it to be near the head if not the head of the DF27 branch because the surnames in haplogroups below DF27 hve patterns that show their location as below 95673.

    The case for random mutations has been made by those involved in population study geneticists who study the data given to them by companies like familytreedna. This information shows the data at a specific date in time where so called mutations have taken place.

    Consequently a family who have a marker such as DYS19 may have some members who have 13 repeats, some more who have 12 repeats and a vast majority who have 11 or 10 repeats because this was their ancestral route that took them to where they are today as populations exploded throughout the Western world. Only those with 13 have remained virtually unchanged as more and more migrate down the path from 12 to 11 and 10 etc whilst a few, if any, have moved against the ancestral pattern. Because time scales for mutations are so long in many instances the mutations have yet to create new patterns on many markers but this does goes further to conclude there is no random element involved.

    A population study of DYS19 markers will show nothing because it will show tens of thousands of different people, often with different surnames and values,which have no connection, despite the fact these people are connected to one common ancestor, who's source DNA may well be still carried unchanged by one such ancestral relative and the ancestral pattern clearly identifying their connection one to another visible in each sample. All that can be seen is many marketrs showing different random values - the present day perceived wisdom.

    Looking at the value alone gives you little understanding of what is happening in the DNA or indeed where it came from or how it got to where it is today. Ancestral pattern tells you how the DNA got to that value and consequently accounts for the concept of convergence where ancestors of the Jewish migration out of Israel are no longer J2 but have R1b definitions based upon how long they have taken to get to this point in the cycle that is clearly unfolding and demonstrable in almost every database connected to the Jews. Apply the human ancestral pattern to these databases and you immediately see the connection these R1b samples have to their source, which the owners of these samples know they have, but science is telling them does not exist. I choose the Jews as an example because they are well documented but the same is true for all humans and to complicate matters appears to cross the species barrier too confirming to me the presence of design - people wont like that I know but this is an assumption I cannot avoid.

    link to spreadsheet here
    link to other jewish, arab and L21 spreadsheet here
    link to Ashkenazi Levites
    link to Basque markers

    Here as a final spreadsheet is the Campbells Project data. Do not make the mistake of thinking that because the red cells are more numerous this means the sample cells are not following the ancestral pattern. It simply means that the Campbells have a number of unique markers that have turned against the original Adam ancestral pattern and more recently been passed to their ancestors. Those cells that have changed against the ancestral flow and turned red are now the new ancestral pattern that all the Campbells are following - hence all the cells are now following the new ancestral pattern which is increasing repeats on 458, GATA H4, YCAiib and CDYb, whilst decreasing repeats on DYS570 and 444, and consequently the predictability of any new mutation is close to 100%. This shows there are no random mutations involved. I would be pleased to hear the case that disproves this please.

    I would like to think this clearly shows design. Am I right?

    regards
    Nick (Ogmion)
    #95673

  2. #2
    Registered Users
    Posts
    1,193
    Sex
    Location
    France
    Ethnicity
    Franchouillard
    Y-DNA (P)
    G2a2b2a1b1a2a1-S2808
    mtDNA (M)
    H2a2a1

    Normandie Wallonia
    Quote Originally Posted by Ogmion View Post
    It is the perceived wisdom that mutations are random and this is why we have I think it is fair to say there is total scientific acceptance of this so called unchallenged fact.

    I wish to challenge this by asking the project managers and administrators and genetic fraternity to look at their databases more carefully and to explain this phenomena to me:

    My work suggests to me that there is an ancestral pattern written into our DNA which has not been observed by the genetic community to date.

    This ancestral pattern is passed from father to son via the Y chromosome since the beginning of time and therefore is both observable and also therefore reverse engineer-able should someone seek to put back together the so called tree of life. This therefore needs to be explained.

    If you take your spreadsheet of values of say any specific surname and paste it into the spreadsheet I have linked to below in the way shown on the spreadsheet it will display the values of those names according to the ancestral pattern following rules using conditional formatting:

    .................................................. .......;

    This ancestral pattern assumes the use of samples who have had at east 67 markers analysed and assumes Adam had DNA that started from a set of values following these rules. As time passed a point is reached where the value of each marker changes according to the rule in a progressive manner ie not randomly but according to the rules.

    In consequence a marker such as DYS19 started its migration from a value which was in theoretical Adam is 14, then changed to 13 to his son and descendants, then to 12, then to 11, then to 10 etc according to the rule where the value today is either 13 or less.

    These ancestral changes may at some stage in the process move in subsequent generations in the opposite direction from the ancestral pattern handed down by theoretical Adam. The trigger for that change being either the time taken from the origination of the source branch of the tree and/or possible environmental changes (drought/famine etc). My reason for believing the former is because changes can be seen occuring in the global database of a number of surnames in cousins and close relatives across unconnected people in the same surname database at more or less the same time in the same haplogroup when there is no drought or adverse environmental condition that we know of. As a statement that is based upon general as to specific observation it looks like the trigger for the determination as to when the change may occur is time based since the origination of the source of any branch of the tree.

    ..........................................;;;;;

    This is confirmed by the fact that 90% or more of all markers follow the original ancestral pattern (Adams) without any changes whatsoever and in some cases 97.5% are the same value of repeats at a specific location where the surname has inherited its source pattern with little change. If those which have changed and flow against the original Adam ancestral pattern are also taken into account because they have formed an amended pattern that all ancestors of that branch follow the reduction of randomness falls to below 3% in most cases. The changed colours are either identifying a new branch that is following an amended Adam pattern or identifying a source outside of the surname (ie an adoption or change of name in the past).

    This pattern has been taken from my own DNA using the kit number 95673 (Y-Search UQCTD) which is currently undefined in the ISOGG tree at R-Z225 and I would expect it to be near the head if not the head of the DF27 branch because the surnames in haplogroups below DF27 hve patterns that show their location as below 95673.

    The case for random mutations has been made by those involved in population study geneticists who study the data given to them by companies like familytreedna. This information shows the data at a specific date in time where so called mutations have taken place.

    .............................;

    regards
    Nick (Ogmion)
    #95673
    Since the development of the knowlege of the SNPs, the interest for the STRs has decreased, one of the reason is that you are not the first one to criticize the random process of the STR processes. In the time of DNA forum, there were a lot of tough discussions about the random process and the validity of datations from this process. In more, Since the Busby study (Busby an Oxford scholar) about R1b, there have been disaffections of some people like Dieneskes.

    http://dienekes.blogspot.fr/2011/08/...t-al-2011.html



    Goiello, famous like the Pisa Tower of his town, because of his particular trend to incline towards an Italian origin for a lot of things (the tower hasn't never fall, but he fell too easily too often) , but great connaissor of STR profiles , he (pseudo Rathna) was banned for this forum for good and bad reasons. For a superfical reading of your post, his thesis is near the yours : A STR fundamental value and a restoring force towards the fundamental value of the STR, but for him, sometimes the fundamental value can change by a leap.

    See in an other forum http://eng.molgen.org/ . He explained his thesis many times, but as he has opinions about a lot of subjects, I haven't succeeded to find an instance quickly. Certainly, the DNA segments are subject to forces due to the topological and chimical environment of the STR, environment which can change strongly sometimes, and this is opposite to a linear stochastich process of the STR mutations.

    SNP mutations should be less subject to the DNA environment and thus, to be a relatively linear process and to be more favourable to the use of the stochastic laws. It is the opinion of a layman with vague and old scholar reminder.
    Last edited by palamede; 11-09-2014 at 12:44 PM.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Posts
    3
    Sex
    Location
    UK
    Ethnicity
    Celt
    Y-DNA (P)
    R-Z225
    mtDNA (M)
    WC1

    Thank you Palamede for your comment. I dont see the evidence for a fundamental value that STRs seek to achieve - if this is your point. If that were the case surely we would all tend to end up with the same value markers and this clearly is not happening. The events are leading to diversity upon a fixed and predictable route based upon position relative to others. The mechanism I see is one that can be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt to changes the repeats at fixed locations in a way where all samples follow the same rules depending upon their position in the tree. I dont think this is what is in that article. I also have not seen any evidence for fathers and sons to have values that leap but of course I havent looked everywhere. Is there evidence for this?

Similar Threads

  1. International Area: Design & Implementation Summary
    By Administrator in forum Announcements
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2019, 10:08 PM
  2. Replies: 54
    Last Post: 02-24-2019, 09:22 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-10-2018, 12:51 PM

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •