Kiss me sister!

[Heraclitus]

Seriously, Hera, you need to stop RIGHT NOW before you embarrass yourself further. ****ing idiot.

NO YOU SHOULD STOP, DUDE SERIUSLY I TALKED **** IN THE STAT THREAD I AM NOT TALKING **** NOW, YOU HAVE DRAWN COMPLETLEY WRONG CONCLUSIONS FROM WHAT I HAVE WRITTEN! DON'T LET A NEWT LIKE ME WIN, THINK!!

In small populations, if children born with heritable birth defects die before they reproduce the ultimate effect of inbreeding will be to decrease the frequency of defective genes in the population with an overall decrease in the number of birth defect-causing genes over time. In larger populations it is more likely that large numbers of carriers will survive and mate, leading to more constant rates of birth defects.

YOU DUMB DUMB ****, YOU ARE SO ****ING AROGANT YOU DON'T EVEN STOP TO READ WHAT THE **** THE OTHER GUY IS POSTING!

Sorry about that... I know you are better than this let me give your own advice "Think before you post."


PS The origianl source for the above statement given by wiki http://books.google.com/books?id=ZFX...age&q=&f=false

[Heraclitus]

Hera, there's a diffusion term (inbreeding) and a frictional term (natural selection). The frictional term DOES NOT MEAN that higher diffusion rates leads to slower loss of diversity

I think you mean a faster loss of diversity if what you are talking about should have made any sense at all (unless you really really aren't reading what I'm posting). But even then....

Ehhh...


It dosen't make sense. Dosen't a higher diffusion rate mean that recessive alleles that might have in a larger population lasted for generations get eliminated quickly in a smaller population if they let the suckers die before reproducing?

[KrazyHorse]

Wait wait wait WUT?!?!?!?!


Don't make me reconsider my position that you are probably right, how the **** DID YOU COME TO THAT CONCLUSION FROM MY POST!?!? WTF WTF WTF

The Amish are a relativley large population esp in the sense of that the quoted source, since many of the children of with brith defects tend to survive and breed. Thus the rate of birth defects are higher than in a more primitve and smaller community where the bad allels are eliminated more quickly.

??????????

****ing moron.

[Heraclitus]

To break it down so that a simpleton like you can follow:

1) Repeated inbreeding causes a loss of genetic diversity, which means that further inbreeding has higher rates of harmful repeated alleles than first gen inbreeding at the same familial distance would otherwise suggest, however:

2) What the Amish practice, which is generally 1st or more usually second cousin inbreeding leads to a very slow loss of genetic diversity. The migration out of the pool of alleles happens on the scale of many generations, not just 1. Repeated sibling inbreeding leads to very quick loss of diversity, on the other hand

[/QUOTE]

Ok, I don't know much about the Amish.

[/QUOTE]

(2) and (3) explain why first gen sibling incest is actually far more harmful than multigenerational inbreeding as practiced by the Amish

Therefore, (4) your initial idiotic statement that 2/11 was HIGHER than the rate you'd expect with close 1st generational incest (which is what we've been discussing) is RE-TAR-DED[/QUOTE]

Wait wait wait... I NEVER said Amish multigeneration inbreeding was worse than a single generation of sister-brother inbreeding. I was talking about a smaller community that would practice such inbreeding for several generations, such a community would eventually have lower birth defect rates than the Amish.

[KrazyHorse]

I think you mean a faster loss of diversity if what you are talking about should have made any sense at all (unless you really really aren't reading what I'm posting). But even then....

No, you ****ing idiot.

I seriously shouldn't have to explain this to you. Are you still in high school or something?

[KrazyHorse]

This is almost as embarrassing as your "everything is normal" ****.

[Heraclitus]

I think you mean a faster loss of diversity if what you are talking about should have made any sense at all (unless you really really aren't reading what I'm posting). But even then....

Ehhh...


It dosen't make sense. Dosen't a higher diffusion rate mean that recessive alleles that might have in a larger population lasted for generations get eliminated quickly in a smaller population if they let the suckers die before reproducing?

Heraclitus:

The Amish are a relativley large population esp in the sense of that the quoted source, since many of the children of with brith defects tend to survive and breed. Thus the rate of birth defects are higher than in a more primitve and smaller community where the bad allels are eliminated more quickly.

??????????

****ing moron.

Wait wait wait... I NEVER said Amish multigeneration inbreeding was worse than a single generation of sister-brother inbreeding. I was talking about a smaller community that would practice such inbreeding for several generations, such a community would eventually have lower birth defect rates than the Amish.

I dare you to say I'm not coherent, or that I was changing the argument. YOU HEAR THAT, I DARE YOU YOU AROGANT ****!

[KrazyHorse]

Wait wait wait... I NEVER said Amish multigeneration inbreeding was worse than a single generation of sister-brother inbreeding

That's PRECISELY what your original comment implied in context.

I was talking about a smaller community that would practice such inbreeding for several generations, such a community would eventually have lower birth defect rates than the Amish.

No, it wouldn't. Again, please think. Evolution does NOT filter out recessive traits completely. It simply reduces their concentration. What it might* do would be to make it safer for people in this hypothetical village to **** their sisters than for Amish people to do the same. It would NOT make it safer for people in the village to **** their sisters than for Amish to **** their cousins.

*not sure even about this, BTW

[Heraclitus]

This is almost as embarrassing as your "everything is normal" ****.

WUT I botched up the statistics prety good in that thread but I never said anything like "everything is normal"

[Heraclitus]

Wait wait wait... I NEVER said Amish multigeneration inbreeding was worse than a single generation of sister-brother inbreeding

That's PRECISELY what your original comment implied in context.

But didn't I explicitly say "in a small community yada yada" before every single one of my posts to make my meaning clear regardles of the context?

No, it wouldn't. Again, please think. Evolution does NOT filter out recessive traits completely. It simply reduces their concentration. What it WOULD do would be to make it safer for people in this hypothetical village to **** their sisters than for Amish people to do the same. It would NOT make it safer for people in the village to **** their sisters than for Amish to **** their cousins.

The Amish are a relativley large population esp in the sense of that the quoted source, since many of the children of with brith defects tend to survive and breed. Thus the rate of birth defects are higher...

Dude these are Ben levels of reading noncomprehension either that or I can't speak English afterall.

AM I TALKING TO AN ECHO HERE?!?! PLEASE QUOTE ME EXPLICTLY SAYING THAT INBREEDING WOULD BE A OK IN SUCH A SOCIETY. I ALWAYS EXPLICITLY SPOKE OF A LOWER DEFECT RATE OF THE INBREED COMMUNITY COMPARED TO THE AMISH OR ABOUT THE HIGH AMISH RATE COMPARED TO THE HYPOTHETICAL INBREED COMMUNITY.

[KrazyHorse]

Hera, you ****ing dumbass, we were discussing sibling incest. Then Dan mentioned the Amish. Your next comment was that the Amish were examples of multigenerational incest. The implication is that brother sister incest isn't as harmful as multigenerational Amish 1st or 2nd cousin incest


Holy ****ing **** you could not be more wrong if you tried.

[KrazyHorse]

Hera, you're seriously not very bright.

[Heraclitus]

Hera, you ****ing dumbass, we were discussing sibling incest. Then Dan mentioned the Amish. Your next comment was that the Amish were examples of multigenerational incest. The implication is that brother sister incest isn't as harmful as multigenerational Amish 1st or 2nd cousin incest


Holy ****ing **** you could not be more wrong if you tried.

Dude.

This may shock you.


But people occasionally go off topic. And when they do its pretty easy to spot since they don't try to hide it like WHEN IN EVERY SINGE POST AFTER THE ONELINER I EXPLICITLY SAID IN WHICH SITUATION THE BLOODY STATEMENT APPLIES. YOU COULD HAVE BEEN RIGHT BY JUST SAYING THAT MY STATEMENT WAS MISLEADING, BUT NO YOU CONTINUED TO ARGUE WITH ME QUOTING THE MORE EXTENSIVE AND EXPLICIT QUOTES UNTILL YOU WHERE ARGUING SOMETHING WAS UNDEFENDABLE.

[Drake Tungsten]

Let's face facts; no matter how hard Hera tries, he will never be able to top his first pwnage by KH. He could say the most retarded **** ever and the beatdown still wouldn't be as sweet.

[Heraclitus]

Hera, you're seriously not very bright.

You seriusly can't read.