Wounded King Message 4 loves remembering my contributions on this topic at EvC, not that he remembers them lovingLY of course, but here he's claiming there are many possible ways of coming up with a supposed super genome:
Yes, that was one of the first things I was playing with as a possible structure for the original genome (and well before WK offered his help on that thread by the way) since of course it MUST have had much more genetic variability than the genome now.(Quoting JAR): First, even if there was some super genome if the Biblical flood stories were true there would still only be at best 14 copies of it to work with and that is still a bottleneck.(WK): This seems to totally miss the entire point of the 'Supergenome' gambit. It might technically be a bottleneck if we assume that the survivors of the flood were typical of the pre-flood populations but allowing for a 'Supergenome' it is a bottleneck in a population with, by definition, a genetic composition drastically different to what we are used to analysing and the signature of such a bottleneck might be expected to be similarly drastically different.
I can come up with plenty of ad hoc pseudoscientific Supergenome explanations that could account for this. In fact when this topic came up on Faith's The End of Evolution By Means of Natural Selection thread she ended up, with a little help from me, proposing a hypothetical post flood population whose members were all superpolyploid acting as massive reservoirs of genetic variation and this was subsequent to her previous proposal that all of the extra required alleles would have been found in what is now 'junk' DNA.
But I found out not too long ago that the original genome really doesn't have to be different structurally from the genome now because it doesn't take much ordinary heterozygosity, or many alleles per gene, to produce all the variations / breeds / races we see today, only 6.7% heterozygosity in the whole population in fact which is the percentage we have now, as I mention in the previous post.
So that does lead to considering that the original genome probably simply had a lot more heterozygosity, and since I'd already figured that junk DNA reflects the death of the original DNA you simply think about the genetic power in those 95% of genes when they were still alive, consider also that there could have been many many genes for any given trait and many many alleles for each, and the possibilitieds of genetic variation become astronomical -- without having to postulate some unusual form for the genome such as polyploidy. Just genes and alleles, the basic stuff of today's genome.
Even two individuals with two alleles each for every gene, that's four different alleles between them -- for EVERY gene in the entire genome including the living versions of today's junk DNA -- are going to produce quite an amazing variety of offspring. It would take many generations for all the possibilities to play out to the point of the genetic reduction of the cheetah.
Then we have Taq in Message 5:
No mutations, simply original functional DNA built in at the Creation which has been destroyed over the generations because of the Fall, in fact no doubt a lot of it destroyed BY mutations.(Quoting WK): In fact when this topic came up on Faith's The End of Evolution By Means of Natural Selection thread she ended up, with a little help from me, proposing a hypothetical post flood population whose members were all superpolyploid acting as massive reservoirs of genetic variation and this was subsequent to her previous proposal that all of the extra required alleles would have been found in what is now 'junk' DNA.(Taq): It would still require hypermutation to produce so many pseudogenes. The overwhelming majority of pseudogenes are the product of MANY mutations, usually not just one.