For some reason, John Hawks thinks my disc flipping calculations have something to do with population genetics. He extends it to FST, which is just plain ridiculous. There is nothing about binomial sampling that can be related to popgen theory. Nothing.
- Log in to post comments
More like this
The title is, obviously, an overstatement, exaggeration, and blatant misrepresentation. But it gets your attention, don't it? Anyway, Hawks has been questioning whether genomics is really any different from genetics. In this post, he says something that I've been thinking for a while:
"Actually…
Can positive selection drown out neutral evolution? That's what John Hawks claims in response to my post on accelerated evolution. Hawks points out that, rather than looking at the neutral fixation rate (which is equal to the mutation rate, u), we should be more interested in the average time to…
This google news query should get you to popular press articles. I'll start putting links to blogs when more come in.
Blogs: One of the lead authors, John Hawks, promises lots of commentary this week. Greg Laden has some questions regarding the demographic assumptions. Steve Sailer with a round-…
For those of you interested in recent adaptive evolution in some insignificant bipedal primate, John Hawks and pals have published a paper in PNAS describing something you'll find interesting. Of course, if you're interested in such things, you already know that. Here are some links related to…
You sound like John Gillespie