[_ Old Earth _] Theist discussing genome sequencing

[VaultZero4Me]

So God designed the human #2 chromosome to look precisely like two chimpanzee chromosomes, right down to the relics of the telemeres and the no-longer functional second telemere?

This is what I was asking on the OP.

What is the response to this?

 

[John]

Humans have X number of chromosomes and Apes have X number of Chromosomes, how does that prove evolution.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

Humans have X number of chromosomes and Apes have X number of Chromosomes, how does that prove evolution.

Come on. Did you even watch the video?

In a nut shell, with my layman understanding of genes, there is a missing pair on humans which presented a problem for the decent theory. It was predicted that the missing pair would show up as being fused, which after sequencing the genome it was.

Thats science. A theory makes a testable prediction. After testing, the results either support the theory or falsify it.

Anyone have a response or found a real response besides just stating "animals are animals, and humans are humans."

 

[John]

They are comparing the Genetic code of the chimpanzee and humans. and because they are starting out with the assumption that we share and ancestor. its like that old thing the evolutionists say "Creationists start out with a conclusion and find evidance to support it" well thats exactly what your doing here.

Humans have 46 chromosomes and apes have 48. we are supposed to be "missing a pair" so what must have happened is that a fusion must have occurred and its true humans have a fused chromosome. You see working form an evolutionary view point one would say " LOOK evidence of common ancestry" when while me a creationist looks at it and says "How the heck does that put forth any evidence towards ancestry? I mean Humans have always been separate from Apes, 95-97% similarities, so what. We were made different." (o and that 5-3% difference is in its self so vast that evolution cannot crossover)

So then they go on with their assumption that the fused chromosomes are in fact to primate chromosomes. LOL, they are human, always were always will be.

Case point: wrong assumptions yield wrong answers.

"But John this was predicted" Yes indeed it was, but seriously how hard was that, you get paid a lot of money to sit on your but and think up these ideals these "predictions".

Hmm apes have 48 and humans have 46, DNA shows that we share 95-97% so i predict that there should be a fused chromosome, after all we see this in other animals.

Again the imaginations of these men are crazy, even more then Steven king . :

Then this guy in the video goes on to say "if we don't find it, evolution is wrong" don't BS me, even if they did not find it the evolution fairy tale would still be preached at school.

I stopped watching at 2:16, this guy is just so funny (in a bad way)

 

[Barbarian]

I've challenged many a creationist to explain how else to see the fact here, and no one's come up with a way to do it.

Generally they say "Well God designed it that way."

And when you ask them to explain why He designed it to make it look like it evolved, they say "well we just don't know what God was thinking then."

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

 

[John]

I've challenged many a creationist to explain how else to see the fact here, and no one's come up with a way to do it.

Generally they say "Well God designed it that way."

And when you ask them to explain why He designed it to make it look like it evolved, they say "well we just don't know what God was thinking then."

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

He did not design any thing to make it look like it evolved, like i said wrong assumptions yield wrong answers. the chromosome simply fused with ones already existing for whatever reason. Why did God make us the way he did? Who knows, why did God not give us tails? Why did God Give us 2 eyes instead of like 10 like a spider? Why did God give us 2 hands and not paws? etc etc. whatever is human is uniquely human no monkey business here :wink:

 

[VaultZero4Me]

They are comparing the Genetic code of the chimpanzee and humans. and because they are starting out with the assumption that we share and ancestor. its like that old thing the evolutionists say "Creationists start out with a conclusion and find evidance to support it" well thats exactly what your doing here.

Humans have 46 chromosomes and apes have 48. we are supposed to be "missing a pair" so what must have happened is that a fusion must have occurred and its true humans have a fused chromosome. You see working form an evolutionary view point one would say " LOOK evidence of common ancestry" when while me a creationist looks at it and says "How the heck does that put forth any evidence towards ancestry? I mean Humans have always been separate from Apes, 95-97% similarities, so what. We were made different." (o and that 5-3% difference is in its self so vast that evolution cannot crossover)

So then they go on with their assumption that the fused chromosomes are in fact to primate chromosomes. LOL, they are human, always were always will be.

Case point: wrong assumptions yield wrong answers.

"But John this was predicted" Yes indeed it was, but seriously how hard was that, you get paid a lot of money to sit on your but and think up these ideals these "predictions".

Hmm apes have 48 and humans have 46, DNA shows that we share 95-97% so i predict that there should be a fused chromosome, after all we see this in other animals.

Again the imaginations of these men are crazy, even more then Steven king . :

Then this guy in the video goes on to say "if we don't find it, evolution is wrong" don't oopsie me, even if they did not find it the evolution fairy tale would still be preached at school.

I stopped watching at 2:16, this guy is just so funny (in a bad way)

I tested your theory out!

I really wanted a Diet Coke and siad to myself "Theres going to be a diet coke in my refridgerator."

I then got up, walked to the kitchen, opened it up, and there was one! I just gave evidence for your assumption, and it was a tasty experiement!

 

[VaultZero4Me]

I've challenged many a creationist to explain how else to see the fact here, and no one's come up with a way to do it.

Generally they say "Well God designed it that way."

And when you ask them to explain why He designed it to make it look like it evolved, they say "well we just don't know what God was thinking then."

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

Dont forget the adhoms and flat out denying it without rhyme or reason.

 

[DavidLee]

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

What does a fused chromosome look like? Are chromosomes like a deck of cards?
Can you see the pairs (CT, AG, etc.) shuffled in the fused chromosome?
Is the fused chromosome bigger? Longer? Fatter? Rounder?
Where is the partially fused (and thus broken) chromosome?

No one saw a "fused" chromosome before the prediction was made. Why?

 

[VaultZero4Me]

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

What does a fused chromosome look like? Are chromosomes like a deck of cards?
Can you see the pairs (CT, AG, etc.) shuffled in the fused chromosome?
Is the fused chromosome bigger? Longer? Fatter? Rounder?
Where is the partially fused (and thus broken) chromosome?

No one saw a "fused" chromosome before the prediction was made. Why?

Because genome sequencing ability is relatively new. Its really neat stuff.

Watch the video.

 

[DavidLee]

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

What does a fused chromosome look like? Are chromosomes like a deck of cards?
Can you see the pairs (CT, AG, etc.) shuffled in the fused chromosome?
Is the fused chromosome bigger? Longer? Fatter? Rounder?
Where is the partially fused (and thus broken) chromosome?

No one saw a "fused" chromosome before the prediction was made. Why?

Because genome sequencing ability is relatively new. Its really neat stuff.

Watch the video.

Genome sequencing has been going on since the early seventies.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

In May 2006, Human Genome Project (HGP) researchers announced the completion of the DNA sequence for the last of the 24 human chromosomes. How does this differ from the finished human genome announced by HGP researchers in 2003?

Quote from the Human Genome Project Information web site http://www.ornl.gov/sci/techresources/H ... acts.shtml

So, yes, the work has been ongoing for a while, but I believe due to the mounds of data involved, it was severely limited until recently.

The volume of the sequencing was in the 90's and 2000's. Correct me if I am wrong.

In fact, I don't think anyone was actually using much of the data during the 70s and 80s due to corporate fighting over control. It wasn't being released to study. It was sitting as data as the companies backing the sequencing didn't have the resources to actually do anything with it, yet didn't want to release it for consumption due to wanting to make money off their investment.

 

[VaultZero4Me]

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

What does a fused chromosome look like? Are chromosomes like a deck of cards?
Can you see the pairs (CT, AG, etc.) shuffled in the fused chromosome?
Is the fused chromosome bigger? Longer? Fatter? Rounder?
Where is the partially fused (and thus broken) chromosome?

No one saw a "fused" chromosome before the prediction was made. Why?

Also, I am pretty sure that the prediction was made before sequencing that part of the genome. At least, that was what I got from the presentation.

 

[DavidLee]

If you have a better way to explain the fused chromosomes, that accounts for all the details, now would be a good time to tell us.

What does a fused chromosome look like? Are chromosomes like a deck of cards?
Can you see the pairs (CT, AG, etc.) shuffled in the fused chromosome?
Is the fused chromosome bigger? Longer? Fatter? Rounder?
Where is the partially fused (and thus broken) chromosome?

No one saw a "fused" chromosome before the prediction was made. Why?

Also, I am pretty sure that the prediction was made before sequencing that part of the genome. At least, that was what I got from the presentation.

Let me answer my own question...

A chromosome is a chromosome. There is no way to tell that one has fused or combined with another. The idea that one fused with another is supposition intended to bolster a flawed hypothesis. The genome had to be sequenced before any comparison, and thus prediction could be made.
That any set of chromosomes may be located at a particular place in different creatures is no indication that one became another.

This is only evidence that people see what they want to see.

 

[Barbarian]

A chromosome is a chromosome. There is no way to tell that one has fused or combined with another.

That's the point. How do we know this? Well, there should be the remains of a no-longer active centromere, and the remains of two telemeres. And they should be precisely where they should be if the two chromosomes in question fused.

Remarkably, the predicted fusion was found, with the expected evidence, precisely where it would have to be, if two hominoid chromosomes fused to form one in humans. Nothing in science is better documented than this fact.

The idea that one fused with another is supposition intended to bolster a flawed hypothesis.

No, that's wrong. It is a hypothesis. The question is, "why do humans have two fewer chromosomes than other apes?" The hypothesis was that there must have been a fusion, because losing an entire chromosome is almost always fatal.

The examination of chromosomes was the test of the hypothesis, and since the predicted fusion was found, the hypothesis is verified.

That's how it works. Denial is really pointless, after that.

 

[DavidLee]

A chromosome is a chromosome. There is no way to tell that one has fused or combined with another.

That's the point. How do we know this? Well, there should be the remains of a no-longer active centromere, and the remains of two telemeres. And they should be precisely where they should be if the two chromosomes in question fused.

You have simply repeated your statement without giving any supporting evidence.
You are also using buzzwords

Remarkably, the predicted fusion was found, with the expected evidence, precisely where it would have to be, if two hominoid chromosomes fused to form one in humans. Nothing in science is better documented than this fact.

That's a pretty bold statement to make without providing anything other than your say-so.

The idea that one fused with another is supposition intended to bolster a flawed hypothesis.

No, that's wrong. It is a hypothesis. The question is, "why do humans have two fewer chromosomes than other apes?" The hypothesis was that there must have been a fusion, because losing an entire chromosome is almost always fatal.

Not true. The function of the missing chromosome is provided (in most instances) by recombination of other chromosomes. This is true in the cases of manipulation as well as in the natural cases. Extra chromosomes usually result in disease (like Down's syndrome) or extra appendages (two thumbs, or six fingers). When chromosomes fail, people are born without arms/legs/lungs/brains/etc. Humans do not give birth to apes when chromosomes are broken/missing.

The examination of chromosomes was the test of the hypothesis, and since the predicted fusion was found, the hypothesis is verified.

I do not doubt the differing lengths of the DNA sequences. That difference does not prove fusion.
The hypothesis actually seems to be "The genomes are different. How can we prove humans evolved from apes if the genetic structure does not allow for a descent from apes?"

That's how it works. Denial is really pointless, after that.

You keep saying stuff like that.
Why do you think people should accept your opinion in the face of critical questions?
Why are legitimate questions met with bravado and condescension but no evidence?
Curiosity that would, in any other field of research, be considered carefully and result in better science, is in this field met with derogatory calls for silence on the subject.
Nothing that contradicts the ideology is up for intelligent discussion, even though mountains of empirical data exist. It is dismissed with a wave of the hand by the intelligentsia.

That is why I do not usually participate in these threads. But now, if you (not just Barbarian) think I'm wrong, you'll have to prove it without semantics, ad hominem arguments, or regurgitated sentences from a press release.

 

[Barbarian]

DavidLee wrote:

A chromosome is a chromosome. There is no way to tell that one has fused or combined with another.

Barbarian observes:
That's the point. How do we know this? Well, there should be the remains of a no-longer active centromere, and the remains of two telemeres. And they should be precisely where they should be if the two chromosomes in question fused.

You have simply repeated your statement without giving any supporting evidence.

You didn't read the link? OK, here's some more info:

Evidence for fusing of two ancestral chromosomes to create human chromosome 2 and where there has been no fusion in other Great Apes is:

1) The analogous chromosomes (2p and 2q) in the non-human great apes can be shown, when laid end to end, to create an identical banding structure to the human chromosome 2. (1)

2) The remains of the sequence that the chromosome has on its ends (the telomere) is found in the middle of human chromosome 2 where the ancestral chromosomes fused. (2)

3) the detail of this region (pre-telomeric sequence, telomeric sequence, reversed telomeric sequence, pre-telomeric sequence) is exactly what we would expect from a fusion. (3)

4) this telomeric region is exactly where one would expect to find it if a fusion had occurred in the middle of human chromosome 2.

5) the centromere of human chromosome 2 lines up with the chimp chromosome 2p chromosomal centromere.

6) At the place where we would expect it on the human chromosome we find the remnants of the chimp 2q centromere (4).

Not only is this strong evidence for a fusion event, but it is also strong evidence for common ancestry; in fact, it is hard to explain by any other mechanism.

http://www.evolutionpages.com/chromosome_2.htm

You are also using buzzwords]/quote]

That is standard terminology, and the simplest explanation in genetics. If you don't know the terminology, it's a problem for you. But it's not impossible for you to look it up and and learn.

Barbarian observes:
Remarkably, the predicted fusion was found, with the expected evidence, precisely where it would have to be, if two hominoid chromosomes fused to form one in humans. Nothing in science is better documented than this fact.

[quote:d7298]That's a pretty bold statement to make without providing anything other than your say-so.

I gave you another link. Would you like more?

The idea that one fused with another is supposition intended to bolster a flawed hypothesis.[\quote]

Barbarian observes:
No, that's wrong. It is a hypothesis. The question is, "why do humans have two fewer chromosomes than other apes?" The hypothesis was that there must have been a fusion, because losing an entire chromosome is almost always fatal.

[quote:d7298]Not true. The function of the missing chromosome is provided (in most instances) by recombination of other chromosomes.

No. If an entire chromosome is lost, the result is almost always fatal, since gene required for the organism to live cannot be replaced by other genes.

While the duplication or silencing of an individual gene is not usually fatal, the wholesale addition or loss of a chromosome, which contains a thousand or more genes, almost always is.
http://www.novelguide.com/a/discover/ge ... 00197.html

This is true in the cases of manipulation as well as in the natural cases. Extra chromosomes usually result in disease (like Down's syndrome) or extra appendages (two thumbs, or six fingers).

Actually polydactyly is caused by a mutation in a gene that regulates the timing of development in limb buds. The developing material "hooks" across the front of the limb bud, and digits start as the hook crosses the bud. The longer this takes, the more digits.

Barbarian observes:
The examination of chromosomes was the test of the hypothesis, and since the predicted fusion was found, the hypothesis is verified.

I do not doubt the differing lengths of the DNA sequences. That difference does not prove fusion.

Rather, it was the discovery of the predicted extra centromere and telomeres that confirmed the hypothesis.

The hypothesis actually seems to be "The genomes are different. How can we prove humans evolved from apes if the genetic structure does not allow for a descent from apes?"

No, that's absurd. It was rather that the differnce could only be explained by a fusion. The test of that hypothesis was to check and see if the remains of the telomeres and centromere could be found. A secondary verification was the sequencing that showed that the 2nd human chromosome was nearly identical to two ape chromosomes.

If there's any other rational way to interpet the facts, I'd like to hear it.

Barbarian observes:
That's how it works. Denial is really pointless, after that.

You keep saying stuff like that. Why do you think people should accept your opinion in the face of critical questions?

Because it's confirmed by the evidence.

Why are legitimate questions met with bravado and condescension but no evidence?

I just showed you some more. There's more yet, if you need it. Would you like some more?

Curiosity that would, in any other field of research, be considered carefully and result in better science, is in this field met with derogatory calls for silence on the subject.

I think that you'd be better served by finding some other way to explain the evidence. Calling names won't help very much.

Nothing that contradicts the ideology is up for intelligent discussion,

This evidence certainly contradicts your ideology, and it seems to be acceptable by the board rules. Why can't we present such evidence?

even though mountains of empirical data exist.

I showed you some of it. If you think there is other evidence that contradicts what I've shown you, now would be a good time to present it.

It is dismissed with a wave of the hand by the intelligentsia.

Well, let's give it a try, and see. Show us your evidence. And we'll see if the "intellectuals" here wave it off, or present an argument.

That is why I do not usually participate in these threads.

[/quote:d7298][/quote:d7298]

If it upsets you this much, maybe that's a good thing. There isn't really any reason you can't learn about the subject and take part;

 

[DavidLee]

The images you posted are a bit misleading. Those are computer generated images of the representation of chemical sequences in DNA.
This is what an actual chromosome looks like.
http://cnx.org/content/m15083/latest/01 ... mosome.JPG
The image is from the article at this link:
http://cnx.org/content/m15083/latest/
Which is discussing the problems with computational gene-finding. The article origin is Rice University. The article is interesting but is not on the subject of evolution.

You have not proven your case that the chromosome has fused or that given a permanent fusion occurred, there is any significance.

As to telomeres:
From: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articl ... #id2598709

These studies demonstrate that normally cells accurately distinguish telomeric ends from random DSB ends and protect the former from illegitimate end-joining reactions. How cells make this critical distinction continues to be an active area of research today, especially as the dividing lines between the two types of ends have become less, rather than more clear. Recent discoveries that certain DSB repair proteins act to preserveâ€â€rather than to joinâ€â€the natural ends of mammalian chromosomes (4–7), have provided impetus for the union of two seemingly disparate scientific fields, DNA repair and telomere biology.

Again not evolution related.

More from: http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/Press_re ... 02_03.html

Much like the plastic tips on shoelaces, telomeres protect the ends of chromosomes. When telomeres get too short, cells usually die. If they don't, the unprotected ends drag the chromosomes through an ugly assortment of fusions that lead to rearrangements, deletions and insertions that scramble the cell's genetic material and can lead to cancer. Until now, scientists had presumed that the fusions were the first thing to happen when telomeres stop protecting the chromosomes.

Yes, its from a press release, but it's Johns Hopkins University.

This article (it's a PDF, sorry):
http://nar.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/repri ... 2/2908.pdf
"In Vitro and In Vivo Reconstitution and Stability of
Vertebrate Chromosome Ends"

Telomeres are essential repetitive sequences at the
ends of chromosomes that prevent chromosome fusion
and degradation.

It's ten years old, but still relevant.

Can you see why I have trouble with your theory that chromosomes fused and thus seemingly prove an evolutionary link? When all your information comes from a website devoted to defending evolution you may miss something that doesn't support evolution.

 

[Barbarian]

(Barbarian shows chromosomes for human and chimps)

The images you posted are a bit misleading. Those are computer generated images of the representation of chemical sequences in DNA.

Well, let's take a look. Here's an actual photomicrograph of a human chromosome spread (female)

Notice chromosome 2. Just like the drawing, um?

This is what an actual chromosome looks like.

http://cnx.org/content/m15083/latest/01 ... mosome.JPG

Actually, that's from a highly mutated human cancer cell, which now life as independent organisms (HeLa cells unfortunately escaped their culture and became a common pest in tissue cell laboratories) And notice that it's actually two chromosomes joined at the centromere, which happens at mitosis.

You have not proven your case that the chromosome has fused or that given a permanent fusion occurred, there is any significance.

Let's review:
1. Scientists note that humans have one fewer pairs of chromosomes than other apes. Knowing that the loss of an entire chromosome would almost certainly be fatal, they hypothesize that a fusion must have occured, in which the ancestor of humans had two chromosomes fuse after the line that led to humans diverged from the line that led to chimpanzees.

2. This would mean that there would be remains of a non-functional centromere and two telomeres on a human chromosome, precisely where they would be if two ape chromosomes would fuse.

3. Investigation located the predicted structures.

That nails it. No other way to explain it.

Can you see why I have trouble with your theory that chromosomes fused and thus seemingly prove an evolutionary link?

Yep. There wasn't much left for you but simple denial.

When all your information comes from a website devoted to defending evolution you may miss something that doesn't support evolution.

I'd be pleased to hear your hypothesis for an alternative explanation, supported by facts. As you see, a theory is considered compelling when it makes testable predictions. And this one was a doozy. Here's a slightly more technical description of the evidence:

The first prediction (evidence of a telomere at the fusion point) is shown to be true in reference 3 . Telomeres in humans have been shown to consist of head to tail repeats of the bases 5'TTAGGG running toward the end of the chromosome. Furthermore, there is a characteristic pattern of the base pairs in what is called the pre-telomeric region, the region just before the telomere. When the vicinity of chromosome 2 where the fusion is expected to occur (based on comparison to chimp chromosomes 2p and 2q) is examined, we see first sequences that are characteristic of the pre-telomeric region, then a section of telomeric sequences, and then another section of pre-telomeric sequences. Furthermore, in the telomeric section, it is observed that there is a point where instead of being arranged head to tail, the telomeric repeats suddenly reverse direction - becoming (CCCTAA)3' instead of 5'(TTAGGG), and the second pre-telomeric section is also the reverse of the first telomeric section. This pattern is precisely as predicted by a telomere to telomere fusion of the chimpanzee (ancestor) 2p and 2q chromosomes, and in precisely the expected location. Note that the CCCTAA sequence is the reversed complement of TTAGGG (C pairs with G, and T pairs with A).

The second prediction - remnants of the 2p and 2q centromeres is documented in reference 4. The normal centromere found on human chromosome 2 lines up with the 2p chimp chromosome, and the remnants of the 2q chromosome is found at the expected location based upon the banding pattern.

Some may raise the objection that if the fusion was a naturalistic event, how could the first human ancestor with the fusion have successfully reproduced? We have all heard that the horse and the donkey produce an infertile mule in crossing because of a different number of chromosomes in the two species. Well, apparently there is more to the story than we are usually told, because variations in chromosome number are known to occur in many different animal species, and although they sometimes seem to lead to reduced fertility, this is often not the case. Refs 5, 6, and 7 document both the existence of such chromosomal number differences and the fact that differences do not always result in reduced fertility. I can provide many more similar references if required. The last remaining species of wild horse, Przewalski's (sha-val-skis) Wild Horse has 66 chromosomes while the domesticated horse has 64 chromosomes. Despite this difference in chromosome number, Przewalski's Wild Horse and the domesticated horse can be crossed and do produce fertile offspring (see reference 9).

Now, the question has to be asked - if the similarities of the chromosomes are due only to common design rather than common ancestry, why are the remnants of a telomere and centromere (that should never have existed) found at exactly the positions predicted by a naturalistic fusion of the chimp ancestor chromosomes 2p and 2q?
http://www.gate.net/~rwms/hum_ape_chrom.html

Let me know what you find.

 

[DavidLee]

Well, let's take a look. Here's an actual photomicrograph of a human chromosome spread (female)
[snipped image]

Notice chromosome 2. Just like the drawing, um?

No. Not just like your drawing. Maybe my eyes aren't as good as yours.

This is what an actual chromosome looks like.
http://cnx.org/content/m15083/latest/01 ... mosome.JPG

Actually, that's from a highly mutated human cancer cell, which now life as independent organisms (HeLa cells unfortunately escaped their culture and became a common pest in tissue cell laboratories) And notice that it's actually two chromosomes joined at the centromere, which happens at mitosis.

Correct. The caption says it's from a HeLa cell. The picture I linked is of a chromosome in the process of replication. It has not finished dividing. It is producing a perfect replica of itself.

Your article did not address the problem of fusions producing only abnormalities, cancer, and cell death. I read all about the inversions and so forth. I did find this bit of information on Don Lindsay's website on the page where he explains the images:

I am not sure what the Creationist explanation is. Since both arrangements function well, we cannot argue that Intelligent Design is at work, or that one is a "degraded" version of the other. Saying that humans and chimps are different "designs" or "kinds" is unconvincing, since then there is a completely unnecessary amount of similarity.

(Don Lindsay is the source of your first image.)
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/crea ... lieve.html

At this point I feel like this thread has devolved into each of us posting the same thing over and over. You have not convinced me, or anyone else (call it denial if you will), and I have not convinced you (or anyone else).
You may have the last word if you like.