|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: MACROevolution vs MICROevolution - what is it? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: Since you include drift as selection the increase in the frequency of allele B is entirely due to what you call "selection". Really, how could you miss that ? The same way you missed the strong selection in the "weasel" program?
quote: Of course people have been dealing with what you have said and - as HBD and Percy have noted - you have responded with your usual dishonest bullying. Really what do you expect when you keep trying to argue a claim disproven years ago, when you won't even honestly answer the disproof and instead resort to tricks like misrepresenting your own argument ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: What really happens is that your case is demolished with reason and evidence. Which is what you mean by "discussion is impossible". So, you decide to declare yourself right anyway. Too bad it won't work.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: You would have to be to think that, and that's not even the craziest thing you've said. It's not even the craziest in this thread.
quote: Of course you do. It contradicts your beliefs. And so you resort to your usual lies and slander.
quote: Which is really not a sensible position. There can't be any fixed boundary of that sort.
quote: Can we ? Have the Pod Mcaru lizards been classed as a new species ?
quote: The fact that your examples are so weak rather suggests the opposite. And the fact that we know it didn't happen puts a further damper on the idea
quote: Let's not forget that the "less junk DNA" is an ad hoc assumption that hardly makes sense in itself. In fact it's another good reason to think that you are "off in la la land".
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: If you have this great logical argument, why are you keeping it secret ? Feel free to produce it if you really have one.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: It is certainly an objection, but it should be noted that you DID frequently claim that the inability to interbreed was caused by your "genetic depletion". Are you admitting that you simply made that up ? (You did, of course, but it is rare if you to admit to that)
quote: So how do you explain ring species ? Not so long ago you were asserting that ring species were evidence for your ideas (which was another thing you simply made up) but if the inability to interbreed never develops in nature, ring species aren't something you would expect to see at all.
quote: I note that you offer only assertion here. However if, as you claim, the inability to interbreed never develops in nature the inability to interbreed must be fundamental. Your assertions are not only false - they are contradictory.
quote: Appealing to false and contradictory "reasons" hardly gives us reason to believe that.
quote: Or alternatively your desperate rationalisations are obviously wrong and all your arrogant bullying backfires as usual.
quote: As usual "discussion is impossible" just means that you are being defeated despite your clumsy tricks. That's not a problem. The problem is your arrogance and dishonesty and refusal to accept that you are wrong even when it is absolutely obvious
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: I don't think you understand the term "logical" correctly. The mere fact that you have to make excuses to try to deny the contribution of mutations would disqualify your argument, even if your usual excuse wasn't obviously false.
quote: in case you have forgotten mutations do occur and are sometimes used by breeders. Adid that there are certainly mutations that will not affect the desired traits (many will affect traits that are not easily seen), and the relatively short time scale and your argument is already in trouble. The lack of gene flow is just an artificial constraint by breeders. So, not exactly a good start.
quote: Which is generally agreed.
quote: The evidence shows that species have changed over time. Species may be stable over long periods of time by human standards but they do not last forever. Many are replaced by closely related species.
quote: Why would we suppose something we know to be false ? You've had the example of the pocket mice. Mutation can and does add selectable diversity. Just because something happens slowly and mostly unseen is not a logical reason to conclude that it does not happen. (Strictly speaking it is illogical)
quote: Unfortunately for your argument the genetic diversity of the parent species is not static, and is very likely significantly increased since it was formed. So, no, you don't have a logically unimpeachable argument or even a good one. And you have no excuse for not knowing that by now,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: By which you mean that it was just an unsupported opinion that you presented as fact. Even after the obvious objections has been raised and not answered. That may be normal for you, but it should not be.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: You suggest that people who reject an argument that has repeatedly been refuted have low IQs or dementia Message 840 - yet you loudly object to any criticism that comes your way no matter how deserved.
quote: Which is a complaint that you don't get to invent your own "facts"
quote: Which is a complaint that you aren't allowed to confuse the issue by inventing your own personal definitions - and insisting that everyone else use them.
quote: Which is a pretty much just an insult as well as a lie.
quote: Which is an admission that you intend to rely on lies and deceit. Glad to see you show some honesty.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: It isn't your fantasy world, no matter how much you try to drag us into it.
quote: You may not like to admit to what you're doing, but nobody here has any duty to be quiet about it.
quote: In other words you don't want to talk to honest people who dare to disagree with your daft opinions. Even if we did like your opinions better than the truth, honesty would still require us to disagree. And all your lying hardly helps. But if you can't handle the truth, if you can't cope with people who won't give in to all your lying and bullying by all means run away.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
What's amazing about it ? It's a direct and on-point response, and if you're claiming that I offered no evidence - then neither did you. Not to mention the fact that your assertions were so non-specific that there would some much point gathering evidence in rebuttal.
The fact remains that you are pushing an argument which was successfully rebutted years ago, that you have made no progress in addressing the rebuttals over all that time and you are "amazed" that you aren't believed. And you think that in the "real universe" asserting that your argument is good and pretending that it isn't understood would convince the very people that defeated you ? Really ? How could that possibly work ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: There is no doubt that there is real ignorance on your part.
quote: It's funny that you seem think that inaccuracy is a virtue. Since your overall loss of genetic diversity is not supported by the evidence and speciation certainly is I don't see how those features can be considered as anything other than differences which make breeding a poor model. Especially as those differences can be attributed directly to differences in the processes. Indeed, the success is f breeding shows the scale of diversity that a species may hold and still retain a recognisable form instead of your "motley collection", which calls your assertion of inevitable decline in diversity into severe doubt, and falsifies your assertion that adding diversity following speciation must - somehow - prevent the species from retaining a distinctive form.
quote: Adaption is obviously not going to be driven by drift. Pure chance will not favour increased fitness while natural selection obviously will. At best you are ignorantly misusing terminology so nobody can understand what you mean, or at worst you are talking complete nonsense.
quote: This is a quite bizarre claim and more evidence of ignorance. But feel free to extend it to an argument if you can avoid silliness like blasting scientists for daring to discover the great variety of trilobite species.
quote: Since reality rarely restricts itself to what you think necessary and this "original design" is purely hypothetical - and advantageous mutations are fact that really isn't much of an argument. As I said before there is nothing strange in the failure of your arguments. The really bizarre thing is that you expect to convince anyone with arguments that have quite clearly been defeated.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3
|
quote: Of course it is only necessary that mutations occur, which hardly seems to merit that description.
quote: No such assumption is necessary.
quote: And how is that relevant ? The point is that evolution will not stop as you claim. How does this assertion address the issue ?
quote: Mutations are necessary to keep evolution going. If you deny that then you are just denying the argument Taq set out to disprove. Happening "as needed" is happening at all - and we know that they do happen. Even the assertion that most are deleterious (which would need support even if it is restricted to mutations with phenotypic effects) isn't sufficient to answer Taq's argument. Given that it's not even the first time that this refutation has been offered the fact that you can't adequately rebut it - or even construct a rational argument against it - shows that you are simply clinging to a failed argument.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17827 Joined: Member Rating: 2.3 |
quote: In other words you are misusing the terminology again and expect us to guess what you mean. Please stop that since it hardly helps honest discussion. However, you are very likely wrong. The big heads alone might be just good luck - but the changes in head shape and the cecal valve as well would be an unlikely coincidence.
quote: And that IS pure insult, especially as it is obviously untrue.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024