Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 53 (9179 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,109 Year: 5,366/9,624 Month: 391/323 Week: 31/204 Day: 7/24 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 121 of 2932 (898200)
09-20-2022 1:25 PM
Reply to: Message 118 by nwr
09-20-2022 12:50 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman:
So you are claiming that there are beneficial mutational differences between humans and chimps.
nwr:
Your mistake is to treat "beneficial" as an absolute. It isn't. What is beneficial is relative to the population.

I think you mean to say that mutations are only beneficial in the context of environmental selection conditions. Do you think that chimps and humans have the same reproductive fitness in the environment where chimps live?
Kleinman:
Why do humans have the reproductive fitness able to achieve a population of greater than 7 billion while chimpanzees have only achieved a population of 300,000?
nwr:
Likewise, you are treating "fitness" as an absolute. It isn't. Again, it is relative to the population.

There are about 1.5 billion people living in Africa. Why only 300,000 chimps? Some chimps live in Senegal but there are over 17 million humans living there. Some chimps live in Tanzania but there are about 63 million humans living there. What mutations do humans have that enable the to have this difference in reproductive fitness?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 118 by nwr, posted 09-20-2022 12:50 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 127 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 1:58 PM Kleinman has replied
 Message 128 by nwr, posted 09-20-2022 2:22 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 122 of 2932 (898201)
09-20-2022 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 120 by ringo
09-20-2022 1:17 PM


Re: Video not available
Kleinman:
The occurrence of a reasonable probability of an adaptive mutation occurring somewhere in a population takes lots of replicatiions.
ringo:
*shrug*

But evolution does happen. So the rate of mutation doesn't seem to be significant.

You are right, evolution does happen and the mutation rate is not the significant variable in the process. This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that HIV has a very high mutation rate but still cannot evolve efficiently to 3-drug combination therapy. The mathematical limitation of this evolutionary process is the multiplication rule of probabilities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 120 by ringo, posted 09-20-2022 1:17 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 123 by ringo, posted 09-20-2022 1:36 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 126 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 1:56 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
ringo
Member (Idle past 520 days)
Posts: 20940
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005


Message 123 of 2932 (898202)
09-20-2022 1:36 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 1:30 PM


Re: Video not available
Kleinman writes:
You are right, evolution does happen and the mutation rate is not the significant variable in the process.
So it's hard to figure out what you're trying to accomplish here.

"Oh no, They've gone and named my home St. Petersburg.
What's going on? Where are all the friends I had?
It's all wrong, I'm feeling lost like I just don't belong.
Give me back, give me back my Leningrad."
-- Leningrad Cowboys

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 1:30 PM Kleinman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 145 by Tanypteryx, posted 09-20-2022 11:32 PM ringo has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17849
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


(1)
Message 124 of 2932 (898203)
09-20-2022 1:37 PM
Reply to: Message 103 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 9:14 AM


Re: Video not available
quote:
Perhaps it is silly to ask you a question you can't answer
When the question is so vague it can’t be answered the silliness is definitely with the asker. I don’t notice you answering it either. Nor do I notice you giving any reason why microevolutionary events can’t add up to macroevolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 103 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 9:14 AM Kleinman has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


(1)
Message 125 of 2932 (898204)
09-20-2022 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 115 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 12:30 PM


Re: Video not available
Kleinman writes:
Biological evolutionary competition (Darwinian competition) is a conservation of energy (first law of thermodynamics) process.
What physical process isn't?
Is your grand contribution to biology the rather obvious observation that resources are limited? If so, you are a bit late to the game.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 12:30 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 126 of 2932 (898205)
09-20-2022 1:56 PM
Reply to: Message 122 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 1:30 PM


Re: Video not available
Kleinman writes:
You are right, evolution does happen and the mutation rate is not the significant variable in the process.
The mutation rate is significant. Why wouldn't it be?
This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that HIV has a very high mutation rate but still cannot evolve efficiently to 3-drug combination therapy.
What is demonstrated by single drug therapy? Does mutation rate matter?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 122 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 1:30 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 127 of 2932 (898206)
09-20-2022 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 1:25 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman writes:
Do you think that chimps and humans have the same reproductive fitness in the environment where chimps live?
Do you think a polar bear is well adapted to the Arctic? Do you think a polar bear is well adapted to the Sahara desert?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 1:25 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 129 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 2:44 PM Taq has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6438
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.0


(1)
Message 128 of 2932 (898207)
09-20-2022 2:22 PM
Reply to: Message 121 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 1:25 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
I think you mean to say that mutations are only beneficial in the context of environmental selection conditions.
I prefer that you don't try to tell me what I meant. You cannot read minds.
It isn't just the environment as an absolute. What matters in the environment depends on what you use and what you do. That's why I described it in terms of ways of living.
Do you think that chimps and humans have the same reproductive fitness in the environment where chimps live?
I don't think there are many humans who want to live in the trees with the chimps. And I don't see chimps training to be plumbers. You cannot make the comparison that you are suggesting.
There are about 1.5 billion people living in Africa. Why only 300,000 chimps?
And the number of ants greatly exceeds the number of humans. You are making inappropriate comparisons.

Fundamentalism - the anti-American, anti-Christian branch of American Christianity

This message is a reply to:
 Message 121 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 1:25 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 130 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 2:50 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 129 of 2932 (898208)
09-20-2022 2:44 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by Taq
09-20-2022 1:58 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman:
Perhaps it is silly to ask you a question you can't answer
Taq:
When the question is so vague it can’t be answered the silliness is definitely with the asker. I don’t notice you answering it either. Nor do I notice you giving any reason why microevolutionary events can’t add up to macroevolution.

Didn't you say you could add up microevolution changes to get a macroevolutionary change? I'm asking you what microevolutionary changes occurred to give the reproductive advantage that humans have over chimps. What's so vague about that? You won't even tell us how many microevolutionary changes have occurred to give the variants that can grow in the high concentration drug region of the Kishony experiment.
Kleinman:
Biological evolutionary competition (Darwinian competition) is a conservation of energy (first law of thermodynamics) process.
Taq:
What physical process isn't?

Is your grand contribution to biology the rather obvious observation that resources are limited? If so, you are a bit late to the game.

Biological evolutionary modification isn't a first law of thermodynamics process, it is a second law of thermodynamics process. That process is not conservative.
Somebody had to explain to Lenski why biological evolutionary competition slows biological evolutionary adaptation. He's limiting his resources. Kishony doesn't limit the resources as much so his populations evolve far more rapidly but it still takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation. Why don't you show us how the addition rule explains the reason it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation?
Kleinman:
Do you think that chimps and humans have the same reproductive fitness in the environment where chimps live?
Taq:
Do you think a polar bear is well adapted to the Arctic? Do you think a polar bear is well adapted to the Sahara desert?

There are humans living both in the Arctic (about 4 million) and the Sahara (2.5 million) but no chimps in either environment. What adaptive mutations do humans have in order to survive and reproduce in these environments that chimps don't have?

Edited by Kleinman, .


This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 1:58 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by PaulK, posted 09-20-2022 2:55 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 132 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 3:08 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 130 of 2932 (898209)
09-20-2022 2:50 PM
Reply to: Message 128 by nwr
09-20-2022 2:22 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman:
There are about 1.5 billion people living in Africa. Why only 300,000 chimps?
nwr:
And the number of ants greatly exceeds the number of humans. You are making inappropriate comparisons.

Now nwr thinks ants are our closest biological relatives. Very strange way of thinking!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 128 by nwr, posted 09-20-2022 2:22 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17849
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 3.6


Message 131 of 2932 (898210)
09-20-2022 2:55 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 2:44 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
quote:
Didn't you say you could add up microevolution changes to get a macroevolutionary change?
I said that I saw no reason why they couldn’t. And obviously you can’t either.
quote:
I'm asking you what microevolutionary changes occurred to give the reproductive advantage that humans have over chimps. What's so vague about that?
That isn’t what you asked me at all.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 2:44 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 132 of 2932 (898211)
09-20-2022 3:08 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 2:44 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman writes:
Didn't you say you could add up microevolution changes to get a macroevolutionary change? I'm asking you what microevolutionary changes occurred to give the reproductive advantage that humans have over chimps.
Compare the human and chimp genomes. Find the differences.
You won't even tell us how many microevolutionary changes have occurred to give the variants that can grow in the high concentration drug region of the Kishony experiment.
Compare the descendants' genomes to the ancestral genomes. Find the differences.
Biological evolutionary modification isn't a first law of thermodynamics process, it is a second law of thermodynamics process. That process is not conservative.
The process of running a refrigerator is a 2LoT process, and yet it moves along just fine. Since there is ample energy available to biology to drive negative entropy it isn't a problem.
Somebody had to explain to Lenski why biological evolutionary competition slows biological evolutionary adaptation. He's limiting his resources. Kishony doesn't limit the resources as much so his populations evolve far more rapidly but it still takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation. Why don't you show us how the addition rule explains the reason it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation?
The error you are making is in assuming every adaptation is as stringent as that seen in either the Lenski or Kishony experiment. There is no reason to think that the number of mutations necessary for an arboreal ape to adapt to a savanna is as few as the number of mutations that can confer antibiotic resistance or aerobic citrate metabolism. Not all adaptations are equal.
What adaptive mutations do humans have in order to survive and reproduce in these environments that chimps don't have?
Compare the human and chimp genomes. Find the differences.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 2:44 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 133 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 3:23 PM Taq has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 133 of 2932 (898212)
09-20-2022 3:23 PM
Reply to: Message 132 by Taq
09-20-2022 3:08 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman:
Didn't you say you could add up microevolution changes to get a macroevolutionary change? I'm asking you what microevolutionary changes occurred to give the reproductive advantage that humans have over chimps.
Taq:
Compare the human and chimp genomes. Find the differences.

I'm not the one claiming that humans and chimps arose from a common ancestor. You still haven't shown how every human alive today has 200,000 beneficial mutations that give the reproductive advantage over chimps. You have about 100 billion replications, 99% of which have occurred in the last 10,000 years for that kind of genetic transformation. You need a much larger envelope.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 3:08 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 134 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 3:40 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10191
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 134 of 2932 (898213)
09-20-2022 3:40 PM
Reply to: Message 133 by Kleinman
09-20-2022 3:23 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman writes:
I'm not the one claiming that humans and chimps arose from a common ancestor.
You don't even have to accept common ancestry in order to stumble on the stupendously obvious answer.
Do you accept that chimps and humans are physically different because the sequence of their genomes are different? If yes, THERE IS YOUR ANSWER.
You still haven't shown how every human alive today has 200,000 beneficial mutations that give the reproductive advantage over chimps.
Are you aware that mutations happen? It's really a thing.
Even more, we have mountains of evidence that the same process that produces mutations in both chimps and humans right now, in the present, is the same process that produced the differences between their genomes through evolution and common ancestry.
Do you understand the difference between transitions and transversions?
Transitions vs transversions
What we observe is that transitions are much more common than transversions due to the fact that transitions occur between bases that are more similar to each other. We can also measure the bias towards transitions in real time. When we compare the rates of transitions and transversions between the human and chimp genomes it is an exact match to the observed rate at which these mutations occur.
Human Genetics Confirms Mutations as the Drivers of Diversity and Evolution – EvoGrad
You have about 100 billion replications, 99% of which have occurred in the last 10,000 years for that kind of genetic transformation. You need a much larger envelope.
The mutation rate is about 50 mutations per person per generation. With a constant population size of 100,000 that would be 5 million mutations per generation. Over 5 million years you would get 200,000 generations with a generation time of 25 years. That would be 1 trillion mutations that happened in the human population with just a population of 100,000 people. We only needed to keep 20 million of those mutations, or 1 out of every 50,000 mutations. I really don't see a problem with that.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 133 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 3:23 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 135 by Kleinman, posted 09-20-2022 4:11 PM Taq has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 444 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 135 of 2932 (898214)
09-20-2022 4:11 PM
Reply to: Message 134 by Taq
09-20-2022 3:40 PM


Re: Apples and oranges
Kleinman:
You still haven't shown how every human alive today has 200,000 beneficial mutations that give the reproductive advantage over chimps.
Taq:
Are you aware that mutations happen? It's really a thing.

Sure mutations happen. You just have to learn the accounting rules for a lineage to accumulate a set of beneficial mutations. You understand that competition is a first law of thermodynamics process. Do you understand that mutations are random events? And that accumulation of beneficial mutations on a lineage is a Markov process where the joint probability of beneficial mutations occurring is governed by the multiplication rule of probabilities. That is a second law of thermodynamics process. That's why your back-of-the-envelope calculation of humans having 200,000 beneficial mutations is wrong. You are using a simple neutral evolution calculation and assuming that 10% of the mutations are beneficial based on rank speculation. Why don't you learn how the Kishony and Lenski experiments work?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 134 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 3:40 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 136 by Taq, posted 09-20-2022 4:35 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024