Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 68 (9101 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: sensei
Post Volume: Total: 904,467 Year: 1,348/14,231 Month: 272/1,076 Week: 5/376 Day: 5/78 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."
nwr
Member
Posts: 6239
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 346 of 2813 (899251)
10-11-2022 12:58 AM
Reply to: Message 344 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 12:16 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
It's not so weird if you want to understand how antimicrobial drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail.
That's an example of what is weird.
Life itself is a thermodynamic process. However, in terms of thermodynamics, what's involved in evolution is an insignificant part of that. But it is the part that creationists emphasize.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 344 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:16 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 348 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 8:52 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 347 of 2813 (899263)
10-11-2022 8:47 AM
Reply to: Message 345 by Tanypteryx
10-11-2022 12:48 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman:
Descent with modification (DNA adaptation) is a second law of thermodynamics process where the random trial is a replication.
Tanypteryx:
Sorry, what random trial? So, the second law is an important term in your equation?

A random mutation is a variation of a coin toss problem, a simple binomial probability problem. Think about the basic concept of coin tossing. The random trial is a toss of the coin with two possible outcomes, a head or a tail. In this case, the outcomes are symmetric, each having a probability of 0.5. The random trial for a mutation occurring is a replication with two possible outcomes, a mutation occurs or a mutation doesn't occur. These outcomes are highly asymmetric where the probability of a mutation occurring is the mutation rate and the probability of a mutation not occurring is (1-mutation rate). Without natural selection, random mutations will cause genetic sequences to become randomly disordered sequences. This process is a Markov random walk process. Markov processes are entropy equations. For example, the Jukes-Cantor model goes to equilibrium (maximum entropy) when the probability of finding any of the bases at the given site is 0.25.
Kleinman:
Biological evolutionary competition is a first law of thermodynamics conservation of energy process
Tanypteryx:
So, the first law is an important term in your equation?

Again, you need to go back to basic concepts. The first law of thermodynamics means that energy is conserved. Another way to put this is that energy in minus energy out equals energy stored. Haldane's substitution (fixation) frequency equations are simply a restatement of the first law of thermodynamics. Those equations can be rewritten in terms of energy consumed for each replication and the total amount of energy available for survival and reproduction (the carrying capacity of the environment).
Kleinman:
What all these selection conditions have in common is that if a single mutation can give improved reproductive fitness to that member, it will take about 1/(mutation rate) replications for that mutation to have a reasonable probability of occurring. If it takes 2 or more mutations to give improved fitness, the number of replications goes up exponentially.
Tanypteryx:
What you keep ignoring is the fact that many species have millions of mutations happening in every generation that are passed to descendants. These mutations are happening on multiple chromosome and on multiple genes that can all be passed to offspring along with mutations from past ancestors. Most genes are not under selection and are passed on to descendants and neutral mutations keep getting passed on and accumulating in descendants too. You say only one of them can be beneficial in a billion generations and then the next after another billion generations.

That's not correct, I don't ignore these possibilities. The equations I've presented apply to every site in the genome, not just the site where an adaptive mutation can occur. So, take the example of the Kishony experiment. His founder bacteria don't have a member with the first adaptive mutation. So the founder starts a colony in the drug-free region. When that colony grows to a number of about 1/(mutation rate) population size, this colony will have done an exhaustive search of every possible mutation in that sample space. In other words, that population will have a member with every possible mutation at every site in the genome. But, only those members with an adaptive mutation can grow in the next higher drug concentration region. Now, think about what that new founder in the next higher drug concentration must do to get the next adaptive mutation.
Kleinman:
The problem is that reading fossil tea leaves doesn't correctly explain the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.
Tanypteryx:
Well, you may be right. I couldn't find a single record of fossil tea leaves, Camellia sinensis

I would also note that evolutionary biology doesn't use mathematics, but evolutionary science does.

Should evolutionary science based on the laws of physics, mathematics, and experimental evidence conform to the interpretation of the fossil record or should it be the other way around? Evolutionary science shows that each adaptive evolutionary step requires about 1/(mutation rate) replications. That's for each adaptive mutation. Why aren't you overwhelmed with examples of transitional forms in the fossil record?
Kleinman:
You should have transitional fossil forms coming out of your ears if universal common descent was true.
Tanypteryx:
Good prediction, it turns out we do. I guess while you were getting that fancy education you didn't visit and university fossil collections. Probably too busy taking those high school probability courses

I was actually taught introductory probability theory in elementary school. I'm really dating myself now. When I was a kid, we played card and dice games. And I have visited museums with fossil collections. I don't recall seeing a sequence of fossils showing reptiles evolving into birds or fish evolving into mammals. The mistake you make in this basic concept is trying to use gross anatomy to explain what is happening at the molecular (DNA evolutionary) level. That's like trying to explain quantum mechanics using classical physics. You need to get your fossil record interpretation in line with the hard mathematical evolutionary science. But if you think I'm wrong, use your interpretation of the fossil record to explain the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 345 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-11-2022 12:48 AM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 349 by nwr, posted 10-11-2022 12:15 PM Kleinman has replied
 Message 353 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-11-2022 12:59 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 348 of 2813 (899264)
10-11-2022 8:52 AM
Reply to: Message 346 by nwr
10-11-2022 12:58 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman:
It's not so weird if you want to understand how antimicrobial drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail.
nwr:
That's an example of what is weird.

Life itself is a thermodynamic process. However, in terms of thermodynamics, what's involved in evolution is an insignificant part of that. But it is the part that creationists emphasize.

How would you know? You still haven't done the math.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 346 by nwr, posted 10-11-2022 12:58 AM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6239
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 349 of 2813 (899271)
10-11-2022 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 347 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 8:47 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Thanks for your explanation.
When you talk about "the mathematics of evolution", you are apparently talking about "population genetics". That's well established research area with a substantial literature. If you use the established terminology, people will better understand what you are talking about.
By the way, your own version of population genetics is horribly naive and simplistic.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 8:47 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 351 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:40 PM nwr has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20851
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 350 of 2813 (899277)
10-11-2022 12:33 PM
Reply to: Message 343 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 12:11 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman writes:
my employer in the aerospace industry that paid me a lot of money for that skill.
When somebody pays you for your biological skills, let us know.

"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 343 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:11 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 352 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:46 PM ringo has replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 351 of 2813 (899278)
10-11-2022 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 349 by nwr
10-11-2022 12:15 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
nwr:
Thanks for your explanation.

When you talk about "the mathematics of evolution", you are apparently talking about "population genetics". That's well established research area with a substantial literature. If you use the established terminology, people will better understand what you are talking about.

By the way, your own version of population genetics is horribly naive and simplistic.
How would you know, you don't do the math of biology. And sure the math I've presented is simplistic but it predicts and simulates very nicely real experimental examples of biological evolution. If you did do the math, you might understand the blunder that biologists make when doing inferential phylogenetics. Are there any varsity players left on this forum or just the C- team.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 349 by nwr, posted 10-11-2022 12:15 PM nwr has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 357 by nwr, posted 10-11-2022 1:23 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 352 of 2813 (899279)
10-11-2022 12:46 PM
Reply to: Message 350 by ringo
10-11-2022 12:33 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman:
my employer in the aerospace industry that paid me a lot of money for that skill.
top.ringo:
When somebody pays you for your biological skills, let us know.

Does that include what I got paid for practicing medicine? You see ringo, I'm licensed in both engineering and medicine. And biologists suck at explaining the evolution of drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail. Biologists just don't understand the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 350 by ringo, posted 10-11-2022 12:33 PM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 354 by ringo, posted 10-11-2022 1:07 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 355 by Tangle, posted 10-11-2022 1:07 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 3768
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(1)
Message 353 of 2813 (899280)
10-11-2022 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 347 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 8:47 AM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Tanypteryx writes:
What you keep ignoring is the fact that many species have millions of mutations happening in every generation that are passed to descendants. These mutations are happening on multiple chromosome and on multiple genes that can all be passed to offspring along with mutations from past ancestors. Most genes are not under selection and are passed on to descendants and neutral mutations keep getting passed on and accumulating in descendants too. You say only one of them can be beneficial in a billion generations and then the next after another billion generations.
Kleinman writes:
That's not correct, I don't ignore these possibilities. The equations I've presented apply to every site in the genome, not just the site where an adaptive mutation can occur. So, take the example of the Kishony experiment. His founder bacteria don't have a member with the first adaptive mutation. So the founder starts a colony in the drug-free region. When that colony grows to a number of about 1/(mutation rate) population size, this colony will have done an exhaustive search of every possible mutation in that sample space. In other words, that population will have a member with every possible mutation at every site in the genome. But, only those members with an adaptive mutation can grow in the next higher drug concentration region. Now, think about what that new founder in the next higher drug concentration must do to get the next adaptive mutation.
And then you completely ignored what I said and repeated the same thing about bacteria that you have already repeated a hundred time. I am talking about complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species and you keep talking about bacteria starting from a single clone.
Kleinman writes:
Should evolutionary science based on the laws of physics, mathematics, and experimental evidence conform to the interpretation of the fossil record or should it be the other way around?
You tell me. You seem to be saying that the fossil record violates the laws of physics. What do you think fossils represent? What do you think the whole fossil record that has been discovered so far represents?
Kleinman writes:
Evolutionary science shows that each adaptive evolutionary step requires about 1/(mutation rate) replications. That's for each adaptive mutation.
No, that's what your calculations using data from 2 experiments with bacteria showed. You have not demonstrated that your calculations apply to the evolution of populations of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species.
Kleinman writes:
And I have visited museums with fossil collections. I don't recall seeing a sequence of fossils showing reptiles evolving into birds or fish evolving into mammals.
Well, I was lucky enough to see an Archaeopteryx fossil as well as others that I don't remember the names of. And even you should know that no one but creationists think mammals evolved from fish. Once again you undermine your credibility.
Kleinman writes:
The mistake you make in this basic concept is trying to use gross anatomy to explain what is happening at the molecular (DNA evolutionary) level. That's like trying to explain quantum mechanics using classical physics.
Oh really? Can you remind me where I did that?
Your mistake is trying to use bacteria colonies from 2 narrow lab experiments as models for the evolution of all populations of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species. You ignore the fact that we can actually study these organisms and learn quite a lot from their gross anatomy, behavior and life histories, you know, biology.
Kleinman writes:
You need to get your fossil record interpretation in line with the hard mathematical evolutionary science.
Well, if you think that's important you should do that. I'm happy letting paleontologists report their observations. There is still a lot to learn and it's fine if you don't want to be part of that process, but I find it fascinating.
Kleinman writes:
But if you think I'm wrong, use your interpretation of the fossil record to explain the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail.
Gosh, I'm surprised that you think someone would want to do that. That would be kind of like explaining the function of a table saw by talking about the pyramids in Egypt.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 347 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 8:47 AM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 358 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 2:23 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20851
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


(1)
Message 354 of 2813 (899282)
10-11-2022 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 352 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 12:46 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman writes:
You see ringo, I'm licensed in both engineering and medicine.
Good for you. I have the Loch Ness Monster in my bathtub.
Kleinman writes:
And biologists suck at explaining the evolution of drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail.
It's true that scientists are often not good explainers. That's why I sometimes stick my oar in to explain my kindergarten-level take on science. Maybe once in a while I help somebody up to a kindergarten-level understanding.
Kleinman writes:
Biologists just don't understand the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.
Aren't you the guy that was talking about tea-leaf reading? Message 147, Message 158, Message 160
That suggests to me that you don't accept evolution. And that suggests to me that you're a lying, science-denying creationist bastard.

"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 352 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:46 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8896
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 3.3


(1)
Message 355 of 2813 (899283)
10-11-2022 1:07 PM
Reply to: Message 352 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 12:46 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman writes:
And biologists suck at explaining the evolution of drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail. Biologists just don't understand the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.
Why are you wasting your time here a the back-end of Internet nowhere? Why aren't you publishing this mathematics of yours and collecting your Nobel Prize? If biologists have got this so wrong for so long and it's as easy and as obvious to prove mathematically as you say, why aren't you the new Darwin?
We think you're a nutcase and a crank and we have a lot of experience of those here. Prove us wrong, get published in a real journal, we'd all be delighted for you and listen politely at your knee.

Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. I am Mancunian. I am Brum. I am London. Olen Suomi Soy Barcelona. I am Ukraine.

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 352 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:46 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 356 by ringo, posted 10-11-2022 1:14 PM Tangle has not replied
 Message 362 by Kleinman, posted 10-12-2022 10:12 AM Tangle has not replied

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 20851
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 356 of 2813 (899286)
10-11-2022 1:14 PM
Reply to: Message 355 by Tangle
10-11-2022 1:07 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Tangle writes:
why aren't you the new Darwin?
Then we can be the first Kleinmanists.

"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 355 by Tangle, posted 10-11-2022 1:07 PM Tangle has not replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6239
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


(1)
Message 357 of 2813 (899287)
10-11-2022 1:23 PM
Reply to: Message 351 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 12:40 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
How would you know, you don't do the math of biology.
The expression "math of biology" is a misnomer. I know enough about population genetics to recognize how simplistic is your version.

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

This message is a reply to:
 Message 351 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 12:40 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 359 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 2:32 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 358 of 2813 (899291)
10-11-2022 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 353 by Tanypteryx
10-11-2022 12:59 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Tanypteryx:
What you keep ignoring is the fact that many species have millions of mutations happening in every generation that are passed to descendants. These mutations are happening on multiple chromosome and on multiple genes that can all be passed to offspring along with mutations from past ancestors. Most genes are not under selection and are passed on to descendants and neutral mutations keep getting passed on and accumulating in descendants too. You say only one of them can be beneficial in a billion generations and then the next after another billion generations.
Kleinman:
That's not correct, I don't ignore these possibilities. The equations I've presented apply to every site in the genome, not just the site where an adaptive mutation can occur. So, take the example of the Kishony experiment. His founder bacteria don't have a member with the first adaptive mutation. So the founder starts a colony in the drug-free region. When that colony grows to a number of about 1/(mutation rate) population size, this colony will have done an exhaustive search of every possible mutation in that sample space. In other words, that population will have a member with every possible mutation at every site in the genome. But, only those members with an adaptive mutation can grow in the next higher drug concentration region. Now, think about what that new founder in the next higher drug concentration must do to get the next adaptive mutation.
Tanypteryx:
And then you completely ignored what I said and repeated the same thing about bacteria that you have already repeated a hundred time. I am talking about complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species and you keep talking about bacteria starting from a single clone.


Sorry, I thought you were aware that complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species only transmit gametes to their offspring. DNA evolution works the same way for any form of DNA replication whether it be clonal, mitosis, or meiosis. In the case of meiosis, you have to take into account whether particular alleles will be transferred to the offspring due to the effect of recombination. Sorry if I'm overwhelming you with these mathematical and biological facts of life.
Kleinman:
Should evolutionary science based on the laws of physics, mathematics, and experimental evidence conform to the interpretation of the fossil record or should it be the other way around?
Tanypteryx:
You tell me. You seem to be saying that the fossil record violates the laws of physics. What do you think fossils represent? What do you think the whole fossil record that has been discovered so far represents?

Yes, I think that the way biologists interpret the fossil record that it violates the laws of physics. Why do you think that I challenged Taq with the evolution of humans and chimps from a common ancestor? You have about a billion human replications to account for the accumulation of the adaptive mutations that would give humans the improved reproductive fitness humans have over chimps. DNA evolution alone operating with a billion replications only allows for less than 5 adaptive mutations. So Taq grabs on to recombination but then has to claim that multiple adaptive alleles can fix simultaneously in a population. That is flat-out wrong and Taq knows it.
Kleinman:
Evolutionary science shows that each adaptive evolutionary step requires about 1/(mutation rate) replications. That's for each adaptive mutation.
Tanypteryx:
No, that's what your calculations using data from 2 experiments with bacteria showed. You have not demonstrated that your calculations apply to the evolution of populations of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species.

Do you want me to start posting links to papers that show that combination herbicides work to suppress the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds, papers on combination pesticides work to suppress the evolution of pesticide-resistant insects, or combination rodenticides work to prevent the evolution rodenticide resistant rodents? There is an abundance of data and literature that show how the multiplication rule affects the biological evolution of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing organisms. Taq understands this now, you have yet to learn this mathematical and empirical fact of life about biological evolution.
Kleinman:
And I have visited museums with fossil collections. I don't recall seeing a sequence of fossils showing reptiles evolving into birds or fish evolving into mammals.
Tanypteryx:
Well, I was lucky enough to see an Archaeopteryx fossil as well as others that I don't remember the names of. And even you should know that no one but creationists think mammals evolved from fish. Once again you undermine your credibility.

You still don't get it. You should have thousands of Archaeopteryx fossils because each step of adaptive evolution takes hundreds of millions if not billions of replications. You are taking a fossil of some strange extinct creature and attributing something to it that fits your bias. For adaptive evolution to work, it takes huge populations and recovery ability. Plants can do this because they can achieve these kinds of populations and recovery rates and produce huge amounts of seeds and pollen. Insects and rodents can but only adapt to a single selection condition at a time with any efficiency. Pressure these populations with two or more simultaneous selection conditions and the population requirements for adaptation become exponentially larger for getting a member with multiple adaptive mutations. The multiplication rule affects all populations when it comes to adaptive evolution (and random recombination as well).
Kleinman:
The mistake you make in this basic concept is trying to use gross anatomy to explain what is happening at the molecular (DNA evolutionary) level. That's like trying to explain quantum mechanics using classical physics.
Tanypteryx:


Kleinman:
Tanypteryx:
Oh really? Can you remind me where I did that?

You did this in this post with your claim about Archaeopteryx. You have no idea what the genetic sequence of this replicator was and have no idea what the genome of the parent or offspring was of this replicator. But somehow, you have convinced yourself that this is a fossil of a reptile turning into a bird.
Tanypteryx:
Your mistake is trying to use bacteria colonies from 2 narrow lab experiments as models for the evolution of all populations of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species. You ignore the fact that we can actually study these organisms and learn quite a lot from their gross anatomy, behavior and life histories, you know, biology.
Do you think that if Kishony or Lenski were to make their experiments more complex that evolution would work more quickly? Are you aware that Kishony has tried to perform his experiment with two drugs and it doesn't work. The reason is that a single adaptive mutation to one drug or the other will not give improved reproductive fitness and allow that variant to grow in a two drug region. Kishony can get that experiment to work but he will need a much larger carrying capacity environment that can support a colony size of about a trillion. Your misinterpretation of the fossil record doesn't explain that mathematical fact of life to you.
Kleinman:
You need to get your fossil record interpretation in line with the hard mathematical evolutionary science.
Tanypteryx:
Well, if you think that's important you should do that. I'm happy letting paleontologists report their observations. There is still a lot to learn and it's fine if you don't want to be part of that process, but I find it fascinating.

It may take a while but paleontology will go the way of astrology and phrenology. It all depends on how long these adherents want to waste their lives on this pseudo-science.
Kleinman:
But if you think I'm wrong, use your interpretation of the fossil record to explain the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance and why cancer treatments fail.
Tanypteryx:
Gosh, I'm surprised that you think someone would want to do that. That would be kind of like explaining the function of a table saw by talking about the pyramids in Egypt.

It's not a matter of wanting or not wanting. You can't explain the evolution of drug-resistant microbes or why cancer treatments fail using fossil tea-leaf reading. Biologists really suck at explaining the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 353 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-11-2022 12:59 PM Tanypteryx has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 360 by Tanypteryx, posted 10-11-2022 4:12 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member
Posts: 1690
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 359 of 2813 (899292)
10-11-2022 2:32 PM
Reply to: Message 357 by nwr
10-11-2022 1:23 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman:
How would you know, you don't do the math of biology.
nwr:
The expression "math of biology" is a misnomer. I know enough about population genetics to recognize how simplistic is your version.

This math is almost trivial but works quite nicely in explaining the Kishony and Lenski experiments, and why combination therapy works for the treatment of HIV,... I like it for its simple elegance and the way it explains why biological competition slows biological descent with modification. Biologists should learn these simple mathematical facts of life. Then, when medical students take their genetics courses, they can have some understanding of how antimicrobial drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 357 by nwr, posted 10-11-2022 1:23 PM nwr has seen this message but not replied

  
Tanypteryx
Member
Posts: 3768
From: Oregon, USA
Joined: 08-27-2006
Member Rating: 3.0


(2)
Message 360 of 2813 (899297)
10-11-2022 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 358 by Kleinman
10-11-2022 2:23 PM


Re: Kleinman does not think mutations can be passed down to descendants
Kleinman writes:
Sorry, I thought you were aware that complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing species only transmit gametes to their offspring.
Sorry, I thought you were aware that those gametes contain DNA from the parent that combine with the DNA from the gamete from the other parent. The combined DNA from the parents form genes in chromosomes of the offspring and those genes carry many mutations from the ancestors of each parent as well as a set of new mutations.
Kleinman writes:
In the case of meiosis, you have to take into account whether particular alleles will be transferred to the offspring due to the effect of recombination.
Obviously.
Kleinman writes:
Yes, I think that the way biologists interpret the fossil record that it violates the laws of physics.
Which specific laws of physics do fossils violate and in what ways? Show us your work. Fossils exist, we can see them and touch them. Are you saying they formed by magic?
Since you didn't answer these questions I will ask again: What do you think fossils represent? What do you think the whole fossil record that has been discovered so far represents?
Kleinman writes:
You have about a billion human replications to account for the accumulation of the adaptive mutations that would give humans the improved reproductive fitness humans have over chimps.
A billion human replications, where does that number come from? I think your interpretation of humans having "improved reproductive fitness" over chimps is flawed. Each species is adapted to different selective pressures. Chimps adapted to a fairly specific habitat and humans became generalists.
Kleinman writes:
DNA evolution alone operating with a billion replications only allows for less than 5 adaptive mutations.
DNA evolution doesn't operate alone. Humans seem to have an average of about 50-100 new mutations in every single individual. You have failed to show any barrier to multiple adaptive mutations being passed on to descendants.
Kleinman writes:
So Taq grabs on to recombination but then has to claim that multiple adaptive alleles can fix simultaneously in a population. That is flat-out wrong and Taq knows it.
You have not demonstrated that they cannot.
Kleinman writes:
Do you want me to start posting links to papers that show that combination herbicides work to suppress the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds, papers on combination pesticides work to suppress the evolution of pesticide-resistant insects, or combination rodenticides work to prevent the evolution rodenticide resistant rodents?
Please don't. We already know those things, but those are not normal selective pressures that affected the evolution of those species.
Kleinman writes:
There is an abundance of data and literature that show how the multiplication rule affects the biological evolution of complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing organisms
I am sure there is. There is also an abundance of data and literature showing how species adapt to non-lethal selection.
Kleinman writes:
Tanypteryx writes:
Oh really? Can you remind me where I did that?
You did this in this post with your claim about Archaeopteryx. You have no idea what the genetic sequence of this replicator was and have no idea what the genome of the parent or offspring was of this replicator. But somehow, you have convinced yourself that this is a fossil of a reptile turning into a bird.
As others have noted your mind reading skills suck. The only claim I made about Archaeopteryx is that I have seen a fossil. I made no claims or implied anything with regards to its genome.
Kleinman writes:
It may take a while but paleontology will go the way of astrology and phrenology. It all depends on how long these adherents want to waste their lives on this pseudo-science.
Well, it's clear that you will not be the one to overturn paleontology. You think fossils are magic.
Kleinman writes:
It's not a matter of wanting or not wanting. You can't explain the evolution of drug-resistant microbes or why cancer treatments fail using fossil tea-leaf reading.
You are the only person that I am aware of who suggest that you think that has ever been attempted. That seems like a classic example of a red herring.
Biologists really suck at explaining the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.
So far, you really suck at it too.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

What if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty Python

One important characteristic of a theory is that is has survived repeated attempts to falsify it. Contrary to your understanding, all available evidence confirms it. --Subbie

If evolution is shown to be false, it will be at the hands of things that are true, not made up. --percy

The reason that we have the scientific method is because common sense isn't reliable. -- Taq


This message is a reply to:
 Message 358 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 2:23 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 361 by Kleinman, posted 10-11-2022 5:45 PM Tanypteryx has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2022 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2023