|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,914 Year: 4,171/9,624 Month: 1,042/974 Week: 1/368 Day: 1/11 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..." | ||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:I already have. You report you to have one fossil that you claim is some kind of transition between a reptile and a bird. You should have hundreds or thousands of these transitional fossils because each DNA adaptational step takes 100's of millions or billions of replications. Understand rubberband?
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:You must like it because several posts back, you said, "OK, I'm finished.", That's when I said, "At least my model correctly explains the Kishony and Lenski experiments and why combination therapy works for the treatment of HIV." Message 363 Are you finally ready to give your explanation of the physics and mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski experiments? In particular, why does it take a billion replications for each adaptive mutational step? Kleinman:So is your new settled science dinosaurs are now birds? Seems like biologists are having a hard time making up their minds. Kleinman:You tell me lots of things, but you still haven't given your explanation for the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments. When are you going to give your explanation of why it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutational step? I know you're confused but a good place to start is in your elementary school arithmetic class. Tanypteryx:I'm in good company, biologists don't cite Edward Tatum's 1958 Nobel Laureate Lecture either. Edward Tatum understood the effect of the multiplication rule on biological adaptive evolution. Too bad biologists don't understand this because then they could correctly explain the biological evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance and why cancer treatment fails. That's what happens when you put the solution of a scientific problem into the hands of amateurs. Tanypteryx:Now I'm sure you have never studied probability theory. The mutation rate is the frequency of success for a binomial probability problem. That means that in 1/(mutation rate)*(number of random trials) gives the mean value for that binomial distribution. Mean of Binomial Distribution - Statistics How To quote:When n=1/p, you have on average, 1 success. Understand rubberband. And don't blame me that biologists are so slow at understanding these mathematical facts of life. It explains why biologists have failed to correctly explain the physics and mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski experiments. It appears you haven't learned this in your survey of physics and survey of mathematics courses. Tanypteryx:You are so silly and inattentive. Check out equation (1) from this paper: The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection Kleinman:You see Tany, a mutation is also a random trial with multiple possible outcomes. Read this paper carefully and learn how to derive the governing equation for DNA evolution for a single selection pressure. Equation (13) is the governing equation for the Kishony experiment and when used in conjunction with Haldane's substitution equation predicts the behavior of the Lenski experiment. You should learn this.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman: Kleinman:Opinions aren't evidence. Try some experimental evidence such as the Kishony and Lenski experiments. ringo:How long do we have to wait for your physical and mathematical explanation of descent with modification for the Kishony and Lenski experiments? Kleinman:You can have whatever opinion you want but that opinion of yours doesn't explain descent with modification for the Kishony and Lenski experiments or why combination therapy works for the treatment of HIV. To do this requires understanding the physics and mathematics of biological evolution, something that you don't have. Kleinman:OK ringo, here's your big chance to teach introductory evolutionary theory. Teach us the physics and mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski evolutionary experiments. These are two very simple experimental examples of evolutionary theory. Kleinman:I'm sorry I disappoint you so much. At least I don't do this to you: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tYgsBHbW3Og&ab_channel=Da... Kleinman:Are you now claiming that descent with modification works differently for reptiles or humans and chimps than demonstrated in the Kishony and Lenski experiments? Taq tried to make a case for sexual reproduction and recombination but that didn't go so well. Perhaps you think you can do better? Kleinman:Too bad your opinion isn't supported by physical, mathematical, and experimental evidence. You have gotten used to your opinion just like many people got used to the opinion that the earth is flat. But if you want to make a case that descent with modification works differently for bacteria as demonstrated by the Kishony and Lenski experiments than for complex, multicellular, sexually reproducing organisms, make your case. But try to use physical, mathematical, and experimental evidence to do this, not your highly biased opinions. I do like a good scientific discussion, so don't keep us waiting.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:If you use proportionality to the number of T Rex fossils, then 40 transitional fossils for each mutational adaptation step. Then you have to estimate how many mutations it would take to cause a transition from a reptile lineage to a bird lineage. If it can be done with 10 adaptive mutations, you would expect about 400 transitional fossils from the 10 billion replications necessary to make that genetic transition. For 100 adaptive mutations, you would expect about 4000 transitional fossils from the 100 billion replications necessary to make that genetic transition. Why do you think you can explain descent with modification with a single fossil specimen? Why do you think you can explain descent with modification with any fossil specimens? Kleinman:How about taking a single fossil and claiming this proof of reptiles evolving into birds? Don't you know that we are in the era of DNA evidence? Kleinman:Taq knows it's not a miscalculation. And why not be fixated on the Kishony and Lenski experiments? These are real, measurable, and repeatable examples of DNA evolution and descent with modification. And you are giving an opinion on a single fossil and calling it a transitional form of a reptile to a bird. Why don't you tell us how many replications for this lineage to make the transition from a reptile population to a bird population? I always enjoy a good fairytale. Kleinman:It's much easier to give the amount of scientific evidence you have presented. Zero! Feel free to repeat yourself while stamping your feet, "I have a fossil of a reptile evolving into a bird and that's scientific evidence because it is a pig". Kleinman:ringo thinks that descent with modification works differently for bacteria than it does for complex, multicellular, sexual replicators but he won't explain how. Kleinman:Sure these experiments have everything to do with the point I'm making. They demonstrate experimentally how descent with modification works. Kleinman:Sorry if this discussion bursts your bubble on the idea of universal common descent, but facts are facts, that's what the science is showing. The fossil record does not demonstrate how descent with modification works, you need to measure it by doing experiments such as what Kishony and Lenski have done. Too bad biologists don't teach these facts to premed students because then they would have some idea of how antimicrobial drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. Kleinman:Correctly explaining the physics and mathematics of these experiments is misusing them? These experiments demonstrate how many replications it takes for each adaptive mutation. And if you are agreeing that descent with modification works the same for all replicators, why can't these results be applied to other replicators? Kleinman:Taq bailed out because he knows he's wrong. The Lenski experiment demonstrates this and neither Haldane nor Kimura make claims in their analysis of fixation that multiple alleles fix simultaneously. Kleinman:The difference is that I've given the correct mathematical and physical explanation of the Kishony and Lenski experiments. Biologists have not. Universal common descent is a mathematically and empirically irrational belief. And your opinion about a fossil does not change the mathematical and experimental evidence. Kleinman:For someone who admits to being biased in favor of science, you certainly put a lot of effort into avoiding the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:A transition to what? ringo:Evidence Definition & Meaning | Dictionary.com quote: Kleinman:All the empirical evidence of descent with modification behaves like the Kishony and Lenski experiments. It just happens that the Kishony and Lenski experiments demonstrate this the best. And this evidence doesn't kill evolution, it kills the notion of universal common descent. Kleinman:So, when are you going to explain to us the physics and mathematics of descent with modification and how this proves (or is evidence of) universal common descent? Biologists really need help on this.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
ringo:Where are all the fossils that demonstrate the next transitional mutation? Now that you know that it takes about 1/(mutation rate) replications for each adaptational transitional mutation. For a mutation rate of 1e-9, that's about a billion replications and if these replicators' fossil remains were preserved in a similar ratio as T Rex, you should have about 40 fossils for the next adaptational transitional mutation. And 40 more for the next adaptational mutation, and 40 more for the next transitional mutation,... It appears that you are missing something from the fossil record. So, let's hear your excuse. Kleinman:You don't know when you have been circumscribed. Kleinman:I've already mentioned many examples how the multiplication rule affects descent with modification (adaptation). Start with the evolution of HIV to antiviral treatment. Single-drug treatment fails in about a week because the virus only has to achieve a population size of about 100,000 (mutation rate of 1e-5) for resistant variants to appear. While 3 drug therapy (3 mutations, 1 to each drug) requires about 1e15 replications to give a reasonable probability of that variant occurring. Read this paper if you want to understand the math: The mathematics of random mutation and natural selection for multiple simultaneous selection pressures and the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance And if you want examples of descent with modification (adaptation) for complex, multicellular, sexual replicators, consider what people in agriculture do to suppress the evolution of herbicide-resistant weeds and pesticide-resistant insects: Herbicide Resistance: Development and Management quote:Take Steps to Avoid Insecticide Resistance quote:These same principles apply to using rodenticides and cancer therapies. Single-drug targeted cancer treatments have a very low probability of working unless the cancer is caught at a very early stage. If you want to see how to apply this math to cancer treatment, read this paper: Drug Resistance, An Enemy of Targeted Cancer Therapies There are many, many papers where people in agriculture and medicine are figuring out descent with modification despite the failure of biologists to explain this process correctly. Kleinman:Descent with modification occurs, biological competition occurs, recombination occurs, selection pressures exist, and universal common descent is mathematically irrational and should not be taught as scientific fact to naive school children. It is a stupid and dangerous thing to teach this falsehood when all the real, measurable, and repeatable scientific evidence shows that universal common descent does not occur. Your problem is that your intellectual bias doesn't allow you to accept these physical and mathematical facts of life. I'm a Creationist because I believe that the scientific evidence substantiates that belief. If you want to believe in abiogenesis and universal common descent, this is a free country. But I attribute your claims to a lack of good training in the laws of physics, chemistry, and mathematics. After all, biologists have failed to give a correct explanation of the Kishony and Lenski experiments. And we are all accountable to our Creator. Kleinman:ringo, you really need a new playbook. You trot out the same stupid lines but you can't hide the fact that you can't explain the Kishony and Lenski experiments. You need a much larger engine for universal common descent to fly. Descent with modification gets you at best one adaptive mutation per 1/(mutation rate) replications. That will get you to drug-resistant microbes, pesticide-resistant insects, herbicide-resistant weeds, and failed cancer treatments. But getting from reptiles to birds, fish to mammals, or even chimps and humans from a common ancestor, forget it. Kleinman:I don't think that everything that biologists do and teach is wrong. I've taken many biology courses over the years. You have to in order to get a medical degree. But biologists have done a terrible job teaching and explaining the physics and mathematics of biological evolution. They don't understand the relationship between biological competition and descent with modification. Haldane and Kimura do a decent job with the mathematics of biological competition but don't recognize the effect that competition has on descent with modification. Other than Mendelian Genetics, they don't understand how recombination works in a population and the vast majority of biologists have no idea how to derive, study, and understand the equations they use. They just plug numbers into some equation without understanding the underlying physics that the equation represents. If biologists want to claim biological evolution as there own private domain of study, they had better explain the subject correctly. So far, their explanation sucks and if I did something like this under the authority of my engineering or medical license, I would get sued for malpractice. But biologists don't have to get licensed, nobody blames them for drug-resistant infections and failed cancer treatments. ringo, take an introductory probability course and learn how descent with modification works.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
[QUOTE=top,Kleinman]Where are all the fossils that demonstrate the next transitional mutation?
Dredge:If only these Darwinists could figure out the physics and mathematics of Darwinian evolution. Instead they do this:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:How do you know that the differences in phenotype you are seeing are due to recombination rather than DNA evolution? Great Danes and Chihuahuas are both canines but their phenotypic difference are due to selective recombination. The point is that you can't use gross anatomy to explain descent with modification. That process has to be measured at the molecular level by DNA sequencing. That's why you shouldn't ignore experiments such as the Kishony and Lenski experiments. Kleinman:Sadly, those examples are the results of real-world experiments. Single selection pressures (antiviral agents, herbicides, pesticides, rodenticides, cancer treatment agents) are tried and they fail due to the emergence of resistant variants. Combination selection pressures are used and they suppress the emergence of resistant variants. But if you want an experiment, try the Desai Lab experiments with yeast. Phenotypic and molecular evolution across 10,000 generations in laboratory budding yeast (with asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction) populations quote:Figure B gives the number of fixations in the different populations: Kleinman:I'm saying that descent with modification (DNA evolutionary adaptation) requires huge populations to operate even when considering a single selection pressure environment. DNA evolutionary adaptation to multiple simultaneous selection pressures takes orders of magnitude larger populations to operate due to multiple instances of the multiplication rule acting simultaneously. Whether you want to use the word "species" or "kind", you have a mathematical and empirical problem with your idea of universal common descent. Kleinman:At least I understand the physics and mathematics of biological evolution, why biological competition slows descent with modification and can give the correct mathematical explanation for the Kishony, Lenski, and Desai experiments. Perhaps in a couple more generations biologists will figure this out, perhaps sooner if they take physics and mathematics for science majors, not their survey of physics and survey of math courses.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Dredge:AZPaul3 will now use his fossil tea-leaf reading skills to explain DNA evolutionary adaptation for the Kishony and Lenski experiments. AZPaul3 wants to be captain of the C- team.AZPaul3:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Tanypteryx:I was starting to think you had left the building as well. Have you figured out how to include the mathematics for mutations other than base substitutions? Do you want me to show you how to do this with a Markov process as well? It's easy peasy! I wouldn't put too much hope in that saving your universal common descent notion.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Of course, Darwin had no idea of DNA, but what do you think Darwin was talking about when he used the term "modified offspring"? And you are right, the Kishony and Lenski experiments are simple when it comes to demonstrating the concepts of Darwinian evolution and evolutionary biology. But these same principles apply to natural selection when describing the effect of herbicides on weeds, insecticides on insects, rodenticides on rodents, and anti-cancer treatments on cancers. Too bad they didn't teach you these mathematical facts of life in your survey of math courses. Perhaps you want to explain to us this finding from the Desai yeast experiment: Phenotypic and molecular evolution across 10,000 generations in laboratory budding yeast (with asexual reproduction and sexual reproduction) populationsquote:
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Everybody knows that AZPaul3 has no idea how to do the mathematics of biological evolution.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:You are assuming that the pattern of color can only vary by DNA evolution when recombination can have a very rapid effect on phenotype, including fur color. A better example of DNA evolution would be an albino leopard where a mutation in a recessive gene would lead to pigmentation absence. One could expect that mutation to occur in about 1/(mutation rate) replications of your leopard population.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Dredge:Don't take Tany too seriously. Tany is just frustrated that he doesn't have any experimental evidence to justify his belief that he is related to chimpanzees. The experimental evidence actually contradicts his beliefs so he figures if he acts like a chimpanzee and throws some poop around that it will make his belief system seem more real.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Porkncheese:Welcome to the discussion Porkncheese. The are a lot of strange things that are being called science these days. With regard to the theory of evolution, not everything is wrong in that theory. The flaw in that theory is in the concept of universal common descent. The mathematical reason for this flaw is that the multiplication rule of probabilities applies to biological evolution, specifically DNA adaptive evolution. The treatment of someone with gender confusion with surgery is analogous to treating someone with depression with a lobotomy. And the problem with this covid vaccination episode is the sloppy job of creating ineffective vaccines with incomplete testing, in an environment of fear caused by politicians and pharmaceutical companies for their own gains and very poor expert advice on the purpose and the way vaccines work.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024