|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..." | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Kleinman writes: You think this causes UCD, so go for it, explain how a phage makes this possible. I think it proves your claim about 1 adaption per 1 billion replications wrong. You still can't respond to this???? Joshua and Esther Lederberg published a hallmark paper in 1951 titled, "Replica Plating and Indirect Selection of Bacterial Mutants", which can be found here: REPLICA PLATING AND INDIRECT SELECTION OF BACTERIAL MUTANTS - PMC Luria and Delbruck went on to explain the processes that undergirded the Lederberg's results which later won Luria and Delbruck a Nobel Prize. There is one interesting observation in the Lederberg paper: "The culutre is fully sensitive to the phage T-1, as well as to streptomycin, and like most E. coli strains gives rise to resistant mutants at rates of approximately 10E-7 and 10E-10 per division, respectively." In this example we saw a beneficial mutation rate of 1 in 10 million and 1 in 10 billion to two different selection pressures using the same strain of E. coli. Kleinman is telling us that one beneficial adaptation every billion divisions is some universal constant, or something of the like. It is so universal that it can even be applied to human evolution. However, in another experiment using E. coli we see beneficial mutation rates that are quite different than what Kleinman claims. If Kleinman's math can't even apply universally to evolution in E. coli, what hope does it have of applying to any other species?
You think that combination therapy doesn't work because of recombination, there is far more literature that says it does work. It works for HIV, weeds, and insects. You are wrong. I cited the scientific literature which clearly stated that recombination is an important factor in multidrug resistance in HIV. Ignore it all you want, it's still there.
Show me the paper that explains how drug resistance evolves. I already did that. Sexual recombination and increased mutation rate expedite evolution of Escherichia coli in varied fitness landscapes | Nature Communications
Only in a single selection pressure constant environment and that only gives a slight improvement in fitness. In a multi-selection pressure environment with multiple selection pressures, it's a different game even if you think that evolution works the same in a constant single-pressure environment as in a varying multiselection pressure environment. quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6
|
Kleinman writes: Tell Kishony and Lenski to use a phage and their experiments will evolve instantly. You still can't address it. I think it proves your claim about 1 adaption per 1 billion replications wrong. Joshua and Esther Lederberg published a hallmark paper in 1951 titled, "Replica Plating and Indirect Selection of Bacterial Mutants", which can be found here: REPLICA PLATING AND INDIRECT SELECTION OF BACTERIAL MUTANTS - PMC Luria and Delbruck went on to explain the processes that undergirded the Lederberg's results which later won Luria and Delbruck a Nobel Prize. There is one interesting observation in the Lederberg paper: "The culutre is fully sensitive to the phage T-1, as well as to streptomycin, and like most E. coli strains gives rise to resistant mutants at rates of approximately 10E-7 and 10E-10 per division, respectively." In this example we saw a beneficial mutation rate of 1 in 10 million and 1 in 10 billion to two different selection pressures using the same strain of E. coli. Kleinman is telling us that one beneficial adaptation every billion divisions is some universal constant, or something of the like. It is so universal that it can even be applied to human evolution. However, in another experiment using E. coli we see beneficial mutation rates that are quite different than what Kleinman claims. If Kleinman's math can't even apply universally to evolution in E. coli, what hope does it have of applying to any other species?
So nobody should use combination therapy for the treatment of HIV, weeds, and insects because Taq says he read it. Now you have to lie about what I have said. I never said those things, and the papers I cited never said those things. Why do you lie on a regular basis? Read the citations. They clearly state that recombination is factor in the evolution of multidrug resistance in HIV. If all you can do is lie about what those papers say, then what does that say about your argument?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Go tell Kishony and Lenski they are wrong. And then explain how a phage make UCD possible. Kleinman:Tell everyone treating HIV with combination therapy and everyone using combination herbicides and pesticides they are wrong. Kleinman:Tell Kishony, Lenski and Desai, I'm sure they would be interested. Of course, you have no idea how drug resistance evolves. Kleinman:Wow, you have a simulation, try doing an experiment with real populations and real selection conditions.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:I have, you want me to explain your reference and I tell you to explain how a phage makes UCD possible. Do you want me to explain non-target site resistance to you? Kleinman:Don't be silly, you are the one claiming that recombination makes combination therapy fail. But now you are claiming something different. Do you think that combination therapy impairs evolution and if so, why?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Ouch! You really know how to hurt a bloke ...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Taq writes:
There's probably not much difference between a dozen verified ERVs and 200,000 questionable ERVs. The chimp genome paper is 17 years old. Six years before McLatchie tried to claim that there are less than a dozen ERV's shared by humans and chimps there was a chimp genome paper that demonstrated how chimps and humans share over 99% of the 200,000 ERVs found in the human genome. Everyone knows that Darwinist scientists can't be trusted and that they exaggerate the evidence for their cherished beliefs. It's a bit like how the media reported that "300,000" spectators lined the streets to watch the Sydney Gay Mardi Gras, but the police reported a crowd of considerably less - about 30,000.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.5
|
Sludge writes: Everyone knows that Darwinist scientists can't be trusted and that they exaggerate the evidence for their cherished beliefs. I don't know who you think is "everyone" but it sure looks like the kind of exaggeration of your cherished belief, that you are talking about.
Sludge writes: It's a bit like how the media reported that "300,000" spectators lined the streets to watch the Sydney Gay Mardi Gras, but the police reported a crowd of considerably less - about 30,000. It's interesting that you couldn't provide an example of scientists exaggerating anything, but rather a completely unrelated example.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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dredge Member (Idle past 103 days) Posts: 2850 From: Australia Joined: |
Tanyptuvwxyz writes:
A classic example is evolutionary scientists claiming that they "know how evolution works" ... which is actually worse than an exaggeration ... it's a flat-out lie. It's impossible to know what process was responsible for producing the changes in life-forms evident in the fossil record. It's interesting that you couldn't provide an example of scientists exaggerating anything, but rather a completely unrelated example. "The deceit is sometimes unconscious, butnot always, since some people, owing to their sectarianism, purposely overlook reality and refuse to acknowledge the inadequacies and falsity of their beliefs." Pierre-Paul Grassé, EVOLUTION OF LIVING ORGANISMS, TRANS. FROM FRENCH (ACADEMIC PRESS: NEW YORK, NY, 1977) P.8 NOV 30 . 1977 Another source of Darwinist exaggeration is transitional fossils .... Archaeopteryx, is a classic example. In short, anyone who trusts what Darwinist scientists say is a fool.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tanypteryx Member Posts: 4451 From: Oregon, USA Joined: Member Rating: 5.5 |
It's interesting that you couldn't provide an example of scientists exaggerating anything, but rather a completely unrelated example.
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Taq:This claim about ERVs has to be one of the worsts that biologists come up with. Retroviruses kill most of the cells they infect. Just look at what happens to people with HIV and what it does to their immune systems. Taq then brings up an example of koalas and retroviruses, and it is ruining their immune system and possibly driving them to extinction. And then they expect you to believe them that a germ cell line can have 200k retroviral infections. Maybe a moron like Tany thinks that but he also doesn't know how descent with modification works and antibiotic resistance evolves based on the Kishony experiment which is repeatable and measurable. This happens when you chase bugs and think it teaches you about biological evolution.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Tanypteryx:Tany is the worst kind of example. He takes an observation whether it be fossils or genetic sequences he calls ERVs and draws any kind of conclusion he wants but ignores the Kishony and Lenski experiments which are repeatable and measurable. It would never enter his mind that these are sequences that control the expression of coding genes so that he doesn't have hair growing out of his eyeballs and fingernails growing from his nose.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 365 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Tanypteryx:No one can claim that you are exaggerating the Kishony and Lenski experiment. You don't know anything about them or how they work. But you are an expert on retroviruses and how a germ-cell line can have 200k infections and not cause any harm and how a single fossil shows how reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals. You are a very smart bug chaser that knows everything about biological evolution except how it works.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Kleinman writes: I have, you want me to explain your reference and I tell you to explain how a phage makes UCD possible. Right, you are avoiding it. Here it is again. I think it proves your claim about 1 adaption per 1 billion replications wrong. Joshua and Esther Lederberg published a hallmark paper in 1951 titled, "Replica Plating and Indirect Selection of Bacterial Mutants", which can be found here: REPLICA PLATING AND INDIRECT SELECTION OF BACTERIAL MUTANTS - PMC Luria and Delbruck went on to explain the processes that undergirded the Lederberg's results which later won Luria and Delbruck a Nobel Prize. There is one interesting observation in the Lederberg paper: "The culutre is fully sensitive to the phage T-1, as well as to streptomycin, and like most E. coli strains gives rise to resistant mutants at rates of approximately 10E-7 and 10E-10 per division, respectively." In this example we saw a beneficial mutation rate of 1 in 10 million and 1 in 10 billion to two different selection pressures using the same strain of E. coli. Kleinman is telling us that one beneficial adaptation every billion divisions is some universal constant, or something of the like. It is so universal that it can even be applied to human evolution. However, in another experiment using E. coli we see beneficial mutation rates that are quite different than what Kleinman claims. If Kleinman's math can't even apply universally to evolution in E. coli, what hope does it have of applying to any other species?
Don't be silly, you are the one claiming that recombination makes combination therapy fail. That is a lie. It is the authors of peer reviewed papers that are saying recombination is an important factor for developing multidrug resistance in HIV.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 10085 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Kleinman writes: Taq then brings up an example of koalas and retroviruses, and it is ruining their immune system and possibly driving them to extinction. Yes, it is an example of a circulating retrovirus producing endogenous retroviruses, something you claim can't happen. Reality trumps your empty claims.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9202 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.4
|
We seem to be in a liars for Jesus phase again.
What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence. -Christopher Hitchens Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness. If your viewpoint has merits and facts to back it up why would you have to lie?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024