Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 910 of 1104 (909665)
04-08-2023 8:39 AM
Reply to: Message 906 by dwise1
04-06-2023 8:10 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
dwise1:
Confirming his diagnosis of you for the 1890'th time. Refer Message 903.
Let's consider the knowledge and wisdom that AZPaul3 has in making medical diagnoses (in particular psychiatric diagnoses) since he is too bored to explain anything about biological evolution. From Message 903:
Kleinman:
AZPaul3, I am not lying.
AZPaul3:
Of course you are lying. That was established in your first few posts here many moons ago. But you go on with your errant logic and faulty math for all the rest of the world to ignore.

Note how your great life-saving and super important discoveries have gone unnoticed by humanity. Notice how the fault is alway with the thousands of scientist all being too stupid to comprehend your oh-so-easy to understand math. You are the great revealing genius who just can't convince the best minds in the world of your stature.

This is one of the signature characteristics of the mental looney. That's you, Kleinman.

Another telling feature of the mentally deficient superego nutjob (that's you, too, Kleinman) being the fixation on your errant self-published fantasy papers that, despite their obvious revolutionary life-saving discoveries, have been totally ignored by the scientific community.

Despite their being shown bogus you are compelled to boast and display them as the hard evidence of your brilliance. You are a lying religious nutjob, Kleinman.

Let's start with his claim that I go on with errant logic and faulty math (even though my math has been peer-reviewed and published). The Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments both demonstrate that it takes a billion replications for each adaptive step. Since you have demonstrated some knowledge of probability theory and descent with modification and adaptation is a stochastic process, you should recognize what the random trial(s) is/are and the possible outcomes for the random trials. You have a mutation rate, the probability of success in a single random trial. When that probability of success is very small as mutation rates tend to be, it will take many replications for the adaptive mutation to occur. Simply do the math and you can get a good estimate for the number of replications needed for the adaptive mutation to occur. If you have trouble doing the math for this case, try studying these two papers.
For a single selection condition:
The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection
And for multiple simultaneous selection pressures:
The mathematics of random mutation and natural selection for multiple simultaneous selection pressures and the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance
See if you can find any errors in this math, you won't.
So, what other evidence does AZPaul3 have that I'm a "mental looney"? Since I have had to make some psychiatric diagnoses on patients in the past, I'll give you some conditions necessary to do so. The kinds of things a physician does to make such a diagnosis includes the following, medical history, physical examination, and laboratory tests. Laboratory tests include blood tests, radiographic imaging, electrograms, and other studies as necessary.
AZPaul3 has not done a physical examination or any laboratory tests on me and if he did, he would be charged with practicing medicine without a license. So we are left with AZPaul3's idea of medical history for my lunacy. When making a psychiatric diagnosis on someone with a loss of contact with reality, one should consider what the person's mental state has been in the past. Has this person shown behavior consistent with a loss of contact with reality? I have, in the past, gone to school and studied engineering and obtained a PhD degree in that subject. I worked a few years in the aerospace industry and part-time in the university system teaching engineering and at that time, I took the state professional engineering exam and passed it to become a licensed engineer. But I was still young and impulsive at that time, and my real interest was in medicine/engineering, so I decided to go to medical school. Some people may claim this was the act of a lunatic and they might be right. Anyway, I completed medical school, passed all my licensing examinations, and am now a licensed physician as well as a licensed engineer. I then worked for more than 30 years as a primary care physician. I did about 150,000 patient encounters, and no medical malpractice judgments or medical board complaints against me. And I decided to try and understand the evolution of drug resistance and why cancer treatment fails. I then published a few papers on what my studies showed. That's pretty crazy, isn't it dwise1.
So, what is a possible conclusion that we can draw from AZPaul3's diagnosis? AZPaul3 believes that reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals, and I'm crazy because I give an explanation of how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail based on the laws of physics, mathematics, and experimental results. I also explain why it takes a billion replications for each adaptive step in the Kishony and Lenski experiments using mathematics that you should understand. You should look for a second opinion when it comes to any medical diagnosis that AZPaul3 gives. You certainly shouldn't look to AZPaul3 for advice on how to do a probability calculation.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 906 by dwise1, posted 04-06-2023 8:10 PM dwise1 has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 911 by AZPaul3, posted 04-08-2023 9:43 AM Kleinman has replied
 Message 916 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 11:24 AM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 912 of 1104 (909667)
04-08-2023 10:10 AM
Reply to: Message 911 by AZPaul3
04-08-2023 9:43 AM


Re: problems with detecting design
Kleinman:
AZPaul3 believes that reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals ...
AZPaul3:
Wow. You almost got something right.

Birds did descend from dinos that did descend from reptiles. And mammals did descend from tiktaalik that did descend from fish.

That you don't see these facts, despite the weight of data points available in evidence, shows just how intellectually blind (via religion) you have become.

The rest of your post was your personal butt-hurt tripe. I'll pass.

Since AZPaul3 knows as much about descent with modification and adaptation as he knows about making a psychiatric diagnosis, he will now explain to us how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. He won't and he can't because he only knows the stories that biologists have told him. And biologists don't know and have never explained how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 911 by AZPaul3, posted 04-08-2023 9:43 AM AZPaul3 has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 917 of 1104 (909673)
04-08-2023 11:41 AM
Reply to: Message 913 by Dredge
04-08-2023 11:14 AM


Re: problems with detecting design
AZPaul3:
That you don't see these facts
Dredge:
They're not facts, con-man ... they're theories. Don't you ever get tired ???? of telling lies?

It isn't actually a theory. Here is the definition for "theory" from the American Heritage Dictionary:
Theory
A set of statements or principles devised to explain a group of facts or phenomena, especially one that has been repeatedly tested or is widely accepted and can be used to make predictions about natural phenomena.
AZPaul3 tries to include the concept of "universal common descent" with the concept of "evolution". There are no experimental tests that verify UCD. All evolutionary experiments contradict the notion of UCD.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 913 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 11:14 AM Dredge has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 919 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 11:56 AM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 918 of 1104 (909674)
04-08-2023 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 916 by Dredge
04-08-2023 11:24 AM


Re: problems with detecting design
Kleinman:
AZPaul3 has not done a physical examination or any laboratory tests on me and if he did, he would be charged with practicing medicine without a license.
Dredge:
However, I think APauling might be capable of conducting a psychiatric examination on someone, having been a psychiatric patient for most of his adult life.

AZPaul3 may have had a lifetime filled with the inability of dealing with reality, but that only makes him experienced with that inability. Spending a lifetime being a psychiatric patient doesn't make a person any more knowledgeable about psychiatry than being a lifetime fan of baseball makes you a homerun hitter.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 916 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 11:24 AM Dredge has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 921 of 1104 (909677)
04-08-2023 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 919 by Tangle
04-08-2023 11:56 AM


Re: problems with detecting design
Kleinman:
It isn't actually a theory.
Tangle:
The Theory of Evolution, unsurprisingly, is a scientific theory and a scientific theory explains a set of facts. All of them, no exceptions. Exceptions disprove a theory.

The "Theory of Evolution" is not the "Theory of Universal Common Descent". They are two different things. So far, you and biologists have failed to explain why drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. You and biologists have gotten nowhere near verifying that the "Theory of Universal Common Descent" is a reasonable and rational theory. The fact is, all biological evolutionary experiments contradict this idea.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 919 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 11:56 AM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 925 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 1:08 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 922 of 1104 (909678)
04-08-2023 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 920 by AZPaul3
04-08-2023 12:06 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
AZPaul3:
The facts of evolution are not hidden in a secret holy room in some church. They are available at museums and schools world wide for all to see and learn.
Then it should be easy for you to explain how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. You won't because you don't have the ability to understand the evidence.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 920 by AZPaul3, posted 04-08-2023 12:06 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 923 by AZPaul3, posted 04-08-2023 12:30 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 924 of 1104 (909680)
04-08-2023 12:34 PM
Reply to: Message 923 by AZPaul3
04-08-2023 12:30 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
AZPaul3:
Idiot.
That's AZPaul3's explanation of how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. He learned this from biologists. Their explanation is no better.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 923 by AZPaul3, posted 04-08-2023 12:30 PM AZPaul3 has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 928 of 1104 (909684)
04-08-2023 1:27 PM
Reply to: Message 925 by Tangle
04-08-2023 1:08 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Kleinman:
The "Theory of Evolution" is not the "Theory of Universal Common Descent".
Tangle:
Correct and that is exactly what what I said isn't it?
Kleinman:
They are two different things.
Tangle:
The UCA is a necessary conclusion of the ToE. It's is not the ToE.



You and biologists' inability to understand the physics and mathematics of descent with modification and adaptation does not make UCA or UCD or whatever you want to call it necessary or possible. Biologists' experiments show that UCD is not possible simply because of the huge populations required and rapid recovery rates necessary for descent with modification and adaptation to work. And these findings are when only one selection condition is used at a time in these experiments. The populations required are exponentially larger when two or more selection conditions are applied to a population for descent with modification and adaptation to operate. That is why 3-drug therapy (3 selection conditions) works for the treatment of HIV. You still have not learned how biological evolution works and neither have biologists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 925 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 1:08 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 929 of 1104 (909685)
04-08-2023 1:30 PM
Reply to: Message 927 by Tangle
04-08-2023 1:23 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Dredge:
You need to stop lying and making a fool of yourself by claiming that the theory of evolution is a fact.
Tangle:
ffs, get it into your dense skull, a scientific theory is a far higher level of knowledge than a simple fact. A theory explains facts, all of them.

Tangle will now explain to us how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail. Nope, he won't and neither will biologists.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 927 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 1:23 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 931 of 1104 (909689)
04-08-2023 2:11 PM
Reply to: Message 930 by Dredge
04-08-2023 1:34 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Tangle:
Anyway here's a formal test of UCD for you to ignore and lie about not existing.
A formal test of the theory of universal common ancestry - PubMed
Dredge:
"Theobald recently challenged this problem with a formal statistical test, and concluded that the UCA hypothesis holds. Although his attempt is the first step towards establishing the UCA theory with a solid statistical basis, we think that the test of Theobald is not sufficient enough to reject the alternative hypothesis of the separate origins of life"
Was the universal common ancestry proved? - PubMed

Tangle's link is behind a paywall but he posts the link because he thinks this is proof. You need to understand the difference between probability theory and statistics. Probability theory lays the foundation for statistical analysis. In probability theory, you start with the concept of a random trial (e.g. toss of a coin, roll of a die, draw of a card,... etc.), and from that, you can construct a sample space and derive a distribution function. Once you do that, you know the frequency of success for your case. Statistical analysis starts from a point where you have a set of data, and from that data, you assume a distribution function and then try to establish a confidence interval. My work is based on probability theory, not statistical analysis. That was the only complaint that I got from one of the peer reviewers at Statistics in Medicine, that my work was not a statistical analysis. They were correct, I started from fundamental principles (the mutation rate) and derived the correct distribution for descent with modification and adaptation and showed that the distribution function was a variation of the binomial probability distribution. That's why the statistical data from the Kishony and Lenski biological evolution experiments fit the model I've presented. Biologists have no statistical data that doesn't fit this model.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 930 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 1:34 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 932 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 2:51 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 951 by Dredge, posted 04-09-2023 2:19 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 934 of 1104 (909692)
04-08-2023 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 933 by Tangle
04-08-2023 2:53 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Dredge:
"Theobald recently challenged this problem with a formal statistical test, and concluded that the UCA hypothesis holds. Although his attempt is the first step towards establishing the UCA theory with a solid statistical basis, we think that the test of Theobald is not sufficient enough to reject the alternative hypothesis of the separate origins of life"
Was the universal common ancestry proved? - PubMed
Tangle:
I don't suppose for a moment you read or understood either paper.

Quote your proof if you think you have some. You won't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 933 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 2:53 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 935 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 3:23 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 936 of 1104 (909694)
04-08-2023 3:27 PM
Reply to: Message 935 by Tangle
04-08-2023 3:23 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Kleinman:
Quote your proof if you think you have some. You won't.
Tangle:
There's 200 years of evidence. Start here

Evidence of common descent - Wikipedia

Meanwhile, show me how it's wrong.

Quote your proof if you think you have some. You won't.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 935 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 3:23 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 937 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 3:47 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 938 of 1104 (909696)
04-08-2023 3:56 PM
Reply to: Message 937 by Tangle
04-08-2023 3:47 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Tangle:
6 Evidence from antibiotic and pesticide resistance
Let's start there. Why does it take a billion replications for each adaptive step (adaptive mutation) in the Kishony evolution of bacterial resistance experiment?
Is that your proof for UCD?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 937 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 3:47 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 939 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 4:01 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 940 of 1104 (909698)
04-08-2023 4:04 PM
Reply to: Message 939 by Tangle
04-08-2023 4:01 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Tangle:
Good night Kleinman
Good night Tangle.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 939 by Tangle, posted 04-08-2023 4:01 PM Tangle has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 335 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 942 of 1104 (909711)
04-09-2023 10:06 AM
Reply to: Message 941 by Dredge
04-08-2023 6:59 PM


Re: problems with detecting design
Tangle:
You guys are billions of years up the ladder trying to pretend that dinosaurs reptiles, birds and mammal don't share a common ancestor. No-one but loony-tunes religionists doubt that.
Dredge:
So you think the amusing belief that carrots and dinosaurs evolved from a common ancestor is the product of a sound mind?

(Please don't reply that it's "not a belief" ... that tiresome lie is such a tiresome lie.)

Their beliefs are so weird that vimesey thinks I can do photosynthesis. He pictures me as plankton!
https://www.evcforum.net/dm.php?control=msg&m=903827#m903827

This message is a reply to:
 Message 941 by Dredge, posted 04-08-2023 6:59 PM Dredge has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 943 by AZPaul3, posted 04-09-2023 11:24 AM Kleinman has replied
 Message 945 by Dredge, posted 04-09-2023 11:52 AM 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