|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total) |
| |
popoi | |
Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2 | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Certainly, you deflect and certainly, you are wrong. The reason you can't explain how humans and chimpanzees are related is that you don't understand how biological evolution works. You are claiming nested hierarchy just because you see some similarity. But you refuse to see the differences and account for them. You are wrong Taq and you don't know how biological evolution works. Your claims of nested hierarchies do not correctly explain biological evolution. You don't construct phylogenetic trees properly.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Kleinman writes: The reason you can't explain how humans and chimpanzees are related is that you don't understand how biological evolution works. We are related to chimps in the same way you are related to your cousins. It's not that hard to figure out.
You are claiming nested hierarchy just because you see some similarity. That's false. If there was a species that had similarities both with birds and mammals this would violate a nested hierarchy. A nested hierarchy isn't just similarities. A nested hierarchy is a PATTERN of similarities.
But you refuse to see the differences and account for them. All of the differences are accounted for in a nested hierarchy. If you understood what a nested hierarchy is you would already know this.
You are wrong Taq and you don't know how biological evolution works. Your claims of nested hierarchies do not correctly explain biological evolution. You don't construct phylogenetic trees properly. Then please tell us what pattern of similarities and differences common ancestry and vertical inheritance would produce if it isn't a nested hierarchy. If you think I am wrong then please show us what pattern it would produce.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:That's not a reasoned and logically based argument. That's something that ringo would say. You can't explain how humans and chimps are related other than saying you see some similarities. How could humans accumulate adaptive mutations to have a reproductive advantage over chimpanzees? Your nested hierarchies do not explain the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees. Your nested hierarchies are fabricated drawings that don't explain how biological evolution works. If you think they do, explain the reproductive fitness advantage that humans have over chimps.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Kleinman writes: That's not a reasoned and logically based argument. That's something that ringo would say. You can't explain how humans and chimps are related other than saying you see some similarities. Then you are saying that it is not reasoned nor logical that my cousins and I are related through common descent. You also failed to read this part: "That's false. If there was a species that had similarities both with birds and mammals this would violate a nested hierarchy. A nested hierarchy isn't just similarities. A nested hierarchy is a PATTERN of similarities."
How could humans accumulate adaptive mutations to have a reproductive advantage over chimpanzees? Mutation and natural selection, both of which we see operating in living populations.
Your nested hierarchies do not explain the genetic differences between humans and chimpanzees. You have it backwards. The nested hierarchy is the observation, not the explanation. The explanation for the observation of a nested hierarchy is a combination of common ancestry, vertical inheritance, mutation, and natural selection. You get shared features from common ancestry, and you get lineage specific adaptations from mutations that stay within a lineage due to the lack of horizontal genetic transfer (i.e. vertical inheritance).
Your nested hierarchies are fabricated drawings that don't explain how biological evolution works. Nested hierarchies are objective measurements.
quote: If you think they do, explain the reproductive fitness advantage that humans have over chimps. The increased reproductive advantage is due to the mutations that humans have which chimps do not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:So you obtained your argument from ringo. But you still can't explain how humans have a reproductive fitness advantage over chimpanzees using your nested hierarchies. You know you are related to your cousin because your parents told you. You are seeing patterns but that does not necessarily mean relatedness. Just because the earth is spherical and a baseball is spherical does not mean they are related. Explain how humans have a reproductive fitness advantage over chimpanzees. Let's see if your nested hierarchies can explain this. Kleinman:How did the human lineage get these mutations which the chimpanzee lineage did not? What are these mutations, and how many of them are there? Do your nested hierarchies explain this?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Kleinman writes: But you still can't explain how humans have a reproductive fitness advantage over chimpanzees using your nested hierarchies. Natural selection of lineage specific mutations.
You know you are related to your cousin because your parents told you. If that is how you think common descent works in biology then you have a lot to learn.
You are seeing patterns but that does not necessarily mean relatedness. Then please tell me what patterns common ancestry, vertical inheritance, mutation, and natural selection would produce if it isn't a nested hierarchy.
How did the human lineage get these mutations which the chimpanzee lineage did not? The same way we they do now. We can observe mutations happening in both lineages right now.
What are these mutations, and how many of them are there? They are the mutations that differ between the two species.
Do your nested hierarchies explain this? The nested hierarchy is the observation, not the explanation. Please learn the difference between an observation and an explanation.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
kleinman writes: (explain) reproductive fitness advantage over chimpanzees using your nested hierarchies. This is the knowledge base you are trying to deal with. This guy needs years of re-education. I am skeptical of anything enlightening coming from this. The disconnect from reality seem deeper here. Anyway, good luck.Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Nested hierarchies tell you that? Explain that to all of us in detail. Explain to us how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations. AZPaul3 won't (can't) explain how a lineage accumulates adaptive mutations and of course, Phat isn't interested in how that happens. Perhaps you can explain to us how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations. You can use your nested hierarchies if you can.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
AZPaul3 writes: This is the knowledge base you are trying to deal with. This guy needs years of re-education. A cephalanalectomy wouldn't hurt, either.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
AZPaul3:Taq, you aren't telling us how nested hierarchies explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations. I say they don't explain this and that's why you are wrong.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Kleinman writes: Taq, you aren't telling us how nested hierarchies explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations. Nope. "You have it backwards. The nested hierarchy is the observation, not the explanation. The explanation for the observation of a nested hierarchy is a combination of common ancestry, vertical inheritance, mutation, and natural selection. You get shared features from common ancestry, and you get lineage specific adaptations from mutations that stay within a lineage due to the lack of horizontal genetic transfer (i.e. vertical inheritance)."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Of course, nested hierarchies don't explain anything about biological evolution. You have observed some similarities between life forms and jumped to the conclusion they are related. Since you can't explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations using nested hierarchies, explain to us how a lineage can accumulate a set of adaptive mutations using "common ancestry, vertical inheritance, mutation, and natural selection" if you can.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7 |
Kleinman writes: You have observed some similarities between life forms and jumped to the conclusion they are related. False.
quote: We conclude that species are related by common ancestry and subsequent evolution because those processes will produce a nested hierarchy, and the observation of a nested hierarchy is evidence for those processes.
Since you can't explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations using nested hierarchies,
False. They accumulate through mutation, natural selection, and vertical inheritance.
explain to us how a lineage can accumulate a set of adaptive mutations using "common ancestry, vertical inheritance, mutation, and natural selection" if you can. Are you telling me that after all this time you don't know what mutations, natural selection, and vertical inheritance are? Seriously? You don't understand how your cousins and you have shared DNA?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
Kleinman:Why don't you explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations? Don't your observations explain that? Is this science that difficult for a virologist?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.7
|
Kleinman writes: Why don't you explain how a lineage accumulates a set of adaptive mutations? Let's start with your great-grandfather. When your grandfather was born he would have had 50 to 100 new mutations. When your father was born, he would have had 50 to 100 mutations plus half (on average) of the mutations that your grandfather had. Those add up together. When you were born, you had 50 to 100 new mutations. You would have also inherited half of your father's mutations plus a quarter of your grandfather's mutations. Repeat with grandmother's on your father's side. Repeat with both grandfather and grandmother on your mother's side. Do you not see how this will accumulate mutations?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024