Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."

How would you know?

You are too stupid to understand high school-level math.

Go run after bugs, that's what you are good at.

Organizations like this exist all over the world. AZPaul3 thinks that it is propaganda that the leaders in the American educational system are trying to groom and sexualize young children.

Organizations like this exist all over the world.

Do you really believe that 8% of the human genome is viral DNA? You heard someone claim that ERVs show that humans and chimps are related and you swallowed that one hook, line, and sinker.

When I started this discussion, I asked if any of the posters understood what were the physical processes that Darwin was describing. Most of the posters had no idea.

Parasitoid wasps may be useful in helping control invasive insect pests but you are making a mistake if that is all that will be needed.

Don't you think that these invasive insect pests will be evolving against that parasitoid wasps?

You really need to learn something about the physics and mathematics of biological evolution.

Kleinman writes: Do you really believe that 8% of the human genome is viral DNA? You heard someone claim that ERVs show that humans and chimps are related and you swallowed that one hook, line, and sinker. You are so stupid, you don't understand anything about sampling data when doing statistical analysis. I'll try giving the explanation again why you are wrong but I don't think you will learn it this time either:
Statistics for Dummies
quote:
How do you select a statistical sample in a way that avoids bias? The key word is random. A random sample is a sample selected by equal opportunity; that is, every possible sample of the same size as yours had an equal chance to be selected from the population. What random really means is that no subset of the population is favored in or excluded from the selection process.
​
Non-random (in other words bad) samples are samples that were selected in such a way that some type of favoritism and/or automatic exclusion of a part of the population was involved, whether intentional or not.
You are cherry-picking data to fit your bias. Felsenstein makes the same blunder when he does his inferential phylogenetics.

you choose a few thousand bases out of billions where you see similarities and ignore all the rest of the genome where matches don't exist. That's how inferential phylogenetics is done and you can predict anything you want by choosing which gene to compare.
How to build a phylogenetic tree

Comparing one gene out of thousands ignores all the genetic differences in all the other genes.

Kleinman writes:You are too stupid to understand high school-level math.
You are so boring. It's no fun playing with the C- team with their out-of-date playbook.
Dumb cluck
Tell that to Taq and Tany. The difference between you and them is that they know enough about the subject to know they are wrong. You don't.
And ringo isn't the only one that makes this mathematical blunder, it is every one that believes in universal common descent.
You are such a dumb dodo that you can't see your own obvious blunders.
so you don't look like such a jerk on this subject?
That's what happens when you put mathematically incompetent zealots in charge of the field of biology.
I thought I was going to be stuck debating the C- team or Tany who thinks that DNA evolution for viruses, bacteria, and yeast differs from complex, multicellular, sexually replicating organisms.
Now you are just being stupid Taq.
Absolutely, I stand by this, slow learner.
Understand rubberband?
Absolutely, I stand by this, slow learner.
When it comes to mathematics, biologists are pathetic.
Learn how to use the addition rule you dummy.
Your survey of mathematics course really doesn't cut it for you biologists.
I know I'm asking a lot from a biologist whose only training in mathematics is a survey of mathematics course.
Dumb dumb, if you sum up all possible frequencies of different variants in a population, it always has to equal 1. It doesn't matter whether the alleles are linked or not. Take your seat on the C- team bench.
Silly boy!
Perhaps you can use that principle with a chimp population and breed a biologist out of them.
Hey, dummy,
Taq, you are such a dumb cluck.
You are starting to make the C- team look smart.
This is why social promotion is not a good idea in our educational system.
I expect you to make a highschool level mathematical blunder, but Taq?
No wonder Taq is having so much difficulty figuring out how random recombination works.
I'm just giving you atheists a chance to tell us, religious people, how you don't impose your morals on others.
You are so slow to understand
That's your cue for telling us we are lying creationists and that you never lie or do evil.
Let's make it simple to give you the best chance of understanding what we are talking about.
Someone needs to explain to you these physical and mathematical facts of life as well as explain to you that you do impose your morals on others.
Is anyone else on the C- team ready to take up the task?
But somehow, you find believing that reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals is real.
This is not interesting, this is dumb.
You are another one whose anger and derision is impairing your ability to learn.
Simply brilliant! No wonder the sun is setting on the British Empire.
This is the first smart thing you've said in this discussion.
please do your homework first Nimrod.
So, Tany isn't the only poster on this forum that doesn't do their homework.
Silly boy, you left out the vanity journal part of your claim.
Too bad biologists failed to explain to him how drug resistance evolves.
I've already given you positive responses, pay attention
It takes time to explain why universal common descent is not true for biologists that are poorly trained in mathematics and physics.
That's why biologists have failed to correctly explain why drug resistance evolves and cancer treatments fail.
Biologists don't understand how descent with modification works.
So, the mathematician that doesn't do the mathematics of biology
Don't blame me if biologists are slow learning why drug resistance evolves or why cancer treatments fail.
At least Taq now understands, you, Tany is quite a bit slower.
You know Tany, I wrote a couple of paragraphs to help novices like you to understand how descent with modification works.
Understand rubberband?
When are the rest of you biologists going to figure it out?
If nwr is really a mathematician, he should understand that is a beginner student type blunder.
But nwr doesn't do the mathematics of biology.
It doesn't help if I repeat myself to you, you are just to slow a learner.
a subject that biologists fail to teach properly to naive school children.
Obviously, the math is too difficult for you.
At least Tany can answer that one, his problem is that he thinks DNA evolution works differently for viruses, bacteria, and yeasts than for complex, multicellular sexually replicating organisms.
You might as well get used to it, somebody has to teach novices, laymen, and biologists how descent with modification works.
My goodness! Is this so confusing to you?
Biologists just don't recognize how to apply this math and in your case, very slow to learn.
Yeah, what if? That's the biologist's version of science.
Let us note that Taq doesn't want to discuss why recombination doesn't cause combination therapy to fail for the treatment of HIV.
See Taq, even nwr, the mathematician that doesn't do the mathematics of biological evolution understands that multiple adaptive alleles don't go to fixation simultaneously.
​nwr, you can go back to storing nuts in your cheeks.
And it is so typical of the posters on this forum to chime in without doing their homework.
Please try and do your homework before you chime in.
Once again nwr, you demonstrate that you don't do your homework.
I don't mind doing your homework nwr, somebody has to do it.
That's why biologists have been so slow to correctly explain the physics and mathematics of biological evolution. You aren't trained to do this science with your survey of physics and survey of math courses. And you are very slow and resistant at learning how to do this kind of scientific analysis.
So, are you now going to claim that the reproductive fitness advantage that humans have over chimps is due to a plasmid?
Taq is now claiming that sexual replicators can't get adaptive mutations.
Are all biologists this confused about the concepts of biological competition and recombination?
I thought biologists are cloned.
Silly boy.
Tany, next time you bring up ERVs, please do your homework.
And when will biologists learn the physics and mathematics of biological evolution?
Of course, I don't expect biologists to do this kind of science any time soon when their scientific training consists of a survey of physics and a survey of math courses.
Biologists are such slow learners.
Tany, you have neither the training nor the experience to understand the discussion I'm having with Taq.
You are a failure at your job.
No thanks to the ignorance and stupidity of biologists like you.
Idiots like you have no idea how to deal with such medical problems.
but you are too stupid to understand a highschool level class.
The physics and mathematics of biological evolution certainly aren't Tany's game and it isn't yours either.
You are a mathematically incompetent ignorant twit who knows nothing
Your stupidity and that of other biologists that think like you makes the job for physicians more difficult.
You are certainly useless when it comes to explaining biological evolution.
Enjoy your laugh at the expense of people dying of drug-resistant infections and failed cancer treatments.
Stupid and mean, you are useless.
You are too stupid to understand high school-level math.
Tany, you are too lazy to do your own research.
You haven't even made it to the ballpark.
I think you are too lazy to come up to speed
You are just being stupid when you say this.
You are so stupid, you don't understand anything about sampling data when doing statistical analysis
You really are a stupid slow learner.
You are so poorly trained in science, it is pathetic.
You really are a nimrod Tany.
You are the one that doesn't understand basic biology
Stop being an ignoramus and lazy and try to understand
ou are such a lazy dummy.
Until then go sit in the corner and put on your dunce cap.
This is not the way to earn your way out of the corner and get your dunce cap removed.
Don't be so lazy and research how biologists are doing this math and why it is incorrect.

Kleinman writes: What's the matter nimrod, are you too lazy to do your own research. I'm just giving you a dose of your own medicine. You are typical of biologists, unable to explain the physics and mathematics of the simplest biological evolutionary experiments and you whine when your blunders are pointed out to you. That list is a very accurate description of what you know about biological evolution. Go look for someone else to bully, you cowardly little twit.

He changes the title.of a paper to pretend it supports him

I'm hoping he will show a bit more humility about the limitations of his knowledge of biology.

Sludge writes:You don't have to be very smart to be smarter than someone who thinks life started all by itself, as atheists do.

And you don't have to be very smart to be smarter than someone who thinks Darwinian theory adequately explains the history of life on earth, as per atheist folklore.

This is just the beginning of their torment and will go on for an eternity.

They wait like vultures to find any mistake in misreading or misinterpreting what someone says and pounce when their mistakes are monumental and they know it.

they don't like to hear that their ignorance of biological evolution is harming people with drug-resistant infections and failed cancer treatments.