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

You reject Mendelian genetics when you require the percentage distribution of alleles in different genes to add up to 1. You keep doing this. I bet you do it later in this post. And there it is. You still don't understand basic Mendelian genetics, at least at the time you wrote this post.Let's see how this works out. Let's use 3 hypothetical disease alleles (e.g. cystic fibrosis, achondroplasia). Let's say 1 out of 1,000 people carries the diseases allele, or 0.1% of the population. This would mean that 99.9% of people don't carry the disease allele but the healthy allele. Let's call these Aa, Bb, and Cc alleles for genes A, B, C. According to you, I should be able to add up the number of people with the A, B, and C allele and get an accurate population count. Is that true?NO!!!If I do as you suggest I will get about 3x the actual population number. Do you know why? You still don't understand how sexual reproduction works. How about learning how genetics works? Why don't you start there?You seem to think that there is just one gene per genome. Perhaps you could start by learning how meiosis works, or perhaps what a chromosome is. Maybe you could learn that there are multiple genes in a genome, each with it's own set of alleles. So you claim you don't make that claim, and then make that very claim in the next sentence. You effing moron.

But he isn't. He said he was using "the mathematics of God". Which is absurd. I don't use any "addition rule". I have said many times that the odds don't change from one drawing to the next. How could they? And Dredge claims there can be probabilities greater than one. Why don't you tell HIM there can't? I do NOT believe there can be probabilities greater than one, as I have said many times. DREDGE has said there can be probabilities greater than one. Why don't you try to school HIM? YOU claim I am making a mathematical blunder. Nobody but Dredge seems to agree with you and he's a bigger idiot than you are. I do. So you can stop lying about me. Tell Dredge that probabilities can only range between 0 and 1. I know enough not to try to combine probabilities when the events are independent. Why don't you suggest that to Dredge? Are you so desperate for affirmation that you don't care how stupid your followers are? Buy a mirror.

That's an appropriate name for them ... the gatekeepers of the cult.

You forget what we're talking about here. Your claim is that abiogenesis is impossible. You calculate a very small probability and call that impossible. But three heads in a row id not impossible, so your example is worthless.

Why would you multiply the probabilities? The draws are independent. The probability for each draw is the same. So show us how you calculated the probability of abiogenesis.

If you flip a coin three times, for example, each flip is an indepedent event. How would you calculate the probability of getting 3 heads from 3 flips?

Wow. This is basic highschool maths ... and you haven't got a clue.

It is.Remember that we're ultimately talking about abiogenesis. Chemistry happens in a stepwise process. Two components join together. It's inevitable. Try and stop them. Then the resulting molecule lies around, for years, maybe, before another suitable piece comes along. Then the two pieces join together. It's inevitable. Try and stop them. It might take thousands of steps to make a complex molecule but you can't prevent it from happening. But that is NOT what happens in chemistry. We do NOT expect all of the constituents to come together in one step. We do NOT expect a jigsaw puzzle to come together in one step.You're using a dishonest scenario.

Quiz for Kleinman:Why are gene 1 and 2 linked in the first example but not in the other two examples?What effects does linkage have on relative allele distributions between linked genes compared to unlinked genes?

We are getting more distant from the actual genetic system that got this all going.Kleinman is claiming that if we add up all of the allele frequencies for all genes in a genome that we will get 1. That's ridiculous. That shows a massive misunderstanding of the basic mathematics of genetics.Let's just say that there are two alleles for each of the ~30,000 genes in the human genome, and the frequency of each allele is 0.5, or 1.0 for each gene. If we add them up like Kleinman claims we can then we get 30,000, not 1.

That isn't hyperbole; it's just plain wrong. And yet you have no argument against abiogenesis. Go ahead and show us your probability calculations for abiogenesis. it isn't just atheists though. Many Christians - including the Catholic Church - accept the science. Buddhists accept the science. Hindus accept the science. Muslims accept the science. It has nothing to do with religion. It's not a belief. It's knowledge. Oh, no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no.... We don't expect you to accept reality. We expect nothing but stupidity from you. They were not "lucky" steps. They were inevitable steps. Try to stop two atoms from bonding.The time lapses vary. It could be years or it could be microseconds. Often they didn't. Molecules can become extinct just like living things. That doesn't mean they didn't exist.Everybody doesn't win a Nobel Prize. We're looking at the ones who do. Were you under the impression that mind and aim are required for reproduction? Show us your calculations.But it doesn't matter how improbable it is. People DO win the lottery. Thoroughly scientific. You're the one who knows nothing about science. You seem to have forgetten again whom the idiot is. It is YOU. No belief is needed. We have knowledge. Again, you seem to have forgeooten that YOU are less than half-intelligent and nowhere near half sane.

We could start here:

Bullshit, K-man. Life happens, and I got busy elsewhere.Let's revisit this classic you used in post 311

quote:

---

Define the following variables:
n – is the total population size.
nA – is the number of members in the population with beneficial allele A.
nB – is the number of members in the population with beneficial allele B.
nC – is the number of members in the population that have neither beneficial allele A nor beneficial allele B.
​
In addition, we have the following condition: nA + nB + nC = n.

​

And the frequency of each of the variants are:
f_A = nA/n
f_B = nB/n
f_C = nC/n

---

Do you still stand by this? Do you add the allele frequencies for alleles in different genes?What about the healthy alleles for 3 different genes associated with a genetic disease, each with a frequency of 0.999?0.999A + 0.999B + 0.999C != 1OOOOOPPPPPSSS!!!! Your math doesn't work.

The same could be said for space telescopes. etc. We pay for it because we want to know.(At least you admit there IS abiogenesis research going on. Tell it to Dredge. He's turned a blind eye to it.)

WHY would you?