Quality Control the Gold Standard

Hey I know an even better straw mand and red herring (you can do both simultaneously.. remarkable), IS TO USE THE RATE FOR 1,000 GENERATIONS IN RADIATED FRUIT FLYS.. THTA'S MUCH HIGHER.Not one of your examples is apples to apples .. pitiful.The evo ego is a sight to behold.

You are really treading very close to suspension. Learn to follow the guidelines. Address the points that are raised. Learn to participate or leave.

This message has been edited by AdminJar, 02-13-2006 03:15 PM

Just so I understand the professors who select their text books and are very frequently the audience from which reviewers are chosen most frequently pick those books which contain the most erroneous presentation of evolution bacause they are actually IDer and Creationists or mandated by their colleges and universities to pick the poorest scholarship possible in text book selection. Furthermore the publishers standardly spend their type talking to legislatures rather than their primary audience as in teachers, instructors and selectors.Hmmm! I can walk into any office in this college and see somewhere between 15 and 30 different textbooks given as review copies to the instructors for their consideration. The sales reps do not spend much time presenting their textbooks to legislators and they don't send them review books.I live in this environment, I know how it works.

Actually yopur implication was that replicators being refined demonstrate the ability of such to arise from simple molceular pre-cursors and that is entirely on topic with my challenge.Of course when confronted with discliplined thinking and irrefutable logic that tears the thin fabric of the evolutionary claims .. your team simply repairs to the threaten and bully practice so akin to the way non-tenured instructors, professors, researchers etc. are blackballed, blasted, blackmailed and delisted when they dare not toe the line of evolutionary mysticism.Its really not a very convincing tactic.

Wrong. My challenge was how could a seven sigma repliator arise from pre-rna to rna to ... the present system by Darwinian methods.Your experiment assumed the existance of an rna replicator and showed a level of improvement over generations in a designed controlled warm and fuzzy environment. Would it occur in the restless sea , attacked by water, oxygen and UV?And was it an improvement from 0.0001 sigma to .0002 sigma. Are you proposing that given another few generations it would have fulfilled the challenge but they just ran out of grant money.What constituted the measure of improvement... lets see the details.

Wrong again I served on the science and texbook volunteer parents review committee at Humble School District for the Kingwood H.S. It was a 6A school with 5,000 students and consistently ranked in the national the twenty academically.The school had a formal full time staff of textbook review people by subject area, including biology. School boards approve teh recommendations of staff and teachers like a rubber stamp.. period.I remember meeting with the biology text book review senior staff lady in the spring of 1989. I gave her a copy of Denton's magnum opus and said you know it might be helpful to read one MD and biologist's concerns about evolutionary theory.Later I went back and she refused to talk to me, gave me the book back and said she didn't have time for it.Its good to see you fellas in full retreat though rewriting history and such.Count on me to check with my sources on H.S. book authors soon.Maybe you should recommend getting me off the post now to avoid the embarrassmsnt.. that tactic is well worn and seems effective.

Wow! Can't read either huh? 4013 including the freshman class.I am more concerned about the level of scientific literacy the evos possess. I mean I thought you'd at least have a grasp of significant figures.5,000 has one significant figure and three place setting zeros.I just assumed you knew as a literate science expert that this represents an estimate.. looks like I have to revise my assumptions downward for the posts.California buys more textbooks than Texas by the way.

I see you conveniently circumvented your obvious error in not understanding basic significant figures knowledge. And such puts my figure which I have said was an estimate in thr range of 4100 plus.Actually in Texas schools can use any books they wish but they may not get state support for the purchase.And if you think there has been any lessening of evolutionary teaching in high schools in Texas and California or anywhere else you are just intellectually dishonest.I once had a one hour telephone debate with Dr. Steven Schafersmann a paleontologist from Rice. Since he heads a foundation to preserve evolution in Texas schools you can bet its well represented.He did of course turn down my offer to fly Duane Gish in from So Cal and sponsor all expenses for a debate at Rice on his turf.When you have an on point documented experiment showing pre-rna to rna to the seven sigma genome replication lets see it.After all your words were .. "there is no known limit to the improvement that can be achieved" by evolutionary processes acting on a crude rna replicator".What do you think a week or two to get it finished?

And here I thought you were up on things. The only current theory of merit is the rna world or rna first theory. Natuarally I thought you were aware of these basic issues. Looks like a downgrade in the level of posting is in order.

My point is that 5000 without a decimal point at the end or a bar over any mumber is generally considered to have one significant figure.That means the estimate is an unbiased sample mean of a normal distribution where the uncertainty is indicated as plus or minus 999 which of course just happens to include the purported number 4013.

PLease define fraud and hack regarding Dr. Gish. Does that mean he really has no Phd in science from Berkly. Does it mean he did not participate on the team at Berkley whose principal won a Nobel Prize for their work on the Tobacco Mosaic Virus. Does it mean the books he has written he really didn't write but were all plagerized.Your infantile and erroneous posts are pitiful to read and display a maturity just below my very intelligent eight year old grandson. I have entertained Dr. Gish, met him many times and he is a fine gentleman unlike you.As to error budgets and estimation theory the results are always stated as + or - a range for unbiased estimators. The range clearly depends on the accuracy of the sample in this case one innocuous number drawn from my memory and appropriately rounded, ie, to the nearest thousand because that is the level of detail that gave rise to my gross estimate. It was not a measuremnt , a quote or an analytical result.. a gross estimate sensibly treated.

My figure was simply a statement that the dna copying mechanism in the human cell in toto resulted in making no more than copying errors than 1 in 10**-09.That is taken directly from the book Exons Entrons and Talking Genes.You introduced the concept of the total spectrum of the things that might result in an altered or mutated genome.My statement was that the human genome project and several other papers some of which I provided agreed with the quoted figure and that sucha system was operating at a Six Sigma level of 7.0+I understand fully that considering radiation, mutagens, chemicals, carcinogens etc. the genome suffers mutations unrelated to the intrinsic copying errors.. but the intrinsic rate is unaltered.If you disagree take it up with the author of the book, the reviewers and the publisher.

Dear egomaniac and immature bloviator, Kenneth R. Miller - Home PageYou might review the strong evolutionary content and stance and agressive anti ID credentials of the authors.Please feel free to email Dr. Miller Phd. in Biology 1974 and presently a tenured proferssor ar Brown University in Biological Sciences to inform him of his pi-- poor scholarship, intellect, writing and presentation. Pay particular attention to his anti-creationist positions, papers, talks and of course his teaching credentials at Brown.And for Percy as well.. if you need help reading this direct and irrefutable source cutting off your last line of retreat maybe I can help further.These authors series have been well accepted and used considerably.Fried crow is on your menu for the next month.

You continue to demonstrate that you cannot understand what someone posts or respond to the content of their messages. We have made many allowances for you, yet you continue to show that you are unable to follow the rules or guidelines. Understand that your privileges to post have been continued simply because your posts serve to exemplify the capabilities of those who believe like you. They can and will be restricted if you continue to ignore the rules and guidelines.

This message has been edited by AdminJar, 02-15-2006 05:31 PM

I began a regular workout after January at the local YMCA.The first day I could swim only four laps, the next time five and now I am up to twelve.Your logic says Evopeach has demonstrated that a person can achieve a performance improvement of several hundred percent in only twenty iterations of his exercise experiment. SO far there is no limit to the number of laps he will eventually be able to swim non-stop.You may have heard of the 100 year old science of selective breeding and the unalterable fact that every genetic progression yet observed hits the wall at some point and is never ever able to be advanced further.Can you supply the experimental data to show that sugar beet sugar content is now routinely advanced by these means beyond say 20%?Remember we are not talking intrusive genetic engineering.. just mutation and natural selection, gene shuffling and other evolutionary mechanisms.LOL

Gish was an Assistant Research Associate at Berkeley, and an Assistant Professor at Cornell University Medical College, before joining the Upjohn Company as a Research Associate in 1960. According to Sidney W. Fox:Duane Gish has scientific credentials. As a biochemist, he has synthesized peptides, compounds intermediate between amino acids and proteins. He has been co-author of a number of publications in peptide chemistry.1Wikipedia is an objective source and you may have heard of Dr. Fox.Is Dr. Fox in the habit of corroborating the credentials of hacks and frauds, especially people with whom he disagrees on the topic og origins.. his primary field of research?Here are a few of the many peer reviewed research papers published by the FRAUD.Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...Just a moment...If you had any class you would issue a public apology to Dr. Gish for your ignorant and uninformed ad hominem attack.

Its almost incredible that your team cannot stick to the original point .. I am amazed.. really.My post related to the inherent error rate in copying the DNA molecule in the human call.. in a statistically significant estimate over the entirity of the genome.It did not relate to all sources of mutation, mutation in the gamete, mutation per child, per generation or any other per beyond per replication of the dna molecule.Again read my source "Exons, Entrons and Jumping Genes".