Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,806 Year: 3,063/9,624 Month: 908/1,588 Week: 91/223 Day: 2/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Quality Control the Gold Standard
Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 166 of 238 (286402)
02-14-2006 9:52 AM
Reply to: Message 164 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 9:19 AM


Re: References
Evopeach writes:
Wrong. My challenge was how could a seven sigma repliator arise from pre-rna to rna to ... the present system by Darwinian methods.
The term "rna" doesn't even appear in your opening post, only DNA. Your main point seemed to be this:
Evopeach in the Opening Post writes:
At no stage is the improvement sought by introducing a source of random error, operating, seeing if the market accepts the new result keeping those that are accepted and discarding those that are unworkable or inefficient or otherwise unmarketable.
Why,,, because it would absolutely never work in the real world.
No such R&D effort would ever result in a new or higher quality profitable marketable product... not ever and the enterprise would simply go bancrupt.
Yet evolutionists suppose that a seven sigma replicator arose by a random error generator and an accept/reject "market " mechanism, namely random mutation and natural selection.
The experiments I cited do precisely what you claim here is impossible, improve replication accuracy through a process of inaccurate replication and selection. There are no known limits to the improvements such a process can achieve.
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?
One of the significant problems faced by origins of life research is that for the most part we don't know what the conditions on the early earth actually were. The experiment didn't include as one its goals a replication of the early earth environment. The goal was to see if an evolutionary process could improve the accuracy and speed of replicators, which answers your last question about "what constituted the measure of improvement."
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 164 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 9:19 AM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:19 PM Percy has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 167 of 238 (286419)
02-14-2006 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 165 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 9:32 AM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach writes:
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.
Really? This is from http://www.humble.k12.tx.us/KHS_profile.htm:
Kingwood High School (main campus)is a Class Five-A comprehensive high school serving approximately 3,075 students...
Caught exaggerating again, I see. And while Kingwood H.S. is rated Exemplary by the Texas Education Agency, I could found nothing about any national academic ranking.
Regardless of your personal experience at a single high school in Texas, it is common knowledge that the Texas State Board of Education provides lists of conforming and non-conforming textbooks to the school districts under its jurisdiction. In the biology discipline there are probably around 5 to 10 books on the conforming list, and I expect your group chose from among these books. To go outside the conforming list would be to risk a poor assessment by the Texas Education Agency.
AbE: This is all off-topic, of course. I just felt it important to correct your misstatements about textbooks.
--Percy
This message has been edited by Percy, 02-14-2006 11:19 AM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 165 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 9:32 AM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 11:31 AM Percy has replied

Evopeach
Member (Idle past 6613 days)
Posts: 224
From: Stroud, OK USA
Joined: 08-03-2005


Message 168 of 238 (286437)
02-14-2006 11:31 AM
Reply to: Message 167 by Percy
02-14-2006 10:37 AM


Re: Going back off topic
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 167 by Percy, posted 02-14-2006 10:37 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Percy, posted 02-14-2006 11:49 AM Evopeach has replied
 Message 170 by Belfry, posted 02-14-2006 11:49 AM Evopeach has not replied
 Message 175 by cavediver, posted 02-14-2006 5:40 PM Evopeach has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 169 of 238 (286443)
02-14-2006 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 11:31 AM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach writes:
Wow! Can't read either huh? 4013 including the freshman class.
Obviously neither can you. This, too, is from the website:
Extensive renovations are underway at this campus in preparation for the building to become a four-year school when Kingwood Park High School opens at the current 9th grade site in 2007.
The freshman class doesn't attend Kingwood High School at present. If the freshman class is considered part of the high school for administrative purposes, this wasn't made clear by either you or the website. But it doesn't matter, because even with the freshman class included you're still off by about a thousand students.
But you're drifting off the point, which is that the set of textbooks you were selecting from were likely on the Texas State Board of Education's conforming list. And PaulK's original point was that state boards of education of large states like California and Texas have a significant influence on what publishers put in textbooks. If these large states request reduced treatments for evolution, then that is what will happen. And has happened. This isn't any secret. It makes big splashes in the news several times a year.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 11:31 AM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:16 PM Percy has replied

Belfry
Member (Idle past 5085 days)
Posts: 177
From: Ocala, FL
Joined: 11-05-2005


Message 170 of 238 (286444)
02-14-2006 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 11:31 AM


what topic?
Just FYI, 4,013 with one significant figure is 4,000, not 5,000.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 11:31 AM Evopeach has not replied

Evopeach
Member (Idle past 6613 days)
Posts: 224
From: Stroud, OK USA
Joined: 08-03-2005


Message 171 of 238 (286614)
02-14-2006 5:16 PM
Reply to: Message 169 by Percy
02-14-2006 11:49 AM


Re: Going back off topic
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?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 169 by Percy, posted 02-14-2006 11:49 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 173 by NosyNed, posted 02-14-2006 5:23 PM Evopeach has replied
 Message 180 by Percy, posted 02-14-2006 6:13 PM Evopeach has replied
 Message 182 by Rrhain, posted 02-15-2006 3:45 AM Evopeach has replied

Evopeach
Member (Idle past 6613 days)
Posts: 224
From: Stroud, OK USA
Joined: 08-03-2005


Message 172 of 238 (286615)
02-14-2006 5:19 PM
Reply to: Message 166 by Percy
02-14-2006 9:52 AM


Re: References
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by Percy, posted 02-14-2006 9:52 AM Percy has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 173 of 238 (286617)
02-14-2006 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 5:16 PM


Sig Figs
basic significant figures knowledge
You've just demonstrated that you don't have the above.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:16 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 174 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:40 PM NosyNed has not replied

Evopeach
Member (Idle past 6613 days)
Posts: 224
From: Stroud, OK USA
Joined: 08-03-2005


Message 174 of 238 (286621)
02-14-2006 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 173 by NosyNed
02-14-2006 5:23 PM


Re: Sig Figs
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.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 173 by NosyNed, posted 02-14-2006 5:23 PM NosyNed has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 176 by cavediver, posted 02-14-2006 5:43 PM Evopeach has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 175 of 238 (286622)
02-14-2006 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 168 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 11:31 AM


Re: Going back off topic
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.
You can be exceptionally insulting for one so blatently in the wrong. Bizarre. Without specific eror bounds, 5000 can represent at most a range of 4500 to 5500.
Apologies for the OT.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 11:31 AM Evopeach has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 176 of 238 (286624)
02-14-2006 5:43 PM
Reply to: Message 174 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 5:40 PM


Re: Sig Figs
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.
Really? Absolute crap. Where do you get your maths degree?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 174 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:40 PM Evopeach has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by NosyNed, posted 02-14-2006 5:51 PM cavediver has replied
 Message 178 by SuperNintendo Chalmers, posted 02-14-2006 5:52 PM cavediver has not replied

NosyNed
Member
Posts: 8996
From: Canada
Joined: 04-04-2003


Message 177 of 238 (286628)
02-14-2006 5:51 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by cavediver
02-14-2006 5:43 PM


degree
Really? Absolute crap. Where do you get your maths degree?
Shhhhh Cavediver. It has been obvious for sometime that a large fraction of what EP says isn't true. Don't get into that; it is fun as it is.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by cavediver, posted 02-14-2006 5:43 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 179 by cavediver, posted 02-14-2006 6:13 PM NosyNed has not replied

SuperNintendo Chalmers
Member (Idle past 5833 days)
Posts: 772
From: Bartlett, IL, USA
Joined: 12-27-2005


Message 178 of 238 (286629)
02-14-2006 5:52 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by cavediver
02-14-2006 5:43 PM


Re: Sig Figs
Really? Absolute crap. Where do you get your maths degree?
Here in the states we covered Significant figures in 9th grade (freshman in high school) science class......... (at least in Montgomery County, MD schools)

This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by cavediver, posted 02-14-2006 5:43 PM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 179 of 238 (286636)
02-14-2006 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 177 by NosyNed
02-14-2006 5:51 PM


Re: degree
Sorry Ned my capacity for bogus biology, genetics, and chemistry is boundless but when maths takes a hit, I can't help but get cranky...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 177 by NosyNed, posted 02-14-2006 5:51 PM NosyNed has not replied

Percy
Member
Posts: 22388
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 180 of 238 (286637)
02-14-2006 6:13 PM
Reply to: Message 171 by Evopeach
02-14-2006 5:16 PM


Re: Going back off topic
Evopeach writes:
What do you think a week or two to get it finished?
As I've stated several times already, it is likely the original process, whatever its nature, took hundreds of millions of years in a laboratory the size of the entire globe. It is highly unlikely to be duplicated from beginning to end in a single experiment in a lab.
When you have an on point documented experiment showing pre-rna to rna to the seven sigma genome replication lets see it.
I would like to see this too, though it is highly unlikely that such a lengthy process of progression could be demonstrated in a single experiment. It would much more likely be a series of many experiments produced over decades and decades of work by scientists in the origins of life community.
I understand that your skeptical that science will ever achieve this, but personal incredulity is a poor reason for rejecting anything. There are, for example, excellent theoretical reasons for believing that matter cannot exceed the speed of light, but you have produced nothing equivalent for believing that natural processes are insufficient for producing highly reliable replicators. Scientists have shown that it is possible in relatively short periods of time to improve replicator reliability by quite a bit. I would point out here that your claim that it was from .0001 to .0002 are figures just pulled from the air, and given your errors in other areas of math, such as your claim that 5000 is the proper approximation for 4013, they are not to be trusted.
Since the laboratory evidence shows that what you claimed was impossible is actually possible, now it is only a matter of degree and extent.
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 171 by Evopeach, posted 02-14-2006 5:16 PM Evopeach has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 187 by Evopeach, posted 02-15-2006 6:06 PM Percy 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