Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 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:   Explaining the pro-Evolution position
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 61 of 393 (792427)
10-09-2016 8:19 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Dr Adequate
10-08-2016 9:19 PM


quote:
Why does combination therapy work for the treatment of HIV?
quote:
See here.
Anything else I can help you with, Alan?

It's been a while Doc. What happened to the Randi Forum? Now you as a mathematician should know that I am looking for a mathematical reason. And actually, Genomicus gave the correct reason in post 10 when he said:
quote:
Multi-valent drug approaches to HIV are more effective because there is a lower probability of the HIV population hitting on the right mutations to counter both drugs simultaneously.
rmns is not a linear algebra problem, it is a stochastic phenomenon which requires the application of probability theory to correctly analyze. The reason why combination therapy works for the treatment of HIV is the multiplication rule of probabilities. So do you want to try to compute the probability that a single beneficial mutation will occur on some member of a lineage?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Dr Adequate, posted 10-08-2016 9:19 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 141 by Taq, posted 10-11-2016 10:30 AM Kleinman has not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 62 of 393 (792428)
10-09-2016 8:25 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by AZPaul3
10-09-2016 4:18 AM


Re: Failing Peer Review
quote:
Kleinman, people are getting testy with you. Your approach here is not welcome.
You have the wrong idea about what is happening on this forum when it comes to presenting alternative ideas.
If you have a proposal to make then make it, in toto. Explain to us what your hypothesis actually is. Explain the problem, state your assumptions, show us your data, show us your process (complete with the math you hint is necessary) and show us your conclusions. Do it all in one post, or, if that complex, in as few as possible for complete understanding.
Stop trying to teach us through this demeaning question/hint crap. This is not your classroom.
This is your peer review and so far you are failing.
If you want to peer review my work, you had better have a good understanding of probability theory. Here's the short answer why the theory of evolution is not true, it's the multiplication rule of probabilities which makes the theory of evolution not true. For those who don't understand probability theory, it takes a much, much longer answer. It requires teaching you probability theory and how to analyze a stochastic process.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by AZPaul3, posted 10-09-2016 4:18 AM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 8:41 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 86 by PaulK, posted 10-10-2016 12:21 AM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 91 by Rrhain, posted 10-10-2016 6:57 AM Kleinman has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 63 of 393 (792429)
10-09-2016 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 7:42 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
Wow!
I didn't realize that the TOE included such a claim.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 7:42 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:07 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 64 of 393 (792430)
10-09-2016 8:37 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by AZPaul3
10-09-2016 4:18 AM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
Since AZPaul3 doesn't have the mathematical skill to peer review a probability problem, let's call this thread Why the Theory of Evolution is not true

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by AZPaul3, posted 10-09-2016 4:18 AM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 8:43 PM Kleinman has not replied
 Message 68 by AZPaul3, posted 10-09-2016 9:01 PM Kleinman has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 65 of 393 (792432)
10-09-2016 8:41 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 8:25 PM


Re: Failing Peer Review
I would venture to guess that you are the one that needs a lesson in probability theory. Do you really think you have destroyed the TOE in a way that no one has ever thought of in the past? Do you not realize that if you in fact have overturned the TOE you would be internationally famous and win at least one Nobel prize.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 8:25 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 66 of 393 (792433)
10-09-2016 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 8:37 PM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
So you got nothing?
Present your argument or move along. None of us want to waste time pandering to you.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 8:37 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 67 of 393 (792434)
10-09-2016 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 7:42 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
Since you seem to be having trouble with basic science here is an explanation geared to high school level.
quote:
If birds evolved from dinosaurs, would that make them reptiles too?
Yes, birds are reptiles, but let me explain a bit. Biologists use two types of classification systems, the Linnaean and the phylogenetic. The Linnaean system was developed by Carolus Linnaeus in the 1730's. In the Linnaean system, organisms are grouped by characteristics regardless of their ancestry. So a reptile is an animal that is ectothermic and has scales, and birds would not be reptiles. In the 1940's, a biologist named Willi Hennig came up with another classification system that he called phylogenetics. In this system, organisms are grouped only by their ancestry, and characteristics are only used to discover the ancestry. So a reptile is any animal descended from the original group called reptiles, and birds (as well as mammals) would be reptiles.
Usually what people mean when they say birds are reptiles is that birds are more closely related to reptiles than anything else, and this is true in a way, but there are many types of reptiles. Birds are most closely related to crocodiles. To understand this, we should look at some history. The first groups of reptiles evolved about 300 million years ago. About 40 million years later, (very quickly by geologic standards), a group of reptiles called therapsids branched off, which eventually became modern mammals. Other groups of reptiles split off over the next 120 million years, and one branch called the dinosaurs were very successful. These dinosaurs were only distantly related to modern snakes, lizards, and turtles, groups that had split off at different times. But 65 million years ago there was a massive extinction event, and all dinosaurs were killed except for a single group of feathered dinosaurs. These evolved over the next 65 million years into modern birds. So birds aren't just closely related to dinosaurs, they really are dinosaurs! This is what most people mean when they say that birds are reptiles, although technically according to the phylogenetic system mammals are also reptiles.
You may wonder why biologists have two systems of classification. One reason, of course, is the history behind them, but they are also both useful in their own ways. The phylogenetic system is useful for understanding the relationships between animals, whle the Linnaean system is more useful for understanding how animals live. It's sort of like cooking. If you organized all your ingredients phylogenetically, you would put everything that was made from peanuts on the same shelf. Then you could see that peanut butter, peanut oil, and peanut brittle are related to each other. But when you really want to cook, you would use something like the Linnaean system and put all your oils together, all your dry goods together, etc. So both systems have their uses.
Birds, Dinosaurs, and Reptiles | Ask A Biologist

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 7:42 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 68 of 393 (792435)
10-09-2016 9:01 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 8:37 PM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
Since AZPaul3 doesn't have the mathematical skill to peer review a probability problem, let's call this thread Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
You have no idea of the strength of my math abilities, but you have shown us ample reason to doubt yours.
Don't change the thread on my account. Or are you trying to escape your opening gambit because you are incapable of following through?
Go ahead. Let us see your full argument. Show us your skills and your majik. Prove to us, in deep mathematical detail, how the TOE cannot be correct. I assure you I will do my best to keep up.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 8:37 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:19 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 69 of 393 (792436)
10-09-2016 9:07 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Theodoric
10-09-2016 8:36 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
quote:
Wow!
I didn't realize that the TOE included such a claim.
Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
Theodoric, my argument is that randommutationandnaturalselectioncan'tdoit. And the reason rmns can't do it is the multiplication rule of probabilities.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 8:36 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 9:17 PM Kleinman has replied
 Message 73 by AZPaul3, posted 10-09-2016 9:44 PM Kleinman has replied
 Message 94 by RAZD, posted 10-10-2016 10:17 AM Kleinman has replied
 Message 146 by Taq, posted 10-11-2016 11:04 AM Kleinman has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 70 of 393 (792437)
10-09-2016 9:17 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 9:07 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
I don't give a rats ass about your probability argument you refuse to divulge. I was commenting on the strawman you made in the post I responded to.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:07 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:26 PM Theodoric has replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 71 of 393 (792438)
10-09-2016 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by AZPaul3
10-09-2016 9:01 PM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
quote:
Since AZPaul3 doesn't have the mathematical skill to peer review a probability problem, let's call this thread Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
quote:
You have no idea of the strength of my math abilities, but you have shown us ample reason to doubt yours.
Don't change the thread on my account. Or are you trying to escape your opening gambit because you are incapable of following through?
Go ahead. Let us see your full argument. Show us your skills and your majik. Prove to us, in deep mathematical detail, how the TOE cannot be correct. I assure you I will do my best to keep up.

Well, let's test your math abilities. The short answer for the reason the theory of evolution is not true is the multiplication rule of probabilities. Do you understand why this is true? The multiplication rule is the reason why combination therapy works for the treatment HIV. The first step in doing the mathematics is to compute the probability that a beneficial mutation will occur in a population for a given mutation rate in a single generation. Do you want me to write out the equation for you?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by AZPaul3, posted 10-09-2016 9:01 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
Kleinman
Member (Idle past 334 days)
Posts: 2142
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2016


Message 72 of 393 (792439)
10-09-2016 9:26 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Theodoric
10-09-2016 9:17 PM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
quote:
I don't give a rats ass about your probability argument you refuse to divulge. I was commenting on the strawman you made in the post I responded to.
It is probability theory which gives the correct mathematical tools to describe rmns. If you think otherwise, post your analysis of how rmns works. And you should want to understand how rmns works because this is the reason microbes evolve resistance to antimicrobial agents and cancer treatments fail.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 9:17 PM Theodoric has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 9:54 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 73 of 393 (792441)
10-09-2016 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 9:07 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
my argument is that randommutationandnaturalselectioncan'tdoit. And the reason rmns can't do it is the multiplication rule of probabilities.
Prove it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:07 PM Kleinman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 10:04 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
Theodoric
Member
Posts: 9076
From: Northwest, WI, USA
Joined: 08-15-2005
Member Rating: 3.7


Message 74 of 393 (792442)
10-09-2016 9:54 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 9:26 PM


Re: Why the Theory of Evolution is not true
Still waiting for you to present your argument.
Yawn!
Still not sure you even know what the TOE is.
Because transforming reptiles into birds is not part of it as far as I can tell.
Do you think it claims humans transformed from chimps or monkey?
Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.
Edited by Theodoric, : No reason given.

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts
"God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 9:26 PM Kleinman has not replied

  
Coyote
Member (Idle past 2105 days)
Posts: 6117
Joined: 01-12-2008


Message 75 of 393 (792443)
10-09-2016 9:59 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by Kleinman
10-09-2016 7:42 PM


Re: This seems like a good place...
quote:
The bottom line: evolution works.
But rmns will not transform reptiles into birds.
Something did.
And it will take more than a mathematical trick to show otherwise. In the meantime, the theory of evolution explains things quite well.
Mathematics is a great tool for describing reality, but only if it is based on reality. Mathematics can be used to "prove" bumblebees can't fly--which is totally incorrect.
So there you are.

Religious belief does not constitute scientific evidence, nor does it convey scientific knowledge.
Belief gets in the way of learning--Robert A. Heinlein
In the name of diversity, college student demands to be kept in ignorance of the culture that made diversity a value--StultisTheFool
It's not what we don't know that hurts, it's what we know that ain't so--Will Rogers
If I am entitled to something, someone else is obliged to pay--Jerry Pournelle
If a religion's teachings are true, then it should have nothing to fear from science...--dwise1
"Multiculturalism" demands that the US be tolerant of everything except its own past, culture, traditions, and identity.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by Kleinman, posted 10-09-2016 7:42 PM Kleinman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Theodoric, posted 10-09-2016 10:08 PM Coyote has seen this message but not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024