A Guide to the tactics of Evolutionists

No, I have not, which is why the "claim" you attribute me is not a quotation.I have never, ever claimed "that a process hostile towards macroevolution ... is actually the same as macroevolution."This is because I am a real human being rather than that pathetic bedraggled bale of straw that you wish to claim is a man. So, you can attribute to me claims I have never made, and then claim that I made them without knowing it?Would you like to substantiate your claim that you're a giant purple elephant? Hey, I bet you didn't know you'd claimed that. I did not ignore your so-called rebuttal. On the contrary, I pointed out that your nonsense about swimming the Atlantic and prop airplanes has nothing to do with genetics.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Let's do the maths.If we have a diploid species, then for neutral variations, the equilibrium heterozygosity is ^*4Nv/(1 + 4Nv)This is different if the species is tetraploid, etc^*, but the math below works out the same, we just have to define x differently.In the diploid case, we shall write x = 4Nv, so that the formula above is justx/(1 + x)Now, let the population be divided into two isolated gene pools of size pN and qN, without changing the total numbers, so thatp + q = 1There is no reason why this should change the mutation rate, so the equilbrium heterozygy of the two gene pools ispx/(1 + px)andqx/(1 + qx)respectively.Now as time -> infinity, and we approach equilibrium, so the probability of the same gene being heterozygous in both gene pools falls to a chance level. Hence the equilibrium combined heterozygosity of the gene pools ispx/(1 + px) + qx/(1 + qx) + pqx²/(1 + px)(1 + qx)Now, given that N (the original population size) and v (the mutation rate) are both > 0, we have x > 0. Moreover, if the two gene pools into which we have divided the population are both non-empty, then we have p and q > 0.Hencepqx² > 0Adding pqx³ + x² + x to both sides, we getpqx² + pqx³ + x² + x > pqx³ + x² + xFactorizing, and bearing in mind that p + q = 1, we get:(1 + x)(pqx² + x) > x(1 + px)(1 + qx)Dividing both sides by (1 + x)(1 + px)(1 + qx), which you will note is strictly positive, we get(pqx² + x)/(1 + px)(1 + qx) > x/(1 + x)Rewriting the numerator on the left hand side, again remembering that p + q = 1, we get(pqx² + pqx² - pqx² + px + qx)/(1 + px)(1 + qx) > x/(1 + x)We may then rearrange the left hand side as(px(1 + qx) + qx(1 + px) + pqx²)/(1 + px)(1 + qx) > x/(1 + x)and finally cancel to getpx/(1 + px) + qx/(1 + qx) + pqx²)/(1 + px)(1 + qx) > x/(1 + x)---Conclusion: If a non-empty gene pool is divided into two non-empty isolated gene pools, and the mutation rate is constant and non-zero, then the equilibrium combined heterozygosity of the two gene pools is strictly greater than the heterozygosity of the original population.Note that this applies to the equilibrium heterozygosity. In the short term, just after we've made the partition, it is not correct to suppose that the probabilities of both gene pools exhibiting heterozygosity in the same gene are independent.---I am not so naive as to suppose that randman will pay any attention to this; it is after all, about genetics, not about "prop airplanes" or "swimming to England". Moreover, it's something I've actually said, rather than something he'd like to pretend that I've said.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : I meant to reply to my post, and edited it by accident.Edited by Dr Adequate, : Fortunately, I had most of it in a text file.Edited by Dr Adequate, : WTF?

The argument which you raised was that I claimed "that a process hostile towards macroevolution ... is actually the same as macroevolution."I adddressed your argument by pointing out that I have not claimed that.You also raised the argument that I had "ignored" your "rebuttal". I addressed your argument by pointing out that in fact I had replied to it.---If you have any arguments which don't involve telling me fairy-stories about what my opinion is, and what I have or haven't said, I shall also be happy to answer those, too.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

I notice that I have tacitly assumed that if both gene pools separately are homozygous with respect to a certain gene, then they are collectively. This is not necessarily true. Fortunately this is a conservative assumption, as, if anything, it must underestimate the equilibrium combined heterozygosity.

Yes, of course. No, I have not "accounted for loss of genetic diversity". I have proved that in the long run it is not lost.Oh, that "real world analysis". Does that have anything to do with "swimming to England"? Where is your "real world analysis"? This is not true. Isolation and genetic drift combined with mutation, as I have just shown, increase genetic diversity, in the long term You have a point? So "simplistic" that you are apparently completely unable to understand it. That simple, hey?Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

None of your "helpful quotations" contain actual arguments aginst the theory of evolution. So they're not really that helpful.Still, if we're playing "argument from authority":"Since its first appearance on Earth, life has taken many forms, all of which continue to evolve, in ways which palaeontology and the modern biological and biochemical sciences are describing and independently confirming with increasing precision. Commonalities in the structure of the genetic code of all organisms living today, including humans, clearly indicate their common primordial origin."--- Albanian Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences, Argentina; Australian Academy of Science; Austrian Academy of Sciences; Bangladesh Academy of Sciences; The Royal Academies for Science and the Arts of Belgium; Academy of Sciences and Arts of Bosnia and Herzegovina; Brazilian Academy of Sciences; Bulgarian Academy of Sciences; The Academies of Arts, Humanities and Sciences of Canada; Academia Chilena de Ciencias; Chinese Academy of Sciences; Academia Sinica, China, Taiwan; Colombian Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences; Croatian Academy of Arts and Sciences; Cuban Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic; Royal Danish Academy of Sciences and Letters; Academy of Scientific Research and Technology, Egypt; Académie des Sciences, France; Union of German Academies of Sciences and Humanities; The Academy of Athens, Greece; Hungarian Academy of Sciences; Indian National Science Academy; Indonesian Academy of Sciences; Academy of Sciences of the Islamic Republic of Iran; Royal Irish Academy; Israel Academy of Sciences and Humanities; Accademia Nazionale dei Lincei, Italy; Science Council of Japan; Kenya National Academy of Sciences; National Academy of Sciences of the Kyrgyz Republic; Latvian Academy of Sciences; Lithuanian Academy of Sciences; Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academia Mexicana de Ciencias; Mongolian Academy of Sciences; Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco; The Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences; Academy Council of the Royal Society of New Zealand; Nigerian Academy of Sciences; Pakistan Academy of Sciences; Palestine Academy for Science and Technology; Academia Nacional de Ciencias del Peru; National Academy of Science and Technology, The Philippines; Polish Academy of Sciences; Académie des Sciences et Techniques du Sénégal; Serbian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Singapore National Academy of Sciences; Slovak Academy of Sciences; Slovenian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Academy of Science of South Africa; Royal Academy of Exact, Physical and Natural Sciences of Spain; National Academy of Sciences, Sri Lanka; Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences; Council of the Swiss Scientific Academies; Academy of Sciences, Republic of Tajikistan; Turkish Academy of Sciences; The Uganda National Academy of Sciences; The Royal Society, UK; US National Academy of Sciences; Uzbekistan Academy of Sciences; Academia de Ciencias Físicas, Matemáticas y Naturales de Venezuela; Zimbabwe Academy of Sciences; The Caribbean Academy of Sciences; African Academy of Sciences; The Academy of Sciences for the Developing World (TWAS); The Executive Board of the International Council for Science (ICSU)."Teaching religious ideas mislabeled as science is detrimental to scientific education: It sets up a false conflict between science and religion, misleads our youth about the nature of scientific inquiry, and thereby compromises our ability to respond to the problems of an increasingly technological world. Our capacity to cope with problems of food production, health care, and even national defense will be jeopardized if we deliberately strip our citizens of the power to distinguish between the phenomena of nature and supernatural articles of faith. "Creation-science" simply has no place in the public-school science classroom."--- Nobel Laureates Luis W. Alvarez, Carl D. Anderson, Christian B. Anfinsen, Julius Axelrod, David Baltimore, John Bardeen, Paul Berg, Hans A. Bethe, Konrad Bloch, Nicolaas Bloembergen, Michael S. Brown, Herbert C. Brown, Melvin Calvin, S. Chandrasekhar, Leon N. Cooper, Allan Cormack, Andre Cournand, Francis Crick, Renato Dulbecco, Leo Esaki, Val L. Fitch, William A. Fowler, Murray Gell-Mann, Ivar Giaever, Walter Gilbert, Donald A. Glaser, Sheldon Lee Glashow, Joseph L. Goldstein, Roger Guillemin, Roald Hoffmann, Robert Hofstadter, Robert W. Holley, David H. Hubel, Charles B. Huggins, H. Gobind Khorana, Arthur Kornberg, Polykarp Kusch, Willis E. Lamb, Jr., William Lipscomb, Salvador E. Luria, Barbara McClintock, Bruce Merrifield, Robert S. Mulliken, Daniel Nathans, Marshall Nirenberg, John H. Northrop, Severo Ochoa, George E. Palade, Linus Pauling, Arno A. Penzias, Edward M. Purcell, Isidor I. Rabi, Burton Richter, Frederick Robbins, J. Robert Schrieffer, Glenn T. Seaborg, Emilio Segre, Hamilton O. Smith, George D. Snell, Roger Sperry, Henry Taube, Howard M. Temin, Samuel C. C. Ting, Charles H. Townes, James D. Watson, Steven Weinberg, Thomas H. Weller, Eugene P. Wigner, Kenneth G. Wilson, Robert W. Wilson, Rosalyn Yalow, Chen Ning Yang."Evolutionary theory ranks with Einstein's theory of relativity as one of modern science's most robust, generally accepted, thoroughly tested and broadly applicable concepts. From the standpoint of science, there is no controversy."--- Louise Lamphere, President of the American Anthropological Association; Mary Pat Matheson, President of the American Assn of Botanical Gardens and Arboreta; Eugenie Scott, President of the American Association of Physical Anthropologists; Robert Milkey, Executive Officer of the American Astronomical Society; Barbara Joe Hoshiazaki, President of the American Fern Society; Oliver A. Ryder, President of the American Genetic Association; Larry Woodfork, President of the American Geological Institute; Marcia McNutt, President of the American Geophysical Union; Judith S. Weis, President of the American Institute of Biological Sciences; Arvind K.N. Nandedkar, President of the American Institute of Chemists; Robert H. Fakundiny, President of the American Institute of Professional Geologists; Hyman Bass, President of the American Mathematical Society; Ronald D. McPherson, Executive Director of the American Meteorological Society; John W. Fitzpatrick, President of the American Ornithologists' Union; George Trilling, President of the American Physical Society; Martin Frank, Executive Director of the American Physiological Society; Steven Slack, President of the American Phytopathological Society; Raymond D. Fowler, Chief Executive Officer American Psychological Association; Alan Kraut, Executive Director of the American Psychological Society; Catherine E. Rudder, Executive Director of the American Political Science Association; Robert D. Wells, President of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology; Abigail Salyers, President of the American Society for Microbiology; Brooks Burr, President of the American Society of Ichthylogists & Herpetologists; Thomas H. Kunz, President of the American Society of Mammalogists; Mary Anne Holmes, President of the Association for Women Geoscientists; Linda H. Mantel, President of the Association for Women in Science; Ronald F. Abler, Executive Director of the Association of American Geographers; Vicki Cowart, President of the Association of American State Geologists; Nils Hasselmo, President of the Association of American Universities; Thomas A. Davis, President of the Assn. of College & University Biology Educators; Richard Jones, President of the Association of Earth Science Editors; Rex Upp, President of the Association of Engineering Geologists; Robert R. Haynes, President of the Association of Southeastern Biologists; Kenneth R. Ludwig, Director of the Berkeley Geochronology Center; Rodger Bybee, Executive Director of the Biological Sciences Curriculum Study; Mary Dicky Barkley, President of the Biophysical Society; Judy Jernstedt, President of the Botanical Society of America; Ken Atkins, Secretary of the Burlington-Edison Cmte. for Science Education; Austin Dacey, Director of the Center for Inquiry Institute; Blair F. Jones, President of the Clay Minerals Society; Barbara Forrest, President of the Citizens for the Advancement of Science Education; Timothy Moy, President of the Coalition for Excellence in Science and Math Education; K. Elaine Hoagland, National Executive Officer Council on Undergraduate Research; David A. Sleper, President of the Crop Science Society of America; Steve Culver, President of the Cushman Foundation for Foraminiferal Research; Pamela Matson, President of the Ecological Society of America; Larry L. Larson, President of the Entomological Society of America; Royce Engstrom, Chair of the Board of Directors of the EPSCoR Foundation; Robert R. Rich, President of the Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology; Stephen W. Porges, President of the Federation of Behavioral, Psychological and Cognitive Sciences; Roger D. Masters, President of the Foundation for Neuroscience and Society; Kevin S. Cummings, President of the Freshwater Mollusk Conservation Society; Sharon Mosher, President of the Geological Society of America; Dennis J. Richardson, President of the Helminthological Society of Washington; Aaron M. Bauer, President of the Herpetologists' League; William Perrotti, President of the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society; Lorna G. Moore, President of the Human Biology Association; Don Johanson, Director of the Institute of Human Origins; Harry McDonald, President of the Kansas Association of Biology Teachers; Steve Lopes, President of the Kansas Citizens For Science; Margaret W. Reynolds, Executive Director of the Linguistic Society of America; Robert T. Pennock, President of the Michigan Citizens for Science; Cornelis "Kase" Klein,President of the Mineralogical Society of America; Ann Lumsden, President of the National Association of Biology Teachers; Darryl Wilkins, President of the National Association for Black Geologists & Geophysicists; Steven C. Semken, President of the National Association of Geoscience Teachers; Kevin Padian, President of the National Center for Science Education; Tom Ervin, President of the National Earth Science Teachers Association; Gerald Wheeler, Executive Director of the National Science Teachers Association; Meredith Lane, President of the Natural Science Collections Alliance; Cathleen May, President of the Newkirk Engler & May Foundation; Dave Thomas, President of the New Mexicans for Science and Reason; Marshall Berman, President (elect) of the New Mexico Academy of Science; Connie J. Manson, President of the Northwest Geological Society; Lydia Villa-Komaroff, Vice Pres. for Research Northwestern University; Gary S. Hartshorn, President of the Organization for Tropical Studies; Warren Allmon, Director of the Paleontological Research Institution; Patricia Kelley, President of the Paleontological Society; Henry R. Owen, Director of Phi Sigma: The Biological Sciences Honor Society; Charles Yarish, President of the Phycological Society of America; Barbara J. Moore, President and CEO of Shape Up America!; Robert L. Kelly, President of the Society for American Archaeology; Richard Wilk, President of the Society for Economic Anthropology; Marvalee Wake, President of the Society for Integrative and Comparative Biology; Gilbert Strang, Past-Pres. & Science Policy Chair of the Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics; Prasanta K. Mukhopadhyay, President of the Society for Organic Petrology; Howard E. Harper, Executive Director of the Society for Sedimentary Geology; Nick Barton, President of the Society for the Study of Evolution; Deborah Sacrey, President of the Society of Independent Professional Earth Scientists; J.D. Hughes, President of the Society of Petroleum Evaluation Engineers; Lea K. Bleyman, President of the Society of Protozoologists; Elizabeth Kellogg, President of the Society of Systematic Biologists; David L. Eaton, President of the Society of Toxicology; Richard Stuckey, President of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology; Pat White, Executive Director of the Triangle Coalition for Science and Technology Education; Richard A. Anthes, President of the University Corporation for Atmospheric Research.---Your turn.

This is false.I have reread what you wrote.Here it is, in full. I responded both to your "point" that I had "repeatedly" claimed something I haven't claimed, and your "point" that I had "ignored" something which I had in fact responded to.Everyone reading this thread can see that. I can't see what you hope to achieve by pretending otherwise.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

So "simplistic" that you are apparently unable to argue against it. Once more, you are telling me fairy stories about my own opinions.

But your quote mine doesn't contain any "factual criticism" for me to "gloss over".Produce, from those quotes, one piece of evidence that you think contradicts the theory of evolution, and I shall respond to it.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

No. I have shown that this imaginary process doesn't happen in the case I've analysed. That is exactly what I've shown. Whom do you hope to deceive by saying otherwise? ... says the man who claims that my model of what happens when you isolate populations doesn't take isolation into account.

I quite understand why you are too frightened to argue for your opinions or against mine.I can also see why in the magical fantasy world in your head you like to pretend that I have not replied to your points, but I still cannot understand whom you hope to deceive by saying so.

I have proved that in the long term, if total population and mutation rate are constant, this increases genetic diversity.Hello?

Again, I ask whom do you hope to deceive?I've been doing genetics. You've been telling me random falsehoods about my opinions. Oh, and the stuff about "prop airplanes" and "swimming to England".Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Sheesh, not only don't you understand the model, but you don't understand what question it answers. Your one resource seems to be your own incomprehension.If your petition to escape my arguments is successful, I'm sure Wounded King will be able to explain the model to you. But not that you will understand the explanation.I have found you an argument. I am not obliged to find you an understanding.Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.

Me: Now, let the population be divided into two isolated gene pools of size pN and qN ...Randman: You completely leave off the pressures towards isolation ...Says it all, doesn't it?