|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Explaining the pro-Evolution position | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
quote:Let's start with a simple minimally mathematic analogy to help you understand how rmns operates: Let's say that in order for your family to survive, your family must win two lotteries. And the probability of winning the first lottery is 1 in a million and the probability of winning the second lottery is 1 in a million. For you to win both lotteries, that probability will be 1 in a million times 1 in a million, 1 in a trillion, a very low probability. But let's say you are lucky enough to win one of the lotteries and now you are very wealthy and because of all your wealth, you can raise a very large family. And now all your descendants start buying tickets to the second lottery. As soon as you have enough descendants, you will have a reasonable probability that your family will win both lotteries.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
I have a problem with his simplistic statement that reptiles transformed into birds. I guess technically it is correct but he seems to be trying to confuse the issue by using term reptiles instead of dinosaurs. The idea of common ancestor seems to be lost on him.
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Coyote Member (Idle past 2106 days) Posts: 6117 Joined: |
Please see Message 47.
This on-line lecture renders your mathematical argument invalid.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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7 |
For you to win both lotteries, that probability will be 1 in a million times 1 in a million, 1 in a trillion,
Why?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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
quote:How do you take an ancestor which has scales and all the genes which produce scales and transform all those scale producing genes into genes which would produce feathers? Then consider that HIV can not efficiently transform two genes subject to three targeted selection pressures. And HIV is the fastest evolving replicator known with high mutation rates, huge populations and it does recombination. This is a consequence of the multiplication rule of probabilities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
quote:The joint probability of two (or more) random independent events is computed by multiplying the individual probabilities.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9076 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.7
|
Well thats embarrassing. For you. Only took me one minute using the google.
quote:Most dinosaurs had scales, not feathers, fossil analysis concludes | Science | The Guardian So according to you there was no evolution from single cell to muticell creatures?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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Kleinman Member (Idle past 335 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: |
quote:Ok, so let's try to follow your logic. Did the lineage of this creature always have scales and feathers? Or did it evolve from a creature that only had scales, only have feathers or neither?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
Let's say that in order for your family to survive, your family must win two lotteries. And the probability of winning the first lottery is 1 in a million and the probability of winning the second lottery is 1 in a million. For you to win both lotteries, that probability will be 1 in a million times 1 in a million, 1 in a trillion, a very low probability. But let's say you are lucky enough to win one of the lotteries and now you are very wealthy and because of all your wealth, you can raise a very large family. And now all your descendants start buying tickets to the second lottery. As soon as you have enough descendants, you will have a reasonable probability that your family will win both lotteries. If you wish to say that evolution does not require all beneficial mutations to appear simultaneously, but that rather they can be accumulated by natural selection over many generations, then you could say so. Indeed, you don't really need to say that: we are familiar with the theory of evolution. Perhaps, then, you could simply proceed to whatever point it is you wish to make. Thank you.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AZPaul3 Member Posts: 8513 From: Phoenix Joined: Member Rating: 5.3 |
my argument is that randommutationandnaturalselectioncan'tdoit. And the reason rmns can't do it is the multiplication rule of probabilities.
Prove it. Let's start with a simple minimally mathematic analogy to help you understand how rmns operates:Let's say that in order for your family to survive, your family must win two lotteries. And the probability of winning the first lottery is 1 in a million and the probability of winning the second lottery is 1 in a million. So, in your mind this shows TOE to be false. OK. Now we can go watch football.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: I suspect that if you honestly describe your argument a decent understanding of evolutionary theory will be sufficient to see the error. Nevertheless I believe that my understanding of probability theory will be adequate.
quote: Perhaps you can explain the model of evolution that you use to make those calculations. Because without that all you have is an assertion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Tangle Member Posts: 9489 From: UK Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Kleinman writes: Be patient, I'm not trying to tease you, I'm trying to introduce you to the concepts required to understand how rmns works. There's plenty of people here capable of reading and understanding anything you have to say without 'introductions'; put it on the table and stop dicking about with this patronosing bollox. You've managed to piss off everybody here with your childish approach, take the hint, if you have something to say, just say it. Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien. Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android "Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved." - Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
vimesey Member Posts: 1398 From: Birmingham, England Joined:
|
"I can smell me a sharpshooter in them thar hills, Sherrif !"
Could there be any greater conceit, than for someone to believe that the universe has to be simple enough for them to be able to understand it ? |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: The first question is an obvious non-sequitur- although for the record most mutations are neutral. The second question is foolish. Saying that another factor must be considered in the general case obviously does not mean that it will make enough of a difference in a particular case. And when do you intend to start supporting your claim that the theory of evolution is not well-established ?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
PaulK Member Posts: 17822 Joined: Member Rating: 2.2 |
quote: Really ? Has it been published in a peer-reviewed journal ? Has it been cited by other papers ? Do you have any reason to believe that it is widely accepted in the scientific community? Even if your assertion were true (and it doesn't look at all likely) it would not be sufficient to support your assertion.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024