Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
1 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,246 Year: 5,503/9,624 Month: 528/323 Week: 25/143 Day: 15/10 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Power of the New Intelligent Design...
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 706 of 1197 (906706)
02-16-2023 11:55 AM
Reply to: Message 692 by sensei
02-15-2023 8:08 PM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
What is limiting about a hierarchy?
In a nested hierarchy there are billions of different gene and feature combinations that can not exist. For example, you can not have a species that has a mixture of mammal and bird features. You can't have a creature with jellyfish and mouse genes.
A nested hierarchy severely limits what you can do which is why humans don't force their designs into a nested hierarchy, and that includes organisms that humans design.
What is unnecessary about it?
You don't need a nested hierarchy in order to get functional designs.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 692 by sensei, posted 02-15-2023 8:08 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 710 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:09 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 707 of 1197 (906707)
02-16-2023 11:59 AM
Reply to: Message 694 by sensei
02-15-2023 8:30 PM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
You would expect a different pattern? Which one?
‚Äč
We would expect a non-nested hierarchy because that is what human designs fall into. There is absolutely no reason why separately created species/kinds should fall into a nested hierarchy. For example, a separately created kind could have feathers, tidal lungs, teats, and three middle ear bones. There is no reason why a separately created species would have feathers simply because it did not have three middle ear bones like mammals do. There is no reason why a species could not have flow through lungs and hair. There is no reason why a species could not have a forward facing retina and a spinal column.
The only reason we would not expect to find these mixture of features is if species evolved from common ancestors with vertical inheritance.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 694 by sensei, posted 02-15-2023 8:30 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 711 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:15 PM Taq has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(1)
Message 708 of 1197 (906709)
02-16-2023 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 698 by sensei
02-16-2023 5:17 AM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
If we would generate millions of totally random DNA sequencies, the sequences can always be arranged in a nested hierarchy.
But those sequences will have a very low phylogenetic signal. This isn't the case with the genomes of species. Instead, there is a very strong phylogenetic signal. In fact, the measure of tree-like structure in DNA sequences from species is compared to random sequences as a negative control.
On top of that, there are two nested hierarchies: morphology and DNA sequence. There is absolutely no reason why these two nested hierarchies should match, but they do.
quote:
The degree to which a given phylogeny displays a unique, well-supported, objective nested hierarchy can be rigorously quantified. Several different statistical tests have been developed for determining whether a phylogeny has a subjective or objective nested hierarchy, or whether a given nested hierarchy could have been generated by a chance process instead of a genealogical process (Swofford 1996, p. 504). These tests measure the degree of "cladistic hierarchical structure" (also known as the "phylogenetic signal") in a phylogeny, and phylogenies based upon true genealogical processes give high values of hierarchical structure, whereas subjective phylogenies that have only apparent hierarchical structure (like a phylogeny of cars, for example) give low values (Archie 1989; Faith and Cranston 1991; Farris 1989; Felsenstein 1985; Hillis 1991; Hillis and Huelsenbeck 1992; Huelsenbeck et al. 2001; Klassen et al. 1991).
29+ Evidences for Macroevolution: Part 1

This message is a reply to:
 Message 698 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 5:17 AM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 709 of 1197 (906711)
02-16-2023 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 697 by sensei
02-16-2023 5:11 AM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
If you take one lottery ticket out of a million, it will always be one ticket out of a million. Any other ticket would also be one out of a million, with the exact same probability.
There is only one ticket out of that million that evolution would produce, and that is a nested hierarchy. We can observe populations producing that same phylogenetic signal in real time, and it is due to common ancestry, evolution, and vertical inheritance.
quote:
Inbred mouse strains have been maintained for more than 100 years, and they are thought to be a mixture of four different mouse subspecies. Although genealogies have been established, female inbred mouse phylogenies remain unexplored. By a phylogenetic analysis of newly generated complete mitochondrial DNA sequence data in 16 strains, we show here that all common inbred strains descend from the same Mus musculus domesticus female wild ancestor, and suggest that they present a different mitochondrial evolutionary process than their wild relatives with a faster accumulation of replacement substitutions. Our data complement forthcoming results on resequencing of a group of priority strains, and they follow recent efforts of the Mouse Phenome Project to collect and make publicly available information on various strains.
mtDNA phylogeny and evolution of laboratory mouse strains - PMC

This message is a reply to:
 Message 697 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 5:11 AM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 712 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:16 PM Taq has replied

  
sensei
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-24-2023


Message 710 of 1197 (906712)
02-16-2023 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 706 by Taq
02-16-2023 11:55 AM


Re: Typical?
So because their are no elephants with bird wings or anything like that, you find that to be strong evidence for evolution?
You gonna need to do better than this. But evolution science seems to have degraded to this level.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 706 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 11:55 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 713 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 12:16 PM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
sensei
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-24-2023


Message 711 of 1197 (906713)
02-16-2023 12:15 PM
Reply to: Message 707 by Taq
02-16-2023 11:59 AM


Re: Typical?
Human design shows a lot of nesting. We see many variations of bicycles. But we don't see a bicycle with a built in coffee bean grinder. Does that surprise you? Do you think human designs are limiting because of this?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 707 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 11:59 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 717 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 12:20 PM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
sensei
Member
Posts: 482
Joined: 01-24-2023


Message 712 of 1197 (906714)
02-16-2023 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 709 by Taq
02-16-2023 12:09 PM


Re: Typical?
Do you understand that one ticket has the same probability as any other single ticket?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 709 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 12:09 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 714 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 12:18 PM sensei has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 713 of 1197 (906715)
02-16-2023 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 710 by sensei
02-16-2023 12:09 PM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
So because their are no elephants with bird wings or anything like that, you find that to be strong evidence for evolution?
Because we don't find numerous and obvious violations of the pattern we would expect from evolution, we take that as strong evidence for evolution. When the observations match what the theory predicts that is evidence for the theory. That's how science works.
You gonna need to do better than this.
Why?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 710 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:09 PM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 714 of 1197 (906716)
02-16-2023 12:18 PM
Reply to: Message 712 by sensei
02-16-2023 12:16 PM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
Do you understand that one ticket has the same probability as any other single ticket?
Yes, I do understand that. Do you?
There are 999,999 tickets that don't match evolution. There is only 1 ticket that does. What ticket do we see? The one that matches evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 712 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:16 PM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 730 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 2:38 PM Taq has replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18456
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.0


Message 715 of 1197 (906718)
02-16-2023 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 703 by sensei
02-16-2023 11:37 AM


Re: What God?
sensei responding to AZPaul3 writes:
All you do is ranting the same evolutionist nonsense, instead of actually responding to any of my points.
I just noticed this conversation. Welcome to EvC, sensei. Enjoy your stay, but be advised that around here we all are cautious of having an argument framed, if you know what that means.
Can you help me to understand what you mean by the "same evolutionist nonsense"? I was unaware that there was a handbook with such a name.
I am a Bible Thumper and can thump with the best of them, but my opponents here
have their own handbook with which to challenge me. I am in the process of writing my own handbook with which to challenge them back, but it isn't an easy job! Do you know what I mean?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 703 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 11:37 AM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
Stile
Member (Idle past 159 days)
Posts: 4295
From: Ontario, Canada
Joined: 12-02-2004


(3)
Message 716 of 1197 (906719)
02-16-2023 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 705 by sensei
02-16-2023 11:53 AM


Re: What God?
sensei writes:
Are you done ranting nonsense and showing your disrespect? Because it says more about you than the people you are trying to bash.
It seems like you've responded to the wrong message.
What are you talking about?
The only people I bashed are those in cults who are trying to control other people.
Don't you think such people should be bashed?
I'd do even more to them, if it were allowed. Such evil should never be tolerated.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 705 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 11:53 AM sensei has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 717 of 1197 (906720)
02-16-2023 12:20 PM
Reply to: Message 711 by sensei
02-16-2023 12:15 PM


Re: Typical?
sensei writes:
Human design shows a lot of nesting.
Human designs show a LOT of violations of nesting. For example, this mouse has a copy of the green fluorescent protein from jellyfish:
So how did this massive violation of a nested hierarchy happen? Humans designed the mouse that way.
Human designs regularly violate a nested hierarchy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 711 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 12:15 PM sensei has seen this message but not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 719 by AZPaul3, posted 02-16-2023 12:58 PM Taq has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8614
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 718 of 1197 (906726)
02-16-2023 12:49 PM
Reply to: Message 703 by sensei
02-16-2023 11:37 AM


Re: What God?
All you do is ranting the same evolutionist nonsense, instead of actually responding to any of my points.
sensei, the points you are trying to make are decades old creationist meanderings refuted a thousand times over. You bring nothing new, nothing we haven't seen and dismissed a hundred times.
You are still trying to preserve your god by killing evolution. First step is to show your god. Absent that you have nothing to offer here.
We are not going to prove you wrong because you haven't said anything intelligent.
If you want to fight against a concept like the nested hierarchy then you should know what it is first. You don't.
Again, if you want to kill evolution then show us your god. Having some trouble presenting any of that, I see.
Where is your god, sensei? Show us. Then we can talk about nested hierarchies.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 703 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 11:37 AM sensei has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 729 by sensei, posted 02-16-2023 2:30 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8614
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 2.2


(1)
Message 719 of 1197 (906730)
02-16-2023 12:58 PM
Reply to: Message 717 by Taq
02-16-2023 12:20 PM


Re: Typical?
Human designs regularly violate a nested hierarchy.
I don't think he will understand this. I don't think he knows what a nested hierarchy is. He doesn't seem to understand its relationship to ancestor.

Stop Tzar Vladimir the Condemned!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 717 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 12:20 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 720 by Taq, posted 02-16-2023 1:06 PM AZPaul3 has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 10197
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 3.1


(4)
Message 720 of 1197 (906733)
02-16-2023 1:06 PM
Reply to: Message 719 by AZPaul3
02-16-2023 12:58 PM


Re: Typical?
AZPaul3 writes:
I don't think he will understand this. I don't think he knows what a nested hierarchy is. He doesn't seem to understand its relationship to ancestor.
Most creationists don't understand what a nested hierarchy is, nor why it is such a big deal. The nested hierarchy is perhaps the biggest piece of evidence that convinced the scientific community in the 1800's that the theory of evolution was right. The nested hierarchy is probably the set piece for the evidence that supports the theory, and wouldn't you know it, most creationists don't even understand the concept.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 719 by AZPaul3, posted 02-16-2023 12:58 PM AZPaul3 has 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