
Register  Sign In 

QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 57 (9174 total) 
 
Neptune7  
Total: 917,616 Year: 4,873/9,624 Month: 221/427 Week: 31/103 Day: 0/11 Hour: 0/0 
Thread ▼ Details 


Author  Topic: Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?  
Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Evolution is not taught in schools, only a mathematically irrational, mythical misinterpretation of evolution is taught in schools. If evolution was correctly taught in schools, there would be fewer drugresistant infections and failed cancer treatments.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
dad writes:
jar, why don't you sober up and learn that they don't teach evolution in schools. What people spout about evolution in schools is such nonsense as reptiles evolve into birds or believe such silly stuff as fish evolve into mammals. I will admit that there might be a certain amount of humor except for the fact that people die of drugresistant infections and failed cancer treatments because evolution isn't taught properly in schools.
Thanks for the blasphemy and hatred of other peoples beliefs.jar writes: It's not hatred of your beliefs, particularly Creationism. It is pity and I will admit a certain amount of humor that there are still people who would spout such nonsense or believe such silly stuff.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
jar writes:
jar demonstrates the consequence of social promotion.
And so far you have still never posted anything showing that evolution does not happen just as taught in the schools. Creationism is simply stupid.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
Just follow the "Do you really understand the mathematics of evolution? topic in the "Biological Evolution" forum.
... evolution isn't taught properly in schools.ringo writes: Why don't you tell us how it "should" be taught?


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined:

Phat writes:
I'm not asking for your support. I'm asking you to understand the physical and mathematical facts of life.
Not that I support Kleinman, mind you.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
Of course, I accept evolution. I have to deal with the consequence of it on a regular basis in my medical practice (that is drugresistant infection). What I don't accept is this mathematically irrational notion that reptiles can evolve into birds and fish can evolve into mammals. A good starting point to put this right is to require biology students to master introductory probability theory in their dumbbell math courses so that they might have some understanding of stochastic processes such as DNA evolution. What that means is that the faculty of biology departments have to understand the subject and clearly, in general, they don't understand that subject.
Just follow the "Do you really understand the mathematics of evolution? topic in the "Biological Evolution" forum.ringo writes: You haven't even made it clear whether you accept evolution or not. In this thread, try to be coherent. Tell us what the schools are doing wrong and what they need to do to put it right.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
Just because people claim that reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals don't make them scientists. And mathematics is the language of science. Why don't these "scientists" correctly describe the mathematical behavior of the Kishony and Lenski evolution experiments? Why don't these "scientists" give the mathematical explanation for why combination therapy works for treating hiv? These socalled "scientists" can only make up stories but they can't explain the mathematical and empirical evidence of DNA evolution, a stochastic process (which is mathematical).
What I don't accept is this mathematically irrational notion that reptiles can evolve into birds and fish can evolve into mammals.ringo writes: So you don't accept evolution as it is understood by scientists. And you think mathematics trumps reality.Kleinman writes:
Who???? Taq???? The only number that Taq has produced in our discussion is 3e9 which substantiates the math that I've presented. Where are all these people on this forum who understand introductory probability theory? I've had to do the math for multiple possible beneficial mutations, the math for random recombination, I've had published and had peerreviewed the mathematics for random mutation and natural selection for multiple simultaneous selection pressures (which explains why combination therapy for the treatment of hiv works and why the Kishony experiment for two drugs doesn't work), I've published the mathematics which explains the Lenski experiment, and I'm doing the finishing touches on a paper which correctly does the Markov Chain mathematics for DNA evolution. Where are all your experts in probability theory that can explain how reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals? They can't even explain the simplest evolutionary experiments.
A good starting point to put this right is to require biology students to master introductory probability theory in their dumbbell math courses so that they might have some understanding of stochastic processes such as DNA evolution.ringo writes: There are people on this forum who understand introductory probability theory but they don't seem to be convinced by your version of what evolution really, really, really is. So that doesn't seem to be a solution.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
blah, blah, blah. Tangle is now going to give us the mathematical explanation of how evolution works, NOT.
What I don't accept is this mathematically irrational notion that reptiles can evolve into birds and fish can evolve into mammals.Tangle writes: Reptiles didn't evolve into birds and fish didn't evolve into mammals. Species evolve *from* other species. Reptiles did not change into birds. Nor is that silly bumper sticker simplification useful even if you manage to get the terminology right.Tangle writes:
And Tangle is bit by bit coming out (actually full throttle) with his pseudoscientific understanding of evolution. And that pseudoscientific understanding of evolution harms people with drugresistant infections and failed cancer treatments.
Anyhow, bit by bit, you're coming out of your closet. An evolution denier who believes in evolution.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
Oh no, I have a new claim. If they are real scientists, why haven't they given the correct mathematical explanation for the Kishony and Lenski evolution experiments?
Just because people claim that reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals don't make them scientists.ringo writes: You have it backwards. What makes them scientists is doing science. And the science they do indicates that species do evolve into other species.I suppose next you're going to roll out the old creationist claim that it isn't "real science". Kleinman writes:
That's right! But if you do the mathematical modeling correctly, you can predict the behavior of a physical system. So, where are your correct mathematical models for the Kishony and Lenski evolution experiments? If you want to see the correct mathematics for these experiments, you can find those papers here: And mathematics is the language of science.ringo writes: Exactly. It's what we use to describe the science. It doesn't define reality. Just a moment...and Just a moment... Where are all your "real scientists'" mathematical explanations of these experiments?
Kleinman writes:
The only thing that Taq has said so far is that for a mutation rate of 1e9 that it takes 3e9 replications for a beneficial mutation to occur. I doubt you understand the significance of this for reptiles evolving into birds and fish evolving into mammals.
Where are all your experts in probability theory that can explain how reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals?ringo writes: If they disagreed with Taq, they'd say so.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined:

AZPaul3 writes:
I don't think that thousands of mathematicians have taken a close look at what geneticists and evolutionary biologists are doing with their math. If mathematicians take a close look at what geneticists and evolutionary biologists are doing they can easily find out what is wrong with their math. There ideas are not all wrong but they are making fundamental errors at key points of their mathematical analysis and I know where their errors are. For example, in their Markov Chain analysis, they are making an assumption at the beginning of their analysis that gives totally inaccurate predictions.
Thousands of mathematicians, thousands of geneticists, thousands of evolutionary biologists the world over and none of them have figured out that their ideas are all wrong.AZPaul3 writes:
That's right. And it's the same as when the "real scientists" said the earth was flat. They didn't want to give up on their beliefs and accept the mathematical and empirical facts of life. The problem for these pseudoscientists is that there mathematically irrational understanding of evolution harms people with drugresistant infections and failed cancer treatments.
Must be really disheartening to go through all that schooling, all those years in the lab and at the computer crunching numbers, working all those years building skills in your discipline and reputation with your colleagues just to find out some upstart internet nobody says you've been so wrong all this time.AZPaul3 writes:
Not at all AZPaul3. You have as much understanding of evolution as most of these "professionals". I do these discussions to get practice debating these issues. Once in a while, I get a challenging argument and I learn something about evolution. You just aren't able to present that challenge.
The real hurt for you, I'm sure, is that you have to come here to EvC, to an amateur general discussion site, to push your novel views because you can't hold your own against the professionals on the dedicated discipline sites.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Kleinman writes:
On this issue, yes. If you think there is some scientist out there who claims my explanation is incorrect, have them explain why. When I wrote my initial papers on this subject, the editors asked me to write an explanation suitable for a layman to understand, you can read that explanation here: If they are real scientists, why haven't they given the correct mathematical explanation for the Kishony and Lenski evolution experiments?ringo writes: So you know better than every scientist? That smells cranky.Page not found  Stats & Data Science Views At the bottom of the page gives the panel of expert mathematicians who review this work. Geneticists and evolutionary biologists have bungled the mathematics of evolution and I know where they have made their errors. And by their blunders on correctly explaining the mathematics of DNA evolution, they are harming people with drugresistant infections and failed cancer treatments. Their mathematics stinks like a corpse. Kleinman writes:
You can start with that the math I've presented correctly models the Kishony and Lenski experiments. In fact, I published the math for the Kishony experiment before he ran his experiment. You can read the papers here: That's right! But if you do the mathematical modeling correctly, you can predict the behavior of a physical system.ringo writes: Only if the model is based on accurate observations of reality. The mathematics is always secondary.Just a moment... and Just a moment... You can also read the paper which explains why combination therapy works for the treatment of hiv here: Just a moment... Feel free to post any empirical examples of DNA evolution that behave differently than the math I've presented. I'm just finishing another paper that shows the error that population geneticists have made with the application of Markov Chain mathematics and show how to do the mathematics correctly. Your problem is that you don't have either the training or experience to critically analyze evolutionary phenomenon and neither do the socalled scientists you claim are experts on this subject. If they were, they would have long ago explained how drugresistant microbes evolve and why cancer treatments fail. Lenski has been working on his experiment for over 30 years yet he has never correctly modeled his experiment. You have to go to my paper if you want to see how to mathematically model evolution under his experimental conditions.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Straggler writes:
That's not my job. I have to deal with problems of evolution, in particular, drug resistant infections. And the present explanation of how evolution works being given to naive school children is incredibly harmful and wasteful.
So let’s assume you are correct. Let’s assume that evolution  AKA descent of all species on Earth from common ancestry  is mathematically impossible.What’s your alternate explanation for the existence of mammals and reptiles and insects and birds? How did different species come about? How did different kinds(?) come to be? How does this alternate explanation account for the fact that all known life shares the same genetic code? And how likely is that in terms of your statistical analysis?


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Coragyps writes:
It's not my job to give you alternative explanations. If you want to believe in some childish mythology such as reptiles evolving into birds and fish evolving into mammals, go for it. Just don't indoctrinate naive school children with such nonsense. Look what it has done to AZPaul3's mind. He's a walking billboard that social promotion is a complete failure. The best he can do telling us the number of replications for a beneficial mutation to occur is somewhere between 1 and infinity. At least Taq could figure that one out. It make you wonder how much worse our educational system can get.
But you have no alternative explanation for Straggler?Hmmm.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
AZPaul3 writes:
A precision thought from the mind of AZPaul3, "From a minimum of 1 to an indeterminate maximum." Give AZPaul3 a trophy and advance him one grade.
You're making that quite obvious.


Kleinman Member (Idle past 418 days) Posts: 2142 From: United States Joined: 
Straggler writes:
It happens to be the correct model for DNA evolution and every real, measurable, and repeatable example of DNA evolution correlates with this mathematics. Try to find an example that doesn't obey this math.
Well that is quite a claim. The entirety of established science regarding common ancestry and the origin of species is to be discarded because.......you have a mathematical model...? Is that what you are saying?



Do Nothing Button
Copyright 20012023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024