|
Author
|
Topic: Should we teach both evolution and religion in school?
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
Message 1876 of 1960 (879307)
07-14-2020 1:21 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1875 by ringo
07-14-2020 12:30 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: You live in a very small frozen wasteland. | ringo writes: But we're connected to the rest of the world by something called the Internet. |
|
So you think that everyone on the Internet is fish-to-mammals aficionados? You fish-to-mammals aficionados have a habit of making gross over-extrapolations from your very small frozen wastelands. We are still waiting for you to present one empirical example of DNA evolution that contradicts the math I've presented. You have failed at that. | Kleinman writes: And just because you have been indoctrinated into the fish-to-mammals clique.... | ringo writes: I was indoctrinated into the God-created-the-heavens-and-the-earth clique. |
|
We know, those seeds fell on rocky ground. But the fish-to-mammals seeds, that found fertile soil in your mind. How about that verse "whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap"? Did the fish-to-mammals aficionado teach you that math? | Kleinman writes: Have your distant cousins, the bananas taught you anything? | ringo writes: I can trust a banana not to talk bullshit. YOU could learn a lot from a banana if only you were willing to learn. |
|
Is that what bananas tell you, "we are distant cousins"? Do you speak bananaese? Or do you have to put what they say into Google Translate? | Kleinman writes: So what did learn from your teachers that indoctrinated you that you are a distant cousin to bananas? | ringo writes: I haven't taken a biology class since high school and they didn't teach much about evolution then. What little I do know about evolution I learned from the stupidity of creationists. |
|
And it is clear you have never taken a course in introductory probability theory. But bananas talk to you and tell you that they are distant relatives. You have an interesting way of continuing your education. | Kleinman writes: Did they explain to you how drug-resistance evolves or why cancer treatments fail? | ringo writes: They explained to me that when somebody has a great scientific breakthrough (like you claim to have), he should talk to SCIENTISTS about it, not blather to a bunch of laymen where he can't possibly do any good. |
|
Don't worry, I'm going to submit my next paper soon. And this discussion has done a lot of good for me, it enabled me to break my writer's block and write the conclusion for that paper. And people on this forum claim there are scientists who post on this forum that understand probability theory. Where are they? | Kleinman writes: It's too bad you haven't learned anything from this discussion and if it makes you feel better to blame me, that's all right. | ringo writes: I'm not "blaming" you for being a bad teacher. I'm just saying that a good teacher doesn't blame his students. |
|
Since I have experience with teaching, I can tell you there are some poor students out there. Most of the time, the reason they are poor students is that they don't do their homework.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1875 by ringo, posted 07-14-2020 12:30 PM | | ringo has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1880 by dad, posted 07-14-2020 3:30 PM | | Kleinman has responded | | | Message 1883 by ringo, posted 07-14-2020 5:11 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
Straggler
Member Posts: 10324 From: London England Joined: 09-30-2006 Member Rating: 2.6
|
|
|
Message 1877 of 1960 (879311)
07-14-2020 2:00 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1872 by Kleinman
07-13-2020 6:14 AM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Straggler writes: According to your own link only 0.4% of the humans that have ever lived had existed by the point that the traits in question evolved. And we are talking about a geographically separate subset of that population. |
So - Are you going to tell us the probability of these traits occurring in that population or not? What are you afraid of?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1872 by Kleinman, posted 07-13-2020 6:14 AM | | Kleinman has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1878 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 2:26 PM | | Straggler has responded |
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: According to your own link only 0.4% of the humans that have ever lived had existed by the point that the traits in question evolved. And we are talking about a geographically separate subset of that population. | Straggler writes: So - Are you going to tell us the probability of these traits occurring in that population or not? What are you afraid of? |
|
I've already done plenty of probability calculations and have gotten them peer-reviewed and published. Why are you afraid of calculating the probability of a malaria resistance mutation occurring? At some time, you fish-to-mammals aficionados need to start learning how to do the mathematics of evolution. Why don't you start right here? Taq has already given you a big hint. For a mutation rate of e-9, it takes 3e9 replications for each of the possible substitution mutations to occur at the given site. How much more of a hint do you need?
|
Straggler
Member Posts: 10324 From: London England Joined: 09-30-2006 Member Rating: 2.6
|
|
|
Message 1879 of 1960 (879313)
07-14-2020 3:18 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1878 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 2:26 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
I need you to tell me the probability of fair skin, blue eyes, lactase persistence and alcohol tolerance all having evolved during the mesolithic (i.e when the total number of humans that had ever lived was about 400 million according to your link). You do it. It’s your calculation. You were desperate to show how bewilderingly impossible evolution was earlier when talking about chimpanzees and whatnot. Let’s see what your calculations say about the likelihood of relatively recent human traits. Why are you stalling?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1878 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 2:26 PM | | Kleinman has not yet responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1881 by dad, posted 07-14-2020 3:33 PM | | Straggler has not yet responded |
|
dad
Member Posts: 337 Joined: 05-29-2020
|
|
|
Message 1880 of 1960 (879319)
07-14-2020 3:30 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1876 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 1:21 PM
|
|
Impossible is not probable
Probability depends on what factors are used to determine what is probable. It isn't really applicable to TOE. They use beliefs to determine what was 'probable'.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1876 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 1:21 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
dad
Member Posts: 337 Joined: 05-29-2020
|
Achilles tendon
The probability of rapid adapting in the past is not an issue, but a matter of record. We see all the skin changes and etc and know the timeframe it happened in. Science bases what is probable on the way things work today. That is their fatal flaw.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1879 by Straggler, posted 07-14-2020 3:18 PM | | Straggler has not yet responded |
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 1882 of 1960 (879322)
07-14-2020 3:40 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1880 by dad
07-14-2020 3:30 PM
|
|
Re: Impossible is not probable
| dad writes: Probability depends on what factors are used to determine what is probable. It isn't really applicable to TOE. They use beliefs to determine what was 'probable'. |
Why can't you use probability theory on evolution? After all, the mutation rate is simply the probability that an error on DNA replication will occur at the given site in a single replication. It is probability theory that sinks the TOE, in particular, the multiplication rule.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1880 by dad, posted 07-14-2020 3:30 PM | | dad has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1887 by dad, posted 07-15-2020 10:15 AM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
ringo
Member Posts: 18511 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005 Member Rating: 1.6
(1)
| |
| |
| |
|
|
Message 1883 of 1960 (879331)
07-14-2020 5:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1876 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 1:21 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: And people on this forum claim there are scientists who post on this forum that understand probability theory. Where are they? |
You've spoken to some of them. You should be able to spot them. | Kleinman writes: Don't worry, I'm going to submit my next paper soon. |
How many times are you going to mention "fish-to-mammals aficionados" in it?
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1876 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 1:21 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 1884 of 1960 (879337)
07-14-2020 5:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1883 by ringo
07-14-2020 5:11 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: And people on this forum claim there are scientists who post on this forum that understand probability theory. Where are they? | ringo writes: You've spoken to some of them. You should be able to spot them. |
|
Only one so far, Taq. And it took a lot of discussions to get him to do the math for the number of replications necessary for every possible substitution mutations to occur at a given site. His calculation confirmed my math. And he fully understood the consequences this has for the TOE. That's why he started to talk about recombination. His problem is that I had already published a paper on the mathematics of recombination and shown that it has very little effect on DNA evolution. There have been none on this forum that demonstrate any understanding of the Markov chain models of DNA evolution. Only some moron who claims to understand the model but can't even tell us what the initial conditions for the model is. | Kleinman writes: Don't worry, I'm going to submit my next paper soon. | ringo writes: How many times are you going to mention "fish-to-mammals aficionados" in it? |
|
I'll try to be more diplomatic then telling them they are "blithering idiots and you are doing the math incorrectly", but no matter how I say this, it is going to be very upsetting to a lot of "fish-to-mammals" aficionados. After all, even if you don't understand the math, do you think that cherry-picking some gene from an entire genome, ignore the rest of the genome that you can get any kind of an accurate idea how closely related the two species are? That idea is so ludicrous that you could look for a gene in a banana that is similar to your gene and by that logic you are related. If the genes are exact matches, your parents are bananas by that logic.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1883 by ringo, posted 07-14-2020 5:11 PM | | ringo has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1885 by ringo, posted 07-14-2020 7:33 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
ringo
Member Posts: 18511 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 1885 of 1960 (879340)
07-14-2020 7:33 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1884 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 5:46 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: it is going to be very upsetting to a lot of "fish-to-mammals" aficionados. |
We had a guy on here a few years ago who was going to publish that one paper that would bring the whole ToE crashing down. One paper, mind you, against thousands. We're still waiting for that paper.
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1884 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 5:46 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 1886 of 1960 (879342)
07-14-2020 8:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1885 by ringo
07-14-2020 7:33 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: it is going to be very upsetting to a lot of "fish-to-mammals" aficionados. | ringo writes: We had a guy on here a few years ago who was going to publish that one paper that would bring the whole ToE crashing down. One paper, mind you, against thousands.
We're still waiting for that paper. |
|
The mathematics is complete, the paper is written, the only thing remaining is the last case study for the simulation of two drugs simultaneously for the Kishony experiment. That calculation on my computer system (an older I3 Intel chip running at about 1GHz) can only do 1.5 trillion replications/day. It will take about 200 trillion replications to get the one double beneficial mutation. Right now the calculation is at 60 trillion replications and I'm probably going to stop at 100 trillion replications because it is clear where the solution is converging and I don't think it's worth running the calculation for another 2-3 months. Solving Markov chain calculations can take huge amounts of computer time. All the other cases comparing the standard Jukes-Cantor model with the stationary transition matrix with the non-stationary transition matrix (with selection) are done. The non-stationary model accurately simulates the Kishony experiment. In addition, I've been invited by a good statistics journal that publishes papers on Markov chain models to submit a paper. It will probably happen by the end of summer. I assume the peer-review process will take some time because I expect there to be controversy surrounding this paper. What I don't expect is that there will be a problem with the math. I've published too many mathematical papers and when the math is correct and correlates correctly with the empirical evidence, everything seems to harmonize. And this is one of those cases.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1885 by ringo, posted 07-14-2020 7:33 PM | | ringo has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1888 by ringo, posted 07-15-2020 12:10 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
dad
Member Posts: 337 Joined: 05-29-2020
|
|
|
Message 1887 of 1960 (879353)
07-15-2020 10:15 AM
|
Reply to: Message 1882 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 3:40 PM
|
|
Re: Impossible is not probable
quote:
Why can't you use probability theory on evolution?
The same reasons that we can't say it is not probable that wolves will eat grass and lions will eat grass one day soon. The basis for what is probable cannot be this present world and nature. For the past this holds true also. quote:
After all, the mutation rate is simply the probability that an error on DNA replication will occur at the given site in a single replication
Genetics do not appear to be the same as now in the future in the bible. The changes to animals will be fast, lightning fast. The changes to mankind also will be. They will live a thousand years again for example. It is not the mutation rate that will be responsible for this. It sounds more like a new set of laws working on animals and man and the world will be responsible. Nothing random about it. The same holds true of the past. The way genetics worked was simply not the same and not under the current laws. We cannot use the way things now work in this temporary nature as the basis for what was or will be probable.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1882 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 3:40 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
ringo
Member Posts: 18511 From: frozen wasteland Joined: 03-23-2005 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 1888 of 1960 (879368)
07-15-2020 12:10 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1886 by Kleinman
07-14-2020 8:12 PM
|
|
Re: If We Throw The ToE Away, What Will Replace It?
| Kleinman writes: The mathematics is complete, the paper is written, the only thing remaining is the last case study for the simulation of two drugs simultaneously for the Kishony experiment. That calculation on my computer system (an older I3 Intel chip running at about 1GHz) can only do 1.5 trillion replications/day. It will take about 200 trillion replications to get the one double beneficial mutation. |
Have you ever considered grid computing? I used to be hooked up to the World Community Grid and they had my computer working in its spare time on protein folding. You could hypothetically have thousands of computers working on your problem and returning their results.
"I've been to Moose Jaw, now I can die." -- John Wing
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1886 by Kleinman, posted 07-14-2020 8:12 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1891 by Kleinman, posted 07-15-2020 1:51 PM | | ringo has acknowledged this reply |
|
AZPaul3
Member Posts: 5244 From: Phoenix Joined: 11-06-2006 Member Rating: 2.4
|
|
|
Message 1889 of 1960 (879372)
07-15-2020 1:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1887 by dad
07-15-2020 10:15 AM
|
|
Re: Impossible is not probable
| The way genetics worked was simply not the same and not under the current laws. |
And your evidence is what? Fairy tales? The badly kludged oral histories of some ancient goat herders? Your gut feel? Rank ignorance and the stupidity of refusing to learn? Tell us about this "other, different, used-to-be" nature that never was.
Factio Republicana delenda est. I am antifa.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1887 by dad, posted 07-15-2020 10:15 AM | | dad has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1892 by dad, posted 07-15-2020 2:35 PM | | AZPaul3 has responded |
|
Kleinman
Member Posts: 528 From: United States Joined: 10-06-2016 Member Rating: 1.1
|
|
|
Message 1890 of 1960 (879373)
07-15-2020 1:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1887 by dad
07-15-2020 10:15 AM
|
|
Re: Impossible is not probable
| Kleinman writes: Why can't you use probability theory on evolution? | dad writes: The same reasons that we can't say it is not probable that wolves will eat grass and lions will eat grass one day soon. The basis for what is probable cannot be this present world and nature. For the past this holds true also. |
|
You should do a little more research on the subject, canines and felines already do eat grass. Why Do Dogs Eat Grass?Why do cats eat grass?DNA evolution is no different that any other type of stochastic process such as coin tossing, dice rolling, card drawing, etc. That's why when you do the math properly, you can predict the evolutionary process and do DNA identification. Do you doubt the validity of DNA identification because this is done based on the rules of probability theory. | Kleinman writes: After all, the mutation rate is simply the probability that an error on DNA replication will occur at the given site in a single replication | dad writes: Genetics do not appear to be the same as now in the future in the bible. The changes to animals will be fast, lightning fast. The changes to mankind also will be. They will live a thousand years again for example. It is not the mutation rate that will be responsible for this. It sounds more like a new set of laws working on animals and man and the world will be responsible. Nothing random about it. |
|
You have to play the hand your are dealt. The only real examples of evolution we have available which can be measured and repeated are experiments such as the Kishony and Lenski experiments. | dad writes: The same holds true of the past. The way genetics worked was simply not the same and not under the current laws. We cannot use the way things now work in this temporary nature as the basis for what was or will be probable. |
You can only say with certainty how genetics works right now. Why would you think that genetics worked differently in the past and will work differently in the future?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 1887 by dad, posted 07-15-2020 10:15 AM | | dad has responded |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 1893 by dad, posted 07-15-2020 2:52 PM | | Kleinman has responded |
|
™ Version 4.0 Beta
