Exposing the evolution theory. Part 2

Still Conman the Bullshit Peddler, I see. Still no new citations of your Bullshit papers?

Such idiotic comparisons are typical of Darwinoid propaganda. It would be funny if it wasn't so pathetic and dishonest.

Please describe a nested hierarchy that includes pre-Cambrian and Cambrian biota.

Like sensei, are you claiming there are biological populations that evolve in other than such a pattern?Whether we have the level of perfect information that would allow me to write a paper for you detailing pre-Cambrian and Cambrian patterns or not is unimportant (AI available). What would be important, world shattering, conclusively revealing, is if you show us one of these majik biological lineages that violates the nested hierarchy.Got any? Only takes one.

Angels.

Acute or obtuse?

Obtuse, obviously.

Tanypteryx:

---

Still Conman the Bullshit Peddler, I see. Still no new citations of your Bullshit papers?

---

Is that your best response? You certain can't explain the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments. That would require that you have some scientific training.

Dredge:

---

AZPaul3:

---

Like sensei, are you claiming there are biological populations that evolve in other than such a pattern?
​
Whether we have the level of perfect information that would allow me to write a paper for you detailing pre-Cambrian and Cambrian patterns or not is unimportant (AI available). What would be important, world shattering, conclusively revealing, is if you show us one of these majik biological lineages that violates the nested hierarchy.
​
Got any? Only takes one.

---

---

The layman still can't explain the simplest biological evolutionary experiments. But that's not surprising, neither can biologists.

Two of those things is common ancestry and evolution.

The populations in those experiments produced a nested hierarchy due to common ancestry and evolution.

The same way you survive with 200,000 retroviral insertions in your genome. These insertions are a fact.

Kleinman:

---

So, the physics and mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments are not evidence?

Taq:

---

The populations in those experiments produced a nested hierarchy due to common ancestry and evolution.

---

---

You are partially correct. The Kishony and Lenski biological evolutionary experiments do produce a nested hierarchy. Here is a video of the Kishony experiment that demonstrates that:
The Evolution of Bacteria on a “Mega-Plate” Petri Dish (Kishony Lab)
At time 1:42, the presenter actually draws in the nested hierarchy (family tree) for this example of the evolution of drug resistance.What this video and experiment do not demonstrate is the concept of (universal) common descent which you and other biologists try to imply with your nested hierarchy drawings of reptiles and birds, and fish and mammals.The Kishony and Lenski experiments demonstrate how slow descent with modification and adaptation works. You claim that sexual reproduction and recombination overcome this. However, what you are not considering is that if adaptive mutations must occur in a single allele, recombination will not make a difference.Consider this example, it takes 5 mutations to give a high-efficiency beta-lactamase allele (high resistance to penicillin class drugs) bacteria variant. Even if the bacteria can recombine, it will make no difference in the evolution of that allele. Recombination only accelerates biological adaptation when adaptive alleles can recombine and the probability of that happening depends on the frequencies of those adaptive alleles. But recombination will not accelerate biological adaptation if the accumulation of adaptive mutations must occur in a single allele. Your claim that humans and chimpanzees are related is not reasonable. There are too many genetic differences, even if we use your numbers. You are making an unreasonable extrapolation when drawing your nested hierarchies.

Kleinman:

---

Tell us more about how a germ cell line can get 200,000 retroviral infections without killing that line.

Taq:

---

The same way you survive with 200,000 retroviral insertions in your genome. These insertions are a fact.

---

---

I'm very surprised by you when you make this claim. Are you really a virologist? Aren't you aware of what HIV does to an untreated person with this infection? And your own link about koalas and the retroviral infection these animals have may drive them to extinction. Yet you seem to think that a lineage can get 200,000 of these infections when a single infection has such great lethality. I think you are having trouble recognizing what a fact is and what a misinterpretation of data is because this is a gross misinterpretation of the data by you.

The exogenous retrovirus may drive them to extinction, not the endogenous ones.You have over 200,000 endogenous retroviruses in your genome. This is a fact. You survive just fine with those ERV's. From the human genome paper:
Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome | NatureAdding up ERV class I-III is equal to 203,000 insertions.