Rebuttal To Creationists - "Since We Can't Directly Observe Evolution..."

That's rich coming from someone who is a known liar, charlatan and a fraud.

It's up to you to demonstrate that the Kishony and Lenski experiments prove UCD. That has nothing to do with thermodynamics. You still can't address anything I post.

Kleinman:

---

For a single selection pressure:
The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection
​

Kleinman:

---

What this empirical example demonstrates is that the sequence of mutations must occur in an order ofever increasing fitness in order for the evolutionary process to have a reasonable chance of occurring.

Taq:

---

That is not true for sexual populations. In sexual populations, beneficial alleles fix independently and are moved from separate genetic backgrounds into the same genetic background. Of course, you will never address this.

---

---

---

Yeah, we know your claim that 3 drug combination therapy doesn't work for the treatment of HIV, and combination therapy doesn't work for weeds and insects. You are a brilliant virologist. No wonder biologists can't explain how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail with your kind of thinking.

The very same way that you think the Lenski and Kishony experiment, drug resistance, and cancer drug resistance prove UCD. Category error. Bears are mammals, but not all mammals are bears. Markov processes can relate to thermodynamics in some systems, but not others. Entropy is about the energy available for work in a system, and you aren't addressing that at all.Let's say we start with a handful of DNA molecules of about 3 kbp, some primers specific to the 5' and 3' ends of the DNA molecules, free nucleotides, buffers/salts, and a polymerase. We cycle the temperature up and down between 60 and 95 C about 40 times. What we end up with is far fewer free nucleotides and a whole bunch of 3 kbp DNA molecules.Has entropy gone up or down? How do you measure it? How do the sequences factor in to your calculation?

And you still won't address it.

Kleinman:

---

You are confused, it takes a billion replications in each experiment for each adaptive step.

Taq:

---

It's up to you to demonstrate that the Kishony and Lenski experiments prove UCD.

---

---

Oh, the Kishony and Lenski experiments demonstrate common descent, it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation for a single selection pressure in a constant environment.

Kleinman:

---

If descent with modification goes on, eventually the DNA will be random sequences.

Taq:

---

That has nothing to do with thermodynamics.

---

---

Sure it does, slow learner, that's called entropy.

Kleinman:

---

You are an idiot and don't know what you are talking about. You dummy.

Taq:

---

You still can't address anything I post.

---

---

Did you post about how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail? Or how about giving us an example of how a Markov process works? You can also tell us how a germ cell line can have 200k retroviral infections that do no harm, not about some retroviral infection in koalas that threatens them with extinction. I'll stick with explaining how drug resistance evolves. For a single selection condition:
The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection
And for multiple simultaneous selection pressures:
The mathematics of random mutation and natural selection for multiple simultaneous selection pressures and the evolution of antimicrobial drug resistance
You can tell us how sexual reproduction causes 3 drug combination therapy for HIV to fail and why combination selection pressures don't work on weeds and insects.

So you are saying that the Kishony and Lenski experiments support UCD using your own criteria. This is how antibiotic resistance evolves in sexual populations, and you won't address it. The multiple mutations conferring CM resistance independently move towards fixation and are moved into the same genetic background in the sexually reproducing populations.You try to deflect from these findings by talking about constant environments, as if that addresses anything in these experiments or your misapplication of math from asexual populations to sexual populations.Yes, I did. You ignore it every time. For example, I have discussed this paper: Sexual recombination and increased mutation rate expedite evolution of Escherichia coli in varied fitness landscapesYou just flat out refused to discuss it.

quote:

---

Theoretical impacts of mutation rate and sexual recombination on population structures. a Mutationally limited fitness landscape, where most mutations fix in a single sweep with very little inter-clonal competition. b Increased mutation rate over (a), more competition and faster evolution observed, but some mutations are lost due to inter-clonal competition. c Adding sexual recombination to (a), due to few available beneficial mutations, no strong influence on evolution is observed. d Both sexual recombination and increase in mutation rate from (a), more rapid evolution is observed and fewer beneficial mutations are lost due to clonal interference

---

quote:

---

Fitness improvements during ALE. Black: asexual ara− populations. Blue: asexual ara+ populations. Turquoise: genderless ara− populations. Magenta: genderless ara+ populations. a Chloramphenicol resistance vs. generations in G9+CM evolution. b Trimethoprim resistance vs. generations in G9+TM evolution. c Growth rate vs. generations in G9 evolution. The dotted line in a and b represent the chosen threshold antibiotic resistance level

---

Kleinman:

---

Tell us how phages make UCD possible. And then you can give us your wisdom about Markov processes, and the second law of thermodynamics.

Taq:

---

The very same way that you think the Lenski and Kishony experiment, drug resistance, and cancer drug resistance prove UCD.

---

---

Don't be silly, the Kishony and Lenski experiment takes a billion replications for each adaptive step for a single selection pressure in a constant environment. It's all about the multiplication rule of probabilities. Each selection pressure causes another instance of the multiplication rule to be applied to the evolutionary process. That's why 3 drug combination therapy for the treatment of HIV works. This is really hard for you to understand but that is how it works.

Kleinman:

---

Tell us how some Markov processes don't apply to the second law of thermodynamics.

Taq:

---

Category error. Bears are mammals, but not all mammals are bears. Markov processes can relate to thermodynamics in some systems, but not others. Entropy is about the energy available for work in a system, and you aren't addressing that at all.
​
Let's say we start with a handful of DNA molecules of about 3 kbp, some primers specific to the 5' and 3' ends of the DNA molecules, free nucleotides, buffers/salts, and a polymerase. We cycle the temperature up and down between 60 and 95 C about 40 times. What we end up with is far fewer free nucleotides and a whole bunch of 3 kbp DNA molecules.
​
Has entropy gone up or down? How do you measure it? How do the sequences factor in to your calculation?

---

---

Markov processes always generate entropy. And random mutations which cause diversification of the population will ultimately lead to random genetic sequences which is the end result of an entropy-producing process. Of course, you are an expert in Markov processes, aren't you? Tell us how to formulate a Markov chain.

And you are saying that they prove UCD. This is exactly how you are treating my explanation of the Lederberg experiment. False. And yet we see large swaths of non-random sequence. Your claims don't comport with reality.

Then why don't you use Mendel's math in your calculations. You have failed to do so in every experiment that uses sexual reproduction.

Kleinman:

---

Oh, the Kishony and Lenski experiments demonstrate common descent, it takes a billion replications for each adaptive mutation for a single selection pressure in a constant environment.

Taq:

---

So you are saying that the Kishony and Lenski experiments support UCD using your own criteria.

---

---

There's a difference between "common descent" and "universal common descent". Do I have to explain that difference to you?

Kleinman:

---

Did you post about how drug resistance evolves and why cancer treatments fail? Or how about giving us an example of how a Markov process works?

Taq:

---

This is how antibiotic resistance evolves in sexual populations, and you won't address it. The multiple mutations conferring CM resistance independently move towards fixation and are moved into the same genetic background in the sexually reproducing populations.

---

---

So that's why you believe that 3 drug combination therapy doesn't work for the treatment of HIV and combination selection pressures don't work for weeds and insects. You really know how to treat infectious diseases, don't treat them at all because they will all evolve resistance.

You are the one saying that the Lenski and Kishony experiments prove UCD. Don't look at me. Now you are saying that 3 drug combination therapy and combination selection pressure in weeds proves UCD.

Kleinman:

---

Mendel did the math for his observations,

Taq:

---

Then why don't you use Mendel's math in your calculations.

---

---

Using Mendel's math only reduces the probability of a recombination event and complicates the calculation which only confuses you even more.

Kleinman:

---

I can explain the physics and math of Darwinian evolution and correlate this explanation to biological evolutionary experiments to predict the behavior of these experiments.

Taq:

---

You have failed to do so in every experiment that uses sexual reproduction.

---

---

I know, 3 drug combination therapy doesn't work for the treatment of HIV, and combination selection pressures don't work for weeds and insects. You think that shuffling genes (recombination) is a much larger factor than it really is. The reality is that recombination has very little effect on the evolution of drug resistance. That is why 3 drug therapy works for the treatment of HIV and combination selection pressures works for the treatment of weeds and insects.

Kleinman:

---

There's a difference between "common descent" and "universal common descent". Do I have to explain that difference to you?

Taq:

---

You are the one saying that the Lenski and Kishony experiments prove UCD. Don't look at me.

---

---

You are confused.

Kleinman:

---

So that's why you believe that 3 drug combination therapy doesn't work for the treatment of HIV and combination selection pressures don't work for weeds and insects. You really know how to treat infectious diseases, don't treat them at all because they will all evolve resistance.

Taq:

---

Now you are saying that 3 drug combination therapy and combination selection pressure in weeds proves UCD.

---

---

Sure, HIV is evolving into a wookie and weeds are evolving into "the thing".

I'm not confused. You are claiming that the Lenski and Kishony experiment are proof of UCD in the very same way you are saying that I am trying to prove UCD with the Lederberg experiment. Now you are saying that we shouldn't use 3 drug treatment programs with HIV. Why?