Poll: Does the Theory of Evolution have practical applications?

[Alan Kleinman]

The 2LoT argument? Really? That is wrong in so many ways, not least of which is that thermal entropy is not the opposite of 'complexity'. There's a lot less entropy in a single cell than there is in a human body.

Information (order) is the converse of entropy (disorder). Mutations cause disorder.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics does not apply to evolution, as I showed you, [Staff Edit]

And, once again, you haven't shown ANYTHING to say that any other scientist is wrong and that you are right apart from you repeatedly claiming that they are wrong.

Do you think that population size has anything to do with DNA evolution?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Do you think that population size has anything to do with DNA evolution?

Evolution is the change of alleles in an individual organism based upon changes in their environment which are then passed down through breeding.

Population size does have an affect on evolution but no, I do not think that population size has a direct effect on DNA.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Evolution is the change of alleles in an individual organism based upon changes in their environment which are then passed down through breeding.

Population size does have an affect on evolution but no, I do not think that population size has a direct effect on DNA.

So, try to understand the change of alleles in an individual organism based on changes in their environment which are then passed down through breeding (replication) in the Kishony experiment. Why does it take a billion replications of the bacteria to get the correct mutation and allele that would enable that variant to grow in the niche with low concentration antibiotic?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

So, try to understand the change of alleles in an individual organism based on changes in their environment which are then passed down through breeding (replication) in the Kishony experiment. Why does it take a billion replications of the bacteria to get the correct mutation and allele that would enable that variant to grow in the niche with low concentration antibiotic?

I cannot answer that question since I am not a biologist. Although I can imagine that it depends on the how quickly the parent organism with the mutation lives for and if it can live long enough to pass on that mutation to its offspring. Bacteria though, that's where it can get iffy.

Though I doubt you have answer.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

I cannot answer that question since I am not a biologist. Although I can imagine that it depends on the how quickly the parent organism with the mutation lives for and if it can live long enough to pass on that mutation to its offspring. Bacteria though, that's where it can get iffy.

Though I doubt you have answer.

The change in allele occurs with mutation and mutation occurs with replication. If the mutation rate is 1e-9 that means that a particular mutation will occur on average about once every billion replications. There are some differences in DNA evolution when it comes to bacteria (haploid clonal replicators) and diploid sexually reproducing replicators that can do recombination. With a diploid, you get two DNA replications with each offspring replication and you are nowhere near ready to understand how recombination can affect DNA evolution.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

The change in allele occurs with mutation and mutation occurs with replication. If the mutation rate is 1e-9 that means that a particular mutation will occur on average about once every billion replications. There are some differences in DNA evolution when it comes to bacteria (haploid clonal replicators) and diploid sexually reproducing replicators that can do recombination. With a diploid, you get two DNA replications with each offspring replication and you are nowhere near ready to understand how recombination can affect DNA evolution.

Okay, so how often does the replication occur in the bacteria?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Okay, so how often does the replication occur in the bacteria?

DNA replication occurs each time the parent bacteria replicates, the copy of the DNA goes into the offspring and that's when there is a possibility of a mutation and an allele change. The rate of replication depends on the conditions the bacteria are subject. Under ideal conditions, bacterial populations can double every 20 minutes. In the Lenski experiment where his bacteria are subject to starvation, his populations do about 6-7 doublings/day. But the rate of population growth doesn't determine the probability of a particular mutation occurs, it is the number of replications of the DNA that determines that probability. That's why it is important to include population size (number of replications of the DNA) in any DNA evolution calculation. Biologists don't include this variable in their calculations and therefore get incorrect predictions and are unable to do the mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski experiments.

 

[Speedwell]

DNA replication occurs each time the parent bacteria replicates, the copy of the DNA goes into the offspring and that's when there is a possibility of a mutation and an allele change. The rate of replication depends on the conditions the bacteria are subject. Under ideal conditions, bacterial populations can double every 20 minutes. In the Lenski experiment where his bacteria are subject to starvation, his populations do about 6-7 doublings/day. But the rate of population growth doesn't determine the probability of a particular mutation occurs, it is the number of replications of the DNA that determines that probability. That's why it is important to include population size (number of replications of the DNA) in any DNA evolution calculation. Biologists don't include this variable in their calculations and therefore get incorrect predictions and are unable to do the mathematics of the Kishony and Lenski experiments.

The probability that a particular mutation will occur is not of much relevance.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

But the rate of population growth doesn't determine the probability of a particular mutation occurs, it is the number of replications of the DNA that determines that probability. That's why it is important to include population size (number of replications of the DNA) in any DNA evolution calculation.

Explain this to me.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

The probability that a particular mutation will occur is not of much relevance.

Some people would call the probability that a particular mutation will occur the "mutation rate".

 

[Speedwell]

Some people would call the probability that a particular mutation will occur the "mutation rate".

That's fine, but long odds of a particular mutation is not an argument against evolution.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Explain this to me.

Replication is the random trial. A random trial is an experiment. A simple example of a random trial is a coin toss. The possible outcome for that toss is a head or a tail. So when replication occurs (DNA is replicated) the possible outcomes are no mutation occurs or a mutation occurs. The probabilities for a coin toss are symmetric, that is, either outcome is equally likely. For DNA replication, the outcome is highly asymmetric, that is, it is far more likely that no mutation occurs. That's why it takes a billion replications just to get on average that one beneficial mutation.

 

[pitabread]

That's fine, but long odds of a particular mutation is not an argument against evolution.

Agreed. I think the fundamental issue here is it's treating evolution in a post-hoc lens (e.g. assuming that particular mutations have to occur in particular sequences). In actuality, there is a probability space of potentially viable outcomes. We don't have the information of what the entirety of that space looks like.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

Replication is the random trial. A random trial is an experiment. A simple example of a random trial is a coin toss. The possible outcome for that toss is a head or a tail. So when replication occurs (DNA is replicated) the possible outcomes are no mutation occurs or a mutation occurs. The probabilities for a coin toss are symmetric, that is, either outcome is equally likely. For DNA replication, the outcome is highly asymmetric, that is, it is far more likely that no mutation occurs. That's why it takes a billion replications just to get on average that one beneficial mutation.

Where do you get the number of a billion replications from?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

That's fine, but long odds of a particular mutation is not an argument against evolution.

I'm not arguing against evolution, I'm arguing against the ToE. And it's not just the long odds, it's the multiplication rule of probabilities that sinks the ToE because it is the joint probability of those long odds. The way evolutionary processes work against those long odds and joint probabilities is by getting massively large numbers into the game, for example, a billion players for each evolutionary step in the Kishony experiment. Do you think that reptiles can achieve the population sizes and recovery rates that bacteria can?

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I'm not arguing against evolution, I'm arguing against the ToE. And it's not just the long odds, it's the multiplication rule of probabilities that sinks the ToE because it is the joint probability of those long odds. The way evolutionary processes work against those long odds and joint probabilities is by getting massively large numbers into the game, for example, a billion players for each evolutionary step in the Kishony experiment. Do you think that reptiles can achieve the population sizes and recovery rates that bacteria can?

It's not that the problem is the large numbers, it's that you seem unable to accept that evolution can occur the way the theory of evolution describes with the number of animals in the world.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Agreed. I think the fundamental issue here is it's treating evolution in a post-hoc lens (e.g. assuming that particular mutations have to occur in particular sequences). In actuality, there is a probability space of potentially viable outcomes. We don't have the information of what the entirety of that space looks like.

You do when you claim that reptiles evolve into birds or fish evolve into mammals. Sequence the DNA, count the total number of genetic differences and from the genetic differences, determine how many replications necessary to make that genetic transformation.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Where do you get the number of a billion replications from?

From Kishony and before Kishony said this from the mathematics that I've had published before he ran his experiment. Here's where Kishony gives the number of a billion (for example at 0:55):
EXTRA MINUTES - SUPERBBUGS (Harvard Experiment explained)
I published the mathematics and predicted the behavior of the Kishony experiment before he ran his experiment, you can read that paper here:
The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection

Look at Figure 1 for a mutation rate of 1e-9. For a population size of a billion, the probability of the beneficial mutation occurring is about 0.6. If the population size goes to 10 billion, the probability of the beneficial mutation occurring goes to about 1. I have another publication out there which explains why his two drug experiment doesn't work and explains why 3 drug therapy for HIV does work.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

From Kishony and before Kishony said this from the mathematics that I've had published before he ran his experiment. Here's where Kishony gives the number of a billion (for example at 0:55):
EXTRA MINUTES - SUPERBBUGS (Harvard Experiment explained)
I published the mathematics and predicted the behavior of the Kishony experiment before he ran his experiment, you can read that paper here:
The basic science and mathematics of random mutation and natural selection

Look at Figure 1 for a mutation rate of 1e-9. For a population size of a billion, the probability of the beneficial mutation occurring is about 0.6. If the population size goes to 10 billion, the probability of the beneficial mutation occurring goes to about 1. I have another publication out there which explains why his two drug experiment doesn't work and explains why 3 drug therapy for HIV does work.

Okay, you've answered my questions.

Now, here's a question for you, and I do want to answer this fully and wholly: why do you think that all of your stuff is correct, and the work of all the other scientists in the world is wrong?