Creationists: Explain your understanding of microevolution and macroevolution

[Frank Robert]

And your belief that algae growing in colonies is an example of macroevolution?.

First, I don't believe in macroevoluion, I affirm it. Use a bit of logic. If you want to convince people don't go out of your way to insult them.

Explain to us how this causes reptiles to evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals.

You fail to take correction. Birds and reptiles are related through a common ancestor. Birds are dinosaurs.

Write out the correct probability equations that describe DNA microevolutionary adaptation. I'll even give you a hint. Start by identifying the random trial(s) and the possible outcomes for the random trial(s).

Once again you fail elementary schcool logic. If you can not convince the experts why do you continually ask non-experts? I am sure you know what Eisenstein said about people doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Go ahead and notify the National Library of Medicine that my papers are based on incorrect assumptions and an incorrect application of the rules of probability theory. You won't do that and that's enough proof for anyone except perhaps a macroevolutionist.

LOL! Trying to shift the burden of proof again. Do you seriously think that the NIH is unaware that crank papers slip through? They realize that they will do little if any harm. Your papers are an excellent example. The only citations appear to be self citations. Researchers see right through that.

They appear to have the more than reasonable attitude that it is better to include some bad papers rather than to exclude some good papers by mistake.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Statistics in Medicine is vanity press? How about the fact that these papers are in the National Library of Medicine!

Isn't that just a database of papers from various journals? The kind of database most funding agencies *require* that the outputs of their grants be deposited in?

(I checked, and not surprisingly, I don't have anything in PubMed.)

 

[Subduction Zone]

You still haven't answered the basic question of what the difference is between micro and macro evolution which was asked long before that Oh' keeper of the flame... look to your own house before you start whining about what other people do or don't do.

He is as others have pointed out a one trick pony and he has done his trick for us. He does not appear to have anything more than that.

 

[Hans Blaster]

The author of my introductory thermodynamics text made the following statement in the preface of the book: "Entropy like beauty is in the eye of the beholder".


What do you mean that information must be useful?

You're the one making claims about order being related to fitness, not me.

 

[Hans Blaster]

LOL! Trying to shift the burden of proof again. Do you seriously think that the NIH is unaware that crank papers slip through? They realize that they will do little if any harm. Your papers are an excellent example. The only citations appear to be self citations. Researchers see right through that.

They appear to have the more than reasonable attitude that it is better to include some bad papers rather than to exclude some good papers by mistake.

The one I looked at seem to be more "trivial" than "crank". If he works at it he might reach the publication record of our old friend MM.

 

[Subduction Zone]

The one I looked at seem to be more "trivial" than "crank". If he works at it he might reach the publication record of our old friend MM.

You are right. It is his interpretation of his own work that crosses over into the "crank" territory.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

You still haven't answered the basic question of what the difference is between micro and macro evolution which was asked long before that Oh' keeper of the flame... look to your own house before you start whining about what other people do or don't do.

There is no such thing as macroevolution, there is only microevolution where each adaptive evolutionary step is joint to the others by the multiplication rule.

 

[Phred]

There is no such thing as macroevolution, there is only microevolution where each adaptive evolutionary step is joint to the others by the multiplication rule.

So you can tell us with certainty something you can't define doesn't exist.

Got it.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

The one I looked at seem to be more "trivial" than "crank". If he works at it he might reach the publication record of our old friend MM.

Trivial but correct. That's why it accurately predicted the behavior of the Kishony experiment before the experiment was performed.

And are you ever going to answer Phred's question that he asked you several pages back? His question is in post #1167.

 

[Subduction Zone]

There is no such thing as macroevolution, there is only microevolution where each adaptive evolutionary step is joint to the others by the multiplication rule.

And yet we have observed macroevolution in the lab and in the field.

It appears that you do not even understand the terms that you are using.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Trivial but correct. That's why it accurately predicted the behavior of the Kishony experiment before the experiment was performed.

And are you ever going to answer Phred's question that he asked you several pages back? His question is in post #1167.

Really!? Where did you do that?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

So you can tell us with certainty something you can't define doesn't exist.

Got it.

Oh, are you going to show us that macroevolution exists? Is it algae growing in colonies or is it transposons?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Oh, are you going to show us that macroevolution exists? Is it algae growing in colonies or is it transposons?

We probably cannot do so since it appears that you do not understand the concept of scientific evidence.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

And yet we have observed macroevolution in the lab and in the field.

It appears that you do not even understand the terms that you are using.

I know, I've seen all 0 of your examples of macroevolution. Oh, wait, you have algae growing in colonies and transposons. That explains how reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals. The childlike simplicity of it all.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Really!? Where did you do that?

It's in that paper you won't read.

 

[Subduction Zone]

But just in case:

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations

https://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/news/100201_speciation

Observed Instances of Speciation

Do I need to post more?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

We probably cannot do so since it appears that you do not understand the concept of scientific evidence.

You don't mean experiments. Have you ever studied the Kishony and Lenski biological evolution experiments?

 

[Subduction Zone]

I know, I've seen all 0 of your examples of macroevolution. Oh, wait, you have algae growing in colonies and transposons. That explains how reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals. The childlike simplicity of it all.

I just posted quite a few. None of them are your strawman.

If you can debate properly then you will get more specific answers. As long as you use strawman arguments and other improper debate strategies you get scraps and bones.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You don't mean experiments. Have you ever studied the Kishony and Lenski biological evolution experiments?

Once again you do not understand the concept of scientific evidence.

Did I mention experiments?