Creationists: Explain your understanding of microevolution and macroevolution

[Alan Kleinman]

I see that you had to strawman again. Observations of fossils can be experiments. An inability to understand this tells us that you do not understand the scientific method.

Whatever^2

 

[Hans Blaster]

Oh boy Hans, are you going to present experimental evidence of macroevolution? Perhaps you should try and figure out how microevolution works first.

I really hope it doesn't take 2000 years to figure out that macroevolution doesn't exist. I gave Frank a number to check out where microevolution ends and macroevolution starts but he doesn't have the chops to check it out.

That's not even what the 2000 years was doing in my post.

A more appropriate analogy would be: will people still be denying evolution for ideological reasons 2000 years after it was clearly demonstrated. Alas, given your example, I suspect the answer is yes.

 

[Frank Robert]

Ask them.

No need too, they reviewed the math not your evolutionary fables.

You asked me the question, I gave you the answer. If you don't have the chops to check it out,

I gave you my reasons it doesn't matter to me what you believe and name calling won't get you to where you want be.

As I noted above: Nothing is stopping you from making the claim at PS that you met Miller's challenge. This could be a great opportunity for you, or not. I wish you would but my guess is that you will not.

You can take the opportunity and satisfy my curiosity or prove my prediction.

just keep on believing that bacteria can evolve into humans.

Notwithstanding your objection common descent is the accepted science.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Be patient Hans, even you can learn how to apply this math to DNA adaptive evolution. We almost have you understanding the "at least one rule" mathematics for the Kishony experiment. Did you know there is another way to model the Kishony experiment mathematically? It's a random walk process called a Markov Process. Ah, forget it, we better stick with the jr high school level math for now.

If there is a more condescending poster on this forum, I can't recall.

 

[Frank Robert]

If there is a more condescending poster on this forum, I can't recall.

Alan has a strange notion on how to influence people and win friends.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Whatever^2

I can help you to figure out what is and what is not evidence. Right now you have indicated multiple times that you have no evidence that supports your WAG.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

That's not even what the 2000 years was doing in my post.

A more appropriate analogy would be: will people still be denying evolution for ideological reasons 2000 years after it was clearly demonstrated. Alas, given your example, I suspect the answer is yes.

Does that mean you aren't going to present any experimental evidence of macroevolution? Perhaps you want to use Subduction Zone's argument that observations are experiments?

I'm not denying evolution, I'm presenting the correct thermodynamics and mathematics of this physical process. Of course, I use observation for my evidence, observation of experiments. It's real, it's measurable, and it's repeatable! How many times does Kishony have to repeat his experiment for you to believe it?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

No need too, they reviewed the math not your evolutionary fables.

Now you are a mind reader. Did you learn how to do that when you learned how to read fossil tea leaves?

I gave you my reasons it doesn't matter to me what you believe and name calling won't get you to where you want be.

I got your reason, you are chicken.

 

[pitabread]

I'm presenting the correct thermodynamics and mathematics of this physical process.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

If there is a more condescending poster on this forum, I can't recall.

Condescending with the correct physical and mathematical explanation of biological evolution. Would you care to make a guess at why it took 30 years for the Lenski populations to accumulate about 100 adaptive mutations? That's 500,000,000 million replications/day * 365days/year * 30 years! And Lenski ran his experiment in parallel * 12.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Alan has a strange notion on how to influence people and win friends.

Oh no, Frank! OK, reptiles evolve into birds and fish evolve into mammals. Can we be friends now? Speaking of birds, you know that saying, what came first, the chicken or the egg? Shouldn't it be, what came first, two chickens or the egg?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Condescending with the correct physical and mathematical explanation of biological evolution. Would you care to make a guess at why it took 30 years for the Lenski populations to accumulate about 100 adaptive mutations? That's 500,000,000 million replications/day * 365days/year * 30 years! And Lenski ran his experiment in parallel * 12.

Do you actually read the specific posts you reply to, or do you just push forward your agenda willy-nilly? The post I was replying to was extremely condescending to me regarding your perception of my mathematical skills. For the record, you do not know my mathematical skills.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Somebody do signature verification on that ballot.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Do you actually read the specific posts you reply to, or do you just push forward your agenda willy-nilly? The post I was replying to was extremely condescending to me regarding your perception of my mathematical skills. For the record, you do not know my mathematical skills.

Let your light shine.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Let your light shine.

you ain't worth it

 

[Alan Kleinman]

you ain't worth it

Too bad, and I actually started to think that you understood the Kishony experiment. Perhaps you do and don't want to admit it.

Does that mean you are heading back to the peanut gallery on this thread, if so Adios?

 

[Hans Blaster]

Too bad, and I actually started to think that you understood the Kishony experiment. Perhaps you do and don't want to admit it.

Does that mean you are heading back to the peanut gallery on this thread, if so Adios?

Again, you either fail to comprehend the context of the message or choose not to.

I do not feel like taking your "math quiz" as you assess my worthiness to discuss your work.

I learned more from the 3 minute video you posted about the Kishony experiment than 3+ days of your postings.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Perhaps you want to use Subduction Zone's argument that observations are experiments?

If you really don't understand how observation and field work can be experiments, then there is really no hope for you to understand the nature of science, particularly as related to a science like evolution.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I was going to say, thanks for the offer. But why not? Tell us what is evidence and what isn't. Let's see if I can remember anything from my psychiatry lectures in medical school. I hope we don't have to 5150 you.

I would suggest an apology for violating the rules of the forum if you want me to proceed.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Does that mean you aren't going to present any experimental evidence of macroevolution? Perhaps you want to use Subduction Zone's argument that observations are experiments?

I'm not denying evolution, I'm presenting the correct thermodynamics and mathematics of this physical process. Of course, I use observation for my evidence, observation of experiments. It's real, it's measurable, and it's repeatable! How many times does Kishony have to repeat his experiment for you to believe it?

I see you are still using strawman arguments. And after I tried to make your error even clearer to you. How do you expect to learn when you effectively shut your mind down to new information?