- Jun 4, 2013
- 10,132
- 996
- Country
- United States
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Non-Denom
- Marital Status
- Widowed
- Politics
- US-Others
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Yes, the programmers. Garbage in, garbage out.....Are you suggesting that the computers used to construct such trees use ‘imagination’?
Oh don't I know. Some of those with the strongest faith on here claim to have no faith at all but are merely practicing science. Not realizing they have simply inserted the "word" science into their doctrine of faith to protect their fragile ego's.
That's why you notice in almost every post they find it necessary to participate in ad-hominem attacks of one sort or another. An attempt to salvage their ego and inflate themselves above others.... They equate this with meaning they have won the argument, when it reality it shows they lost it and need to resort to such to salvage that damaged ego.
Oh agreed. Zealots of all religions (even ones that call themselves science) are the same. Closed to new ideas.Dare I say that it is the same thing religious folks do when they don't really know the Word of God: attack and attempt to save face (of self, and the idols)?
Academia and organized, institutional religion have the same structure, which is why the psychology is so similar to religious people, and why, therefore, they clash so often.
Yes, the programmers. Garbage in, garbage out.....
.Oh agreed. Zealots of all religions (even ones that call themselves science) are the same. Closed to new ideas.
Justa if you don’t understand science just say so. It’s obvious to everyone that you don’t . Kaon, science is a tool to figure out how nature works ,period . When religious leaders pull stuff out of their behinds and claim that it’s scientific they deserve to be chewed up and spit out not emulated
I believe data is the word you’re looking for.
Didn’t you post a canine phylogenetic trees earlier? I thought you were satisfied that it was accurate?
How was it constructed?
By the researchers understanding they were all the same species... Correct info in, correct info out....
I asked how, not who.
Did they not use similar methods to the trees you claim are garbage?
No, their programming started with the knowledge they were all the same species. It is who, in every single case. The programming is given statistical weight by the parameters the programmer decides what to weight it for.
Let's see, knowing they are the same species you weight the statistics to give you a tree of direct lineage.How do the parameters differ?
It sounds like you are making vague excuses, and that you will only accept data that reinforces your preconceptions. Classic cognitive dissonance.
Unless you can point out specific errors in the construction of such trees I’m afraid I’ll have to go with the scientific consensus and disregard your unsubstantiated objections as hot air.
The common descent tests are based upon false premises. Garbage in, garbage out.They use DNA tests to determine the baby daddy and they also use them to determine common descent . The common descent tests are more sophisticated.
No, their programming started with the knowledge they were all the same species. It is who, in every single case. The programming is given statistical weight by the parameters the programmer decides what to weight it for.
How do the parameters differ?
It sounds like you are making vague excuses, and that you will only accept data that reinforces your preconceptions. Classic cognitive dissonance.
This is just gobbly-gook.
Phylogenetic algorithms don't care whether the DNA sequences used are the same species are not.
Hmm, and yet you cant even do that, just make ad-hominem attacks. See post #119.What he is writing sounds like something you'd expect from Star Trek-type technobabble. It's a smattering of technical terminology mixed with gibberish.
Not if the data is entered correctly, that's why they don't point to an ever-bifurcating branching tree of life but instead point to cross-contamination by HGT and individual gene trajectories that are irreconcilably different.
But before the data was entered correctly, it showed a ever-bifurcating branching pattern because half the data about HGT was ignored during the first decades of genomic research.....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?