Creationists: Explain your understanding of microevolution and macroevolution

[Subduction Zone]

I like to use experimental evidence to correlate with my math. You know, like the Kishony and Lenski experiments. What experimental evidence do you have for macroevolution?


Do you mean one of you so-called "on topic" journals where they can't explain the Kishony and Lenski experiment?

By the way, do you think Lenski is ever going to restart his experiment? I don't think he will.

Unfortunately you have demonstrated that you only like to cherry pick. You ignore corrections of your gross errors, such as assuming that specific mutations had to occur. And once again that evolution has been explained. Your disagreement with their conclusions is not a refutation. If you want to contribute try to find an on topic journal. Until then your "theory" (t is not a theory, in fact you told us it is not even a hypothesis) will probably not pass peer review.

And since Lenski is getting up in years he is unlikely to restart it. Tell me why you think that he would need to? You will probably be caught in another error.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

how many times do you have to be told that extrapolating from only two or three points is problematic at best. And don't tell me sigmoidal since that is as good as any for pointing out the fallacy of tangent approximation to the general curve.

So, what's your curve for macroevolution?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Unfortunately you have demonstrated that you only like to cherry pick. You ignore corrections of your gross errors, such as assuming that specific mutations had to occur. And once again that evolution has been explained. Your disagreement with their conclusions is not a refutation. If you want to contribute try to find an on topic journal. Until then your "theory" (t is not a theory, in fact you told us it is not even a hypothesis) will probably not pass peer review.

Too bad you don't have any cherries to pick, sorry, I have the whole tree.

And since Lenski is getting up in years he is unlikely to restart it. Tell me why you think that he would need to? You will probably be caught in another error.

If Lenski hasn't figured out his experiment by now, he probably never will.

 

[Hans Blaster]

Why the idea of a joint probability of the sickle cell mutation and lactase persistence mutation is nonsense.

Let's imagine two populations (tribes, villages, etc.) far from each other. In one a child is born with a mutation that permits lactase to remain active past infancy, another is born with the sickle cell trait.

Location 1: Tropical west Africa.

A boy is born with the sickle cell mutation. It provides some protection against the endemic malaria his people live with and the boy is fortunate to survive to take a wife and have several children. Those of his children that have the new mutant variant are more likely to survive the malaria and have children of their own. This continues for generations until the number of persons in the area with the gene grows. Eventually couples where both have the gene have children and some of those children are born with two copies of the mutant gene and get the sickle cell disease. An equilibrium forms balancing the cost of sickle cell disease on survival to parenthood and the benefits against malaria.

Location 2: East Africa.

A boy is born with a mutation that keeps his lactase gene active past early childhood. The people of his village grow crops and keep some cattle for meat and leather. Like the neighboring villages, the mothers of his village supplement the diet of their infants with milk from the cattle until the child no longer tolerates it. The boy continues to consume milk through his adolescence the other villagers think he's a bit weird. He takes a wife and has some children. Some of those can also drink milk past infancy as can some of their children and so on. Though the benefits aren't obvious at the moment to the villagers, the gene propagates through the local population until it becomes so common that they add dairying to their herding. [This would also occur if the gene spread somewhat through the population as a neutral mutation and then the villagers decided to try milk (perhaps in desperation) and then adopted it as part of their diet.]

Two mutations with advantages in two populations that are independent. No reason for them to be associated.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Wookiees only exist in movies, fiction just like macroevolution. If you only understood the physics and mathematics of microevolution, we might be able to bring you back to reality.

Why not, I know people 7 ft tall and I know people who are hirsute, why is the combination impossible? You keep claiming that you know physics and math better than the rest of us, but you present no physics and your math isn't anything complicated, so what is your line that we cannot pass.

 

[Hans Blaster]

physics and mathematics of microevolution

Physics? I don't think so. No understanding of physics is needed for this.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

So, what's your curve for macroevolution?

As a brutal answer, it is less than the one that yours defines as at best an outer bound if you even understand the terms.

Physics? I don't think so. No understanding of physics is needed for this.

No, but it is one of his mantras to try and buffalo biologists.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Too bad you don't have any cherries to pick, sorry, I have the whole tree.


If Lenski hasn't figured out his experiment by now, he probably never will.

LOL! Nope, you already told us that you do not. Too bad that you do not understand the scientific method.

And Lenski understands his experiment far better than you do. Here is a hint: He knows what a hypothesis is.

 

[Frank Robert]

Only that I've failed to teach introductory probability theory to a believer in macroevolution. My suggestion is don't take up a career as a gambler.

Yes, you failed over and over and over and over ad nauseam. Did you ever ask yourself why no one appears to agree with your introductory math? Perhaps you are just unable to explain it correctly, the alternative is that it is that it leads to a incorrect conclusion.

 

[Frank Robert]

Chimpanzees certainly don't have a vast vocabulary. What mutations do Chimps need to increase their vocabulary?

What is the selection pressure to do so?

Are you aware that chimps can outperform humans at some memory tasks.
Chimps outperform humans at memory task

Perhaps memory is more important for chimps than vocabulary.

 

[Frank Robert]

Don't forget, I have the mathematical and empirical evidence. Of course, you don't understand the math.

Apparently, you are only one that understands it as no one else appears to agree with you.

 

[Frank Robert]

A simple analogy would be if you want to try and win two lotteries, you have to buy large numbers of tickets for each lottery.

Richard Lustig came to prominence for winning relatively large prizes in seven state-sponsored lottery games from 1993 to 2010.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Why the idea of a joint probability of the sickle cell mutation and lactase persistence mutation is nonsense.

The sickle cell mutation is just an example of an adaptive mutation against malaria. It can be any adaptive mutation for any particular selection pressure. It makes just as much sense as you using a lactase persistence mutation for your example. All adaptive mutations are particular mutations and the joint probability of any two particular adaptive mutations must be computed using the multiplication rule.

Let's imagine two populations (tribes, villages, etc.) far from each other. In one a child is born with a mutation that permits lactase to remain active past infancy, another is born with the sickle cell trait.

Why not the parents have lactase persister alleles and the child is born with a mutation that stops lactase persistence?

Location 1: Tropical west Africa.

A boy is born with the sickle cell mutation. It provides some protection against the endemic malaria his people live with and the boy is fortunate to survive to take a wife and have several children. Those of his children that have the new mutant variant are more likely to survive the malaria and have children of their own. This continues for generations until the number of persons in the area with the gene grows. Eventually couples where both have the gene have children and some of those children are born with two copies of the mutant gene and get the sickle cell disease. An equilibrium forms balancing the cost of sickle cell disease on survival to parenthood and the benefits against malaria.

Location 2: East Africa.

A boy is born with a mutation that keeps his lactase gene active past early childhood. The people of his village grow crops and keep some cattle for meat and leather. Like the neighboring villages, the mothers of his village supplement the diet of their infants with milk from the cattle until the child no longer tolerates it. The boy continues to consume milk through his adolescence the other villagers think he's a bit weird. He takes a wife and has some children. Some of those can also drink milk past infancy as can some of their children and so on. Though the benefits aren't obvious at the moment to the villagers, the gene propagates through the local population until it becomes so common that they add dairying to their herding. [This would also occur if the gene spread somewhat through the population as a neutral mutation and then the villagers decided to try milk (perhaps in desperation) and then adopted it as part of their diet.]

Two mutations with advantages in two populations that are independent. No reason for them to be associated.

The point you are missing is that you are considering only a single adaptive mutation in a lineage. For that lineage to improve reproductive fitness against the selection conditions of that environment, more adaptive mutations must occur on some member of that variant. If the population size of that variant is small, the probability of another adaptive mutation occurring on some member of that variant population will be small. But as the population grows, that probability improves. The joint probability of additional adaptive mutations is computed by multiplying their individual probabilities. It doesn't matter what the selection conditions are, it is a simple binomial probability problem, does the adaptive mutation occur or does it not occur on replication.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Why not, I know people 7 ft tall and I know people who are hirsute, why is the combination impossible? You keep claiming that you know physics and math better than the rest of us, but you present no physics and your math isn't anything complicated, so what is your line that we cannot pass.

You can get all kinds of genetic combinations, but only certain combinations give an improvement in reproductive fitness. You compute the joint probability of those occurring using the multiplication rule.

I'm pretty sure I understand the physics of evolution better than you. My major field for my PhD in mechanical engineering was thermodynamics. Do you think you are ready to learn the physics of evolution? Actually, the physics is not all that much more complicated than the math.

Here are the laws of physic that govern the basic principles of Darwinian evolution. Evolutionary competition is governed by the first law of thermodynamics and DNA microevolution is a second law of thermodynamics process. If you think you understand the laws of physics, why would I say this?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Physics? I don't think so. No understanding of physics is needed for this.

This explains why you can't formulate the correct mathematics of evolution.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Apparently, you are only one that understands it as no one else appears to agree with you.

I don't expect that the people who believe that macroevolution is a real thing to agree with me. These are also the same people that can't describe mathematically microevolution correctly.

 

[pitabread]

I don't expect that the people who believe that macroevolution is a real thing to agree with me.

What's the alternative?

The cumulation of various lines of evidence (genetics, fossils, biogeography, developmental biology, comparative anatomy, etc) all support the idea that life shares common ancestry.

If you're suggesting an alternative, what is that alternative? How do we otherwise explain what we see in nature?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Richard Lustig came to prominence for winning relatively large prizes in seven state-sponsored lottery games from 1993 to 2010.

Richard Lustig - Wikipedia

In an interview with ABC News, Lustig explained that his method is to re-invest all of his winnings back into the lottery.[2] He also recommends using hand-picked sequential numbers and using the same numbers repeatedly.[7]

At win #5, he got $842,152.91. With that money he got, Win 6: $73,658.06, Win 7: $98,992.92. Not bad, he only lost about $650,000 of his winnings. They also don't tell you how much he spent on his first win.

So, are you going to buy his book and make yourself rich? Las Vegas depends on people like you.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

What is the selection pressure to do so?

Are you aware that chimps can outperform humans at some memory tasks.
Chimps outperform humans at memory task

Perhaps memory is more important for chimps than vocabulary.

So you think that chimps have better reproductive fitness than humans. Perhaps it's because chimps remember their wives' birthday!

 

[Alan Kleinman]

What's the alternative?

The cumulation of various lines of evidence (genetics, fossils, biogeography, developmental biology, comparative anatomy, etc) all support the idea that life shares common ancestry.

If you're suggesting an alternative, what is that alternative? How do we otherwise explain what we see in nature?

Genetics certainly doesn't support macroevolution. Misinterpretation of the fossil record and comparative anatomy? You can't explain what is going on at the molecular level using gross anatomy That's like trying to explain quantum mechanics with classical physics. Developmental biology, are you trying to dredge up "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"? Do you understand the difference between evolution and differentiation of a stem cell?

My suggestion is to teach students the correct physics and mathematics of microevolution.