Creationists: Explain your understanding of microevolution and macroevolution

[Subduction Zone]

You need to post one example which identifies the selection conditions and mutations required for adaptation. Post a single example that shows that DNA microevolutionary adaptation works any different than the math I've presented, not all this garbage about speciation. Of course, changing the subject from microevolution/macroevolution is your specialty.

No, one does need to follow your faulty model. Where did you get that crazy idea from. And you have it backwards. your claims are assumed to be false until supported by evidence. Others do not make your errors because your concepts are just nonsense. You only have a model. It is not even a proper model. You have tacitly admitted it twice. I bet you will do it a third time. Wait for the "Bingo!!"

I posted you links that described observed examples of speciation. If your "math" says that it does not happen then I do not even need to refute your math. It was already refuted by reality.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Reminds me of Michael Mozina in his singular determination not to listen to or understand why his model doesn't apply...

 

[Phred]

No, one does need to follow your faulty model. Where did you get that crazy idea from. And you have it backwards. your claims are assumed to be false until supported by evidence. Others do not make your errors because your concepts are just nonsense. You only have a model. It is not even a proper model. You have tacitly admitted it twice. I bet you will do it a third time. Wait for the "Bingo!!"

I posted you links that described observed examples of speciation. If your "math" says that it does not happen then I do not even need to refute your math. It was already refuted by reality.

Rimsky-Korsakov. You didn't say Lemming Kissimmee. Lemskoo Kishoonie. Something.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Dr. Alan Kleinman, MD, Family Medicine Specialist - Merced, CA | Sharecare

Went to an urgent care facility once, Dr. diagnosed gout, nurse said it looked like arthritis. Went home and looked up both, definitely not gout. got carbon fibre insole from Physical Therapist and symptoms only return if I don't use it. Not impressed with urgent care docs.

I don't mind, I have more than enough patients. And you are correct only 9 months at AUC. I did 3 years of my medical studies at the Touro/Israel Institute of Technology program. Why don't you look up my malpractice record. See how many malpractice cases I've had in 150,000 patient visits.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

I thought it was called creationism?

When did I say creationism was science? Now the belief in macroevolution, that is pseudo-science. You can't even do the physics and mathematics of microevolution correctly.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

So I guess the engineering thing didn't pan out for him. You'd think a super genius like Al would have been gobbled up by the Discovery Institute or the ICR by now. What with his math skills and all. Wonder how many of his patients he regales with his exposition on the failures of evolution. They're creepy like that.

Did well enough in engineering to be licensed in the field, teach engineering for 3 years at the undergraduate and graduate level, and work for 3 years on the Space Shuttle. But my interest was in bioengineering. Why don't you find my PhD thesis where I solved the inverse bioheat transfer equation. That's the equation that would be used to diagnose cancers using thermography. Like thermography and the ToE, they are both mathematically irrational, thermography because the mathematics is ill-conditioned, and the ToE because of the multiplication rule.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

No, one does need to follow your faulty model.

You don't have a model.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Reminds me of Michael Mozina in his singular determination not to listen to or understand why his model doesn't apply...

Sure I listen, all I've heard is that algae growing in colonies and transposon are macroevolution. Can't any of you do the math for the Kishony and Lenski experiment?

 

[Phred]

Did well enough in engineering to be licensed in the field, teach engineering for 3 years at the undergraduate and graduate level, and work for 3 years on the Space Shuttle. But my interest was in bioengineering. Why don't you find my PhD thesis where I solved the inverse bioheat transfer equation. That's the equation that would be used to diagnose cancers using thermography. Like thermography and the ToE, they are both mathematically irrational, thermography because the mathematics is ill-conditioned, and the ToE because of the multiplication rule.

Yeah, you keep saying the same thing over and over and over again. Why haven't you won a nobel prize for disproving the single most supported theory in all of science?

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Yeah, you keep saying the same thing over and over and over again. Why haven't you won a nobel prize for disproving the single most supported theory in all of science?

The ToE is the most supported theory in all science? Finally, the clown says something funny. You notice that Hans hasn't answered your question. If he studies and understands the data from the Kishony and Lenski experiments and the math from my papers, he will see that it fits. And the math is all so trivial!

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

Sure I listen, all I've heard is that algae growing in colonies and transposon are macroevolution. Can't any of you do the math for the Kishony and Lenski experiment?

That was your straw man. Don't project it onto us.

As everyone keeps telling you, that math is not usefully applicable to evolution 'in the wild'.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

That was your straw man. Don't project it onto us.

As everyone keeps telling you, that math is not usefully applicable to evolution 'in the wild'.

I see, this math is useful for laboratory experiments, nowhere else? Does that mean that combination therapy for the treatment of HIV doesn't work? Where do laboratory end and wild start?

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Did well enough in engineering to be licensed in the field, teach engineering for 3 years at the undergraduate and graduate level, and work for 3 years on the Space Shuttle. But my interest was in bioengineering. Why don't you find my PhD thesis where I solved the inverse bioheat transfer equation. That's the equation that would be used to diagnose cancers using thermography. Like thermography and the ToE, they are both mathematically irrational, thermography because the mathematics is ill-conditioned, and the ToE because of the multiplication rule.

Hey, I am a mech e, the difference is I created a model in the bio world and demonstrated with data why it was relevant in the bio world. BTW, my model is still being used in a production environment.

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I see, this math is useful for laboratory experiments, nowhere else? Does that mean that combination therapy for the treatment of HIV doesn't work? Where do laboratory end and wild start?

The lab door? The boundary isn't necessarily clear; it's like asking when microevolution becomes macroevolution. Put simply, the 'wild' is a far more complex situation.

 

[Phred]

The ToE is the most supported theory in all science? Finally, the clown says something funny. You notice that Hans hasn't answered your question. If he studies and understands the data from the Kishony and Lenski experiments and the math from my papers, he will see that it fits. And the math is all so trivial!

You didn't answer the question. Just like you never answer a question. You divert, avoid and belittle.

I'll try again. Since macroevolution is impossible, explain the diversity of life on earth. And why haven't you won a Nobel prize for disproving it?

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

I see, this math is useful for laboratory experiments, nowhere else? Does that mean that combination therapy for the treatment of HIV doesn't work?

I see, this math is useful for laboratory experiments, nowhere else? Does that mean that combination therapy for the treatment of HIV doesn't work? Where do laboratory end and wild start?

When the simplistic math you advocate runs into the real world. As I have said to you several times, you can model a curve over a short segment with a linear equation, but apparently you forgot the outcome of that high school lecture.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

Hey, I am a mech e, the difference is I created a model in the bio world and demonstrated with data why it was relevant in the bio world. BTW, my model is still being used in a production environment.

Well, I chose a problem that turned out to be ill-conditioned (now called Chaos theory). Do you know what an inverse PDE is? That's where you don't know the physical properties of your system but can measure extra information on the boundary? That's what the thermographic tomography problem is, you are trying to predict blood flow patterns by measuring both temperature and heat flux on the boundary. The problem is, to get the correct pattern, you have to put the surface temperatures accurately to 8 significant figures, otherwise, the solution converges on a completely different blood flow pattern. When I saw this mathematical behavior, I knew immediately this wouldn't work. I never did any further work on this project after my PhD and nothing seems to have changed on this subject in the last 40 years. So I worked a few years in aerospace and teaching at the university level before going to medical school and on to work on the evolution problem using my engineering training Why are you having such a difficult time understanding this problem. Competition is a straightforward first law problem and DNA evolution is also a pretty straightforward second law problem. And there is more than enough empirical data to recognize the patterns in the evolutionary process.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

When the simplistic math you advocate runs into the real world. As I have said to you several times, you can model a curve over a short segment with a linear equation, but apparently you forgot the outcome of that high school lecture.

Now I think you are lying about your ME degree because any 1st year ME student would know the difference between a linear and nonlinear equation. The curves governing DNA evolution are sigmoidal. Now some people might try to linearize that curve, but that's because they don't have enough mathematical skill to deal with a nonlinear equation. Anyway, the sigmoidal portion of the curve is the interesting part. That's where the probability of adaptive mutations occurring increases.

So, what in the "real world" would make evolution work differently (faster) than in the laboratory.

 

[Alan Kleinman]

You didn't answer the question. Just like you never answer a question. You divert, avoid and belittle.

I'll try again. Since macroevolution is impossible, explain the diversity of life on earth. And why haven't you won a Nobel prize for disproving it?

I can tell you with mathematical and scientific certainty that microevolution didn't do it.

And Edward Tatum already got the Nobel prize, I just did the math.

 

[Ponderous Curmudgeon]

Well, I chose a problem that turned out to be ill-conditioned (now called Chaos theory). Do you know what an inverse PDE is? That's where you don't know the physical properties of your system but can measure extra information on the boundary? That's what the thermographic tomography problem is, you are trying to predict blood flow patterns by measuring both temperature and heat flux on the boundary. The problem is, to get the correct pattern, you have to put the surface temperatures accurately to 8 significant figures, otherwise, the solution converges on a completely different blood flow pattern. When I saw this mathematical behavior, I knew immediately this wouldn't work. I never did any further work on this project after my PhD and nothing seems to have changed on this subject in the last 40 years. So I worked a few years in aerospace and teaching at the university level before going to medical school and on to work on the evolution problem using my engineering training Why are you having such a difficult time understanding this problem. Competition is a straightforward first law problem and DNA evolution is also a pretty straightforward second law problem. And there is more than enough empirical data to recognize the patterns in the evolutionary process.

Yes understood, you once recognized something that had not been recognized before. Congratulations.
Been there done that. As a mech e with only 8th grade bio, I solved a problem that had confused many bio PhDs.

That does not make you a genius, even less it makes you an authority on unrelated situations. If you wish to repeat your success, then you need to go back and do the due diligence that brought you to the original finding. So far, your hypothesis is unevidenced by anything.

Understand what you do know, and also what you do not know.