The Scientific Method & Macroevolution?

whois · Apr 6, 2015

bhsmte said:
And, I thought it was against forum rules, to threaten to report someone.

yes, that was my original intention, but i thought i would let you search for my material after i posted it twice.

the mods do indeed need to do something about this type of tactic.

lewiscalledhimmaster · Apr 6, 2015

sfs said:
Sorry, that link doesn't work for me. Was it the mutation accumulation you cited?

Exactly as you said:

Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4096375/

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
i cannot help if these people refuse to read my posts.
but for them to refuse to read them and continually insist i haven't posted this or that is called what exactly?
they can search my posts as well as i can.

You haven't addressed your claim of fraud. So where does rensberger claim that horse evolution was a fraud?

whois · Apr 6, 2015

sfs said:
Sorry, that link doesn't work for me. Was it the mutation accumulation you cited?

"why do you believe in the evolution theory" post 738

whois · Apr 6, 2015

crjmurray said:
You haven't addressed your claim of fraud. So where does rensberger claim that horse evolution was a fraud?

read my post about horses, k?

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
read my post about horses, k?

I have. Nowhere does rensberger claim that horse evolution is a fraud.

bhsmte · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
read my post about horses, k?

I have and your source does not mention fraud, it was you who claimed fraud.

Can you point us to the quote, where your reference claims fraud?

If you can not do so, just retract your claim.

whois · Apr 6, 2015

crjmurray said:
I have. Nowhere does rensberger claim that horse evolution is a fraud.

okay, in your opinion what does it say?

lewiscalledhimmaster · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
"why do you believe in the evolution theory" post 738

Exactly as I linked:

Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4096375/

Repeat:

sfs said:
.... has nothing to do with the evidence I presented, nor does it present any kind of argument against common descent.

'....In conclusion, we find that fitness decays in recurrently bottlenecked populations of hypermutator P. aeruginosa because of the fixation of many weakly deleterious mutations and a few highly deleterious mutations. We argue that this pattern of punctuated decay of fitness arises for two reasons. First, most mutations carry little, if any, fitness cost in a laboratory environment, but a substantial fraction of mutations are highly deleterious. Our results suggest that weakly deleterious mutations tend to be intergenic and nonsynonymous mutations, while highly deleterious mutations tend to be indels and mutations in core genes. Second, we find that recurrent bottlenecking does not completely compromise the efficacy of natural selection in microbial mutation accumulation experiments, although large deleterious mutations are unlikely to play a substantial role in the evolution of natural populations. We hope that this study will pave the way for future work aimed at understanding: (1) why frameshift mutations are subject to such strong selection, (2) how bacteria adapt to the deleterious effects of spontaneous mutations, and (3) how the molecular basis of spontaneous mutation is linked to the fitness effects of mutations in natural populations.'*

~~~
* http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4096375/

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
okay, in your opinion what does it say?

That the concept of a smooth transition is wrong. It says nothing about fraud. You are the one that claimed fraud.

bhsmte · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
okay, in your opinion what does it say?

You claimed fraud, where does the source say it was fraud?

whois · Apr 6, 2015

crjmurray said:
That the concept of a smooth transition is wrong. It says nothing about fraud. You are the one that claimed fraud.

okay, now what?
there has to be a reason for boyce to say such a thing.

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
okay, now what?
there has to be a reason for boyce to say such a thing.

He never claims fraud. So your claim of fraud is false.

bhsmte · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
okay, now what?
there has to be a reason for boyce to say such a thing.

Was there a reason you claimed fraud?

You do know what the term "fraud" means correct?

lewiscalledhimmaster · Apr 6, 2015

sfs said:
I didn't do an experiment; I performed an analysis and wrote some words. Could you at least tell me what thread your evidence is in? I hope you don't mean your link to "Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment", since that has nothing to do with the evidence I presented, nor does it present any kind of argument against common descent.

Exactly as I linked:

Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4096375/

Repeat:

sfs said:
.... has nothing to do with the evidence I presented, nor does it present any kind of argument against common descent.

'....In conclusion, we find that fitness decays in recurrently bottlenecked populations of hypermutator P. aeruginosa because of the fixation of many weakly deleterious mutations and a few highly deleterious mutations. We argue that this pattern of punctuated decay of fitness arises for two reasons. First, most mutations carry little, if any, fitness cost in a laboratory environment, but a substantial fraction of mutations are highly deleterious. Our results suggest that weakly deleterious mutations tend to be intergenic and nonsynonymous mutations, while highly deleterious mutations tend to be indels and mutations in core genes. Second, we find that recurrent bottlenecking does not completely compromise the efficacy of natural selection in microbial mutation accumulation experiments, although large deleterious mutations are unlikely to play a substantial role in the evolution of natural populations. We hope that this study will pave the way for future work aimed at understanding: (1) why frameshift mutations are subject to such strong selection, (2) how bacteria adapt to the deleterious effects of spontaneous mutations, and (3) how the molecular basis of spontaneous mutation is linked to the fitness effects of mutations in natural populations.'*

~~~
* Fitness Is Strongly Influenced by Rare Mutations of Large Effect in a Microbial Mutation Accumulation Experiment

whois · Apr 6, 2015

crjmurray said:
He never claims fraud. So your claim of fraud is false.

that still doesn't answer the question of why he would say what he said.
are going to answer this or not?

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
that still doesn't answer the question of why he would say what he said.
are going to answer this or not?

Because there is no "smooth" transition. He doesn't say fraud. You say he did. You are wrong.

lewiscalledhimmaster · Apr 6, 2015

whois said:
okay, now what?
there has to be a reason for boyce to say such a thing.

Surely you must know the answer to that? Would you please provide a link to what it is that was said by Boyce?

crjmurray · Apr 6, 2015

lewiscalledhimmaster said:
Surely you must know the answer to that? Would you please provide a link to what it is that was said?

"The popularly told example of horse evolution, suggesting a gradual sequence of changes from four-toed, or fox-like creatures, living nearly 50 million years ago, to today's much larger one-toe horse, has long been known to be wrong. Instead of gradual change, fossils of each intermediate species appear fully distinct, persist unchanged, and then become extinct. Transitional forms are unknown." "Ideas on evolution Going Through a Revolution among Scientists," - Boyce Rensberger: Houston Chronicle, 5 Nov. 1980, sec. 4, p. 15.

There's the full quote and a citation Lewis. The discussion was over whois claiming that rensberger believed horse evolution to be a fraud. As anyone can see, rensberger claims no such thing.

bhsmte · Apr 6, 2015

There's the full quote and a citation Lewis. The discussion was over whois claiming that rensberger believed horse evolution to be a fraud. As anyone can see, rensberger claims no such thing.

Yes, we are waiting for whois to address the fraud claim.

The Scientific Method & Macroevolution?

rational

georgemacdonald.info

The Bear. Not The Bull.

rational

rational

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Newbie

rational

georgemacdonald.info

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Newbie

rational

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Newbie

georgemacdonald.info

rational

The Bear. Not The Bull.

georgemacdonald.info

The Bear. Not The Bull.

Newbie

Similar threads

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency