Annoying creationists

[kleinman]

Annoying Creationists

When you produce a single real example that shows n+1 selection conditions evolve more rapidly than n selection conditions, I’ll take a look at your program.

Or, in other words, you are a fraud who knows none of the mathematics you claim to know and are completely unable to refute any of my mathematics.

Why should I even waste my time trying to refute your computer program? If you can provide one real example of your model then I’ll spend some time trying to understand your algorithm. On the other hand, it is very easy to find real examples of combination selection pressures slowing the evolutionary process and that is what Dr Schneider’s peer reviewed and published model shows. Do you want me to help you find examples of your algorithm? Try googling “nonexistent” “examples” “evolution”.

Belz, I’m not ignoring your posts, I’m waiting for one of you evolutionists to post a citation showing that n+1 selection pressures evolves more rapidly than n selection pressures.

Easy.

Dinosaurs live and die for millions of years, with n selection pressures affecting them.

Meteor hits. Selection pressures: n+1. Lots of death. Suddenly mammals are all over the place.

Hey, I saw that movie. I wonder what will replace us when they make the next “meteor hits” movie.

If you want to talk about beggaminases, that alright with me.

Yes, let's talk about that. Remember what it means ?

Yes, I think so, that’s what makes dinosaurs turn into mammals after meteor hits. I really like the Bugs Bunny and Road Runner cartoons they show with the movie.

Kjkent1, I have never said that there can not be variants of genes. There are hundreds of forms of human hemoglobin. Just because there may be two variants of a particular gene that may confer resistance to a particular drug does not mean there is no goal for evolution as you allege. All you have shown is that there are only a small number of possible genetic sequences that improve fitness for the virus from the huge number of possible combinations available. The transformation of reptiles into birds requires a trajectory on a fitness landscape that transforms thousands of genes which always gives fitness to reproduce. When you give an example which shows only two possible variants that give improved fitness to reproduce, how do you explain the transformation of thousands of genes when you have so few variants that give improved fitness to reproduce?

In the current example there are demonstrably at least two pathways to resistance (maybe more, no way to know without repeating the experiment at least a few million times).

Sadly, that experiment is being done.

Sol, forget the 100 generations, show us how to use probability theory to win a million lotteries only 14 times longer than winning one lottery. You must be incredibly wealthy after winning all those lotteries.

I already did - if you can find me a million lotteries where each ticket has a chance to win all of them. That's not so common in real lotteries... but the math is identical to the case we were discussing, which is why I mentioned it.

In any case you've already agreed my formula was correct, and yours was wrong. Are you flipflopping again?

Sure I know where you can buy a ticket where one ticket can win a million lotteries. Evolutionists are selling that ticket all the time which also explains why you are not incredibly wealthy. Yes sol, your formula is correct. The probability that the theory of evolution is true is not 1 in 10^400, it is 1 in 10^360. Do you want to buy a ticket to that lottery? They are on sale, a quarter each or increase your chances with 3 for a dollar.

Here’s a couple more examples how mutation and selection actually works, no charge for these tickets.
http://mic.sgmjournals.org/cgi/content/full/153/10/3211

Exposure of C. albicans to antifungal drugs induces immediate phenotypic stress responses that may permit drug tolerance. This tolerance allows the selection, or evolution, of stable stress responses that confer higher levels of resistance. All micro-organisms contain a plethora of genes that can potentially confer resistance to new environmental stresses (Wright, 2007). C. albicans is a diploid fungus with several gene families that have probably arisen by gene duplication. We have discovered that alleles of CDR1 and CDR2 within the same strain differ functionally and that CDR2 alleles are continuing to evolve (Holmes et al., 2006). Thus there are a large number of pumps with different substrate specificities that, if overexpressed or mutated, could confer resistance to ‘novel’ antifungals with intracellular targets.

This perspective on antifungal drug resistance suggests several possible ways of overcoming, or preventing, drug resistance. Combination therapy can be used to attack two different targets simultaneously with a low probability that resistance to both drugs will arise, or to attack a drug target and its resistance mechanism (cf. augmentin). While combination therapy sounds attractive, and it has been reported that antimicrobial combinations can actually select against the development of resistance (Chait et al., 2007), clinical results are variable and there are increased efficacy testing requirements.

http://www.springerlink.com/content/7441316203717r82/

Abstract Chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML) is a progressive and often fatal hematopoietic neoplasm. The disease is characterized by the presence of the Philadelphia chromosome, which arises following a balanced translocation between chromosomes 9 and 22, creating the BCR-ABL fusion gene. It is often stated that the only proven curative option is allogeneic stem cell transplantation (allo-SCT), which is indicated for only a limited subset of patients. The Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitor (TKI) imatinib mesylate (IM) represented a major advance over conventional CML therapy. Following IM treatment, more than 90% of patients obtain complete hematologic response, and 70–80% of patients achieve a complete cytogenetic response. Resistance to IM represents an increasing clinical challenge and is often a result of point mutations causing a conformation change in Bcr-Abl, which impair IM binding. Novel targeted agents designed to overcome IM resistance, including multitargeted TKIs and farnesyl transferase inhibitors, are in various phases of development. Dasatinib, which has recently become available in the clinic, is a Bcr-Abl TKI that also inhibits Src, c-Kit, platelet-derived growth factor receptor, and ephrin A receptor kinases. In a phase II randomized trial in patients resistant or intolerant to IM, patients receiving dasatinib had better hematologic and cytogenetic responses than those on high-dose IM, irrespective of the presence or absence of mutations. Nilotinib has also shown promising activity. Combining IM with conventional chemotherapy, interferon, and targeted agents including TKIs is being actively pursued. Diagnostic testing may enable individualized targeted treatment so that patients receive the most effective agent first-line.

 

[Dr Adequate]

How much longer will the faulty misunderstanding of how mutation and selection actually works be perpetuated by evolutionists so that needless deaths due to HIV, and other infectious disease and cancers because of evolution of resistance?

Well, that's up to you, isn't it?

About three million died last year from AIDS alone.

During that period, kleinman, you spent your time explaining the same ideas again and again, to about a dozen people none of whom showed any signs of believing you. And whose mental competence to understand your ideas you have often questioned.

While three million died of just one of the many diseases you claim your teachings could help to treat, you strewed your seed again and again on exactly the same patch of stony ground. On what is, I have just looked it up, only the 1464th most popular forum on the internet.

While millions died, kleinman.

I should be fascinated to hear your explanation for your actions.

 

[rocketdodger]

Why should I even waste my time trying to refute your computer program?

You don't have to -- since I know you are a fraud, and that you know nothing about mathetmatics, I gave you a simple version of my algorithm that even a bible school kiddie can understand, which I will repeat right here:

1) Randomly mutate x number of bases in each creature's genome.
2) Determine the fitness of each creature according to the pressures exerted on the population.
3) Reproduce, such that creatures with higher fitness have more offspring.
4) Go back to 1, stopping when the targeted mutations of all pressures have achieved 80% or more fixation in the population.

If you can provide one real example of your model then I’ll spend some time trying to understand your algorithm.

If it takes you time to understand the above algorithm, Kleinman, then you genuinely are a fraudulent moron. There is just no way someone could get a doctorate, even from the worst night school in Mexico, and not be able to easily grasp exactly what is done in the above algorithm. It is only four steps. Four simple, easy to understand, uncomplicated steps.

Can you show anyone here why the above algorithm is not a sorting/optimization algorithm?

 

[delphi_ote]

Almost as if…? Too bad the theory of evolution isn’t the game of horseshoes. Then your “almost” would score some points. Now that we know exactly that combination selection pressures profoundly slow evolution, your “almost” doesn’t score points any more. Tell us all about the non-homologous genes between humans and chimpanzees and tell us how mutation and selection transformed these genes in 500,000 generations. Oh yes, don’t forget to tell us what the selection pressures were to achieve these transformations.

Okay, so you'll agree that life we see today was produced by descent with modification over millions of years, but you don't believe that the force that caused the modification was natural selection?

 

[sol invictus]

Sure I know where you can buy a ticket where one ticket can win a million lotteries. Evolutionists are selling that ticket all the time which also explains why you are not incredibly wealthy.

Huh? Try to make more sense.

Yes sol, your formula is correct. The probability that the theory of evolution is true is not 1 in 10^400, it is 1 in 10^360.

That was your theory - in which there are only 100 generations, and the odds of a mutation are one in a million - not the theory.

But if you'd like we can take your number for the odds, since you're so attached to it, and ask how many mutations we can expect after 3 billion years. It's a hell of a lot more than 100, or 1,000,000, for that matter.

So it sounds like you're admitting evolution happened? Or if not, why don't you clearly specify what you think the problem is?

 

[kleinman]

Annoying Creationists

How much longer will the faulty misunderstanding of how mutation and selection actually works be perpetuated by evolutionists so that needless deaths due to HIV, and other infectious disease and cancers because of evolution of resistance?

Well, that's up to you, isn't it?

About three million died last year from AIDS alone.

Well Adequate, the understanding of mutation and selection is not going to improve with your irrational and illogical explanation of how mutation and selection works. I suppose you advocate teaching naïve school children that n+1 selection pressure evolve more rapidly than n selection pressures. Then you can tell these children that the hundreds of real examples of mutation and selection which show that combination selection pressures profoundly slow evolution are nothing but lies. When you finish with this you can smugly say:

But when I put together an article summarising the present state of scientific knowledge for popular consumption, emphasising the skeptical point of view, the only requirements placed on me are that I should be honest, diligent, consciencious, and clear.

Adequate, you have no excuse, your skills in mathematics has done nothing to help the millions of people dying of HIV or any other disease subject to the phenomenon of mutation and selection. Millions more would die if clinicians listened to your asinine views.

Almost as if…? Too bad the theory of evolution isn’t the game of horseshoes. Then your “almost” would score some points. Now that we know exactly that combination selection pressures profoundly slow evolution, your “almost” doesn’t score points any more. Tell us all about the non-homologous genes between humans and chimpanzees and tell us how mutation and selection transformed these genes in 500,000 generations. Oh yes, don’t forget to tell us what the selection pressures were to achieve these transformations.

Okay, so you'll agree that life we see today was produced by descent with modification over millions of years, but you don't believe that the force that caused the modification was natural selection?

What I am saying is that evolutionbymutationandselectiondidn’tdoit. The mathematical and empirical evidence shows what mutation and selection can do and it doesn’t do what you allege.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Well, that's up to you, isn't it?

About three million died last year from AIDS alone.

During that period, kleinman, you spent your time explaining the same ideas again and again, to about a dozen people none of whom showed any signs of believing you. And whose mental competence to understand your ideas you have often questioned.

While three million died of just one of the many diseases you claim your teachings could help to treat, you strewed your seed again and again on exactly the same patch of stony ground. On what is, I have just looked it up, only the 1464th most popular forum on the internet.

While millions died, kleinman.

I should be fascinated to hear your explanation for your actions.

Still waiting, kleinman.

Do tell us why you're hiding your radiant light of healing under a bushel.

 

[T'ai Chi]

Evolution is not deterministic, Alan. Two trials of an experiment using identical selection pressures will not necessarily produce the same evolutionary outcome,..

Uh oh, expect droves of Disagreeers/Hecklers. Well, that's what I always get anyway when I state the obvious.

In regards to the experiment, I tend to agree. Especially when they experiment is carried over long chunks of time, for example billions of years.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Uh oh, expect droves of Disagreeers/Hecklers. Well, that's what I always get anyway when I state the obvious.

I didn't know anyone had cornered you into actually stating something.

Gosh, and to think I missed it.

I presume that the obvious thing about it was how wrong it was.

 

[kleinman]

Annoying Creationists

Well, that's up to you, isn't it?

About three million died last year from AIDS alone.

During that period, kleinman, you spent your time explaining the same ideas again and again, to about a dozen people none of whom showed any signs of believing you. And whose mental competence to understand your ideas you have often questioned.

While three million died of just one of the many diseases you claim your teachings could help to treat, you strewed your seed again and again on exactly the same patch of stony ground. On what is, I have just looked it up, only the 1464th most popular forum on the internet.

While millions died, kleinman.

I should be fascinated to hear your explanation for your actions.

Still waiting, kleinman.

Rather than waiting for an explanation for my actions, why don’t you look for an explanation for your own actions? The contrast couldn’t be clearer.

 

[Dr Adequate]

Rather than waiting for an explanation for my actions, why don’t you look for an explanation for your own actions?

Because I already have one. This would be because I know what I am thinking, but am not able to read your mind. Hence my question.

So, for the benefit of those of us who are not telepaths, please let us have an explanation for your actions. If your grandiose claims are true, you could help millions of dying people. Instead, you stand idly by and let them suffer, preferring to waste your time in pointless bickering on an obscure Internet message board.

Why?

 

[kleinman]

Annoying Creationists

Rather than waiting for an explanation for my actions, why don’t you look for an explanation for your own actions?

Because I already have one.

Now let us have an explanation for yours. If your grandiose claims are true, you could help millions of dying people. Instead, you stand idly by and let them suffer, preferring to waste your time in pointless bickering on an obscure Internet message board.

Adequate, you really are an arrogant snob. Why do you waste your time posting on an obscure Internet message board? And what makes you think that I am standing idly by? What makes you think that you have a monopoly on the truth? Is there anything you don’t know?

Adequate, perhaps this will become the 1463rd most popular thread on the internet, maybe it will even become more popular than the Big Foot forum. Why don’t you add your request for an explanation for my actions to your Kleinman FAQ link? And I’ll keep asking you for a real example of n+1 selection pressures evolving more rapidly than n selection pressures, which is my Adequate FAQ. Let’s see how much a PhD in mathematics can contribute to the understanding of how mutation and selection actually works, or do you even have a clue?

Please remember your Membership Agreement, and be civil and polite in these discussions. Also, do not direct your attacks at individuals, but at the arguments presented.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

In fact, I would strongly suggest that since it seems impossible for you two to discuss matters civilly with each other, that you place each other on ignore.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero

 

[Dr Adequate]

Adequate, you really are an arrogant snob. Why do you waste your time posting on an obscure Internet message board?

Because I do not have, as an alternative use of my time, helping millions of suffering and dying people.

If I had an option between the two, I'd go for the latter.

If what you claim is true, you do have the choice.

Why have you chosen to exercise it in this peculiar manner?

Is there anything you don’t know?

Yes. The answer to the question that you keep ducking.

That's why I keep asking it.

 

[rocketdodger]

Why should I even waste my time trying to refute your computer program?

You don't have to -- since I know you are a fraud, and that you know nothing about mathetmatics, I gave you a simple version of my algorithm that even a bible school kiddie can understand, which I will repeat right here:

1) Randomly mutate x number of bases in each creature's genome.
2) Determine the fitness of each creature according to the pressures exerted on the population.
3) Reproduce, such that creatures with higher fitness have more offspring.
4) Go back to 1, stopping when the targeted mutations of all pressures have achieved 80% or more fixation in the population.

If you can provide one real example of your model then I’ll spend some time trying to understand your algorithm.

If it takes you time to understand the above algorithm, Kleinman, then you genuinely are a fraudulent moron. There is just no way someone could get a doctorate, even from the worst night school in Mexico, and not be able to easily grasp exactly what is done in the above algorithm. It is only four steps. Four simple, easy to understand, uncomplicated steps.

Can you show anyone here why the above algorithm is not a sorting/optimization algorithm?

 

[joobz]

While you are coming up with *ahem* thoughtful *ahem* replies to Dr. A and Rocketdodger's questions, perhaps you'd also like to provide some of your assumptions.

Assumptions Kleinman must make for his "theory" to be correct:
1.) Mutation rate remains constant
2.) Mutation rate is known
3.) Number of selection pressures for all species for all time in all areas is known
4.) Number of selection pressures is constant
5.) Selection pressure magnitude is constant and equal for all pressures
6.) Point mutations are the only mutation/adaptation mechanism
7.) defining selection pressure is unimportant
8.) slow equals stop
9.) Mutation is non-random

 

[Shalamar]

And...

Dinosaurs became mammals?

Okay.... You still think that lizards became birds, and dinosaurs became mammals.

Sorry. Too bad. You fail.

Why not actually look up some biology?

 

[rocketdodger]

If what you claim is true, you do have the choice.

If what he claimed were true, he would be able to provide us with the state he is certified as both an engineer and doctor, so we can look him up and make sure he is who he says he is. Of course, he refuses, so...

 

[Paul C. Anagnostopoulos]

Evolution is not deterministic, Alan. Two trials of an experiment using identical selection pressures will not necessarily produce the same evolutionary outcome,..

Uh oh, expect droves of Disagreeers/Hecklers. Well, that's what I always get anyway when I state the obvious.

Hang on a mo. You're not seriously suggesting that our disagreement with your sig line has been one of deterministic vs. random, are you? No one has ever suggested that evolution is deterministic.

No droves so far.

~~ Paul

 

[Belz...]

Hey, I saw that movie. I wonder what will replace us when they make the next “meteor hits” movie.

You have no interest in an honest debate.

You ask for an example. I provide such an example, and you act like a child. How fitting for a theist.

Yes, I think so, that’s what makes dinosaurs turn into mammals after meteor hits.

Strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman, strawman!!!!

 

[rocketdodger]

I don't think its quite fair that only Kleinman is getting censored.

I have been calling him a f---ing moron, or something along those lines, for awhile now, and none of my posts get cut.

If we are going to start enforcing the "attack the argument not the one making it" rule we should enforce it across the board. Just my opinion.

Kleinman is an idiot but that doesn't mean he should be treated unfairly.