Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

A whale of a tale

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #61
    Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
    But I'm quoting their Behe and Snoke number, not this other number.


    No, I'm granting the paper their results, and concluding that even then, the probability of whale evolution is low.

    Blessings,
    Lee
    As documented repeated Behe dishonestly and unethically misrepresents statistics and probability. He is not a reliable scientific source.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #62
      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
      No, I'm granting the paper their results, and concluding that even then, the probability of whale evolution is low.
      Based on what? Your vast lack of understanding of biology?
      "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

      Comment


      • #63
        Ok, the whale argument phenomenally stupid for a variety of reasons, but i'm going to focus on the genetic aspect since it's the one i understand best. The mindnumbingly awful video and Lee's extensions to it are basically saying "specific mutations are rare, and so the specific mutations needed to make a whale must be REALLY rare, therefore whales could not exist due to mutations."

        Let's break that down a bit more. Specific mutations - changing A at position 347896 of chromosome 4 to a G probably doesn't happen often. That's the only thing that's right.

        Are specific mutations needed to make a whale? Nope. Whales largely have the same gene set as any other mammal. The genes are just deployed differently. How does that happen? By changes in the timing, level, and location of the genes. And doing so does not involve specific changes. The regulatory DNA that controls these aspects of gene activity is extensive, and changes in any of it generally produce incremental differences. As a result, you can typically have an enormous range of mutations (or combinations of mutations) that accomplish the same thing. Arguments based on a single, specific change are therefore completely irrelevant to speciation.

        Yet that's the only thing Lee's giving us numbers for. Because he has absolutely no idea what he's talking about.

        Do any of these mutations have to go to full fixation? Probably not. See, for example, the fact that many species of whale sporadically develop vestigial hind limb bones. Most traits allow a degree of flexibility, as does the fact that different combinations of mutations in regulatory DNA can accomplish the same thing. Some changes will undoubtedly end up fixed over time, just because that's how genetic drift works. But many of them don't necessarily need to be for a population to express a trait.

        But Lee has the numbers for fixation, so that's what he uses, since he doesn't know any better.

        Finally, there's the stupid argument that if one mutation takes this long, you can't have all the mutations you need to make a whale. Which of course is the difference between solving problems in sequence and doing so in parallel. Evolution works in parallel - you can lose hindlimb and redeploy your fat to form blubber at the same time. But Lee continues to ignore that fact no matter how often it gets pointed out to him.

        I could go on - the video says a lot of garbage about ghost lineages, apparently unaware that we KNOW they have existed thanks to genomic evidence. But the only one who thinks it isn't complete garbage here is Lee. And i've seen no evidence that Lee has ever recognized that he's wrong and changed his mind, no matter what evidence anyone else shares here.
        "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

        Comment


        • #64
          Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
          Based on what? Your vast lack of understanding of biology?
          Based on the fact that many mutations, whether in genes or in regulatory DNA, will be needed.

          Blessings,
          Lee
          "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

          Comment


          • #65
            Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
            Finally, there's the stupid argument that if one mutation takes this long, you can't have all the mutations you need to make a whale. Which of course is the difference between solving problems in sequence and doing so in parallel. Evolution works in parallel - you can lose hindlimb and redeploy your fat to form blubber at the same time.
            Certainly, but the probability of independent events all occurring, in parallel, is the multiplied probability of each event, which decreases exponentially.

            Blessings,
            Lee
            "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

            Comment


            • #66
              Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
              Certainly, but the probability of independent events all occurring, in parallel, is the multiplied probability of each event, which decreases exponentially.

              Blessings,
              Lee
              No, ENRON probability does not pass muster in science.
              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

              go with the flow the river knows . . .

              Frank

              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

              Comment


              • #67
                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                no, enron probability does not pass muster in science.
                Enron?

                Comment


                • #68
                  Originally posted by Seeker View Post

                  Enron?

                  Enron Scandal: The Fall of a Wall Street Darling - Investopedia

                  www.investopedia.com › ... › Crime & Fraud
                  The Enron scandal drew attention to accounting and corporate fraud as its shareholders lost $74 billion in the four years leading up to its bankruptcy, and its employees lost billions in pension benefits. Increased regulation and oversight have been enacted to help prevent corporate scandals of Enron's magnitude.

                  ENRON was the company that developed massive bookkeeping dishonesty. The ID creationist do this unethically and dishonestly with statistics and probability throughout their publications.


                  American Statistical Association (ASA) has standards of ethics for the use of statistics and probability in science, and the ID community trashes them all.

                  Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-01-2020, 08:42 AM.
                  Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                  Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                  But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                  go with the flow the river knows . . .

                  Frank

                  I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                  Comment


                  • #69
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                    No, ENRON probability does not pass muster in science.
                    But this is basic probability, P(A and B) where A and B are independent is P(A) x P(B).

                    Blessings,
                    Lee
                    "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                    Comment


                    • #70
                      Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                      But this is basic probability, P(A and B) where A and B are independent is P(A) x P(B).

                      Blessings,
                      Lee
                      Simplistic statements are not an argument.

                      I documented a whole thread to academic references that Behe and others unethically and dishonestly misused statistics, and repeated the references numerous times and you did not respond.

                      Shall I repost many references again, and again and again. . . maybe one more time.
                      Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-01-2020, 08:28 PM.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #71
                        The following reference is a good introduction.

                        Source: http://ramanujan.math.trinity.edu/polofsson/research/Chance.pdf



                        I n the last decades, arguments against Darwinian evolution have become increasingly sophisticated, replacing Creationism by Intelligent Design (ID) and the book of Genesis by biochemistry and mathematics. As arguments claiming to be based in probability and statistics are being used to justify the anti-evolution stance, it may be of interest to readers of CHANCE to investigate methods and claims of ID theorists.

                        Probability, Statistics, and Evolution

                        The theory of evolution states in part that traits of organisms are passed on to successive generations through genetic material and that modifications in genetic material cause changes in appearance, ability, function, and survival of organisms. Genetic changes that are advantageous to successful reproduction over time dominate and new species evolve. Charles Darwin (1809–1892) is famously credited with originating and popularizing the idea of speciation through gradual change after observing animals on the Galapagos Islands. Today, the theory of evolution is the scientific consensus concerning the development of species, but is nevertheless routinely challenged by its detractors. The National Academy of Sciences and Institute of Medicine (NAS/IM) recently issued a revised and updated document, titled “Science, Evolution, and Creationism,” that describes the theory of evolution and investigates the relation between science and religion. Although the latter topic is of interest in its own right, in fairness to ID proponents, it should be pointed out that many of them do not employ religious arguments against evolution and this article does not deal with issues of faith and religion.

                        How do probability and statistics enter the scene? In statistics, hypotheses are evaluated with data collected in a way that introduces as little bias as possible and with as much precision as possible. A hypothesis suggests what we would expect to observe or measure, if the hypothesis were true. If such predictions do not agree with the observed data, the hypothesis is rejected and more plausible hypotheses are suggested and evaluated. There are many statistical techniques and methods that may be used, and they are all firmly rooted in the theory of probability, the “mathematics of chance.”

                        © Copyright Original Source



                        Read on . . .
                        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                        go with the flow the river knows . . .

                        Frank

                        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                        Comment


                        • #72
                          Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                          But this is basic probability, P(A and B) where A and B are independent is P(A) x P(B).

                          Blessings,
                          Lee
                          Brought this thread back that documents the Intelligent Design unethical dishonest, and you avoiding responding to the problem. Read the references, again?

                          https://theologyweb.com/campus/forum...me-again/page3

                          I noticed you have not responded to my references on homochirility. Cat got your tongue or more likely you just do not understand them. I can post more . . .
                          Last edited by shunyadragon; 10-01-2020, 09:19 PM.
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • #73
                            Originally posted by lee_merrill View Post
                            But this is basic probability, P(A and B) where A and B are independent is P(A) x P(B).

                            Blessings,
                            Lee
                            Again . . . read the references concerning ID dishonest misuse of p values in the old thread I brought up and you failed to address.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • #74
                              How many ID Creationists are members of and/or affiliated with the American Statistical Association
                              Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                              Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                              But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                              go with the flow the river knows . . .

                              Frank

                              I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                              Comment


                              • #75
                                Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post

                                Again . . . read the references concerning ID dishonest misuse of p values in the old thread I brought up and you failed to address.
                                Where did I fail to address a post you made with references on probability?

                                Blessings,
                                Lee
                                "What I pray of you is, to keep your eye upon Him, for that is everything. Do you say, 'How am I to keep my eye on Him?' I reply, keep your eye off everything else, and you will soon see Him. All depends on the eye of faith being kept on Him. How simple it is!" (J.B. Stoney)

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 10-17-2020, 05:11 PM
                                7 responses
                                33 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by shunyadragon, 10-09-2020, 09:25 PM
                                0 responses
                                22 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 10-09-2020, 03:29 PM
                                6 responses
                                51 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by shunyadragon, 10-07-2020, 12:11 PM
                                0 responses
                                10 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Sherman, 10-06-2020, 03:31 PM
                                33 responses
                                212 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Leonhard  
                                Working...
                                X