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

YEC scientist not so smart

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

  • YEC scientist not so smart

    YEC scientist Jeff Tomkins wrote the following:



    "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago." Old-earth proponents now have a new challenge: to explain why—after millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans—human genomic diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?
    However, the same data conforms to and dramatically confirms biblical history. Since the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "



    Can YECs can spot the problem in this confident assertion from the ICR's genetics and science "expert"?

  • #2
    Originally posted by nmanning View Post
    Can YECs can spot the problem in this confident assertion from the ICR's genetics and science "expert"?
    When mocking somebody for writing something "not so smart", you might want to check your own writing before hitting "post".
    "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      When mocking somebody for writing something "not so smart", you might want to check your own writing before hitting "post".
      What was wrong with his writing???

      K54

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by nmanning View Post
        YEC scientist Jeff Tomkins wrote the following:



        "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago." Old-earth proponents now have a new challenge: to explain why—after millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans—human genomic diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?
        However, the same data conforms to and dramatically confirms biblical history. Since the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "



        Can YECs can spot the problem in this confident assertion from the ICR's genetics and science "expert"?
        From what orifice did Jeff pull this?

        There was a LOT of diversity in human evolution over 4 million years -- even at least one split of genera.

        And how the beejeebers did Jeff figger out this? "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago."

        I'm not even sure what he means.

        Sounds like a snake oil sales pitch.

        But of course YEC is a fact, Fact, FACT!

        K54

        P.S. Ah, finis coronat opus...
        Last edited by klaus54; 02-11-2015, 12:11 AM. Reason: p.s.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
          When mocking somebody for writing something "not so smart", you might want to check your own writing before hitting "post".
          You are so very correct - why, when I edited my question I left a word in that I should not have, thus, I must also be not so smart.

          So terribly sorry.

          Of course, what amounts to a typo is not quite the same as presenting oneself as an expert on genetics and phylogenetics and not understanding/purposefully misrepresenting an analytical technique, is it?

          Can I conclude that your inane pedantery is merely meant to mask the fact that you are the sort of person that YEC "scientist" hacks rely on, i.e., you don't know any better?
          Last edited by nmanning; 02-11-2015, 08:27 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by nmanning View Post
            YEC scientist Jeff Tomkins wrote the following:

            "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago." Old-earth proponents now have a new challenge: to explain why—after millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans—human genomic diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?

            However, the same data conforms to and dramatically confirms biblical history. Since the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "

            Can YECs can spot the problem in this confident assertion from the ICR's genetics and science "expert"?
            While inelegantly stated, the overall argument here is logically coherent. The maximum likelihood time does put most of the continuing changes on this side of the timeline.

            It is generally a mistake to attack ICR articles as merely ignorant. While often enough true, even if true, these attacks are misdirected. More commonly, ICR and its fellow travelers are guilty of deliberate misrepresentation and misappropriation of others' research, and this particular article is no exception.

            The ICR article, "posted on July 23, 2012," references an article published online on May 17, 2012, and in Science on July 6, 2012. The ICR's "question" is actually answered in the abstract:

            Evolution and Functional Impact of Rare Coding Variation from Deep Sequencing of Human Exomes
            This excess of rare functional variants is due to the combined effects of explosive, recent accelerated population growth and weak purifying selection.

            More pointedly, this ICR article lies comfortably within the genre popularly referenced as "pubjacking."

            As ever, Jesse


            Welcome to TWeb, nmanning!

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by lao tzu View Post
              While inelegantly stated, the overall argument here is logically coherent. The maximum likelihood time does put most of the continuing changes on this side of the timeline.

              It is generally a mistake to attack ICR articles as merely ignorant. While often enough true, even if true, these attacks are misdirected. More commonly, ICR and its fellow travelers are guilty of deliberate misrepresentation and misappropriation of others' research, and this particular article is no exception.

              The ICR article, "posted on July 23, 2012," references an article published online on May 17, 2012, and in Science on July 6, 2012. The ICR's "question" is actually answered in the abstract:

              Evolution and Functional Impact of Rare Coding Variation from Deep Sequencing of Human Exomes
              This excess of rare functional variants is due to the combined effects of explosive, recent accelerated population growth and weak purifying selection.

              More pointedly, this ICR article lies comfortably within the genre popularly referenced as "pubjacking."

              As ever, Jesse


              Welcome to TWeb, nmanning!
              "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago." Old-earth proponents now have a new challenge: to explain why—after millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans—human genomic diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?

              However, the same data conforms to and dramatically confirms biblical history. Since the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "


              Please reconsider.


              Thanks for the welcome!

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by nmanning View Post
                Can I conclude that your inane pedantery is merely meant to mask the fact that you are the sort of person that YEC "scientist" hacks rely on, i.e., you don't know any better?
                Once again, you would be in error. But I'm not surprised.
                "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by nmanning View Post
                  "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago."
                  ...
                  the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "
                  And here was me thinking that you were noting that "sooner" meant earlier, and thus the author was claiming that the diversification took place before it could have taken place.

                  Roy

                  P.S. Welcome!
                  Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                  mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                  Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                  Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    Once again, you would be in error. But I'm not surprised.
                    And yet, you continue to avoid enlightening us all with your acumen.

                    But I'm not surprised.

                    Feigning indignation only works for so long. Sort of like crying wolf.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Roy View Post
                      And here was me thinking that you were noting that "sooner" meant earlier, and thus the author was claiming that the diversification took place before it could have taken place.

                      Roy

                      P.S. Welcome!
                      Thanks!

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by nmanning View Post
                        And yet, you continue to avoid enlightening us all with your acumen.
                        Relax - I just think it's kinda funny when somebody comes roaring in her like an arrogant ass finding fault with somebody's "writing", and they goof up their own attack. You said "Can YECs can spot the problem...." - a simple error.

                        I apologize for causing your panties to be unnecessarily wadded.


                        Nmanning - gonna try this again.
                        I was KIDDING.
                        I think it's humorous when we "beat up" on somebody and we have our own foibles - I've done it too.
                        I was picking on you like I kid with my friends, but I understand that - given lack of tone of voice and facial expression and stuff - it could be easily seen as an attack.

                        My fault.

                        You're new here, and perhaps you thought it was a Christian attacking you because you're an agnostic.

                        Seriously - my apologies -- no harm intended!
                        Last edited by Cow Poke; 02-12-2015, 11:38 AM.
                        "Neighbor, how long has it been since you’ve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?”

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by nmanning View Post
                          "The authors wrote, "The maximum likelihood time for accelerated growth was 5,115 years ago." Old-earth proponents now have a new challenge: to explain why—after millions of years of hardly any genetic variation among modern humans—human genomic diversity exploded only within the last five thousand years?

                          However, the same data conforms to and dramatically confirms biblical history. Since the author's date represents the maximum time, the actual DNA diversification event probably occurred even sooner. "
                          This is simply failing to understand technical terms. "Maximum likelihood time" means the time that is most likely. It has does not mean the "maximum time" that is likely.

                          "maximum" refers to "maximum likelihood", not "maximum time".

                          Cheers -- sylas

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by sylas View Post
                            This is simply failing to understand technical terms. "Maximum likelihood time" means the time that is most likely. It has does not mean the "maximum time" that is likely.

                            "maximum" refers to "maximum likelihood", not "maximum time".

                            Cheers -- sylas
                            Yes indeedy!

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Relax - I just think it's kinda funny when somebody comes roaring in her like an arrogant ass finding fault with somebody's "writing", and they goof up their own attack. You said "Can YECs can spot the problem...." - a simple error.

                              I apologize for causing your panties to be unnecessarily wadded.


                              Nmanning - gonna try this again.
                              I was KIDDING.
                              I think it's humorous when we "beat up" on somebody and we have our own foibles - I've done it too.
                              I was picking on you like I kid with my friends, but I understand that - given lack of tone of voice and facial expression and stuff - it could be easily seen as an attack.

                              My fault.

                              You're new here, and perhaps you thought it was a Christian attacking you because you're an agnostic.

                              Seriously - my apologies -- no harm intended!
                              I did - apology accepted.

                              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
                              50 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