Victory for evolution in Texas

[Blake]

Schtick or not... nothing can change the fact that you're always an asinine jerk everyday of the week and twice on Sunday...

I respond -for-tat, in kind...

at least you can admit that you are an asinine jerk, in kind.

For the most part my jabs tend to be subtle (and yes, sometimes overt as necessary), but those in your camp tend to throw vicious and spiteful crap in my direction all the time... Martyr??? Give me a break...

" I just throw the viscious and spiteful crap some of the time "

the Evolutionary banner

lol your camp vs evolutionary camp

our camp has a cool RV.

[RandomGuy]

BTW Lenski's experiment still continues... his current E. coli cultures have reproduced somewhere beyond 50,000 generations from their starting point... That said, the bacteria are all still E. coli and the notable 'change' that allowed his cultures to begin digesting citrate were fully manifest by the 31,500 generation (even if they progressively happened in steps)...

...Think about that for a second [we've done this exercise before]... A couple of genes in an asexual organism were altered after 31,500 generations...

If humans were able to "add" two (or being generous, three) beneficial genes to their genome at this rate, and if we conservatively considered a human generation to be all of 20 years (again generously) then under single lineage dynamics humans would be able to add three beneficial genes to their genome every ~600,000 years!!!

Ummm… that presents quite the conundrum for the accepted evolutionary timeframe of human lineage… especially when one considers there are over 40 million differences between our genome and the chimpanzee ‘next-of-kin’ genome… and if it’s generally accepted that our lineages broke apart only 6 million years ago…

[I know RG will tweak the math and make it all conveniently feasible…]

You mean tweak it like you tweaked it to make it conveniently *unfeasible*?

Let's dissect this here, as I think it is pretty symbolic of the kind and quality of arguments being made.

Facts stated:

1) "Two genes were altered in an asexual organism after 31,500 generations"
2) "there are over 40 million differences between our genome and the chimpanzee ‘next-of-kin’ genome…"
3) "it’s generally accepted that our lineages broke apart only 6 million years ago…"

Assumptions made to complete calculation:

1) Humans and bacteria mutate (add beneficial mutations) at the same generational rate, or 50% more (3 mutations as opposed to 2)
2) a human generation to be all of 20 years

Calculation:
20*31500= 630,000

humans would be able to add three beneficial genes to their genome every ~600,000 years!!!

I will grant, assumption #2, and fact #3.

The rest of it, will require some facts to be confirmed to fully see if this calculation has been "tweaked". I think the fatal assumption in this calculation is the first one, that an asexual bacteria will mutate as fast, generationally speaking, as a sexually reproducing (vive la difference!) human being. It is a very messy, flawed assumption, as far as I can tell.

Bull has been called. Back up fact 1 and 2, and show me on what you base assumption 1.

We will see who is tweaking what.

(edit)
Although it is ultimately YOUR responsibility to back up YOUR claims and assertions. If you can't, or won't, try after a few days, I will do so myself, so don't at me for getting something wrong, when you can't be bothered to back up your claims.

[RandomGuy]

Before you accuse me of arguing semantics or avoiding your "central point", not that I have been able to figure out what exactly that is, you have called me out on "tweaking" calculations, and essentially accused me of being dishonest.

There will always be time to get to your central point, if it emerges, but since I am not allowed to "tweak" this calculation, it is your responsibility to show that it was a valid exercise in the first place.

If not, then you cannot reasonably fault anyone for attempting to "tweak" your calculations to get a more reasonable and realistic picture.

[clambake]

"I believe there are demons, bent on confusing mankind"

[MannyIsGod]

Schtick or not... nothing can change the fact that you're always an asinine jerk everyday of the week and twice on Sunday...

I respond -for-tat, in kind... you all aren't the most accommodatingly kind crowd, not by a long shot. That said, I can't recall 'lobbing bombs' at any poster who hadn't already thrown one at me... people like yourself, however, do so repeatedly (as if getting a rise out of others somehow validates your bitter existence).

For the most part my jabs tend to be subtle (and yes, sometimes overt as necessary), but those in your camp tend to throw vicious and spiteful crap in my direction all the time... Martyr??? Give me a break...

How's this for choice (a Mouse classic ):

Of all the people here, I know why someone like yourself fervently upholds the Evolutionary banner... I mean come on, you look at yourself in the mirror daily and effortlessly see the reflection of the "missing link"...

Like I said, Martyr complex.

PS How Christian of you, Hector.

[Phenomanul]

If you are going to do like that, quit ing about *anybody* being condecending. Hypocrisy is annoying.

My issue with your posting style is that you're one of the few people here that repost the same exact post (multiple times often) demanding that it be addressed immediately...

"Answer this NOW!!!"

That's what I was referencing as being condescending, and tbh that tactic is annoying as ... I can't think of others here that do that as often as you. That we insult our viewpoints along the way... I've come to accept that as the M.O. for these topics... There's no hypocrisy in understanding we've made this topic such an adversarial one...

Just look at this thread alone...

You quoted Blake's mocking statement, "Phenomanul itching to jump in" and launched your first argumentative attack... I hadn't even posted in the thread yet...

[ChumpDumper]

My issue with your posting style is that you're one of the few people here that repost the same exact post (multiple times often) demanding that it be addressed immediately...

"Answer this NOW!!!"

That's what I was referencing as being condescending, and tbh that tactic is annoying as ... I can't think of others here that do that as often as you. That we insult our viewpoints along the way... I've come to accept that as the M.O. for these topics... There's no hypocrisy in understanding we've made this topic such an adversarial one...

Just look at this thread alone...

You quoted Blake's mocking statement, "Phenomanul itching to jump in" and launched your first argumentative attack... I hadn't even posted in the thread yet...

Nice stall.

[Phenomanul]

Like I said, Martyr complex.

I give you mad props in other topics such as the atmospheric sciences...

When it comes to microbiology, however, sorry if I can't extend the same consideration... you've rarely addressed my arguments, simply the manner in which I make them...

BTW that was a mouse's facetious reference, not mine... Can't say that I'm sorry it hurt your feelings, though... seeing as you've never cared how your posts affect others...

[ChumpDumper]

you've rarely addressed my arguments, simply the manner in which I make them...

Much like your last post to RandomGuy.

[LnGrrrR]

I like the "I'm not lobbing bombs at anyone" part, a few posts after he denigrates all the atheists on the board.

Yet if you ask our forum agnostics... most of them likely consider the depravation of our society's 'moral fabric' as progress... They are blind to the overall loss in the strength of the 'family unit' as well as the consequences that this has had on the infrastructure of our society... not that they care, because they seem to be content with a society that harbors and condones unnecessary abortions, the legitimizing of the sexual lifestyle, rampant drug use, the increase in the spread of STDs, an increasing suicidal rate, the loss of innocence at far younger ages, an increasing disdain for authority, vulgar and crass vocabulary, and the general lack of respect for others, etc... To them America is better off this way, the 'American Dream' is "all about the Benjamins" all about "me, me, me..." and not about building each other up...

Certainly, no bombs there. That was the epitome of an insightful, nuanced stance which does equal duty to understand both sides of the debate.

[Phenomanul]

You mean tweak it like you tweaked it to make it conveniently *unfeasible*?

Let's dissect this here, as I think it is pretty symbolic of the kind and quality of arguments being made.

Facts stated:

1) "Two genes were altered in an asexual organism after 31,500 generations"
2) "there are over 40 million differences between our genome and the chimpanzee ‘next-of-kin’ genome…"
3) "it’s generally accepted that our lineages broke apart only 6 million years ago…"

Assumptions made to complete calculation:

1) Humans and bacteria mutate (add beneficial mutations) at the same generational rate, or 50% more (3 mutations as opposed to 2)
2) a human generation to be all of 20 years

Calculation:
20*31500= 630,000



I will grant, assumption #2, and fact #3.

The rest of it, will require some facts to be confirmed to fully see if this calculation has been "tweaked". I think the fatal assumption in this calculation is the first one, that an asexual bacteria will mutate as fast, generationally speaking, as a sexually reproducing (vive la difference!) human being. It is a very messy, flawed assumption, as far as I can tell.

Bull has been called. Back up fact 1 and 2, and show me on what you base assumption 1.

We will see who is tweaking what.

(edit)
Although it is ultimately YOUR responsibility to back up YOUR claims and assertions. If you can't, or won't, try after a few days, I will do so myself, so don't at me for getting something wrong, when you can't be bothered to back up your claims.

Well now that you've actually gone through the trouble of breaking down this exercise I will address your qualms with it despite the fact you're going down a tangential road again... BTW I'm pretty sure that's what I called it, an exercise - LOL treating this as if it were my central argument in this thread (I clearly stated what that was - see bottom of this post in case you've forgotten it)]...

First, I will point out that your contention with assumption No. 1 (given the factors that ElNono posted somewhere above [and I never got around to addressing his rebuttal]) was only loosely defined as a starting point. I believe I clearly stated that the propagation dynamics of beneficial mutations between sexual organisms and asexual ones were markedly different. (Again, are you even reading my posts?) The implication being that sexual organisms have more numerical probability hurdles to overcome before their mutations are successfully passed down to the next generation.

The fact that I would then use the gene mutation rate from Lenski's experiment to represent the propagation rate for that of sexual organisms would be a conservative assumption, not one that helps my cause... NOTE: I was using the do ented rate produced by Lenski's asexual organisms, because that's all we can use given his methods, and his results... To speculate as to why the rate should be higher, while valid, has not been confirmed in the lab setting... EVEN THEN, the resulting numbers from this quick exercise aren't favorable to the timeframe that is generally accepted for the evolutionary model of human descent...

Second, the 40 million base pairs difference figure (approximate genetic difference between Humans and Chimps) was obtained from one of the articles I have in my office. The reference is listed below:

Fujiyama, Asao, Hidemi Watanabe, et al., (2002), “Construction and Analysis of a Human-Chimpanzee Comparative Clone Map,” Science, 295:131-134, January 4.


And lest I forget, my central argument in this thread has been:

That the classification of new species to validate the process of macroevolutionary speciation is subjective... Especially for bacteria (which is why new classification strategies have been developed).

I then introduced Lenski's experiment to counter the claim that neoDarwinian Evolution has been proven fact (a claim many posters in this thread were making well before I jumped in)… Because even if his experiment, as elegantly structured as it was designed cannot conclusively make that claim, then none of us can... Of course, you balked with a "Debunked already" objection and spun off on other rants rather than address my contention that his claim is subjective and not authoritative...

[Phenomanul]

I like the "I'm not lobbing bombs at anyone" part, a few posts after he denigrates all the atheists on the board.

Certainly, no bombs there. That was the epitome of an insightful, nuanced stance which does equal duty to understand both sides of the debate.

I didn't say LnGrrR, or ElNono, or RandomGuy here you go... bombs away...

Typically however, many of you all have argued in favor of those other issues...

That rant was a bit boutons-esque... I'll admit that much. But it wasn't a direct personal attack on any one poster...

[Phenomanul]

Much like your last post to RandomGuy.

Except RandomGuy actually addresses the arguments themselves... even if sometimes they're tangential ones...

MIG enters these topics scoffingly, from the get-go. He might not like it if I respond in kind... but whatever.

Keep defending your folks moderator... good job!

[ChumpDumper]

Except RandomGuy actually addresses the arguments themselves... even if sometimes they're tangential ones...

MIG enters these topics scoffingly, from the get-go. He might not like it if I respond in kind... but whatever.

Keep defending your folks moderator... good job!

Keep playing the martyr... good job!

[Phenomanul]

Keep playing the martyr... good job!

Keep launching unsubstantiated and subjective one-liners... [and keep ignoring the actual discourse content, like you always do...]

[ChumpDumper]

Keep launching unsubstantiated and subjective one-liners... [and keep ignoring the actual discourse content, like you always do...]

I don't have a dog in this particular fight. Watching you whine and avoid answering direct questions is entertaining. Keep it up.

[MannyIsGod]

I give you mad props in other topics such as the atmospheric sciences...

When it comes to microbiology, however, sorry if I can't extend the same consideration... you've rarely addressed my arguments, simply the manner in which I make them...

BTW that was a mouse's facetious reference, not mine... Can't say that I'm sorry it hurt your feelings, though... seeing as you've never cared how your posts affect others...

Hurt my feelings? The day monkey references hurt my feels will be the day Jesus comes out of the clouds and says Phenomanul is my homeboy. Nice of you to add lying to the list, though. Mouse may have said it, but you made it your own when you used it in a manner intended to hurt. Man up to your actions.

I never claimed to be a microbiology expert nor even moderetly versed in the subject for that matter. Don't believe I ever engaged anyone here on the subject.

There's no point in engaging you in any of this. The moment you can't explain things, you chalk it up to supernatural. Like I said, we've been down this path before.

[Phenomanul]

I don't have a dog in this particular fight. Watching you whine and avoid answering direct questions is entertaining. Keep it up.

I don't know, seems like you've entered one... I've responded to what I can... you can't claim to be just another bystander...

[clambake]

dad really ed you up.

[ChumpDumper]

I don't know, seems like you've entered one... I've responded to what I can... you can't claim to be just another bystander...

Right, you got me. I claimed that you whine and play the martyr.

Your response was to whine and play the martyr.

Good talk.

[MannyIsGod]

Except RandomGuy actually addresses the arguments themselves... even if sometimes they're tangential ones...

MIG enters these topics scoffingly, from the get-go. He might not like it if I respond in kind... but whatever.

Keep defending your folks moderator... good job!

RG most definitely has more patience than me. I ran out with you a LONG time ago.

[ChumpDumper]

I have said before that all these arguments merely come down to matters of faith which simply can't be debated. There's a line where some will simply throw up their hands and say "God did it." and that's all that's going to be said after that.

We know where that line is with you, Phenomanul. All the rest is your personal Christ-like martyrdom. You could have picked a worse roll model, but I don't think Jesus was so emo.

[RandomGuy]

My issue with your posting style is that you're one of the few people here that repost the same exact post (multiple times often) demanding that it be addressed immediately...

"Answer this NOW!!!"

That's what I was referencing as being condescending, and tbh that tactic is annoying as ... I can't think of others here that do that as often as you. That we insult our viewpoints along the way... I've come to accept that as the M.O. for these topics... There's no hypocrisy in understanding we've made this topic such an adversarial one...

Just look at this thread alone...

You quoted Blake's mocking statement, "Phenomanul itching to jump in" and launched your first argumentative attack... I hadn't even posted in the thread yet...

If I can't get an straightforward answer to a simple yes or no question, I will ask until I get something that I feel is sufficient to answer it.

If I ask the question:

Do you want pickles on your sandwich for lunch?

The answer is not a 5 paragraph rambling polemic.

I will refrain from being deliberately condescending going forward, but will ask a simple question as many times as it takes to get what I feel is a straight answer.

If you choose to imply that I am either stupid, or ignorant, I will tell you in no uncertain terms to off. Unfortunately for you, I am neither.

[RandomGuy]

Well now that you've actually gone through the trouble of breaking down this exercise I will address your qualms with it despite the fact you're going down a tangential road again...

It ceases becoming tangential when you accuse me of dishonesty. "RG will tweak the numbers so it changes".

Then it becomes rather important, so, again, stop ing about it. We can get to your central idea in due time. The internet ain't going anywhere.

[LnGrrrR]

I didn't say LnGrrR, or ElNono, or RandomGuy here you go... bombs away...

If I said something along the lines of, "All Christians are idiots, and they deserve to have their voting privileges taken away", would that NOT be a bomb because I didn't name anyone specifically?

That rant was a bit boutons-esque... I'll admit that much. But it wasn't a direct personal attack on any one poster...

Thanks for the admittance. While it wasn't a direct personal attack, it still was an attack. I take umbrage to being lumped into one category and then skewered on the basis of that category.