Elsewhere on the internet...

The League of Reason has some social media accounts! You can find us on Facebook or on Twitter for some interesting links and things.

Evolution for Leroy

Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 5
 [ 86 posts ] 
Evolution for Leroy
Author Message
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

And one more point: no, of course I don't mean whatever you capitulated.

I mean what I wrote in the sentence you've picked out. When I use the term 'step by step' it is immediately followed with my own definition of the words I used, which is the iterative process of reproduction, and the effects of births and deaths on allele frequencies in a population.


Sparhafoc wrote: Evolution is specifically the changes in allele (gene variants) frequencies (statistical distribution) in a population, and each and every step - every time an offspring is born or a member of that population dies, then the allele frequencies in that population have changed too.


So perhaps I have my answer as to whether you processed what I wrote?

Clearly, I never said anything whatsoever about whatever you claimed I said, and the step by step I was referring to, and explained in the sentence you cited, was about the birth and death of individuals in a gene pool, and that this alone (regardless of anything else) represents a change in the frequencies of alleles in a population, and is therefore evolution. To note, so no other shenanigans can occur, I did not say it is the only way in which evolution occurs, nor do I suggest it represents any thing more than 1 of many examples (which I provided) of the type of evolution you deny.

Not sure how you can even think that I meant that organisms' birth and death are 'caused by RANDOM genetic changes' when that's a non-sequitur, and doollaly - just nonsensical.

Births are caused by fucking, LEROY. Sperm, eggs, mitosis embryology and so on. Causal there has to be proximate, as any arbitrarily selected other 'cause' would not provide a rational or coherent response.

Deaths are caused by a myriad of things, LEROY, whether that be falling over and squishing yourself, being squished, or any other numerous ways organisms can die, if by nothing else, then by cellular senescence or by replicative senescence, LEROY.

So how can you so bizarrely mistake what I wrote for whatever nonsense you then went on to capitulate?

Please do explain very clearly why you did this, LEROY.

Given I have just told you in no uncertain terms that I will not accept you misrepresenting what I write (and provided you with an object example of what happens when you do), why are you appearing to do exactly that again?

If it's just a poor comprehension on your part, then people might give you a bit more leeway rather than assuming (based on tangible evidence) that you're just pulling our collective plonkers.

Either which way, I would like an explanation.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 3:11 pm
leroyPosts: 1349Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 1:30 pm

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Sparhafoc wrote: I am telling you about what empirical evidence shows to be factual.


ok so what does the empirical evidence shows? for example

in order to evolve an eye form a blind eyeless creature this creature would need genetic changes................agree?

where this genetic changes random (random mutations) or where these genetic changes guided in some way



Now please address the rest of my post rather than seeming to, once again, ignore all of it to pick at a couple of words you think you can address.


My reply is depended on your answer, I would answer differently depending if you answer yes or no to the question



However, you've written 'random genetic change' and I have no idea what you mean there because you also include selection, which thereby means the genetic change is not wholly random. Instead, I assume you mean random mutation, i.e. de novo genes arising in the population pool. Even then, mutation isn't strictly 'random'


that is not the definition of random mutation, (but I am assuming that you made a fare mistake, you probably meant base pairs instead of genes)


Mutations are random
Mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful for the organism, but mutations do not "try" to supply what the organism "needs." Factors in the environment may influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random —

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07
this is what I mean with random mutations


so for example do you believe that the eye evolved mainly as a consequence of random mutations that where then selected by natural selection.? or do you believe that the mechanism that causes these mutations was not random and was "trying" to create an eye.





you've written 'random genetic change' and I have no idea what you mean there because you also include selection, which thereby means the genetic change is not wholly random


the genetic change (mutation) is random and then natural selection (not random) selects the beneficial mutations and rejects the harmful mutations.

even if some loci are more likely to suffer form a mutation than others, the process would essentially be random.


does this represents your view?




I honestly made my best effort, ether I am very bad in asking and explaining questions or you are very bad in understand them this is going to be my last
try


I mean what I wrote in the sentence you've picked out. When I use the term 'step by step' it is immediately followed with my own definition of the words I used, which is the iterative process of reproduction, and the effects of births and deaths on allele frequencies in a population.


Sparhafoc wrote:
Evolution is specifically the changes in allele (gene variants) frequencies (statistical distribution) in a population, and each and every step - every time an offspring is born or a member of that population dies, then the allele frequencies in that population have changed too..



ok for that I apologize, my mistake,
"events with a zero probability happen all the time"
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:10 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Does everyone else see my previous three posts where I tell LEROY in no uncertain terms that he has failed to address my post honestly, and has apparently once again misrepresented what I wrote?

Does everyone else see that I wrote I am not going to reply to any more JAQing off until he acknowledges the content of the post he misrepresented?

If other people can't see those posts, then I must be going mad, and that would explain an awful lot about this 'conversation'.

If other people can see those posts, how do we proceed with LEROY when he is repeatedly performing these tricks in every thread and refuses to engage in even the most elementary discoursive honesty?
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:18 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

in order to evolve an eye form a blind eyeless creature this creature would need genetic changes................agree?


LEROY asking me if I agree with the point I have literally spent thousands of words explaining to him: that genotype->phenotype.

It's like we're using the same language, but every word has a slightly different meaning for each other.

Now the 4th time LEROY has asked me if I agree with something that I already wrote.

/scratchy head emoticon really needed
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:21 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Read, come back with real questions:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genotype- ... istinction

The genotype–phenotype distinction is drawn in genetics. "Genotype" is an organism's full hereditary information. "Phenotype" is an organism's actual observed properties, such as morphology, development, or behavior. This distinction is fundamental in the study of inheritance of traits and their evolution.

It is the organism's physical properties which directly determine its chances of survival and reproductive output, while the inheritance of physical properties occurs only as a secondary consequence of the inheritance of genes. Therefore, to properly understand the theory of evolution via natural selection, one must understand the genotype–phenotype distinction. The genes contribute to a trait, and the phenotype is the observable expression of the genes (and therefore the genotype that affects the trait). Say a white mouse had the recessive genes that caused the genes that cause the color of the mouse to be inactive (so "cc"). Its genotype would be responsible for its phenotype (the white color).
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:22 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

that is not the definition of random mutation, (but I am assuming that you made a fare mistake, you probably meant base pairs instead of genes)


Oh fuck me sideways with a cactus.

The irony of LEROY thinking he can tell me the definition of mutation, after I just spent several hundred words explaining why his 'random genetic changes' canard is illiterate, nonsensical, and tautological, and then explaining that we're talking about mutations, and then providing a clear set of examples why not all mutation is random...

Even then, mutation isn't strictly 'random'. There are genes which cannot mutate, they are fixed. Mutations there would just make the organism fail biologically. Similarly, on the opposite end of the spectrum there are genes which are very easy to change, which have little effect on phenotype, and essentially fly under the radar of evolution. - a good example of this would be non-coding DNA. Science has long talked (5 decades at least) about the problem with the Hopeful Monster notion, as in, if dramatic gene changes occurred wholly at random or in huge steps as per the oft-used Creationist strawman, then the chances are that the mutations will affect something critical and the individual with those mutations would not survive. Instead, small changes are less likely to have major dysfunctional effect, and then present a new platform of genotype from which other mutations can occur, and a modified genetic environment for the other genes to be expressed. We don't find hopeful monsters either in the fossil record, or in the lab, nor do we expect to. Thus cats evolving to dogs, ducks evolving to crocodiles etc. is a notion held only by Creationists, not predicted by evolution.


It's like being in an insane asylum. I write A, B, C, LEROY asks me why I've written 'banana' and then explains why 'banana' is wrong.

So yeah, after me explaining to you, you then think you can explain what I just educated you about back to me.

Do you do anything other than unwarranted hubris?

You don't realize this (although everyone else knows) but I am writing to you in simple terms so you can understand. Yet even then, even when dumbed down and spelled out to the nth degree, you're not getting it.

I don't credit you with that much stupidity, LEROY. I think there's a motivation that summarizes all your tenure here, and indeed, the motivation for your tenure.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:26 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

This is what we'd be discussing if you possessed the competence. You don't, we can't talk about this with you because you don't even understand extremely simplified and abridged explanations which you'd need to implicitly comprehend to have a seat at the table.

http://jb.asm.org/content/182/11/2993.full

A Biochemical Mechanism for Nonrandom Mutations and Evolution. Wright, Barbara. Journal of Bacteriology

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v ... 10665.html

Predicting mutation outcome from early stochastic variation in genetic interaction partners. Burga, Alexander et al, Nature 480

https://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/artic ... -7007-9-41

Stochastic dynamics and the evolution of mutations in stem cells. Dingly, David, BMC Biology 2011


Perhaps a pop science source might get through to you where otherwise perfectly clear English fails.


https://www.livescience.com/48103-evolu ... andom.html
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles. ... y-random-/

Or perhaps even that's too tough? Maybe just dumping all the reading stuff written for non-specialists for you to work through first, then you can come back and have sufficient understanding to propose whatever crap it is you're proposing. Note, you won't be able to if you process what we do know via evidence, rather than the guff you thought up in your hostile armchair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_expression
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatio ... expression
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_silencing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conserved_sequence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_allele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutationi ... ion_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_repair

Once you're done, I've got 8 more, and another 8, and many more 8's before you possess the competence to continue.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:53 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07
this is what I mean with random mutations


Yeah, a source for children. Didn't the comic strips give that away, LEROY?

You realize that the information contained on that page represents... I would hazard a guess.... substantially less than 1% of what we know about genetic mutation?

Are you really going to engage in more lazy fallacies and state that because X is not on that page for children that X is not true?

Wouldn't any serious person actually understand immediately that just because X is not on that particular page, that doesn't mean X is not true, it could much more easily mean that the page is not comprehensive, nor is it intended to be?

In your source for children, didn't you read anything else?

Like...

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_05

Like, how that page lists all the things I just explained to you, and to which you replied condescendingly as if you knew better? That following your repeated usage of a term you made up which repeatedly showed you didn't know the word 'mutation' and kept uttering contrived tautologies?

Boggling, LEROY, truly boggling. I don't know if you think you can fool me or other people (the former assuredly not, the latter very unlikely unless they possess a competence equal to yours), or whether you are just fooling yourself.

This is why people laugh at Creationists, LEROY. All of it. It's either laugh or cry.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 4:58 pm
leroyPosts: 1349Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 1:30 pm

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Sparhafoc wrote:
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07
this is what I mean with random mutations


Yeah, a source for children. Didn't the comic strips give that away, LEROY?

You realize that the information contained on that page represents... I would hazard a guess.... substantially less than 1% of what we know about genetic mutation?

Are you really going to engage in more lazy fallacies and state that because X is not on that page for children that X is not true?

Wouldn't any serious person actually understand immediately that just because X is not on that particular page, that doesn't mean X is not true, it could much more easily mean that the page is not comprehensive, nor is it intended to be?

In your source for children, didn't you read anything else?

Like...

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_05

Like, how that page lists all the things I just explained to you, and to which you replied condescendingly as if you knew better? That following your repeated usage of a term you made up which repeatedly showed you didn't know the word 'mutation' and kept uttering contrived tautologies?

Boggling, LEROY, truly boggling. I don't know if you think you can fool me or other people (the former assuredly not, the latter very unlikely unless they possess a competence equal to yours), or whether you are just fooling yourself.

This is why people laugh at Creationists, LEROY. All of it. It's either laugh or cry.




:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:


what a surprise, an other atheist that is unable to answer a simple yes or no question.................


I did my best and after several tries you where unable to answer a very simple question, so ether I am to bad in explaining stuff or you are too stupid to understand it


please contact me, whenever you are ready to provide direct answers.




so a question for anyone else in the forum.

do you believe that eyes evolved mainly trough random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

do you believe that the genetic differences between chimps and humans are mainly due to random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

do you believe that modern birds evolved from ancient dinosaurs mainly through random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

this are simple yes or no questions, that for some reason Sparhafoc is unable to understand

this is what I mean by random mutation
Mutations are random
Mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful for the organism, but mutations do not "try" to supply what the organism "needs." Factors in the environment may influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random —

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07


I ve been in this forum for quite a while and I already learned my lesson, if an atheist is unable to answer a simple question after 2 or 3 tries, he wont do it after 100 tries ether so there is no point in asking the same thing again.
"events with a zero probability happen all the time"
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:16 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

One last comment in my string of comments, and that is my point earlier made about the necessity of admitting error if truth is ever involved.

We will see this at some point.

What will happen is that I will make a mistake because I am not a geneticist, or a biochemist, or many other areas of expertise that we necessarily have to traipse through in the Creationist merry-go-round. (I am part palaeoanthropologist, part sociobiologist with a focus on anatomy and primate behavior.)

Someone like Rumraket will come along and explain that I was wrong.

If I don't understand, I will say I don't understand, not try and tell him he needs to work within my paradigm he's suggested is flawed.

I might even ask Rumraket to support his argument, and you can bet your red-raw rectum that he would do so instantly and with great pleasure (it's one of the very few immediate pleasures we get in the sciences).

At that point, I would read the source, confirm that Rumraket's point was correct, and state unequivocally that it was my mistake, and thank him for correcting me.

That last point is quite telling. Correction when in error should be met with gratitude for removing falsehood, not ego and foolishness.

You can guarantee that I will make a mistake some time - who doesn't? I've made plenty of mistakes in my own field, that's how you learn - and that someone will correct me. Then watch what happens and learn how your hubris is the elephant in the room blocking your vision.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:19 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

what a surprise, an other atheist that is unable to answer a simple yes or no question.................


And the lying cunt is back - what a surprise! :D

Do you still beat your wife, LEROY?

WHY CAN"T CREATIONISTS ANSWER A SIMPLE QUESTION BLAH BLAH BLAH WHACK WHACK WHACK SPLUUUUUUUUUUURGE OH YEAH!

What a cunt you are, a nasty, devious, self-obsessed little runt of a cunt.

And you've been told you delusional ignoramus that I am not a fucking atheist, so pop your cock back in your mouth where it clearly belongs.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:21 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

The purpose of this argument method is to keep asking leading questions to attempt to influence spectators' views, regardless of whatever answers are given..... Additionally, this tactic is a way for a crank to escape the burden of proof behind extraordinary claims.


As explained in such simple English even a lobotomized newt would potentially have more chance of comprehending than Lying Cunt LEROY,

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loaded_question

A loaded question or complex question fallacy is a question that contains a controversial or unjustified assumption

...

A common way out of this argument is not to answer the question (e.g. with a simple 'yes' or 'no'), but to challenge the assumption behind the question.



So, the 50 gajillion times I've said exactly that, for example:

Sparhafoc wrote:And then you ask me the same question with the same mistaken assumptions I've just spent time explaining to you, and indicate I didn't answer your question. Yes, I fixed your broken question and educated you as to why it's an error on your part, and therefore basically a loaded question. The answer to a loaded question, LEROY, is always to deconstruct the erroneous assumptions and explain why they're erroneous. Any following retort cannot simply restate the same errors and expect a different answer.


Yet that's exactly what you did. Restate the same ignorant bullshit that you were already shown was ignorant bullshit, and then you even tried to get the boot in like the snivelling little shitbag you are.

You had your chance, tool. Now you have the pleasure of permanently being on my shit list.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:26 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Sparhafoc wrote:In your source for children, didn't you read anything else?

Like...

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_05



LEROY got caught with his cock in his mouth again, and so what did he do? :)

Of course, I think everyone who's exchanged more than 2 messages with him knows the answer.

Throw shit, hope it covers his retreat!

Not an honest bone in his body.

His own 'source' (for children lol) confirms exactly what I wrote, but to which he replied dismissively citing only this very source! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Humpty Numpty McCunty wrote:that is not the definition of random mutation, (but I am assuming that you made a fare mistake, you probably meant base pairs instead of genes)
http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07
this is what I mean with random mutations


Yep, the same 'source' he forwards as his definition of why I am wrong he then ignores when it turns out he didn't even fucking bother reading it because it says exactly what I said! :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Maybe the comic strips distracted him? :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Morons look up to you LEROY, they aspire to attain your facility for shoving your head up your own anal passage and blowing bubbles.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:34 pm
leroyPosts: 1349Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 1:30 pm

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Sparhafoc wrote:One
Someone like Rumraket will come along and explain that I was wrong.

.



don't worry sooner or later he will come and explain that your definition of mutation is wrong

Instead, I assume you mean random mutation, i.e. de novo genes arising in the population pool.


and I am pretty sure that someone like Rumarket would answer to my question with a simple yes or no

my question
while your position is that random genetic change, natural selection and genetic drift can account for all (or nearly all) the diversity that we observe, including the origin of complex organs and systems (wings, eyes, reproductive systems, brains etc.)


so is that your position? yes or no?


My question explained with apples and oranges

do you believe that eyes evolved mainly trough random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

do you believe that the genetic differences between chimps and humans are mainly due to random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

do you believe that modern birds evolved from ancient dinosaurs mainly through random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?


this is what I mean by random mutation
Mutations are random
Mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful for the organism, but mutations do not "try" to supply what the organism "needs." Factors in the environment may influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random —

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07
"events with a zero probability happen all the time"
Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:54 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

leroy wrote:Someone like Rumraket will come along and explain that I was wrong.


No, he won't because Rumraket's not a thick cunt like you, so he will agree that there are a) random mutations and b) mutations that are not strictly random, such as all the examples I gave and which were repeated in your own comic book source! :lol: :lol: :lol:

Remember: you know squat, and you show it over and over. I actually base my claims on the work of scientists in their field doing their studies.

You know, like the list of papers above which you are now desperately trying to deflect from like the stunted little half-man you are!


leroy wrote:don't worry sooner or later he will come and explain that your definition of mutation is wrong


Pretty clear you are infatuated with faith positions based on your wildly over-inflated ego.



leroy wrote:and I am pretty sure that someone like Rumarket would answer to my question with a simple yes or no


No, what Rumraket would say is: the question 'do you still beat your wife?' is a loaded question because of X, Y, and Z, and therefore I reject the implicit and unjustified assumption you've made and tried to get me to accept as you JAQ off.

I've known Bumcrack for 10 years, give or take, and I know his standards of honesty, credibility and integrity are impeccable - i.e. the exact opposite of yours, you lying cunt.


leroy wrote:my question
while your position is that random genetic change, natural selection and genetic drift can account for all (or nearly all) the diversity that we observe, including the origin of complex organs and systems (wings, eyes, reproductive systems, brains etc.)

so is that your position? yes or no?



My question: have you stopped beating your wife yet?

So have you?

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

Have you stopped?

Beating your wife, I mean.

So have you stopped beating her yet, or do you still beat her?

Tell me, do you still beat her, LEROY?

Do you beat her?

Does it turn you on when you beat your wife, LEROY?

Does it make you feel like a man because your silly little overinflated ego is always an indication of a pathetic little shitbag lurking behind the anonymity the internet affords?

Does your wife like it when you beat her, LEROY?

Have you asked her if she likes it when you beat your wife, LEROY?

Or do you just assume your wife enjoys being beaten, LEROY?

If you found out that your wife didn't enjoy your beatings, LEROY - would you stop?



How long do you want to persist in this transparently idiotic mumblefuckery you joker?

I answered your question in spades - who do you think you're fooling, you ignorant fool?


leroy wrote:My question explained with apples and oranges


And red herrings, and Wednesdays, and rainfall in the spring.

Sadly, no discoursive etiquette, no sense of honesty, no competence, and no emotional maturity - just apples and oranges.



leroy wrote:do you believe that the genetic differences between chimps and humans are mainly due to random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?

do you believe that modern birds evolved from ancient dinosaurs mainly through random mutations and selection (and genetic drift)?



Sparhafoc wrote:Does everyone else see my previous three posts where I tell LEROY in no uncertain terms that he has failed to address my post honestly, and has apparently once again misrepresented what I wrote?

Does everyone else see that I wrote I am not going to reply to any more JAQing off until he acknowledges the content of the post he misrepresented?

If other people can't see those posts, then I must be going mad, and that would explain an awful lot about this 'conversation'.

If other people can see those posts, how do we proceed with LEROY when he is repeatedly performing these tricks in every thread and refuses to engage in even the most elementary discoursive honesty?




leroy wrote:this is what I mean by random mutation
Mutations are random
Mutations can be beneficial, neutral, or harmful for the organism, but mutations do not "try" to supply what the organism "needs." Factors in the environment may influence the rate of mutation but are not generally thought to influence the direction of mutation. For example, exposure to harmful chemicals may increase the mutation rate, but will not cause more mutations that make the organism resistant to those chemicals. In this respect, mutations are random —

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_07



:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

And here's what you don't mean by mutation cos you're a clueless muppet masquerading as knowledgeable to strangers on the internet who sadly know he's terminally and irremediably thick and a lying cunt:

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrar ... tations_05

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

The effects of mutations
an apple with a somatic mutation Since all cells in our body contain DNA, there are lots of places for mutations to occur; however, some mutations cannot be passed on to offspring and do not matter for evolution. Somatic mutations occur in non-reproductive cells and won't be passed onto offspring.



Check, I wrote that to LEROY explaining that somatic mutations don't get passed on to offspring, but LEROY wanted to say I was wrong on this, for magical reasons!


The only mutations that matter to large-scale evolution are those that can be passed on to offspring. These occur in reproductive cells like eggs and sperm and are called germ line mutations.


Check, I explained that to LEROY in nearly the same words, but he tried to deny it, failed, changed to another stalking horse.


Effects of germ line mutations
A single germ line mutation can have a range of effects:

A single mutation caused this cat's ears to curl backwards slightly.

No change occurs in phenotype.
Some mutations don't have any noticeable effect on the phenotype of an organism. This can happen in many situations: perhaps the mutation occurs in a stretch of DNA with no function, or perhaps the mutation occurs in a protein-coding region, but ends up not affecting the amino acid sequence of the protein.

Small change occurs in phenotype.
A single mutation caused this cat's ears to curl backwards slightly.

Big change occurs in phenotype.
Some really important phenotypic changes, like DDT resistance in insects are sometimes caused by single mutations. A single mutation can also have strong negative effects for the organism. Mutations that cause the death of an organism are called lethals — and it doesn't get more negative than that.


Check, I wrote all of that, but in more actual detail about the operating mechanisms, like regulatory genes and how they might effect genotype expression. LEROY pretends that this is not in his OWN COMICBOOK SOURCE! :lol: :lol:


Some regions of DNA control other genes, determining when and where other genes are turned "on". Mutations in these parts of the genome can substantially change the way the organism is built.


Check.

Many organisms have powerful control genes that determine how the body is laid out. For example, Hox genes are found in many animals (including flies and humans) and designate where the head goes and which regions of the body grow appendages. Such master control genes help direct the building of body "units," such as segments, limbs, and eyes. So evolving a major change in basic body layout may not be so unlikely; it may simply require a change in a Hox gene and the favor of natural selection.


This one slightly differs from what I wrote, not that what I wrote excludes it, but it wasn't what I was driving at. There are genes involved in core structural components that can't mutate because they any sudden change here would be more likely to result in a severely deleterious effect. Of course, I don't mean the mutation itself can't happen - it can, but as it instantly kills the foetus, it leaves the gene pool and the mutation is not heritable; i.e. another of the points LEROY can't comprehend but wants to claim is wrong.


We can, of course, not look at comic book precis for children.

We could, for example, be looking at the articles by real people with real knowledge who really got off their arses and did something rather than thinking they are the gospel of the natural world.

But LEROY can't even understand a comic book source - what fucking hope would he have at the big boy's table? :lol: :lol:
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 6:17 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

What's that? Hard to read, comprehensive sources?

LOOK OVER THERE!!!

/sound of LEROY attempting to flap his way to safety


Sparhafoc wrote:This is what we'd be discussing if you possessed the competence. You don't, we can't talk about this with you because you don't even understand extremely simplified and abridged explanations which you'd need to implicitly comprehend to have a seat at the table.

http://jb.asm.org/content/182/11/2993.full

A Biochemical Mechanism for Nonrandom Mutations and Evolution. Wright, Barbara. Journal of Bacteriology

https://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v ... 10665.html

Predicting mutation outcome from early stochastic variation in genetic interaction partners. Burga, Alexander et al, Nature 480

https://bmcbiol.biomedcentral.com/artic ... -7007-9-41

Stochastic dynamics and the evolution of mutations in stem cells. Dingly, David, BMC Biology 2011


Perhaps a pop science source might get through to you where otherwise perfectly clear English fails.


https://www.livescience.com/48103-evolu ... andom.html
http://www.the-scientist.com/?articles. ... y-random-/

Or perhaps even that's too tough? Maybe just dumping all the reading stuff written for non-specialists for you to work through first, then you can come back and have sufficient understanding to propose whatever crap it is you're proposing. Note, you won't be able to if you process what we do know via evidence, rather than the guff you thought up in your hostile armchair.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenotype
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_expression
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulatio ... expression
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_silencing
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conserved_sequence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fixed_allele
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutationi ... ion_theory
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DNA_repair

Once you're done, I've got 8 more, and another 8, and many more 8's before you possess the competence to continue.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 6:19 pm
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

https://www.livescience.com/48103-evolu ... andom.html

What's that?

Sorry, I can't hear you because I don't read words, just intuit the gospel according to ME!

Oh wait...

But changes in genetic material that occur at the molecular level are not entirely random, a new study suggests. These mutations are guided by both the physical properties of the genetic code and the need to preserve the critical function of proteins, the researchers said.



LA LA LA LA LA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Thu Jul 13, 2017 6:20 pm
he_who_is_nobodyBloggerUser avatarPosts: 3222Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2009 1:36 amLocation: Albuquerque, New Mexico Gender: Male

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

Sparhafoc wrote:Does everyone else see my previous three posts where I tell LEROY in no uncertain terms that he has failed to address my post honestly, and has apparently once again misrepresented what I wrote?

Does everyone else see that I wrote I am not going to reply to any more JAQing off until he acknowledges the content of the post he misrepresented?

If other people can't see those posts, then I must be going mad, and that would explain an awful lot about this 'conversation'.

If other people can see those posts, how do we proceed with LEROY when he is repeatedly performing these tricks in every thread and refuses to engage in even the most elementary discoursive honesty?


I can see your posts. However, you are dealing with a dandan/leroy special. He has written a script for you. No matter how many times you demonstrate his script is broken, he will keep coming back to it. Honestly, his only other option would be to act honest and deal with the answers people give him.
_BONES AND FOSSILS = LOVE_
(_'--------------------'_)
(_.--------------------._)
Fri Jul 14, 2017 4:32 am
YIM WWW
SparhafocPosts: 536Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2017 6:48 am

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

he_who_is_nobody wrote:I can see your posts. However, you are dealing with a dandan/leroy special. He has written a script for you. No matter how many times you demonstrate his script is broken, he will keep coming back to it. Honestly, his only other option would be to act honest and deal with the answers people give him.



What's interesting is that he hasn't yet noted that this just won't work on me.

I am pedantic to a fault (note this means I think pedantry is a positive characteristic :D ) and I won't simply ignore all the previous bullshit and be tugged along by LEROY's latest attempt at distraction.
If a human disagrees with you, let him live! In a hundred billion galaxies you will not find another!
Fri Jul 14, 2017 9:18 am
leroyPosts: 1349Joined: Sat Apr 04, 2015 1:30 pm

Post Re: Evolution for Leroy

he_who_is_nobody wrote:
Sparhafoc wrote:Does everyone else see my previous three posts where I tell LEROY in no uncertain terms that he has failed to address my post honestly, and has apparently once again misrepresented what I wrote?

Does everyone else see that I wrote I am not going to reply to any more JAQing off until he acknowledges the content of the post he misrepresented?

If other people can't see those posts, then I must be going mad, and that would explain an awful lot about this 'conversation'.

If other people can see those posts, how do we proceed with LEROY when he is repeatedly performing these tricks in every thread and refuses to engage in even the most elementary discoursive honesty?


I can see your posts. However, you are dealing with a dandan/leroy special. He has written a script for you. No matter how many times you demonstrate his script is broken, he will keep coming back to it. Honestly, his only other option would be to act honest and deal with the answers people give him.


I dealt with your answers and explain why are you wrong
"events with a zero probability happen all the time"
Fri Jul 14, 2017 3:10 pm
PreviousNext
Post new topic Reply to topic  Page 4 of 5
 [ 86 posts ] 
Return to Science & Mathematics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 7 guests
cron