View Single Post
Old 13th April 2008, 09:55 AM   #32
Dancing David
Penultimate Amazing
 
Dancing David's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: central Illinois
Posts: 39,699
Thanks for the response.
Originally Posted by wogoga View Post
It is difficult to discuss with persons who, if necessary, deny the obvious in order to defend their dogmatic beliefs.
It is even more difficult to debate people who just use words but don't defend the definition that they use and just assert stuff without evidence.

How are you measuring progress, you just leave that out don't you? Progress towards what?
Quote:
Do you also deny a progress in telecommunication over the last decades? And if you do not deny such a progress, why should an increase in complexity of human communication skills not qualify for being considered real progress?
Um, how do you define the complexity of human communication?

What standard are you using? What can we talk about that has meaning? And human communication skills, regards what, the ability to talk, the ability to play music, the ability to use a cell phone.

Vague assertions are still use vague assertions.

So what area are you talking about.

A lion is very progressed as well, so what standard are you using as a goal of 'progress'?
Quote:

I understand your logic: If there is no progress, then no genetic information corresponding to biological innovations must be explained by random errors and subsequent selection and trivial probability arguments showing the impossibility of an information increase by such a mechanism can be dismissed.
No, you don't understand my argument at all.

Why not address your false contention that there is only one mechanism by which variation can occur and natural selection can act upon it.

Or do you just attack straw men?

Here I will bold it for you again:

[b] There are multiple ways that there can be variation amongst members of a species, one of which is mutation, but natural selection just needs the variation. The mechanism for variation is not important[b]
Quote:

Even if we take into account that random mutations include also duplications, inversions, transpositions, recombination, etc., single-step mutations (affecting only two bit = 0.25 byte) are the most frequent form of genetic change. And it at least contradicts common sense
Common sense, like the world is flat, that is a great argument!
Quote:
to explain the emergence of human language and intelligence primarily by a sequence of such 0.25 byte (!) changes, each of which must imply such a strong increase in fitness that it spreads to the whole population. Not to forget that the majority of such random 0.25 byte changes have negative effects.
You still just like to state things you have already stated and then pat yourself on the back.

You don't need mutation to have variation, any mechanism will do.

Fitness is only fitness to reproduce.

I directly gave you a mathematical model for how natural selection through reproduction works.

You ignored it, hmm, maybe because you can't actual argue except by attacking straw men.

And you still have shown anything to demonstrate why a change (mutation in this case) is detrimental. Not even part of the time. You just assert it.
Quote:






I'm actually astonished! So you agree with the title of the thread: If random mutations are not needed in the evolution of humans, then it is obvious that random mutations cannot explain human evolution.
that is just bad logic , I don't even need the Boolean to explain that.

The set of variation that leads to natural selection is larger than the set of mutation that leads to natural selection.

So apparently your grasp of logic is equal to your grasp of evolution.
Quote:

Your claim however entails that all the genetic information concerning humans was already somehow present in the population of our proto-chimp/human ancestors. This does not resolve the problem of the emergence of the information needed for humans, it only shifts the problem further into the past.
More straw. i said that variation in traits is enough to produce something for natural selection through reproductive success to act upon.

You do not need information prepackaged.
Quote:

Cheers, Wolfgang
So to date you get a 'F' for your essays: address the points and stop attacking you own mistaken ideas.

Here I will recap for you.

1. There are multiple mechanism by which variation between individuals may occur in a population, that is all natural selection needs.

2. I showed you a mathematical demonstration , albeit simplified, where it is shown how natural selection might increase a trait in a population.

3. You have not demonstrated in the least why genetic miscopies would always be detrimental.

4, You show mistaken logic by saying that since there are other mechanisms through which variation can occur, mutations can not lead to variation that natural selecti9on can act upon.

So far you can't pass high school rhetoric, you have an 'F+' because you do at least use proper grammar and spelling.
__________________
I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn
And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch
You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager
Never underestimate the power of the Random Number God. More of evolutionary history is His doing than people think. - Dinwar
Dancing David is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top