Blowing Up Darwin

[PoliticalChic]

While the science establishment continues to stone-wall the public, "There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution." This was the testimony of Eugenie Scott to the Texas State Board of Education in January when the Board was debating new state science curriculum standards. Dr. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), ..." Stutz, T. Texas education board debates teaching of evolution. Dallas Morning News, January 21, 2009....

a. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer produced a binder of one hundred peer-reviewed scientific articles in which biologists described significant problems with the theory.
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt."

b. The attempt to prevent students from hearing of the problems with evolutionary theory is exactly the kind of indoctrination that critics of the Left have been railing about. “Avoid Debates. If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to ‘defend evolution,’ please decline...you probably will get beaten.”
Scott, Eugenie C., "Monkey Business," The Sciences (January/February 1996), pp. 20-25.






" Because the claims of Darwinism are presented to the public as "science"most people are under the impression that they are supported by direct evidence such as experiments and fossil record studies This impression is seriously misleading[: it is false.]
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17

Let that sink in.....then re-consider your belief in Darwin's thesis.




Notice that I provide documentation in my posts.

 

[Hollie]

More than interesting is the fact that the Royal Sociey conference was not about defending Darwin's thesis.


"Much debate at the conference centered around the question of whether these new mechanisms could be incorporated into the basic population genetics framework of neo-Darwinism, thus making possible a new “extended” evolutionary synthesis, or whether the emphasis on new mechanisms of evolutionary change represented a radical, and theoretically incommensurable, break with established theory.

This largely semantic, or classificatory, issue obscured a deeper question that few, if any, of the presentations confronted head on: the issue of the origin of genuine phenotypic novelty — the problem that Müller described in his opening talk."

Why the Royal Society Meeting Mattered, in a Nutshell | Evolution News

The proceedings confirmed something that advocates of intelligent design, including Stephen Meyer and others, have been saying for years.

evolutionnews.org

Suddenly real scientific criticism of Darwin's theory comes to the fore and makes it difficult to claim it is a proven fact.

Your religion of neo-ID'iot creationism is funny.

Suddenly, you expect your hyper-religionism to be accepted as anything but a manifestation of fear, superstition and ignorance.

I suppose you didn't know your God of fraud, Meyer, is not a scientist.

 

[Hollie]

As recent developments have proven that the Democrats/Left has no compunction as far as lies, hoaxes and slander, it is time to highlight their similar attempts at the basis of Western Civilization….religion.
And the use of Darwin’s theory to attack same.

In this thread, an interview that Piers Morgan had with Dr. Stephen Meyer, about the actual science behind Charles Darwin’s theory (spoiler: there is none)​

When it comes to evolution, politics is more prominent than science. And with that in mind, .....a simple rule that will clarify the place Darwin’s Theory holds:
Any article, event, opinion, data or study that redounds in favor of the Left/Demorat Party, is to be considered a lie or hoax.

• One of the first readers of 'On the Origin of Species' was Friedrich Engels, then living in Manchester. He wrote to Karl Marx: "Darwin, by the way, whom I’m reading just now, is absolutely splendid. There was one aspect of teleology that had yet to be demolished, and that has now been done. Never before has so grandiose an attempt been made to demonstrate historical evolution in Nature, and certainly never to such good effect."
  Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Marx-Engels Collected Works" , vol. 40, p. 441.

• I will provide the interview of Meyer by Piers Morgan…..and quotes from that interview. Meyer provides FACTS. Put aside the Democrat/Liberal/Marxist anti-religion propaganda, and focus on the science that demolishes Darwin’s Theory.
• 
  
• 
  

• 
  
• Tucker Carlson, on Joe Rogan: “Evolution as articulated by Darwin is kinda not true. There is no evidence for it….if all life originated from a single organism, there would be a fossil record of that….and there is not.”
• 
  
• Meyer: “Here in London, 2016, there was a conference held by the most august scientific society, the Royal Society, a group of evolutionary biologists, are dissatisfied with Darwin’s method of evolutionary change, natural selection and random mutation …lacks the creative power to generate major changes in life.”

Spoiler, Meyer is not a scientist and holds no training in any science field.

 

[Leo123]

Sigh.

Let me set you straight.

Read this carefully it's only a paragraph long. You can reference the entire paper from the link.

Loading…

www.sciencedirect.com

This is mid-80's, right around the time the bullshit propaganda from the ID crowd started floating around.

Let's go over it sentence by sentence.



That describes biological systems.



This references a random walk, which includes the mutations that occur during cell division.

Do you know what an indel is? It's different from a point mutation. Indel stands for "insertion or deletion", which means a frame shift. In a point mutation, you just get one amino acid instead of another, but the rest of your protein remains intact. But with an indel the entire rest of your protein is completely messed up - you end up with a different protein.



The state manifold is the curved surface I was referring to. The entropy scalar is what mathematicians call a "field", which you will learn about when you study dynamics. (A simple example is temperature, which is a scalar but is represented as a "field" on a surface). The diffusion tensor (as in the reaction-diffusion chemistry I talked about) is why you need to understand Einstein's tensor notation - otherwise you end up with gazillions of annoying summation symbols in your math. And the vector of evolution is the "tangent" to your system trajectory.

So what they're talking about here, is a random walk on a curved surface that is subject to a "field", which you can look at as a function (or flow) over the surface. This is why you need to understand dynamics, things like LaPlace's equation. Here though, it's more than just ordinary dynamics, it's "stochastic" dynamics which means you need the Langevin calculus because your differential equations are stichastic. "x" is a random variable, and "dx" is a Wiener process.

This math describes "a" trajectory through a biological evolution pathway, based on the action of a field of possible mutations and the distances to the next outcome.



You know what the Second Law is. What they're saying is that a "smooth" trajectory only happens in certain ways, you have to carve a symmetric path through the mutation field of you want your entropy to be continuous. Entropy is information content, you can calculate the entropy from the DNA sequence.



"Balance" means your post-mutstion state is the same as your pre-mutstion state. They're stating the obvious. In balance, your state vector doesn't move.



This is a mouthful, but they're saying you can DERIVE the trajectory by using the methods of variational calculus. Which is a big deal when your system consists of random motions. This is the primary contribution of The paper, it gives us a method for formulating the "expectation" (probability) of a trajectory.



So there you have it. If you can understand this paper, you will be in a position to CALCULATE how biological systems can evolve. You will be able to predict the likelihood that they'll evolve in certain ways, which is to say, follow certain evolutionary paths or trajectories.

So you see, the "specific" trajectory doesn't really matter, it's just a random path through a probability space. What matters is the shape of the space and the pattern of the field that flows over it.

In a way, this type of analysis is much like fluid dynamics, or predicting the weather. You can't really do it "exactly" but you can describe the general patterns to be expected.

There's only one gotcha in this paper. It only deals with Markov processes, which means generators without memory. Unfortunately, DNA has memory. The transition probabilities depend on the previous states and the paths that got them there. So the real picture is a tad more complex, you have nonlinear terms in your generator. Which you can still do math with, but it's a little harder.

To get a feel for how to generate the phase space from a nonlinear system, you can watch this video and try to imagine what happens when x is a random variable.

I am not denying biological evolution. Stop making shit up about what I post please.

 

[abu afak]

I am Not denying Biological Evolution. Stop making shit up about what I post please.[/B]

So you too DISAGREE with PoliticalSheik but are harassing others who do instead?
Trying to keep your Right Wing Cred up?

`

 

[Hollie]

• This thread is based on “why?”
• 
  
• Since a century and a half after Darwin produced his eloquent theory, with more professional scientists active today than every before, why has no proof of Darwin’s theory been produced, and, in fact with evidence has been found in Chengyiang, China, Syria, England, with fossils showing the very opposite pattern from Darwin’s predictions.
• 
  
• Why is this provably false theory taught as fact in schools?
• To whom is it so important that it be viewed as such?
• Answer: any who need God driven from the common discussion: the ideologies that have murdered untold million of human being and don’t care to have God watching their actions, or to individuals who understand God's view of murder.

• Meyer: “There are two issues: how do you get to the first life from simple non-living chemicals…we have no chemical evolutionary theory that accounts for the first life.”
• 
  
• Never have scientists been able to generate living organisms from any array of chemicals or any procedure.

• 
  
• “Darwin presumed some simple organisms, which we now know were not simple, and then proposed a mechanism by which they could generate all the new forms of life.”
• The mechanism proposed does a nice job of explaining small scale variations…adaptions such as bigger or smaller in response to weather but does a very poor job of explaining the major variations in the history of life such as the origin of birds, mammals….”

Here is the key fact that obviates Darwin's theory:
“In the fossil record we do see very abrupt appearance without the transitional intermediates you would expect on the basis of Darwin’s theory.”


Why is it so important to persuade every susceptible individual that it is

While the science establishment continues to stone-wall the public, "There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution." This was the testimony of Eugenie Scott to the Texas State Board of Education in January when the Board was debating new state science curriculum standards. Dr. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), ..." Stutz, T. Texas education board debates teaching of evolution. Dallas Morning News, January 21, 2009....

a. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer produced a binder of one hundred peer-reviewed scientific articles in which biologists described significant problems with the theory.
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt."

b. The attempt to prevent students from hearing of the problems with evolutionary theory is exactly the kind of indoctrination that critics of the Left have been railing about. “Avoid Debates. If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to ‘defend evolution,’ please decline...you probably will get beaten.”
Scott, Eugenie C., "Monkey Business," The Sciences (January/February 1996), pp. 20-25.






" Because the claims of Darwinism are presented to the public as "science"most people are under the impression that they are supported by direct evidence such as experiments and fossil record studies This impression is seriously misleading[: it is false.]
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17

Let that sink in.....then re-consider your belief in Darwin's thesis.



Notice that I provide documentation in my posts.

I notice you spam threads with hyper' religious nonsense. phony "quotes" and references to Disco'tute charlatans.

As far as direct, observable evidence of biological evolution in populations, there is the fossil record, there is direct, observable evidence of bacteria developing antibiotic resistance and insects evolving pesticide resistance and there is the direct observable evidence of human populations which have shown direct, observable changes to height, specifically, over the last hundred years.

On the other hand, where is the direct, observable evidence of your various gods?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

We're simply not interested in wasting our time to satisfy their standards of proof.

They don't even know what their standards are. Because they are not discussing in good faith. Nothing could ever convince them, because: religion.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Both religion and Darwin don't really know they just guess at it.

Science operates on guesses (hypotheses). Guessing and not performing science on the guess is what religion does.

 

[scruffy]

What a stupid attempt to save face.

Your posts used to be far better.



No, the Bible does not say that humans are gods:

• Psalm 82:6
  In this psalm, the Lord says, "I have said, 'You are gods; and all of you are children of the most High'". However, the use of the word "gods" in this verse is a metaphor. The psalm is a warning to unjust leaders who consider themselves gods, but who are actually ignorant and walk in darkness

Oh. So it's a metaphor when you want it to be, but Genesis is literal.

I see.

• 
  
  
• Jesus's use of Psalm 82:6
  In John 10:34, Jesus quotes Psalm 82:6 in response to Jewish leaders who accuse him of blasphemy. Jesus uses the passage to expose the ignorance and inconsistency of his accusers. He asks why he is blaspheming by claiming to be God's Son, when human rulers are called gods.

lol

The Jews didn't like Him much.

• 
  
  
• God's nature
  God is God alone, and humans are not divine. Humans are not omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient, or self-existent.

lol

"Attributes" of God?

Bestowed by humans?

You don't see how silly that is?

 

[scruffy]

.
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17

Notice that I provide documentation in my posts.

Your documentation is worth about as much as the leftard MSM.

Johnson is an idiot. If I had a nickel for every idiot that thinks he understands science I'd be filthy rich

We observe complex structures being created by random mutations and selection EVERY SINGLE DAY in the laboratory. Hundreds of times a day!

The above fucking idiot has obviously never visited a hospital.

If I were you I'd stop quoting morons. Because it makes you look like one too.

Science trumps conjecture every time. EVERY time. Only idiots deny the evidence that's right in front of their faces.

Sorry but this guy Johnson is a world class idiot. You should find credible sources.

 

[scruffy]

Perhaps you can explain where the first living organism came from.

No scientist can.

The Bible can't either.

It also can't explain where God came from.

Can you explain why Darwin's theory is so important to Marxism.

Nope. Can you?

Careful.....if this is your first attempt at thinking, you may be subject to an aneurysm.

You should learn some math. Math trumps conjecture every time.

Bacterial DNA is less than 10 million base pairs long. 10 million is 10^7

But there are 10^30 bacteria on earth.

That means mutation and recombination has probability 1 with 23 ORDERS OF MAGNITUDE of redundancy.

That's a 1 with 23 zeros after it

Pretty much kills any attempted quote mining.

 

[Hollie]

While the science establishment continues to stone-wall the public, "There are no weaknesses in the theory of evolution." This was the testimony of Eugenie Scott to the Texas State Board of Education in January when the Board was debating new state science curriculum standards. Dr. Scott is Executive Director of the National Center for Science Education (NCSE), ..." Stutz, T. Texas education board debates teaching of evolution. Dallas Morning News, January 21, 2009....

a. Dr. Stephen C. Meyer produced a binder of one hundred peer-reviewed scientific articles in which biologists described significant problems with the theory.
Meyer, "Darwin's Doubt."

b. The attempt to prevent students from hearing of the problems with evolutionary theory is exactly the kind of indoctrination that critics of the Left have been railing about. “Avoid Debates. If your local campus Christian fellowship asks you to ‘defend evolution,’ please decline...you probably will get beaten.”
Scott, Eugenie C., "Monkey Business," The Sciences (January/February 1996), pp. 20-25.






" Because the claims of Darwinism are presented to the public as "science"most people are under the impression that they are supported by direct evidence such as experiments and fossil record studies This impression is seriously misleading[: it is false.]
Scientists cannot observe complex biological structures being created by random mutations and selection in a laboratory or elsewhere."
Johnson P.E. "Evolution as Dogma: The Establishment of Naturalism," Foundation for Thought and Ethics: Richardson, Texas, 1990, pp1-17

Let that sink in.....then re-consider your belief in Darwin's thesis.




Notice that I provide documentation in my posts.

Notice that you provide nonsense from charlatans and quacks from the Disco’tute such as Philip Johnson.


You suffer from a debilitating case of hyper-religionism.

 

[Hollie]

As recent developments have proven that the Democrats/Left has no compunction as far as lies, hoaxes and slander, it is time to highlight their similar attempts at the basis of Western Civilization….religion.
And the use of Darwin’s theory to attack same.

In this thread, an interview that Piers Morgan had with Dr. Stephen Meyer, about the actual science behind Charles Darwin’s theory (spoiler: there is none)​

When it comes to evolution, politics is more prominent than science. And with that in mind, .....a simple rule that will clarify the place Darwin’s Theory holds:
Any article, event, opinion, data or study that redounds in favor of the Left/Demorat Party, is to be considered a lie or hoax.

• One of the first readers of 'On the Origin of Species' was Friedrich Engels, then living in Manchester. He wrote to Karl Marx: "Darwin, by the way, whom I’m reading just now, is absolutely splendid. There was one aspect of teleology that had yet to be demolished, and that has now been done. Never before has so grandiose an attempt been made to demonstrate historical evolution in Nature, and certainly never to such good effect."
  Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, "Marx-Engels Collected Works" , vol. 40, p. 441.

• I will provide the interview of Meyer by Piers Morgan…..and quotes from that interview. Meyer provides FACTS. Put aside the Democrat/Liberal/Marxist anti-religion propaganda, and focus on the science that demolishes Darwin’s Theory.
• 
  
• 
  

• 
  
• Tucker Carlson, on Joe Rogan: “Evolution as articulated by Darwin is kinda not true. There is no evidence for it….if all life originated from a single organism, there would be a fossil record of that….and there is not.”
• 
  
• Meyer: “Here in London, 2016, there was a conference held by the most august scientific society, the Royal Society, a group of evolutionary biologists, are dissatisfied with Darwin’s method of evolutionary change, natural selection and random mutation …lacks the creative power to generate major changes in life.”

Obviously, you don’t understand you follow a list of ignorant, anti-science, hyper-religious loons who cut and paste from ID’iot creationer ministries which cater to the science illiterate types and the Disco’tute groupies such as yourself.

 

[scruffy]

This thread does seem to be religious propaganda, with no scientific value whatsoever.

 

[scruffy]

Here is the REAL science of biological evolution:

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2100473118

Graph Curvature for Differentiating Cancer Networks - Scientific Reports

Cellular interactions can be modeled as complex dynamical systems represented by weighted graphs. The functionality of such networks, including measures of robustness, reliability, performance and efficiency, are intrinsically tied to the topology and geometry of the underlying graph. Utilizing...

www.nature.com

Charting cellular differentiation trajectories with Ricci flow - Nature Communications

When stem cells develop into tissues intracellular signalling is rewired, errors in this process lead to cancer. Here, authors applied tools from differential geometry made by Albert Einstein’s General Relativity to understand and predict biological network rewiring in health and disease.

www.nature.com

https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2318951121#:~:text=Riemannian%20geometry%20also%20allows%20to,analysis%20of%20protein%20dynamics%20data.

You'll notice Ricci's name being mentioned several times. This is the same Ricci from general relativity, who gave us the Ricci curvature tensor.

Here, FYI:

 

[scruffy]

Evolution is all about cell differentiation.

It's how you tell a monkey cell from a cat cell.

Or, a cancer cell from a normal cell.

Turns out, a cancer cell in a monkey could be a normal cell in a cat. And vice versa.

The difference comes from the curvatures of the manifolds induced by the chemical kinetics inside the cell. The DNA engages in feedback loops with the proteins. That's why you need to understand dynamics to speak on evolution.

For example - one of the interesting dynamic solutions you get in biology, is a complex log mapping, which describes the shape of a seashell, or the nerve pathway from the retina to the brain.

A complex log mapping looks like a spiral staircase, like this:

When multiplied by e^-x it tapers off and becomes a seashell. These maps are SOLUTIONS to the dynamic equations. If your transcription factors interact in certain ways, you get maps like this.

You'll notice that at certain viewing angles, these maps can be approximated by a stack of planes. And a stack of planes is a level set for a collection of covectors. So depending on what part of the information you use, you can get a seashell, or a spatial frequency map.

The Ricci curvature tensor is needed to calculate the shape of this mapping when it expressed itself on a CURVED coordinate system. The picture above is on a flat coordinate system, so it's nice and regular. But here are two ways it could play out on a curved surface:

The last image is pathological, it causes cancer. You'll notice it's like a Klein bottle, the surface is embedded into itself. This is why you need a little topology to understand this stuff

THIS is how new species are formed. Not by slow gradual changes in gene expression, but by TOPOLOGY OF DYNAMIC SYSTEMS. This is how you turn a cat into a dog, or a cancer cell into a normal cell

Inside the cell, there are thousands of such topologies - maybe millions in some cells. Brain cells look different from liver cells, even in the same species. "Differentiation" involves irreversible changes in the topologies.

Some of the topologies fit together, like locks and keys. Others just bump into each other at various angles. The chemistry that happens has everything to do with the shape, just like the shape of actual proteins determines which parts get near each other.

Evolution is a YOUNG science. People we're studying gravity for hundreds of years before Einstein came along. But we've only been studying evolutionary dynamics for 50 years or so.

 

[scruffy]

Oh. You get a complex log mapping by integrating the function 1/x, when x is a complex variable. Complex variables arise naturally as solutions to the dynamic equations. They are roots of the dynamic equations, which you get by solving the quadratic formula or its analog in higher dimensions.

So for example, in the earlier video that showed how to map a phase diagram, one of the terms had a square in it. So you get an equation like x^2 + x + 1 = 0. To get a complex solution, all you have to do is change a sign. Which is the same as changing an excitatory connection into an inhibitory connection, in a neural network.

So the difference between a cat and a dog might be very small, it might only be a sign change in a single molecule. But this then ripples through the entire cellular dynamics, causing thousands of changes downstream.

To understand where integration and differentiation come into play, you can study the dynamics of chemical reaction-diffusion equations, which cover about 90% of the chemistry inside a cell. These types of reactions show us how we can get chemical compartments inside the cell, WITHOUT any physical separation. There doesn't have to be a membrane between compartments. All that's needed is a certain type of dynamic solution that gives you spatial standing waves in your reaction-diffusion chemistry. Ilya Prigogine got the Nobel prize in chemistry for showing us how this works.

 

[scruffy]

The video in this link shows you some interesting examples of the movies I was talking about earlier.

These are examples of the development of shape on manifolds with complex topology.

Complex manifold - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

You'll note all these manifolds start as flat planes and then become curved.

This is why you need the Ricci curvature tensor. To figure out what a volume element looks like "after" the curvature process.

A volume element is just a cubic millimeter of water inside a cell. Maybe it contains DNA, maybe it doesn't.

 

[scruffy]

You'll notice I never mentioned Darwin in this exposition.

 

[scruffy]

PoliticalChic
Leo123
Woodznutz

This is how God operates.

You can't expect a bunch of 3000 year old Jews to know about this stuff.

You can't expect Darwin to know about it either.

But you can expect politicians to abuse it. Every time.

It's not the fault of science. It's the fault of evil politicians.

Real science doesn't care about politics.

But politics cares a lot about science. In an opportunistic kind of way. Much like a pickpocket looks for victims.