The simple brilliance of Darwin's revelation

[Wuwei]

OR, how about a Gamma Ray burst. There will be no shielding for to leeward side of the planet. When half of the atmosphere goes, that will affect them. there goes our protection from, for example, UV radiation from the Sun. Stay inside or go underground. Or cook like a hog on a spit.. There are your choices, maybe for a few million years.

Ugh.

That would nicely crush civilization too. But it's very short with no warning.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

That would nicely crush civilization too. But it's very short with no warning.

ZERO warning. We would only detect it once it arrives. We may be able to see meteors and CMEs coming our way...

(15-60 minutes warning, as it turns out:

"Imminent CME arrival is first observed by the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite, located at the L1 orbital area. Sudden increases in density, total interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) strength, and solar wind speed at the DSCOVR spacecraft indicate arrival of the CME-associated interplanetary shock ahead of the magnetic cloud. This can often provide 15 to 60 minutes advanced warning of shock arrival at Earth – and any possible sudden impulse or sudden storm commencement; as registered by Earth-based magnetometers."

Coronal Mass Ejections | NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center

www.swpc.noaa.gov

)
... but we don't see "light" coming our way until it arrives. Eek.

 

[james bond]

ZERO warning. We would only detect it once it arrives. We may be able to see meteors and CMEs coming our way...

(15-60 minutes warning, as it turns out:

"Imminent CME arrival is first observed by the Deep Space Climate Observatory (DSCOVR) satellite, located at the L1 orbital area. Sudden increases in density, total interplanetary magnetic field (IMF) strength, and solar wind speed at the DSCOVR spacecraft indicate arrival of the CME-associated interplanetary shock ahead of the magnetic cloud. This can often provide 15 to 60 minutes advanced warning of shock arrival at Earth – and any possible sudden impulse or sudden storm commencement; as registered by Earth-based magnetometers."

Coronal Mass Ejections | NOAA / NWS Space Weather Prediction Center

www.swpc.noaa.gov

)
... but we don't see "light" coming our way until it arrives. Eek.

It's interesting that you hit upon CME. The Bible states the sky will be on fire and that civilization will be wiped out with fire at the end. First, by water and finally by fire.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The Bible states the sky will be on fire and that civilization will be wiped out with fire at the end.

Right, because the ignorant, superstitious, illiterate people that were alive back then knew about fire. They weren't talking about gamma rays, because they didn't know what gamma rays were.

And here you are, talking about fire. Maybe it's time for you to play a little catch up?

 

[frigidweirdo]

If the climate change is slow each new generation will make an incremental adjustment. I see no reason why the technology would take a hit. But you would be right if there was an apocalypse.

.

And the issue is we don't know the impact we're having on the environment. We don't know if we're going to cause an apocalypse or not.

 

[abu afak]

Oops, forgot to address my argument again.

I read your first post. I thoughtfully and directly responded to it. And every post by you since then has been some form or degree of little hissy fit, with zero attempts to address what I have said, outside of specious appeal to emotion. That doesn't exactly lend you or your positions any credibility.

STILL WAITING FOR YOUR REPLY After Three or FOUR HOURS from the top of the last page.
YOU WHIFFED AGAIN Despite many replies to others.. as I Predicted in that post
So AGAIN/I REPEAT:


""I just answered and Porked you again when you asked Why I brought in race and IQ.
I explained why and You have no answer/rebuttal. Again!
You initially said, and I gutted the old wives tail that IQ only measures IQ.
Yawn.
Which is not true.
It is the single best measure of life outcomes.

If you have another specific question/point I'd be glad to not only answer it, but embarrass you more than I already have while doing so.
Precisely state your question.

Then it will be your turn (you know-nothing Fraud) to stop dodging my very meaty entry 3 posts ago (#69) you whiffed on which goes to discrimination, success, race, IQ. (You won't/can't)

You're up junior."""

`

 

[abu afak]

I am open to things that work. How would this be useful? Please tell me the practical applications of knowing that, say, sub-Saharan Africans are genetically pre-disposed to have, on the average over the entire population, an IQ 8 points lower than Europeans. 8 points on an IQ test could be due to an accidentally circling the wrong answer on ONE problem, even though you knew the right answer.

LOFL, NO!
Another show of Gross Ignorance.
American 'Blacks' are still app (the very well known) 1 SD (15 pts) below whites/Euros. (85 vs 100)
Some say it has closed a few points, some not.
10 pts would be very, very, generous.
They remain 1 SD below (15 IQ pt equiv) on the 86% Correlated SAT.

sub-Saharans OTOH, are IQ 70, some say has high as 75-80
(You rarely see a comparative group chart with the sub-Saharan 70 curve on it because it's Devastating info, so they use African American 'black' as 'Black!')

Reason?
American 'Blacks' (85+) are a Mixed Race due to the cruelties of Slavery.
On average they are 76% sub-Saharan and 24% Euro.
So their IQs, due to Mixed Genes, are higher than full-blooded sub-Saharans.
HARK!

NE Asians are app 105-106.
That's at least 30 pts (2 SD) higher than sub-Saharans.
Look at those group's relative success in America.
Look at their success in their respective countries/unmolested.
Just what one would predict.
China, Taiwan, Japan, S Korea, vs Piles of destitute ungovernable rabble of sub-Sahara despite the latter having more natural resources that NE Asia.
Japan is a seismic resourceLess rock that was Nuked 66 years ago.
That kind of organization is impossible in Africa due to IQ, and it's been that way for centuries/Millennia.

This country/World makes perfect sense [Only] when one knows the numbers.
Powerful evidence that discrimination is not the main reason for disparate economic outcomes.

And proof you know Nothing about this topic.
You are/remain completely non-conversant/wildly PC wrong.
`

 

[james bond]

And you have been wrong every single time. There are 4 other well-known and well-proven mechanisms of evolution. You know less about evolution than the average high school freshman and really should never open your mouth about it again.

Lol, you're the one who is insane and believe in the atheist religion instead of real science. I already mentioned the papers that evos write in order to get published. It's lies build upon lies.

 

[zaangalewa]

The simple brilliance of Darwin's revelation

This revelation was natural selection.

This was not new. Since 20,000 years we use selective breeding - how this works we found out from natural selection.

Evolution appeared, to Darwin, to be a fact that explained the existence of every organism on the planet. And a mechanism to explain this fact was proposed by Darwin: natural selection. But how did Darwin puzzle this out?

By the simple brilliance of recognizing "survivorship bias". Survivorship bias causes us to miss the forest for the trees.

My favorite illustration of this -- for its simplicity -- is Abraham Wald's (who coined the term "survivorship") analysis of how best to armor our bombers during WW II.

Not any instrument or machine which human beings make and use has anything to do with biological evolution.

He was presented with the following information, which shows where returning bombers were hit by enemy strikes:

View attachment 548978

So when the aeroplane was hit in other regions than the red dotted regions it came not back. I guess we Germans had paid some money for this picture.

Without recognizing survivorship bias, one might think that the (limited resource, have to conserve weight) armor should be increased in the spots where the bullet holes are concentrated. This would seem to be where most bullet strikes occur, per the data. So more armor should be spent in those places, right?

No. One would better spend the armor on the places where returning planes show fewer strikes. Why? Because the bombers that were hit in those areas did not make it back. They splashed.

Darwin's revelation of natural selection owes itself to the same turn of thought.

Sorry: But in this machines were biological entities who called themselve "human beings" and who are normally called from other human beings "mass-murderers" and/or "terrorists".

The other models that are not observed? They died off, and the more successful models propagated instead. That being the case, selection bias would greatly influence what we observe today.

Darwin's answer to the cause of that bias was the brilliant idea of natural selection.

Again: This had been not any idea which had been very astonishing. Every farmer since thousands of years was familiar with selective breeding. And the monk Gregor Mendel - a contemporary of Darwin - made very clear how genetics really works.

 

[zaangalewa]

otIn the past millennia clans or tribes were thought to number from 20 to 200. Clans were probably very aggressive toward each other. Evolution in craftiness, foraging, etc. was no doubt at a high pace. That doesn't happen today. When it comes to survival of human fittest, fitness has to be redefined. There is an inverse relationship between birthrate and income. An interesting question is what groups will survive the next huge meteor hit.

One problem of the expressions "fitness" and "survival" is the tautological use of both expressions - so it's not really clear what this analogy explains. A frog witout mouth not fits and not survives - but it never came to a fight in sense "survival of the fittest" between frogs without a mouth and frogs with a mouth.

"Musk" for example "survives" because this what he did do not fits to ways how other people think. But he "survives" because it fits to the dreams of human beings and/or to the money bags of human beings. All this is without any biological reality - so what to do with expressions like biological fitness or biological survival outside of biology? The often propagated "universality" of the laws of evolution seem not really to exist.

Another example: "Income" = to get money - but money is an illusion of our own psychological structure. Money motivates us - but indeed we could do everything what we do in the same way also without money. It's only a psychological crook or trick for our motivation. And how much money someone gets has also nothing to do with evolution. This follows social rules - and breaks of this rules - in the social game "might and money".

 

[james bond]

Right, because the ignorant, superstitious, illiterate people that were alive back then knew about fire. They weren't talking about gamma rays, because they didn't know what gamma rays were.

And here you are, talking about fire. Maybe it's time for you to play a little catch up?

Not gamma rays, but CME. Maybe, it's you who is turning ignorant, et al.

As for the Bible, we find is still backed up by science.

 

[james bond]

Per observational science, we observe no monkeys are bipedal. It shows Darwin was wrong.

 

[Wuwei]

One problem of the expressions "fitness" and "survival" is the tautological use of both expressions - so it's not really clear what this analogy explains. A frog witout mouth not fits and not survives - but it never came to a fight in sense "survival of the fittest" between frogs without a mouth and frogs with a mouth.

"Musk" for example "survives" because this what he did do not fits to ways how other people think. But he "survives" because it fits to the dreams of human beings and/or to the money bags of human beings. All this is without any biological reality - so what to do with expressions like biological fitness or biological survival outside of biology? The often propagated "universality" of the laws of evolution seem not really to exist.

Another example: "Income" = to get money - but money is an illusion of our own psychological structure. Money motivates us - but indeed we could do everything what we do in the same way also without money. It's only a psychological crook or trick for our motivation. And how much money someone gets has also nothing to do with evolution. This follows social rules - and breaks of this rules - in the social game "might and money".

The conversation is about survival of species, not individual frogs or Musk, and I don't know what money has to do with species survival.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

initially said, and I gutted the old wives tail that IQ only measures IQ.

Unfortunately for your bragging, you did not do that at all. You have not once addressed my arguments or the obvious truth that life experience affects IQ test results. Until you do, spare us the dancing and prancing and preening.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

This was not new.

Actually it was. But you go ahead and show us the prior treatises on natural selection before Darwin's, if you think otherwise. Selective breeding is not natural selection and your comment doesn't seem to have any relevance whatsoever.

Not any instrument or machine which human beings make and use has anything to do with biological evolution.

It's an illustration of survivorship bias. Another irrelevant and inappropriate comment from you.

Again: This had been not any idea which had been very astonishing.

Again that's nonsense, as shown by the fact that he was the first to name and describe natural selection and the fact that there was rigorous debate over it in the scientific community.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

LOFL, NO!
Another show of Gross Ignorance.
American 'Blacks' are still app (the very well known) 1 SD (15 pts) below whites/Euros. (85 vs 100)
Some say it has closed a few points, some not.
10 pts would be very, very, generous.
They remain 1 SD below (15 IQ pt equiv) on the 86% Correlated SAT.

sub-Saharans OTOH, are IQ 70, some say has high as 75-80
(You rarely see a comparative group chart with the sub-Saharan 70 curve on it because it's Devastating info, so they use African American 'black' as 'Black!')

Reason?
American 'Blacks' (85+) are a Mixed Race due to the cruelties of Slavery.
On average they are 76% sub-Saharan and 24% Euro.
So their IQs, due to Mixed Genes, are higher than full-blooded sub-Saharans.
HARK!

NE Asians are app 105-106.
That's at least 30 pts (2 SD) higher than sub-Saharans.
Look at those group's relative success in America.
Look at their success in their respective countries/unmolested.
Just what one would predict.
China, Taiwan, Japan, S Korea, vs Piles of destitute ungovernable rabble of sub-Sahara despite the latter having more natural resources that NE Asia.
Japan is a seismic resourceLess rock that was Nuked 66 years ago.
That kind of organization is impossible in Africa due to IQ, and it's been that way for centuries/Millennia.

This country/World makes perfect sense [Only] when one knows the numbers.
Powerful evidence that discrimination is not the main reason for disparate economic outcomes.

And proof you know Nothing about this topic.
You are/remain completely non-conversant/wildly PC wrong.
`

Answer the question. The one you put in boldface.

What practical use?

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

The conversation is about survival of species, not individual frogs or Musk, and I don't know what money has to do with species survival.

I think maybe things get lost in translation with that poster. His responses to me are sometimes wildly inappropriate and irrelevant to my prior comments.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Let's try this again.

Please tell me the practical applications of knowing that, say, sub-Saharan Africans are genetically pre-disposed to have, on the average over the entire population, an IQ 8 points lower than Europeans.

 

[abu afak]

Let's try this again.

Please tell me the practical applications of knowing that, say, sub-Saharan Africans are genetically pre-disposed to have, on the average over the entire population, an IQ 8 points lower than Europeans.

Well for one thing it's a Raging LIE/understatement like everything you post.
"8 points" is Like asking what's the matter with having a glass of wine twice week when the problem is a bottle every day.

Second, You apparently have me mixed up with Anomalism to who you originally asked that question, NOT ME You idiot! But you kept saying I didn't answer an even earlier question too... You Idiot!

I answered all your questions and I posted the ONLY facts in the thread between us you Blind PC Clown.

You are not qualified to even be in any such discussion without any basic knowledge. Never have I seen such Ignorance on any board over years of the discussion.

Finally, I did explain the significance several times of what in fact was a much bigger gap than 8 points! That being that if the gaps are that big it explains unequal outcomes better than some phantom/worn out charge of Racism.

I have had this discussion many times with many people. No one EVER was as ignorant as you. "8 points!" between sub-Saharans and Euros? LOL again.

Did you ever google anything you blithering fool and LIAR for PC?
No one can be that dumb.
But you either are or are Fabricating numbers that are a LIE to make a DISHONEST point that in fact Fails when REAL numbers Are introduced.
You stupid POS.
Get some facts first next time.

Gameover. ALL questions with/when Real numbers put in (30 points instead of 8).
and you exposed as a non-conversant Idiot with no knowledge of the topic.
So no more "answer the question" which was actually your Bogus premise question.
`

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Well for one thing it's a Raging LIE/understatement like everything you post.

It was a hypothetical. Still avoiding the question. Put your big boy pants on.

15 points is not a huge gap, between individuals. Go ahead and answer the question using 15 points difference.

And, go.