Sandbox (4)

Sometimes very active discussions about peripheral issues overwhelm a thread, so this is a permanent home for those conversations.

I’ve opened a new “Sandbox” thread as a post as the new “ignore commenter” plug-in only works on threads started as posts.

0

2,773 thoughts on “Sandbox (4)

  1. Nonlin.org: Notice how this is an “explanation” of the past devoid of any forecasting power, on par with what astrologers, phrenologicsts and tarot readers offer? That is how we know it is NOT science.

    ROFLMAO
    You quoted, but apparently did not understand, this forecast

    it isn’t “regressing to the mean” anytime soon…

    put another way, I forecast that “the D614G strain will continue to outperform the 614D strain”, your fantasies about “regression” notwithstanding.

    0
  2. OMagain: Oh, so the environment can turn a seemingly deleterious “mutation” into a positive one, can it?

    More precisely, there is no such thing as “deleterious mutation”. Logic 101.

    OMagain: And I was asking how I will know when you publish your work. Will you be using your real name? If not, who is going to publish that?

    You’ll know, but don’t be a stalker. It’s not healthy.

    0
  3. DNA_Jock: You quoted, but apparently did not understand, this forecast

    it isn’t “regressing to the mean” anytime soon…

    put another way, I forecast that “the D614G strain will continue to outperform the 614D strain”, your fantasies about “regression” notwithstanding.

    First off, viruses are not even life. Second, your “forecast” is no better than palm reading. Third, we were talking about “fitness” and you replied with a story about the genome, basically confirming you don’t even know what “fitness” is supposed to mean. And that after I turned very LENIENT and asked for ONE little thing about “fitness” instead of your FULL “fitness function”. How embarrassing is that? Is it painfully embarrassing? It should be. Time to abandon ship once again Hit and Hide dude: http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/william-paleys-excellent-argument/comment-page-27/#comment-276161. Hilarious!

    Furthermore, you’re making the Pegasus Fallacy (like the name I coined?) by assuming 614G is superior to 614D when in fact it’s not, since there is no such thing as deleterious/beneficial mutation. The Pegasus Fallacy is the erroneous idea that you can take a horse, add wings and now you have a much better animal when in fact a horse with wings would be both a bad horse and a bad flying animal. Cool?

    0
  4. Nonlin.org: First off, viruses are not even life.

    When viruses enter and take over a cell, resulting in replication of new offspring, what difference is there intrinsically that makes this not a biological process?

    0
  5. Nonlin.org,

    My, oh my.
    Every single sentence in your comment is WRONG. That’s a record, even by your standards.
    In virology, “R” is my fitness function.
    But since you were talking about running away, I must ask:
    Under what circumstances is P(A|B) ÷ P(B|A) = P(A) ÷ P(B) ?
    😉

    0
  6. Anecdote follows.

    Wife and I enjoying an an evening meal on our west-facing terrace (chorizo con alioli) and I’m thinking that little cloud over there is an odd colour, when flash of lightning followed within half a second by the most almighty bang made me reconsider my existence. Was God reminding me of his power? Random? I report: you decide!

    0
  7. Alan Fox:
    Anecdote follows.

    Wife and I enjoying an an evening meal on our west-facing terrace (chorizo con alioli)and I’m thinking that little cloud over there is an odd colour, when flash of lightning followed within half a second by the most almighty bang made me reconsider my existence. Was God reminding me of his power? Random? I report: you decide!

    Either that or the dangers of high levels of cholesterol

    0
  8. DNA_Jock: Every single sentence in your comment is WRONG.

    Or so you say. Take your word for it? I think not, Hit-and-disappear. Haha.

    But we both know what happened: you were rendered speechless and to hide your embarrassment, you issue a blanket denial that fools no one… OK, maybe one or two of you fans.

    DNA_Jock: In virology, “R” is my fitness function.

    Impossible. According to the “theory”, “fitness” comes BEFORE “selection” whereas R most definitely comes AFTER not one but many “selections”. What you mean to say is that “R is an INDICATOR of “fitness”” which is most definitely not the same. This has been explained. Repeatedly. Someone’s shorthand tricked you. Embarrassed? Should be.

    DNA_Jock: But since you were talking about running away, I must ask:
    Under what circumstances is P(A|B) ÷ P(B|A) = P(A) ÷ P(B) ?

    As replied, I am not answering random questions. But, if you can prove I made that comment anywhere, then and only then you will get an answer. So again: “…where do you think I commented on that equation?” http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/william-paleys-excellent-argument/comment-page-27/#comment-276189

    Alan Fox: When viruses enter and take over a cell, resulting in replication of new offspring, what difference is there intrinsically that makes this not a biological process?

    I am sure the internet has an answer to your question. Search for “virus” in your favorite search engine.

    0
  9. Nonlin.org: I am sure the internet has an answer to your question.

    I have an answer to my question. You don’t apparently.

    0
  10. Alan Fox:
    Anecdote follows.

    Wife and I enjoying an an evening meal on our west-facing terrace (chorizo con alioli)and I’m thinking that little cloud over there is an odd colour, when flash of lightning followed within half a second by the most almighty bang made me reconsider my existence. Was God reminding me of his power? Random? I report: you decide!

    Your wife was tha target, you just happened to be nearby.

    Lightning is much more impressive ‘on the continent’, I find. On my Pyrenees hike I got overtaken by a summer storm, and nearly shat myself. Right overhead. Sheltered under an embankment, nearly choked on a cloud of flies. Cough, splutter, BANG!! Jesus! BANG!!! Trees can explode, cough, splutter … on another occasion, I left my son to go over a mountain top while he went round. Waaay in the distance was a tiny storm which proceeded to track slowly and inexorably towards me. Heavens opened, ran across the blasted moor like Heathcliff escaping the paparazzi, taking shelter in a mountaintop cowshed, cows in full-on panic mode.

    2+
  11. Nonlin.org: where do you think I commented on that equation ?

    What, P(A|B) ≠ P(B|A)?
    Err, you dedicated an entire OP to your inability to understand it, called “Intelligent Design Detection”.
    Corneel and I explained your schoolboy howlers over the first two pages of that OP, and my only explanation of your flailing is that you did not understand the meaning of P(A|B) notation. If you understood the notation, then answering my pop quiz would be a breeze:
    Under what circumstances is P(A|B) ÷ P(B|A) = P(A) ÷ P(B) ?
    As it stands, you look like you know nothing about probabilities.

    1+
  12. Allan Miller: Your wife was tha target, you just happened to be nearby.

    I’ll tell her you said so! Yes Pyrenees thunderstorms can be majestic when viewed from a distance. Up close…

    0
  13. DNA_Jock: Nonlin.org: where do you think I commented on that equation ?

    What, P(A|B) ≠ P(B|A)?
    Err, you dedicated an entire OP to your inability to understand it, called “Intelligent Design Detection”.

    So you cannot point to any actual mistake. That’s typical. Let me know when you have more than a generic “wrong”. Some proof for instance.

    Like I said many times: we both know what your empty “wrong” means: you’re speechless and to hide your embarrassment, you launch a naked “wrong”. Also noted: you can’t utter one intelligent word about “fitness” and don’t even know what it means to your own dogma. How weird and embarrassing is that? Or at least it would be to any normal person.

    0
  14. DNA_Jock: What, P(A|B) ≠ P(B|A)?
    Err, you dedicated an entire OP to your inability to understand it, called “Intelligent Design Detection”.

    Furthermore… I know for a fact you’re not one of the drones and dilettantes populating this site. So of course you know the argument needs to take the form: “part A from… to… is wrong because 1… 2… 3… where 1,2,3, etc are logical arguments that both you and your opponents appreciate, not yada, yada bullshit.” This is exactly what I am doing when pointing to your “R is “fitness”” nonsense and proving with clear, concise and logical arguments that it cannot be. To which you obviously fall silent not having any intelligent reply. And if you’re not a drone or dilettante, why don’t you extend the same courtesy to me that I extend to you? When you went to school and now at work you certainly apply this principle.

    Of course you’re very unhappy seeing “fitness”, “selection”, “evolution” now failing and see yourself not having a good recourse (and you will NEVER do). But such is life. Why can’t you take it like a man? Of course, you can still ponder in silence. Or better yet, try your best logical reasoning. Who knows? Maybe the magical rabbit shows up after all. That’s fine. But meanwhile just behave like the logical, intelligent, and educated guy that you are. Can you? This also applies to a FEW of your comrades here and elsewhere.

    0
  15. Nonlin.org: So you cannot point to any actual mistake.

    You have assumed that P(A|B) = P(B|A). This is a schoolboy howler.
    But it appears, from your steadfast refusal to answer a simple question, that you do not understand this notation.
    Therefore, it appears that you know nothing about probabilities.
    On the other hand, you claim to have proved that “fitness”, “selection”, and “evolution” are meaningless concepts.
    That’s rather impressive.
    😀

    1+
  16. Nonlin.org,

    the argument needs to take the form: “part A from… to… is wrong because 1… 2… 3… where 1,2,3, etc are logical arguments that both you and your opponents appreciate, not yada, yada bullshit.”

    Speaking as a card-carrying drone/dilettante, I can only marvel at the crystal clarity on display.

    2+
  17. DNA_Jock,

    Maybe I was wrong about you not being one of the drones/dilettantes. That’s fine. Now I know.

    Allan Miller,

    ?

    Also, you can’t be both. I’d say you’re not a drone, and that’s a plus. But then again, I have been wrong.

    Alan Fox: You forgot to ask when he stopped beating his wife!

    I noticed you’re very good at coming up with the craziest comments. What’s your secret? Is it Chemical Ali?

    0

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.