Posted: Aug 11, 2010 7:31 am
Your problem is that I brushed your question aside. You have a little bit of knowledge, and use it like you are a super-expert.

The fact that you brushed his question aside on the basis of non-sequiturs, dodgy reasoning and a fundamental misunderstanding on the difference between cause and effect relationships and the attempt to use mathematics to analyze the data thereof, in this case erroneously because the cumulative dataset involves data derived from variable dynamics is not his problem, it's yours. Cricket is played in three very different formats, and absolutely no one computes averages based on both formats. Your fundamental fallacy is to use data from the recent population explosion to compute an average for the whole of human history, regardless of whether the dynamics of that explosion applied or not, therefore, your attempt is a failure.

You didn't understand the question I posed or the problem it makes for evolution. So I won't pose it again. It's in the vid at the beginning of this thread, but I'm sure you will have some excuse for not watching it.

Read the explanation above, also try doing an experiment with bacterial populations, and see if the results are analogous to the bullcrap posted in the video, I already have dealt with microbial growth kinetics in the previous post, and since I've done actual experiments in the lab during my degree to verify the kinetics involved, using methods such as turbidimetry and haemocytometric counting, I can assure you that the equations governing growth are fundamentally different, of course, let me get wikipedia in on the act, now, regarding doubling time, and a very important premise at that.

The doubling time is the period of time required for a quantity to double in size or value. It is applied to population growth, inflation, resource extraction, consumption of goods, compound interest, the volume of malignant tumours, and many other things which tend to grow over time. When the relative growth rate (not the absolute growth rate) is constant, the quantity undergoes exponential growth and has a constant doubling time or period which can be calculated directly from the growth rate.

For your bullcrap about an average doubling time to work, the relative growth rate has to stay constant, the data we have, which I already posted, indicate that it isn't the case, in light of this, and the explanations about the importance of the functions that contribute to the numbers we have, your question is nothing more than a strawman and a non-sequitur, therefore your assertions, and TruthfulCretin's are fucked.

You think "traits" and "characteristics" are the same as "organs" and "bio-systems" and you answered my question with that misconception. You start right out spouting dogma that doesn't come remotely close to answering the question.

More bullcrap, you need to brush up on your developmental biology and the ways cells interact to produce tissues,organs and organisms by cell differentiation, initially starting out with an unspecialized, undifferentiated zygote, cell differentiation itself is driven by cell signalling cascades, which are composed of genes and the proteins they produce, and mutations, by creating functional changes, ranging from quantity to the way proteins interact with the target genes, especially if said proteins are transcription factors, can alter the way cells interact to form tissues and organs.

Let's have a look at few papers and abstracts on this, shall we?

In metazoans, the Notch pathway is one of the crucial pathways that regulate cell fates and tissue formation during development. Moreover, Notch has also been implicated in the regenerative capacity of adult self-renewing tissues. Notch signaling mediates local cell-cell communication via interaction of the Notch receptors with a membrane-bound ligand of the Delta-Serrate-LAG-2 family. Accumulating evidence suggests that aberrant Notch signaling is implicated in a variety of human diseases. In the heart, Notch controls several key processes during cardiac morphogenesis. In particular, Notch plays an important role in the commitment between the mesodermal and neuroectodermal lineages and seems to regulate cardiogenesis in mesodermal precursors.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17418369

That is wrt heart development and formation through cell signalling. The following pathway is much more comprehensive.

The pathway and the description thereof, along with a comprehensive set of resources, can be found here at

http://www.sabiosciences.com/pathway.ph ... Vertebrate

Since all organisms develop from undifferentiated cells which then are consigned to developmental fates through cell signalling cascades, which are a property of the expression of the genome, which itself can be altered by mutations, organogenesis and "bio-systems" are also traits, or phenotypes in a rigorous sense, coded for by either single genes or networks of genes, which can be more plastic to the effects of mutation, it becomes clear that YOU, Steve, have no fucking clue about the subject.

So how do I deal with that? How do I converse someone with such disdain as you have for me, along with your complete lack of understanding of the question I posed? You did lots of noisy writing, and said nothing. You are point #1 and #2 on my list of why you are indoctrinated:
(1) When the answers you give have nothing to do with the questions I ask and you have no idea.
(2) When your answers are memorized dogma. Stuff that someone who taught you in school who doesnâ€™t know, or a book you read written by a person who has no idea how nature came to be but nonetheless has fooled you into thinking they do.

Nothing more than fuckwittery coupled with generous dollops of Dunning Kruger.

Why do you need a math instructor? Because you don't understand the basic population math that I posed. And it gets tiring going over and over the same material.

Yup, it gets tiring dealing with the same kind of ignorant fuckwittery spewed forth in carnal glee ad infinitum.