Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • I'm gonna have to be drunk for this. So, I guess; it is still the same old TR.

Recent Posts

1
But yeah... Back to the original point... Nature has selection mechanisms

Give me an example of Nature's selection mechanisms.

and one way we can mimic nature is by mimicking the selection process and we call that artificial selection. As you have seen Joe hopping has been selecting hard for 20 years and I am one of the beneficiaries of his work with my sheep. Thanks to Joe, I have virtually maintenance-free sheep!

So answer my question above: Did that dark-hooved variant appear because the genome knew that Joe Hopping was coming and he'd breed from the sheep that had it, or did it just turn up and get lucky when it met Joe?
2
Remember when Guapo thought Trump was going to ban bump stocks and increase background checks? What was that, 12 hours ago?
3
Shapiro is speculating here that these freaky cool NGE mechanisms that he has discovered are the ultimate source of new features in biology.

Basically, yes, although I would cavil at "ultimately" and I would also add that many cool features are the result of combinations of priorly existing novelties, and that an important factor in combining them is provided by natural selection. But, simplistically, yes.

But that's just speculation and in fact it's not very informed speculation because the evidence we have indicates otherwise. 

It's extremely informed speculation and, it's one of the reasons McClintock's work, and indeed Shapiro's, was exciting. 

The evidence we have from our actual experience is that it takes intelligence to create new Innovations such as the things we see in the biological world.

So why are you championing Shapiro, if you don't believe he's right?

All this NGE stuff is wonderful but there is no evidence that it was not there from the beginning.

Yes, there's lots of evidence that it is unlikely to have been there "from the beginning".  The whole Third Way thing you keep banging on about is about how natural selection works above the level of the gene or the organism to "select" for systems that tend to produce viable novelties, and, for that matter, suppress novelties that are likely to be damaging.

My belief is that all this NGE whiz-bang stuff was programmed by God in the beginning and the evidence that we have is actually consistent with that view.

And you are entitled to that belief. But don't try to pretend it's science, or that it's anything to do with Shapiro.
4
Science / Re: NH winter cooling
Last post by BenTheBiased -
I'm a little disappointed we didn't get any ad hom about Mann in that post. Come on, Cephus! Have you forgotten the hockey stick? Also no railing against the unexpressed idea that this means Earth will soon become another Venus. Very disappointing. Plenty of the trademark incredulity though, so it's good to see that's still consistent.

There was one bit that I find really baffling though...
Did carbon dioxide suddenly increase rapidly to account for the hypothesis that carbon dioxide drove the event?  No it obviously did not.
Um...what? I thought if there was one thing even deniers agreed to it was that CO2 levels have been rising rapidly over the past century. Is Cephus denying even that?
5
Sports / Re: Winter Olympics 2018
Last post by borealis -
National pride aside, I love watching women's hockey. It's entirely personal bias, but I just find the moves and strategies so savagely elegant and precise. Men's hockey is exciting, but doesn't grab my attention in the same way.
6
Here's another thing that Shapiro gets, but you Hawkinsed past it, or possibly simply stole someone else's quotemine:


Quote
This 21st century view of evolution establishes a reasonable connection between ecological changes, cell and organism responses, widespread genome restructuring, and the rapid emergence of adaptive inventions. It also answers the objections to conventional theory raised by intelligent design advocates, because evolution by natural genetic engineering has the capacity to generate complex novelties. In other words, our best defense against anti-science obscurantism comes from the study of mobile DNA because that is the subject that has most significantly transformed evolution from natural history into a vibrant empirical science.

It's in the paragraph directly below the one you cited.

oh yeah I've read that too. It's irrelevant though because it's just Shapiro's speculation. In science, you see, observation and evidence is much more interesting than speculation.

This is bullshit Dave, and yet again demonstrates your science suckage.

The entire article is "speculation" in the sense that it is about a potential 21st century view.  For that matter ALL science is "speculation" because science never proves anything.  It advances hypotheses ("speculations" if you will, although normally grounded in evidence and sound argument) that can be supported or falsified by data, but never proven.

However, the part I just quoted isn't "speculation" or "hypothesis" at all.  It's logic.  What Shapiro is showing - proving if you like, is that IF it is true that "natural genetic engineering has the capacity to generate novelties" (and there is good evidence for that) THEN the objection made by IDists that Darwinian evolution is impossible because there hasn't been enough time for a "random walk random walk through the virtually infinite dimensions of possible genome configurations" to have a high enough probability of success fails.

If Shapiro is right, in other words, and in many respects he probably is, then that demolishes the ID argument that the "search space" is too large for Darwinian evolution to have traveled the distance it has in the time life has been around.

But then you still haven't got your head round what evolutionary theory actually is, so it's not surprising that you fuck it up every time.

So let me ask you a question: You say that Hopping has bred low-maintenance hooves into his sheep by observing that the darker hooved animals needed hoof-trimming less frequently than the lighter-hooved sheep.  So he bred from the darker hooved sheep, right?

So here is my question: do you think that:

The hoof-gene mutation that produces slow-groing dark hooves occurred BECAUSE the genome knew that Joe Hopping was coming, and produced them for him to choose?

Or do you think the genome just happened to produce that slow-groing dark hooved variant and Joe Hopping got lucky when he noticed them?

Pick one.

7
Hey Dave, do you know where your GOP Governor is tonight?
lol, party of family values
Can't have families without a little hanky panky :wave:

Are you fucking serious? The man tried to blackmail his mistress. He was arrested and charged. Are you unaware, or simply so immoral that you think shit like that is perfectly normal and amusing?
8
Here's another thing that Shapiro gets, but you Hawkinsed past it, or possibly simply stole someone else's quotemine:


Quote
This 21st century view of evolution establishes a reasonable connection between ecological changes, cell and organism responses, widespread genome restructuring, and the rapid emergence of adaptive inventions. It also answers the objections to conventional theory raised by intelligent design advocates, because evolution by natural genetic engineering has the capacity to generate complex novelties. In other words, our best defense against anti-science obscurantism comes from the study of mobile DNA because that is the subject that has most significantly transformed evolution from natural history into a vibrant empirical science.

It's in the paragraph directly below the one you cited.

oh yeah I've read that too. It's irrelevant though because it's just Shapiro's speculation. In science, you see, observation and evidence is much more interesting than speculation.
First Law
LOL yeah, wow. I think that's the most explicitly he's ever stated it too.

Hey Dave, would you agree that all evidences for evolution are speculative, and all speculations for creationism are evidential?
9
It's easy to only have maintenance-free things. Just get rid of anything you have that requires maintenance!
Yup ... that's the idea.
And replace it with a new one.

So sustainable. So efficient.
It's actually quite.  On both counts.  I'm surprised you've never heard of artificial selection.  People have doing it for thousands of years.
That's not artificial selection, you moron. What the guy you got your sheep from is doing is artificial selection. He has a large herd and is selectively breeding it. If he loses some, he has plenty of others. You, on the other hand, have a handful of animals. If you lose some, you have to bring in others from outside your operation to replace them. That's neither sustainable nor efficient, and it certainly isn't artificial selection. It's just a particularly inept form of hobby farming.
10
By the way, Joe hoppings pioneering work is paying off greatly for him financially. I see him placing ads on Facebook to buy land and houses because his sheep operation is so profitable.