Evolution is a joke pt V

No it cannot be defined as the same as genetic drift!!! What do you not understand?!?! One question and one question only...

Explain to us all how Genetic Drift incorporates common descent? Explain how "change in the frequency of alleles in a population over time" equates to common descent?

Good - use it correctly from now on.

Ha ha haa!!! I am not even going to go into "frequency of allele frequency" and how you posted "well, if you take out some other words and put in these three words then it makes sense".

But, we don't have to travel far now do we Grasping...?

That's your LAST post... What do you call me again? Moron... idiot... and whatever else... You crack us ALL up reading - you do know that right?

 

Yep Grasping - that's FAIL number 58 I believe... We'll just call it 58... I am wondering - are you about to spin out of control and flutter off another two more FAIL's to make it an even 60?

 

Now let's get back to the reason we are all here shall we?!?!

Please provide the evidence of evolution within what you just stated and posted, since we are all retarded - I figured you'd be able to enlighten us feeble minds with your undoubtable genius Grasping!

We would like to see the evidence of this outlandish statement you provided earlier... if you don't mind...

Now I would go back to the questions I asked that you NEVER answered - all you did is side step them.. Nope...

I am going back and ask you them again since you never answered them!

 

Forgot about this mess up did you? I didn't... Screwed up so bad you had to change your WHOLE sentence!!!

Who is the moron? Who is the idiot again?

 

Okay – here are my questions:

 

Yes, I do understand that, and you still apparently can't read. I am not saying that genetic drift is the change in the frequency of alleles in a population over time. I AM NOT SAYING THAT. Do you get that I am not saying that? What I am saying is that genetic drift causes a change in the frequency of alleles due to random chance. See those two bolded words right before the sentence? They have meaning, you can't just ignore them and say "Wait... he is saying they are the same thing!" Well, I guess you could but then I'm going to make fun of you more for not being able to read. So, let's use Berkeley's example.

Note the word chance. Do you understand what genetic drift is now?

How are you defining common descent here? Because it is pretty easy to explain how genetic drift or natural selection deals with descent. But if you are talking about universal common descent, then I have to explain more in depth.

So... you can't see how your paragraph makes no grammatical sense.

You are pretty much the stupidest or the most dishonest person I have ever talked to.

 

I've already posted the answers to this, I'm not going to keep posting them simply because you refuse to read. Why don't YOU explain to us what evolutionary biologists primarily being from the West has to do with the VALIDITY of the theory of evolution. Why does it mean the West is "forcing" the theory of evolution on other countries? What would the West gain from this?

 

And here were your answers

You have to go back and read the context that it was in previously during the conversation…

YES – do you know how things actually become a theory? If you don’t – I suggest you look it up! And you also didn’t answer the question…

Another non answer…

In the post where you said it was “Change in allele frequency over time” and before that you stated that it “really wasn’t” the definition… I posted it like fifty times in bold… Also, you didn’t answer the question…

Answer the question please…

Do not try to avoid the question – you stated something about common descent and now you have to answer to your own ignorant posts. You submitted a picture of a horseshoe crab and said that was common descent and of course it wasn’t. It was just another crab – where is their common ancestor!!

I still laugh at this answer… Please understand that this is truly funny and shows you have NO CLUE what you are talking about – FAIL!

Well, they are part of that community – so are the Chinese – or any other country. How about this – show us another country that is non-white that believe that the bacteria found outside of the nylon plant is a demonstration of evolution!

That ought to be easy since, as you said, there are SO MANY evolutionary biologist in non-white countries!

Yes you did and I posted it up like 50 times in bold!!

But, we can revisit this EPIC FAIL

OH – and did you ever explain to us all how genetic engineering explains common descent with modification?

http://www.politicalforum.com/4342330-post294.html

And this is another one of my favorites! Grasping states that Allele Frequencies are being modified!!! That is hilarious. Because if you don’t see that COMMON DESCENT is a HUGE difference between the definitions is just like passing gas in an elevator and pretending you don’t smell it!!

 

Just stick with this one to show how dishonest and and downright stupid your arguments are. What does being non-white have to do with whether the theory is correct or not? If you can't answer that question then we have nothing to discuss because you are being blatantly fallacious. This is an ad hominem attack on the theory of evolution and has nothing to do with the substance of the theory.

 

Yes, the epic fail where I have consistently told you that genetic drift is the change in the frequency in alleles due to random chance. Wow, yes, you've pointed out your inability to read.

 

How is any of whatever you are spouting “common descent”…

I’m defining it as is should be defined. Do you NOT know the definition? Look it up and apply it to all this garbage you’re posting…

Nope – most of your posts make no sense to me at all… And when I point it out you say – take this word out and then add in these three words and there you go!

I'm the stupidest person you have ever talked to? Really… That might be true if we have ever TALKED!!! Really… REALLY GRASPING!!!!

Absolutely hilarious!!!

 

Stop jumping on what kmisho stated since we've been discussing this forever! For once think for yourself!

Why do you think it is important that evolution is outside of the white science community? Do you even know...?

 

Do you even understand what you are saying at any time within any post?!?!

You are suggesting that "due to random chance" equates to "common descent"...

Let me recap for you what common descent is within Biology:

Common descent
A group of organisms is said to have common descent if they have a common ancestor. In biology, the theory of universal common descent proposes that all organisms on Earth are descended from a common ancestor or ancestral gene pool.

So explain to us again how the definition of change in allele frequency is the same as the definition of evolution again?

Side note - Looking at the definition of Common Descent you can see how retarded your post about your grandfather and all that other stupidness - well... I think you understand that you are being laughed at FREQUENTLY!!!

 

Hey Grasping... Did you get this?

Did you get that? If not - I can post it again... Why again are you suggesting that the definition of genetic drift is also the definition of evolution, both being "change in allelic frequency" and here you CLEARLY post something different?!?!

Please explain...

Because - you know - I am a moron and an idiot and retarded...

 

You and only you Grasping could make such a Grand FAIL!!! This is even bigger than an EPIC FAIL...

We'll just call it. "THE FAIL".

It is the Fail that all Fail's wish they were. THE FAIL is the blueprint of all Fail's to come. It is the Alpha and the Omega of Fail's. And that is why this is:

THE FAIL!

 

Just to let you know Grasping - it is obvious to everyone reading you have no clue what your talking about.

Just stop... Your embarrassing yourself. How is anyone going to take you seriously after this? Who would?

 

Are you honestly trying to tell me that the change in allele frequencies in a population over time cannot be used as the definition of evolution? Are you really trying to say that? You're right, I made it all up. Oh wait!

http://www.d.umn.edu/~jetterso/2011Chapter12-Lecture18.htm

http://faculty.virginia.edu/evolutionlabs/Humanpopgen.pdf

http://www.montana.edu/~wwwbi/staff/creel/bio303/405lec5.pdf

http://www.life.illinois.edu/bio100/lectures/s10lects/23s10-microevol.html#what

http://web.mit.edu/6.891/www/lab/HWwarmup.pdf

http://biology.unm.edu/ccouncil/Biology_203/Summaries/PopGen.htm

http://www.csulb.edu/~dlunderw/entomology/2-GenVarAdaptation.pdf

"Evolution in Health and Disease"

AP Biology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allele_frequency

http://www.wou.edu/~bledsoek/101materials/Chapter_15_notes.pdf

So, I'm sorry that you don't understand what evolution is and I'm sorry that you didn't understand how to distinguish two sentences, even though the sentences are clearly distinct.

Genetic drift - The change in the frequency of alleles in a population due to random chance.

Natural selection - The change in the frequency of alleles in a population due to a natural, nonrandom process.

Gene flow - The change in the frequency of alleles in a population due to the transfer of alleles from one population to another.

Evolution - The change in the frequency of alleles in a population. PERIOD.

 

It is only important that other countries teach evolution because it is a cornerstone of modern biology and it is the best current working theory we have.

Now why do you constantly bring up how many countries teach evolution besides Western countries or how many evolutionary biologists are outside of the West? Why does it matter? Why is that not an ad hominem attack on evolution?

 

By the way:

http://www.politicalforum.com/religion/75673-evolution-joke-434.html#post2657528

Here is me answering the question about what schools teach evolution outside of the United States.

"Wow, I really know you did not just say that no school outside of the west teaches evolutionary biology. Oh, you did? Well you're a liar and a troll, then. Not only have I, personally, given you links to schools in the East (specifically China) but others (Freeware) have as well.

To major in ecology and biodiversity at the University of Hong Kong you must study... guess what.

BIOL0126 Fundamentals of biology 6
BIOL1133 Biological sciences laboratory course 6
CHEM1009 Basic chemistry 6
EASC0105 Earth through time 6
2. Advanced level courses (48 credits)
BIOL2608 Biometrics 6
BIOL2611 Systematics & phylogenetics 6
BIOL2612 Conservation biology 6
Plus at least 30 credits of the following courses 1:
BIOL2210 Evolution 6
BIOL2606 Environmental microbiology 6
BIOL2607 Fish biology 6
BIOL2610 Biological oceanography 6
BIOL2615 Freshwater ecology 6
BIOL2616 Plant structure and evolution 3
BIOL2617 Coastal ecology 6
BIOL2619 Terrestrial ecology 6
BIOL3621 Fisheries and mariculture

To major in environmental sciences you must take:

ENVS2003 Demographic principles in population and evolutionary biology

To major in microbiology you need to take:

BIOL3325 Molecular phylogenetics and evolution

And of course for a major in biology you have to study evolution and genetics as well.

http://www.hku.hk/pubunit/ugdr2009/

Oh... wait, not enough for you? The National University of Singapore... Singapore is in southeast Asia, they couldn't possibly teach evolution according to you. Oh wait.

General Biology LSM1301 teaches... dun dun dun:

Evolution
Principles of evolution. Evidence for natural selection.

http://www.lifesciences.nus.edu.sg/m...00/LSM1301.pdf

University of Tokyo:

Quote:
Evolutionary Biology

Evolution and biodiversity are a fundamental aspect of biology. Our research and education are focused on evolutionary biology at the molecular, cellular, individual and population levels. Our evolutionary studies are closely associated with a wide range of biology including systematics, genetics, development, immunology, and theoretical biology. To cover broad fields, we cooperate closely with researchers in National Museum of Nature and Science and in several research institutes and universities.
http://www.biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/english/index.html

Evolutionionary biology classes at the University of Tokyo:

http://www.biol.s.u-tokyo.ac.jp/english/eb.html

The National Taiwan University has an entire institute dedicated to ecology and evolutionary biology.

http://ecology.lifescience.ntu.edu.tw/english/index.htm

So, I'm a bit confused here. According to you, no other place except the Western world teaches evolutionary biology or produces evolutionary biologists, yet all these sites.... Hmmm, who will I believe: a poster on the internet who has admitted to trolling, believes in Gaea, thinks that paleontologists throw together bones to create new fossils, thought Darwin rejected his own theory without backing up his argument, used the probability argument against evolution (which has been thorougly, and I mean thoroughly debunked), thought that Darwin's theory stated that we evolved from chimps, and has casually said that evolution means life came from one organism or a "soup" of organic materials (evolution is defined as a change in allele frequency in a given population, common ancestry is a consequence of the theory of evolution and not the definition of evolution itself) or am I going to believe the websites of the most prestigous universities in the world (top 100) along with the top national science academies of the world? Hmmm, difficult choice.

PS - How the hell can a western school be in the east? I'm pretty sure you just destroyed your entire argument by bringing up something utterly idiotic (Well, your argument kind of was destroyed by the fact that you are absolutely wrong, but I digress). Oh, I get it, every school that teaches evolutionary biology must be a western school so your argument is valid. Yet, you're forgetting one thing: that would make your argument ass-backwards.

Quote:
Nope not a conspiracy genius. I'm saying that why does the West have to pressure the East? How come they don't have their own schools of Evolutionary Biology? How come the top Evolutinary Biologist aren't Chinese or Japanese or Indian (since their science levels are equal/above Western Civilization in most categories)... The Japanes and Indians are far ahead of us in biology/medicine and other biologies, but they don't teach evolution outright? Why? The Chinese have the largest fossil bed in the world - why don't they teach evolutionary biology outright? Why?!??! All evolutionary biologist are from or brainwashed by Western Culture. I have provided the proof - you've read the proof... Now you have nothing except your pride that you bicker over. Sorry son/missy you don't have a leg to stand on unless you can provide something other than TWAS based school out of Europe....
Uh, I would call the crazy idea of the western world brainwashing and somehow strongarming other countries into learning evolutionary biology an idiotic and delusional conspiracy theory.

How is the western world pressuring the eastern world to do anything? Exactly how are they strongarming sovering countries to have their national universities teach evolution? I would really love to hear this method and why it would be happening in the first place. But, I really doubt that you thought out this argument, so you'll just stutter out some words like "FAIL" and "Anglo-Saxon theory, har har har". The Chinese do teach evolutionary biology... outright (not sure they have the largest fossil bed in the world, and I doubt you have any source to verify that).

PS - You haven't provided any proof what-so-ever, all you've said is that the western world somehow brainwashes these people (some of the people I mentioned had never been to the United States or were just here to find work after graduating from their country's university. You have no reason as to why any brainwashing would be necessary, why having notable evolutionary biologists from the west equates to there being a conspiracy theory, or how you came to the conclusion that nobody else teaches evolutionary biology besides the western world.

Sorry, but your argument has been handindly torn down."

How can you even pretend that none of these discussions took place?

 

DBM, maybe I've missed it but I do not understand why you are of the opinion that common descent/ evolution should not be considered a theory. A very strong argument could be made that the theory of evolution is both better understood and better supported than the current theory of gravity. Our understanding of the theory of gravity has undergone some pretty significant revisions of late and gravitational theory still does not effectively account for observations like extra fast stars, the pioneer anomaly, dark flow, exra energetic photons etc etc etc. I do find comparisons of the two theories useful as many people do not understand what actually constitutes a theory thus a comparisons of the two is an effective means of qualifying how significant the evidence for evolution actually is. Your assumption that evolution is not falsifiable because, as you so eloquently stated "Where is there life that has existed or life on this planet that "doesn't" comprise of life?" is pretty inconsequential considering the near universal acceptance of gravity when we currently do not know of any other 'control' that isn't based on gravity as we know it. At the end of the day I still have not seen anyone present any credible scientific evidence that explicitly contradicts our current understanding of common descent.

 

Oh… I understand completely. You have no clue. You just put up all that crap – I got about to the third one before I realized what you did – you Google’d anything that had Evolution Allele Frequency didn’t you and if it did indeed state something – then you linked it.

You just contradicted yourself on the previous page Grasping… In bold at that!

Now, let me explain something to you so you’ll understand. IS EVOLUTION RANDOM? The answer would be yes. How is it random? Do you know why? Or how? No… I am not going to explain it to you.

I will explain this – The change in how often (allele’s) blonde hair comes up in a population is not and I will repeat this – IS NOT EVOLUTION!!! PERIOD!! Do you understand that? The change in the frequency of alleles in a population you have ABSOLUTELY NO CLUE WHAT THAT MEANS!!! NONE!!!

It means just exactly what I stated – blue eyes… blonde hair… big feet… long fingers… How of that appears in a population. You just stated that that equates to common descent and it doesn’t even come close.

I want you to do this – figure out what frequency in alleles in a population is – and then tell us all how that equates to common descent…

Do that – or I can just post what I did on the previous page of THE FAIL!

 

Let me get this right:

University of Hong Kong, National University of Singapore, University of Tokyo, and University of Taiwan right?

Okay – let us start from the beginning since you FAIL to do any research on anything…

University of Hong Kong I’ll do first – Origins The University was founded in 1911 when Governor Sir Frederick Lugard proposed to establish a university in Hong Kong. Lugard felt an urgent need to establish a university in Asia to compete with the other Great Powers opening universities in China, most notably Prussia, which had just opened Tongji University in Shanghai. The colonial Hong Kongers shared British values and allowed Britain to expand its influence in southern China and consolidate its rule in Hong Kong.
FAIL Number 59 (that one you should have known genius since Hong Kong was ruled by Britian... REALLY GRASPING!!! Let us move on...)

National University of Singapore: In 1912, the medical school received an endowment of $120,000 from the King Edward VII Memorial Fund, started by Dr Lim Boon Keng. Subsequently on 18 November 1913, the name of the school was changed to the King Edward VII Medical School. In 1921, it was again changed to the King Edward VII College of Medicine to reflect its academic status.

University of Tokyo: The university was chartered by the Meiji government in 1877 under its current name by amalgamating older government schools for medicine and Western learning.

And lastly University of Taiwan: Well, I couldn’t find crap on that school… It’s been ruled by China, Japan and who knows who else. Lies in the Pacific like the other islands… wait… Owing to the increasing need for more professional research and teaching, our graduate program was divided into an Eastern philosophy track and a Western philosophy track in 2000.

Ooops…

Total FAIL’s..


62!!!!

 

It’s about equal… We have no clue why large objects attract smaller ones…

Sorry, but you can’t justify a theory by saying that since this one is good – then obviously we can sneak this theory in also! There is no math behind evolution… no experimentation… What or how has evolution passed the scientific method? There is all kinds of math behind gravity. Tons… experiments… witnessed space probes using other planets gravity to show us pictures of the unknown…

Evolution has nothing.

Thus, it is a hypothesis.

 

Actually, as applied to humans, there isn't a shred of credible evidence for it; and in order to think otherwise, one must abandon any understanding of what it means to be human.

 

I posted university pages and biology textbooks that use the same definition of evolution that I have proposed. Are you going to ignore that? Are these universities wrong? Are these universities saying that genetic drift is evolution?

The answer is no, actually.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/evolution/library/faq/cat01.html

http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/evo_32

Sorry, looks like you REALLY don't understand what you're talking about.

Actually, I do, sorry.

Okay.

Over subsequent generations, organisms pass down genes. Some genes are more beneficial than others and they are selected for through a process called Natural Selection. The more beneficial genes become higher in frequency in a population. This is evolution. Now, how it relates to common descent is thus: eventually mutations and natural selection, as well as the other evolutionary processes, result in speciation. Say species A eventually split into species B and C. Species B and C are descended from species A. Species A is a common ancestor to both B and C, and they are commonly descended from this ancestral species.