/sci/ whats your opinion on this newest scientific discovery
>>16963468Don't we already have an evolution vs. schizophrenia thread up somewhere?Anyway: if you want this argument to even be addressable, you'd need to at least present it.How did they come to the conclusion that 20 million mutations had to have become fixed? How did they come up with their upper bound? As it stands, you haven't actually said anything.
>>16963468Made up claims until the twitter nobody shows papers on everything
>>16963478>mutations are a constant rather than parabolic/geometric or variable.We all know events like high radioactivity or bottlenecks(incest), among other, considerably increase variability.
>ai slop from some radical christian with no math or biological knowledge
>amazon link as a source????
>>16963483We also reproduced with cousins like neanderthals etc(they're finding new ones every decade) which further complicates the equation
>>16963484>its fake because my schizo paranoid persecutory delusions relating to christianity darwin was christian and couldn't do math and you take his word as dogma
do not express doubts about darwinism no matter what field you're in. if you do you will be excommunicated from the sciences
>>16963492Do you just believe every personal anecdote someone posts on Twitter?
People form isn't from here. People coming here share connections from other groups they visited as well (If you are nice)
>>16963468>four fucking million years since Australopithecus>new genes are observed within ONE generationThis retard isn't worthy of that Mononoke avatar.
>>16963468paper retraction due to anti semitism in 3…2…1…
>>16963524What paper? It's a book written by some retard.
>>16963528replace paper with book
>>16963537How does a book get retracted?
>>16963492>Darwinian>DarwinismWhy do christcucks love to use these terms?
>>16963564To be fair, it is kinda a pithy term to describe "people who believe in evolution." The term "evolutionist" got a little stale and they wanted a term to describe people who specifically believe is "macro-evolution" as opposed to the "micro-evolution" which creationists usually do accept.Having one word to describe "people who believe [thing]" is genuinely useful for conversation's sake, even if no one self-identifies with the term.I think creationists are fucking retards but the fact that they have a collective noun to describe me and people who agree with me on that topic is a pointless thing to take issue with.
Hyper-spacial laylines of convergent and destructive forces directing all of life and experience itself...youre late.https://youtu.be/JD48XNby1bg
Heard Darwin was proven wrong but never heard what other theory they came up with to replace it. Word got out about this more than a few years ago I think. Word was that we really essentially don’t understand all of genetics yet?
>>16963489Meanwhile your mom birthed a retard who also has klinefelter which means way more genetic variations than you can account for with your implied upper limit.
>>16963580Epigenetics especially inherited epigenetics throws a wrench in darwinism since your gene expression can change over the course of your life and those changes can be passed on so its not a simple matter of mutation over generations.
>>16963584I’m only recently learning about the true complexities of genetics. Always knew abstractly that it was complicated. Learning that RNA can change itself after transcription to modify its uptake and manufacturing instructions to the ribosome sort of really opened my eyes to the density of systems in that space. There’s a lot going on and I don’t think we understand most of it.
>>16963590>RNA can change itselfhttps://youtu.be/RJh59h0gvR8
>>16963598Oh, this is also something interesting. I was referring to human RNA. Without going to into the weeds, I guess, our RNA after it is transcribed and floating, can dynamically change its shape. These changes are driven by temperature and ionic properties in the health of the cell and lots of other things. The shapes are so advanced that the ribosome will literally produce an entirely different object based on just this change of shape. That change of shape can also cause the RNA to be stored during cell stress. I can’t go into all of it, because it’s a lot, but they are very complex functions existing in the molecular systems of the RNA itself. Just to clarify, no RNA adapting molecules, no adapting proteins, intelligent and dynamic behavior from the molecular structure of the RNA itself. Wtf. How?
>>16963605>Wtf. How?Atomic Biology. Ive reduced it down to proton, neutron, electron, generally speaking. It can be reduced further to just proton and electron but that only exists pre-Big Bang, and that is the origin of "woman". It can only be expressed Mathematically as its pre-space and time.The unbroken line of Cognition from (You) to Creation.
>>16963607>proton, neutron, electron,Well, BioElectroMagnetic signals, emitted from and into all other life in a web of famillial balances. Its what keeps species in line with each other and not a continuous attempt at speciation at the invidual level.Positive, negative, neutral (orthogonal), and macro directionality, which covers all life, even viral, bacterial, and (You), which are inside of your DNA....making them kind of (You) too.Interspecies communications via the same hueman-vessel.
>>16963492In practice, the "question everything" spirit is only useful insofar as your worldview is not the dominate worldview. As soon as your worldview becomes the dominate worldview it becomes counter-productive.
>"Yes, we broke your science with our sophons.">A sophon (Chinese: 智子) is a sentient proton-sized supercomputer.Now Molecular Biology looks like voodoo...Medicine is poison...Physics is black, Math is crisis in foundation, Whats a Woman?https://youtu.be/JDPGefjM_vU
Whats Temperature?https://youtu.be/Hf-sKeeWaeYLMFAO!!!!! Earth's sciences are fukken REKT.
>>16963612>Positive, negative, neutralHrmm...https://phys.org/news/2026-04-boost-strange-magnetic-rewrites-chips.html
>>16963564>>16963566Darwinism and by extension neo-darwinism refers to a very specific theory of evolution (and its not just le macroevolution), retard.
I don't care about this topic because genetics is a pseudoscience.
>>16963478Vox Day also believes there are multiple Donald Trumps running around. Each time Trump does something stupid, Vox blames it on "short fat Trump". He doesn't explain why the real Trump allows these other fake Trumps to run around doing things in his name. One might think he's just using "short fat Trump" as an insult to Trump when he does something stupid but no, Vox Day has made clear he believes there are actual multiple physical doppelganger Trumps. Why would you get your science from him?
>>16963546It happens sometimes like when behavioral scientist Paul Dolan wrote a book about women being happier without men in their lives. Turned out Dolan based the book on the research studies conducted by others and "accidentally" misunderstood parts of the data, which conveniently provided the conclusion he wanted when interpreted wrong. Dolan's publisher retracted the book and while Dolan acknowledged the error upon which his entire book rests, he stands by his conclusion that women are happier without men.
>>16963468Show maths and explanations with citations, otherwise it's just yapping for yappers sake.
>>16963642I tried to be charitable and assume that maybe he just thought Trump had been replaced by a doppelganger who is on the side of the NWO or whatever, you know, regular conspiratard stuff that adheres to an internal logic, but no, he literally said "there are multiple Trumps running around"
>>16963468 One time in a light dream I had vision of my DNA up close and could see the pull of the Milky Way's equatorial plane has an impact.
>>16963650>maths
>>16963642>Each time Trump does something stupid, Vox blames it on "short fat Trump"that doesn't really narrow it down
>>16963637>refers to a very specific theory of evolutionWhich is?
>>16963656I'm Polish
>>16963468>number possible: a couple of hundred>human/chimp split believed to have occurred 5-8 million years agoDoes he think the earth is 6000 years old and that Darwinian evolution has to fit that time scale?
>>16963489the author literally admits to using ai, mouthbreather
>>16963680so much updoot.Can I fuck your wife?
Darwin worshipers seething in this ITT, but they can't offer any ration basis for their beliefs, all they can do it try to screech personal insults at OP, they have no explanation for over 20 million genetic mutations in less than one million generations.
>>16963615see >>>/sp/154333447
>>16963673>>human/chimp split believed to have occurred 5-8 million years agothey made that the fuck up
>>16963642>>16963652That's based though. Reminds me of when Louis-Ferdinand Celine talked about Hitler being replaced by a doppelganger at some point.
>>16963795Fewer.
>>16963844Nothing reminds you of when Louis-Ferdinand Celine did anything, he died before you were born
>>16963846I'm amazed you figured out what would be the singular most autistic possible objection to that post specifically
>>16963847Thank you.
>>16963652He thought the same with Biden too, though in that case the fake Biden was because the real one was dead or otherwise too ill to make public appearances. He also uses LLMs to tell him he's right about things like his views on evolution and expects everyone else to see that output as proof of him being correct. It was funny when Christopher Langan called him out for being an idiot so Day had to come up with an excuse why Langan, who Day reveres, had some kind of emotional trauma that caused him to misjudge Day.
>>16963795>in less than one million generations.You realize there's been more than one individual in each of those generations, right?
Can cretinists come up with any argument that is not already debunked on talkorigins.org?
>>16963680He does have a post where he ridicules Darwinists for their believed rate of mutations being incompatible with their estimates of the age of Earth, strongly implying that the Earth must be very young for Darwinism to work as presented. I don't know how old he thinks the Earth is but as he's a creationist, Earth doesn't really have to be any particular age as God set up the initial settings.
>>16963795>>16963858By the way>The average germline mutation rate for humans is approximately 1.1×10−8 to 1.2×10−8 per base pair>this means that every time a child is born, they carry roughly 40 to 70 new mutations (de novo mutations) that weren't present in the DNA of either parent.
>>16963860Particularly embarrassing given that website hasn't been updated in ages
>>16963860>>16963864>The producers of America's 1993 CBS television show, "The Incredible Discovery of Noah's Ark," were hoaxed.Kek. I've never heard of this but it's comforting to find out that the TV news was always a bubble of hoaxes and hoaxers.
>>16963468>>16963863Another number to give you an idea: There are estimated to be tens of millions of distinct Y-DNA human haplotypes, maybe even hundreds. Half a million have been catalogued already from people who provided samples to DNA companies or authorities.For the idiots, each of those haplotypes is a unique combination of mutations on the Y-chromosome alone, the shortest chromosome in the human genome, carried by only half of mankind, since the last common male human ancestor that lived maybe 200k years ago. The number of unique individual mutations is lower than that (if we don't care how they're combined), but the point is mutations are extremely fucking common.If anything, 20 million mutations between humans and chimps seems rather low, but perhaps they're counting in a way that discounts a large portion of them (in-species diversity and so on)
I think the reason that this is also attractive is because of the “stagnation“ in a few fields of science. Understanding genetics is one of the last few areas of science that clearly indicates that there is a lot of information waiting to be revealed. The code in genetics is complex on its own, we are also looking at billions of unique molecular combinations. Genetic research is slow to understand the code itself, while pretending to know more than it does, any genetic researcher will admit that we don’t know much in the scope of what remain remains to be known. To address the old arguments about earth-time-mutation chains. Earth is 4.54 billion years old, 3.5-4 billion years of genetic material evolution, 10^40 total cells have ever existed in that time, at the average life of a cell, is 10^27 years of genetic mutation clock time. Life is “maybe“ 4.5 billion years old, but has operated about one octillion cell years in mutation research. This is accepted total evolutionary testing time in current genetics. Looking into this, the “not enough time” argument seems to be a favor of fringe creationist critics and is fundamentally on serious as it lacks any supporting evidence.
>>16963468>hoomans don't com frm monke>darwinish disprovenis darwinism exclussively based on monke => human? isn't it also about just evolution? google says yes
>>16963862Here's his thoughts on it.
>>16963939One of the many things that proves that Darwinian evolution isn't a valid scientific theory is that its fairly impossible for it to be disproved experimentally.Unless you have several hundred or maybe a few thousand years to work with proper experimentation can't be done. Of course the Darwin worship religion happily ignores that because they aren't truly interested in science, their main interest, as can be seen in this thread, is disproving the Christian biblical creation myth. And Darwin doesn't even do that, if evolution is real then who created it?
>>16963744Mindbroken
>>16964013>its fairly impossible for it to be disproved experimentallyHow? Darwin’s theory of natural selection is just that heritable traits influence the survival and reproductive success of an organism, and that environmental factors influence which traits are more likely to increase/decrease in frequency. That doesn’t require thousands of years to test. It’s perfectly falsifiable and has been tested a gazillion times>their main interest, as can be seen in this thread, is disproving the Christian biblical creation mythCreationism is not a standard Christian belief, it’s a retarded fundamentalist belief
>>16964013I reckon finding bunnies in cambrian strata would effectively falsify evolution.
>>16964030it wouldn'tyou can find horseshoe crabs in cambrian strata and that doesn't falsify darwinism
>>16964031First off, no you can't. Second off, that's literally not the same thing.
>>16964032it is the same thing
>>16964030Vishnu himself could appear and affirm he created every species 100 billion years ago and poof a few novel phyla into existence before our eyes and it still wouldn't falsify evolution. It would put into question many biological and geological disciplines and their predictive models, including stuff like phylogeny/common descent, but it wouldn't disprove evolution any more than it disproves gravitation, organisms are evidently subjected to that.
>>16964043Finding that organisms don’t pass genetic information down to their offspring would falsify evolution. Finding that inherited genetic information does not impact an organism’s reproductive success would falsify natural selection. It’s that simple
>>16963468I could probably get to tens to a hundred mutations in my reproductive cells in my natural life what is he on about
>>16963605>The shapes are so advanced that the ribosome will literally produce an entirely different object based on just this change of shapehow does it happen? Doesn't the ribosome "straighten" the mRNA in its fixation site with tRNA?
>>16963492Because evolution is so proven you'll be seen as a dumb retard who didn't understand basic science. If you actually do understand evolution but still doubt it then go ahead and look into whatever it is that doesn't make sense to you.
>>16964184Oh its proven? Care to demonstrate the proof in a way only a dumb retard could believe?
Darwinism is just a rewrite of the biblical creation myth into a form that appeals to the delusional grandiosity that commonly appeals to scientists, all of whom like to consider themselves geniuses regardless having never accomplished anything to justify the title. >God didn't create the plants and animals, darwinism created the plants and animals. And then when all the irrational flaws in their science mythology are pointed out they just screech contrived insults such as "science denier" instead of defending their theories because their theories are indefensible.
