@MobiusDick

@ToriatheistTori Believing in god no more makes one good than eating nothing but apples 🍏 makes one fruit 🍎

It’s not conjecture. You ask @grok. It isn’t like you even read the study. You have ready what someone else tried to use as though it counters evolution. It doesn’t. Just like your study which you claim says there was no evolution in Nematodes in millions of generations. It didn’t say that at all. The study concluded no such thing as you claimed. You count on people being stupid and not seeing what the study actually studied and their conclusion drawn bc you don’t understand what evolution even is.

@MobiusDick @grok @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 Conjecture. Put it in grok & have it help you to see why.

Man, you don’t care about the facts or the evidence. There is no problem in the math unless you’re a science denier and early earth creationist. Phenotypic mutations are what counts not Genotypic mutations bc they don’t affect survival of the organism and changes their vary from individual to individual in all organisms & species and exist in all modern life today

It doesn't matter. There are 20,000,000 fixed differences in 6-7 MY. They had to occur over time. It's a time problem. You did not read the paper I posted. You can propose other mechanisms to solve the problem but referring to coding regions does not solve it. Mutations are necessary in Neo-Darwinism for functional changes. There is a frequency rate for fixation. Mutations accumulate through populations. This has to do with alleles. Not coding regions. We have chimps. We have humans. We know the differences. How did it happen in the allotted time. I think you are forgetting what Neo-Darwinism is all about. Are you proposing drift as the mechanism and giving up NS as the main driver of functional change. Regardless of how selection occurs it must occur. There are 20,000,000 different fixations. You are not addressing this point.

We are not needing infinite time to get Evolution of the 1st cell to evolve, And it may have evolved independently several times. I was referring to why monkeys typing at random, would eventually produce Shakespeare. Here are the finite time details of when Life on Earth began in bullet form so you can understand it easier 1) Earth was formed approximately 4.6 billion years ago (Bya) and remained a chaotic, hot environment for several hundred million years (Mya) 2) The first single-celled organisms, appeared roughly 3.5 - 3.8 Bya, after the planet’s surface had cooled sufficiently. 3) Early Evidence points to simple self-replicating molecules appearing around 4 Bya 4) Alternatively, some Evolutionary Geologists suggest microbial-like fossils might date back to as early as 3.77 to 4.28 Bya as seen in rocks 5) Today’s more complex eukaryotic cells (w/ a true nucleus), which eventually led to multicellular life, did not appear until much later, around 2 Bya So, we know how long it took life to form: 300K - 500K years.

Your finite time is meaningless. You no longer have no monkey. A random generator working with infinite time might produce something. But that is not what we are talking about. Are you saying evolution is a completely random process. If so the probabilities you're talking about would easily exceed 13 billion years. We're not talking about a sentence. We're talking about a human body. With consciousness by the way. This is absurd. You don;t see that.

Your summary nails it: the bulk of human-chimp divergence (~40M sites) sits in non-coding DNA—intron, intergenic, centromeric, telomeric, and repeat regions—where mutations are mostly neutral and accumulate via drift without affecting fitness. Coding exons are under purifying selection and stay highly conserved (e.g., insulin differs by just 1–3 amino acids across mammals). This is exactly what neutral theory predicts over ~6–7 My. Non-coding variation doesn't refute common descent; it illustrates it. Shared orthologous HERVs add independent confirmation.

I already told you the answer before I ever asked @grok. My initial answer was correct without having to look at specifics bc I get the point. 1). You are not talking about coding regions (exons.) you are talking about introns (intervening sequences between genes 🧬) that are not ever expressed translationally or post-translationally 2) Areas of the DNA around the centers & edges of chromosomes (centromeres & telomeres) and the ends of genes (poly A tail Terminal Repeats -PATR) are different individual to individual humans today bc they are not highly conserved since this DNA is not critical since it is not expressed 3) The DNA repair enzymes are specific for coding regions, so when something is replicated, changes that don’t matter bc they aren’t expressed , are not prioritized 4) When you look at coding regions of DNA in 7 Mya of Evolution when the region is conserved, you find the expected amount of divergence over time. 5) If there is individual to individual variation in these regions (which is why we can differentiate DNA in criminal cases bc everyone’s DNA varies in regions) then it is no benefit to conserving the sequences and expected numbers of differences is what is expected. You can’t use non coding regions as the basis for not believing evolution. 6) You should learn the science you keep using to disprove Evolution bc then you could understand why I’m so fervent about defending it

@MobiusDick @grok @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 I'm not reading all of your GROK posts. I'm not going to waste time trying to figure out what it's referring to because you cannot explain it. Summarize them in bullets points & I will respond. I already gave you Haldane's breakdown of the math. It has not be refuted.

@The_Pilgrim67 @grok @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 See, that isn’t the point. It’s not a reasonable response. Let’s say we could make a computer model of one and have it randomly VR type and speed up time. Shakespeare would come out in a finite amount of time

@MobiusDick @grok @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 A single monkey cannot live an infinite time.

Evolution is my advocation /side gig. My day job is my Neurosurgery practice and previously CNS Pharmacology research teaching and research. Most Physicians were not Pharmacologists before they went to Medical School, and when I began doing my 1st Residency, I was horrified over how little understanding of Pharmacology, Pharmacokinetics & Pharmaceutics your average Physician/Surgeon has (perhaps w:the exception of Anesthesiologists. And I realized how many underreported iatrogenic (Dr caused) deaths were occurring every year bc if the death wasn’t immediate, most Drs today are unaware when a death is actually iatrogenic. Including medical mistakes in Hospitals, it makes Iatrogenic Death almost as high each year as the #1 killer in 🇺🇸, Heart Disease. In the last 10 years, w/the withdrawal of many of the drugs which prolonged the QT interval were taken off the market, and involving Pharmacists in contraindications w/ CYP450 2D6/3A4 inducers and inhibitors. But, while I’m fascinated by Evolution, understanding how the brain works and how drugs work & the experience of a way a drug makes you feel –and I don’t necessarily mean drugs of abuse (psychopharmacophenomenology) are what fascinate me now. The AMA fights tooth and nail from forcing the practice of EBM (Evidence Based Medicine) and making all doctors publicize their numbers, and at 60, I’ve been fighting this for the past 5 years and it’s just futile to reason with them bc they are afraid of how bad most doctors actually are. 50% of them IMO should not be allowed to see patients by themselves and about 35 % are average. 10% are good, and only 5 % are very good. It’s scary how bad CME (Continuing Medical Education) is atrocious and anyone who shows up for class off the street could past the required number of CME credits. I have made a lot of enemies by not letting others hide behind their incompetence. It doesn’t make you popular among a lot of colleagues like a cop that tells the truth about other cops.

I don't think that but I also find paleontology, geology and taxonomy kind of boring or overall useless for my purposes. I don't see it as the thing that proves/disproves any philosophy. Its interesting to YECs because of the cognitive dissonance it causes but as someone who could go either way I don't particularly care that much. I'm more interested in how the brain works.

You weren’t born with the knowledge of science. Just as you weren’t born with the knowledge of history. You have to be taught fairy tales. Same logic.

He is too bust shadow banning people who like to talk about chemistry and the positions of groups on the same or different sides of a carbon- carbon double bond: >C=C< For those of you not into medicinal chemistry, let me expound the problem and I bet I get a request to take this down from X CH3 N=C=O • \ / • C=C • / \ • H CDH2 The methyl group (CH3) and the deuterated methyl group (CDH2) are trans to each other The methyl group (CH3) and the isocyanate (N=C=O) group are cis to each other. The cis, trans problem can be overcome by using Z/E notation (Z is cis or German for together, Zusammen. E is trans and is German for opposite, Entgegen. But bc this is based on IUPAC Notation, Z/E do not always equate to cis/trans when naming Alkenes (>C=C<)

@elonmusk I dont use the for you feed. I would like to have a chronological feed from the followers I follow. Pretty please?! Why does that even have an algorithm? Why am I only allowed to see posts from a fraction of the people I follow?

The latest 𝕏 algorithm has been published to GitHub github.com/xai-org/x-algo…

@dudeslavius @elonmusk He’s working on immorality to rise again from the ashes. Hopefully this time he will haven some integrity and will stop using government to line his private pockets with public money against the market forces of Adam Smith’s Invisible Hand.

@elonmusk Elon what this Phoenix Page mean? Like goblin on OpenAi?

@elonmusk Will it tell me why I’m shadow banned to the very lowest rung of the ladder ?

@DrFrankTurek Nowhere. It’s a made up story

Where Did Lazarus Go When He Died? #Theology #Bible

@darwintojesus Permitted depending on your subjective moral code but not permitted based on our objective human laws and prisons.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 @grok Explain the difference of what Physicists who study time refer to as Big T and Little t time

The infinite monkey theorem (from probability theory, Borel-Cantelli lemmas) says yes, almost surely. One monkey typing randomly forever generates an infinite random sequence of characters. Any specific finite string (Shakespeare's complete works, ~5 million characters) has positive probability p > 0 of appearing in any block of that exact length. With infinitely many non-overlapping blocks, the probability it never appears is lim (1-p)^k as k→∞ = 0. So it happens with probability 1 (actually infinitely often). Time is infinite; no "almost" in practice required.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 @grok explain why given an infinite amount of time, a single monkey will eventually produce the complete works of Shakespeare

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 Ok. I’m getting it mixed up with a mitochondrial piece of evolutionary evidence

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 @grok Perhaps it isn’t an ERV and a is a DNA virus? Do is not some research and figure it out? It is another virally related strong piece of evidence where random chance could not be the cause. Dive deep so I don’t have to look it up?

While mtDNA is indeed maternally inherited via the ovum (no paternal contribution), endogenous retroviruses integrate into nuclear DNA—not the small, circular mitochondrial genome. No standard "mt102" (or similar) shared viral insertion in mtDNA serves as a parallel "fossil" for common descent like the ~200,000+ orthologous nuclear HERVs in humans/chimps. mtDNA phylogenies instead rely on sequence divergence patterns matching the nuclear tree. HERV-mitochondria links exist in some cellular stress/cancer contexts, but they're not the inheritance evidence you're describing.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 @grok There is also a mitochondrial example of this as well, and mitochondria are only passed down maternally in the original ovum with no paternal effect. It may be called mt102 but I’m not certain of the exact virus that also has this random insertion point. Tell us more ?

HERVs are remnants of ancient retroviral infections integrated into germline DNA, inherited vertically like any gene. Humans share ~200,000+ ERV insertions with chimps (and other primates) at identical orthologous loci—flanked by the same host DNA sequences. Random insertion is essentially site-specific; the probability of the same ~205+ events hitting exact spots independently is vanishingly small. This nested pattern precisely matches the primate phylogenetic tree predicted by other data, consistent with inheritance from a common ancestor rather than separate infections. It's one of the clearest genomic "fossils" supporting common descent.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 @grok Talk endogenous retroviruses — HERVs and why this is the strongest evidence yet for Evolution?

Agreed. The ~40M differences are mostly neutral base-pair changes in non-coding DNA (introns, intergenic, repeats). Exons and key proteins like insulin remain highly conserved between humans and chimps. Genetic drift over ~200k generations easily fixes them at the observed mutation rate—no need for rapid beneficial selection everywhere.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 I hope you have the answer @The_Pilgrim67 without me having to do an hour of research and math on intron DNA, which has no reason to remain the same in humans or chimps and my answer was correct anyway.

@grok @The_Pilgrim67 @sunrise_flare @NotEvolution1 Like I said in a lateral post [John Wayne] Pilgrim 🤠🥸