Tillbaka till svenska Fidonet
English   Information   Debug  
ECHOLIST   0/18295
EC_SUPPORT   0/318
ELECTRONICS   0/359
ELEKTRONIK.GER   1534
ENET.LINGUISTIC   0/13
ENET.POLITICS   0/4
ENET.SOFT   0/11701
ENET.SYSOP   33772
ENET.TALKS   0/32
ENGLISH_TUTOR   0/2000
EVOLUTION   0/1335
FDECHO   0/217
FDN_ANNOUNCE   0/7068
FIDONEWS   23435
FIDONEWS_OLD1   0/49742
FIDONEWS_OLD2   0/35949
FIDONEWS_OLD3   0/30874
FIDONEWS_OLD4   0/37224
FIDO_SYSOP   12841
FIDO_UTIL   0/180
FILEFIND   0/209
FILEGATE   0/212
FILM   0/18
FNEWS_PUBLISH   4155
FN_SYSOP   41520
FN_SYSOP_OLD1   71952
FTP_FIDO   0/2
FTSC_PUBLIC   0/13555
FUNNY   0/4886
GENEALOGY.EUR   0/71
GET_INFO   105
GOLDED   0/408
HAM   0/16041
HOLYSMOKE   0/6791
HOT_SITES   0/1
HTMLEDIT   0/71
HUB203   466
HUB_100   264
HUB_400   39
HUMOR   0/29
IC   0/2851
INTERNET   0/424
INTERUSER   0/3
IP_CONNECT   719
JAMNNTPD   0/233
JAMTLAND   0/47
KATTY_KORNER   0/41
LAN   0/16
LINUX-USER   0/19
LINUXHELP   0/1155
LINUX   0/22002
LINUX_BBS   0/957
mail   18.68
mail_fore_ok   249
MENSA   0/341
MODERATOR   0/102
MONTE   0/992
MOSCOW_OKLAHOMA   0/1245
MUFFIN   0/783
MUSIC   0/321
N203_STAT   894
N203_SYSCHAT   313
NET203   321
NET204   69
NET_DEV   0/10
NORD.ADMIN   0/101
NORD.CHAT   0/2572
NORD.FIDONET   189
NORD.HARDWARE   0/28
NORD.KULTUR   0/114
NORD.PROG   0/32
NORD.SOFTWARE   0/88
NORD.TEKNIK   0/58
NORD   0/453
OCCULT_CHAT   0/93
OS2BBS   0/787
OS2DOSBBS   0/580
OS2HW   0/42
OS2INET   0/37
OS2LAN   0/134
OS2PROG   0/36
OS2REXX   0/113
OS2USER-L   207
OS2   0/4779
OSDEBATE   0/18996
PASCAL   0/490
PERL   0/457
PHP   0/45
POINTS   0/405
POLITICS   0/29554
POL_INC   0/14731
PSION   103
R20_ADMIN   1117
R20_AMATORRADIO   0/2
R20_BEST_OF_FIDONET   13
R20_CHAT   0/893
R20_DEPP   0/3
R20_DEV   399
R20_ECHO2   1379
R20_ECHOPRES   0/35
R20_ESTAT   0/719
R20_FIDONETPROG...
...RAM.MYPOINT
  0/2
R20_FIDONETPROGRAM   0/22
R20_FIDONET   0/248
R20_FILEFIND   0/24
R20_FILEFOUND   0/22
R20_HIFI   0/3
R20_INFO2   2626
R20_INTERNET   0/12940
R20_INTRESSE   0/60
R20_INTR_KOM   0/99
R20_KANDIDAT.CHAT   42
R20_KANDIDAT   28
R20_KOM_DEV   112
R20_KONTROLL   0/13029
R20_KORSET   0/18
R20_LOKALTRAFIK   0/24
R20_MODERATOR   0/1852
R20_NC   76
R20_NET200   245
R20_NETWORK.OTH...
...ERNETS
  0/13
R20_OPERATIVSYS...
...TEM.LINUX
  0/44
R20_PROGRAMVAROR   0/1
R20_REC2NEC   534
R20_SFOSM   0/340
R20_SF   0/108
R20_SPRAK.ENGLISH   0/1
R20_SQUISH   107
R20_TEST   2
R20_WORST_OF_FIDONET   12
RAR   0/9
RA_MULTI   106
RA_UTIL   0/162
REGCON.EUR   0/2055
REGCON   0/13
SCIENCE   0/1206
SF   0/239
SHAREWARE_SUPPORT   0/5146
SHAREWRE   0/14
SIMPSONS   0/169
STATS_OLD1   0/2539.065
STATS_OLD2   0/2530
STATS_OLD3   0/2395.095
STATS_OLD4   0/1692.25
SURVIVOR   0/495
SYSOPS_CORNER   0/3
SYSOP   0/84
TAGLINES   0/112
TEAMOS2   0/4530
TECH   0/2617
TEST.444   0/105
TRAPDOOR   0/19
TREK   0/755
TUB   0/290
UFO   0/40
UNIX   0/1316
USA_EURLINK   0/102
USR_MODEMS   0/1
VATICAN   0/2740
VIETNAM_VETS   0/14
VIRUS   0/378
VIRUS_INFO   0/201
VISUAL_BASIC   0/473
WHITEHOUSE   0/5187
WIN2000   0/101
WIN32   0/30
WIN95   0/4275
WIN95_OLD1   0/70272
WINDOWS   0/1517
WWB_SYSOP   0/419
WWB_TECH   0/810
ZCC-PUBLIC   0/1
ZEC   4

 
4DOS   0/134
ABORTION   0/7
ALASKA_CHAT   0/506
ALLFIX_FILE   0/1313
ALLFIX_FILE_OLD1   0/7997
ALT_DOS   0/152
AMATEUR_RADIO   0/1039
AMIGASALE   0/14
AMIGA   0/331
AMIGA_INT   0/1
AMIGA_PROG   0/20
AMIGA_SYSOP   0/26
ANIME   0/15
ARGUS   0/924
ASCII_ART   0/340
ASIAN_LINK   0/651
ASTRONOMY   0/417
AUDIO   0/92
AUTOMOBILE_RACING   0/105
BABYLON5   0/17862
BAG   135
BATPOWER   0/361
BBBS.ENGLISH   0/382
BBSLAW   0/109
BBS_ADS   0/5290
BBS_INTERNET   0/507
BIBLE   0/3563
BINKD   0/1119
BINKLEY   0/215
BLUEWAVE   0/2173
CABLE_MODEMS   0/25
CBM   0/46
CDRECORD   0/66
CDROM   0/20
CLASSIC_COMPUTER   0/378
COMICS   0/15
CONSPRCY   0/899
COOKING   27601
COOKING_OLD1   0/24719
COOKING_OLD2   0/40862
COOKING_OLD3   0/37489
COOKING_OLD4   0/35496
COOKING_OLD5   9370
C_ECHO   0/189
C_PLUSPLUS   0/31
DIRTY_DOZEN   0/201
DOORGAMES   0/1974
DOS_INTERNET   0/196
duplikat   5999
Möte EVOLUTION, 1335 texter
 lista första sista föregående nästa
Text 243, 101 rader
Skriven 2004-09-29 22:00:00 av Tim Tyler (1:278/230)
Ärende: Re: Testing Evolution Via
=================================


John Edser <edser@tpg.com.au> wrote or quoted:

> > > JE:-
> > > Drift is just a defined random 
> > > process of sampling error.
> > > All random processes remain ubiquitous.
> > > Therefore, if you define any gene freq.
> > > changes via genetic drift as "evolution"
> > > and not as strictly "temporal variation" the 
> > > theory of evolution becomes a non refutable.
> > > You end up reducing evolutionary theory
> > > to just a non scientific "iron man" proposition
> > > on par with so called "creation science".
> 
> > TT:-
> > Huh?!?
> > Evolution is certainly normally defined as I described.
> > It's been the subject of many experimental tests over the years.
> > It's not "non refutable".  Rather it's proven beyond reasonable doubt.
> > I'm afraid that what you are saying makes no sense.
> 
> JE:-
> I would suggest you read anything by Karl Popper. 
> A valid point of refutation is required for any valid
> scientific theory. This requirement is just common sense.
> If I am accused of being a witch then I must have the right
> to ask what test is definitive for refuting that 
> proposition, i.e. what test can I make that could demonstrate
> I am not a witch? In the middle ages the accused were
> tied in a chair and dunked. If they drowned this proved
> they were not a witch but if they survived this proved that
> they were! It's just the W.C. Fields syndrome: "there is a sucker
> born every minute". Political manipulation of reasoning and
> logic has always been endemic. _Rational_ tests have to exist
> to refute any proposition otherwise the proposition just becomes
> a dictate (again, mostly for political reasons). 
> 
> A point of refutation is _not_ a point of non verification.  
> If something is supposed to be observed but fails to show
> up this does not refute a proposition. However, if something
> should never be observed but is, then this may refute a 
> proposition. If a proposition cannot provide at least one
> such prohibited observation, then the view constitutes an iron man
> proposition because it remains irrefutable. The "drift as evolution
> without selection" viewpoint cannot be refuted it can only 
> be non verified. This is because you cannot delete a
> random processes, they remain _ubiquitous_. Unless you can
> delete it you cannot test it to refutation. However selection
> can be deleted for a significant period of time using the
> experiment I have described so it can be refuted.

The issue of to what extent selection and drift are responsible
for observed features of organisms is quite subject to 
experimental investigation - the hypothesis that selection is involved 
predicts a lot of convergent evolution - whereas the hypothesis that drift 
is involved predicts much greater morphological diversity.

There have been attempts to examine the relative contributions of 
selection and drift to evolution - e.g. see "Life's Solution:
Inevitable Humans in a Lonely Universe" by Conway Morris.

> > TT:-
> > Apparently random processes form the foundation of many scientific laws. 
> > I refer you to the Boyle's law and the theory of ideal gasses - which
> > are based on the hypothesis that gas molecules interact at random.
> > What might be "non-refutable" is whether the mutations (or whatever)
> > are *really* random - but frankly, nobody cares two hoots about that.
> 
> JE:-
> Random _patterns_ can be produced by _either_, random or non
> random processes.  Thus random _patterns_ can be employed all
> the time as just ONE PART of "of many scientific laws" but
> not random processes because these can only produce random patterns.

Genetic drift is a process with undirected componets.  Nothing
stops it from producing non-random patterns.

Recall the experiment where you fire ball bearings "at random" into
a grid of vertical spikes on an inclined plane - and the ball bearings
wind up forming a normal distrubution in buckets at the bottom of
the slope?

That's a classic example of random processes producing a non-random 
pattern.

> This means that such processes cannot, just on their OWN, constitute
> a valid causative process within the sciences.

It doesn't follow.  The whole argument is nonsense :-(
-- 
__________
 |im |yler  http://timtyler.org/  tim@tt1lock.org  Remove lock to reply.
---
ū RIMEGate(tm)/RGXPost V1.14 at BBSWORLD * Info@bbsworld.com

---
 * RIMEGate(tm)V10.2á˙* RelayNet(tm) NNTP Gateway * MoonDog BBS
 * RgateImp.MoonDog.BBS at 9/29/04 10:00:45 PM
 * Origin: MoonDog BBS, Brooklyn,NY, 718 692-2498, 1:278/230 (1:278/230)