How is there reality without God?

[EarthScienceguy]

Neils Bohr
"No Phenomenon is a phenomenon until it is an observed phenomenon." Or another way to say this is that a tree does not fall in a forest unless it is observed.

The only way for there to be an objective reality is if God is the constant observer everywhere.

Physicist John Archibald Wheeler: "It is wrong to think of the past as 'already existing' in all detail. The 'past' is theory. The past has no existence except as it is recorded in the present."

God is everywhere so He can observe everywhere and produce objective reality.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #360]

Hmmm... well, we could take the Hawaiian fruit fly example. The oldest islands in the group are about 65 million years old. So that puts a floor on the time the flies could have gone there. Best guess from genetics and geology is that the first flies got there about 25 million years ago. The genetic evidence says that several different species of fruit flies happened to be blown to the islands where they found no competition, and lots of food. They evolved quickly to fill niches held elsewhere by other insects. In 2022, 689 species had been identified, and entomologists think there are probably 1,000 native species of fruit fly there. So we see spectacular results in maybe 20 million years and an incredible number of useful mutations from that small population.
https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.10 ... -9585-4_15

Even if the population was a small as 500 that means that around 1000 genetic deaths would have to occur for the recessive allele to become fixed. So 1000/.1 is 10,000 generations or right around 20,000 years. Then whenever 2 groups come together again and let's say there are 500 in each group so that now there would be 1000 in the population that 2000 would have to suffer genetic death and that would take 20,000 generations or 400,000 years. If three groups come together 1500 there would have to be 3000 genetic deaths with on excess of 0.1 it would take 3000 generations so 600,000 years. 4 groups 2000 there would have to be 4000 genetic deaths 800,000 years. 5 groups 2500 = 1,000,000, 6 groups 3000 individuals = 1,200,000 years to reach. How long would it talk to combine half of these groups? 200,000,000 years


The flies never got the word about Haldane's Dilemma. And so they ignorantly evolved and speciated anyway

Yes, they did. Wow, you might want to stop while you are way behind. 1000 generations in 20 million years, really.

20,000,000 / 1000 = 20,000 years per species Flies live between 15 to 25 days so that means that there are 14.6 generations per year. So every new species took 292000 generations. That would not be considered fast.

I do think we need to take a look at this again.

How many of those 1.5E13 mutations are going to end up in genetic death? If you are saying that 1 out of every 375,000 becomes fixed. Even if all 1,000,000 have offspring that would mean that each individual would have 4 of its mutations become fixed in the genome. We do not see this.

If you are saying that they are neutral mutations then how many of them are going to be lost? In a population of 1,000,000, each allele has a 1/2,000,000 chance of becoming fixed in the population. And the average time will be 4,000,000 generations or 80,000,000 years for each allele that is according to current genetics.

The probability that a new allele in a population will eventually become fixed is 1/2N, the frequency of the allele in the population at the time it arose. If the allele is to become fixed in the population, the average time to fixation is approximately 4N generations. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/nu ... population.

The probability that any new allele will become fixed in the population of 1,000,000 is 1 in 2,000,000 Which is nowhere close to your 375,000. And according to population genetics, that one mutation would take 4,000,000 generations to become fixed. In the case of apes or humans would be 80 million years.

Even your examples do not show that evolution is possible not one of them.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #351]

Give an example then. So far none of the barbarian's examples have been lower than Haldane's average.

[The Barbarian]

Even your examples do not show that evolution is possible not one of them.

They are all examples of evolution. All of them. You're still trying to tell us that your calculations say it's impossible, but all those things evolved in spite of your numbers.

Maybe it's time to just accept the reality and go on?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #363]

They are all examples of evolution. All of them. You're still trying to tell us that your calculations say it's impossible, but all those things evolved in spite of your numbers.

Maybe it's time to just accept the reality and go on?

Oh, that is funny. I need to accept reality because you cannot make the numbers work. If the numbers do not work then it did not happen and it is not reality. I do not think I am the one that needs to accept reality.

[The Barbarian]

They are all examples of evolution. All of them. You're still trying to tell us that your calculations say it's impossible, but all those things evolved in spite of your numbers.

Maybe it's time to just accept the reality and go on?

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #363]
Oh, that is funny. I need to accept reality because you cannot make the numbers work.

You need to accept reality because it's real. As you see, the numbers don't describe the reality. Which as you know, Haldane anticipated.

If the numbers do not work then it did not happen and it is not reality.

Long time ago, in graduate school, a professor told us in a modeling class, something very important:
"The map is not the territory; never forget this."

You apparently never learned that. This is why all the evolution I showed you, is real, and your numbers are just an attempt to get around reality.

I do not think I am the one that needs to accept reality.

You don't have to accept reality. But the funny thing is, reality doesn't care if you do or you don't. It's still reality.

[The Barbarian]

But however small may be the selective advantage the new character will spread, provided it is present in enough individuals of the population to prevent disappearance by mere random extinction...An average advantage of one in a million will be quite effective in most species.
J.B.S. Haldane, The Causes of Evolution, 1932

[Jose Fly]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #351]

Give an example then. So far none of the barbarian's examples have been lower than Haldane's average.

Of what, a population evolving (since your position is "evolution is impossible")? And why? I've already posted tons of info to you and you've ignored just about all of it, so I see no reason to post more.

Plus, like I said I did this as an undergrad. We took a single-clone population of bacteria, cultured them on petri dishes that were half neutral and half antibiotic-infused, and within a matter of weeks we had an evolved population growing on the antibiotic-infused half in one of the dishes. We then cultured them on dishes that were 100% antibiotic-infused, and then we examined their genetics and compared them to the parental strain to identify the mutations that conferred the beneficial trait (resistance to the antibiotic). Since the final populations were all antibiotic resistant, the mutations had therefore become fixed. All of this took place over the course of a single semester.

According to you, that can't happen.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Jose Fly in post #367]

Of what, a population evolving (since your position is "evolution is impossible")? And why? I've already posted tons of info to you and you've ignored just about all of it, so I see no reason to post more.

Ok, sure.

Plus, like I said I did this as an undergrad. We took a single-clone population of bacteria, cultured them on petri dishes that were half neutral and half antibiotic-infused, and within a matter of weeks we had an evolved population growing on the antibiotic-infused half in one of the dishes. We then cultured them on dishes that were 100% antibiotic-infused, and then we examined their genetics and compared them to the parental strain to identify the mutations that conferred the beneficial trait (resistance to the antibiotic). Since the final populations were all antibiotic resistant, the mutations had therefore become fixed. All of this took place over the course of a single semester.

Well, this would not be an example of something breaking Haldane's theory. Especially if it took the entire semester.

Bacteria can reproduce every 20 min. That means there can be 72 generations per day. A semester is about 120 days so that means during a semester the bacteria can have 8640 generations. This article says that it can happen with just one mutation. 1 mutation in 8640 generations is way over Haldane's 300 generations.

Thanks for playing but try again.

[Jose Fly]

Well, this would not be an example of something breaking Haldane's theory. Especially if it took the entire semester.

First, again you're not paying attention. Haldane developed a model, not a theory, and he acknowledged that since it didn't line up with observed reality, it needed refining/revision (as Barbarian has been trying to show you).

Second, remember you've been claiming that evolution is impossible, yet we see populations evolve all the time.

Bacteria can reproduce every 20 min. That means there can be 72 generations per day. A semester is about 120 days so that means during a semester the bacteria can have 8640 generations. This article says that it can happen with just one mutation. 1 mutation in 8640 generations is way over Haldane's 300 generations.

Thanks for playing but try again.

First, you're mistakenly assuming that it took the entire semester for the mutations to become fixed. Had you paid better attention, you'd have noticed that I said the entire process took the whole semester, which included more steps than just the fixation (e.g., sequencing the strains and comparing the results, well after the trait evolved and became fixed).

Second, what article are you referring to and what is "it" when you say "This article says that it can happen with just one mutation"?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to The Barbarian in post #366]

But however small may be the selective advantage the new character will spread, provided it is present in enough individuals of the population to prevent disappearance by mere random extinction...An average advantage of one in a million will be quite effective in most species.
J.B.S. Haldane, The Causes of Evolution, 1932

The quote still does not make the numbers work.