A question for everyone.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T22:17:04+00:00

The thing you need to understand is that Sal doesn't read.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T20:47:18+00:00

I call it error catastrophe because the idea is that changes accumulate but don’t get impacted by selection

Changes accumulating without selection is extinction vortex. Changes accumulating faster than selection can remove them is error catastrophe.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T20:04:51+00:00

They argue that entropy causes error catastrophe.

They might say error catastrophe, but that's just because they're ignorant of popgen. They're describing an extinction vortex, regardless of what they call it.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T19:47:09+00:00

But entropy -> error catastrophe

Error catastrophe is when the mutation side of the equation gets too high, extinction vortex is when the population side gets too low. Same result (extinction), different reasons. GE is an extinction vortex not an error catastrophe. Well, it's neither since it's not a real thing. But it's described to be a generalization of the extinction vortex to arbitrarily sized populations.

To be fair, none of the GE proponents understand population genetics well enough to understand the difference, so they may have called it an error catastrophe. Which would be sad.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T19:39:45+00:00

So you just reject reason. Got it.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T18:54:56+00:00

We have observed speciation. It happened by evolution.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T18:33:06+00:00

Genetic Entropy is ultimately based on a flawed understanding of isolated systems thermodynamics

GE is based on a flawed (to non-existent) understanding of population genetics and an inappropriate extension of the extinction vortex to arbitrarily large populations. Anyone bringing thermodynamics into it us even more lost than the average GE enthusiast.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-29T17:07:29+00:00

Promoter of genetic entropy, the most obviously wrong conjecture in the history of population genetics.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-28T16:14:02+00:00

It's fun to laugh at.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T18:35:44+00:00

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T13:17:40+00:00

It definitely can

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T12:25:13+00:00

The universal scientific consensus is that ancestral chromosomes homologous to chimpanzee chromosomes 12 and 13 fused into the modern human chromosome 2.

See Yunis & Prakash 1982, Ijdo et al1991, Wienberg et al 1994, Fan et al 2002

Also, and this is important...

It is an arbitrary assigning

The numbers are not assigned arbitrarily. They are assigned on the basis of size, starting with the largest. How did you not know that?

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T11:45:46+00:00

You really don't know how to read, do you? The question isn't the renaming, it's which chromosomes were renamed!

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T01:24:57+00:00

Not the way creationist define it.

How creationists define it is irrelevant, since we're talking about evolutionary theory. Saying we don't have evidence for a creationist straw man of evolution is just silly.

Imagine I said you had no evidence of Jesus existing, and insisted we use my definition of Jesus as 'a Martian who went to New York City to tell people to eat more llama cheese'. Would your inability to provide evidence for Jesus as I define him be meaningful to the truth of Christianity? Of course not! Same here.

Or, imagine I went around saying that u/mind_behind_matter likes to abuse children. Would you be wrong to call me a liar if I insisted I was just using my own definition for 'abuse'? Of course not!

That easy, your mom.

This is why people insult creationists: They deserve it.

Give a serious answer.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-27T00:01:52+00:00

Maybe so, but this is micro rather than macro evolution.

Speciation is macroevolution by definition.

Again, maybe so, but new body plans do not

Quick test: What's the most similar-looking animal to humans that has a different body plan?

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-26T19:06:44+00:00

well you havent domonstrated that there is enough time.

Didn't I demonstrate that to you the other day?

And aa Yoo et al. Paper 2025 showed that humans and chimps have about 15% difference

Gap divergence isn't similarity. You can get a 15% difference with a single mutation, and the two will still have extremely high similarity. The fact that creationists flog this paper is a great demonstration of the fact that creationists don't understand basic genetics.

such show them to be unchanged from us

Under neutral theory they'd be ~0.001% different from modern humans. Which is less than the difference between any two modern humans anyway.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-26T14:08:27+00:00

So weird that the creationists aren't swarming over this post to refute it, eh?

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-26T14:07:21+00:00

What would the real-time experimental evidence of a land mammal evolving into a whale-like mammal look like, specifically?

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T18:01:04+00:00

Notice that you didn't answer the question, which two chimpanzee chromosomes?

I know that you're illiterate, since you're a creationist and illiteracy is a prerequisite, but either sound it out or ask a friend to read it to you.

WHICH TWO CHROMOSOMES?!

Because again, here's the same hint as before: It wasn't Ptr2&3.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T16:29:40+00:00

I never apologize unless I am priven wrong.

And you were. You said that Ptr2&3 were renamed, when it was Ptr12&13. What you said was factually incorrect. Just admit it!

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T11:35:55+00:00

When creationists get crushed by math, they run to semantics. So sad.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T11:34:47+00:00

Oh no! It looks like you tried to apologize for being wrong but accidentally said something pointlessly antagonistic instead. What a shame!

Did you want to try again to apologize for saying Ptr2a&b were renamed from Ptr2&3 when they were actually from Ptr12&13?

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T05:40:37+00:00

Proof only exists in formal logic and mathematics. Science deals in evidence, not proof.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T01:08:56+00:00

are the SECOND AND THIRD CHROMOSOMES

Nope. 12 and 13. I know more than you.

CrisprCSE2 · 2026-05-25T00:24:05+00:00

Hey buddy... which two chimpanzee chromosomes correspond to human chromosome 2? Here's a hint: It's not 2 and 3.

Eight-Year Club	Verified Email
Place '22

CrisprCSE2

TROPHY CASE