XPost: talk.origins, free.metaphysics, talk.religion.pantheism   
   From: rokimoto557@gmail.com   
      
   On 9/8/2025 11:41 AM, Dale wrote:   
   > On 9/8/2025 9:37 AM, RonO wrote:   
   >> On 9/7/2025 8:53 PM, Dale wrote:   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> random mutation ?   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomness   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randomized_controlled_trial   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> is random really a definition of disorder ?   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entropy   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uncertainty_principle   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> induction ?   
   >>>   
   >>> if disorder then evolution ?   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> not a hypothesis of deduction as reversed induction ?   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypothesis   
   >>>   
   >>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reversible_computing   
   >>>   
   >>> if evolution then disorder ?   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >>> even if it was a hypothesis, it is not a theory because it isn't   
   >>> testable until life at full evolution can test it by disordering   
   >>> everything including it self ?   
   >>>   
   >>> no data left to statistically analyze ?   
   >>>   
   >>>   
   >> Whatever you are trying to do here it doesn't matter.  We already   
   >> understand that mutations are not "random" as in the usual probability   
   >> estimation methods sense.  We know that transcribed sequences are more   
   >> prone to mutation.  The act of making RNA exposes the DNA to higher   
   >> mutation rates.  We know that CpG dinucleotides suffer mutations at a   
   >> higher rate than other dinucleotide combinations.  Certain sequences   
   >> suffer mutations more often than others.  There is a single base   
   >> substitution that occurs in around 1 in 14,000 live births.  We know   
   >> this because it causes a dominant phenotype (achondroplastic dwarfism,   
   >> munchkin dwarfs) and in around 98% of the changes at this site the   
   >> same base substitution occurs, but we do not know why.  The mutation   
   >> rate for most of your genome is around 1 X 10^-8 and this site mutates   
   >> at around 1 X 10^-4.  When people claim random mutation they really   
   >> mean arbitrary.  We know that they are not truly random, but when they   
   >> occur is arbitrary and unpredictable.   
   >>   
   >> Ron Okimoto   
   >>   
   >   
   > what is the statistical confidence of the things to be known ?   
   >   
      
   Statistical confidence for what?   
      
   Ron Okimoto+   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)