Re: Weirdo's Irony Meter Just had a Blowout.

On Jul 1, 6:24 am, spintronic <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 30 June, 15:24, Prof Weird <pol...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

On Jun 30, 9:56 am, spintronic <spintro...@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
--------A,A
|
|
-----------A
| | ----A,G,A
| | |
| --------A,G
| |
| ----A,G,G
|
-------------G
|
| ----T,A,A
| |
| |
|-----------T
| |
| |----T,G,A
|
|-----------C

Etc etc.
In the second tree above. (A,G,T,C) every gene that you could ever
possibly list is contained within one of the infinite branches within
the infinite tree.

Too bad that tree is USELESS for showing relationships between
organisms - which is what a phylogeny is SUPPOSED TO DO.

That *DOESN'T* matter. The hierarchy Above is *NESTED*.

Not really - there are different numbers of traits along the branches
- some have just 1 base, some have three.

your 'tree' is every CONCEIVABLE sequence, but phylogenetic
trees are generated from sequences that
exist in actual organisms that shows relationships between the
sequences

I never said it was a phylogenetic tree'.

Then why did you bring it up (other than your pathological need to
look arrogant and stupid) ?

I said your 'nested hierarchies' are contained within mine.

Not really, given it would be near impossible to sort out the actual
sequences from your infinite mess.

Every nested hierarchy that you offer up, is also contained in the
above infinite tree of (A,G,T,C).

Nope

Nope? Are you stupid? How many examples & sequences do you want
me to ram down your throat before the penny drops in your tiny brain?

There is NO WAY humans would sort closer to fish or mice than chimps
GIVEN THE ACTUAL SEQUENCES PRESENT IN THOSE ORGANISMS.

Once again simpleton : a nested hierarchy shows RELATIONSHIPS between
ACTUALLY EXISTING CRITTERS; your 'tree' is a hallucination which
fixates on every conceivable sequence while ignoring actual sequence
relationships.

Examination of REALITY shows there is one solidly supported nested
hierarchy for living things - get over yourself.

What is your 'point', simpleton - do you 'think' that if a blithering
simpleton like you can draw a tree, that somehow invalidates the
observed nested hierarchy in nature (and somehow supporting your
delusion that chromosomes teleport about metazoan genomes willy-
nilly) ?

You know as well as I do that any set of sequences you offer up, *IS*
contained within the above tree.

And your 'tree' is useless because over
99.999999999999999999999999999999999999999999% of it is hypothetical.

- your 'tree' is just a compilation of every conceivable sequence

Wow, that was a quick change of mind.

Hallucinating again spintwitty ? When did I CLAIM your tree was NOT a
compilation of every conceivable sequence ?

- it does NOT show relationships between any gene sequences

Of course it does you *MORON*.

A,T,C,C is more closely related to A,T,C,G than T,T,T,T.

Now do that for ACTUAL sequences in ACTUAL organisms you get an ACTUAL
nested hierarchy.

(every sequence is a seperate twig on seperate branches, with no indication
of what is more closely related to what other sequences).

Are you stupid? (Don't answer. I already know that one).

Sneered spintwitty at the face in the mirror.

Since any phylogenetic hierarchy that you offer up is contained in
mine.

Too bad REALITY is concerned with the ACTUAL phylogenetic hierarchy
seen in ACTUAL organisms and not your festering hallucinations.

Once again, buffoon : there is no way ACTUAL human sequences would be
closer to fish or cicada or slime mold sequences than to chimp
sequences.

Over
99.9999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999999%
of the hierarchies found in your 'tree' exist only in your
imagination.

And is *IDENTICAL* in sequence form & structure, only a *MORON*
would say what you just said. (Oh that's right, you are a *MORON*)- Hide quoted text -

Q : How does one know when spintwitty is losing an argument ?
A : He splits up his responses up into several posts, and starts
acting more obnoxious and arrogant than usual.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Part 1 (of 3): What are major aspects of evolutionary theory?
    ... We see various sequences with various differences ... But when we reconstruct the states of the internal nodes of our ... Now if we construct an unrooted parsimony tree for those sequences, ... Now let's reconstruct the internal nodes by majority rule: ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: A few bonobo & chimp genes more related to our own
    ... In 453 of their sequences, ... What you get from homologous stretches of DNA from different species is a gene tree. ... This is usually pretty similar to the underlying species tree, but there are a variety of processes which can cause them to diverge. ... The gene tree has been incorrectly determined: that is, phylogenetic analysis has produced an estimated tree that doesn't match the true gene tree. ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Part 1 (of 3): What are major aspects of evolutionary theory?
    ... We see various sequences with various differences ... By rooting the tree, or by assuming a molecular clock that roots the ... >>>What about duplications followed by later divergence of the copies? ... > clade of sponges becomes eumetazoans, the unrooted tree should look ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: An uncountable countable set
    ... binary sequences, i.e ., infinite sequences whose terms were from a set ... And my tree shows that the complete set can be listed in form of a ... It is only the set of individualy infinite paths in that tree that are ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: Weirdos Irony Meter Just had a Blowout.
    ... Too bad that tree is USELESS for showing relationships between ... organisms - which is what a phylogeny is SUPPOSED TO DO. ... trees are generated from sequences that ... above infinite tree of. ...
    (talk.origins)
Loading