China's Wuhan shuts down transport as global alarm mounts over virus spread - Page 136 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Provision of the two UN HDI indicators other than GNP.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#15094132
Hindsite wrote: Genesis in the Holy Bible tells us how we got here from God himself. We got here through an act of creation by God. Science doesn't tell how we got here. All it does is make speculations.
I know that. Science doesn't conflict with that, in any way.

Hindsite wrote: Another thing you need to learn is that there are two main types of evolution that have been named Micro-evolution and macro-evolution.
Yes, and you don't understand either one.

Hindsite wrote:Macro-evolution is large scale changes that makes the theory of evolution a pseudoscience, since a dog has never been seen to change to a horse, for example.
You don't understand it, or you'd realize that if the dog became a horse, there would not be dogs around.

Hindsite wrote:A dog or horse can change to a different breed, but a dog can not change to a horse.
Yes. Science is not trying to say that. You are.

Hindsite wrote:It is a belief that fish changed to amphibians and to reptiles and mammals and to man. As you have pointed out belief is not science. So for me to believe what God said about his creation is just as valid as your so-called evolutionist's belief.
Fossil records are facts. That things change over millions of years, are facts. They have observed evolution in bacteria. They have observed changes:

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sc ... ervations/

How do we know that evolution is really happening?
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150803 ... on-is-real

No one is trying to say that your God didn't create everything, and design a system by which things change, or at least to make things make sense on some level. Science shows us that there really isn't magic, and that there are rules. The Bible tells stories in ways so that people throughout history, at varying levels of intellect and education, can understand teachings. It was never meant as a science text, and indeed, science as we know it, wasn't around in that day, in quite the same way.

If you show me a scientist trying to prove that God doesn't exist, then I will show you a person who is not a scientist.
#15094138
Godstud wrote:Fossil records are facts. That things change over millions of years, are facts. They have observed evolution in bacteria. They have observed changes:

Evolution: Watching Speciation Occur | Observations
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/sc ... ervations/

How do we know that evolution is really happening?
http://www.bbc.com/earth/story/20150803 ... on-is-real

No one is trying to say that your God didn't create everything, and design a system by which things change, or at least to make things make sense on some level. Science shows us that there really isn't magic, and that there are rules. The Bible tells stories in ways so that people throughout history, at varying levels of intellect and education, can understand teachings. It was never meant as a science text, and indeed, science as we know it, wasn't around in that day, in quite the same way.

If you show me a scientist trying to prove that God doesn't exist, then I will show you a person who is not a scientist.

Fossil records do not prove macro-evolution occurs. It does not prove the fossil turned from a fish to a bird, for example. It all relies on man's speculation and imagination. Your references are just more evolutionist's propaganda.
#15094160
Hindsite wrote:Fossil records do not prove macro-evolution occurs. It does not prove the fossil turned from a fish to a bird, for example. .

it does prove, in as much as you can empirically prove anything, that evolution happened. What it does not explain is the evolutionary mechanism. I have to say you certainly seem more educated on this than the average Liberal Atheist. Natural selection on random mutation of DNA can not explain the macro evolutionary developments.

However the Bible is just plain wrong. We don't need modern science to know this. The Bible contradicts itself. Genesis starts with two creation stories and they don't even agree on the order of creation.
#15094169
I don't know what Christian principles you are referring to. But I admit I do reject much of the teaching of the Roman Catholic Church since I am a Protestant.


No you don't. Do you not believe in the Trinity? Do you believe Jesus healed the sick? On and on. In fact. You reject very little of the teachings of the Roman Catholic Church. But. I really don't give a fuck because it is off topic and you are trying misdirection through untruth.

The signature seems to fit what I believed a scientist open to the truth would say the more he learned about the truth in real science knowledge and putting aside the pseudoscience of Darwinian Evolution.


You posted this in which Einstein rejects the very foundation of Judeo-Christian religion:

"My position concerning God is that of an agnostic. I am convinced that a vivid consciousness of the primary importance of moral principles for the betterment and ennoblement of life does not need the idea of a law-giver, especially a law-giver who works on the basis of reward and punishment.


Einstein wrote this a year and a half before his death:

"The word God is for me nothing but the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of venerable but still rather primitive legends. No interpretation, no matter how subtle, can (for me) change anything about this. [...] For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstition. [...] I cannot see anything 'chosen' about them [the Jewish people]."


So he utterly rejects the God of Christian beliefs. Sorry Sivad. Einstein was an immigrant living in a deeply religious Christian country. He tried not to offend. He was also somewhat kind. Nevertheless, his beliefs are in no way similar to the beliefs of a religious Christian, Muslim or Jew. Not on a single thing of substance other than "it is nice to be nice".
#15094267
The bat coronavirus RaTG-13 has a 96.2 percent genetic similarity to SARS-CoV-2. The SARS-CoV-2's entire genome contains about 30,000 bases and the difference of 3.8% means the difference of over 1,100 nucleotide positions. In the natural world, it takes about 50 years for RaTG-13 to naturally evolve to SARS-CoV-2. The chronology of human evolution relies on the “molecular clock” provided by the steady accumulation of substitutions on an evolutionary lineage and the number of substitutions on a lineage can be translated into a yearly mutation rate. We can now accurately calculate when Neanderthals split from a human lineage using the “molecular clock”. In the near future, geneticists will reconstruct our entire phylogenetic or evolutionary tree from the start.

One of the most fundamental discoveries in evolutionary biology is the “molecular clock”: the observation that changes to the genome along an evolutionary lineage accumulate steadily with time [1–3] and the subsequent development of a theory—the Neutral Theory—that explains why this behavior is expected for neutral genetic changes (i.e., changes with no fitness effects) [4,5]. We now understand that neutral mutations fix in the population at the rate at which they arise, irrespective of demographic history or natural selection at linked sites [4,6]. Thus, the accumulation of neutral substitutions over generations provides a record of the time elapsed on a lineage. It is this “evolutionary clock” that allows researchers to date past events.

Conversely, the existence of an evolutionary clock allows the number of substitutions on a lineage to be translated into a yearly mutation rate, given an independent estimate of when that lineage branched off [2,7–9]. For example, interpreting the fossil record as reflecting a 30 million year (My) split time between humans (apes) and rhesus macaques (Old World Monkey [OWM]) and using the average nucleotide divergence of ~6.2% between the two species [10] suggests an average yearly mutation rate of 10−9 per base pair (bp). Until 2010, single nucleotide substitutions were the main source of data from which to learn about mutation rates, and analyses of substitution patterns consistently suggested rates of around 10−9 per bp per year for primates [9,11–13].

Recent findings in human genetics therefore threw a spanner in the works when they suggested de novo mutation rates estimated from human pedigrees to be less than half what was previously believed, or approximately 0.5 x 10−9 per bp per year [14,15]. Because sequencing pedigrees is a much more direct and, in principle, definitive approach to learn about mutation, these new rate estimates have been widely adopted. They have led to a reappraisal of the chronology of human evolution, suggesting in particular that populations split longer ago than previously believed (e.g., [14,16]). Extrapolating farther back in time becomes problematic, however, as pedigree-based estimates imply split times with other primates that are older than is compatible with the fossil record, at least as currently interpreted [17–21]. One possible solution, suggested by Scally and Durbin (2012) [14] as well as others, is that yearly mutation rates have decreased towards the present, consistent with the “hominoid rate slowdown” observed in phylogenetic data [22–24].

As we discuss, changes in the yearly mutation rate over the course of human evolution are not only plausible but follow from first principles. The expected number of de novo mutations inherited by a child depends on paternal (and, to a lesser extent, maternal) ages at puberty and reproduction [25–27], traits that differ markedly among extant primates [18,28,29]. Because these traits evolve, there is no fixed mutation rate per generation and almost certainly no fixed mutation rate per year. An important implication is that the use of mutations to date evolutionary events requires a precise characterization of how germline mutations accumulate in development in males and females and across species. We argue that this knowledge is still elusive and that, as a result, it remains unclear how to set the evolutionary clock. For recent time depths, however, a complementary approach from the study of ancient DNA samples may offer a solution.

In discussing these points, we focus almost exclusively on humans, in part because, in other species studied to date, estimates of de novo mutation rates are instead higher than substitution rates, and the underlying reasons are likely distinct [30–33]. Likewise, we do not discuss mutation rates estimates for mitochondrial DNA; the sources of mutations, complete linkage, and selection pressures make the evolutionary dynamics of this one locus quite distinct from those of the nuclear genome, and, indeed, the discrepancy there, too, is opposite [34,35]. Moreover, we concentrate on the rate of single nucleotide substitutions in autosomes; for other types of mutations and a discussion of variation in mutation rates along the genome, see [25,36–38].

https://journals.plos.org/plosbiology/a ... io.2000744
#15094345
Drlee wrote:You posted this in which Einstein rejects the very foundation of Judeo-Christian religion:

Einstein certain rejected the Judo-Muslim religions. However he was very much in tune with some of the values of the Pagan-Christian tradition. The idea of universal human brotherhood and love for one's neighbour regardless of race or ethnicity comes from Grecco-Roman philosophy and culture and is totally antithetical to Judaism and Islam. both religions celebrating genocidal extermination by their founder patriarchs.

Posted this before seeing the above moderator comment.
#15094573
Kaiserschmarrn wrote:A few decent quality sero-prevalence surveys have now been conducted. Probably the best of them all is the Spanish one which has tested 60,000 samples.



So herd immunity is still a long way off.

Australia is trying to lift lock down. This is not going to work out well. Already several new clusters have sprung up.

Very few people wear masks. Also, people are going out with flu like symptoms. So I expect a second wave within a month.
#15094574
@foxdemon WTF is wrong with people, in these countries?

Honestly, I went to the Macro store, today(Thailand's version of Costco), and they were taking phone numbers, temperatures and ensuring all people had masks and were sanitized. They cleaned the carts after every use.

Thailand's had very few Covid-19 cases, and the restrictions just got pushed back until the end of June, because there is still risk.

Everyone is wearing masks if they get in close proximity. Almost no one is NOT wearing a mask.

What does that say about social responsibility in these countries? Freedumb, at what cost?
#15094581
@Godstud I think there will need to be legislation regarding masks. Masks only work if most people use them.

The general problem is that people think it is over, so they think they can relax. However, the Australian government seems to be more competent than some other governments, so they will likely figure out a solution to keep covid-19 growth down while still allowing economic activity. It will take one or two more scares before they figure out what the rules should be. I think mask legislation will be coming soon.

I should point out that when I claim the Oz gov is competent, I mean that relatively. Actually, by historical measures, the Oz gov was not considered the gold standard by which to measure quality of governance. It hasn’t improved, still be very much an example of ‘lions led by donkeys’ (an Anglo-Saxon tradition). But the rest of the world has deteriorated so much that the Oz gov now looks good.

Rather sad, really.
#15094593
Well, I am sick and tired of hearing idiots claiming that "it's just like the normal flu"
and idiots saying well those that died had only months to live because they were old and had hypertension or whatever. And then you see the idiots refusing to wear masks and partying in their hundreds in close proximity.

I had it.

I will only care for my near and dear ones and I will stop trying to inform anyone else about COVID-19.
The information is out there for anyone who cares.
Good luck.
#15094996
foxdemon wrote:So herd immunity is still a long way off.

Quite. Now is probably the time for even the last one of those postulating that theory to move on to partial immunity from previous infections with other coronaviruses. I'm actually hoping this will turn out to be a significant favourable factor, but there's no way of knowing yet.

foxdemon wrote:Australia is trying to lift lock down. This is not going to work out well. Already several new clusters have sprung up.

Very few people wear masks. Also, people are going out with flu like symptoms. So I expect a second wave within a month.

Would be a real shame if Australia doesn't stamp out the virus. You are close enough.

In terms of community transmissions, almost all of it seems to be happening in Victoria and NSW now, which made me wonder if you have any regional travel restrictions in place.

I'm now quite confident that NZ has done it. We are just not finding any cases that would point to ongoing community transmission. The only case we've had in the last 10 days was a person who was already in isolation since late March due to a link with an existing cluster. And even before that we've hardly had any unknown transmission source for weeks. I can't remember when the last such case was reported to be honest and we've done a lot of testing, including sampling asymptomatic people in the community.

The only downside now is international travel restrictions which can be expected to remain in place for quite some time.

Ter wrote:Well, I am sick and tired of hearing idiots claiming that "it's just like the normal flu"
and idiots saying well those that died had only months to live because they were old and had hypertension or whatever. And then you see the idiots refusing to wear masks and partying in their hundreds in close proximity.

I had it.

I will only care for my near and dear ones and I will stop trying to inform anyone else about COVID-19.
The information is out there for anyone who cares.
Good luck.

Understandable, but you've been right most of the time from the very beginning and it's no good to let those, who've been mostly wrong, wear you down. Perhaps having a break and then continuing to post is a better option?

Also, re that HCQ Lancet paper which was so breathlessly reported on:
  • 1
  • 132
  • 133
  • 134
  • 135
  • 136

I apologize to everyone for helping Hindsite set u[…]

Who told you both are incompatible with each othe[…]

Maybe to a pofo epidemiologist but not really. Th[…]

She could have been a great homemaker instead. A […]