Scivillage.com Casual Discussion Science Forum

Quote:reproductive success.

The middle finger is handy and if used correctly goes a long way in helping to achieve this goal. (enough puns for ya?)

(Nov 25, 2020 05:15 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]

Quote:reproductive success

The middle finger is handy and if used correctly goes a long way in helping to achieve this goal. (enough puns for ya?)

(Nov 25, 2020 04:54 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]I’ve already explained it.

Fitness is a measure of reproductive success.

You've only argued a straw man. Too bad you can't see that simple fact.

(Nov 25, 2020 05:48 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]

(Nov 25, 2020 04:54 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]I’ve already explained it.

Fitness is a measure of reproductive success.

You've only argued a straw man. Too bad you can't see that simple fact.

Nope, it's not a misrepresentation of your statement. Your statement hinges on that fact, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it, your statement is a misrepresentation of evolution.

(Nov 22, 2020 11:25 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]For all the, often disingenuous, talk of following the science, you'd think more people could resign themselves to accepting things like Covid and autoantibodies as crucial to natural selection. Humans have been so successful for so long that we've been able to protect the survival of the "less fit", very often keeping them in the gene pool. As such, we may have unintentionally bred these very weaknesses, and nature may be catching up.

(Nov 25, 2020 03:56 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Fuck off, twat. We all recognize that you're just being toxic because you're an insecure piece of shit.

I have the confidence to be wrong. If someone can prove that I’m wrong then I’ve learned something. It’s one of my guilty pleasures, but you, on the other hand, struggle with it.

Quote:Why Certain People Will Never Admit They Were Wrong
But what about when a person does push back against the facts, when they simply cannot admit they were wrong in any circumstance? What in their psychological makeup makes it impossible for them to admit they were wrong, even when it is obvious they were? And why does this happen so repetitively — why do they never admit they were wrong?

The answer is related to their ego, their very sense-of-self. Some people have such a fragile ego, such brittle self-esteem, such a weak "psychological constitution," that admitting they made a mistake or that they were wrong is fundamentally too threatening for their egos to tolerate.

(Nov 25, 2020 06:16 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Nov 25, 2020 05:48 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]

(Nov 25, 2020 04:54 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]I’ve already explained it.

Fitness is a measure of reproductive success.

You've only argued a straw man. Too bad you can't see that simple fact.

Nope, it's not a misrepresentation of your statement. Your statement hinges on that fact, and there are no ifs, ands, or buts about it, your statement is a misrepresentation of evolution.

(Nov 22, 2020 11:25 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]For all the, often disingenuous, talk of following the science, you'd think more people could resign themselves to accepting things like Covid and autoantibodies as crucial to natural selection. Humans have been so successful for so long that we've been able to protect the survival of the "less fit", very often keeping them in the gene pool. As such, we may have unintentionally bred these very weaknesses, and nature may be catching up.

Again, ad nauseam, where in any of that do you imagine I'm talking about individual life-span...you know, your physical fitness straw man. "Keeping them in the gene pool" is all about genotypic or phenotypic survival.

Quote:

(Nov 25, 2020 03:56 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Fuck off, twat. We all recognize that you're just being toxic because you're an insecure piece of shit.

I have the confidence to be wrong. If someone can prove that I’m wrong then I’ve learned something. It’s one of my guilty pleasures, but you, on the other hand, struggle with it.

Quote:Why Certain People Will Never Admit They Were Wrong
But what about when a person does push back against the facts, when they simply cannot admit they were wrong in any circumstance? What in their psychological makeup makes it impossible for them to admit they were wrong, even when it is obvious they were? And why does this happen so repetitively — why do they never admit they were wrong?

The answer is related to their ego, their very sense-of-self. Some people have such a fragile ego, such brittle self-esteem, such a weak "psychological constitution," that admitting they made a mistake or that they were wrong is fundamentally too threatening for their egos to tolerate.

Again, you're projecting, as you've yet to show, beyond your own motivated reasoning, that I was ever talking about individual life-span. You're projecting your own inability to admit you're wrong, and you're so blinded by it that you don't even remember a recent time I admitted I was wrong (about you voting for Trump). You seem to just harbor so much animosity that you refuse to accept me literally telling you exactly what I meant. So you go on and on arguing a caricature in your own head and subsequent straw men.

If you had the confidence to be wrong, you wouldn't regularly avoid so many of my points, deflect to older, irrelevant posts, take more time whining about wasting your time than actually addressing the argument, dismiss, and resort to your new emoji.

(Nov 25, 2020 06:46 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Again, you're projecting, as you've yet to show, beyond your own motivated reasoning, that I was ever talking about individual life-span.

That's irrelevant. Your entire statement is based on a common misconception.

(Nov 25, 2020 07:10 PM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Nov 25, 2020 06:46 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]Again, you're projecting, as you've yet to show, beyond your own motivated reasoning, that I was ever talking about individual life-span.

That's irrelevant. Your entire statement is based on a common misconception.

No, that's the whole point. Since I never even implied anything about individual life-span, your assertion of a misconception is wholly a straw man. But you will never admit that, hence projecting.

(Nov 26, 2020 12:25 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]No, that's the whole point. Since I never even implied anything about individual life-span, your assertion of a misconception is wholly a straw man. But you will never admit that, hence projecting.

Syne Wrote:For all the, often disingenuous, talk of following the science, you'd think more people could resign themselves to accepting things like Covid and autoantibodies as crucial to natural selection. Humans have been so successful for so long that we've been able to protect the survival of the "less fit", very often keeping them in the gene pool. As such, we may have unintentionally bred these very weaknesses, and nature may be catching up.

Older people are more likely to develop a serious illness with Covid-19. How exactly have we unintentionally bred this weakness?

Syne Wrote:We’ve been protecting the "less fit" keeping them in the gene pool.

 
Evolution doesn’t maximize health. It maximizes the reproductive success of genes. If it doesn’t inhibit your reproductive ability then disease-causing alleles will stay in the gene pool.

Most older people probably would self-isolate for an extended period of time in order for the younger generation to carry on with their lives but not open-endedly. That’s just absurd and cruel.

(Nov 26, 2020 02:24 AM)Secular Sanity Wrote: [ -> ]

(Nov 26, 2020 12:25 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]No, that's the whole point. Since I never even implied anything about individual life-span, your assertion of a misconception is wholly a straw man. But you will never admit that, hence projecting.

Syne Wrote:For all the, often disingenuous, talk of following the science, you'd think more people could resign themselves to accepting things like Covid and autoantibodies as crucial to natural selection. Humans have been so successful for so long that we've been able to protect the survival of the "less fit", very often keeping them in the gene pool. As such, we may have unintentionally bred these very weaknesses, and nature may be catching up.

Older people are more likely to develop a serious illness with Covid-19. How exactly have we unintentionally bred this weakness?

Underlying conditions can exist at any age. See where I didn't specify older people in that quote and even mentioned autoantibodies? Do you think only old people have trouble with autoantibodies? O_o

Quote:

Syne Wrote:We’ve been protecting the "less fit" keeping them in the gene pool.

 
Evolution doesn’t maximize health. It maximizes the reproductive success of genes. If it doesn’t inhibit your reproductive ability then disease-causing alleles will stay in the gene pool.

Most older people probably would self-isolate for an extended period of time in order for the younger generation to carry on with their lives but not open-endedly. That’s just absurd and cruel.

Who said "health"? See, you just keep dropping in words I didn't even use. Is that like mental Tourette's?
Again, I explicitly said genotype and phenotype, which are not traits that change in an individual life-span and only relate to survival over many generations. Natural selection includes differential survival, as well as reproductive success. So a disease without modern treatment will limit survival and thus opportunity to reproduce.

Again, who said anything about older people isolating "open-endedly"? Another straw man or more mental Tourette's?
I've repeatedly told you that the elderly...

(Nov 25, 2020 06:27 PM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]... will still need a vaccine to go about normal daily life

Normal daily life literally means not open-ended isolation.

And even so, many older people would opt to trade the remainder of their lives for the joy of being with their families and grandchildren. Much like people given the option to live longer staying in a hospital preferring to die at home.

So the only thing "absurd and cruel" is your own straw man, completely non sequitur to anything I said. You're just making shit up to justify your emotional reaction to me. But then...that's this entire thread.

Unbelievable!

You’ll never admit to being wrong. You even posted a quote and link that clearly shows you’re wrong. Try reading it.

(Nov 23, 2020 02:17 AM)Syne Wrote: [ -> ]"Fitness" in natural selection literally means physical fitness, both of genotype and phenotype.

No, it does not literally mean physical fitness.

See…that’s why I need an emoji. You’re a time-consuming little troll. I’m out. 

Nite, Syne.