Computer design via evolutionary algorithms, free radicals, response to Joopq

[afielsch]

you are wasting your time.

creationists either know this and willfully ignore it or they dont want to hear it. the only way to expose them efficiently (at least imo) is to debate in a moderated public forum. otherwise you are casting pearls at swine.

[TravisMorien]

@afielsch I don't think there is any way to get through to dyed in the wool fundamentalists, and after reviewing Joopq/unbiased000's other body of work he seems like just some guy with strong opinions based on minimal knowledge, backed up with a conspiracy mindset, so they're unreachable. But there are others who are undecided and uneducated, people who are fair minded enough to consider the evidence when it is presented to them. Scientists have a strong case to make, creationists don't.

[unbiased000]

...you dont fucking listen, thats why!

and if you are you are too fucking dumb to get what im referring to unless i spell it out in 5th grade terms. to someone who KNOWS these issues they would know what i am talkin about and not do a stupid video talkin about ELCTRON TRANSFER instead of the issue of free electrons produced by artificial process'

you must have to do some serious mental gymnastics to be so conceited and not suspect a huge strawman clouding your inner consxious. im done with you

[unbiased000]

...represented in 2 out of the three theories for why we die (from natural causes...goombah... not car crashes)

so if you are seriously trying to refute THAT, then...ok, feel free to try.

why you would think i meant anything else is a little suspect though

[TravisMorien]

And just so we're clear on this, "unbiased000", you are Joopq posting under another name, right?

[unbiased000]

yes, this is joopq. just like i told goombah and he PRETENDED to not know (i have the proof all dated for those who are interested) so that he could run away from the debate. instead making some silly video as a replacement BEFORE ever accepting a debate or agreeing on a topic. pure dishonesty and dishonor doesnt look similar with that for nothing.

for your information, joopq or unbiased is not my govt name...

[TravisMorien]

Well, ok. I just wanted to make sure I knew who I was talking to. Eddie says he wasn't aware of your dual identity, if you say you told him earlier then I'm prepared to believe both of you, he simply didn't remember or hadn't read the earlier message.

Doesn't really matter though, if you are up for a debate, why not debate me?

I've uploaded a number of videos since this one, on various religious and scientific topics. Lots there for you to debunk, if you can.

[unbiased000]

so you are going to ignore my questions? WHY did you go to electron transference? shouldnt it be painfully obvious that when people in general (as they do so often since this is a basic thing) talk about free radicals they are talkn about the harmful ones that occur from artificial process'?

i only wanted to debate goombah cuz i could tell he is masquerading as an intellectual. while being conceited and claiming to be able to "debunk the bible" somethigni slowly saw he is no where near. ...

[TravisMorien]

"so you are going to ignore my questions?"

So... you wanna do this huh? Ok.

If you want me to answer your questions, make a video. I will answer any question you like.

You can also reply to my existing videos, see if there is anything to debunk there.

I warn you though, as a trained chemist I do know what free radicals are, and it is obvious to me that you do not. Do your homework or expect to be pwned. :P

[unbiased000]

now all the sudden i dont know again. you are going in circles and not making alot of sense. and you dont need a fucking video to answer why you thought i was talking about electron transfer (or could get it confused) with harmful free radicals. you could just explain...the truth that i assume but dont know for sure (thats why i asked). oh yes, intentions are very important.

i dont giv a shit about your videos until i see some type of mature behavior that would indicate you arent some social ..

[TravisMorien]

Ok, here's your answer. Your point about free radicals is 100% sheer bullshit and shows you don't know what you are talking about there.

The majority of the free radicals which do damage to us are perfectly natural. Free radicals form in various ways most notably whenever we are exposed to sunlight, but we also take them in into our food. Free radicals in fact serve vital biological functions and while some are harmful, many are not.

I urge you to do your homework before pursuing this point.

[unbiased000]

that is NOT an answer to my question, and if you dont know it...you must be lying.

now let ME explain this AGAIN. your point about cancer and the sun is NOT FACT it is theory. the CAUSE of cancer? you think your masters will print that out in a text book or scientific journal? not yet. all YOU get are ideas for why they THINK so and so.

free radicals in food...are FROM HYBRIDIZATION. in terms more second grade (i know you need that here) UNnatural foods! artificial where it matters most.

[TravisMorien]

"your point about cancer and the sun is NOT FACT it is theory. the CAUSE of cancer?"

The link between skin cancer and sun exposure is a fact. I don't know where you think this is going, but if you are in such complete denial of medical reality that you think damage to the skin caused by the sun is "just a theory" then you are even more ignorant than I had feared.

I am an Australian. We have the highest rates of skin cancer in the world. Every Aussie knows this fact, there is no debate.

[unbiased000]

the CORRELATION is talked about regarding skin cancer, that does not prove causation dummy.

and it seems that mainly (or maybe even only) white people get that.

hybridization between two plants that cant mate through chemical affinity ALWAYS produce free electrons BECAUSE the molecules are not meant to fit together. how long this has gone on is a moot point, again a stupid comment from you. it is not crap and you denying it means you are stubbon and ignorant to the facts of nutrition.

[TravisMorien]

Ok, that's the point where you jumped the couch and exposed yourself to be pretty much a complete flake.

The link between sun exposure and skin cancer is about as controversial medically as the link between radiation and cancer. The actual genetic changes in skin caused by UV are not just speculated on, but are actually measurable and easily observed. Any dermatologist anywhere in the world will tell you that FFS.

[unbiased000]

i repeat WHITE people are damaged by the sun...

possibly. but this does not extend farther then them by much. what does that tell you?

we get vitamin d from it and you get cancer...

lol. im not saying i know why.

NATURAL food...you know nothing about it. you dont want a debate. you want to play petty games because your intellectual pool is all you have to give yourself value. im not blind i see you clearly.

you know nothing about things you deny. name some natural vegatables!! name them. cant?

[TravisMorien]

"between two plants that cant mate through chemical affinity ALWAYS produce free electrons BECAUSE the molecules are not meant to fit together."

Sorry, I thought we were talking about science.

You've got a moral/religious viewpoint based on some kind of weird natural foods cultish belief system. I was trying to debate you with my knowledge from chemistry and biology, little realising that these things factor so little into your points.

"Not meant to fit together". Says it all really.

[unbiased000]

what are you an idiot? this is a very basic common sense idea. things that are finite are composed into certain rations of atoms. thats why all the atoms in a substance is made of that substance. a cat isnt meant to be a dog...thjis is common fucking sense.

knowing that natural plants (which you evidently know nothing about since you FAILED to even try to name one you pussy) are far superior in every aspect concerning health to artificial ones IS seen by scientific measurement you lazy newb

[TravisMorien]

"knowing that natural plants (which you evidently know nothing about since you FAILED to even try to name one you pussy)"

Sorry, I was stunned by your idiocy.

I'm guessing you mean the wild, uncultivated prehistoric forms of the fruit and veg we grow for food today, as found growing in the wilderness.

Sea Cabbage (Brassica oleracea)

Wild banana (various Musa species)

Wild carrot (Daucus carota)

Indian Wild Orange (Citrus indica)

Asian Wild Apple (Malus sieversii)

[unbiased000]

i mean if your only hope to deny the obvious is to try and brand me something that in your small world view is a synonym with wrong...thats pathetic and delusional. look up the concept of chemical affinity in regards to plant life and see how you are wrong about this BASIC idea. for fucks sake llol

[unbiased000]

a cat and a human can have sex (im sure you know this well) but they cant produce a baby ogether naturally. so it is in the plant kingdom. a rose cant spread its pollen to a venus fly trap and make a rosey fly trap....only HYBRIDIZATION can do that. an ARTIFICIAL process that produces a simple starch to bind the uneven atomic structures of two plants that dont mate with chemical affinity..ok stupid? therefore the uneven amounts of electrons produce a NEW balance of free radicals that are harmful

[TravisMorien]

If you knew anything at all about horticulture you'd know that hybridisation is where the pollen from one species is used to fertilise another species or variety, resulting in a viable offspring.

Gene splicing is something different, they just take particular gene sequences and put them in usually with viruses.

But where the heck do you get the idea that this creates free radicals? Are you making that shit up or are there others as schmucky as you?

[unbiased000]

so im afraid i HAVE done my homework and i DO know what im talking about here you undeserving conceited little prick.

the very act of hybridization CREATES harmful free radicals that are in imbalance with the delicate balance of our electromagnetic structure! food produced by nature is FAR superior AND doesnt slowly KILL us.

but you dont want to admit that i bet...i wonder why?....

[TravisMorien]

Well although your claim about hybridisation is complete and utter crap, at least you provided enough context to let me figure out that you are referring to the crossbreeding of plants by farmers, something which people have done for thousands of years.

However, if you think that produces free radicals you are completely wrong. If you have evidence, prove it. Cite your sources.

[unbiased000]

and your sun THEORY is just that, a theory. however it depends on the existence of MELANIN...something we have yet to actually see exist. like i said, if it exists...what is its electromagnetic structure? you see, you are building houses of cards to try to support a PREFERED version of reality. i hope you dont compound that with hypocrisy towards christains who may do the same. but to each his own

[TravisMorien]

"the existence of MELANIN...something we have yet to actually see exist"

I'm not sure why I am continuing to argue with someone who is clearly a complete idiot, if you want proof that melanin exists look in the freaking mirror! You're a black dude, where do you think this colour comes from... shoe polish?

Melanin is very difficult to extract from human skin in pure form, but it can be synthesised and studied, its UV photoprotection properties measured etc.

[KaOtoko]

"where do you think this colour comes from... shoe polish?"

If I could like this, or give you massive Kudos for this comment I would.

Oh, the declining standards of education nowadays :/

[unbiased000]

and AGAIN i am NOT talkin about electron TRANSFER you IDIOT lol. how many times do i have to tell you that? maybe YOU dont know any of this stuff really...

look, free radicals in food is almost common sense in this day and age. an electron itself may be "natural" according to whatever defination you are using...but a free radical or free electron produced by ARTIFICIAL process' are what harms the body most. THAT is the fucking issue DER!! this far in i have to reiterate that? this is why no deba

[TravisMorien]

"but a free radical or free electron produced by ARTIFICIAL process' are what harms the body most. THAT is the fucking issue DER!!"

You are wrong. That you keep repeating such an asinine point as if somehow you've hit scientific gold is just sad.

The claim that somehow the body is able to tell the difference between a free radical produced by artificial means, and the billions of free radicals produced naturally in our bodies ever day, is just silly.

But if you have evidence, show us.

[unbiased000]

harmful free radicals in artificial food is PRECISELY the point! you have falied at learning this reality on your own. laziness and bias is to blame i suspect.

an of course i know what an electromagnetic structure is, why the fuck do you think im talkin about it? you see your arogance is ridiculous and shows further what a social pariah you are, not worth taking serious. your intentions are evil and self serving, and you are biased and ignarant. damn, isnt that enough to put you in the trash?

[unbiased000]

...and as for you. why would i "debate" someone who off the bat shows me he has no regards for my valid points or questions?

[TravisMorien]

"has no regards for my valid points or questions"

In all sincerity, and I'm not just saying this to be rude or obtuse, you haven't made any valid points or asked any valid questions yet.

You keep insisting that I am talking about the electron transfer chain in cellular respiration, but I'm not. You somehow think there is a valid point in claiming that we don't know things about melanin, but there isn't. You've got this crazy idea that somehow only "artificial" radicals do harm, but it's wrong.

[unbiased000]

...it is not my fault your schooling or life has failed you to see this. and its not my responsibility to spenmd my time holding your hand to show you while you kick and scream like a child. grow up, grow a will to LEARN the whole story. and i know these are sensative facts for people like you to learn so late in life. ask monsanto if hybridization causes fre radicals. what do you think they will say? but ill tell you what reality is...i already did. if you cant find it you fail. thats it.

[unbiased000]

keep eatng your artificial plants and try to be merry. i dont give a shit. and i dont care for a person who is spreading goombahs lies about why he declined to debate me.

you are a true biased fool. and you have some nerve to expect me to conversate with you like this when i already explained that i dont talk to DISHONEST people with poor intentions and are BIASED.

you are a state made puppet spreading monsanto like lies about hybridization and harmful free radicals FROM artificial reactions

[TravisMorien]

"and you have some nerve to expect me to conversate with you like this"

Actually, I no longer expect you to converse with me.

It is clear to me now from your paranoid ravings that scientific facts are not really of much interest to you, since you have a delusion that science is a big conspiracy, the textbooks and published papers all lies, and you just assume any facts you like and the credit lack of evidence to the inherent bias of the system against you.

i.e. you're way too kooky for me.

[unbiased000]

and i dont even know what the fuck a sock account is. i have two accounts to post different types of things on. implying it is something dishonest is the feeling i get from you two. he ONLY knew it was my other account becase i TOLD HIM IT WAS lol. unless hes trying to hack my computer or something. regardless i told him anyway THEN he tried to act like i tricked him into something lol. hes mad cuz what he said BEFORE i told him it was me. he admitted he knows nothing about the bible....hmm

[TravisMorien]

"he admitted he knows nothing about the bible....hmm "

Well you're in luck with me. I was an altar server for 12 years and attended catholic schools for all but one year of my primary and secondary education, so I have plenty of religious education.

I am also well educated scientifically with a BSc in chemistry and some other stuff.

While I'd prefer to stick with science, or at least science vs. religion, unlike Eddie, I'm willing to debate you in either area.

Give it your best shot.

[unbiased000]

...misfit who likes to read text books in his spare time. why in the world would i feel there is anything to gain from entering into the depths of conversation with a man who may have a very twisted and immature mindset? you appear to just be trying to stroke your intellectual ego. something that is dangerously too vital for your self worth im assuming. im not interested in your weird and pathetic world ok? just do what you do, i dont care, but i dont want to be around people like that.

[TravisMorien]

What's wrong with reading text books? I have a big exam coming up and I have to study for it.

A side effect of studying for an exam is it also equips me for scientific debates, even if the person I am debating doesn't really know much about science and is tragically/comically unaware of this.

[unbiased000]

its very simple, free radicals that are harmful are the ones that our bodies are not built to handle. we are not talkin about electron transfer...i am talkin about free radicals produced from artificial electromagnetic manipulation (something man has no idea how the pond ripples into the infintly fractioned subatomic world). what we DO see in our limited view is that these types of free radicals are the ones that cause cancer and are the reason why we die (of natural caused DER) ....

[TravisMorien]

Free radicals form in the skin when we are exposed to ultraviolet rays from sunlight. These free radicals cause genetic damage which is the direct cause of sunburn and skin cancers.

Do you classify sunlight as a natural or artificial phenomenon?

[unbiased000]

that is debatable. and i suppose you believe melanin is a fact instead of a belief...

do YOU see my point though? i mean how could you even miss that? how could you take it so far to even make this video traveling down a path of electron transfer? lol

goombah made a fool of himself responding to my point about two of the three theories of why we die being chalked up to harmful free radicals....he brought up car crashes lke "duh..car crashes? hello joopq.." lol! wow.

and u. elec trans

seriously.

[TravisMorien]

"that is debatable. and i suppose you believe melanin is a fact instead of a belief..."

?

Is there some kind of debate over the existence and/or biological function of melanin raging in creationist circles which the rest of us aren't aware of?

What exactly about melanin isn't a fact? That it is the stuff which gives humans their skin colour, that it is a natural sunscreen?

One of the flaws of your earlier video is that you merely insinuate that you have a point, you don't actually state it.

[unbiased000]

lol....what is the electromagnetic structure of melanin? oh thts right...NOBODY knows. it is a belief not a reality

[TravisMorien]

Where the heck do you get your information?

Chemists know the structure of melanin perfectly well, and know how it works.

This is one of the points which the scientifically illiterate need to understand: just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean it isn't known.

If you have a valid point to make, for FSM's sake will you please go ahead and make it. All this dancing about with "I've got a brilliant point but it is beyond your feeble intellect to understand it" is wearing thin.

[unbiased000]

there is no dancing, i have typed out about 4 messages that have responded directly to your bullshit. you are the one avoding what i say. denial is your only defense and it is childish. i see this is going nowhere but ignoring me and wasting my time. i will now ignore YOU. two can play that

and if there really is the discovery of melanins electromagnetic structure...you would state it id think. i will not just take your word. i know med students who know it isnt known. but you do supposedly.

[TravisMorien]

I am not ignoring your points, I am just astonished that you are so completely unaware of your own ignorance.

Do you even know what a molecule's "electromagnetic structure" is?

The UV absorbent properties of melanin are well known and have been measured in the lab. The structure has been determined by crystallography and other means. We even know how to make it synthetically.

Just because you asked a med student who didn't know doesn't mean it is unknown to science.

[unbiased000]

you have ignored my first point again and again. and when you try to address it you are wrong. electron transfer is NOT restricted to the lungs dummy. i thought you were studying these things?

the point is you are avoidng the point...and then you try to deny it as if you know what you are talkin about. body cant recognize different balances of chemicals entering it? thats essentially what you said and it is FUCKING STUPID.

hybridization produces harmful fre radicals. ....

[unbiased000]

and you obviously have no idea what you are talkibn about here cuz food is NOT your area. you dont even know what a natural plant is. name some natural vegatables. i dont think you can even do that let alone discuss the depths of their compositions. just stop wasting my time with your petty games.

[TravisMorien]

So by your standards an organic tomato or banana would be an "artificial food", and packed full of those nasty free radicals?

Tomatos and bananas are the product of artificial selection via millennia of selective breeding and hybridisation.

So what do you eat? In the typical urban environment there are only so many wild berry bushes and roots to forage for, and they certainly don't sell any plants in their wild form in any shops I know about.

[Polyphemus08x]

Well, I'm glad you're making videos explaining the shortcomings of the probability argument, still doesn't do it justice in my opinion. Seems like trying to reduce the Alps to dust with a tack hammer, chipping off a 30 pound rock, and declaring you've succeeded.

Computer algorithms in a simulated environment are essentially inconsequential, and the assertion that Game Theory can be applied to such monolithic odds is, in my own view, laughable.

Good information though.

[MrM00kster]

Someone created the software for Computer design via evolutionary algorithms, didn't they??

[TravisMorien]

Yes they did. But the point is, the software is designed to model evolution as a way to create "design". The software is not taught anything about how to design antennas, it is just given the task of mucking about with it until it gets something which works.

Arguing that because an intelligent human was needed to program the computer to do evolution, this somehow proves that God did it, is like arguing that because oceanographers write software to model ocean currents this is proof of Poseidon.

[MrM00kster]

How well do Computer design via evolutionary algorithms work, compared to something an engineer would come up with? I hear a lot of arguments about nature and how if there was an intelligent designer, why do we have bad backs, apendics, etc. It just seems that if people aren't happy with what evolution has come up with as in "design", why try and use it to design things on a computer? Also, at what point does the "design" process stop?

[TravisMorien]

For some problems, the results of the evolutionary algorithms are excellent and surpass the best existing human designs both in performance and innovativeness.

The problem with evolution as a mechanism though is it is just an optimisation process, largely stuck with the pieces already present. The human eye is wired inside out, like a car with all the wires sticking out of the dashboard for no good reason. Evolution hasn't managed to figure out a way to correct this, so we have a blind spot.

[TravisMorien]

"Also, at what point does the "design" process stop?"

It doesn't really stop if the mutations are allowed to keep going, as they do in nature, but if the organism is already highly optimised for the environment it is in then there will be little impetus for change, especially directional change as seen in evolution where there is a definite advantage to be gained from, say, growing bigger flippers or something.

That is why sharks haven't changed much in a long time, they don't need to.

[eddygoombah]

he hasn't replied at all, has he...

[TravisMorien]

No. His Tourettes has flared up a bit by the looks of it. Perhaps he'll be back when he's all better.

Or perhaps not. If you look at the descriptions of his two videos he's lamenting all the "haters" who are unfairly giving him undeserved criticism.

[eddygoombah]

for the past 4 days he's been unrelenting in his email barrage, calling me names, accusing me of lying and using fraudulent tactics, making up lame excuses to run away from his debate, and he constantly threatens to post this scathing response video that i have yet to see. It seems he is throwing a temper tantrum.

clearly we are dealing with an acute mind at work, here

[TravisMorien]

Encourage him to debate me if you like. I've been wondering whether I should make another video for him, or just move on and do something on a different topic. From my perspective, he's the one dodging me and making up lame excuses not to debate me. :)

[Polyphemus08x]

5:00 - 5:24

"They're tested one at a time by evolution."

Coming from a "probability theory" perspective, there simply has not been enough time in the lifespan of the Earth (4.5 Billion years, 3.9 w/ organic life) (or for that matter the Universe (13.9 Billion Years - 30 Billion Years)) for that to have occurred.

Good vid, elucidated your point of view well. 5*

[TravisMorien]

Many of the difficult metabolism problems were solved by the prokaryotes (bacteria). Many of our metabolic pathways today are inherited directly from them, which is why even today we can do things like research Parkinson's Disease using yeast as the test patient.

The features of prokaryotes which make them suited to that trial and error are 1 primitive gene copying results in lots of errors and therefore novelty, 2 huge numbers of individuals at any one time 3 rapid turnover of generations.

[TravisMorien]

My latest video addresses the probability argument.

watch?v=OZFEOAuZgmo

[eddygoombah]

well said, although I don't know how much will get through