Theme: Truth

@xevious2030 I don’t know you so I’m not really sure which argument you’re trying to make. But (a) if you can’t make the argument you don’t understand it yourself. (b) I can make every single argument whose assertion I offer. (c) As is noted in most of the journals the primary problem with the failure of most modern scientific publications is a lack of understanding of statistics, or the evolutionary conditions under which any evolutionary process competes. (we call this a failure of full accounting).

a) the first article says nothing related to the topic
b) the second article seeks to demonstrate the rate of reproduction but does not include the rate of genetic variation, or the conditions of selection
c) the third article uses ecoli to illustrate that in a healthy long-surviving single-cell organism, the mutation rate is constant, and most surviving mutations are beneficial. In other words, the purpose of the article is to express how much work we have to do to understand how cells process information such that harmful mutations rarely succeed (and unlike cancer cells, don’t hyper-reproduce destroying the colony of cells).
d) the fourth article states the obvious that every time we refine our measurements we discover that there are more bacteria living under more conditions in more niches than we had estimated – fulfilling the theory that ‘bacteria are the most durable adaptive and successful form of life’.

CONCLUSION
So what you have tried to do, if I understand, is pretend that these articles are relevant to the discussion, that you possess sufficient konwledge to participate in such a discussion, and that you possess sufficient knowledge to hold an opinion, and that your opinion has any merit.

And in doing so you have confirmed my accusation that Abrahamic religions and that you are employing the female strategy of deception by claiming your disapproval is equal to falsification, then lying denying and socially constructing a falsehood to obscure your equation of approval with truth, the pretense of knowledge, competency, merit (ie: lying).

So yes. You just proved again that I was right on my accusation that Abrahamic religions teach you to lie. using the female method of deception that was institutionalized – not as reason, science, technology, economics, and law as in the west, but as supernatural deceit in the middle east.

You know. (a) it’s very unlikely you (or anyone else for that matter) will approach being smarter than I am in such matters. Largely because my work has resulted in a certain level of skill in lie detection that is unique. (b) and because I’m quite careful about the difference between decidability, undecidability, opinion, and trash talking for amusement. (c) it is however possible to know something I don’t – but then you’d have to demonstrate it. And by your actions you’ve demonstrated that you’re that category of person who neither possesses such knowledge nor would be able to employ it.

Cheers