Evidence of evolution: Sex ratio as a function of male competition

[drmarkan]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

This was in the original post:
"The evolution theory also predicts that if the males compete only in a local population (within a single herd, for example) while the females disperse throughout the global population (leaving the herd at adulthood), then the percentage of males should drop significantly. The ratio is essentially a function of the local population size (Local Mate Competition Model)."
Tell me, if the 1:1 ratio is the benchmark we start with, what would the ratio be if "the percentage of males should drop significantly?" Is it still 1:1? Why would it be "a function of the local population size" if it doesn't change?

It would be clearer if you ever bothered to read the article in the link given. I gave you two chances to read it. Anyone who still don't get it deserves to be called "idiot."

It wouldn't matter in the X chromosome Y chromosome scenario because the determination is basically a coin flip.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from drmarkan:

It wouldn't matter in the X chromosome Y chromosome scenario because the determination is basically a coin flip.

You still don't get it. Whether it's XY or something else is totally irrelevant. The Nature always have ways to change the ratio if evolution requires it to do it. If X-Y mechanism always produces 1:1 ratio, and it is more favorable evolution wise to have a 1:3 ratio, then nature will find a way to change it, for example, by adding a third chromosome, or through chemical means if the chromosomes are not (yet) changed.

 

[jem]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

You just cited an authority for the speed of light you complete moron.

Which is an appeal to authority you complete fool.

You complete lack of integrity manifested again when you said my I misrpresented the quotes of Susskind. You are a complete asshole. I presented the quotes of Susskind and no one has ever said he did not make them or that he refuted them.

if you wish to dispute this fact prove I misrepresented them you complete fucking asshole.

 

[jem]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

You just cited an authority for the speed of light you complete moron.

Which is an appeal to authority you complete fool.

You complete lack of integrity manifested again when you said my I misrepresented the quotes of Susskind. You are a complete asshole. I presented the quotes of Susskind and no one has ever said he did not make them or that he refuted them.

if you wish to dispute this fact prove I misrepresented them you complete moron.

 

[jem]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

Your ignorance is glaring:


The Standard International unit definition defines the speed of light to be exactly 299,792,458 m/s. So there is no need to prove it neither a need for appealling to authority. It is a scientific definition.


They're not. All claims that fingerprints are unique are exaggerated. It's a probability question, similar to but less accurate than DNA matching. All fingerprint scanning softwares are written using probability matrix. The likelihood that two people have identical fingerprints is exceedingly small but not zero.



The more you speak, the more you expose your ignorance.



Your misrepresentation of Susskind has been thouroughly exposed in another thread. There is no need to rehash it here.

You just cited an authority for the speed of light you complete moron.

Which is an appeal to authority you complete fool.

You also had scientists in court for years saying fingerprints ID people. This was an appeal to authority by science you fool. Now it has been proven to be wrong.

Your complete lack of integrity manifested again when you said I misrepresented the quotes of Susskind. You are a complete asshole.
Prove I misrepresented them you complete moron.

 

[pattersb]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

The designer would have to go through a great deal of trouble to "design" the large variety of ratios we see today.

and I'm the idiot ...



here's you first problem, in attempting to disprove the existence of god , actually that is your fundemental flaw, you're attempting to disprove the existence of god.

there is no evidence that god does not exist.

if you simply offer evidence of evolution, you may avoid not only pissing people-off, but making an ass of yourself.

 

[jem]

the above similar posting are evidence of the difficulty my firefox set up has editing elitetrader posts.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from pattersb:

and I'm the idiot ...



here's you first problem, in attempting to disprove the existence of god , actually that is your fundemental flaw, you're attempting to disprove the existence of god.

there is no evidence that god does not exist.

if you simply offer evidence of evolution, you may avoid not only pissing people-off, but making an ass of yourself.

Showing your real colors now. I have offered evidence of evolution. It's your turn to offer the evidence of God.

 

[james_bond_3rd]

Quote from jem:

... you complete moron.

... you complete fool.

... you fool. Now it has been proven to be wrong.

...You are a complete asshole.
... you complete moron.

Very persuasive. Very well done.

Quote from jem:

the above similar posting are evidence of the difficulty my firefox set up has editing elitetrader posts.

Comical, with grammatic errors and all.

 

[drmarkan]

Quote from james_bond_3rd:

You still don't get it. Whether it's XY or something else is totally irrelevant. The Nature always have ways to change the ratio if evolution requires it to do it. If X-Y mechanism always produces 1:1 ratio, and it is more favorable evolution wise to have a 1:3 ratio, then nature will find a way to change it, for example, by adding a third chromosome, or through chemical means if the chromosomes are not (yet) changed.

This still does not prove your point. One can say that the equation you are solving is unlocking the method of the designer. One can also say that what looks like random chance to us is something that is just beyond our comprehension at this point. Considering that the designer (however you want to view him/her/it) would have infinite wisdom compared to us, one could say that it is easier for us to create our own theories in order to satisfy our own need for understanding our existence rather than leaving it to faith alone and believing that there is something greater than ourselves out there.

By the way, great touch you added to your last post calling jem out on his grammatical errors. We know that you would never do anything like that. From the above quote:

The Nature always have ways to change the ratio if evolution requires it to do it.

Or this one:

Anyone who still don't get it deserves to be called "idiot."