Critics are saying just the opposite, that nested hierarchies ARE NOT SEEN IN HUMAN DESIGNS. For example, vehicles don’t fall into a nested hierarchy. Buildings don’t fall into a nested hierarchy. Computers don’t fall into a nested hierarchy. Even genomes that were partially designed by humans regularly violate a nested hierarchy.
Do you even know what a nested hierarchy is? Could you describe what a nested hierarchy is in your own words?
Viruses are supposed to be the human designs that do fall into a nested hierarchy. Here, let me continue on and I will directly revisit this after I am done if necessary.
[remaining volumes of content removed by moderator…]
I doubt that you even understand what a nested hierarchy is. Perhaps you could start there.
You would also need to show how human designed viruses fall into a nested hierarchy. I can tell you right now I can find many, many different references for human designed viruses that violate a nested hierarchy because humans can mix and match different parts of viruses without adhering to a nested hierarchy.
Yes, please be patient. Further sections of my revised paper will potentially explain how this works and if not, I will directly do so later. For now, just read this third part please.
Let’s not keep playing this game. (and I’ve removed most of the last large text dump you made, in any case.) You’ve repeatedly been asked to demonstrate that you know what a nested hierarchy is - not even asking you to agree with it - just a demonstration that you even just know what is being observed and why those observations are significant. We’ve already been more than accomodating, allowing you to publish yourself (or whatever AI is being used) to dodge answering simple questions by unleashing unending great volumes of material that others are expected, then, to wade through.
You can demonstrate a good faith (actually interactive) response by just trying to answer the question (in only a few sentences of your own words) … What is “nested hierarchy”?
If you don’t even understand the basics of a nested hierarchy then reading any of your paper is a waste of my time.
Again, can you explain in your own words what a nested hierarchy is?
Groups within groups within groups
What does this have to do with DNA sequences and physical characteristics?
They help explain how organisms are classified based on their genetic relationships and shared traits.
Any other questions before we move on…
NO.
See where those features are on the tree? Everything above those feature nodes have those features. There are features that are shared (synapomorphies) and features that are derived (apomorphies). They fall into a tree like pattern.
We could add three middle ear bones to the mammal group and feathers to the bird group. That’s where those features appear on the tree. Therefore, we would predict that we should not see a species with a mammal-like middle ear with three bones and feathers.
So how do computer programs fit this type of pattern? If we compare computer programs how would they fit into this type of tree with synapomorphies and apomorphies? How would viruses fit into this type of tree with their propensity for recombination? For example, the currently circulating strain of SARS-CoV-2 is a recombinant that has a mixture of features from at least 2 different lineages, a clear violation of a nested hierarchy.
You keep making claims about certain things fitting in a nested hierarchy when they clearly don’t. Why is that?
Well - you do like to swing between extremes! At least your second response was single complete grammatical sentence, even if it left things pretty vague. You can find that happy medium of clearly expressing a thought (and still leaving out the mega-text dump). Nobody would begrudge you a few sentences. That’s what’s being asked here I think. What is the significance of nested hierarchy as evidence for evolutionary origins? Can you see the difference between biological nested hierarchy and the spurious alternate examples of it you’ve been attempting to provide?
I will have already went over this before, but I guess I could change it up a little to get my point across better.
The Common Archetype theory posits that independent phylogenies emerge from archetypical blueprints in the mind of God, which inherently contain nested hierarchies. However, these nested patterns are not universal and do not necessarily apply above the level of Order or across all life forms. This contrasts with the Common Descent model, which assumes a continuous, universal tree of life.
Importantly, observations do not show a universal tree of life. As Eugene Koonin describes, the base of the tree resembles a “bush” or “star tree,” with unresolved deep branches. For example:
“No intermediate ‘grades’ or intermediate forms between different types are detectable… A single, uninterrupted TOL does not exist.” (Koonin, “Biological Big Bang Model”)
This “bush” structure aligns with the idea that distinct created kinds emerged rapidly during pivotal evolutionary transitions, such as the Cambrian explosion. Both Common Archetype and Common Descent agree that nested patterns exist within created kinds, but the Archetype model attributes these patterns to intentional design rather than a continuous lineage.
Regarding viruses, the high rate of recombination, as seen in SARS-CoV-2, challenges the assumption of strict nested hierarchies. The Archetype model accommodates such cases by recognizing that recombination introduces horizontal relationships that do not fit a tree-like structure. This aligns with Koonin’s argument that evolutionary transitions often follow unique principles distinct from regular cladogenesis.
In summary:
This approach provides a coherent framework for understanding why nested hierarchies exist in some cases but are violated in others, such as viruses with high recombination rates.
Yes that was when you kept telling us to read your paper refusing to quote any sections. Now you are obnoxiously posting obscene amounts of text every reply, word salads of technical words that are void of real substance.
And it is telling that some of us who are not biologists or computer coders can see that it is word salad, or as I called it “hand-waving common in papers by university sophomores trying to claim more knowledge than they actually have”.
“Let your conversation be always full of grace, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how to answer everyone.” -Colossians 4:6
This is a place for gracious dialogue about science and faith. Please read our FAQ/Guidelines before posting.
