>>On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 21:45:51 -0700, Richard Norman
>><r_s_nor...@comcast.net> wrote:

>>>On Fri, 27 Apr 2012 00:37:45 -0400, jillery <69jpi...@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:

>>>>On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 21:32:12 -0400, Friar Broccoli <elia...@gmail.com>
>>>>wrote:

>>>>>On Wed, 25 Apr 2012 22:24:45 -0700, Richard Norman
>>>>><r_s_nor...@comcast.net> wrote:

>>>>>>The probability of a heterozygote mother contributing a recessive
>>>>>>allele to her child is 1/2.  The probability of her heterozygote
>>>>>>father also contributing a recessive allele is 1/2.  The probability
>>>>>>that the child will be homozygous recessive is 1/2 x 1/2 = 1/4.  That
>>>>>>is the application of the law of multiplication of probabilities to
>>>>>>genetics and hence explains evolution properly.

>>>>>>I have now solved the problem of drug resistant bacteria, cured virus
>>>>>>diseases not to mention cancer, and eliminated pesticide resistant
>>>>>>insects.

>>>>>I presume you have realized that if we just leave the bugs alone, then
>>>>>each generation the unwanted characteristics will drop by 3/4's, and
>>>>>then quickly disappear.

>>>>>I have the following questions:
>>>>>1) How do you propose to convince bacteria and viruses to reproduce
>>>>>sexually?
>>>>>2) If "p" be the probability of a beneficial mutation where should I
>>>>>place my "q"?

>>>>In the Continuum?

>>>The rational numbers don't form a continuum.  And if you allow
>>>irrationality into the theory of evolution we are right back in that
>>>4000+ post quagmire.

>>Not "a" continuum.  THE Continuum, specifically the Q Continuum, from
>>Star Trek.

>I always thought the characters on Star Trek were too real to have been
>made up.  So now I discover that it was some of them who started life
>here on earth.   So Dr. Dr. was right all along!

>All I had to do was ask, and it was revealed unto me !!