# Progress after the Royal Society conference?

**URL:** <https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/progress-after-the-royal-society-conference/17569>\
**Category:** Conversation\
**Tags:** Science\
**Created:** [December 22, 2025, 5:32pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/progress-after-the-royal-society-conference/17569 "2025-12-22T17:32:46Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 284

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Roy](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/discourse.peacefulscience.org/roy/32/3799_2.png) [@Roy](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/u/Roy)\
**Post date:** [January 30, 2026, 9:22pm UTC](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/progress-after-the-royal-society-conference/17569/284 "2026-01-30T21:22:32Z")

</div>

> [@Side Comments on Progress after the Royal Society Conference](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/side-comments-on-progress-after-the-royal-society-conference/17641/67):
>
> > [@Faizal\_Ali](#):
> >
> > > [@lee\_merrill](#):
> > >
> > > Well, fine, but in any fitness advance, just any two mutations anywhere in the genome is not going to do.
> > 
> > And who ever said otherwise?
> 
> Well, I was addressing Roy’s complaint that he expected Stadler’s referenced studies to be about knockout experiments, also apparently also claiming that Stadler’s view (or the experimenters’ view?) is that only those two knocked-out mutations could be considered to restore functionality, those two mutations were specifically sought, in the experiment.

You weren’t addressing my complaint, which didn’t even mention knock-out experiments - you were posting irrelevant nonsense completely unrelated to my complaint, which was that you had denied the video mentioned looking for preselected mutations immediately before describing how it did exactly that.

---

_[View the full topic](https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/progress-after-the-royal-society-conference/17569)._