see my comment to T_aquaticus.
Already explained multiple times. These are minor deviations from the canonical phylogeny in a gene that we would expect to lose phylogenetic information quickly due to a higher mutation rate. Whales don’t group with squid or birds. They group with other mammals.
1 Like
All your attempted distraction is doing is highlighting that you don’t understand your own arguments. Whales are expected to be grouped with primates because whales are mammals. So are cats. Why you seem to think whales and cats shouldn’t appear where they do on that phylogeny is a mystery. Whales and cats are also expected to be outgroups on that phylogeny because they aren’t as closely related to primates as the other animals included - and that’s where they are. The issue with the phylogeny you posted isn’t the position of whales or cats w.r.t. primates, which is unremarkable, it’s the unexpected position of tarsiers as the earliest branch.
But nothing you write about biological hierarchies is worth reading until you provide the equivalent vehicle hierarchies. Either produce nested hierarchies for vehicles that are similar to those available for life, as you have repeatedly claimed is possible, or admit that you can’t.
Every post you make in this thread that doesn’t contain a vehicle phylogeny is more evidence that you haven’t got any and wouldn’t know how to build one even if you did know what data to use. Every time you fail to back up your earlier claim that “there is no real difference between a vehicles tree and a biological one” by not producing a vehicles tree to demonstrate the comparison is further indication that you’re an ignorant blatherskite whose opinion on this and every other subject can be dismissed without refutation.
4 Likes
“Blatherskite.” That’s a word that I need in my vocabulary. Thanks!
You’re welcome! I also recommend ‘braggadocio’, ‘bloviator’, ‘logorrheist’, ‘duckspeaker’ and ‘prate’.
1 Like
i can say the same for the engine- its a minor deviation from the general vehicles phylogeny and most traits still give us the correct phylogeny. no difference.
Yes, you could. You’d be lying, because it wouldn’t be a minor deviation, and other traits (fuel intake, rev counter, plugs, etc) would give similar phylogenies. You’d know this if you’d ever tried to produce a vehicle hierarchy, as opposed to posting ridiculous cartoons, but of course you haven’t.
So… are you going to say that?
2 Likes
Oh, look. Another vapid “response” from scd, in which he yet again fails to produced the promised phylogeny of vehicles. Shocked, I am. Shocked.
3 Likes
It isn’t evident that this is not an artifact of some combination of poor taxon sample, and/or algorithm. Does the same result obtain with a denser and broader sampling of mammals? There’s only one species of whale and then one feline called “cat”. And then you missed the entirety of the rest of my response, to which yours is simply not a rebuttal, never mind a meaningful answer.
1 Like
But it isn’t a minor deviation. It is a major deviation. It would put cars in the same clade as trucks.
1 Like
I can. Thats exactly how nested heirarchies are classified. Let me give you an example -
Above is an example of the dolphin, icthyasours and sharks. They have similar body shapes yet belong to different families.
The key to get nested heirarchies is to select traits that have their own distinct subtraits. Similarities in form/color etc will be found in nature also among organisms that are not closely related.
Your objection doesn’t come across as valid.
You didn’t.
2 Likes
That’s your opinion… it fits very neatly with all kinds of vehicles finding their place in the tree.
It most certainly is not just my opinion - you did not fit those four cars into a nested hierarchy.
4 Likes
- a blue VW Passat diesel estate
- a red Ford Ka diesel hatchback
- a blue VW Passat petrol estate
- a red Ford Ka petrol hatchback
Four cars. Five traits each. Only 20 data points. I’ve seen undergraduate cladogram exercises with more data.
It should be trivial to produce a nested hierarchy from that small dataset, if such a thing is possible. But neither Sal nor Ashwin will attempt to do so. Instead, they repeatedly revert to describing biological nested hierarchies.
It’s not hard to work out why.
3 Likes
I already told you how… The diesel engines go in one group. The petrol engines in the other.
You can tell me as often as you like, but until you actually do it - which should take less time than you’ve spent writing your insistent but worthless assertions - there’s no reason to believe you.
2 Likes
Do it yourself… Put the Diesel cars in one Group and the petrol driven one’s in another.
I don’t see what the difficulty is.
If you want to console yourself that way… go ahead.
By the way,would you put grasshoppers and grass in the same group because they are both green?
The difficulty is in getting you to do what you claim you can do easily.
The conversation so far suggests that you can’t.
2 Likes
Diesel Engine subfamily of ICE family -
- blue VW Passat diesel estate
- a red Ford Ka diesel hatchback
Petrol Engine subfamily of ICE family
- a blue VW Passat petrol estate
- a red Ford Ka petrol hatchback
And before your ask me about the color and the shape, tell my why the dolphine,icthyosaur and Sharks are in different families inspite of having similar shapes while sharing the same family with organisms with totally different shapes.
And why grass and grasshoppers are in different families though both are green.
The answer will be similar in the car example too.