"4 Unvigintillion to One"
i'm going to call this the fruit machine fallacy.
i don't know what the likelihood is of SARS-CoV-2 having natural origin, but i know this isn't how you work it out.
i'm going to call this the fruit machine fallacy.
i don't know what the likelihood is of SARS-CoV-2 having natural origin, but i know this isn't how you work it out.
https://twitter.com/EthicalSkeptic/status/1482430893478322179
in the fruit machine fallacy the 'digits' of a genome are treated as though they are wheels of a fruit machine.
roughly: you look at a sequence of nucleotides, at the number of possible types for each nucleotide, and calculate the odds of recreating the sequence of interest if all nucleotide types were set at random.
you're calculating the odds of getting this particular sequence if you pulled the lever once on an imaginary nucleotide fruit machine.
there are important differences with real life that the fruit machine math doesn't account for. and which invalidate this approach.
1. evolution works with what already exists and small incremental mutations. so if a virus existed that was already very close to SARS-CoV-2, the odds of SARS-CoV-2 emerging in any given period would be much higher. the fruit machine math doesn't account for this consideration.
2. related to 1, while a virus is active there are a great many pulls of the lever (which may or may not 'spin wheels' and create mutations). not just one.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
