Talk:3010: Geometriphylogenetics

Does the phrase "maximum likelihood" have any relationship to phylogenetics? Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 03:01, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Profoundly so. Most contemporary analyses, especially of large datasets, use either maximum-likelihood methodologies or Bayesian inference (q.v.). I will see if I can say something coherent and comprehensible about this in the explanation. 172.71.147.58 03:30, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

If it was you who added the explanation for the title text, nicely done! Ianrbibtitlht (talk) 05:04, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

"Pointy circle" is, of course, an oxymoron. Randall is also making a joke about how older phylogenetic trees were based on anatomy, like saying that squares and triangles are close because they have exoskeletons with straight lines and joints. Now, the tree is (where possible) based on genetic similarity. Nitpicking (talk) 05:10, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Hippos can't swim? Did the BBC lie to us? https://youtu.be/X20NjqMiQyo?si=8pN-xwgKJEWM08ZF 172.68.186.135 06:18, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Why was phylogenetic analysis required to establish this relationship? Reuleaux triangles are an intermediate form, demonstrating a close relation between circles and triangles. 172.71.130.208 06:24, 12 November 2024 (UTC)

Obviously, he's doing phylogenetics wrong: the pentagons (& hexagons, not shown) should also be shown as descending from the circles. Plus, the ovoids (far more than a middle step between lentiform & triangle, truly an extant branch in their own right) are not represented at all. A major oversight, to cut such corners, given the point he's circling about? ProphetZarquon (talk) 06:31, 12 November 2024 (UTC)