Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Salty Discussion Post-mortem
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 31 of 82 (35491)
03-27-2003 3:42 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus
03-27-2003 3:19 PM


Re: over 200 posts?
Dr. Welch, I recommend Jonathan Wells' book "The Icons of Evolution".
Also, I weould appreciate when you respond to me that you address me as Dr. Davison. Maybe we can restore a modicum of decency to this discussion board. Thank you very much. John A. (salty) Davison, boy curmudgeon

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-27-2003 3:19 PM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 32 of 82 (35492)
03-27-2003 3:53 PM


Why I Won't Disclose My Identity
The reasons, in no particular order, are:
  • I really do believe there are some crazies out there on the Internet. While this wouldn't have bothered when I was younger, I now have a wife, family and cat who I would never risk endangering.
  • The company that employs me and the professional organizations of which I am a member would not likely take a favorable view of participation in such a frivolous exercise as debate with Creationists. While I wouldn't have given this possibilty a second thought when I was younger, I'm now at the age where the possibility of age discrimination must also be considered, and I now have a wife, family, cat and discussion board who are dependent upon my income.
--Percy

Replies to this message:
 Message 34 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 4:12 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 36 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-27-2003 9:44 PM Percy has not replied
 Message 42 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2003 3:40 AM Percy has not replied

  
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 7577 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 33 of 82 (35493)
03-27-2003 3:59 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 2:58 PM


quote:
Now if the rest of the members would divulge their identities, we might have a decent exchange of ideas.
What on earth does one's identity have to do with it? Surely an exchange of ideas is possible without an exchange of biographies?
Is it, as I suspect, because the argument from authority is the only tool in your toolbox?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 2:58 PM John A. Davison has not replied

  
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 34 of 82 (35494)
03-27-2003 4:12 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Percy
03-27-2003 3:53 PM


Re: Why I Won't Disclose My Identity
There is nothing frivolous about interacting with creationists, unless of course one is an atheist. salty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Percy, posted 03-27-2003 3:53 PM Percy has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2003 3:38 AM John A. Davison has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 35 of 82 (35497)
03-27-2003 4:39 PM


Wells
I will gladly discuss Wells' comic book, "Icons of Evolution." I will especially be glad to discuss his section on the "growing crisis in molecular phylogeny." I have already documented his dishonest use of quotes.
But, with my room temperature IQ and all, what do I know.
My Amazon.com review:
quote:
I purchased a copy a month or so ago to see what all the fuss was about. I started reading the section that I have some experience/knowledge in, systematics. I discovered something strange. When I checked one of the quotes Wells had used to 'prove' that molecular systematics is 'in crisis,' I found that it came from a paper dealing not with molecular systematics methodology or something similar, but a paper on the clonal theory of the origin of eukaryotes.
Wells seems to imply that because 'deep' phylogenies of prokaryotes have yielded conflicting results and that there is evidence of lateral gene transfer in them and eukaryotes that therefore the entire field of molecular phylogenetics has been plunged into crisis.(p.51).
On p.49, Wells quotes an article by Lake, Jain and Rivera to bolster his claim, in a section titled The growing problem in molecular phylogeny:
"But the expectation that more data would help matters "began to crumble a decade ago," wrote University of California molecular biologists James Lake, Ravi Jain, and Maria Rivera in 1999, "when scientists started analyzing a variety of genes from different organisms and found that their relationship to each other contradicted the evolutionary tree of life derived from rRNA analysis alone."
Reading the article (Mix and Match in the Tree of Life, James A. Lake, Ravi Jain, Maria C. Rivera, 1999), we see that Wells' quote is plucked from this paragraph (Wells' quote bracketed by **):
"The clonal theory **began to crumble a decade ago when scientists started analyzing a variety of genes from different organisms and found that their relationship to each other contradicted the evolutionary tree of life derived from rRNA analysis alone.** To explain the differences between the evolutionary trees reconstructed from eukaryotic rRNAs and from proteins, Sogin (2) proposed a chimeric origin for eukaryotic genomes, with rRNA genes coming from one organism and genes encoding proteins coming from another. Analyses of DNA-dependent, RNA polymerases (3) and heat shock protein (hsp70) gene sequences from different organisms (4) supported theories of chimeric evolution (5-10)."
The way Wells uses the quote, in, again, a section titled "The growing problem in molecular phylogeny", it appears that the problem is a field-wide one, as he explicitly writes elsewhere. Yet, is that a proper interpretation of the article in question? The abstract:
"The evolutionary relationship between prokaryotes and eukaryotes has long been viewed from the perspective of a single molecule: ribosomal RNA (rRNA). Analyses of rRNA from many different organisms provided the basis for the clonal theory of the evolution of eukaryotic genomes from prokaryotes. This theory holds that genes have been passed directly from generation to generation, with modifications in the genes resulting in the appearance of new organisms. But like a color-blind friend who admires your ability to observe the nearly invisible little "green" flowers on a rose bush, rRNA genes cannot be used to distinguish genomes that are mosaics (mixtures) of genes from different sources. By relying too heavily on rRNA, scientific attention has been diverted away from considering the impact of gene acquisition from other species (horizontal gene transfer) on the evolution of eukaryotic genomes. Viewed now from the vista of completed genome sequences for a number of bacteria and for the yeast Saccharomyces (a eukaryote), the clonal theory of eukaryotic genome evolution contains evident flaws(1)."
It seems that the authors were/are referring to the "clonal theory," not molecular systematics or evolution as a whole. It is important also to note that in this article - indeed, in this entire 'debate' (re: e.g., lateral gene transfer) - 'eukaryotes' refers to singler-celled eukaryotes, not multicellular organisms.
To paraphrase/borrow the dust jacket endorsement from Behe, if we can't trust Wells to use published material in an honest way, why should we believe anything else he has to say?
Now, granted, that is the only quote that I have checked thus far, but it is an important one. Should I really give Wells the benefit of the doubt and consider that this one quote was the only one that he improperly uses?
We must give Wells some credit though - he is doing his darndest to fulfill his mission to "destroy Darwinism" that he set out on so long ago. Too bad the American public is so gullible and scientifically ignorant to swallow it hook, line, and sinker.
This book is a good example of how a scientist should not write a book, unless that scientist is out to dupe the gullible. --
[This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-27-2003]

Replies to this message:
 Message 44 by John A. Davison, posted 03-28-2003 6:00 AM derwood has not replied
 Message 47 by John A. Davison, posted 03-28-2003 6:55 AM derwood has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 36 of 82 (35520)
03-27-2003 9:44 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Percy
03-27-2003 3:53 PM


Re: Why I Won't Disclose My Identity
quote:
I really do believe there are some crazies out there on the Internet.
Keep picking on me like that, and I'll have to have Adminnemooseus do something about it.
quote:
... and I now have a wife, family, cat ...
You really do need to get rid of that wife and family.
Excuse me now, I must go and serve cat,
Moose
------------------
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
My big page of Creation/Evolution Links
[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 03-27-2003]
[This message has been edited by minnemooseus, 03-27-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Percy, posted 03-27-2003 3:53 PM Percy has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 82 (35522)
03-27-2003 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Mister Pamboli
03-27-2003 11:52 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
I find Mr P's description of Salty's behaviour at message #18 to be both accurate and insightful.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-27-2003 11:52 AM Mister Pamboli has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-28-2003 12:28 AM wj has replied

  
Minnemooseus
Member
Posts: 3941
From: Duluth, Minnesota, U.S. (West end of Lake Superior)
Joined: 11-11-2001
Member Rating: 10.0


Message 38 of 82 (35527)
03-28-2003 12:28 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by wj
03-27-2003 10:34 PM


Sad what creationism can do to an evolutionists mind
wj, I fully agree with you on this.
Unfortunately, I do also find a lot of truth in Salty's appraisals of SLPx.
Moose

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by wj, posted 03-27-2003 10:34 PM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by wj, posted 03-28-2003 12:39 AM Minnemooseus has not replied
 Message 53 by derwood, posted 03-28-2003 10:10 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

  
wj
Inactive Member


Message 39 of 82 (35528)
03-28-2003 12:39 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Minnemooseus
03-28-2003 12:28 AM


Re: Sad what creationism can do to an evolutionists mind
Moose, one persona might be described in certain circumstances as "abrasive", the other appears to be dysfunctional.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Minnemooseus, posted 03-28-2003 12:28 AM Minnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2003 3:35 AM wj has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 40 of 82 (35538)
03-28-2003 3:35 AM
Reply to: Message 39 by wj
03-28-2003 12:39 AM


Re: Sad what creationism can do to an evolutionists mind
the other is abrasive AND dysfunctional

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by wj, posted 03-28-2003 12:39 AM wj has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 41 of 82 (35539)
03-28-2003 3:38 AM
Reply to: Message 34 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 4:12 PM


Re: Why I Won't Disclose My Identity
S: There is nothing frivolous about interacting with creationists, unless of course one is an atheist. salty
M: Hey imagine that! Yet another unsupported statement...what a rarity from salty....why would atheists and creationists not wish to understand each others views? Since there are both on this forum the forum itself negates your assertion....aside from the fact that there are plenty of people who believe in god/vishnu/allah etc. and both understand and accept the theory of evolution.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 34 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 4:12 PM John A. Davison has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 42 of 82 (35540)
03-28-2003 3:40 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Percy
03-27-2003 3:53 PM


Re: Why I Won't Disclose My Identity
Not to mention some little threats from the likes of Zephan directed towards Scott for example....Post 8 A primate puzzle for page, Evolution forum.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Percy, posted 03-27-2003 3:53 PM Percy has not replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 43 of 82 (35542)
03-28-2003 3:50 AM
Reply to: Message 27 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 3:26 PM


Re: over 200 posts?
S: You have no idea of what I have or have not thought of. Such arrogance!
M: Actually, we do have a pretty good idea of what you have not thought of. You make it clear that most basic concepts in biology and especially of experimental research are completely beyond your grasp. You have also admitted to not keeping up with anything remotely current and base all your claims on long debunked and dead people...so it is pretty clear you have never thought of anything that approaches science.
S: Of course I am an outsider and proud of it.
M: Then why do you whine like a baby any time you are challenged, threaten to leave, beg me and others to stop posting to responses to you? Hardly sounds like someone who is proud of their stance...oh yeah, and don't forget your statement that you had the majority on your side and the majority is always correct ..maybe Taz' diagnosis should have included schizophrenia?
S: Einstein once admitted that if he had obtained the academic position that he had sought, he never could have conceived of relativity.
M: And you claim that Taz is arrogant? At least Einstein understood the subjects he was talking about.
S: I think I have done remarkably well considering that I have been surrounded (at UVM) by a bunch of Darwinian mystics for the last 30 odd years.
M: Lost your position, are completely unknown in the scientific community outside of a few of us who post on this forum...after 30 years?..that is your definition of having done well? Hate to see what you call having done poorly.
S: I am sure that spurred me to expose them as apparently I have, judging from some of the behavior they have exhibited.
M: you mean behaviour like trying to get you to support the assertions you make? Not accepting that you are the genius you say you are? Not accepting the statements you make uncritically?...oh horrors of horrors
S: I don't think being a curmudgeon is half as bad as being a blind follower of a transparent myth.
M: Oh you mean like the flood? or ex nihilo creation of kinds?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 3:26 PM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by John A. Davison, posted 03-28-2003 6:39 AM Mammuthus has replied

  
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 44 of 82 (35548)
03-28-2003 6:00 AM
Reply to: Message 35 by derwood
03-27-2003 4:39 PM


Re: Wells
Mivart destroyed Darwinism while Darwin was still alive. salty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 35 by derwood, posted 03-27-2003 4:39 PM derwood has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2003 6:37 AM John A. Davison has replied

  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6475 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002


Message 45 of 82 (35551)
03-28-2003 6:37 AM
Reply to: Message 44 by John A. Davison
03-28-2003 6:00 AM


Re: Wells
Funny then that a sceptical scientfic community embraced and then greatly expanded on and provided evidence for Darwin's theory both during his lifetime and to this day....which you would know if you actually read any of the scientific literature post 1900

This message is a reply to:
 Message 44 by John A. Davison, posted 03-28-2003 6:00 AM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by John A. Davison, posted 03-28-2003 7:04 AM Mammuthus has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024