Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Oh Good - Bart is back
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 4 of 51 (30941)
02-01-2003 1:50 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by derwood
01-31-2003 12:21 PM


I see, Page is already involved in another personal attack. What else is new.
However, since we are all Panomo's let's have a look at your brilliant analysis concerning your utmost evidence of common descent:
http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignmentgam.htm
I have a couple of remarks and questions about your analysis:
Let start here:
1) Did you notice the sudden transition between Tob and Cap. Could you please indicate what it means according to you?
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by derwood, posted 01-31-2003 12:21 PM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by Adminnemooseus, posted 02-01-2003 2:03 AM peter borger has replied
 Message 9 by derwood, posted 02-02-2003 2:28 PM peter borger has not replied
 Message 14 by wj, posted 02-14-2003 12:27 AM peter borger has not replied
 Message 26 by wj, posted 02-19-2003 9:24 PM peter borger has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 6 of 51 (30944)
02-01-2003 2:17 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by Adminnemooseus
02-01-2003 2:03 AM


Dear Admin,
As promissed 6 months ago, I registered to bring down evolutionism. Not Page. I didn't even know Page. But, since he is the authority in the field I have to attack his visions. It is nothing personally, though. I wished Page understood that, it would definitely improve the discussions.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by Adminnemooseus, posted 02-01-2003 2:03 AM Adminnemooseus has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by nator, posted 02-02-2003 10:15 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 13 of 51 (32168)
02-13-2003 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by derwood
02-02-2003 2:22 PM


Page,
In response to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Schraf:
So, it would seem to me that the way to "bring down evolution (ism)" (whatever "evolutionism" is) would be to publish some work in the professional literature.
Why should we bother listening to what you have to say until you have produced some good peer-reviewed publications?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Page says: Indeed. Instead, we have denials of counter-evidence, refusals to accept refutations, etc.
All part and parcel of the creationist bag-o-tricks.
PB: Yeah, you would like to peer review my papers that question your methods, isn't it?
Best wishes, and keep up the appearance,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by derwood, posted 02-02-2003 2:22 PM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by derwood, posted 02-14-2003 10:43 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 16 of 51 (32237)
02-14-2003 11:20 AM
Reply to: Message 12 by derwood
02-12-2003 8:37 AM


Hi Page,
You say:
"Must be that genetic redundancy and the creatons...."
Since you require a bit of a read-up, why don't you go to the library and get the Nature (=leading scientific journal) paper by Gu et al, 2 January 2003. Hopefully it will give you a bit of an understanding of genetic redundancies.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by derwood, posted 02-12-2003 8:37 AM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by derwood, posted 02-14-2003 12:55 PM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 19 of 51 (32309)
02-15-2003 12:42 AM
Reply to: Message 18 by derwood
02-14-2003 12:59 PM


Role of duplicate genes in genetic robustness against null mutations
ZHENGLONG GU, LARS M. STEINMETZ, XUN GU, CURT SCHARFE, RONALD W. DAVIS & WEN-HSIUNG LI.
Nature, Vol 421, No 6918, P63.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by derwood, posted 02-14-2003 12:59 PM derwood has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 21 of 51 (32487)
02-17-2003 5:29 PM
Reply to: Message 20 by derwood
02-17-2003 12:46 PM


Dear Page,
Page: "There are only two groups of people that I can't stand:
Those who hate groups of people based solely on their heritage or culture, and the Dutch."
-Nigel Powers
PB: What about Hans Thewissen and Fred Spoor? They're Dutch too.
Just another of your generalism. Ever heard of nuance?
Anyway, have a nice day. And when you have scientific commments be my guest. Otherwise be silent.
best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 20 by derwood, posted 02-17-2003 12:46 PM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 22 by derwood, posted 02-18-2003 11:59 AM peter borger has replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 24 of 51 (32601)
02-18-2003 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by derwood
02-18-2003 11:59 AM


Page says:
Pity that Borger is so humorless.
PB: Yes, you are one of the biggest laughs ever. Always nice and always funny.
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by derwood, posted 02-18-2003 11:59 AM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by derwood, posted 02-19-2003 12:14 PM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 27 of 51 (33198)
02-25-2003 11:46 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by wj
02-19-2003 9:24 PM


Hi WJ,
Borger says in message #4
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
However, since we are all Panomo's let's have a look at your brilliant analysis concerning your utmost evidence of common descent:
http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/alignmentgam.htm
I have a couple of remarks and questions about your analysis:
Let start here:
1) Did you notice the sudden transition between Tob and Cap. Could you please indicate what it means according to you?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
SLPx provided his answer at message #9.
Borger, are you going to provide your alternative meaning for the "sudden transition"? Are you going to move on and provide question 2?
PB: I am still waiting for Page. He is going to provide the full terms for all abbreviations and a phylo-tree. [Still waiting Page]
best wishes,
Peter
[This message has been edited by peter borger, 02-25-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by wj, posted 02-19-2003 9:24 PM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by wj, posted 02-25-2003 11:59 PM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 30 of 51 (33306)
02-26-2003 8:36 PM
Reply to: Message 29 by derwood
02-26-2003 9:54 AM


Re: Oh, bother
dear Page,
Either you provide this board with all codes and a tree, or this is another one of your defeats.
I don't mind it is up to you,
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 29 by derwood, posted 02-26-2003 9:54 AM derwood has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 31 by wj, posted 02-26-2003 9:03 PM peter borger has replied
 Message 34 by derwood, posted 02-28-2003 9:28 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 32 of 51 (33320)
02-26-2003 11:56 PM
Reply to: Message 31 by wj
02-26-2003 9:03 PM


Re: Oh, bother
dear WJ,
WJ: PB, as you have not previously asked for the data on this thread, despite the fact that you felt informed enough to start discussion on the Tob and Cap discontinuity, I suggest you ask for the codes and phylogenic tree nicely.
PB: I askes several times in several threads to provide more information, in particular the codes and the tree. Next I will have a careful look at it.
WJ: Your threat to deem this as a defeat for SLPx is laughable.
PB: Yep, but it is an easy victory as well.
WJ: It is clear that you started the discussion ignorant of basic information and then cry foul because someone else will not do your homework for you.
PB: Get real. It was Page to post this ultimate proof of common descent, not me. Why doesn't Page simply give all information. It would improve the discussion.
WJ: In the meantime, since you initiated the discussion, where is your explanation for the Tob / Cap discontinuity?
PB: I did not initiate the discussion. Page posted his best evidence months ago. Now, I respond. Top and Cap are distinct MPGs, so I do not see a problem for NRM on distinct spots. NRM is dependent on the DNA sequence, so disctinct sequences will give distinct NRM that line up in similar MPGs. As soon as I have Page's info I will discuss this example in detail. That's why I wanna know what the codes stand for.
It is also important to note that certain regions in the genome are not in accord with common descent (as discussed), while others are. Both are however in accord with NRM. Thus GUToB rules, while common descent is questionable for such regions.
best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 31 by wj, posted 02-26-2003 9:03 PM wj has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by wj, posted 02-27-2003 12:58 AM peter borger has not replied
 Message 35 by derwood, posted 02-28-2003 9:34 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 43 of 51 (33514)
03-02-2003 10:28 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by wj
03-02-2003 6:37 AM


Re: Oh, bother
Hi WJ,
WJ: So, old world primates and new world primates are distinct multipurpose genomes?
So. is this your position or not?
PB: From these sequences it is clear that they are pretty distinct, and probably comprise disctinct super-MPGs. Although I do think that MPGs are determined at another level, [and probably involving a higher organisation of genomes].
Best wishes,
Peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by wj, posted 03-02-2003 6:37 AM wj has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 45 by Admin, posted 03-03-2003 7:41 AM peter borger has not replied

  
peter borger
Member (Idle past 7665 days)
Posts: 965
From: australia
Joined: 07-05-2002


Message 44 of 51 (33515)
03-02-2003 10:32 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by derwood
02-28-2003 1:28 PM


Re: declaration?
Hi page,
In response to:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Borger's perusal, a "phylo-tree":
http://www2.norwich.edu/spage/phylo-tree.htm
Cebus apella would be in the collective branch at the top, labeled Platyrrhini.
It is the maximum likelihood tree. The numbers present are likelihood branch lengths, converted (loosely) to percent.
PB says:
Thanks a lot for providing (half of) the tree. I will have a look at the data. Tobecontinued.
best wishes,
peter

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by derwood, posted 02-28-2003 1:28 PM derwood has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024