|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
Syamsu  Suspended Member (Idle past 5620 days) Posts: 1914 From: amsterdam Joined: |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Forum: Darwnist Ideology | |||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
I request that a forum be made on the subject of the breast of Janet Jackson's that we did not get to see. I know that the instigator of this thread does not like comparisons (it could lead to prejudicial terms like areola and nipple) but it would clearly be appopriate within the context of his desire to talk about comparative reproduction.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
The creation versus evolution debate pre-dates eugenics..but in any case, this stupid thread is not getting us any closer to a forum discussing the much more relevant unrevealed breast of Janet Jackson. Why are you avoiding this topic? Could it be the judgemental terms such as right breast and left breast? It leads to such anti-social behavior as Mr. Hambre claiming Kid Rock can sing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
Now you have gone and done it. You had to introduce judgmental and prejudicial language like "right here" as opposed to "over there". Rather than competitive breasts, links should have been provided for both...You see brother Syamsu..I have learned, I have learned.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
I would further add to Mr. Hambre's warning that Syamsu, by his own inadvertent admission, has not actually read much of the literature which he criticizes (The Selfish Gene comes to mind). He has also been directed by me several times to Daniel Kevles book "in the name of eugenics" which goes far more in depth (than a few pathetic websites) regarding the origins of eugenics concepts and far into the 20th century where some governments, notably the U.S. and Sweden were still practicing eugenics as part of government programs. While your desire to debate is commendable, you will be stuck as Mr. Hambre warns in a "you are wrong because I said so" pissing match with a complete ignoramus.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: It is nice to see you are still a liar and a hypocrite. First, every single one of us has initially taken your point seriously and made constructive arguments against them. Eugenics is an interesting subject and would make for an great debate. But not when a complete ignoramus like you wishes to spew utter bullshit over and over again. YOU HAVE IGNORED EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF COUNTER EVIDENCE. You have even ignored evidence about eugenics presented to you which could actually support some of your claims. You have made it clear over and over again that not only are you completely ignorant of basic biology, but are particularly clueless about natural selection. You are so ridiculous that mark24 got you to agree with a common definition of natural selection repeatedly and then you still did not even realize it. You have also made it clear that you would prefer to make your stupid assertions without actually ever reading the books you claim are so damning for evolution i.e. willful ignorance i.e. stupidity.
quote: 1. You should admit that you have never even cracked a book open on the subject of natural selection and you have repeatedly refused to educate yourself. You even made it clear you do not know what the primary literature in evolutionary biology is i.e. claiming that Richard Dawkins book is primary literature..LOL!2. Your meandering posts have lead you alternatively to agree with exactly the opposite of your own position (i.e. mark24) or to ramble on incoherently. You are about as precise as a drunk at the Oktoberfest trying to play darts in the dark. quote: It is clearly beyond your incredibly limited capacity to actually learn anything about biology, evolution, natural selection or the history of eugenics and then come here and make your case. A pity since the subject is ultimately interesting...however, you are not.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: If you fail to address this post you should seriously consider putting your head in the washing machine next time you do laundry. Please show how any of the following randomly picked evolutionary studies have 1. contriburted little knowledge 2. are shoddy 3. are intermixed with ideology 4. have ynathing to do with the holocaust. Please feel free to compare and contrast each study I am sure you are about to read with any article from any other scienctific discipline. Anders S. Nilsson, Joakim L. Karlsson, and Elisabeth Haggrd-LjungquistSite-Specific Recombination Links the Evolution of P2-like Coliphages and Pathogenic Enterobacteria MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg223 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 1-13. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Jori O. Ruuskanen, Henri Xhaard, Anne Marjamki, Erik Salaneck, Tiina Salminen, Yi-Lin Yan, John H. Postlethwait, Mark S. Johnson, Dan Larhammar, and Mika ScheininIdentification of Duplicated Fourth 2-Adrenergic Receptor Subtype by Cloning and Mapping of Five Receptor Genes in Zebrafish MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg224 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 14-28. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Gangqiao Zhou, Yun Zhai, Xiaojia Dong, Xiumei Zhang, Fengying He, Kaixin Zhou, Yunping Zhu, Handong Wei, Zhijian Yao, Shaofei Zhong, Yan Shen, Boqing Qiang, and Fuchu HeHaplotype Structure and Evidence for Positive Selection at the Human IL13 Locus MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg231 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 29-36. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Koichiro Tamura, Sankar Subramanian, and Sudhir KumarTemporal Patterns of Fruit Fly (Drosophila) Evolution Revealed by Mutation Clocks MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg236 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 36-44. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Andrew P. Jackson and Michael A. CharlestonA Cophylogenetic Perspective of RNA—Virus Evolution MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg232 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 45-57. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Jesper Brohede, Norman Arnheim, and Hans EllegrenSingle-Molecule Analysis of the Hypermutable Tetranucleotide Repeat Locus D21S1245 Through Sperm Genotyping: A Heterogeneous Pattern of Mutation but no Clear Male Age Effect MBE Advance Access published on October 6, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg242 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 58-64. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Grant H. Pogson and Kathryn A. MesaPositive Darwinian Selection at the Pantophysin (Pan I) Locus in Marine Gadid Fishes MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg237 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 65-75. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Michael Klinger, John S. Taylor, Thomas Oertle, Martin E. Schwab, Claudia A. O. Stuermer, and Heike DiekmannIdentification of Nogo-66 Receptor (NgR) and Homologous Genes in Fish MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg241 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 76-85. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Vincent Daubin and Howard OchmanQuartet Mapping and the Extent of Lateral Transfer in Bacterial Genomes MBE Advance Access published on August 29, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg234 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 86-89. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Huai-chun Wang, Gregory A. C. Singer, and Donal A. HickeyMutational Bias Affects Protein Evolution in Flowering Plants MBE Advance Access published on October 31, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msh003 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 90-96. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] Mara Silvina Fornasari, Diego A. Laplagne, Nicols Frankel, Ana A. Cauerhff, Fernando A. Goldbaum, and Julin EchaveSequence Determinants of Quaternary Structure in Lumazine Synthase MBE Advance Access published on October 1, 2003, 10.1093/molbev/msg244 Mol Biol Evol 2004 21: 97-107. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] quote: Detail a single scientific discovery made EVER based on creationist dogma. Also please address Dan's questions about how creationists have ever supported creativity, freedom of choice or equality. Finally, demonstrate that there is a single science that uses creationism as a reference point for exploring their theories. From most recent Journal of Chemical Physics, Volume 120, Issue 7, pp. 3049-3520, show specifically that this "advanced science" uses creationism as a reference point for any of the following papers Vibrational zero-point energies and thermodynamic functions beyond the harmonic approximationVincenzo Barone pp. 3059-3065 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (76 kB) GZipped PS ] Order On the use of Bennett's acceptance ratio method in multi-canonical-type simulationsMichael K. Fenwick and Fernando A. Escobedo pp. 3066-3074 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (197 kB) GZipped PS ] Order Slow manifold for a bimolecular association mechanismSimon J. Fraser pp. 3075-3085 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (176 kB) GZipped PS ] Order On the efficient path integral evaluation of thermal rate constants within the quantum instanton approximationTakeshi Yamamoto and William H. Miller pp. 3086-3099 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (264 kB) GZipped PS ] Order Path integral calculation of thermal rate constants within the quantum instanton approximation: Application to the H + CH4H2 + CH3 hydrogen abstraction reaction in full Cartesian spaceYi Zhao, Takeshi Yamamoto, and William H. Miller pp. 3100-3107 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (127 kB) GZipped PS ] Order Auxiliary field Monte Carlo for charged particlesA. C. Maggs pp. 3108-3118 Abstract Full Text: [ HTML Sectioned HTML PDF (196 kB) GZipped PS ] Order finally stick your head in he washing machine Sy because you will clearly fail to address anything in this post.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: It is the point to "lift" evolutionary biological primary literature and substantiate your point. I will give you a broad assessment then, there is not a single ideological work in any issue of the journals Evolution, Journal of Heredity, Molecular Biology and Evolution, Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, Journal of Molecular Evolution, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature, Science, Cell, the Journal of Virology, Genetics, Molecular Ecology that have to do with evolution....if I am wrong, you go and find it. These are all primary literature journals in my field. There are many more...so get to work Syamsu...prove that all of this is just pure ideology..find one article..should be easy if you are correct.
quote: Why? If politicians or whoever chose to use physical principles to build weapons I am not going to change my mind and stop obeying the laws of gravity. Show me again in any of the journals I listed where there is a single article that could support the Chinese governments or anyones eugenics policies..good luck
quote: Reading your list made me reconsider something about you Sy..previously I thought your were merely ignorant. But your following list suggests you are actually rather stupid.
quote: The great synthesis was the only context in which to understand Mendel's laws. Thus score one for evolutionists.
quote: Care to explain away each and every transitional fossil that has been found? Start with equids and work your way to hominoids.....good luckAnd that you think the fossil record is the same as it was as 150 years ago suggests you are so blindly unaware of the weekly discoveries of new fossils that I think you actually must have taken my advice and put your head in the washing machine last night. score another one for evolution. quote:First, demonstrate that this is a major goal of "darwinism" like everything else you say it is an unsupported load of shit. But in any case, for some organisms, it has been largely successful...so again, one for evolution zero for the empty pumpkin Sy calls a head. quote: Control genes, whatever the hell you mean by that..I assume Hox and Pax genes are one of the foundations of current evolutionary theory and the basis of a new subdiscipline called Evo(evolutionary)-Devo (developmental biological) research. This has been recognized since their discovery. Score another one for evolution and still zero for Syamsu's startling ignorant noodle.
quote: The fact is, all are units of selection depending on the selective pressure. There is a mountain of literature based on actual studies (as opposed to your uninformed blathering). So again score for evolution...Syamsu left bleeding on the pitch.
quote: this incoherent rambling is presumabley a result of Syamsu trying to chew gum and type at the same time overloading the limited capacity of his brain. I'm feeling generous..I'll say no score since you don't make any sense here.
quote: Name a big thing that Darwinists did? Ok, from your own list of things they did not do, they demonstrated that population genetics and the laws of heredity are the underpining of the changes in population over time i.e. evolution i.e. the great synthesis Demonstrated the link between morphological determinants at the molecular level and evolution of morphological traits Have allowed for the development of the first round of vaccines against HIV by providing and understanding of its evolution and explaining why single target drugs will always fail. Have provided us with our current understanding of gene structure function relationships using comparative genomics. Have pioneered the discovery of disease genes by use of searches for homology among different model organisms. I can go on all day as this was just stuff I pulled off the top of my head..but given your next bullshit statement why bother, you would be completely unaware of any scientific advancement made since at most you have skimmed the editors notes of 150 year old books on the subject of evolution.
quote: And lets not forget that this is your unsupported, often refuted assertion born of your profound laziness and unwillingness to actually find out what the theory of evolution states, what the current state of the subject is, and your refusal to learn about the eugenics movement. Again, an interesting topic..but too bad it is always brought to this board by such a pathetically uninterested person such as yourself.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: You have never restricted your commentary to evolutionary psychology. And you "assume" the papers I mentioned are ideological? I did not ask for your assumptions. I have challenged you to find a single f$#cking paper from ANY of them that supports what you are saying. Are you truly so lazy?
quote:...that is what you get if you don't read but only talk to yourself quote: How about some specific citations to support this assertion?
quote: Presumably because you are unable even though you brought the points up yourself
quote: And the point you failed to grasp is that by never bothering to actually read or find out what evolutionary biologists actually do (even though much of the current literature is free and accessible on the net) that this is precisely where evolutionary biology has made the greatest strides in our (well not your) understanding of biodiversity...you missed the boat.
quote:...you seem to be keeping this knowledge a closely guarded secret from everyone on this site. quote:...pot calling kettle... quote: You might say historical revisionists such as yourself have produced nothing except a lot of wasted hard drive space at EvC. I am eagerly awaiting the results of the research you will be doing to find the ideological paper among the journals I listed [This message has been edited by Mammuthus, 02-17-2004]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: My broad assesment of the controversy is simple enough for even you to understand. People like you who have no background, understanding or even willingness to inform yourself about methodological naturalism whine and scream bloody murder when science does not 1. address your religious doctrine 2. conflicts with your religious dogma. Thus, creationists rail against evolution because they 1. don't know anything about it and don't want to 2. but have heard from some other fundie that it is bad so they must knee jerk oppose it regardless of the unbelievable requirments of ignoring evidence sitting under their noses.
quote: I am sure you are well into the evolution literature I posted looking for your 1 example of ideology but can you find a single paper that deals with fitness where they do not measure reproductive fitness and claim to not care to know? Answer..no. And no I have not read comments about the futility of natural selection in any scientific literature.
quote:That is also funny considering you admit you have never read any scientific literature...you may want to give your crack pipe away so that you stop imagining such strange things. Note to anyone following this thread...isnt it lovely how Syamsu gives references and quotes to support his assertions quote: That is funny Syamsu. I have a $480,000 dollar grant to study the genetic effects of extinction on populations and evolution of specific related groups of animals. It is my second grant on the subject. My former institute had an entire program on extinction in the context of mammalian evolution. One of my colleagues runs a program on extinction and conservation also in the context of evolution. And this is just the circle I work in. There are labs all over the world studying extinction....do you ever feel pain in your gut from being so full of shit?
quote: Obviosly you have never read anything about PE or the common hypotheses prior to PE....but my guess considering the level of your discussion as to who you find reliable are probably other Indonesian laundry specialists who make themselves feel better by going to the Aceh province and beating up little girls on the weekend.
quote: And I will note again that you don't know anything about any theory and that you are unwilling and to lazy to educate yourself as you have shown by your running in terror at the thought of substantiating the claims YOU MADE in this thread regarding the pervasiveness of ideology in evolutionary literature...and all I asked you for was 1 paper in a huge list of journals..but no...you can't even do that.
quote: Well, look what else Syamsu does not know ...so you think that morphology is independent of DNA..yes or no?
quote: What "information conception" of creationists? Or are you now going to answer the challenge that I and others made to you so often which is to give a single example of a scientific discovery ever made or aided by creationism as opposed to methodological naturalism? And as to the great synthesis and the impact of the rules of heredity and the discovery of DNA on the ToE...go out and read about it..there are only dozens of books on the subject..oops forgot who I am talking to..it is Mr. Willful ignoramus who rather have an uninformed opinion than bring anything substantive to a debate.
quote: Your opinion is worthless to anyone with a single neuron in their head. RegardsActuallyReadstheLiterature Mammuthus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: Um first, that is false..from my own work and actually reading the literature I have a broad perspective of the field of evolution. However, it is truly ironic that you claim I should look at all of the data when you have looked at NONE of it...you are talking out of your ass.
quote: Funny then that the research and literature on the subject goes back almost as far back as that of speciation...bzzzt Syamus talks out of rectum again.
quote: You must have used a calculator to do that math given the unreal lack intelligence in the beginning of your sentence. Duh..if you kill off a species in one go,there is no natural selection and adaptation..just death..and?..so in that context evolution and natural selection are irrelevant. You would not be guilty of making a false observation and "making those observations into a broad perspective where you have to look at all data, and not just the data that suits you."?
quote: Sure it does..you kill all members of a species, they do not pass on their genes ever again, they are extinct...their are several fields of research that study the impact of this including its ecological consequences.
quote: What the hell drugs are you on? Are you going to support this lie with evidence or will you let the label liar stick to you?
quote: You misquote one ecologist and claim I am only making single observations?...or which article from which journal that I cited are you basing this falsehood on...volume number and page please.
quote: No, it is not underdeveloped, and she did not say what you are implying she said. The only thing underdeveloped is your education in the relevant fields. This would normally be called ignorance..but since you refuse to educate yourself, it is willful ignorance i.e. stupidity.
quote: Funny then that so few scientists are aware of the debate and that the majority of creationists are biblical literalists.
quote: Guess you never have been in the Dates and Dating forum or the Big Bang forum
quote: Yuo can if you detach your caudal region from your posterior
quote: Does your personal religion have as its number one commandment "Thou shalt lie"? Show me where you have ever even answered a challenge I have given you... It's ok Syamsu...we know you don't know how to read..otherwise, what could explain your complete reluctance to actually independently of this forum, go out and read about this subject you pretend to be concerned about?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: How convenient...then I will assume you are simply a liar
quote: Easy enough..read any post by you in this or any other thread where you claim to provide an answer, data, or any kind of information as opposed to mere Syamsu says so assertions. Hypothesis that Syamsu is a liar confirmed.
quote: You must run along now and read "See Spot Run" in order to prepare yourself to read up on the ToE so that you stop making yourself look like a jackass.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote:You sound like Nixon looking for the tapes...or all of those people who think Elvis is still alive. Since you admit you cannot produce the quotes yourself and still maintain that your arguments are based on fact (not what you wish will eventually turn up), I think I can conclude that you are a liar..and a pretty bad one at that. quote:...oh you mean that book you did not read (your own admission) and as a result ended up having your ass fed to you on a platter by mark24 and others because of your lame brained statements? quote: I am sure it will eventually turn out to be reliable when reliable quotes from the EvC turn up saying Syamsu is an ignoramus...ooops..looky here..they already exist (insert quote from any response from anyone in any thread where Syamsu has posted)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
Hey Quetzal, don't cite chapters, page numbers and specific arguments..you will only confuse Syamsu since he believes reading a book is having walked by the bookstore once..maybe...or someone telling him they walked by a bookstore once.
Nice to see that mark24, Loudmouth and you further confirmed Sy's dishonesty and ignorance...though it a bit like shooting fish in a barrel.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
Oh yeah? Well back when I was an unemployed drunk who slept in a laundromat, I heard about a guy who wrote something about a criticism of Ulysees. I assume it will substantiate anything I say. You are just empty posing.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Mammuthus Member (Idle past 6506 days) Posts: 3085 From: Munich, Germany Joined: |
quote: Sure1. Quetzal demonstrated that you cannot read and have misrepresented Raup. 2. Both Quetzal and I referenced primary literature, that if you had actually read, would have linked you to thousands of articles on extinction research. It is as developed as any other branch of science. Your response? "please mommy don't make me read those nasty science papers...my eyes hurt when I get past the first word on the cover of a book". So your desire to remain opinionated yet completely ignorant indicates you are an idiot. 3. You can't even get the pop literature you claim to have read straight 4. You glean all of your little Syamsu soundbites from websites Conclusion: You don't have, never had, and never will have anything informed or useful to say.
quote: You should certainly entertain some serious doubts about your honesty and you should really fear the level of laziness you have demonstrated on this site.
quote: Coming from a guy who has demonstrated a champions league level of ignorance about every subject he has ever engaged in.
quote: Name a single creationist who has made a scientific discovery or made a contribution to a scientific hypothesis using creationism as the basis. Also tell us what THE testable and falsifiable hypothesis of creationism is
quote: Are you the sole occupant of Nganjuk? The debate must be all the rage there then.
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024