Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • The Talk Rational forum. It seems like a bunch of dudebros who want to talk about how smart they are, and how ugly women are.

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - Pingu

1
Meh. Pingu was lurking yesterday, so not completely out.

Just up to my ears in stuff.

2
Politics and Current Events / Re: Removing Assad
Remember that he's a coward.

It's the only hope we've got.
5
So, do you now get that nobody here is a neo-Darwinist?
All of you are neo Darwinists.   But the evidence is requiring you to ... er ... evolve.

By what definition?  None of us subscribe to the 3 tenets of neo-Darwinism that Noble wants to jettison.

So tenets are you referring to?

Or is it just a generic insult?
6
Dave, hero-worship impedes your ability to think.

Where "hero" = Dave.
7
So, do you now get that nobody here is a neo-Darwinist?
8
Do you know what the words "integrated" means, Dave?



Do you know anyone who thinks that that the genome is "isolated"?  Do you even know what that means?

Or anyone who thinks that DNA is the only vector of inheritance?

Or that selection only operates at the level of the gene?

Because I don't.
9
We think that random mutations happen all over. Some of them lead to lactase persistence. In areas without much dairy, these tend not to spread quickly - and might die off, especially if the lactase persistence costs energy. In areas with lots of dairy, the mutation spreads. This leads to lactase persistence becoming the norm in areas with dairy, and not in areas without.
Well that's a nice just so story but I don't buy it. Why would lactase persistent people reproduce better than non lactase persistent people?

Just ask yourself, Dave: under what environmental circumstances might one species of mammal start to drink the milk of another?
Nice alternative to eating the flesh the other mammal? Tastes good? You csn make yogurt and cheese? Don't have to kill?

Keep going.
I can't think of anything else.

Well, you aren't very good at thinking, it has to be said.
10
If you're going to be a Second Wayer you have to get good at storytelling.

Dave, nobody here is a "neo-Darwinist".

That's not how any of this works.
Well you might want to take that up with Shapiro & Noble because they are the ones identifying the Second Way with neo-darwinism. It was not my idea.

And I repeat: nobody here is a neo-Darwinist.

Any more than any of us is a Newtonian or a Daltonian or a Mendelian.
I repeat. Take that up with Noble and Shapiro who seem to have a different View.

They have a view as to whether the denizens of your TR threads identify as neo-Darwinists?

And no, they don't.  It was like getting blood from a stone trying to get you to identify the three elements of "neo-Darwinism" that Noble thinks  need to be jettisoned.  Two were merely limitations (i.e. he wanted people to think more broadly) and one is still true enough for most applications (as Newtonian mechanics remains true enough for most applications).



11
It's obviously just a hunch, but if people had domesticated cattle for helping to till the land for grain, in times of drought and famine, it would be a fairly obvious idea for a mother nursing her own babies to see a cow nursing her calves, and think about using the cow's milk to help feed her own infants. And to drink some herself.

Interesting that the archaeology seems to suggest that equipment for fermenting milk (and thus reducing lactose) date a long way back, suggesting a possible two-step process, by which fermented milk (yogurt, cheese) makes facilitates more widespread dairy consumption by adults, and ability to digest lactose in adulthood then enables some adults to survive on fresh milk.

Again, very helpful in drought and famine.

Which we know occurred.  Even Dave will agree with that.
12
And perhaps be specific: archaeological evidence suggests that cattle were the first animals to be milked by humans for their own consumption.

Why do you think that might be?

And why might they have done it?
13
We think that random mutations happen all over. Some of them lead to lactase persistence. In areas without much dairy, these tend not to spread quickly - and might die off, especially if the lactase persistence costs energy. In areas with lots of dairy, the mutation spreads. This leads to lactase persistence becoming the norm in areas with dairy, and not in areas without.
Well that's a nice just so story but I don't buy it. Why would lactase persistent people reproduce better than non lactase persistent people?

Just ask yourself, Dave: under what environmental circumstances might one species of mammal start to drink the milk of another?
Nice alternative to eating the flesh the other mammal? Tastes good? You csn make yogurt and cheese? Don't have to kill?

Keep going.
14
If you're going to be a Second Wayer you have to get good at storytelling.

Dave, nobody here is a "neo-Darwinist".

That's not how any of this works.
Well you might want to take that up with Shapiro & Noble because they are the ones identifying the Second Way with neo-darwinism. It was not my idea.

And I repeat: nobody here is a neo-Darwinist.

Any more than any of us is a Newtonian or a Daltonian or a Mendelian.
15
If you're going to be a Second Wayer you have to get good at storytelling.

Dave, nobody here is a "neo-Darwinist".

That's not how any of this works.

Like none of us are "Newtonianists" or "Daltonists" or "Mendelians".

16
Also, note to uncool: if you are going to use the word "random" in replies to Dave, please specify what meaning of "random" you are using.

Because he equivocates like fuck with that word.
17
We think that random mutations happen all over. Some of them lead to lactase persistence. In areas without much dairy, these tend not to spread quickly - and might die off, especially if the lactase persistence costs energy. In areas with lots of dairy, the mutation spreads. This leads to lactase persistence becoming the norm in areas with dairy, and not in areas without.
Well that's a nice just so story but I don't buy it. Why would lactase persistent people reproduce better than non lactase persistent people?

Just ask yourself, Dave: under what environmental circumstances might one species of mammal start to drink the milk of another?
18
Guys.

A lot of good, competent hard working scientists have rejected the Second Way.

And opted for what they call the Third Way.

Does that not cause you to pause and reflect at all?

The entirety of competent hard-working scientists have rejected YEC.  And opted for what they call evidence-based science.

Does that not cause you to pause and reflect at all?
19
If you're going to be a Second Wayer you have to get good at storytelling.

Dave, nobody here is a "neo-Darwinist".

That's not how any of this works.
20
And, moreover, endorsed by many religious people who have stated that they would have preferred to have found that the earth was young?  Many IDists for instance?  Behe, Dembski, Denton?

21
For instance, Dave, what would make the OVERWHELMING majority of scientists in RELEVANT fields all agree on the SAME age for the earth and one that is many orders of magnitude greater than the one you believe to be correct?  What possible psychological motivation could there be for a collective fabrication on such a vast and consilient scale?

Entailing the fabrication of evidence from independent sources that nonetheless on the same large number, so wildly different from yours?

hmmm?
22
Because that shrimp patties thing isn't going to cut it.
23
Dave, serious question: if you think the evidence is so overwhelming WHY do you think the vast, indeed overwhelming, majority of the world's geologists, physicists, chemists and palaeontologists disagree?  And that the tiny fraction of a percent that do are committed to so a priori by their adherence to a very specific minority religious group that mandates this stance?
Psychology

That's not an answer.  Be SPECIFIC.

ya know?
24
...  why don't you enlighten us on the NGE research work being done on lactase persistence?
You seem to be assuming that the single base pair change implicated in this case happened by some "NGE" mechanism. 
You should examine that assumption.
I'm not assuming it.

I'm just curious.
Curious enough to troll.
But not curious enough to do any reading of your own.
What sorts of mechanisms lead to single base-pair substitutions of the sort implicated in the European lactase persistence phenotype?
I don't know. But I would like to know.

No, you wouldn't.
25
Dave, serious question: if you think the evidence is so overwhelming WHY do you think the vast, indeed overwhelming, majority of the world's geologists, physicists, chemists and palaeontologists disagree?  And that the tiny fraction of a percent that do are committed to so a priori by their adherence to a very specific minority religious group that mandates this stance?