Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talk Rational: spewing shitposts into the twitterverse for 4 years and counting

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 - SomeCallMeTim

1
This is the "trade secret of paleontology" that Gould refers to.

You're one of the quote miners by design or stupidity Gould refers to.
2
In fact evolution theory is based on that incorrect principle*. Cladistic analysis just covers over the incorrectness.

* The correct principle is that there is an absence of "in-between" species

When will you be deleting your shithead blog claiming pterosaurs evolved into extant birds?    :parrot:
3
 
https://www.realclearscience.com/quick_and_clear_science/2018/05/21/what_can_dna_barcodes_tell_us_about_evolution_and_ourselves.html
Quote
"If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies. They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space," Thaler analogized.
The study demonstrates that "Big Data" can play a pivotal role in classification, and has the potential to infuse taxonomy with a needed measure of objectivity.

Still pushing this non peer reviewed idiotic garbage paper?  What a surprise.   ::)
4
Which brings us back to our question: why did the overwhelming majority of species in existence today emerge at about the same time?

Easy.  They didn't.  That's a non peer reviewed garbage paper published in an obscure Italian vanity journal.  The authors sent around a bombastic press release with remarkable claims but the paper itself is caca.  Go read the Soccy thread for the details.
5
Sometimes I wonder if you folks are as dumb as you seem.

Speaking of being a major league dumbass, why are you still pushing a garbage paper published in a non peer reviewed vanity journal?

BTW I've concluded you're both stupid and dishonest in the Gould quote mining.   :yes:
6
People seem to have woken up. It will be interesting to see if anyone responds to this point.

I'm still curious if it was by design or stupidity you repeated the Creationist lie about Gould's work.  In your case I'm sure it could be both.
7
https://phys.org/news/2018-05-gene-survey-reveals-facets-evolution.html

https://phe.rockefeller.edu/news/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Stoeckle-Thaler-Final-reduced.pdf

Looks like Soccy got suckered by this dog turd of a paper making the rounds of Creationist sites too.  The authors apparently know nothing about population genetics because they made the incredibly stupid blunder of mistaking mtDNA markers as showing speciation instead of the last common ancestor. All members of a species share a common matrilineal ancestor of the same species (just as humans have Mitochondrial Eve) but that isn't the same as being the first member of a species.    ::)

I was curious about where this paper was actually published so I tried to find it.  In the bombastic press release the paper is identified as being published in Human Evolution, Vol.33.   Springer used to have a journal called Human Evolution. but it ceased publication is 2007.  There is a professional journal titled Journal of Human Evolution put out by Elsevier but it is at Vol. 119 and the paper in nowhere to be found there.  Finally I found the source.  Turns out the rights to the title Human Evolution were picked up by an obscure Italian entrepreneur named Angelo Pontecorboli and is now published online (along with a few other titles) as a vanity journal.   :)   Looks like the authors paid to have this garbage published instead of submitting it for actual scientific peer review and publication.   I suspect either closet Creationism or amazing incompetence, or both.
8
Quote
And yet--another unexpected finding from the study--species have very clear genetic boundaries, and there's nothing much in between.
"If individuals are stars, then species are galaxies," said Thaler. "They are compact clusters in the vastness of empty sequence space."
The absence of "in-between" species is something that also perplexed Darwin, he said.
Quote
"The extreme rarity of transitional forms in the fossil record persist as the trade secret of paleontology. The evolutionary trees that adorn our textbooks have data only at the tips and nodes of their branches; the rest is inference, however reasonable, not the evidence of fossils ....We fancy ourselves as the only true students of life's history, yet to preserve our favored account of evolution by natural selection we view our data as so bad that we never see the very process we profess to study." - Stephen J. Gould - "Evolution's Erratic Pace," Natural History, vol. 86 (May 1987), p. 14.

"Since we proposed punctuated equilibria to explain trends, it is infuriating to be quoted again and again by creationists--whether through design or stupidity, I do not know--as admitting that the fossil record includes no transitional forms. Transitional forms are generally lacking at the species level, but they are abundant between larger groups."

- Stephen J. Gould, "Evolution as Fact and Theory"

Which is it Soc?  Is it by design or stupidity you recite the standard Creationist lie about Gould's work?
9
Comparing her and Clinton to a Masaai child with few choices is not just wrong, Dave, it is loathesome and you should be ashamed of yourself.

I haven't been around much.  Did Dave finally develop a sense of shame for the repulsive and disgusting things he posts? 
10
Holy damn but this thread is like reading a script for the next sequel of "Hot Tub Time Machine".    :unsure:
11
I have no interest in sex with preteens. 30-somethings are about my speed.

Is that why your wife kicked you out and divorced you?
12
And maybe next time, just answer the question rather than being snarky. Seems the one who's playing dumb is you.

Disagree.  He isn't playing being dumb.  Davie-dip is the real deal.
13
OK so I have to do some work proving to you the extent and characteristics of this continent sized sandstone layer ...

AFDave's Second Law: One may escape intellectual responsibility on any issue merely by stating an intent to pursue it.
14
AFDave's Seventh Law: No matter how transparently pathetic or retarded any of Dave's claims may be they can always be followed by something even more pathetic and retarded.
15
evidence of your high speed mind running circles around us, like a headless chook with its arse on fire.

If that's not in the memescape it sure should be.   :happydance:
16
That's what you spent days arguing. Your argument at the time was that since we describe measurements by using our base 10 numerical system, that means the feet/inches system is base 10. You were adamant that the feet/inches system couldn't be base 12, and that people who were telling you it was base 12 were idiots.

It was fucking hilarious. Some of your greatest tard ever.

*waits for vehement denial that he ever said any such thing*

IIRC Dopey was also arguing for his "pyramid inch" standard to prove how special the Pyramids are.
17
100% sure it was Davie-dip, 90% sure it was the old IIDB
18
This is weird.

I just went to AIG to check out the stromatolite article.  Hadn't been there in some time and found

1.  AIG now requires you to create an account with them to view articles.  You can log in with Facebook or Twitter but the software still creates your own account and tries to spam your email with AIG crap
2. I signed in with Facebook, created the account, searched for "stromatolites" and found a new article (Sept 1 2017) titled "Stromatolites--Rare Reminders of a Lost World".  However when I selected the link I got a message "Access to this content is restricted. Please enter an unlock code to view the content." and a box to enter an unlock code which I don't have.

Anyone else have the same experience?  Is this their way of hiding the new heretical article?
I saw that article you mention is locked. Tried to access it the other day, but CBF'd making an AiG account. The article I was referring to is this one: https://answersingenesis.org/biology/microbiology/survey-of-microbial-composition-and-mechanisms-of-living-stromatolites-of-the-bahamas-and-australia/


Thanks.  Still curious they have locked articles unless they really don't want anyone to see them.  Too embarrassing I suppose.
19
This is weird.

I just went to AIG to check out the stromatolite article.  Hadn't been there in some time and found

1.  AIG now requires you to create an account with them to view articles.  You can log in with Facebook or Twitter but the software still creates your own account and tries to spam your email with AIG crap
2. I signed in with Facebook, created the account, searched for "stromatolites" and found a new article (Sept 1 2017) titled "Stromatolites--Rare Reminders of a Lost World".  However when I selected the link I got a message "Access to this content is restricted. Please enter an unlock code to view the content." and a box to enter an unlock code which I don't have.

Anyone else have the same experience?  Is this their way of hiding the new heretical article?
20
Hey I just found a nifty page on the Sauk sequence. It has pictures, so Dave won't have to read any Reverse Swahili Pig Latin.

This one shows southwestern Colorado at the peak of the marine transgression. IOW, the edge of the water here is also the limit of the Tapeats in that area. The red circle is Baker's Bridge.

And this one shows the North American and Canadian areas covered by the complete Sauk sequence.

IOW, this would be the limits of any Tapeats-equivalent layers in that part of the world.

Didn't we go through this whole goat rope with Davie-dip and the St. Peter sandstone?  You saw how much he learned out of that one.
21
In that case we're all your buddies, because we're all catastrophists in the same way that Ager is.

Plus we all think Dave's a fuckwit. 
22
Also the gradual shift in geology from strict uniformitarianism to catastrophism has been the direct result of the work of creationists.

(cough cough) Missouri geology.  Dave's still too much of a coward to discuss it.    :yes:
23
Yes well. Creationists are not known for their useful contributions to science.
Actually you're wrong.  Creationists founded modern science.  Recently there have been a fair number of  professional scientists reject Darwinism and adopt what they call "the third way."  One major cause of this is the work of creationists.
Also the gradual shift in geology from strict uniformitarianism to catastrophism has been the direct result of the work of creationists.
Wow.
Every single sentence there is dead wrong.
Quite an accomplishment!

Nah.  I've seen him go whole weeks posting nothing but incorrect lies and bullshit.
24
Hey this is funny. :grin:

I ran a search for stromatolites on AiG and, sure enough, they have recognised that they have a problem. They have (or at least Snelling has) even admitted that stromatolites are confirmed as far back as the Lower Archaean, around 3.5 billion years ago on the Evilutionist Global Conspiracy Timescale. And, they have admitted that stromatolite reefs take a long time to grow, and they only have about 1600 "pre-Flood" years to deal with all the pre-Cambrian strata. So, what to do?

Well, and hold onto your gasters here lest they be flabbered out of reach, they have decided there is only one way to deal with the situation: make shit up! :cheer: They have done this very enthusiastically, to the point where they're arguably committing heresy.

They want the pre-Cambrian sedimentary strata to be laid down in "the Day 3 Great Regression", which is what they call it when God supposedly raised the land out of the water, and lotsa water ran off, causing massive erosion in the process. The early stromatolites are in these strata, so the stromatolites have to come first.

The result of this clusterfuck is that they are now proposing that God created complete stromatolite reefs, with real live cells, on Day 2. They can't fit them in anywhere else, so Day 2 it has to be. This is in spite of the Bible clearly saying that God did not create life in the oceans until Day 5.

Answers in Genesis no longer cares what the Bible says. They have gone and jumped the shark, and are now writing their own creation myth in direct contradiction of the Bible.

 :stopper:  :cheer:  :happydance:  :parrot:  :happydance:  :cheer:  :stopper:
Any comments on this, Dave?

AFDave's Fourth Law: Unanswerable questions are invisible.
25
Hey Dave, I found a new source of creotard. :clap:

Noah's Flood: The Key to Correct Interpretation of Earth History by John Baumgardner, Ph.D.


Holy moly that's some seriously condensed Creotard.  It's a Gish Gallop on steroids.