8
   

International Scientific Conference Deems Evolution A "Hoax"

 
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Nov, 2020 06:00 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Since epigenetic expression can retain "acquired characteristics" for a few generations in which they can become fixed generationally. Lamarck is getting a new look-see in light of epigenetics .


That isn't what our friend Bulma wants from Lamark. That is just saying that in addition to passing down my genes... I pass down more to my children in the way of behavior, nutrition, and bathroom habits.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Nov, 2020 09:21 pm
@maxdancona,
Im sorta ignoring him. When he posted the various critters an their skelatal structures an then tried to deny relationships induced via evolution, he missed the whle point that "Evolution is taking something youve already got an doing something entirely new with it".

I just wanted to post to you that Lamarck is getting a new batch of scientific interest. Remember, like St Hillaire, Lamarck really didnt say a whole lot.(He had no system or entire "theory" surrounding his proposals). They were just interesting ideas among more complete panoplies of ideas about "transmutation of critters" through time.
Science still is the closest to fully understanding the whole schmagig. Its just that, with our level of knowledge today, were able to introduce earlier "ideas" that have some possible (albeit small) part of how transmutation can be affected.

We still have not counted out how archae have introduced species that may have their roots from other places besides earth.

We just have to keep open minds but be critical of garbage when we can (like you first said)
PROVE THAT ITS GARBAGE.

Im one who, through my career, my own scientific contributions were more often based on NOT what is right, but WHAT AINT WRONG/ Ive had a number of fthings in surface chemistry work out for totally incorrect reasoning. It wasnt till I and some colleagues challenged ourselves that we found all this out and had to generate new physical chem relationships.

Happens all the time.


farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Nov, 2020 09:38 pm
@farmerman,
Its kinda interesting that the entire re-evaluation of Lamarkian ideas has only happened during the priod that A2K has been on the air. about 20 years eh?

Guys like LYSENKO, who practiced some kind of Lamarkian thinking xcept that h was like the example you mentioned .Lysenko would cut fox tails off, hoping that successive generations would have short tails. (Kind like the fly wing experiments)

Strict Lamarkian thinking doesnt damage or remove a critters tissue or organs , that would leave nothing on which evolution could work its business.
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 21 Nov, 2020 05:07 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
he was often fun to talk with. He knew his guns, (unlike a few others who read about em but dont use em).

Unlike you, you mean (as you are the only poser with a history of such ignorance).
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 08:58 am
@oralloy,
anything you can add to the subject??


I thought not.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 09:31 am
@farmerman,
No one has ever accused you of being able to think.

Something that I can add? Gungasnake is alive and well. I can see that he is posting on other messageboards. His most recent post is today.

I do not know if his current absence from a2k is imposed by the moderators or if he is just tired of putting up with frauds like you.
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 10:19 am
@oralloy,
ok, if thats a fact, then i was misinformed. Im glad that hes out there still. Still fulla **** though (I dont have to show reverence to any memory if hes alive).

You really dont deserve any consideration since youre just a teeny mind fart.

He liked to have his clock cleaned on subjects like natural science and biology. It was the way he learned. I was glad to oblige cause hed bring actual data from his sides "champions"

oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 10:23 am
@farmerman,
You engage in childish name-calling because you're too stupid to produce an intelligent argument.

Your claims to have bested him are just as suspect as all your phony claims about me that you are never able to back up.
farmerman
 
  4  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 10:42 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
You engage in childish name-calling because you're too stupid to produce an intelligent argument

Just a minor point ,but while youre engaging in recriminations, I believe that you should refrain from engaging in the very behavior you are criticizing.

Takes away all the impact and most of the pizzazz .


Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy Very Happy 2 Cents
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 10:51 am
@farmerman,
I prefer factual accuracy. Your lack of intelligence is in fact the reason why you engage in childish name-calling.

I do understand that factual accuracy is not a concept that you are familiar with.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 12:13 pm
@oralloy,
"FACTUAL ACCURACY"

Language is also not one of your skills is it?.

oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 04:18 pm
@farmerman,
My language skills are just fine.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Sun 22 Nov, 2020 05:42 pm
@farmerman,
well that was a fun bit .
Back to max.The book re: Lamarck's re-interest i called "Lamarck' s Revenge" by Peter Ward . Its an investigation of the evidence that supports the "retention of acquired characteristics" Like any good scientist, Ward knows he is dancing on the edge of science where you wanna avoid taking abject statements of ignorance and turning them into abject statements of certainty (Im sure youve had your work taken and run with by newspapers and the writers make statements like " these Scientists will have to go back to their drawing boards based on these new findings).
Ward knows that reporters will **** it up with giving them more and more so, when they report the "Drawing board phrase" LET IT GO FROM THERE

Its not a theory, it is a fairly well developed hypothesis and Ward is working on several spinoffs based on epigenetics in Paleobiology. Much more evience is needed but most of it looks really encouraging.


0 Replies
 
rosborne979
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2020 02:29 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Somebody said that gungasnake died. I shall miss him as he at least tried to make arguments ,even though quite flawed.

Gunga died? I hadn't heard that. That makes me sad, even though I disagree with him most of the time.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Tue 24 Nov, 2020 05:53 pm
@rosborne979,
Ollie came back and said that wasnt true because hes seen gungasnake post at some other more conservative leaning sites.



izzythepush
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Nov, 2020 10:43 am
@farmerman,
At the beginning of the pandemic he was posting some highly irresponsible and very dangerous nonsense about the Covid 19 virus.

I reported him, which was a first for me because I usually only report spam. I don’t know if I had anything to do with it, but he stopped posting shortly afterwards.
McGentrix
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Nov, 2020 11:34 am
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Language is also not one of your skills is it?.


You don't want to go there.
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Nov, 2020 11:51 am
@McGentrix,
why not.My day to day working vocabulary is probably much more voluble than is his. If you are trolling about my spelling skills, you try to type one handed with little feeling in the other hand. I can use the spellcheck but setanta always said I was just lzy , Probably so.
Anyway, he speaks mostly in bumper stickers, rarely creative new thoughts.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Nov, 2020 11:53 am
@izzythepush,
ahaaa. Why am I not suurprised. Gunga's "Alternate views" of all the sciences sounds like hes been taken in by Lysenkoism.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/26/2020 at 08:43:09