Genetic Changes In Mice 'Question Evolution Speed'

Ananova ^ | 5-21-2003

[Quick1]

A. Ooh, demands from someone on a message board. No, I won't do it now, thanks though.
B. Have I done any insulting? Hell, I'm not even addressing an insult from you.

[ALS]

A. First, one must believe there is such an entity/process of evolution in order to faithfully answer the question, as put.
B. If it does anything, it establishes his own state of mind/opinion on his own BELIEFS.
C. You added "impact". He did not address impact in that particular quote that anyone reading english could honestly attest to.
D. However, you are free to imply.

[ALS]

"No, I won't do it now, thanks though."

I won't wait then. As the only person to even attempt to, could only offer this:

"Sure, we sometimes insult. The difference is, we usually give the reasons for our insults"

[Quick1]

A. No, it really doesn't. It simply requires knowledge of what the process is, theoretically.

B. No, it establishes that he wondered if he was wrong, and that people aren't always 100% sure about everything.

C. "Often, a cold shudder has run through me..."

D. I am, and I did.

Thanks for finally at least giving a semi-answer, I'm done with this thread now, as it's time for some partying.

[Quick1]

Sorry, I could care less about insults, especially when they're not even addresses to me. If they're affecting you that much, you can feel free to go have a good cry and grow some skin. Me, I always have witty comebacks at hand.

[ALS]

A. Yes, it really does. If I asked you what color dress did the toot fairy wear last night, would you attempt to answer the question or state the obvious, "there is no tooth fairy, so I can't answer the question".
B. No, it establishes little except he had doubts, big doubts about his own personal BELIEF.
C. "..." are not allowed in the whacky world of Eloony quotes.
D. In your dreams.
E. If you always look down at people, you'll never see the stars.
F. Don't Drink and Drivel

[ALS]

"I always have witty comebacks at hand."

you did what in your hand?

ps - your entire line of questioning was all about you worrying that darwood and by extension, your silly make beliefs, were being insulted.
Reflective obsession

You exhibit the characteristic trademark of Eloons the world over:
Projectionism

[ALS]

"As argumentative as you and I have been in the past on these threads, I think you are better than the sort of puerile idiocy as has been displayed by too many others here. And so I make a suggestion of a sort of pax evolva, and pledge to try to remain aboveboard in my posts to you in the future - in particular, by examining posts and evidence on their own merits, rather than by simply dismissing them for seemingly illogical reasons - and ask the same in return. And I ask it of you because I know that you and I are capable of it, despite our respective flaws - something which I doubt about a few others here lately.... "

make that, Arrogant Projectionism

[js1138]

If you are wondering why ALS posts quoted, check out the original source for one of his fabrications.

[ALS]

hey thanks for reminding me.

More darwood quotes & regrets/revisions/admissions:
With a sigh Darwin expunged the passages, `which I rather grieve about, as 1 wished it to be true; but alas a scientific man ought to have no wishes, no affections, - a mere heart of stone."'

the prose appalled him in print, and he made drastic revisions

`I am sorry to say that I have no "consolatory view" on the dignity of man. I am content that man will probably advance, and care not much whether we are looked at as mere savages in a remotely distant future."'

btw - "ALS posts quoted"
hehehehe - what the hell are you drinking tonight, Thunderbird?
It was quite thoughtful of you to go to all the trouble of validating his guilt ridden quotes for me. Most on here would have just thrown a hissy fit in a rage of denial, and so forth, ad nausaum. Thank you for destroying their chances.

[AndrewC]

This is really a different point altogether, but again, one which hardly screams "ID" instead of more traditional evolutionary processes.

You may have read it then, but you missed his whole point. He has distanced himself from the "traditional" evolutionary viewpoint. He goes out of his way to establish that the random stochastic mutational mechanism is not the driving mutational force in what we now know of the methods the cell adapt to the environment. Evidence after piece of molecular evidence now bolsters that viewpoint. Having established that as the mechanism any postulation of how that mechanism came about then belongs in the range of just-so.

[ALS]

"we now know of the methods the cell adapt to the environment. Evidence after piece of molecular evidence now bolsters that viewpoint."

Looks like he's gotcha there

You really should keep up with current scientific data Mr. Itchy

[AndrewC]

Ah, but just think how much more presentable that argument is than simply pointing to a date and acting as though that's the end of it.

True, but I was lazy having seen some of my information treated as a dog treats a fire hydrant(not by you). I was responding to the person who had placed the link and who apparently was unaware of the "staleness" of the information.

I have noted your aboveboard and civil manner and appreciate that of you. I turn the other cheek once and then turn the other "cheeks" (think leprechaun) thereafter to uncivil behavior. I do not expect agreement to my viewpoint from anyone, all I ask is a civil "I don't agree".

[AndrewC]

You forgot the "uses to" as in "of the methods the cell uses to adapt to the environment"

[general_re]

I try to respond in kind, when I can. Given that I'm far from perfect, I expect I will lapse from time to time, but I'm hopeful that we can mostly turn these threads in a somewhat different direction. Minds may not be changed as a result, but we can at least comport ourselves in a more civilized manner...

"A gentleman is one who never inflicts pain."

- Cardinal Newman

"Unintentionally."

- Oscar Wilde

[AndrewC]

but I'm hopeful that we can mostly turn these threads in a somewhat different direction.

Amen!

Ni!
--- A certain Knight

[ALS]

"turn these threads in a somewhat different direction."

sure, after you trash it all up with name calling and insults.


hahahaha! phoney twit

[ALS]

C. DARWIN TO J.D. HOOKER.

Down, November 4th [1856].

My dear Hooker,

To my own mind my MS. relieved me of some few difficulties, and the difficulties seemed to me pretty fairly stated, but I had become so bewildered with conflicting facts, evidence, reasoning and opinions, that I felt to myself that I had lost all judgment.


boy howdy, has he ever...

[ALS]

C. DARWIN TO J.D. HOOKER.
July 14th [1857?].

I have been making some calculations about varieties, etc., and talking yesterday with Lubbock, he has pointed out to me the grossest blunder which I have made in principle, and which entails two or three weeks' lost work; and I am at a dead-lock till I have these books to go over again, and see what the result of calculation on the right principle is. I am the most miserable, bemuddled, stupid dog in all England, and am ready to cry with vexation at my blindness and presumption.

Ever yours, most miserably,
C. DARWIN.



ahaa!

[ALS]

C. DARWIN TO JOHN LUBBOCK.

Down, [July] 14th [1857].

I am quite convinced yours is the right way; I had thought of it, but should never have done it had it not been for my most fortunate conversation with you.
Un quite shocked to find how easily I am muddled, for I had before thought over the subject much, and concluded my way was fair. It is dreadfully erroneous.

What a disgraceful blunder you have saved me from. I heartily thank you.

Ever yours,
C. DARWIN.

P.S.—It is enough to make me tear up all my MS. and give up in despair.


more groping blunders

true oaf!