Originally posted by: abj13
I am?
Yes.
Originally posted by: abj13
What did I type in my post?
You stll don't acknowledge it.
Yet another cookie-cutter post. What is with up with making claims but never supporting them with anything? The schtick is getting old.
It's old because you don't have a clue of the problems, the politics, and backbiting in paleoanthropology. If you did, you'd at least acknowledge the problems, and not make untrue statements.
There is NO gold standard in judging the classification of paleo remains. It's based on hunch, speculation and guess work. It's not a HARD science.
Once again, you are taking everything out of context.
I'm not, I've said it repeatily: there's a problem with classification when it's nothing but guesswork.
Lick your thumb and hold it up to measure the wind, "science".
[qb]When classifying a bone, it isn't done randomly, or simply an attempt to put labels on the fossil. Instead it is compared to everything else out there, and classified in relation to all other relevant fossils.[/quote]
AAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
You don't "get it." Let me put it down into an elementary level: you have to type the bones accurately, or the results are false. Remember the Piltdown Man? How many scientists accepted it as human again? How long did it take before the hoax was finally known? Do you realize how many more disarticulated remains are misclassified?
Identification is very critical.
But now you're claiming I don't have a clue and you actually understand it, when instead you continue to misdirect.
It's clear that you don't. Do you release Science has all the bad elements any other field of study has? Do you realize it has it's share of fakes, liars, propagandists, and even sociopaths? Science isn't pure, it's prone to the same mistakes of
religion.
The sheer lack of evidence and assumptions you make, speak larger than claiming someone isn't "abreast" of the subject.
I don't need to provide it because someone can easily do their own homework. I did. Stop being lazy and do your OWN research.
BTW, do you know the short comings of meta-analysis (which talkorigins does with reviewing reams --doubt reading half of them -- of other people's studies)?
Its a fairly good topic until someone decides to mischaracterize it, just so it can fit some preconceived notions...
What "preconceived notions" on the creationist bashing wagon idea again? You have no clue what I believe in, but you want to react to me like I'm a Christian.
Life isn't simple.
The 2004 human is different from a human 100,000 or 1 million years ago. Saying an abnormal (if there is such a word for this situation) number of chromosomes was deleterious back then is nothing but an assumption.
What you're not willing to see -- :knock, knock --- HELLO ANYONE HOME??: -- that your premise has man being born
diseased.
Tell us, what's cancer? What does it affect? Why does it kill?
What does cancer need to reproduce?
This is why you guys are lay folks. Heck, I'm no MD, but knew this long ago. I wouldn't go down this 24 chromosomes road with a tyicycle, let a lone Mack truck.
Even today chromosome fusion is observable:
Who are you trying to convert? No conversions here.
As it should be, instead of making science more than it is, or whatever manipulated form you want for your "arguments," especially for someone who done this for "8" years.
We'll versed on this topic.
When did I ever say it doesn't happen? So now the game is making up quotes, and assigning them as the end all straw man arguments? Next time, please find an actual quote instead of making up disingenuous posts.
There's a definition from Abnormal psychology that applies here. Do you know it?
It's called:
projection identification.
And you have a
fixation on that word
straw man. Is that a "Freudian slip"?
LOL! So you cannot argue what is being said, so you argue what was never said? I'm reminded of a quote:
Originally posted by: Terumo
don't put up a challenge if you guys can't deliever
Hilarity insues.
What now the last resort: spelling flames? lololol
But I'll let you deal with my gallbladder then, and the lack of sleep!
I'm not hawking anything. I'm reminded of another quote from this thread:
Originally posted by: Terumo
If anyone question your belief they're automatically Christians
Replace Christians with whatever you want to label me. Add another contradiction to the list.
You are hawking something: your fanatical belief in Evolution. It almost becomes your
God.
I didn't label you a Christian, but if you're confused by now that's fine (I only just started, too).
Who said it was a "fact?" Not me. I said it "overwhealming supports."
You'll defend it as so, but I'm more unbiased: prove me wrong.