slpage
Posts: 349
Joined: June 2004
|
| Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 30 2006,18:25) | On the Wikipedia thread here, Patrick claimed he too has been grievously wronged. Within a Wikipedia article on the vermiform appendix, this originally appeared:
| Quote | | One explanation has been that the appendix is a remnant of an earlier function, with no current purpose. |
Patrick substituted a much more detailed essay on the possible functions of the appendix, which began thusly:
| Quote | | For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function. We now know, however, that the appendix serves an important role in the fetus and in young adults.... |
But ALAS! He was almost immediately reverted, and his post identified as vandalism.
He wasn't entirely unappreciated, however. Other sycophants at UD commented upon Patrick's erudition:
| Quote | bFast // Nov 30th 2006 at 5:00 pm
Patrick, your knowledge of the appendix is incredible. I bet that if I assembled all of the physicians in my local hospital, they would not know as much as you about this appendage. |
But Patrick is modest:
| Quote | | Not really “impressive”, I just spent the time to look into it. The problem is that the common view of the appendix is so entrenched that it’s become dogma. And information contrary to the dogma is buried under everything else (see TalkOrigins for example). |
On a hunch, I googled the sentence, in quotes, "For years, the appendix was credited with very little physiological function." This turned up a 1999 "Ask the Experts: Medicine" response on Scientific American.com - which happens to be the revolutionary appendix essay Patrick posted on Wikipedia, word for vermiform word. See: Sci Am
The original was penned by Loren G. Martin, professor of physiology at Oklahoma State University. The article, or portions of it, is repeated here and there across the net (blogs and so on), including Patrick's repeat post at Overbearing Ungulates. Where he again fails to credit the author.
Way to go Patrick! See, there is research going on within the ID community. Not to mention a good deal of cutting and pasting.
And good work digging up information hidden from us - buried, no less - DEEP within the vaults of Scientific American.
Incredible? Impressive? Try, "ridiculous." |
What is worse is 'bfast's' drooling admiration of the plagiarist...
Pathetic.
|
