JAM
Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007
|
| Quote (Paul Nelson @ April 23 2008,10:40) | Alb said,
| Quote | | Don't you think you could answer some of them, rather than just ask questions of your own and pretend that ours don't exist? |
Here's a quick recap. |
You're not even close. You are a profoundly dishonest man.
| Quote | | JAM cited a paper from Science... |
The journal is not important in this context. The data are, but you can't deal with the data.
| Quote | | in support of his question to me about the genetic basis of size differences. |
Wrong. I challenged your dishonesty in YOUR BOOK:
| Quote | | Some textbooks alter the scale of pictures showing the order of appearance of group such as the mammal-like reptiles. This makes the features appear closer in size than they really are, and creates the impression of a close genealogical relationship, and an easy transition between different types of animals. Presentations of the reptile-to-mammal sequence, in particular, often enlarge some skulls and shrink others to make them appear more similar in size than they actually are. |
I cited the data from the paper to support my claim that changes in size are no big deal evolutionarily. This is blindingly obvious from even a cursory understanding of growth-factor pathways, but that would be too subtle for someone as ignorant and dishonest as you clearly are. Therefore, I used the sledgehammer. Then, I asked a simple question and taunted you. You see, Paul, the hypothesis that you are a dishonest fraud makes very clear predictions about your evasive behavior:
| Quote | Do you have some data that suggest that size changes are a big deal?
Oh, I forgot--you produce no data, because you're lack sufficient faith to test your hypotheses. Instead, you just spin the data of others. |
My question was a simple one placing the evidentiary burden on you, as someone who made a claim in what he sells as a textbook. Clearly, your answer is 'no, I have no data,' but you lack the integrity to admit it.
| Quote | | The paper concerned variation in dogs. |
Yes, Paul, but what were the data?
| Quote | | I read it, thought about it, and wondered about a couple of things: |
Translation: exposed as a dishonest fraud yet again, Paul, who never looked at evidence, tries to find a way to transfer the burden of proof.
| Quote | | 1. How do we determine the genetics of size differences for extinct taxa? |
You would have to have an answer to that BEFORE complaining that disregarding size differences was deceptive, particularly given that size was not used as a characteristic in classification.
The answer is that since we know that the underlying molecular mechanisms are incredibly conserved, it's not a problem.
| Quote | | The original context of JAM's question involved scaling illustrations of the mammal-like reptile transition. |
More accurately, the context YOUR book's dishonest claim that using different scales was deceptive, a claim for which you clearly have no support.
| Quote | | 2. The variation in canids was in domesticated, not wild, populations. Hence I wondered if JAM had additional data about size variation in natural populations, |
But you lack the integrity to answer my question.
| Quote | | because I think there are important (evidentially relevant) differences between domesticated and wild populations, with respect to evolution. |
Then why didn't you answer my question "Yes," and cite the relevant evidence (not quotes)?
| Quote | | So my question to JAM stems from trying to follow up his question to me. |
No, it stems from trying to evade answering it.
|
