RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (14) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... >   
  Topic: JAD was banned again from UD..., Can we let him post here again?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10321
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 09 2006,10:12   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 09 2006,10:06)
Quote (jeannot @ Nov. 08 2006,16:43)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 08 2006,16:18)
 
Quote (jeannot @ Nov. 05 2006,23:59)
What does JAD's PEH have to say about it?

God dun it.

Then he died.

Thanks.

'Got that, and wrote that down.  :D

It's hard to believe, isn't it?

I love it so!

SOCK IT TO HIM!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 16 2006,16:20   

Davison cited prominent modern scientists who dismissed darwinism. I would like add one name from "small philosophy" - atheist Friedrich  Nietzsche who ridicules Darwin very. I cannot find english translation of his last book Gotzen dammerung, but German original  can be found easily on inet.

Nietzsche on darwinism AND MIMICRY in Gotzen Dammerung (see especially that Darwin forget spirit (Geist) - "das ist englisch!"), :

Anti-Darwin. - Was den berühmten Kampf um's Leben betrifft, so scheint er mir einstweilen mehr behauptet als bewiesen. Er kommt vor, aber als Ausnahme; der Gesammt-Aspekt des Lebens ist nicht die Nothlage, die Hungerlage, vielmehr der Reichthum, die Üppigkeit, selbst die absurde Verschwendung, - wo gekämpft wird, kämpft man um Macht... Man soll nicht Malthus mit der Natur verwechseln. - Gesetzt aber, es giebt diesen Kampf - und in der That, er kommt vor -, so läuft er leider umgekehrt aus als die Schule Darwin's wünscht, als man vielleicht mit ihr wünschen dürfte: nämlich zu Ungunsten der Starken, der Bevorrechtigten, der glücklichen Ausnahmen. Die Gattungen wachsen nicht in der Vollkommenheit: die Schwachen werden immer wieder über die Starken Herr, - das macht, sie sind die grosse Zahl, sie sind auch klüger... Darwin hat den Geist vergessen (- das ist englisch!;), die Schwachen haben mehr Geist... Man muss Geist nöthig haben, um Geist zu bekommen, - man verliert ihn, wenn man ihn nicht mehr nöthig hat. Wer die Stärke hat, entschlägt sich des Geistes (- "lass fahren dahin! denkt man heute in Deutschland - das Reich muss uns doch bleiben"...). Ich verstehe unter Geist, wie man sieht, die Vorsicht, die Geduld, die List, die Verstellung, die grosse Selbstbeherrschung und Alles, was mimicry ist (zu letzterem gehört ein grosser Theil der sogenannten Tugend).

http://manybooks.net/support....xp.html

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 16 2006,16:57   

Am I now banned like Davison?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 16 2006,21:21   

Huh, did you say something?

Sorry, but nobody is listening to you.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 16 2006,22:54   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 16 2006,17:20)
Davison cited prominent modern scientists who dismissed darwinism. I would like add one name from "small philosophy" - atheist Friedrich  Nietzsche who ridicules Darwin very. I cannot find english translation of his last book Gotzen dammerung, but German original  can be found easily on inet.

Nietzsche on darwinism AND MIMICRY in Gotzen Dammerung (see especially that Darwin forget spirit (Geist) - "das ist englisch!"), :

Anti-Darwin. - Was den berühmten Kampf um's Leben betrifft, so scheint er mir einstweilen mehr behauptet als bewiesen. Er kommt vor, aber als Ausnahme; der Gesammt-Aspekt des Lebens ist nicht die Nothlage, die Hungerlage, vielmehr der Reichthum, die Üppigkeit, selbst die absurde Verschwendung, - wo gekämpft wird, kämpft man um Macht... Man soll nicht Malthus mit der Natur verwechseln. - Gesetzt aber, es giebt diesen Kampf - und in der That, er kommt vor -, so läuft er leider umgekehrt aus als die Schule Darwin's wünscht, als man vielleicht mit ihr wünschen dürfte: nämlich zu Ungunsten der Starken, der Bevorrechtigten, der glücklichen Ausnahmen. Die Gattungen wachsen nicht in der Vollkommenheit: die Schwachen werden immer wieder über die Starken Herr, - das macht, sie sind die grosse Zahl, sie sind auch klüger... Darwin hat den Geist vergessen (- das ist englisch!;), die Schwachen haben mehr Geist... Man muss Geist nöthig haben, um Geist zu bekommen, - man verliert ihn, wenn man ihn nicht mehr nöthig hat. Wer die Stärke hat, entschlägt sich des Geistes (- "lass fahren dahin! denkt man heute in Deutschland - das Reich muss uns doch bleiben"...). Ich verstehe unter Geist, wie man sieht, die Vorsicht, die Geduld, die List, die Verstellung, die grosse Selbstbeherrschung und Alles, was mimicry ist (zu letzterem gehört ein grosser Theil der sogenannten Tugend).

http://manybooks.net/support....xp.html

And the babelfish translation....
 
Quote
Which concerns the famous fight um's life, then it seems to me meanwhile more stated than proven. It occurs, but as exception; Gesammt aspect life is not Nothlage, which which sumptuousness, even the absurd verschwendung, - one fights where, one fights to hunger situation, rather the Reichthum, for power... One is not to confound Malthus with nature. - set however, it giebt this fight - and in the That, he comes forwards -, then it runs out unfortunately in reverse as the school Darwin's wishes, when perhaps one might wish with it: indeed to Ungunsten of the strong ones, which privileged, the lucky exceptions. The kinds do not grow in the perfection: the weak ones become again and again over the strong ones gentleman, - which makes, them are the large number, them are also more intelligent... Darwin forgot the spirit (- that is English!, the weak ones have more spirit... One must have spirit noethig, in order to get spirit, - one loses him, if one does not have him any longer noethig. Who has the strength, entschlaegt itself the spirit (- "lass drive there! one thinks today in Germany - the realm must us nevertheless bleiben"...). I understand the caution, the patience, the ruse, the adjustment, the large self-control and everything that mimicry by spirit, as one see, is (to the latter a large Theil of the so-called virtue belongs).


Actually, reading this fairly quickly.  It sounds more like JAD than Nietzsche.  It just needs the proper flourish at the end.
Pick one:
  • I love it so!
  • Write it down!
  • How do you like them dung-dripping apples!

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,13:37   

I do not see what is this thread is about - I see no arguments only "jokes" missing any meaning.
Arguments against Davison I do not see at all, not even against prominent scientists he cited. I cited also Punnet mentioned in Manifesto who did not believe in darwinian gradualism as sufficient explanation of mimicry. I suppose that you will ridicule also this response but anyhow I cannnot help myself but send it - I never suppose that prominent neodarwinian scientists would support their phatasy how mimicry evolve by "transvestite evolutionary step" in 21 century!

http://www.nbb.cornell.edu/neurobio/BioNB420/Dardanus2003.pdf


1)

   
Quote

The niobe phenotype can be obtained with the niobe allele of the mimicry locus (Hni) but also as a heterozygote between the planemoides and trophonius alleles (Hpl/HT), yielding the so-called synthetic niobe (Clarke and Sheppard 1960a).
 



I would say that color on back wings of niobe is distinctly different from that of plamenoides and trophonius. So from where this color came from?

2)

   
Quote

Our studies on the correlated variation of pattern elements revealed a substantial amount of phenotypic variability in the various forms of P. dardanus. Assuming a similar mutation load, patterns that are subject to strong selection should exhibit less genetic and phenotypic variability than patterns that are under weaker selection.
.
.
The absence of correlated variation among pattern elements in mimicking forms stands in contrast to the neighbor and regional correlations observed in the nonmimetic patterns.
 



Again I would say - studying neodarwinian explanation of Batesian mimicry - that mimic should be protected against any shift of patterns and colors that would anyhow diminish its resemblance to distasteful model. I would also say that no such constrains would exist in nonmimetic patterns, while there I see no protection and subsequntly no selective pressure to look same. Yet the measured values for Papilio d. are exactly opposite to this consideration.

3)

There is accepted theory that even if males of P.d. look same throughout species its patterns and colors are not ancestral form - probably as I assume it would complicated neodarwinists phancy how to explain initial mutation from these ancestor to others mimic morphs. Instead according Nijhout archaic patterns look like P.phorcas. There should be than only 6 mutations that changed patterns on forewing - author probably forget on hindwings and colors - but even these 6 mutations occuring simultaneously from 12 measured patterns give probability 1/3.000.000.

What is more interesting is that supposed ancestor of P.d. morphs have 2 female morphs that are eatable so question aroses how it comes that these two morphs exists when there is no selective pressure? Neodarwinists do not lack phantasy at all:

   
Quote

The polymorphic female form of P. phorcas is believed to have originated as a male-mimicking ‘‘transvestitism’’ from a primitively sexually dimorphic color pattern (Vane-Wright 1976; Clarke et al. 1985).
 


If you never heard about transvestite evolution than again:

   
Quote

This suggests that the species may initially have
been sexually dimorphic (with brown/yellow females and
black/green males) and that a so-called transvestite evolutionary
step (Vane-Wright 1976; Clarke et al. 1985) produced
male-like females and was the origin of the female color
 



So that is the modern, "scientific" neodarwinistic account for Papilio dardanus polymorphism - resting partly upon "transvestite evolutionary step" with subsequent "genetic effect of large magnitude".

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5379
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,14:29   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 19 2006,13:37)
I do not see what is this thread is about - I see no arguments only "jokes" missing any meaning.

This thread is about DAJ, so that's rather appropriate, doncha think?

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,15:24   

I would appreciate if you addressed my post on mimicry instead of talking on somebody who is banned and cannot defend himself. I agree with Davison Manifesto on Punnet and mimicry. I would appreciate any comment of this part on Davison Manifesto or on my previous post connected with it.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,15:25   

Dude, no one is paying any attention to you.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,16:01   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 19 2006,13:37)
Arguments against Davison I do not see at all

'Cause there's nothing at all in JAD's arguments, that's why.

"God 'dun it, then he died."

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5379
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,19:21   

Quote (jeannot @ Nov. 19 2006,16:01)
"God 'dun it, then he died."

"Thanks.

'Got that, and wrote that down.  :D

It's hard to believe, isn't it?"

:D

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 19 2006,20:03   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 19 2006,19:21)
Quote (jeannot @ Nov. 19 2006,16:01)
"God 'dun it, then he died."

"Thanks.

'Got that, and wrote that down.  :D

It's hard to believe, isn't it?"

:D

Aren't we forgetting something?

Something about apples? ? ? ?  :angry:

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,05:52   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 19 2006,19:21)
Quote (jeannot @ Nov. 19 2006,16:01)
"God 'dun it, then he died."

"Thanks.

'Got that, and wrote that down.  :D

It's hard to believe, isn't it?"

:D

I love it so!

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,05:56   

Quote
I would appreciate if you addressed my post on mimicry instead of talking on somebody who is banned and cannot defend himself.

Quote (Alan Fox @ Nov. 06 2006,12:04)
Posters at AvC seem already to have dealt quite adequately with your concerns. I doubt you will get any further here without some new material. I wouldn't rely on John to come up with anything original.

  
Mr_Christopher



Posts: 1238
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,12:03   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 19 2006,15:24)
I would appreciate if you addressed my post on mimicry instead of talking on somebody who is banned and cannot defend himself. I agree with Davison Manifesto on Punnet and mimicry. I would appreciate any comment of this part on Davison Manifesto or on my previous post connected with it.

Dude, do you honestly think we're going to argue about JAD's "theories" with you?  Are you serious?

Besides, this thread isn't about JAD's "theories" it's about his banning.

Got that?  Write it down!








ps - I love it so!

--------------
Uncommon Descent is a moral cesspool, a festering intellectual ghetto that intoxicates and degrades its inhabitants - Stephen Matheson

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,13:04   

Quote

Dude, do you honestly think we're going to argue about JAD's "theories" with you?  Are you serious?


Darling I do not suppose you folks here are able  discuss any problem outlined by Davison.  Your discussion here is only childish mockery of Davison of no value. Whats more  he is banned and so unable defend himself.

Your mockery with naive and unscientific opinion on mimicry like this one from Jeannot Nov.5:

Quote

I don't see why the first steps of mimicry would require mutations of large effects in all species.


explain everything.

Enjoy your inane discussion!

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,13:09   

Quote (Mr_Christopher @ Nov. 20 2006,12:03)
Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 19 2006,15:24)
I would appreciate if you addressed my post on mimicry instead of talking on somebody who is banned and cannot defend himself. I agree with Davison Manifesto on Punnet and mimicry. I would appreciate any comment of this part on Davison Manifesto or on my previous post connected with it.

Dude, do you honestly think we're going to argue about JAD's "theories" with you?  Are you serious?

Besides, this thread isn't about JAD's "theories" it's about his banning.

Got that?  Write it down!








ps - I love it so!

How do you like those road apples?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
REC



Posts: 574
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,16:37   

Vmartin,
I replied on page 2 of this topic. Perhaps you would care to reply directly? If I understand correctly, you have 2 points:

1) Mimicry is too complex to have evolved simultaneously.
2) Mimics defy natural selection

My complaint that a molecular understanding of mimicry is lacking stands. Your "BIG" genetic changes may be large in phenotypic consequence, but minor in actual genetic change (think HOX expression). The paper I found describes mimicry achieved by the altered expression of a single enzyme. This seems to support Jeannot's response, which you mock. Secondly, there seem to be only philosophical guesses at how many alterations yield a mimic-which without molecular backing are indeed guesses. You rest your complaint upon these...

As for the second point-that a mimic, once evolved, would not drift from mimicry, as this would put it at risk of being eaten. Interesting premise-but predation is only one variable. Suppose being a mimic decreases other fitness parameters-attractiveness to mates,  stress resistance, who knows what? Therefore, a more complex, multi-phenotypic species could persist.

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 20 2006,16:54   

Vmartin, you need to read a book by evo-devo biologist Sean Carroll re evolution of butterfly wing markings, etc.:
Endless Forms Most Beautiful: The New Science of Evo Devo and the Making of the Animal Kingdom, W.W. Norton (2005).

It doesn't take a whole bunch of mutations to have a major impact on phenotypic patterns--it takes relatively small changes to signalling genes.

Do your research and then come back and talk about your questions.

On some relevant thread, which--as you will have gathered--this is not.

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,13:18   

And why dont you read discussions on brainstorms?

http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-forum-f-6.html

Whats more - Davison has full access there and he also has some allies there - me too. Davison is right with his conclusion that "A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,13:35   

hey, VM:

If you think Davison is correct with his PEH, all you have to do is ask him why he, nor ANYBODY else, has EVER attempted to test any prediction resulting from it.

or even ask youself....

why there ARE no testable predictions to begin with.

or why it was never published in a credible peer reviewed journal (Hint:  Revista de Biologia is NOT a credible journal).

so yeah, we can just as easily make fun of your ability to rationally process information if you think Davison's PEH is any more credible or viable than the old creationist "front loading" meme.

get a clue.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,14:15   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 21 2006,13:18)
Davison is right with his conclusion that "A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."

And he has shown that it's impossible to argue with him.

Davison : "I'm right and darwinism is wrong"
Sane person: "but look all these recent papers that prove YOU are wrong <insert references>"
Davison: "I don't read papers written by darwinists"

???

  
REC



Posts: 574
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,14:30   

Quote
Whats more - Davison has full access there and he also has some allies there - me too. Davison is right with his conclusion that "A past evolution is undeniable, a present evolution undemonstrable."


Then you should be well-versed, and fully prepared to rebut my posts. Got anything to say?

I've also posted directly to ISCID. We'll see what happens...

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,16:03   

Quote

If you think Davison is correct with his PEH, all you have to do is ask him why he, nor ANYBODY else, has EVER attempted to test any prediction resulting from it.


Davison named his Manifesto "A NEW HYPOTHESIS FOR ORGANIC CHANGE". He is no way I dare say so arrogant as darwinists and communists to call his facts and very originally thoughts to be "scientifically proved".

Btw what are the tested prediction of darwinism and communism?

Why not go to Brainstorm where John Davison is not banned and can give you explanation personally?

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,16:11   

Jeannot.

That is no argument what is written in darwinian books.
If Davison do not read them he might be right. Why to waste time with it? Here in Central and East Europe we were forced to read marxistic bullshits, in every University there was department of marx-leninism and people in Russia were prisoned as insane if they doubted on marx-leninism wordl-view.

Critics of communism were marked as "insane" - just like you marked Davison right now.

Do not forget that marxism and darwinism are similiar outdated naturalistic theories from mid 19 century.

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,16:28   

Yo, Vmartin, I gave you the book cite for the info you're going to need to even begin to discuss this mimicry issue intelligently.

And, take a hint, discussing it intelligently is not something that you are currently doing.

Get back to us when you know something.  Anything!  Until then, weg gehen, bitte sehr!

  
VMartin



Posts: 525
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,16:49   

Steviepinhead.

Do not ridicule yourself with your "holy" book. There is interesting discussion on mimicry on EvC with people who underestand little bit of it and I hope it will be going on Brainstorm as well.

If you speak german (weg gehen) you can also scan book from Andreas Suchantke "Metamorphosen im Insektenreich". You will learn something interesting from modern author who dismissed neodarwinism as explanation of insect mimicry completelly.

If you have something say except of presenting books  for reading you are welcome. Try read my answer on Brainstorm to REC and give me some neodarwinistic arguments. Thanks.

http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi....#000291

--------------
I could not answer, but should maintain my ground.-
Charles Darwin

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,17:16   

The arguments are in the book, V.

When you are able to express that you understand them, I'll be happy to talk further with you.

Until then, ta ta.

  
jeannot



Posts: 1200
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,17:36   

Quote (VMartin @ Nov. 21 2006,16:11)
Jeannot.

That is no argument what is written in darwinian books.

Wow, what an insightful answer.

I'm talking about evidence, facts... observations and results published in scientific journals. Like substitution rates indicating positive selection, fact that Davison willfully ignores.

But I'm not going to discuss anything with him. It's just impossible. He can't take any objection, but resorts to childish insults and cries for persecution. The man is insane. This isn't a metaphore. He's really insane.

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 21 2006,17:55   

I say VMartin is JAD in disguise.

Write that down.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
  417 replies since Oct. 11 2006,12:18 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (14) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]