Joe G
Posts: 12011
Joined: July 2007
|
| Quote (k.e.. @ Jan. 01 2018,17:37) | | Quote (Joe G @ Jan. 01 2018,19:51) | keiths continues to puke all over himself when it comes to nested hierarchies. And even though it has been proven that Doug Theobald is totally wrong keiths continues to reference him on nested hierarchies. Theobald wrongly spews:
| Quote | | The only known processes that specifically generate unique, nested, hierarchical patterns are branching evolutionary processes. |
WRONG! Linnaean Taxonomy is an objective nested hierarchy and it doesn't have anything to do with branching evolutionary processes. Corporations can be placed in objective nested hierarchies and again they have nothing to do with branching evolutionary processes. The US Army is a nested hierarchy and it too has nothing to do with branching evolutionary processes.
Clearly Theobald is ignorant of nested hierarchies. He goes on to spew:
| Quote | | It would be very problematic if many species were found that combined characteristics of different nested groupings. |
Umm, TRANSITIONAL FORMs have combined characteristics of different nested groups, Dougy. And your position expects numerous transitional forms.
But Doug's biggest mistake was saying that phylogenies form a nested hierarchy- they don't as explained in the Knox paper- “The use of hierarchies as organizational models in systematics”, Biological Journal of the Linnaean Society, 63: 1–49, 1998.
And for fuck's sake even Darwin knew that if you tried to include all of the alleged transitional forms you couldn't form distinguished groups:
| Quote | | Extinction has only defined the groups: it has by no means made them; for if every form which has ever lived on this earth were suddenly to reappear, though it would be quite impossible to give definitions by which each group could be distinguished, still a natural classification, or at least a natural arrangement, would be possible.- Charles Darwin chapter 14 |
Nested hierarchies require distinct and distinguished groups- again see Linnaean Taxonomy. AND nested hierarchies are artificial constructs.
So only by cherry picking would Common Descent yield a nested hierarchy.
And I understand why the losers here don't want to discuss it.
Zachriel, Alan Fox and John Harshman are also totally ignorant when it comes to nested hierarchies. Now I know why I was banned from the skeptical zone- so I couldn't refute their nonsense to their faces. This way they can continue to ignore reality and prattle on like a bunch of ignoramuses. |
Hey bassackwards Joe why don't you post some porn links or threaten to meet everyone in a carpark again? That would be funnier than watching you trip over your tongue trying to explain a nested hierarchy. Are bird's nests hierarchies?
Fuck you've only just got one blog left they will let you post on. Maybe the fact that you are such a cunt and poorly educated should indicate to even someone as stupid as you.... nevermind.
Hey Joe tell all how frequency time is equivalent to length again.
Careful with your answer Joe.
Revealing you never attended a physics class or any other basic science class for that matter because of a pathological learning deficit proves why you are in you're own little play pen here. |
LoL! Quite the devastating refutation.
As for physics it says that transmitting on a frequency of 1.87 MHz is the equivalent of transmitting on a wavelength of 160 meters.
In this context frequency and wavelength are interchangeable
summary of the principles of hierarchy theory
| Quote | | Nested and non-nested hierarchies: nested hierarchies involve levels which consist of, and contain, lower levels. Non-nested hierarchies are more general in that the requirement of containment of lower levels is relaxed. For example, an army consists of a collection of soldiers and is made up of them. Thus an army is a nested hierarchy. On the other hand, the general at the top of a military command does not consist of his soldiers and so the military command is a non-nested hierarchy with regard to the soldiers in the army. Pecking orders and a food chains are also non-nested hierarchies. |
The US Army which is broken up into Field Armies, which contain and consist of Corps, which contain and consist of Divisions, which contain and consist of Brigades, which contain and consist of Battalions, which contain and consist of Companies, which contain and consist of Platoons, which contain and consist of Squads & Sections. Squads and sections contain and consist of soldiers. Each level, down to the soldier, has a well defined role and place in the scheme.
Cities can be broken down into a nested hierarchy structure
Corporate organization can be broken down into a nested hierarchy structure
Linnaean taxonomy is an objective nested hierarchy with respect to biology but it doesn't try to incorporate all of the alleged transitional forms.
But if you had to classify all of the alleged transitional forms the it would be impossible to find objective criteria to form distinct groups. That is because you would expect a smooth blending of traits- unless your mechanism is saltation. You would have to try to find some other method to form a nested hierarchy- good luck with that.
You can try to insult me all you want but it remains that you cannot refute that. Nor can you refute the fact that transmitting on a frequency of 1.87 MHz is the equivalent of transmitting on a wavelength of 160 meters.
BTW I am posting on several blogs. But then again anything over one is beyond your comprehension.
If I'm poorly educated then you must be brain dead and clearly you are proud of it. So fuck you, Davey, loser.
--------------
"Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth
"Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton
Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code- Acartia bogart, TARD
YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism
|
