Guano (3)

Dirty penguin

Comments that seem to me to be in violation of the game rules will be moved here, and closed to further comment. Do not regard having your post moved here as a reprimand, merely as a referee’s whistle. 🙂

Feel free to comment on them at any other peanut gallery of your choice.

[New page as links no longer work properly on Guano (2)]

Post n° 56711

71 thoughts on “Guano (3)

  1. colewd: Of the 13,172 genes that Sal’s flower identified as being inherited by future species
    -12897 made it to humans
    -12718 made it mice
    -10983 made it to chickens

    Call me crazy but I would expect order of dissension to be reversed. The further down the evolutionary trip the more opportunity to lose genes yet the greatest number of genes made the longest trip. The genes going down that path experienced a gene loss time warp. Inheritance seems an unlikely cause of this pattern.

    No, we call you ignorant and obtuse.

    What in the world are you doing thinking that there is a “longest trip” to any extant species? Again, I really don’t even get your “reasoning” at all, since I can’t imagine how chickens are the “longest trip” for anything.

    The likely reason why there are fewer genes that “got to” the chickens” is simple–chickens have fewer genes than the two mammals do (at least in the diagram).

    What are you doing anyway? You’ve run the gamut of idiotic objections based on the “flower,” and now you seem bent on yet another meaningless attack. Any chance you could ever do anything but attack the evidence for evolution, however ignorantly? Like, once?

    Glen Davidson

  2. GlenDavidson: No, we call you ignorant and obtuse.

    Yes. You’re another of those who do not care about the rules.

    accusing others of ignorance or stupidity is off topic

    TSZ sucks because people like Glen are allowed to continuously violate the rules.

    My advice. Put Glen on Ignore.

  3. colewd:


    Perfect, for someone who so ably ignores all that he wants not to know. You’ve never answered the crucial questions, just blathered on with Mung-like incompetence.

    By the way, why would you obey Mung who clearly has not had me on ignore? I’ve kept him on ignore for a long time, with very rare breaks for the sake of context, as he almost never breaks from his abysmally ignorant and malicious attacks. But he’s not done the same, not with any constancy anyhow. So he’s a hypocrite on this matter, like so many, not that you’d care enough to call him on it. Well, do you ever rise to objectivity?

    Anyway, fine, have me on ignore. You don’t learn anything from me, or anyone that I can see, and there’s nothing of value for you to teach.

    Glen Davidson

  4. GlenDavidson: By the way, why would you obey Mung who clearly has not had me on ignore?

    You fail. I’ve had you on Ignore. I took your off Ignore to take a look at one of your posts. That post clearly violated the rules. Suck less.

  5. stcordova:

    The “miracles” of evolution are endless. Not only did C4 photosynthesis evolve, it happened 40 times independently!Freaking amazing how random mutations will conspire to make the same thing over and over again.

    Not so amazing is yet another time a lying moron YEC ignores the feedback effect of selection in determining the results of evolutionary processes.

  6. “So you think Vincent should weight the arguments of scientists based on how ‘evangelical’ they are?”

    Obviously not. Schaffner’s anti-Adamism isn’t a secret here. He’s not about to start writing poetic odes to the ‘realism’ of A&E.

    “And do you think there’s something wrong with giving up a belief based on scientific evidence?”

    Which beliefs do you hold, keiths, that are beyond scientific evidence? Any?
    Please do the work and name some.

    As a faithless man who’s become a hardcore anti-religious fool, you’ll most likely fail to come up with anything worth consideration. And then parade that failure as pseudo-success for heartless nihilism qua ‘skepticism.’

    As for ‘proper Christian,’ the despairing attempt at catnip works no longer. Go back to your cave and wallow in atheist misery. Torley at least has some sense left, if ever he could find a way out of this place.

  7. Robert Byers: Slavery was a trivial matter in their day.

    Well, when the constitution declares that you are only worth 3/5 of a white person, it is no wonder that you are trivialized.

    I didn’t read anything past this sentence because this was enough for me to conclude that you are an idiot. Guano here I come.

  8. Mung:
    Two posts by Adapa.

    phoodoo 6 – skeptics 0

    Gee mung, I thought you were going to stop being a dick all the time. Maybe next life, eh?

  9. Entropy: I explicitly said that each strand is a template strand, I didn’t say that a double helix is a template strand. Seems like your illiteracy and your forgetfulness can be quite a problem.

    The real problem is he’s just a shit-stirring troll, has been for years. You’ll never meet a bigger liar or attention whore.

  10. Neil Rickert: He has been guanoed often.That particular comment didn’t hit my threshold.

    Of course, why would it. Calling someone a shit-stain is mild for adapa.

    Who would ever think that is against the rules at TSZ. Now, if he would have said a lying shit-stain, well, then you might have said for him to watch it next time.

  11. Entropy: Did you understand it now or not you self-despising sad excuse of a human being?

    I’m finally a human being!

    I wasn’t the one who used lego pieces as an example of things that could be joined but not separated. That was you. I think I’m going to save that post. Because it was really, Really, REALLY, dumb. But if that’s the best you have to offer, so be it. 🙂

  12. dazz:

    Try to follow the conversation

    The OP refers to wave function, fine tuning and properties of water, which you know nothing about…That’s why YOU can’t see that my comments relate to the theme…
    If you continue to embarr-ass yourself, maybe it’s time to disappear again tronco? 😉

  13. J-Mac:
    What Joe is worried about, that if there is a strong element of randomness in natural selection, then the process loses it ascribed creative power. The finding of novelty in structures and functions in the vast space of non-function without direction natural selection is unlikely to hit the functional target….

    Unable to understand, hopelessly clueless and proving Joe’s point all along. Great job buddy

  14. dazz: Unable to understand, helplessly clueless

    We know…You don’t have to keep reminding us about your fundamental, cognitive incompetence…

  15. J-Mac: So Glen is confused (again)what caused cross-bedding…So he can’t look up wiki… So what?

    “Cross-bedding forms during deposition on the inclined surfaces of bedforms such as ripples and dunes; it indicates that the depositional environment contained a flowing medium (typically water or wind). Examples of these bedforms are ripples, dunes, anti-dunes, sand waves, hummocks, bars, and delta slopes.[1] Environments in which water movement is fast enough and deep enough to develop large-scale bed forms fall into three natural groupings: rivers, tide-dominated coastal and marine settings.[2]”

    No reading comprehension, dullard?

    Glen Davidson

Comments are closed.