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

328 thoughts on “Guano (3)

  1. stcordova: It appears the “phyogenetic” trees, the hierarchical structures, when put through computational analysis may predict protein interactions and possible folds and structures and post translational modification targets.

    And yet you go on to suggest post translational modification targets are random and not shared between species. Which is an outright contradiction.

    You always were a terrible philosopher. A great propagandist for an uninformed audience as you sure know how to impress with technical jargon and anecdotes about how prestigious a venue is, or how impressed someone was. But critical thinking, not so much.

    It’s a recurrent phenomenon among religious extremists. Reason as taken the backseat and is considered at best secondary to blind faith. I suppose that shouldn’t be suprising when it has scriptural support:

  2. J-Mac: After all even Graur is taking it back

    From the very paper this J-Tard shit-for-brains guy quoted

    From table 1, we see that even for unrealistically low estimates of deleterious mutation rates, the fraction of the genome that can be functional cannot exceed 25%. If the fraction of deleterious mutations out of all mutations in functional regions is even slightly >4%, then the fraction of the genome that can be functional becomes much lower. Realistically, the functional fraction of the genome cannot exceed 10–15%. These results agree with empirical estimates in the literature on the fraction of the human genome that is evolutionarily constrained (Rands et al. 2014).

    LMFAO

  3. Gregory: I’ve done more research on this topic than you’ll ever do. If you don’t wish to respect that, it’s on you & makes no difference to me.

    I am sure you have done more research on this topic than I ever will. Which makes your performance all the more puzzling.
    For example, I was wondering why your plots for “development” and “design” showed double-dips; then I realized that you had switched from plotting Worldwide interest to plotting interest in the USA. That’s an odd choice for someone who loves to berate others for their US-centric thinking.
    No matter: whichever geography you pick, “evonomics” and “memetics” still thrash “human extension”…

    [snip]
    A little prayer might do you some good DNA_Jock, taking yourself out of the centre of your universe for a change & focussing on what is more important in life. Might also lead you to less regular attacks on me simply for being an Abrahamic theist as a bonus, who knows. ; )

    I do not attack you simply because you are an Abrahamic theist. Most of my good friends are. I do not attack you simply because you are an sociologist, either. I push back because you seem to be a bad sociologist.

  4. fifthmonarchyman,

    I really feel for you. You don’t realize that religious bullshit has turned you into a horrible person. It’s probably not your fault though, that’s what indoctrination does to people.

  5. Corneel: Also, how do you suppose that polar bears acquired black skin? It could not have been achieved by degrading the function of proteins involved in pigmentation, like what happened for their fur, right?

    Your are joking, right??? Or you have been drinking what OMagain has been drinking? 🤔

  6. dazz: Mung must be really proud that his DI donations go to these dishonest pieces of shit.

    Mung donates to the DI? HAahahaha

  7. newton: How about the subject of moderation, ok to go on and on?

    Moderation? What moderation?

    Literally ONE post before mine….

    dazz
    Ignored says:
    February 15, 2019 at 12:44 am
    fifthmonarchyman,

    I really feel for you. You don’t realize that religious bullshit has turned you into a horrible person. It’s probably not your fault though, that’s what indoctrination does to people.

  8. J-Mac: BTW: Evolutionary prediction please! Will marijuana legal use contribute to evolution or will Darwin Devolve?

    Your ignorance is showing.

  9. Mung:
    Moved a comment to Guano.

    Can you look at some more?! The “meth drinker” is polluting OPs…
    This is close to cyber bullying, which is illegal in some civilized societies…
    My kids think he has run out of mental institution..He definitely needs help!🤗

  10. J-Mac: Can you look at some more?! The “meth drinker” is polluting OPs…
    This is close to cyber bullying, which is illegal in some civilized societies…
    My kids think he has run out of mental institution..He definitely needs help!🤗

    Can you please bring this kind of thing up in the Moderation forum? Thanks.

  11. J-Mac: Behe simply interpreted the data one way…The Cell authors interpreted it another way… But who is right? Are they both wrong?

    No, Behe deliberately cut & pasted half the table, leaving out the data that DISPROVED his claim that ALL mutations to ApoB were damaging.

    This is clear as day, but of course you’re so deluded that you just can’t see it. Pathetic

  12. Alan Fox: *Question for the Grammar Police. Is a phrase ending in an ellipsis a sentence?

    Whom should I contact regarding an admin who pollutes OPs with comments that belong to Moderation, Sandbox or even Guano parts of TSZ?
    Should I ask Mung to move your comments where they belong? Or you have at least a bit of pride left and you are going to do it yourself?

  13. J-Mac,

    I’ve addressed your claims in your OP. If any of my comments break TSZ rules, feel free to point that out in the Moderation Issues thread.

  14. Alan Fox:
    J-Mac,

    I’ve addressed your claims in your OP.If any of my comments break TSZ rules, feel free to point that out in the Moderation Issues thread.

    Can you show me where in the OP I was referring to the grammar issues?
    Unless the grammar was referring to the synthetic dimensions of DNA, your comments broke the rules…as you said it yourself…
    So, you will move your own comments where they belong, rightly so…

  15. dazz:
    I bet J-Tard is a morbidly obese burger gulping cholesterol denialist.

    Oh, okapi-retard?! Is it 5 o’clock yet?

  16. dazz:
    I bet J-Tard is a morbidly obese burger gulping cholesterol denialist.

    “i’m almost positive it is wrong.”- Dazz-loco-sciencence Inc. 😉

  17. dazz:
    I bet J-Tard is a morbidly obese burger gulping cholesterol denialist.

    “i’m almost positive it is wrong.”- Dazz-loco-sciencence Inc. 😉

    PeterP: glycogen in the raw meat they ate.

    Are you a big drinker PeterP?

  18. J-Mac: “i’m almost positive it is wrong.”- Dazz-loco-sciencence Inc.

    Are you a big drinker PeterP?

    teetotaler for the most part. Acetaldehyde plays havoc with my body.

    Why do you ask and why are you trying to change the subject?

  19. PeterP: Jmac made the above claim(s) about me in the Moderation thread.

    Here I invite him to back up his claims if he thinks he is correct alleging that I ’embarrassed myself with any claims of ‘trans fats’.

    Never mentioned ‘trans fats’ in any comments on your notoriously misinformed OP. Feel free to quote the comments that you think I should find embarrassing.Won’t hold my breath waiting for you to do so.

    Let’s see if jmac has the courage of his convictions to back up his allegations or rather, as I suspect, we will see another example of unsubstantiated bluster of his part.Balls in your court, jmac, let’s see what you have!

    Boy! You don’t even know how to Google trans fats vs cis fats? Or, perhaps you didn’t know there was a difference…😉 I don’t know what to tell you…
    It’s not rocket science or quantum mechanics… 🤗

  20. Neil Rickert:
    Swamidass has asked that we post something about an upcoming debate.

    Here’s the link to the PS announcement.It’s a debate between McClatchie (an ID proponent) and Swamidass (an evolutionist), this afternoon 3pm Eastern time, March 16.

    Does anybody even care?
    Behe calls Swamidass a lesser known reviewer…
    I call him an atheist pretending to be a Christian-a wolf in sheep’s clothing…
    Most fair minded people see Swamidass as an opportunist who is trying to seize the opportunity to become more known by misrepresenting Behe, Gauger, Axe and DI…

    Why would anyone care what he says?

  21. DNA_Jock:
    swamidass is a member here, J-Mac.

    Because moderators like you refuse to ban him for breaking the rules and possibly the law because he apologized?
    I’m sorry… can you restore my publishing rights now???

Comments are closed.