|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 06:59:20 [Permalink]
|
CRUX aka MG aka ragland. You have an opportunity now to just apologize to DaveW and SFN and move on to some more saner pursuits. This has dragged on long enough and you are capable of doing much better. It is one thing to have your ego bruised for performing badly in a debate. But attacks on character, integrity is a vicious circle and we don't need that here.
Besides this circus is an absolute waste of everyone's time and effort and very immature considering the technical and complex subject under discussion.
The over used phrase " You are entitled to your opinion but not your own facts." So just be clear what you express as an opinion is not confused with the facts.
The definition of insanity is "Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results."
Lets make a clean break. You like your flamingos pink....you know you just have to feed it shrimp. Genetics does the rest. So why sweat over it.
After this lengthy saga on Phenotypes with the exclusion of genotypes. Is there any reason why you have not made the correction which I posted for your edification. Because if you are wrong about genotypes it is absurd to express any certainty of phenotypes.
I repeat the correction here.
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by CRUX
HH, The things you mention are not variables, because they do ..not...vary. |
Of course genes vary. They are definitely variables. |
HH, the genotype DOES NOT vary. You see, it's not about if genes CAN vary. It's about if they do IN THIS CASE.
In what case ? In the case of the groups. They are all same genotype.
| Within the groups, there is NO variance of those items. |
Oh, you meant the genes for pigmentation don't vary much in this specific species of bird |
HH, that is incorrect. It is not about that. It's about the fact that in such a group for testing, all are the same genotype. It's a "given".
| Oxygen has a pretty uniform distribution in air, yet no sane person would claim that oxygen is not a variable of combustion. |
HH, again, it's variable of what? of combustion? If we are talking about TESTING, and we CONTROL for oxygen, then it will be said to NOT vary and hence is NOT a variable in the test
Secondly, the diet of this species of birds is also relatively stable and doesn't change much |
Wrong. It is the sole variable, as it's to be used in the testing; color food or not.
| Since a variable is any factor that can influence |
( by the varying it does) , if it varies in the test
...which those do not ( except for food )..then not a variable in testing of the groups.
I appreciate your approach and inquisitive questions HH. Will reply so long as it can offer you anything IYO.
|
CRUX you might want to read a little more before attempting to answer questions. Genotype is never referenced for a group and are uniquely different from person to person. They vary from person to person. You are incorrectly using the word genotype. I know you are the expert here so feel free to correct me if I am wrong. 
1. The genotype is the genetic makeup of a cell, an organism, or an individual (i.e. the specific allele makeup of the individual) usually with reference to a specific character under consideration.
2. Typically, one refers to an individual's genotype with regard to a particular gene of interest and, in polyploid individuals, it refers to what combination of alleles the individual carries (see homozygous, heterozygous).
3. Only identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. Identical twins are formed when one fertilized egg (zygote) splits in two and each of the now two zygotes each develop...
4. Genotyping is the process of determining differences in the genetic make-up (genotype) of an individual by examining the individual's DNA sequence using biological assays and comparing it to another individual's sequence or a reference sequence. It reveals the alleles an individual has inherited from their parents. |
| Edited by - justintime on 09/27/2011 07:02:03 |
 |
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
 Posted - 09/27/2011 : 07:47:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise, making differences.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort. How about phenotype and group ? Are you ready to make a statement on that, too ?
How would groups be known to have common phenotypes relatedto common genetics, if a group cannot have a shared genotype ? That is, sure there are phenotypic differences or changes that are results of environmental inputs, but as a practice, how would that be, that there is no such thing as a group being considered to have these things in common ?
Think next time ! |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/27/2011 08:14:20 |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:01:28 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise making a difference.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort.
|
Can you produce some evidence. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Where is genotype used other than to express the individual genetic makeup?
The identical twins in point 3 are (monozygotic). Not just twins. |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:04:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise making a difference.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort.
|
Can you produce some evidence. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Where is genotype used other than to express the individual genetic makeup?
The identical twins in point 3 are (monozygotic). Not just twins.
|
Your claim is what needs to be supported. You need to show who claims that, so that it can be read by people, to find out where you got the funny idea. Your idea is so funny-ridiculous funny, that I do not need to support anything wrt that. It's just one of your bloopers. |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/27/2011 08:10:26 |
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9688 Posts |
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:17:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise, making differences.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort. How about phenotype and group ? Are you ready to make a statement on that, too ?
How would any groups, have a common phenotype if a group cannot have a shared genotype ? That is, sure there are phenotypic differences or changes that are results of environmental inputs, but as a practice, how would that be, that there is no such thing as a group being considered to have these things in common ?
Think next time !
|
How does one have a group phenotype when individuals vary. Some short, some tall, some fat some skinny. some dark, some light skinned.
Environmental factors also vary so how is a group phenotype possible. Now that would be interesting to pursue.
|
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:19:55 [Permalink]
|
The genotype and phenotype issue, the debate, must take a backseat to your accusation that Dave went back and altered an earlier post in the thread, or any thread. I mean, lets face it, all sides have stated their positions. Even me.
I don't know what you saw CRUX or what you think you saw. What I know is that for as long as this site had been in existence, that claim has never been leveled at any staff member here. And being that we are the oldest skeptic forum on the internet, if threads had been altered to make us look better, it seems odd to me that a claim like that would, after all these years, have be noticed and made by others. The accusation is novel.
Because of the seriousness of the claim, that goes to our whole philosophy with regard to ethics in running a forum, and our honesty in general, vagaries will not suffice as evidence.
I suggest that you either apologies to Dave or present the evidence for your claim in a coherent way. If you want to present as honest, I just don't see another way. I don't see a third option other than for us to ignore your claim. Sure, we have been called liars, and that's nothing new. People sometimes react from emotion. I do. And I usually regret it when I do that. That doesn't mean that we are liars. Sometimes a lie and a misunderstanding can look exactly the same. Sometimes a misunderstanding is interpreted as a lie. That happens too. But your claim is beyond the pall.
Edited to add: Woopsy! Looks Mab has issued an official warning. I'd take it seriously if I were you CRUX.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
justintime
BANNED
382 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:25:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise making a difference.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort.
|
Can you produce some evidence. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Where is genotype used other than to express the individual genetic makeup?
The identical twins in point 3 are (monozygotic). Not just twins.
|
Your claim is what needs to be supported. You need to show who claims that, so that it can be read by people, to find out where you got the funny idea. Your idea is so funny-ridiculous funny, that I do not need to support anything wrt that. It's just one of your bloopers.
|
I see you are boxed in again. You claimed groups has same genotype to HH. The entire post was copied to challenge your specific claims. Should you not then be the one to provided the evidence after all it was your claim that was being questioned. So you concede here. |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:31:56 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by justintime
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by justintime
3. Only [b]identical twins have the same genotype because they have the exact same genes. |
That is not true. They have the same genotype, but the genetics are not exactly the same. Small errors arise making a difference.
| Genotype is never referenced for a group |
That is incorrect and a pretty funny effort.
|
Can you produce some evidence. What is good for the goose should be good for the gander.
Where is genotype used other than to express the individual genetic makeup?
The identical twins in point 3 are (monozygotic). Not just twins.
|
Your claim is what needs to be supported. You need to show who claims that, so that it can be read by people, to find out where you got the funny idea. Your idea is so funny-ridiculous funny, that I do not need to support anything wrt that. It's just one of your bloopers.
|
I see you are boxed in again. You claimed groups has same genotype to HH. The entire post was copied to challenge your specific claims. Should you not then be the one to provided the evidence after all it was your claim that was being questioned. So you concede here.
|
What you said is not true. If H Humbert wants more , he will receive as much detail as he demands, to the bitter end. I don't need to waste time on jokes, though. Unless they are more entertaining than yours. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:33:16 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
[br... critical thinking, evidence is required. You suggested from ignorance. Using Internet sources, I can also suggest that we never went to the moon. |
Your intellect is like sludge.
Show the public education site that carries moonshot hoax material. Thank you.
You are dismissed for your clumsy attempt at using such tactics.
....
|
Strawman. Internet sources are not public education sites.
You insult is noted and dismissed as irrelevant.
I also note that you ignored requests for evidence.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:35:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
[br... critical thinking, evidence is required. You suggested from ignorance. Using Internet sources, I can also suggest that we never went to the moon. |
Your intellect is like sludge.
Show the public education site that carries moonshot hoax material. Thank you.
You are dismissed for your clumsy attempt at using such tactics.
....
|
Strawman. Internet sources are not public education sites.
|
ahahhahaha. that is funny. explain it to the many that exist. |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:38:15 [Permalink]
|
To search the archives is a demanding time consuming task.
If Dave were serious, he would not be making time-waster efforts, such as stonewalling on simple answers to things he is currently throwing out there.
He would not have been badgering for a completed and correct report in time that would not allow such.
would he?
He would want my time freed up, wouldn't he?
Kil,
Is it possible FOR any admin member to go in and remove anything ? |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/27/2011 08:47:33 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/27/2011 : 08:44:19 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Dave, you have provided AMPLE evidence that you are and have been behaving VERY unethically ! |
That's not the question, now is it? When are you going to provide the evidence that I altered a previous thread to hide me looking "stupid"?| Now why don't you try to explain why you would not answer the question that you were stonewalling ? |
I already have explained why I did what you refer to as "stonewalling," haven't I? Your question is just a distraction based upon a fabrication, isn't it?| Wouldn't THAT that be a better idea than bluffing ? |
I've got no reason to bluff, do I?Will you present evidence that demonstrates I am lying?| I offered no lie. Not one. |
Two, isn't it? One is that I altered the previous thread to cover my ass, right? The second is that I "began challenging whether or not if was true that the color-food hypothesis had indeed been tested in routine manner as [you] had suggested it must have been," yes? I've done neither thing, but you say I have. That makes you a liar.Please quote one, won't you?| Why did you stonewall, Dave ? |
I've already explained that, right?...and then later claims MY "fabrications" make the answer to that question about the nature of the stuff he was using, irrelevant.
Really ! |
Yes, really, since you've made it clear that any answer I might give won't make a difference, you'll just continue to lie about me, correct?| look at the time Dave spent doing timelines about the evolution of the question, instead of saying if the stuff was factual or not |
What about the time you've spent screaming "STONEWALL" instead of presenting the evidence that I altered the previous thread?| Your demand is unreasonable |
You seriously think it is unreasonable to demand evidence in support of your very serious accusations, even after you claimed to know where that evidence exists?! |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
If I get a haircut 2
Official Warning