|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
 Posted - 06/12/2008 : 04:28:39 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by MuhammedGoldstein
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by MuhammedGoldstein
Let's see if Berkeley responds, so that I don't take up too much more of your time. |
I'm sure I'm going to regret this, but what, exactly, did you ask them?
|
I'm not sure why you're asking, since you seem to have given up on trying, then come back again, give up, come back...
oh...what I am asking them ? |
Right. That's what I mean when I say "what, exactly, did you ask them?""Do you really mean what you wrote ?" that would be something, yeah. Biologists don't "mean it like that", you know ? I've learned that here.
biologists don't mean it like that.
Let's see if they reply. |
Are you taking your meds?
So what,exactly, if anything, would you like to know from them ? or nothing ?
Just curious ? |
Actually, I was asking what you wrote them. That's what I mean when I say "what, exactly, did you ask them?"
any way, this is the way I look at it:
our whole disagreement on one matter rests within one post, between Dave and me.
on the broader view, if Dave is correct, ( that's the way I also used to understand it ) then they should make some changes in their webpage, possibly. I can't see children not taking the words at face value.
If Dave is wrong, then you're all wrong, and I get the Pope's Crown, and you should give me a spot here, "Muhammed's Meme-Busting Corner" , just in return for putting up with you. |
Well, obviously if we're all wrong then lots of sites and books will have to change!
MuhammedGoldstein
Skeptic Friend
I had previously asked if there were any objections to using the site.
I take it that this information is too basic?
"The food they eat makes their phenotype white or pink." Berkeley
too basic or too clear ? Remember, this group is putting it out for teaching kids, this info from them.
Will kids, just learning, think it means what you think it means, or what Berkeley wrote ?
fancy it up for them, will ya |
| A change in the environment also can affect the phenotype. Although we often think of flamingos as being pink, pinkness is not encoded into their genotype. The food they eat makes their phenotype white or pink. |
|
Is this what you wrote them? Or just some rambling screed?
| Seeing Cune's success with composing one sentence, I am encouraged to invite all of you to "fancy it up"; reword that passage so that it doesn't read like that. Show us how it should read, the way biologists would teach it on a website for children's education. Go ahead, SFN. Improve on Berkeley's sentence without making it mean the opposite of what it clearly says now. Or admit that it needs to be fixed ! |
 Wow-- you're stunningly obnoxious. Why don't you compose what you think to be the best sentence (you can even do it in your native language!) and let us see it. |
 |
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 04:34:39 [Permalink]
|
I'm not complaining about the way Berkeley writes it up. I think they are pretty smart, and you're pretty dumb, to switch their words for them, like Dave does.
You're worse.
So why should I rewrite what I agree with ? Huh ? |
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
|
|
|
Cuneiformist
The Imperfectionist
USA
4955 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 04:36:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by MuhammedGoldstein
therefore you're stumped because of the words "beta caroteine turning them pink".
..it tells me that you know it is the pigments. Yet you know there is a genetic component> So you mix the sentences, and come up with an answer. |
No, I'm using the available data. The Berkeley site-- and I know this may be a shock to you-- is not like some inerrant Bible. Your objection to me culling information from other sites to get a clearer answer is weak.
| That's about the best I can do, since I'm not a biologist. |
I have confidence that you CAN do better, and don't need to be a biologist in order to figure this out. |
Uh, OK.
Zebra wants some more concrete proof of the genetic aspect-- which is fine. But I'm not in a position to provide it.
If this has been your position all along, then stand back in awe of your complete inability to express it. |
or it's your meme-locked minds. I chose not to use words that you insist on using incorrectly. So you couldn't comprehend. That's your problem. I can pull up posts to show that I did say it over and over. I am only shocked that you finally realized it. I thought you never would. |
Don't be shocked. You have a complete inability to express yourself in a clear way. I assume it's because English isn't your native language. Which is fine, though you would have been better served earlier just saying so. Since, sadly, there are people who are just that bad at expressing themselves.
|
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 04:38:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Cuneiformist
Originally posted by MuhammedGoldstein
therefore you're stumped because of the words "beta caroteine turning them pink".
..it tells me that you know it is the pigments. Yet you know there is a genetic component> So you mix the sentences, and come up with an answer. |
No, I'm using the available data. The Berkeley site-- and I know this may be a shock to you-- is not like some inerrant Bible. Your objection to me culling information from other sites to get a clearer answer is weak. |
what are you jabbering about now ? I love other sources. Object ? Where ? Do you mean that because I realize that you are stumped by the "contradictions" that I don't think you should use other sources ? not at all. Read s much as you need to.
|
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 04:40:57 |
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 05:18:52 [Permalink]
|
If Dave is wrong, then you're all wrong, and I get the Pope's Crown, and you should give me a spot here, "Muhammed's Meme-Busting Corner" , just in return for putting up with you. |
| Well, obviously if we're all wrong then lots of sites and books will have to change! |
things always change, but in the meantime, maybe some of the books only need to be read more carefully. Not substituting memes for the printed words... or for spoken words on video.
It's when I noticed that you guys switch words so much that I realized I had been switching memes for words on the general subject for years and was still prone to it.
|
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 05:20:53 |
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 05:29:12 [Permalink]
|
If this has been your position all along, then stand back in awe of your complete inability to express it. Zebra did it in one post which everyone understood quite well. You? Well, let's just say that even after 20 pages, no one knows what the hell you're talking about. |
As evidenced , when you guys finally caught on, it was Dude who was surprised first.
then Dave went looking for what I might have said in the previous 15 pages or so, to shove in my face. He tried a couple, and then fell silent for hours.
I've tried to limit the words I use so as not to be trapped by them or convey a meaning I don't intend. You don't understand this language of biology without your memes.
So don't tell me I didn't make it clear to you. You were blind to that, in your attack mode. Maybe I'll call it what it was . Some of you thought you smelled blood.
Actually, several people had caught on earler, but it was to their advantage to paint me as not accepting anything about genetics or evolution.
And then to preach at me as if they did not already know. Dave is one. He had recognized it previously.
Then the whole crew yells in chorus: "shut up, we all agree." When in fact they do not agree, they still are using their memes instead of english.
I'm not sure you would welcome a response from scientists in the field right now, if I just showed Dave's substitution of "genes" for "genotype" and asked if this was a substitution caused perception problem ; user error.
Maybe mr Kil needs to close this and bury it quick. You're the ones who bet your credibility on this. I am squat and am not afraid to be wrong.
But you guys look really weak to me, position wise. Ungainly posture to be in.
But you finally have realized that the flamingo is a white bird that can turn pink. Bravo.
For a few pages some of you seem to have thought differently.
|
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 07:32:48 |
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 06:12:36 [Permalink]
|
And this is where things changed. Dude caught on right quick. Why ? Because I consciously used the memes I had avoided for the most part.
GMDAVE
Unsupported nonsense. If it was the food alone, then any animal fed the same diet (adjusted for caloric requirments, of course) would have the same response. This is true of any food with any creature. It is the reason why some animals eat mostly plants, while some eat mostly meat. The plant-eaters are genetically equipped to digest meat, and vice versa. If you tried to feed a flamingo's diet to an elephant, it would die of malnutrition long before its hair turned pink. |
MG
Because of their genetics, which is what makes pink and white phenotypes instead of solely environmental features. |
And here is where I talk your language
from the start I have said that it is the genetics which allows the creature to be a white bird that can turn pink.
So the bird turning pink when fed pigment is genetically caused. |
so that you now allow me to say it correctly, and you do hear, finally. Except for Zebra..he came in later than some.
why could it not be said that it is the bird's genetic encoding, which, when acted upon by environment, produce a white bird that can turn pink ? |
|
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 06:39:21 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 08:02:40 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by MuhammedGoldstein
It was not the length of the thread... |
Nice. A perfect statement from ignorance of the fact that we always try to limit threads to 15 pages. Letting them get longer bogs down the server.
You also wrote:| ...if Dave is correct, ( that's the way I also used to understand it ) then they should make some changes in their webpage, possibly. |
Not at all. It's just fine for introductory material. Surely the university knows what 101-level information should be like, and the site is called "Evolution 101."
Your week of study is not nearly enough to let you understand that, though.
Now I'll ask again: what is your point? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
filthy
SFN Die Hard
USA
14408 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 08:04:02 [Permalink]
|
But you finally have realized that the flamingo is a white bird that can turn pink. Bravo.
For a few pages some of you seem to have thought differently.
|
Forgive me, but I don't understand; who said anything about flamingos being anything but a white bird that turns pinkish (there are fairly wide variations in the intensity of the color) due to it's diet?
I really don't see where this is going, although the basic premise seems simple enough. Flamingos feed on crustations that alter the color of their feathers. Feathers are primarily composed of keratins just as are the shells of the arthropods they feed on, the claws on their feet, and indeed, the hair of the dog.
Did you ever boil a bucket of shrimp and see how nice & pink they get? Well, genetically, flamingos are predisposed to absorbe this coloration and not only in their feathers. Take a look at this one's feet & legs:
The scales on those too, are mostly of keratins. How is this a deal so big that it must go for lo, these many pages?
|
"What luck for rulers that men do not think." -- Adolf Hitler (1889 - 1945)
"If only we could impeach on the basis of criminal stupidity, 90% of the Rethuglicans and half of the Democrats would be thrown out of office." ~~ P.Z. Myres
"The default position of human nature is to punch the other guy in the face and take his stuff." ~~ Dude
Brother Boot Knife of Warm Humanitarianism,
and Crypto-Communist! 
|
|
|
|
Simon
SFN Regular
USA
1992 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 08:04:41 [Permalink]
|
I am not quite sure what you mean by memes.
If it anything like 'correlating a pre-made; invariant; definition on a particular word'; well yes, we are doing that. That's a requirement for a clear communication, I think.
Remember; back in the day, people were working with genetic. They were quite familiar with the concept and essentially at elucidated most of its inner working through patient experiment.
But it was before the advent of molecular biology and the only way they had to identify the presence of a gene was by observing its expression in the individual that carried them.
For that; they invented the word phenotype.
At that time; he probably meant, in their mind, something like:
'The characteristics I can see in this particular drosophile that allows me to determine the gene it carries and then mate it with similarly characterized drosophiles and to see what progeny I can get and make a nice table that'd explain of this genetic thing works. Man all this talk about mating made me thirsty; I should get some nice Brandy before dinner'.
Since then, we streamlined the definition somewhat (Brandy is so passé) but kept its core meaning. |
Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there – on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.
Carl Sagan - 1996 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 08:29:34 [Permalink]
|
Oh, come off it MG. I didn't ask for full agreement of your statement by all members. I just asked you to state whatever was needed to move the discussion along. It doesn't really matter if everyone is on the same page, because you are not our teacher and we are not your students.
I made a simple request. And I even suggested that you take your time to make it as clear as possible, and then move on to whatever point it is you are trying to make.
Your insistence of getting full agreement from each and every person here is your problem. It's not necessary and it's unlikely to happen. Has it even occurred to you that by moving on, your previous statements might become more clear and less confusing to some? Simply put, there are very few thing that everyone fully agrees on. Watching you attempt to reach such an agreement, not a consensus but unanimous agreement, is like watching some kind of self flagellation, only in your case, you think it is you who is being whipped by everyone who is confused by you or who simply disagrees with your premiss.
Blaming so many of us for not understanding you is a shift in responsibility . You insist that your communication skills are just fine but the evidence of the last (18 pages) say otherwise. You continue to be the only person here who is chronically misunderstood, so stop whining and do something about it.
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Paulos23
Skeptic Friend
USA
446 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 09:12:32 [Permalink]
|
MG you clearly want to lead people to some conclusion you have reached on your own. And it is clear you think not everyone has reached the point to where you want to move on from. The problem is your communication style is not the best and when I think I understand what your trying to say (not that I agree with it mind you) you throw in some unnecessary crap about someone not understanding you and go through the whole thing again. Please move on and get to the point.
Also please forget about not using memes. Words carry many meanings, this is true, and even scientists try to use words with a single meaning, but if your trying to avoid all memes you will end up saying nothing meaningful. So please just say what is on your mind. If it doesn't make sense to someone they will state it another way and you can hash out the meanings of the words then. |
You can go wrong by being too skeptical as readily as by being too trusting. -- Robert A. Heinlein
Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored. -- Aldous Huxley |
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 10:15:46 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Oh, come off it MG. I didn't ask for full agreement of your statement by all members. |
NO kidding, Kil. You didn't, I didn't ask you to, and what you agreed to was that YOU accept it. If nobody else can say "yes, that is correct" to my wording of it, that's OK.
What you did was threaten me to tend to DAVE'S outline of my position...or else.
I just asked you to state whatever was needed to move the discussion along. It doesn't really matter if everyone is on the same page, because you are not our teacher and we are not your students. |
no, you are not my students, you are antagonistic people who are trying to trap me by any of my words, whilst demandind many many answers, and complaining about the space used.
I made a simple request. And I even suggested that you take your time to make it as clear as possible, and then move on to whatever point it is you are trying to make. |
you threatened ADMIN action
on me if I did not address DAVE yet AGAIN. That is bullshit.
Your insistence of getting full agreement from each and every person here is your problem. |
I only needed it from you. Any of the 3 or 4 main pests who would speak directly , and say "Yes, it's correct".
Look at the squirming Dave and Cune went through, trying to NOT agree that my statement - without Dave's added opinion, adding that it "means" phenotyupe, or without Cune's fumbling attempts to include the memes - I jusr neeeded agreement form one of you ,without hedges, without additons, that my statement was correct - that's all. Just correct.
That hard to admit? You didn't have problem with it, so it was done. I could proceed.
You are avoiding taking for ANY responsibility for the time wasted. All on me.
.
that's why it was slow to proceed. I can use that now to show how Simon, for instance, memes himself proof of correctness of his own words. The words he uses are all about the same thing, interchangeable, though he thinks there are 3 separate definitions he is making.
I would not prticularly like to pick on Simon's wordings and logic, as he seems quite reasonable and a nicer person than some. but he presents a good case because he did not attack me, he opened up a bit for discussion.
Nevertheless, he used circular reasoning to think he has said something, when he has not.
We will tend to that shortly as soon as you guys cool off.
S soon as you said it was acceptable, I stopped that request for agreement from anyone, immediately.
So you are full of it.
|
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 10:41:43 |
|
|
|
MuhammedGoldstein
BANNED
201 Posts |
Posted - 06/12/2008 : 10:50:29 [Permalink]
|
Of course I take responsibility for some of the time SPENT - not wasted - hopefully.
I am terrible with pc and keyboard ( much effort spent and it took my attention )and I'm not the best communicator, so some of it is is due to that.
Remember, I have only been working on this problem a short time, and in fact I was finding stuff out as we talked. I couldn't actually formulate the answers at that time, I asked questions .
You blame me for answering questions with questions, yet that is a standard, good investigative method.
Dude started the standard skeptic nastiness rap within a few posts.
It's the same tired standard skeptic rap that you use to attack people who defend chiro, for instance.
the naive people get offended by the mild assault. some don't take it so well, some stay calm.
they never do mount a defense, any of them. I've only seen one clean defense, that could stand on it's own two feet.
they only get a few naive posts in before it starts.
if they don't immediately see the light, you start in.
they either admit they were wrong or get punished verbally.
In reality, they only committed one error in logic, or perhaps approach.
that error was in trying to forward the idea that "it works", instead of "it worked". Two letters different, KIl. Just two stinky letters makes the difference between successful defense and inevitable crumble.Between a possibly true statement and definitely untrue
If they are trying to sell the idea, they say "it works".
but sometimes naive people use that language too, and need s drubbing, eh ?
'Specially when there are 5,000 post members who rarely start a thread with anything challenging, but lie in waiting for fresh meat to make a statement.
I have not checked this, but I would hazard a guess that you pounced on people who questioned the big negative report, the meta-analysis, from the JAMA antioxidant media hit.
Did you get any of them ? |
It does mention phenotype, just without using the word "phenotype."... DAVEW |
| Edited by - MuhammedGoldstein on 06/12/2008 11:32:34 |
|
|
|
Ricky
SFN Die Hard
USA
4907 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
If I get a haircut 2
