Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans.
From: Bob Keeter (rkeeter_at_earthlink.net)
Date: 01/16/05
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Previous message: Marc Verhaegen: "Eshleman = proof that "selectively deleterious mutations can persist & reach fixation in certain situations..." :-D (Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is."
- In reply to: jae_at_ucdavis.edu: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Next in thread: Paul Crowley: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2005 15:38:09 GMT
<jae@ucdavis.edu> wrote in message
news:1105808309.097022.178110@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com...
>
> Algis Kuliukas wrote:
>
> [snip]
>
>> It's odd that the explanation for why we swim better than chimps is:
>> 'Oh, but we can do lots more things than they can - it's certainly
> not
>> any adaptation' - but the explanation for why humans can live in arid
>> habitats better than 'non-desert animals' is, apparently,
>> adaptationist. A bit selective, aren't we?
>
> Philip has said several times that it's not the topic of AAH that he
> despises at all, but the tactics that its proponents here use.
Snip. . . . .
ROTFLMAO!!
Jason,
If you demand of yourself to be honest, can you not see more than
a bit of hypocracy in the good Dr. Deitiker's statement? I have no
problem with the idea that those who play ego games, who put
themselves ahead of science, who lie, who manipulate the facts, and
who simply play the standard netloon oratorical shennigans, should
be ostracized from what should be an intelligent discussion of science.
Of course, I would add that it makes no matter what the discussion
topic might be, and certainly no matter what "side" they might be on.
There are "wet apers" that I feel can at least conduct a civil, intelligent
discussion; once upon a time, even including your buddy Algis. There
are "dry apers", at least one in particular, that I consider to be just
as dispicable as the most nauseating of the soggy simian society.
Its a matter of personal integrity, strength of character, and maybe
even a little bit of human decency mixed in there somewhere. If
you would "dispise" Verhaugen for his antics (a very viable option
in my mind!), how would you propose to deal with Deitiker's USENET
depravities? 8-) The "proponents" of the AAH have only their
own ideas to defile with their "sociopathic, malevolent narcissism"
(Geez, I do love that particular phrase! Sort of totally encompassing
of the netloon mindset, dont you think? ).
Who's values, ideas and beliefs does Deitiker insult?
Et tu, Brute. . . . . er. . . . . .Jason?
Regards
bk
- Next message: Bob Keeter: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Previous message: Marc Verhaegen: "Eshleman = proof that "selectively deleterious mutations can persist & reach fixation in certain situations..." :-D (Re: Is the AAH a legitimate hypothesis? Of course it is."
- In reply to: jae_at_ucdavis.edu: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Next in thread: Paul Crowley: "Re: Sweating is a dryland, not an aquatic adaptation in humans."
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]