Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths


Jim McGinn wrote:
> "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> news:1133671974.386704.165690@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >
> > Jim McGinn wrote:
> >> "JAE" <jae@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
> >> news:1133580415.880427.93850@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> >
> >> > Jim McGinn wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > Hey, that's my insult. Go get your own. Next thing you know you'll
> >> > > be
> >> > > claiming my hypothesis as your own.
> >> >
> >> > Not that I expect Ross to try to wade through the sea of posts designed
> >> > by your own mental illness to resolve whatever the hell it is that is
> >> > your 'hypothesis,' but since you've not published a thing, since you
> >> > seem both unwilling and incapable of putting something coherant
> >> > together, you'd both be powerless to stop him and would remain as
> >> > irrelevant as you are. So why again is it that you don't actually put
> >> > together your hypothesis in a form that's accessible to anyone who
> >> > doesn't inhabit the defective brain of Jim McGinn?
> >>
> >> Don't you know any other tunes. You're starting to bore me.
> >
> > Hit a bit too close to home, huh?
> >
> > Don't you know that you're an irrelevant delusional nutcase?
> >
>
> I do keep forgetting this.
>
> Maybe, if you're not too busy psychoanalyzing me you can restate, one last
> time, why you dispute my hypothesis.

Since your 'hypothesis' isn't in any state such that it can be
critically reviewed because you've steadfastly refused to organize
whatever thoughts you have, what's left is to dispute some of the
claims you've made. You've made the claim that a hunter-gatherer
lifestyle is something new. I dispute this because abundant
archaeological evidence suggests otherwise. You've made the claim that
agriculture is ocnsiderably older than what is more generally accepted.
I dispute this because there's abundant evidence from archaeological
and genetic evidence suggesting that your position is false. I dispute
that you've made a defintion of 'communal territorialism' that has
meaning to anyone other than yourself. I dispute your errant claims
that genetic drift is false as there's abundant empirical and
theoretical data indicating that it is a mechanism of evolutionary
change. I dispute your claim that we essentially evolved from chimps,
their lineage remaining virtually unmodified from whatever date
speciation began. I dispute that you've done more than wildly
speculate that hominid speciation occurred at 8.1mya as you've not even
been able to provide primary reference to paleo-climatological data.
I dispute that you've demonstrated that a group selection model better
explains the biological changes in hominid lineages and dispute that
you've in any way addressed how individuals in a group who do not
possess whatever genetic differences favor whatever changes you see
occurring would not similarly benefit such that their older genes were
not similarly reproduced.

I will continue to dispute these things until you make some real
strives to clear these things up, but as to date, you've not done so.
You've not even tried to organize these into anything coherant and seem
content to leave your half-baked, unsubstantiated assertions as a
hodgepodge of your posts over several years rather than actually making
any attempt at all at putting them into a form accessible to anyone
other than the mentally ill.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Jasons Dilemma
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... delusional-schmuck, er uh, Jimmy. ... complete enough to dispute in full form or to really bother with at ... but the fractions that squeak through in your various diatribes ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Impeccable
    ... > 1131732327.730096.246970@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Jim McGinn" ... Let's face the facts here Jason. ... > Mate, if you have NO evidence, then you have NO story. ... try to dispute it using the evidence. ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Savanna nonsense
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... What 7 million year old fossil are you referring ... Anybody that looks at the evidence and concludes ... >> You don't provide enough to dispute, ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Impeccable
    ... Jim McGinn wrote: ... > Is there anybody that has an evidence based dispute with my ... Do you prefer Dimmy or just plain Dim? ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
  • Re: Impeccable
    ... >> Jim McGinn wrote: ... >> not the genius that you claim to be. ... > up my solution to human evolution as evidence that supports this ... It would seem, then, that the best way to dispute my, to use ...
    (sci.anthropology.paleo)
Loading