Jason's excuse for vagueness
- From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2005 13:55:55 GMT
> > > > > I dispute this because there's abundant evidence from
> > > > > archaeological
> > > > > and genetic evidence suggesting that your position is false.
> > > >
> > > > If you are aware of such evidence then you should refer to it
> > > > specifically.
> > >
> > > Again, you've blown up my irony-o-meter, you putz. You don't appear
> > > to
> > > ever reference evidence specifically, but "The Domestication and
> > > Exploitation of Plants and Animals" is again a good starting point,
> > > similarly with many references to primary studies on the subject. I
> > > suggest you familiarize yourself with such work rather than speaking
> > > out of your sphincter like you appear prone to doing.
> >
> > I'm willing to address any specific complaint you have regardless of
> > what orifice you employ to convey it.
>
> The specific complaint is that you're denying evidence of recent
> domestication of plants and animals when there's solid evidence that
> it's recent. Since you don't appear to be familiar with the literature
> and don't actually appear to familiar with ANY literature in the field
> or related fields, I don't feel in any way compelled to be more
> specific.
I don't deny evidence of recent domestication. I do deny that this evidence
disputes my model. In fact, my model explains the selective origins of a
lineage that, millions of year later, would have the consciousness,
intelligence, and cooperative abilities to achieve domestication. The vague
notions that float around in your head render you incapable of this.
Jim
.
- Prev by Date: Does Jason have a point?
- Next by Date: Re: Absence of Canines in Apiths
- Previous by thread: Does Jason have a point?
- Next by thread: Re: Jason's excuse for vagueness
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
