Re: Savanna = factual evidence (data contradicts comparative imagination

On Jul 9, 12:07 pm, Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Op 09-07-2007 20:28, in artikel
1184005739.100179.260...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Lee Olsen
<paleoc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef:

On Jul 9, 9:42 am, Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Op 09-07-2007 14:14, in artikel
1183983270.903623.46...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Lee Olsen
<paleoc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef:

http://users.ugent.be/~mvaneech/Report.html
Mario Vaneechoutte: "Verhaegen's reasoning was considered as
idiosyncratic by most of the participants."

Yes, thanks. :-) Wegener also was once considered idiosyncratic...

The difference of course is that he didn't have to lie when citing
others:


Message ID: 42e54fa7$0$6141$ba620...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
MV squawks: Biases like: "1.8-Ma Homo remains come from Algeria, Iran,
Kenya, Georgia, Java... always near lakes or seas (R.Dennell 2003 JHE
45:421);..."

LO: "This erroneous piece of information you believe from Dennell (or
did you mis-quote Dennell-I see no quotation marks here, maybe you
ought recheck to see if he actually said that), ...."

I checked that today, doughboy and Dennell said no such thing or
anything like it, either on page 421 or anywhere else. Either you lied
or you can't read.

Ask Dennell, my boy, & shut up.
Oxbow lake.


Liar, you are making that up. Doughboy has to lie to make an argument.
You stupid idiot, "Oxbow lake" doesn't mean AWAYS found near
lakes.... You deliberately tried to deceive people into thinking that
Dennell 2003 was suggesting "always" found near lakes or seas. You are
a fraud, just as Jason claimed.

Message-ID: <1124421294.671438.286120@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"Lee Olsen did a rather good job of pointing out the holes to you
within
the last couple of weeks. Your response was to duck and claim that
your "theory" wasn't about fossils. IOW (as you're so fond of saying)
you've got a "theory" that exists only by ignoring contradictory
evidence and doesn't actually explain anything. You're argumentative
style is to set up a strawman, claiming that the "alternative" is the
"savanna" as if that somehow has meaning. It doesn't. You're a
nutcase, a delusional fool who passes off his correspondence to
Nature
like it was a peer reviewed article, who passes off his TREE article
like it was original research and not an opinion piece, and who
pretends that he's got stratocladistic support for things for which
he
does not. You're a fraud, and on top of that, you're an ***."



Jason Eshleman

Who is that??

Verhaegen, who is that? The man who thinks mountain beavers are semi-
aquatic animals (see TREE 2002).

My little boy, what don't you quote "real" PAs instead of
some obscure savanna fanatic??




Tobias 1995.......

1995?? ROFL try Roche et al. (1999) or Semaw (2000) for some real
evidence, not nut cases who think lions made the tools found on the
savanna.

.

Quantcast