Re: Savanna believers can't find counter-arguments to AAT (Re: Dugouts inland/coastal, Trade, Spears, Apes

IOW, Olson is too stupid to answer...


Op 17-08-2007 05:15, in artikel
1187320546.915202.118290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Lee Olsen
<paleocity@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef:


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 ***."



On Aug 16, 3:07 pm, Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Op 16-08-2007 16:12, in artikel
1187273574.445604.108...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Lee Olsen
<paleoc...@xxxxxxxxxxx> schreef:

"Marc: AAT says that some time after Homo & Pan split, our ancestors
were seaside omnivores
who collected coconuts, fruits, turtles, bird eggs, shell-, crayfish,
algae etc."

Yes.
And??
Anything wrong with it IYHO??
Apparently you still have no counter-argements to this.

Message-ID: <1124058632.360214.177290@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
"You should be more concerned with your inability to come up with an
FOR your scenario. Lee did a fine job of showing that your claim that
there aren't arguments against your scenario is simply your own
delusional ramblings with no ties to the reality the rest of us live
in. He provided arguments, sound arguments against your dealings. If
you don't believe it, this is inevitably only your problem. You should
also be more concerned with the fact that you're a sociopathic prick
who doesn't seem to have the basic descency to realize that calling
out individuals in subject lines is the mark of a true *** but for
quite some time I've realized that being an *** is your hobby and
AAX is merely your vehicle."

Confess, my boy, you're simply too stupid to give us 1 simple
counter-argument to our comparative data.

Jason Eshleman: "You are asking for someone to contradict something
that you've not made a case for. You are asking someone to prove a
negative. This isn't science, though I suspect you don't know what
science is and as such will continue your mentally ill diatribes."

Pathetic fool.



.

Loading