Re: Hamilton's rule
- From: "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 16 Oct 2005 15:14:05 -0400 (EDT)
Josh Hayes wrote:
> "Jim McGinn" <jimmcginn@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in news:dirg28$24ns$1
> @darwin.ediacara.org:
>
> >
> > Josh Hayes wrote:
>
> >> Do you seriously NOT BELIEVE that
> >> one can demarcate a stretch of DNA which, when transcribed and
> >> translated, produces a functional protein? And that the length of the
> >> gene will vary, depending on the length of the protein in question? (And
> >> a few other things like exons and post-translational processing, of
> >> course.)
> >
> > If you are saying the full genome can be split according to discrete
> > proteins then, yes, I'm saying you don't know what you're talking
> > about.
>
> Right.
>
> Well, then. I tried.
You didn't try anything but making some emptyheaded claims that you are
unwilling to substantiate. And that's all you ever do.
> But there are some who are simply unwilling to see.
I'm not a believer.
> One day I'll be able to read McGinn's lunacy and just leave it alone, but
> the teacher in me keeps hoping that, like the really really slow kid in
> class, one day he'll get it. I guess there are some who just never do.
>
> I'm bailing on this subject: you can't have a useful discussion with a
> rock.
If you aren't willing to substantiate your claims then don't make them.
We're supposedly suppose to take your word that DNA can be divided out
according to proteins and that the results will confirm the validity of
HR? For all species? In all instances? That's pure insanity? And
what's your basis, where's your data that supports this? You have
none.
Jim
.
- References:
- Hamilton's rule
- From: Catherine Woodgold
- Hamilton's rule
- Prev by Date: Re: Empirically Measuring Mutualism In Man
- Next by Date: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Previous by thread: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Next by thread: Re: Hamilton's rule
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|