You are one. Evolution: “Environment, Isolation, Speciation, Hybridization”
All species evolved by the same method. ANd for example, the Haeckel example is largely correct – that evolution regulates growth from a neural tube to the wide spectrum of body plans.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 03:15:13 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805495368884612
— “In a fish, pharyngeal folds later develop into gills, but in a reptile, mammal, or bird they develop into other structures entirely (such as the inner ear and parathyroid gland).” —
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 03:13:26 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805488318607304
—“Midway through development, all vertebrate embryos possess a series of folds in the neck region, or pharynx. The convex parts of the folds are called pharyngeal “arches” or “ridges,” and the concave parts are called pharyngeal “clefts” or “pouches.” But pharyngeal folds are not gills. “—
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 03:12:18 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805483880955563
@asomd2021@akulkis00@voxday I am only defending your attempt to claim that this isue has any impact on evolution of man from earlier forms.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 03:10:49 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805478025883609
@asomd2021@akulkis00@voxday Do you know how you distinguish sh-t science from good science? The good scientists list the competing theories and address them. The sh-t scientists don’t. They do not list facts. They list opinions. they make claims about every aspect of it that is easily arguable by the opposing parties. Now, why do you think you are able to determine the difference between the different positions? I mean, I”m pretty scary knowledgeable about the history of art materials (I was VP of the country’s largest art supplier). Why do you think you can judge the veracity of the presented claims? And why don’t you know the countering claims?
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 02:56:54 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805423306696636
@hcuottadtte@BlankAvatar That’s why our job is so difficult, brother. Our own are the problem. They are useful idiots of the enemy.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 02:21:53 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805285625446406
We differ in determination of ‘credible’. I have never seen a single report that as ‘credible’. And a ‘scientist’ like ‘doctor’ doesn’t convey any more meaning than a school teacher of physics does, a clerical scientsts, a scientist at a low end university, in relation to the top one to three people in a field. There are no credible claims that the shroud is not a forgery. It appears we know when and where it was created, and last time I took a look into the evidence we even have some idea who paid for the forgery and his motives.
Most people for a variety of reasons, most of them pragmatic, refer to what I do as law, or the science of decidability. But in practice what it consists of is the science of the means by which people lie, and their motives for lying.
But as in most things the manufacturer of a lie is successful if and only if there is a market for that lie, by people who want to believe that lie, and will invest in the preservation of that lie.
All religions, and abrahamic religions in particular, depend on this willingness to invest in the preservation of a lie that they wish to believe.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 01:51:32 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805166326997586
@asomd2021@akulkis00@voxday I thought I answered the piltdown man question already.
THere are plenty of frauds in history – piltdown being a perfect example. So is the shroud of turin, the voynich manuscript and pretty much every christian relic without exception. My particular interest is in art forgery because my early training is in the fine arts. But it turns out to be relatively easy to spot fraud in the arts. Fraud succeeds for the same reason fraudulent christian relics succeeded: because people want to believe it.
My favorites as a child were the frauds at Ripley’s Believe it or Not. I read the books and went to the museum. I asked so many questions the manager gave young me a handfull of books for free. 😉
Now, it was quite a bit easier to produce frauds before genetics. Now we know pretty much the boundaries of mankind – especially from what we’ve learned over the past ten years or so.
The primary problem we have is that people want to make up stories to explain their archeological and anthropological findings – and it turns out that these stories tend to be pretty much wrong all the time. This is why people like me study the economics, trade, and technology of primitives because almost always it’s “economics in everything” so to speak. The same is true of history. A study of laws and court records falsifies the entirety of writing of the scholars, theologians, and philosophers, who are largely tring to create narratives that will influence current policy.
So if you find x, y, or z, falsehoods they are irrelevant in the face of hundreds of thousands of bits of evidence that isn’t false. And the desperation with which one clings to outliers only demonstrates one is seeking to preserve a cherished lie.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 01:18:04 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805034699024726
@akulkis00 FWIW: the correct personal attack to make against me is the correct political attack to make against all people like me, including smith, adams, kant, and einstein, just to pick a random sampling from different european cultures. Aspies mature in social interaction more slowly than neurotypicals, however we (they) are responsibile for nearly all meaningful advances in history. In other words, it’s correct to attack me (us) for eccentricities that permanently aggrevate neurotypicals by offending neurotypicals in social interactions. But this is nothing more than another way of calling eccentrics ‘rude’. It doesn’t carry any weight in the determination of the merit of the arguments we make. And this ‘rudeness’ comes into play given the rather ‘odd’ nature of autistic humor, and that much of our humor comes at the expense of neurotypicals. But then all humore comes at someone’s expense. That’s why it’s humorous.
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 01:09:51 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107805002412611726
Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107804902102013958
IN REPLY TO:
@curtd
akulkis00 @akulkis00 —” I don’t know what you THINK your IQ is, but it’s definitely below my 142~144, and Vox is at least 5 points higher than I am. ” — IQ consists of two measures. One of neural adaptivity, and one of accumulated knowledge because of that adaptivity. Increasingly we seek to test adaptivity because it’s visible even in neurological reaction times. But demonstrated intelligence consists of no less than: 1) Neural velocity and adaptability 2) Personality variation from systematizing (vs empathizing), openness and extroversion, conscientiousness (executive function), and low neuroticism. 3) General Knowledge – general knowledge compensates for IQ, and the organization of general knowledge by minimum variation from unambiguity, internal consistency, external correspondence, in the form of general rules improves demonstrated intelligence 4) Wants, Beliefs, Faiths, that are contradictory to unambiguity, internal consistency, external correspondence. 5) Of course, trauma and disease. Manifested in: 6) Lifetime Achievement. Now in estimating my IQ you’re off by a standard deviation. That doesn’t matter. I’ve had vastly more success in life than you have so I am less malinvested in self-image, status, and false beliefs to maintain them. And I have very low regard for the opinions of the peasantry. And I rather enjoy parenting gamma males who overstate the merit of their false beliefs, unwarranted opinions, and masculine pretense of competency. And regarding my lifetime achievement, well I’ve built a whole buncha tech companies and sold them. Burned through a couple of wives. Advised campaigns, participated in espionage and revolution. Survived two cancers and two other serious illnesses. Retired in my 40’s, and then solved the hardest remaining problem in intellectual history unifying the sciences as promised by EO Wilson. And I’ve done it with a total lack of respect for those like you, and without airs of pretense common in social, popular, academic, or political affairs. Which historically is a common personality expression for those with similar abilities and high functioning autistic neurology. Now, you know, evidence is. I did. You talk. It’s simple. 😉 And none of your girl gossip will change the demonstrated evidence. 😉
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107804902102013958
akulkis00
@akulkis00
—” I don’t know what you THINK your IQ is, but it’s definitely below my 142~144, and Vox is at least 5 points higher than I am. ” —
IQ consists of two measures. One of neural adaptivity, and one of accumulated knowledge because of that adaptivity. Increasingly we seek to test adaptivity because it’s visible even in neurological reaction times.
But demonstrated intelligence consists of no less than:
1) Neural velocity and adaptability
2) Personality variation from systematizing (vs empathizing), openness and extroversion, conscientiousness (executive function), and low neuroticism.
3) General Knowledge – general knowledge compensates for IQ, and the organization of general knowledge by minimum variation from unambiguity, internal consistency, external correspondence, in the form of general rules improves demonstrated intelligence
4) Wants, Beliefs, Faiths, that are contradictory to unambiguity, internal consistency, external correspondence.
5) Of course, trauma and disease.
Manifested in:
6) Lifetime Achievement.
Now in estimating my IQ you’re off by a standard deviation. That doesn’t matter. I’ve had vastly more success in life than you have so I am less malinvested in self-image, status, and false beliefs to maintain them. And I have very low regard for the opinions of the peasantry. And I rather enjoy parenting gamma males who overstate the merit of their false beliefs, unwarranted opinions, and masculine pretense of competency.
And regarding my lifetime achievement, well I’ve built a whole buncha tech companies and sold them. Burned through a couple of wives. Advised campaigns, participated in espionage and revolution. Survived two cancers and two other serious illnesses. Retired in my 40’s, and then solved the hardest remaining problem in intellectual history unifying the sciences as promised by EO Wilson. And I’ve done it with a total lack of respect for those like you, and without airs of pretense common in social, popular, academic, or political affairs. Which historically is a common personality expression for those with similar abilities and high functioning autistic neurology.
Now, you know, evidence is. I did. You talk. It’s simple. 😉
And none of your girl gossip will change the demonstrated evidence. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2022-02-16 00:44:21 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107804902102013958