For Salty

In an earlier post, in response ot Davison's claim that he is an "experimentalist", I indicated that he has done no research since 1984.Doing a double-check of his CV, I see that, in fact, the last paper which appears (giving the benfit of the doubt by reading only the title) to have been based on actual experimentation/research came out in 1976, a full 27 years ago.That Davison did not bother to correct the rroneous date - making it seem as though he had done lab work for an additional 8 years, is very telling...

quote:

---

M:
Salty blew it off and has most likely retreated to Terry's site and ARN to mumble into his beer as I believe Mr. Pamboli described it...but the bet is still running that he posts before Saturday

​

new bet...his post will be short, off topic, contentless, and full of rightous indignation.

---

I chekced out ARN, and see no sign of him yet. Funny thing is, as I mentioned, every person with science credentials that took part in the threads in which 'semi-meiosis' or the manifesto is mentioned found tons of flaws. The only folks that found any merit in it are the usual uneducated "anything but Darwinism" fools such as mturner and Bertvan.No wonder Davison would like it there - it is a lot like Terry's den of simpletons.[This message has been edited by SLPx, 05-16-2003]

Yes, I found that shortly after I had made my last post.Looks like he is fishing for compliments, and even the resident YEC (vividbleu) isn't giving him the time of day...

Stupidity is stupidity no matter where one peddles it.In case you did not know, salty = nosivad

Jazzraptor on ARN:
"Hi nosidav:I enjoyed reading "Ontogeny, Phylogeny and the Origin of Biological Information." I note that the information for ontogeny is at least partially contained within the genome. Do you have a suspicion regarding the location of the information store for phylogeny? "I guess Jazz did not realize that Salty does not actually say anything about the origin of bioloigcal information in his paper titled "Ontogeny, Phylogeny and the Origin of Biological Information" except to say that it was already there, which is to say absolutely nothing about its origin.

It must be tedious for old folks like salty to have to re-write the same tired crap over and over. I suspect that at some point he just typed up a bunch of pat posts/responses, and pastes them as needed. Looking through his posts here and at Trainor the idiot's place, I noticed that most of his posts over two sentences in length seemed eerily similar to other posts of similar length.Maybe cut 'n' paste with some minor modifications?I have yet to see a post from him less than two sentences in length that are anything other than insults.

Does it say anything about new species being derived from single individuals which reproduce asexually at first?