Quality Control the Gold Standard

Its almost incredible that your team cannot stick to the original point .. I am amazed.. really.My post related to the inherent error rate in copying the DNA molecule in the human call.. in a statistically significant estimate over the entirity of the genome.It did not relate to all sources of mutation, mutation in the gamete, mutation per child, per generation or any other per beyond per replication of the dna molecule.Again read my source "Exons, Entrons and Jumping Genes".

Evopeach I never said he did not. I was simply putting your misdirection of importance by association at rest for what it actually was. I owe Gish no apology since the deceptive methods shown here are yours, not his. I will not apologize for your actions and I will certainly not apologize to you good sir.

---

But I realize now that these people were not in science; they didn’t understand it. They didn’t understand technology; they didn’t understand their time. R.P. Feynman

You called him a hack and a fraud. The record stands and your lack of credibility is fully accounted for.I would never ask for an apology to me from anyone on this forum and if given would not be accepted.

Evopeach LOL
You have not been paying attention have you?
Perhaps little details surpass your judgement on these things and you carry this on into your own work?Seriously, son, please make sure you know whom you are talking to before inserting your foot in your mouth.

Was there some actual information in your post? I thought gibberish was forbidden here.I'm not your son, friend, acquaintance or anything else so stow your condecension.

The first paragraph of my post was on-topic and rebutted your point. I can do no more than that. Oh, okay. We usually request that members make their points in the posts, not by handing out reading assignments.--Percy

Hi Evopeach,Some clarification for you. Sidelined was only pointing out, in an indirect way, that you are confused. You accused him of calling Gish a hack and a fraud when it was Rrhain who did that.--Percy

PercyAhhh. you gave the answer away.

I was hoping for consistency; but alas in prior posts you and others demand references ( why would you ask for them unless you wanted to read them) and now references are ver botin as unwanted reading assignments. Its really rather humorous.

EvopeachThe issue I had concerned your linking with the nobel prize in chemistry to the name of Duane Gish as though this were an important point. It is not and this is really the crux of the matter.

Of course it is !! LOL!! I see a few people picked up on your hypocrisy and you're sqirming.

Hi Evopeach,I regret again having to drop into Admin mode in a thread in which I am a participant, but you again seem to be having trouble grasping the Forum Guidelines. I've attempted to give you low key reminders as Percy, but you're just mocking me and continuing to ignore the guidelines.In regard to this: The Forum Guidelines are quite explicit about this:

5. Bare links with no supporting discussion should be avoided. Make the argument in your own words and use links as supporting references.

Regarding behavior, the Forum Guidelines are again explicit:

10. Always treat other members with respect. Argue the position, not the person. Avoid abusive, harassing and invasive behavior. Avoid needling, hectoring and goading tactics.

Please follow the Forum Guidelines. Thanks!

---

--	Percy
	EvC Forum Director

I have not read the complete forum. But I am wondering if from the sources quoting a percieved rate of genetic mutation the influx of outside natural influences was considered and what impact that may have on the percieved rate.
I have toughts on inteligent design but they cannot be discusssed properly in this narrow context. I will continue to search the site for a more suitable venue.

The site has 284,522 messages and counting. Let us know when you're done! Welcome aboard!--Percy

Evopeach Squirming? In your dreams.This message has been edited by sidelined, Fri, 2006-02-17 07:46 AM