It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Starchild Skull

page: 19
49
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 05:29 PM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

So, don't show our faces again until we're ready to admit that, despite genetic evidence, this deformed human is actually an alien hybrid?

Sorry, but you're welcome to leave yourself if you can't take anymore critical thinking.

Harte




posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 05:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: TerryDon79
No lab name or test results because you want to discuss real science? Show us both of these pieces of information so we can have a fully informed debate.


Yes well that's the thing isn't it...you don't want an "informed debate" you want it your way...


I see...

So, lack of information leads to an informed debate now.

Time have changed, boys.

Harte



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 05:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: truthseeker84
It's only 900 years old, surely there would be ways to DNA test it.

People's been able to DNA test fossil records dating back as far as thousands of years.

You're telling me that something as far as 900 years cannot be DNA tested? Absolutely no organic material present? Turned to minerals completely already?


That's the point of most of the thread - it HAS been DNA tested... Multiple times, but the results did not corroborate Starchild Project's claims.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 05:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: truthseeker84
It's only 900 years old, surely there would be ways to DNA test it.


It has been DNA tested, and those tests show it is human.


You're telling me that something as far as 900 years cannot be DNA tested?


Who said that?



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 06:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
a reply to: tanka418

So, don't show our faces again until we're ready to admit that, despite genetic evidence, this deformed human is actually an alien hybrid?

Sorry, but you're welcome to leave yourself if you can't take anymore critical thinking.

Harte


From you two posts it is very clear you have no idea what's going on...

You are joining a situation where the skeptics are demanding information such as lab, and scientist. While refusing to provide that same information for one of their assertions...the botched discredit of Dr. Ketchum.

This sets up a condition where the those skeptics have become hypocrites, this throws your "critical thinking" out the door, and gives Pye an easy win.

The skeptic side also demands "proof" that the mtDNA is not Human, which has been provided...you will have to look into the thread history here, and perhaps Pye's data to understand. But basically in a reduced sample of a stable region of mtDNA there are some 17 differences in the nucleotide sequencing. Extrapolating that to the full region gives far to many differences for the mtDNA to be Human; more like a relative. Please don't make the mistake of thinking that when I say "alien" I necessarily mean extraterrestrial.

The skeptic side has been requested to provide proof of their assertion using the same data, as they assert that data "says" Human. There does not seem to be anything of substance forthcoming.

Now; IF you are honest, and not "smitten" by the semantics of "alien" perhaps you can understand...I won't hold my breath.


edit on 29-10-2015 by tanka418 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 06:48 PM
link   
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 07:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.


He is nothing? He is worth nothing? A little harsh there NCA, don't you think?

Besides, it seems to me his issue was with tanka's page after page of deflections and unwillingness to present the "secret evidence" to begin with. What has been presented has been discussed. And if you had followed his link you'd have seen that he's opined on the subject previously.
edit on 29-10-2015 by draknoir2 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 07:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.


He is nothing? He is worth nothing? A little harsh there NCA, don't you think?

Besides, it seems to me his issue was with tanka's page after page of deflections and unwillingness to present the "secret evidence" to begin with. What has been presented has been discussed. And if you had followed his link you'd have seen that he's opined on the subject previously.


It is truly sad Drac that you fail to grasp why I am so unwilling...a kind of selective "sight"? Perhaps selective comprehension.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 07:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.


He is nothing? He is worth nothing? A little harsh there NCA, don't you think?

Besides, it seems to me his issue was with tanka's page after page of deflections and unwillingness to present the "secret evidence" to begin with. What has been presented has been discussed. And if you had followed his link you'd have seen that he's opined on the subject previously.


It is truly sad Drac that you fail to grasp why I am so unwilling...a kind of selective "sight"? Perhaps selective comprehension.



On the contrary, after all these years, I fully grasp why. I caught on at "first contact", in fact.

But I don't think you are worthless as a human being (or whatever) because of it.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 07:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.


He is nothing? He is worth nothing? A little harsh there NCA, don't you think?

Besides, it seems to me his issue was with tanka's page after page of deflections and unwillingness to present the "secret evidence" to begin with. What has been presented has been discussed. And if you had followed his link you'd have seen that he's opined on the subject previously.


It is truly sad Drac that you fail to grasp why I am so unwilling...a kind of selective "sight"? Perhaps selective comprehension.



On the contrary, after all these years, I fully grasp why. I caught on at "first contact", in fact.

But I don't think you are worthless as a human being (or whatever) because of it.


No. No you don't.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 07:47 PM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: draknoir2

originally posted by: NoCorruptionAllowed

originally posted by: Harte
By all means, hold your breath.

You don't know me? You think I have no idea what's going on?

check for yourself

Harte


How come you deflect and don't answer his remarks regarding your current misunderstanding of what's presented? Because you are nothing, you have nothing, and you are worth nothing. Troll food.


He is nothing? He is worth nothing? A little harsh there NCA, don't you think?

Besides, it seems to me his issue was with tanka's page after page of deflections and unwillingness to present the "secret evidence" to begin with. What has been presented has been discussed. And if you had followed his link you'd have seen that he's opined on the subject previously.


It is truly sad Drac that you fail to grasp why I am so unwilling...a kind of selective "sight"? Perhaps selective comprehension.



On the contrary, after all these years, I fully grasp why. I caught on at "first contact", in fact.

But I don't think you are worthless as a human being (or whatever) because of it.


No. No you don't.


Yes. Yes I do.

And so do many others.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
19 pages in and Tanka has still not answered one single question and refuses to debate any actual proven data, and when shown why you can not extrapolate from a NON RANDOM sample he ignores it and won't answer the question posed to show his ignorance.

The willful ignorance is strong in this one.



posted on Oct, 29 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
19 pages in and Tanka has still not answered one single question and refuses to debate any actual proven data, and when shown why you can not extrapolate from a NON RANDOM sample he ignores it and won't answer the question posed to show his ignorance.

The willful ignorance is strong in this one.

I've been following this discussion for awhile now, and I have to agree.

Tanka, even though you and I have rarely (if ever) been on the same side in an argument/discussion, I respect your opinions and value your input. That being said, you're making yourself look quite foolish here.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 01:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
19 pages in and Tanka has still not answered one single question and refuses to debate any actual proven data, and when shown why you can not extrapolate from a NON RANDOM sample he ignores it and won't answer the question posed to show his ignorance.

The willful ignorance is strong in this one.


Sorry man, but as I see it we are all those 19 pages in and you don't see the gross error you made...perhaps you should go back and reread, maybe you will pick up on WHY you are so very wrong.

Then you should go and learn a wee bit of mathematics, followed by some data science...it is truly incredible just how ignorant you are, not just of our own actions, but math and science...

On my part, there is no ignorance; but, I continue to await you catching up...via your concerted effort to deny said ignorance.

What I find incredible is the fact that you are completely ignorant of your exception.


(post by tanka418 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 01:38 AM
link   
a reply to: tanka418

Hey, maybe I am wrong, I only went to school for it getting 4.0 in stats and research and actually worked in research but what do I know. Show me where extrapolation using NON RANDOM data is acceptable. And now how about you respond to the scenario I laid out showing why it's wrong.

What if 1% of the population voted and they simply extrapolated those votes to decide who the winner is. Let's say we extrapolate from rural Arkansas every year. That's fine, and will give the same answer as allowing 100% of the population to vote, right? You'd get the same results as if we extrapolated 1% of the votes from urban Boston, right?

Extrapolation is fine to do and those two places will yield the same results right?
edit on 30-10-2015 by OccamsRazor04 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 02:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: OccamsRazor04
a reply to: tanka418

Hey, maybe I am wrong, I only went to school for it getting 4.0 in stats and research and actually worked in research but what do I know. Show me where extrapolation using NON RANDOM data is acceptable. And now how about you respond to the scenario I laid out showing why it's wrong.

What if 1% of the population voted and they simply extrapolated those votes to decide who the winner is. Let's say we extrapolate from rural Arkansas every year. That's fine, and will give the same answer as allowing 100% of the population to vote, right? You'd get the same results as if we extrapolated 1% of the votes from urban Boston, right?

Extrapolation is fine to do and those two places will yield the same results right?


Have you ever been "polled?" Or looked into just how the polls work...Typically they ask a small number of people a set of questions, and then extrapolate the response for the entire nation. They typically use a couple f thousand responses, and extrapolate that into the response of 350 million.

4.0 GPA eh? When I had been discharged from the Air Force and returned to college; I turned 4.0 students into 2.0 students...in the Electrical Engineering Dept., Computer Science as well...the teachers graded on a curve...I felt guilty for that for years...even worse, the 2.0 students had to drop the course. I was one of those who gets nearly perfect scores...without opening a book. IF I had been doing that to myself, I think I should think myself "disgusting"...I must have been a truly frustrating ass back then...and prolly now too, but, oh well...such is life.

As, I don't "feel like" going back and finding your scenario (BTW, I am nearly 70 and have a condition called "macular pucker"...it is truly a pain in the a$$) to read it again...so, if you would be so kind as to copy and paste it into a new post, I'll see what I can do.



posted on Oct, 30 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: tanka418
Have you ever been "polled?" Or looked into just how the polls work...Typically they ask a small number of people a set of questions, and then extrapolate the response for the entire nation. They typically use a couple f thousand responses, and extrapolate that into the response of 350 million.

Learn the difference between RANDOM sampling and NON RANDOM sampling.


As, I don't "feel like" going back and finding your scenario (BTW, I am nearly 70 and have a condition called "macular pucker"...it is truly a pain in the a$$) to read it again...so, if you would be so kind as to copy and paste it into a new post, I'll see what I can do.

You did not have to go back, I just reposted it, here it is again. It perfectly illustrated why your point is incredibly stupid. I expect you to not answer it again.

What if 1% of the population voted and they simply extrapolated those votes to decide who the winner is. Let's say we extrapolate from rural Arkansas every year. That's fine, and will give the same answer as allowing 100% of the population to vote, right? You'd get the same results as if we extrapolated 1% of the votes from urban Boston, right?


(post by OccamsRazor04 removed for a manners violation)


top topics



 
49
<< 16  17  18    20 >>

log in

join