Man didn't evolve from fish or monkeys

a reply to: Noinden

Neigthbour, if by beating, you mean using my education and the facts? You are in for a shock in the real world.

Again, you brought that up. No, I don't mean any such thing.

Phrenology is a pseudoscience, and no one with ANY credibility follows it today.

My point exactly
Yet a while back, some people would insult those who said so

a reply to: wisvol

Say what you mean neighbour. Rather than leave it open to interpretation

Also a "while back" ended rather early in the 20th century, unless one was a National Socialist with an axe to grind. I also note from how you wrote about phrenology, that I am not convinced you mean that it was a pseudoscience. Just saying...

a reply to: Noinden

I do say what I mean, because if not, someone might think I meant something else.

Happens all the time.

a reply to: wisvol

It happens all the time, as you either deliberately or unwillingly misuse words and concepts. None the less you are dodging the point.

a reply to: Noinden

No

Your point is that you don't understand whether I condemn phrenology.

I've been clear

a reply to: wisvol

you've been many things in this thread and others. Clear is not one of them. Regarding Phrenology, it wasn't the most highly regarded thing going on even when it gained popularity. Its biggest a tie in with Victorian principles regarding social mobility. There wasn't much credibility to it in the barely 40 years that it was "a thing". It's been discredited since 1840 and only got its first major push at the tail end of the 18th century. Unless you can provide a citation supporting your position that people would be insulted and engage in verbal sparring over being mocked for promoting phrenology? That would be a nice change of pace if instead of repeating the same tripe, you instead supported your position with citations and science instead of taking pages out of the Troll Diaries.

a reply to: peter vlar

Have you found anything new and interesting?

a reply to: amaguq

I find new and interesting things all the time.

a reply to: peter vlar

Unless you can provide a citation supporting your position that people would be insulted and engage in verbal sparring over being mocked for promoting phrenology?

If you need citations for this, find one. Or assume it never happened, if you will.
My assertion is that phrenologists use the tactics you are using, not the contrary.

That would be a nice change of pace if instead of repeating the same tripe, you instead supported your position with citations and science instead of taking pages out of the Troll Diaries.

Your internet toughguyness means very little to me.

a reply to: peter vlar

please share.. I read =)

a reply to: wisvol

Putting words in my mouth (digitally speaking) is not kosher neighbor. You communication is deliberately obtuse, and evasive. You seem to feel it affords you the ability to move the goal posts, when someone is lining up a conversion

a reply to: Noinden

Your perception becomes less and less interesting to me: I now cease to read from you.

originally posted by: wisvol
a reply to: peter vlar



If you need citations for this, find one. Or assume it never happened, if you will.
My assertion is that phrenologists use the tactics you are using, not the contrary.

So that's a no... you can't support any of your statements. Gotcha.

Your internet toughguyness means very little to me.

And your profound ignorance and B level trolling means little to me. What's the point of any of this if everyone else can and does support their positions and all you do is talk down to everyone and make up garbage while pretending to demonstrate what is wrong with science while not actually doing what it is you proclaim to do?

a reply to: peter vlar

Your conclusions are again made from a place I have no interest in.

I do not refute science, and differentiate it from opinion.

a reply to: amaguq

I'm happy to do so if you could be a little more specific. It's a pretty wide open query!

a reply to: wisvol

Oh I am pretty sure that will prove to be a lie neighbour Though it does illustrate that you don't have anything to contribute here, you refused to engage in debate, at least the OP did for a time.

Now come on, the OP, do you or do you not think man came from fish? The world needs to know.

a reply to: wisvol

Yes, it's been clear from your first post on ATS that you don't refute science. Nor do you use science. Why discuss science at all if you are incapable of utilizing it in the course of the dialogue?

a reply to: peter vlar

Why discuss science at all if you are incapable of utilizing it in the course of the dialogue?

Barking at the wrong tree.

a reply to: peter vlar

HSN, HS, Denisovan interactions =)

a reply to: wisvol

That's not new information. It's been readily apparent from the get go that anything having to do with science and your replies was barking up the wrong tree.