New Homo erectus Skull Shakes up Palaeontology

by cofty 192 Replies latest social current

  • cofty
    cofty

    Adam I didn't say I find anything repugnant. Don't put words in my mouth.

    I have said more times than I can count that all scientific statements are provisional. I've been saying it for years before you joined the forum.

    You haven't been reading Tammy's posts for years so you don't have the context. She isn't talking about the constant refinement of the details of theories.

    Do you think it will ever be discovered that Homo sapiens actually didn't evolve from non-human ancestors? Will it perhaps be concluded that we suddenly appeared out of nowhere a few thousand years ago with no common ancestry with other species?

    Would you agree that the possibility is vanishingly small? On the same scale as discovering that planet earth is indeed flat and the sun revolves around the earth?

    When Tammy says she takes scientific conclusions with a pinch of salt that doesn't mean anything like the same as a scientist admitting that the word proof belongs only in the world of mathematics.

    Tammy thinks the voices in her head have ultimate authority in matters of science.

  • tec
    tec

    Funny how you tell Adamah not to put words in your mouth... and then you turn around and do the same thing to me.

    I asked you a question though. I wonder if you will answer it?

    Peace,

    tammy

  • cofty
    cofty

    What question?

  • tec
    tec

    What if I were to phrase it like this:

    ... take the conclusions that scientists draw from the evidence at hand, with a grain of salt...

    Would you still think that is absurd?

  • jgnat
  • cofty
    cofty

    Tammy - Too deliberately vague a question to be answered.

    You mean that you are justified in blithely dismissing absolutely anything that doesn't fit with what the voices tell you. That is absurd.

    This thread isn't about you though.

  • tec
    tec

    Stop telling me what I mean. You obviously don't know... just as you did not know that I did not deny human evolution in the past.

    It is a very simple question.

    The answer just does not support your theories about me.

    Peace,

    tammy

  • cofty
    cofty

    I have not the slightest idea what you are on about Tammy. You said the same thing two ways and asked me if I thought it made any difference. How would I know FFS you wrote it.

    I am way beyond bored playing semantics with pedants.

    You have contempt for science. You think the voices are the final authority in matters of science. Fine, we get it.

  • tec
    tec

    Your very words show that you don't get it. It was a simple question. I never in the past said that I deny human evolution. You took someone else's words and applied them to me. Your continued accusation about me holding science in contempt shows that you don't get it.

    You apply motives and subterfuge to me where none exist... and that is probaby one reason why you don't 'get it'.

    But enough said. Moving on... hopefully...

    Peace,

    tammy

  • adamah
    adamah

    Cofty said- Adam I didn't say I find anything repugnant. Don't put words in my mouth.

    You reacted in what struck me as a very dogmatic authoritarian manner, as if you found her words "repugnant"; at least, that was my impression of your response (hopefully you're not going to start telling us what we must feel, or discounting our words and telling us that our perceptions are not real (a classic bullying tactic, i.e. "Stop your cryin', you big cry baby! It doesn't hurt THAT much!").

    Is that really how you intended to come across?

    Cofty said- I have said more times than I can count that all scientific statements are provisional. I've been saying it for years before you joined the forum.

    Did you forget that you presented counter-evidence to disprove that claim in this very thread, back when you stated that "facts don't change" (and yes, 'facts' are scientific statements, and you've jumped all over SBF about the same point in other threads in which I participated, where SBF was correct)?

    Cofty said- When Tammy says she takes scientific conclusions with a pinch of salt that doesn't mean anything like the same as a scientist admitting that the word proof belongs only in the world of mathematics.

    Who's putting words into mouths now? TEC said a single GRAIN of salt, not a PINCH of salt. Is there perhaps a standard measurement for grain of salt utilized in Scotland that is larger, or am I being needlessly pedantic by calling you out on your slight exaggeration (as you did, for TEC)?

    Tammy thinks the voices in her head have ultimate authority in matters of science.

    Yes, I'm familiar with TEC's claimed perceptions (which are thought to affect 10% of the population, for many reasons). Are you forgetting who it was who told you about how such auditory hallucinations have been confirmed by fMRI studies?

    Cofty said- You haven't been reading Tammy's posts for years so you don't have the context. She isn't talking about the constant refinement of the details of theories.

    Well there's my problem, then: I'm going off what people SAY, and not what they SAID in the past!

    Just saying, perhaps it might be beneficial to maintaining the peace and harmony to remember that not everyone has the benefit of having spent years observing all the interactions (and what a tempting offer that would be!), so perhaps it might be helpful to consider how our reactions could across as a tad aggressive to someone who ISN'T aware of all these various past interactions, maybe even taking a walk around the room before hitting the "âś“Submit" button?

    Of course, you're free to take that advice with a pinch, eh, a grain, eh, a whatever of salt.

    Adam

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit