And there it it :
the old "hate" accusation...
facts are hate.
noticing differences(which is also a source of respect btw nitwit) is hate.
grow up yo.
universalism is for intellectual bums.
Discussion
Universalism is silly. I follow no ism. Isms are for ists and ists are not free. I am saying that we are primates. Violence is hard wired. Choose to think some primates less capable of harm than others if it makes you feel better. Not my concern. I wish you well.
yeah well that breaks the location of the line down starkly:
You are a primate. I am not.
hahahahah
haaaaaaaaaaa
soooooo lizard?
Alien?
Mushroom?
Avian?
Crocodillian?
What manner of space man are you?
yer the lizard.
What does darwin have to do with this. I said primate and you said Darwin. Stay on track. Genomics not butterfly collecting.
what does darwin have to do with people equating human beings with primates?
is that the question?
what year is it ? 1982?
and it looks like you are in for another cocooning and rebirth - if you can stomach it lol:
I know the math. I point it out anytime classical evolution comes up. The math of evolution and the math of genomics are not the same. If you are saying that we are annunaki spawn then ok maybe. Tell me more. If you ascribe to the stoned ape theory then tell me more, if you are more along gnostic lines cool tell me about that too. But right now you are saying nothing.
you think you are smart.
on with it...
Just got back from outside. will read now.
OK. The author says up front that it is an opinion piece for starters but also references some out of date science with respect to genetic distance. Also basing his thoughts on old science (not his fault it was 2008). The science has progressed and some of those blanks he fills with deduction and belief have been filled in with new tech and evidence. Here is a link to newer info that has been peer reviewed and results replicated.
https://genomebiology.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13059-019-1684-5#Sec9
since you are such an expert on "genomics", you must be familiar with this?
😂
https://www.unz.com/book/richard_d_fuerle__erectus-walks-amongst-us/
I will just quote one of the comments on that piece as my initial response. I think I have seen this before but gonna give it a quick read to make sure its the same brand of gordian pseudo logic and appeal to philosophy that I remember. This fella thinks so but am gonna go look. Cuz thats what polite people do when sent new info.
Interesting. The author raises a lot of interesting facts, points of view, and even value judgments. He is publishing in the face of a religious opposition, an unacknowledged “church” or “faith community” he terms Egalitarianism. It is as good a label as any for the dominant philosophical “faith” governing Occidental civilization, presently. In that sense, it is refreshing to see. This is a challenge that needs to be raised. Superstitious orthodoxy is no friend of science, or even the health of human community and society.
That said, the author is not strictly publishing a scientific position in this work. This is a work of competing religious/philosophical/sociological nature, embodying value judgments about the facts and science upon which the work expounds. It is a challenge to the reigning orthodoxy, the reigning religious worldview, but it is, nonetheless a competing religion/philosophy. If you want to understand this, just read Chapter 29. The author’s “reasons” are not strictly science; they are philosophy, sentiment, religion and aesthetic preferences. The author would like you to believe that the work is entirely dispassionate science, but this claim is patently not true. The reader will have to come to his own conclusions about the author’s normative judgments, as well as conclusions about the veracity and accuracy of the science, but I personally believe that it is better that these topics were discussed openly, and with as much honesty as possible than see them summarily banished from the arena of human discourse as heresy, anathema, and taboo by the Church of Egalitarianism.
You are insulting me for no reason. I am expressing ideas and you are expressing disdain for me instead of acknowledging and examining the replies. This is not healthy, productive, helpful or fun. So I am sorry I bothered yuo. Please continue on your way and be well.