Molecular Dating: The turd that won't go away

[JTEM]

https://getpocket.com/explore/item/what-the-3-2-million-year-old-lucy-fossil-reveals-about-nudity-and-shame

: Technological advancements in genetic analysis suggest that Lucy
: may have been naked, or at least much more thinly veiled.

They're talking about "Molecular Clock" nonsense.

: According to the coevolutionary tale of humans and their lice,

No such "Tale" exists.

: our immediate ancestors lost most of their body fur 3 to 4 million
: years ago and did not don clothing until 83,000 to 170,000 years ago.

Pure fiction.

DNA is notoriously troublesome, when it comes to dating. It assumes
a "Clock like" static rate which is pure fantasy. Effectively it
ignores SELECTION.

"Isolation is the engine of evolution," to quote the good Doctor, and
in isolation the genetic profile -- what is typical -- can change
within a generation. See: Founder Effect.

Any "Bottleneck" could and in all but absolute certainty WOULD also
result in such a "Founder Effect."

The point is, these things EXAGGERATE age, when some mythical
"Molecular Clock" is applied. The changes took over quickly from
this "Founder Effect" but they are assumed to have accumulated at
a very low "Clock like" rate.

Besides, Lucy wasn't an ancestor. Ask the good Doctor about that.

[John Harshman]

Post by JTEM
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/what-the-3-2-million-year-old-lucy-fossil-reveals-about-nudity-and-shame
:  Technological advancements in genetic analysis suggest that Lucy
:  may have been naked, or at least much more thinly veiled.
They're talking about "Molecular Clock" nonsense.
:  According to the coevolutionary tale of humans and their lice,
No such "Tale" exists.
:  our immediate ancestors lost most of their body fur 3 to 4 million
: years ago and did not don clothing until 83,000 to 170,000 years ago.
Pure fiction.
DNA is notoriously troublesome, when it comes to dating. It assumes
a "Clock like" static rate which is pure fantasy. Effectively it
ignores SELECTION.
"Isolation is the engine of evolution," to quote the good Doctor, and
in isolation the genetic profile -- what is typical -- can change
within a generation. See:  Founder Effect.
Any "Bottleneck" could and in all but absolute certainty WOULD also
result in such a "Founder Effect."
The point is, these things EXAGGERATE age, when some mythical
"Molecular Clock" is applied. The changes took over quickly from
this "Founder Effect" but they are assumed to have accumulated at
a very low "Clock like" rate.
Besides, Lucy wasn't an ancestor. Ask the good Doctor about that.

Who is "the good Doctor"?

[erik simpson]

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/what-the-3-2-million-year-old-lucy-fossil-reveals-about-nudity-and-shame
:  Technological advancements in genetic analysis suggest that Lucy
:  may have been naked, or at least much more thinly veiled.
They're talking about "Molecular Clock" nonsense.
:  According to the coevolutionary tale of humans and their lice,
No such "Tale" exists.
:  our immediate ancestors lost most of their body fur 3 to 4 million
: years ago and did not don clothing until 83,000 to 170,000 years ago.
Pure fiction.
DNA is notoriously troublesome, when it comes to dating. It assumes
a "Clock like" static rate which is pure fantasy. Effectively it
ignores SELECTION.
"Isolation is the engine of evolution," to quote the good Doctor, and
in isolation the genetic profile -- what is typical -- can change
within a generation. See:  Founder Effect.
Any "Bottleneck" could and in all but absolute certainty WOULD also
result in such a "Founder Effect."
The point is, these things EXAGGERATE age, when some mythical
"Molecular Clock" is applied. The changes took over quickly from
this "Founder Effect" but they are assumed to have accumulated at
a very low "Clock like" rate.
Besides, Lucy wasn't an ancestor. Ask the good Doctor about that.

Who is "the good Doctor"?

A certain Belgian.

[John Harshman]

Post by erik simpson

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/what-the-3-2-million-year-old-lucy-fossil-reveals-about-nudity-and-shame
:  Technological advancements in genetic analysis suggest that Lucy
:  may have been naked, or at least much more thinly veiled.
They're talking about "Molecular Clock" nonsense.
:  According to the coevolutionary tale of humans and their lice,
No such "Tale" exists.
:  our immediate ancestors lost most of their body fur 3 to 4 million
: years ago and did not don clothing until 83,000 to 170,000 years ago.
Pure fiction.
DNA is notoriously troublesome, when it comes to dating. It assumes
a "Clock like" static rate which is pure fantasy. Effectively it
ignores SELECTION.
"Isolation is the engine of evolution," to quote the good Doctor, and
in isolation the genetic profile -- what is typical -- can change
within a generation. See:  Founder Effect.
Any "Bottleneck" could and in all but absolute certainty WOULD also
result in such a "Founder Effect."
The point is, these things EXAGGERATE age, when some mythical
"Molecular Clock" is applied. The changes took over quickly from
this "Founder Effect" but they are assumed to have accumulated at
a very low "Clock like" rate.
Besides, Lucy wasn't an ancestor. Ask the good Doctor about that.

Who is "the good Doctor"?

A certain Belgian.

Hercule Poirot? Leopold II?

[William Hyde]

Post by John Harshman

Post by erik simpson

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM
https://getpocket.com/explore/item/what-the-3-2-million-year-old-lucy-fossil-reveals-about-nudity-and-shame
:  Technological advancements in genetic analysis suggest that Lucy
:  may have been naked, or at least much more thinly veiled.
They're talking about "Molecular Clock" nonsense.
:  According to the coevolutionary tale of humans and their lice,
No such "Tale" exists.
:  our immediate ancestors lost most of their body fur 3 to 4 million
: years ago and did not don clothing until 83,000 to 170,000 years ago.
Pure fiction.
DNA is notoriously troublesome, when it comes to dating. It assumes
a "Clock like" static rate which is pure fantasy. Effectively it
ignores SELECTION.
"Isolation is the engine of evolution," to quote the good Doctor, and
in isolation the genetic profile -- what is typical -- can change
within a generation. See:  Founder Effect.
Any "Bottleneck" could and in all but absolute certainty WOULD also
result in such a "Founder Effect."
The point is, these things EXAGGERATE age, when some mythical
"Molecular Clock" is applied. The changes took over quickly from
this "Founder Effect" but they are assumed to have accumulated at
a very low "Clock like" rate.
Besides, Lucy wasn't an ancestor. Ask the good Doctor about that.

Who is "the good Doctor"?

A certain Belgian.

Hercule Poirot? Leopold II?

Lamoral, count of Egmont.

William Hyde

[JTEM]

John Harshman wrote:

[...]

What an interesting take. I think you for your input.

[John Harshman]

      [...]
What an interesting take. I think you for your input.

You couldn't think me if you tried.

[JTEM]

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.

I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

[John Harshman]

Post by JTEM

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.
I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

Have pity, then, on a yellow-socked unfortunate: who is this good doctor?

[erik simpson]

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.
I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

Have pity, then, on a yellow-socked unfortunate: who is this good doctor?

It's Verhaegen the crank.

[JTEM]

Post by erik simpson
It's Verhaegen the crank.

Just for shits & giggles: What triggered you this time?

You couldn't deal with the fact that molecular dating is
a farce? The nice headlines told you otherwise?

Occasionally you must try to not act out like a hyper
emotional dimwit. You may yet fool yourself, if you try.

[Athel Cornish-Bowden]

Post by erik simpson

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.
I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

Have pity, then, on a yellow-socked unfortunate: who is this good doctor?

It's Verhaegen the crank.

Ah yes, he's the most likely one. Academia.edu has its own ideas of
what I like to read, and often recommends articles by Marc Verhaegen.

[JTEM]

Ah yes, he's the most likely one. Academia.edu has its own ideas of what
I like to read, and often recommends articles by Marc Verhaegen.

Doesn't know you very well, doesn't it? But I suppose they don't have a
lot of access to coloring books...

[John Harshman]

Post by erik simpson

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.
I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

Have pity, then, on a yellow-socked unfortunate: who is this good doctor?

It's Verhaegen the crank.

Ah yes, he's the most likely one. Academia.edu has its own ideas of what
I like to read, and often recommends articles by Marc Verhaegen.

Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's that
uninterested in being understood.

[erik simpson]

Post by John Harshman

Post by Athel Cornish-Bowden

Post by erik simpson

Post by John Harshman

Post by JTEM

Post by John Harshman
You couldn't think me if you tried.

And you couldn't pee without staining your socks yellow.
I've got the better of that deal, sunshine.

Have pity, then, on a yellow-socked unfortunate: who is this good doctor?

It's Verhaegen the crank.

Ah yes, he's the most likely one. Academia.edu has its own ideas of
what I like to read, and often recommends articles by Marc Verhaegen.

Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's that
uninterested in being understood.

If you really want some advanced discussion, check out Mario Petrinovic
and JTEM in sci.anthropology.paleo.

[JTEM]

Post by erik simpson
If you really want some advanced discussion, check out Mario Petrinovic
and JTEM in sci.anthropology.paleo.

Just the JTEM side

[Ernest Major]

Post by John Harshman
Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's that
uninterested in being understood.

Apart from JTEM Google gives me a quotation from an ecotourism guide in
Costa Rica. I don't find it a particularly opaque phrase. If one was to
be more precise one might substitute diversity or cladogenesis for
evolution. In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

[JTEM]

Post by Ernest Major
In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

Or I might be referring to the founder effect.

It actually fits Punctuated Equilibrium ala Gould like a glove.

"Punctuated Equilibrium," on it's own, is really nothing more than
a result, not a mechanism. "Founder Effect" is a mechanism.

And I really like the term -- Founder Effect -- because it
perfectly illustrates everything from isolation on an island to
surviving a bottle neck.

And, again, slides right into "Punctuated Equilibrium" without
even a dab of lube...

And they both work with Wolpoff's "Multiregionalism" or
"Regional Continuity" if you prefer.

AND, they all walk hand-in-hand with Aquatic Ape.

This is why the good Doctor is such a genius: NOT because his
ideas are good but because they are good AND are complimentary
to (not in conflict with) other ideas. Out of Africa purity, on
the other hand, is self refuting, where every five minutes there's
new evidence that "Completely re-writes" something, only nothing
ever changes.

[John Harshman]

Post by Ernest Major

Post by John Harshman
Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's
that uninterested in being understood.

Apart from JTEM Google gives me a quotation from an ecotourism guide in
Costa Rica. I don't find it a particularly opaque phrase. If one was to
be more precise one might substitute diversity or cladogenesis for
evolution. In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

The question is not what that sentence means but who is supposed to have
said it, i.e. the "good doctor".

[Bob Casanova]

On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 15:37:47 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Ernest Major

Post by John Harshman
Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's
that uninterested in being understood.

Apart from JTEM Google gives me a quotation from an ecotourism guide in
Costa Rica. I don't find it a particularly opaque phrase. If one was to
be more precise one might substitute diversity or cladogenesis for
evolution. In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

The question is not what that sentence means but who is supposed to have
said it, i.e. the "good doctor".

Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Instead of listing your heroes, you might've commented on
the topic... might have... if you weren't a faker.

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

Post by JTEM

Post by Bob Casanova
Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Instead of listing your heroes, you might've commented on
the topic... might have... if you weren't a faker.

You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to spite all your erm interesting posts.

PS It would be better if you snipped less of the context.

[JTEM]

On 7/1/24 8:10 AM, Kerr-Mudd

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to

My "Argument" wasn't that you're nym-shifting, you
drool soaked buffoon. AND YOU ARE NYM-SHIFTING
anyway, though that was never my "Argument."

Apparently your lack of reading comprehension is
total.

[David Greig]

Post by JTEM
On 7/1/24 8:10 AM, Kerr-Mudd

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to

My "Argument" wasn't that you're nym-shifting, you
drool soaked buffoon. AND YOU ARE NYM-SHIFTING
anyway, though that was never my "Argument."
Apparently your lack of reading comprehension is
total.

Don't nym-shift, thanks, whoever is doing it

--D.

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 08:53:53 -0000 (UTC)

Post by David Greig

Post by JTEM
On 7/1/24 8:10 AM, Kerr-Mudd

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to

My "Argument" wasn't that you're nym-shifting, you
drool soaked buffoon. AND YOU ARE NYM-SHIFTING
anyway, though that was never my "Argument."
Apparently your lack of reading comprehension is
total.

Don't nym-shift, thanks, whoever is doing it

No one is AFAICT. JTEM is wrong (again). He cut (as usual) his
accusation that I am (We all are?) one person nymshifting, it's only
occasionally amusing.

Whatever point(s) he may have had have been lost anyway.

[Bob Casanova]

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 12:35:13 +0100, the following appeared in

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 08:53:53 -0000 (UTC)

Post by David Greig

Post by JTEM
On 7/1/24 8:10 AM, Kerr-Mudd

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to

My "Argument" wasn't that you're nym-shifting, you
drool soaked buffoon. AND YOU ARE NYM-SHIFTING
anyway, though that was never my "Argument."
Apparently your lack of reading comprehension is
total.

Don't nym-shift, thanks, whoever is doing it

No one is AFAICT. JTEM is wrong (again). He cut (as usual) his
accusation that I am (We all are?) one person nymshifting, it's only
occasionally amusing.

Not even occasionally; that ship sailed years ago.

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
Whatever point(s) he may have had have been lost anyway.

Not lost; he intentionally threw them away. It's simply his
schtick to poke and see who responds.

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
Not lost

You never had any to begin with.

I wonder what Freud would say about you?

[JTEM]

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
No one is

If the punch missed, why are you crying "Ouch?"

And why did you suffer an emotional breakdown because I
stated an obvious fact? Molecular dating sucks. Period.

Why does this offend you?

[John Harshman]

Post by David Greig

Post by JTEM
On 7/1/24 8:10 AM, Kerr-Mudd

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John
You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to

My "Argument" wasn't that you're nym-shifting, you
drool soaked buffoon. AND YOU ARE NYM-SHIFTING
anyway, though that was never my "Argument."
Apparently your lack of reading comprehension is
total.

Don't nym-shift, thanks, whoever is doing it
--D.

You may remember the Hershey Collective. This is a similar meme.

[JTEM]

Post by John Harshman
You may remember

Funny thing is, I remember EVERYTHING. Which is how I know
what you are.

So, why were you triggered THIS TIME?

You never did say.

[Bob Casanova]

On Mon, 01 Jul 2024 13:10:00 +0100, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by "Kerr-Mudd, John"

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John

Post by JTEM

Post by Bob Casanova
Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Instead of listing your heroes, you might've commented on
the topic... might have... if you weren't a faker.

You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to spite all your erm interesting posts.
PS It would be better if you snipped less of the context.

Since I only see his/her/its "wisdom" when someone else
replies to him/her/it, and he/she/it knows that, it's known
that any comments by the aforementioned entity don't get to
the assumed target.

And the best would be nothing from him/her/it at all; the
average post intelligence would improve somewhat.

[JTEM]

Post by Bob Casanova
Since I only see

You only see what you want to see... another, "Ah, science" moment!

You read my every word, you just avoid reacting with this particular
sock puppet.

You're not fooling anyone, especially not yourself. You know what you
are!

[erik simpson]

Post by Kerr-Mudd, John

Post by JTEM

Post by Bob Casanova
Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Instead of listing your heroes, you might've commented on
the topic... might have... if you weren't a faker.

You need to marshal your arguments more clearly.
It's not us who are nym-shifting to spite all your erm interesting posts.
PS  It would be better if you snipped less of the context.

I can think of another turd that won't go away.

[Pro Plyd]

Post by erik simpson
I can think of another turd that won't go away.

JTRD

[Kerr-Mudd, John]

On Tue, 2 Jul 2024 19:21:54 -0600
[ironically it was:
PS It would be better if you snipped less of the context.]

Post by erik simpson
I can think of another turd that won't go away.

JTRD

KFAYF

[JTEM]

Post by erik simpson
I can think of another turd that won't go away.

The nurse can help you with that.

[Burkhard]

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 15:37:47 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Ernest Major

Post by John Harshman
Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's
that uninterested in being understood.

Apart from JTEM Google gives me a quotation from an ecotourism guide in
Costa Rica. I don't find it a particularly opaque phrase. If one was to
be more precise one might substitute diversity or cladogenesis for
evolution. In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

The question is not what that sentence means but who is supposed to have
said it, i.e. the "good doctor".

Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Shaun Murphy I would have thought

[Ernest Major]

Post by Burkhard

Post by Bob Casanova
On Sat, 29 Jun 2024 15:37:47 -0700, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by John Harshman

Post by John Harshman

Post by Ernest Major

Post by John Harshman
Google gives me nothing in a search for "isolation is the engine of
evolution", unfortunately. You have to wonder why he posts if he's
that uninterested in being understood.

Apart from JTEM Google gives me a quotation from an ecotourism guide in
Costa Rica. I don't find it a particularly opaque phrase. If one was to
be more precise one might substitute diversity or cladogenesis for
evolution. In the light of recent mentions of the founder effect in
quoted posts JTEM might be referring to evolutionary innovation, which
is a somewhat more controversial claim.

The question is not what that sentence means but who is supposed to have
said it, i.e. the "good doctor".

Mengele? Moreau? Kevorkian? So many possibilities...

Shaun Murphy I would have thought

I'm not up on popular culture, but that's what the wisdom of the net
told me.

[JTEM]

Post by Ernest Major
I'm not up on popular culture

Nor mental health! Look what has triggered you THIS time!

Do you honest think your behavior is healthy? These sissy
fits over... nothing what so ever?

"He said something reasonable, AGAIN! I must not rotate
through sock puppets, losing my shit!"