RE: The code that is DNA
December 24, 2019 at 8:39 pm
(This post was last modified: December 24, 2019 at 8:39 pm by The Architect Of Fate.)
Quote:Phyletics lol; and yes, this isn't controversial, they're hypotheses.Maintain you ignorance
(December 24, 2019 at 7:59 pm)Paleophyte Wrote:Truth(December 24, 2019 at 5:41 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: 1. That phylogenies are hypotheses.
Wrong. Do you actually know anything about phyletics?
Quote:2. That they are not (or are rarely) testable.
Dead wrong. How else do you think we produce, revise, and discard them? There are entire journals devoted to little else.
Quote:3. That relatedness is an assumption in the absence of known ancestry.
It's an assumption that the sun will rise in the east tomorrow. Can we assume that you know how basic inference works?
Quote:4. That one can't use nucleic acids to prove relatedness.
I wonder how you think paternity tests work.
"Change was inevitable"
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM
Nemo sicut deus debet esse!
“No matter what men think, abortion is a fact of life. Women have always had them; they always have and they always will. Are they going to have good ones or bad ones? Will the good ones be reserved for the rich, while the poor women go to quacks?”
–SHIRLEY CHISHOLM