{sigh}
You can't keep track of you own lies, and need me to look them up for you?
Oooh Kay.
Your post #162, you used Graur to trash ENCODE:
>>Danny Denier: “You are lying again, Alinsky Joe. Dan Graur has repeatedly and vehemently denied that ENCODE disproved evolution. Why would I claim he did not? “
>>Science Denier Joey said: “{sigh} You ca’t keep track of you own lies, and need me to look them up for you? Oooh Kay. Your post #162, you used Graur to trash ENCODE:
>>Kalamata: ‘”The 2017 article by Graur that Le Page referenced is only one of his many attacks on the Encode project, which he claims: 1) provides support for intelligent design, and 2) doesn’t take into account the primary tenent of his religion, which is “everything is shaped by evolution”. “If Encode is right,” according to Graur, “then evolution is wrong.” I don’t disagree on that point...”
You don’t understand what you read, Joey. or you are too quick to jump to conclusions, or you are simply a liar (I choose door #3.) It it true that I don’t disagree with Graur on that particular point, but that is not Graur’s complete statement. This is my quote from # , which included Graur’s complete statement:
**
[Kalamata quoting EN&S Today:] “We read the paper, and looked over Graur’s accompanying PowerPoint. We’re not impressed by theoretical population genetics because it is based on neo-Darwinian assumptions rather than biological realities. Basically, he is using that circular science to add a quantitative gloss to his fundamental position, namely that if ENCODE is right then evolution is wrong, and evolution can’t be wrong, so ENCODE can’t be right.” [”Dan Graur, Anti-ENCODE Crusader, Is Back.” Evolution News & Science Today, July 28, 2017]”
[Kalamata;] As any normal person can see, I agree 100% that ENCODE is right and evolution is wrong, but that is not Graur’s context. Graur believes ENCODE is wrong, therefore I am not in agreement with him; and anyone claiming I agree with Graur on that point is lying (hint, Alinsky Joe.)
[Kalamata;] For the record, evolution is 100% false, with our without the ENCODE data.
**
That is the third or fourth time Joey has made that dumb claim, so I must assume he is logically challenged. Perhaps this will help him understand. The writer at EN&S Today, stated Graur’s position as:
[Graur:] “if ENCODE is right then evolution is wrong, and evolution can’t be wrong, so ENCODE can’t be right.”
I disagree with Graur. I am of the opinion that ENCODE can’t be wrong, and evolution can’t be right.
I doubt Joey can let go of this, because he has nothing else.
Mr. Kalamata