Danny Denier:
"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:" Right, just as I truthfully reported now several times: Kalamata agrees with Graur in trashing ENCODE: "If ENCODE is right, then evolution is wrong."
Since both Graur and ENCODE think evolution is right, Kalamata's temporary agreement with Graur trashes ENCODE's opinion/position on the subject.
Danny Denier: "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.)"
I'd say it takes a very special kind of liar, Danny boy, to claim that you didn't say what you just said: you agree with Graur in trashing ENCODE.
Sure, your reason is different, but the fact is you're happy, happy to team up with Graur to trash ENCODE in the name of anti-evolutionism.
For you it's a simple case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", however temporarily.
Of course it was a temporary alliance of convenience and by your post #180 (repeated in #239) you were using the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics report to trash both ENCODE and Graur, quoting, "What we find is that less than 5% of the human genome can actually be considered as ‘neutral’”.
But so far as I can discover, neither ENCODE nor Graur nor anybody else agrees with Kalamata's claim that the Swiss report means only 5% of human DNA is not "restrained" or "constrained" by evolution.
Danny Denier: "For the record, evolution is 100% false, with our without the ENCODE data."
And yet, neither ENCODE nor Graur nor the Swiss Institute, so far as I can tell, agree with that purpose for which Kalamata has pitted their words against each other.
Danny Denier: "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."
Right, that is the third of fourth time Kalamata you've lied about your position on Graur.
First you said you agree with Graur on the point and when I called you out on it, you claimed, no, no, you agreed and disagreed.
Now you say you disagree and disagree.
But the bottom line is still this: you are happy to use Graur, ENCODE, the Swiss & anybody else to trash evolution even though none of those agree with your views on the subject.
Danny Denier: "I doubt Joey can let go of this, because he has nothing else."
But there's nothing here for me to "let go of".
I merely respond to your lies, as best as I can.
If you just stop lying, there will be no more response from me, FRiend. ![]()
>>Danny Denier: "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:"
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "Right, just as I truthfully reported now several times: Kalamata agrees with Graur in trashing ENCODE: "If ENCODE is right, then evolution is wrong." Since both Graur and ENCODE think evolution is right, Kalamata's temporary agreement with Graur trashes ENCODE's opinion/position on the subject."
It is hard to argue with that kind of illogic.
**************
>>Danny Denier: "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.)"
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "I'd say it takes a very special kind of liar, Danny boy, to claim that you didn't say what you just said: you agree with Graur in trashing ENCODE. Sure, your reason is different, but the fact is you're happy, happy to team up with Graur to trash ENCODE in the name of anti-evolutionism.
I guess that rules out you being a normal person, Joey.
**************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "For you it's a simple case of "the enemy of my enemy is my friend", however temporarily."
No. Joey. My enemies are my enemies.
**************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "Of course it was a temporary alliance of convenience and by your post #180 (repeated in #239) you were using the Swiss Institute of Bioinformatics report to trash both ENCODE and Graur, quoting, "What we find is that less than 5% of the human genome can actually be considered as "neutral".
You have a science comprehension problem, Joey. The 2018 Swiss team verified the 2012 ENCODE report.
**************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "But so far as I can discover, neither ENCODE nor Graur nor anybody else agrees with Kalamata's claim that the Swiss report means only 5% of human DNA is not "restrained" or "constrained" by evolution."
You truly are scientifically-challenged, Joey.
**************
>>Danny Denier: "For the record, evolution is 100% false, with our without the ENCODE data."
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "And yet, neither ENCODE nor Graur nor the Swiss Institute, so far as I can tell, agree with that purpose for which Kalamata has pitted their words against each other.
How could you know? You don't understand the science! Perhaps this fellow can explain it. He has a PhD in Genetics with many years of research experience:
"According to the popular neutral model of evolutionary theory, much of the human genome is nothing but randomly evolving junk. All of this so-called neutral DNA that is allegedly not under any 'selective restraint' only serves as fodder for functional new genes and traits to somehow magically arise and thus provide the engine of evolution... Global data among diverse people groups for DNA sequence variability across the human genome was inputted into a statistical model of neutral evolution. It was discovered that, at most, only 5% of the human genome could randomly evolve and not be subject to the alleged forces of selection. Fanny Pouyet, the lead author of the published [Swiss] study stated, 'What we find is that less than 5% of the human genome can actually be considered as 'neutral.'' Oops, so much for human evolution! ... This study is just one more example in a long line of failures where the theoretical models of evolution have completely collapsed in light of real-world data. And in this case, the failure was even more spectacular because the statistical model that was used was based on theoretical evolutionary assumptions." [Jeffrey P. Tomkins, "95% of Human Genome Can't Evolve." Institute for Creation Research, Oct 25, 2018]
**************
>>Danny Denier: "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."
>>Danny Denier: "I disagree with Graur. I am of the opinion that ENCODE can’t be wrong, and evolution can’t be right."
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "Right, that is the third of fourth time Kalamata you've lied about your position on Graur. First you said you agree with Graur on the point and when I called you out on it, you claimed, no, no, you agreed and disagreed. Now you say you disagree and disagree."
You are very confused, Joey; perhaps because you are in way over your head.
**************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "But the bottom line is still this: you are happy to use Graur, ENCODE, the Swiss & anybody else to trash evolution even though none of those agree with your views on the subject."
I don't need them or anyone else to trash evolution, Joey. I never tire of flogging that beast.
**************
>>Danny Denier: "I doubt Joey can let go of this, because he has nothing else." **************
>>Joey the Science Denier said: "But there's nothing here for me to "let go of". I merely respond to your lies, as best as I can. If you just stop lying, there will be no more response from me, FRiend."
You need a good dose of repentance, Child.
Mr. Kalamata