...
Post A Reply
my profile
|
directory
login
|
register
|
search
|
faq
|
forum home
»
EgyptSearch Forums
»
Egyptology
»
Ancient west Eurasian ancestry in southern and eastern Africa 2013
» Post A Reply
Post A Reply
Login Name:
Password:
Message Icon:
Message:
HTML is not enabled.
UBB Code™ is enabled.
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QB] [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: You are a moron of a unique kind for focusing on a gene that wasn't even mentioned in the paper.[/QUOTE]Sick lying ass troll, this is the [b]third[/b] time that you're running away from addressing this segment of the discussion: [i]Like the sick troll that you are, you're now structurally lying your way out of your phuckups. Filty lying ass pig, cite where I said that Pagani et al mention SLC45A2 explicitly in their text, rather than simply having identified it as one of the genes implicated in what they meant when they said ''we also looked at [b]other genes[/b] associated with pigmentation in Europe''. While you're at it, explain how your persistent trolling in regards to this tenacious lie of yours, rectifies your earlier fabricated lie that my mention of the gene was an accident.[/i] --Swenet [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: when the authors noted "looked at" the other genes, they simply meant that they took them (other genes) into consideration, which you comically bungled up and mistook it for your own silly conception that their invocation of "looked at" must signify their "looking at literature first to identify which genes they should be looking ‘’for’’[/QUOTE]You phuchin' troll, this is the 2nd time that you're desperately running away from this segment of the discussion. Explain how ''taking into consideration'', in this context, is supposedly an endeavour separated from ''consulting the literature'', to make sense of the non-existent dichotomy between ''taking into consideration'' and ''consulting the literature'', that you're desperately hoping will catch on. Surely there must be an explanation for why your crippled sh!t stained brains are attempting to discredit my interpretation of that Pagani et al citation with what can only be described as another way of saying what I said. [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: Other than fuckhead crackpots, who else would be intellectually inept enough to say that quoting information correctly does not matter?[/QUOTE]Lying ass pig, it is obvious that you're not only running away from what I'm telling you, but that you apparently on the other side of the 99,9% of the educated public who know the difference between a paraphrase and a verbatim quote: [i]Unless these people aren't actually tropical populations, it isn't going to matter whether you explicitly said they were equatorial, you phuchin' jackass.[/i] --Swenet [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: Let's stick to what I actually said: the paper only identifies skin pigmentation as the likely phenotypic candidate of this selection. [/QUOTE]Which brings us back to the fact that the paper says light skin got selected for in the case of [b]Europeans[/b], and makes no such explicit case for Ethiopians. Which then brings us back to the fact that what you proclaim is a view of the authors, is really your own retarded claim, hiding behind someone else’s authority. Which brings us back to the fact that it was none other than your own retarded ass that said that light skin got selected for in populations who reside in the tropics. [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: You were instructed to provide "evidence" for your crazy accusations. Naturally, that would mean first quoting (not silly misinformed paraphrases) me, and then demonstrating where I went wrong, jackass![/QUOTE]Filthy pig, your stupidity has no bounds! You asked someone to reproduce, out of a textual exchange, records of something that’s inherently non-verbal. Even worse: you then go on a full blown super stumped discourse, talking about how, if there was no record of this apparent fact in the said textual exchange, your demented neurones find it a real enigma that it could have been discerned in other ways: [i]Given that you are tacitly saying your accusation speaks to "a non-verbal state of mind", [b]how the heck then can you discern "a non-verbal state of mind"[/b][/i] --The Explorer According to this crippled reasoning, I must not know for a fact that you're alive, simply because there is no explicit record of this in the textual exchanges in this thread! Do you have any idea how insanely retarded your barely functioning neurones must be, to be sending impulses to your crack besmirched lips that it's okay to be talking such unearthly stupid smack? Get your microcephalic head looked at, son! When you’ve mustered up the balls to do so, try tackling the following inconvenient facts as well, will ya? I have more ass whooping in store for your lying ass: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: Go ahead and ask many more times, [b]the answer doesn't change[/b][/QUOTE]Of course it won’t, and the reason is none other than the fact that you can’t answer it without inserting girly giggle accompanied unsubstantiated claims that the Sri Lankan skin pigmentation state of affairs bolsters your non-existent case! For the fourth time it’s observed that you’re scared sh!tless to address what is being shoved in your face, with more than tail between legs amygdala triggered non-replies: [i]Lying ass troll, the Sri Lankan samples had an excess of SLC24A5, and a severe deficit of SLC45A2. Explain this under your crackpot theory that a severe minority of SLC24A5 correlated genes testify to an indigenous origin of this gene.[/i] --Swenet[/QUOTE]Just thought I’d ’remind’ you that you ran away from this, here, too: [QUOTE]Originally posted by Swenet: [QUOTE]Originally posted by The Explorer: I thought I already clued in your stupid monkey ass that if there were no other skin pigmentation genes in Ethiopians[/QUOTE]You’re such a phuckin’ low IQ, dumbass, charlatan. Is your bum ass saying that the Ethiopian sample implicated here wouldn’t have had additional skin pigmentation genes, had, let’s say, derived SLC45A2 been found in them? Get to work, fraud: [i]If not negative selection, explain why no other skin pigmentation genes were found in the Ethiopian population[/i] --Swenet[/QUOTE][/QUOTE] [/QB][/QUOTE]
Instant Graemlins
Instant UBB Code™
What is UBB Code™?
Options
Disable Graemlins in this post.
*** Click here to review this topic. ***
Contact Us
|
EgyptSearch!
(c) 2015 EgyptSearch.com
Powered by UBB.classic™ 6.7.3