I believe in the aquatic ape hypothesis and people persecute me for it.

CEngelbrecht said:
Go through more than one page.
Click to expand...
I'll tell you what, rather than asking me to do all the work, just cite the definitive paper.
You must have one.
I don't know her, never studied her.
Cite the paper that convinced you but not the scientific community.
 
Pinball1970 said:
I don't know her, never studied her.
Click to expand...

No shit.

Pinball1970 said:
Cite the paper that convinced you
Click to expand...

Her books did that. The ones you refuse to read, 'cause you're terrified of being converted to heretical beliefs.

Aquatic Scenarios in the Thinking on Human Evolution: What are they and How do they Compare?

Pinball1970 said:
but not the scientific community.
Click to expand...

Because they are not allowed to say it out loud.

"During the last few years, when I have found myself in the company of distinguished biologists, evolutionary theorists, paleoanthropologists and other experts, I have often asked them to tell me, please, exactly why Elaine Morgan must be wrong about the aquatic theory. I haven't yet had a reply worth mentioning, aside from those who admit, with a twinkle in their eyes, that they have also wondered the same thing."
— Dan Dennett, "Darwin's Dangerous Idea", 1995
 
CEngelbrecht said:
The ones you refuse to read, 'cause you're terrified of being converted to heretical beliefs.

Because they are not allowed to say it out loud.
Click to expand...
Playing the "I'm mad as a hatter" card is working out about as well for you here as it is for Trump on the campaign trail.


Are you here to discuss science; or you are here talk about conspiracies? Pick one.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
You stopped looking.
Click to expand...
OK so you reference some published scientific papers of hers directly, then. It should only take you a few seconds, since you know where to find them, apparently. I suspect there are none and you are bullshitting, but I'll be happy to be proved wrong.
 
exchemist said:
OK so you reference some published scientific papers of hers directly, then. It should only take you a few seconds, since you know where to find them, apparently. I suspect there are none and you are bullshitting, but I'll be happy to be proved wrong.
Click to expand...

(I have above, in post #121.)
 
Last edited:
CEngelbrecht said:
Her books did that. The ones you refuse to read, 'cause you're terrified of being converted to heretical beliefs.
Click to expand...
No just never relevant since it was largely discarded by the scientific community.
Due to unsupported claims as all the references seem to indicate.
 
exchemist said:
OK so you reference some published scientific papers of hers directly, then. It should only take you a few seconds, since you know where to find them, apparently. I suspect there are none and you are bullshitting, but I'll be happy to be proved wrong.
Click to expand...
No, just another book by the looks of it.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
(I have above, in post #121.)
Click to expand...
Nope. That was just another book.

So, no published scientific paper at all then. As I thought: you were bullshitting and hoping we would be impressed with a list of books, in lieu of actual professionally conducted science research.
 
Pinball1970 said:
No just never relevant since it was largely discarded by the scientific community.
Click to expand...

Like I say, you take their word for it. You think you don't have to form your own opinion. Nullius in Verba does not apply.

Pinball1970 said:
Due to unsupported claims as all the references seem to indicate.
Click to expand...

How about you actually read the claims, before you stamp them with that false moniker?

Human_Aquatic_Adaptations.png


.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
No, that wasn't Morgan. That was a fellow biology grad student of mine maybe a quarter of a century back now. She was out right told by a professor of paleoanthropology that asking these kinds of (for him clearly unanswerable) questions about Morgan's beach apes was endangering her passing her exams. 'Cause this was banned knowledge. Then she had to flee that corrupted field. My anger has reasons, 'cause all of you are doing exactly the same thing. You too are disgusted that some people keep pointing out that it's just not crazy, when you "know" it's supposed to be. You're as much stuck in dogma as creationists are. You too think we know everything already and will not accept challenges to the dogma coming from outside the cloth.
Click to expand...
Well since we are not psychic I'm not sure how we were supposed to know who, apart from Elaine Morgan, you were referring to by "she". We obviously can't get into some anecdote of yours involving persons not present in this discussion.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
You're still denying any and all challenge to your dogma. You are a closed mind too.
Click to expand...
You are not doing the credibility of AAH any favours. You claim there are scientific papers by Morgan, when there are none, just books. This makes you look evasive and duplicitous.

What do you think that does for people reading this thread? Will they be impressed by your hypothesis, do you think? Or will they think: "Here's another crank that can't justify his theory and is ducking and weaving in response to challenge.".
 
exchemist said:
You are not doing the credibility of AAH any favours. You claim there are scientific papers by Morgan, when there are none, just books. This makes you look evasive and duplicitous.

What do you think that does for people reading this thread? Will they be impressed by your hypothesis, do you think? Or will they think: "Here's another crank that can't justify his theory and is ducking and weaving in response to challenge.".
Click to expand...

You will remember this, when the selfish bullshit finally ends and this is official consensus.

exchemist said:
Nope. I'm not getting into uncorroborated anecdotes, emanating from a source with credibility as low as yours.
Click to expand...

Then your opinion on all this is irrelevant. When you refuse to believe what you don't want to hear. Aka. the creationist method.
 
CEngelbrecht said:
You will remember this, when the selfish bullshit finally ends and this is official consensus.
Click to expand...
#36: 40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is."

Pro-tip: if you don't want to be treated like a crackpot, maybe don't keep pulling straight from the crackpot playbook.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top