scherado wrote:

Cito di Pense wrote:

scherado wrote:
Idiot, you haven't addressed my statement in your response.

So you say, but you won't get away with it. My advice is to stick with "knucklehead".

scherado wrote:The referent "traits" in my statement quoted in this post means what? It means anything and everything that is inherited by a newborn baby

Some stuff is inherited, some stuff is recombined, some stuff is mutated, ...

I have been clear in referring to what's passed to the newborn through the well-understood process of human propagation, but only that which is a result of two set of genes interacting. You can flap and flail your arms as much as you want about other processes, but I won't join you.

You may make your next attempt.

Let me lay this out as simply as I know how:

• There exists a set of molecules which can catalyse their own replication either directly or indirectly via enzyme intermediates. Such molecules are the [deoxy]ribonucleic acids and possibly more ancient precursors as have been described in the literature by Gerald Joyce (amongst others)
• Such molecules replicate imperfectly (as Theropod has already pointed out
• The imperfect replications lead to daughter molecules which are better (sometimes), the same as (quite often) or worse at performing the same replication as their parent molecule
• Over time due to the accumulation of such mutations, molecules change in their ability to replicate
• If such changes coincide with an increased ability to replicate in their current environment then the change prospers and the molecule generates many copies. The opposite case also obtains

That's it. That's the inheritance mechanism. QED.

If you want to understand how self-replicating molecules came about then we have to discuss abiogenesis and the question is, at best, partially answered at this time.

Meanwhile the question of common ancestry has been conclusively settled by the scientific community, and this poster seems to have agreed to that. Now he's just bent on making this about the origin of genetics as a last refuge for his we-don't-know-therefore-magic beliefs.

Cito di Pense wrote:...
Chemical structure is a trait, genius. Chemical structure has its own inheritance mechanism, and that is its structure. Genius.
...

scherado wrote:...
Idiot, you haven't addressed my statement in your response. ...

Do you--moderation--really think I was calling C d P an idiot? He called me a "genius" twice, which means he called me a dumb-shit. TWICE

I was mocking his use of "genius". Do you follow?

Take it to the Feedback thread, Erin Brokovich.

scherado wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:
There is the question, unanswered I assert, as to the origin of life on Earth ("Abiogenisis"?). This I know to be outside the scope of Biological Evolution.

If you know it's irrelevant to the question being asked, why do you bring it up in the first place?

You, sir, have stepped in it, and I mean the feces.

I, simply--I thought--was demonstrating that I have knowledge of the separation of the two: 1) the question of first-life; 2) Biological Evolution, the theory. There is much to be gleaned from this separation. No? Yes.

You have been added to my list, which I won't name or describe, other than to tell you that the first word of this list appears in this post.

Tough guy.

sdelsolray wrote:

scherado wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:
There is the question, unanswered I assert, as to the origin of life on Earth ("Abiogenisis"?). This I know to be outside the scope of Biological Evolution.

If you know it's irrelevant to the question being asked, why do you bring it up in the first place?

You, sir, have stepped in it, and I mean the feces.

I, simply--I thought--was demonstrating that I have knowledge of the separation of the two: 1) the question of first-life; 2) Biological Evolution, the theory. There is much to be gleaned from this separation. No? Yes.

You have been added to my list, which I won't name or describe, other than to tell you that the first word of this list appears in this post.

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

scherado wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:
If you know it's irrelevant to the question being asked, why do you bring it up in the first place?

You, sir, have stepped in it, and I mean the feces.

I, simply--I thought--was demonstrating that I have knowledge of the separation of the two: 1) the question of first-life; 2) Biological Evolution, the theory. There is much to be gleaned from this separation. No? Yes.

You have been added to my list, which I won't name or describe, other than to tell you that the first word of this list appears in this post.

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

scherado wrote:
You, sir, have stepped in it, and I mean the feces.

I, simply--I thought--was demonstrating that I have knowledge of the separation of the two: 1) the question of first-life; 2) Biological Evolution, the theory. There is much to be gleaned from this separation. No? Yes.

You have been added to my list, which I won't name or describe, other than to tell you that the first word of this list appears in this post.

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

No, Thomas. If somebody as scientifically challenged as s. puts you on his feces list, he is paying you a compliment, albeit an unintended one.

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

scherado wrote:
You, sir, have stepped in it, and I mean the feces.

I, simply--I thought--was demonstrating that I have knowledge of the separation of the two: 1) the question of first-life; 2) Biological Evolution, the theory. There is much to be gleaned from this separation. No? Yes.

You have been added to my list, which I won't name or describe, other than to tell you that the first word of this list appears in this post.

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

Panties all in a bunch. Most definitely in a bunch.

Did [you] know that there is no Santa Clause????

Regina wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

No, Thomas. If somebody as scientifically challenged as s. puts you on his feces list, he is paying you a compliment, albeit an unintended one.

That too, yes.

scherado wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

Panties all in a bunch. Most definitely in a bunch.

Did know that there is no Santa Clause????

More vapid personalisations. I though I already informed you that those do nothing to elevate your trolling?

scherado wrote:

Thomas Eshuis wrote:

scherado wrote:

sdelsolray wrote:

Tough guy.

Thank you?

FYI, "Thomas Eshuis"'s name on the list--as well as any others--hasn't changed anything as the list has not been used on the non-existent Blocklistor.

FYI nobody gives a fuck and such a list only serves to demonstrate bigotry on your part.

Panties all in a bunch. Most definitely in a bunch.

Did [you] know that there is no Santa Clause????

For the love of marmite, learn to spell. I bet you're the type of person who says 'mischievious', aren't you.

Fallible wrote:I bet you're the type of person who says 'mischievious', aren't you.

I am. And "warm as a toaster".

Fallible wrote:

scherado wrote:
Did [you] know that there is no Santa Clause????

For the love of marmite, learn to spell. I bet you're the type of person who says 'mischievious', aren't you.

The spelling is correct, but Schezza is wrong. There is a Santa Clause. It's the bit in the contract everybody who wants to become a priest has to sign, with which he legally (canonically, to be more precise) commits himself to ravishing at least one altar boy by the end of each liturgical year. At the end of each he has to submit a report to the Vatican, stating "Santa Clause has come (insert number here) times." The Church loves its euphemisms.

scherado wrote:Tell me, how did the inheritance mechanism originate?

I can help a little with that, even though I know that engaging with an obvious troll, probably manufactured by Pretty Polly or some such hosier, is like trying to put out the sun with a fire extinguisher.

All Downhill From Here

Imperfect replication, an energy gradient and entropy. Everything a body needs.

Some people's ancestry is more common than others. Like people from Arkansas, they all got ancestors in common.

Oi! My fiancée was born in Arkansas.

To be fair, she's unsure of whether her father is also her uncle.

Paw Paw allus tol us don't never trust no Yankee, but I meeted some in the Army and they was nice fellers, but you know what? They ain't got but ONE maw and ONE paw. Hellfire, they's all of 'em practically orphans. Ain't got no Uncle Daddys nor Sister Mommas nor Cousin Aunts nor nothin. Ain't no wonder they's all a mite squirrelly. Don't know grits from pone neither. I feels sorry for 'em, weren't none raised right. They can have a family reunion in just ONE doublewide. Caint happen her, I'm kin to near ever body up'n this holler an' the next two overways.

And may I say, that tooth in the middle of your forehead is glistening beautifully in the moonlight.