Atheistoclast wrote:

chairman bill wrote:I'm still reeling from the thought that Atheistoclast is a product of my mind. I'm going to try really, really hard to think him out of existence. brb

You can't, because the Creator....

....has implanted the thought...

...of my existence in your mind....

I dwell in your mind and you in my own.

I am here to stay. Sorry.

Atheistoclast wrote:

chairman bill wrote:I'm still reeling from the thought that Atheistoclast is a product of my mind. I'm going to try really, really hard to think him out of existence. brb

You can't, because the Creator has implanted the thought of my existence in your mind. I dwell in your mind and you in my own.

I am here to stay. Sorry.

Atheistoclast wrote:

If you want to be taken seriously by a peer-reviewed researcher like myself, then you have to either publish or perish.

ramseyoptom wrote:

Atheistoclast wrote:

If you want to be taken seriously by a peer-reviewed researcher like myself, then you have to either publish or perish.

And just because something is published in a peer-reviewed journal still doesn't mean to say it is not complete crap. I will just remind you of three letters "MMR" - and looked how that turned out for the author.

Atheistoclast wrote:For the benefit of Calilasseia I am making a helpful suggestion:

If you have really read over 2,000 papers on evolutionary biology, then you are at a stage where you ought to commit this knowledge as a perspective or review article. Given your fascination with fish and their ecology, I think the following journal run by Professor John Endler is a good place to submit a manuscript (there are no author charges):

Evolutionary Ecology (published by Springer-Verlag)

http://www.springer.com/life+sciences/e ... rnal/10682

If you want to be taken seriously by a peer-reviewed researcher like myself, then you have to either publish or perish.

Athie wrote:
You can't, because the Creator has implanted the thought of my existence in your mind. I dwell in your mind and you in my own.

I am here to stay. Sorry.

Atheistoclast wrote:

ramseyoptom wrote:

Atheistoclast wrote:

If you want to be taken seriously by a peer-reviewed researcher like myself, then you have to either publish or perish.

And just because something is published in a peer-reviewed journal still doesn't mean to say it is not complete crap. I will just remind you of three letters "MMR" - and looked how that turned out for the author.

I will be interested if Calilasseia will decide to join the big league of science and submit a manuscript to Evolutionary Ecology. I think he is capable of writing a perspective, review or commentary even if he is not in a position to do research.

Regina wrote:

Athie wrote:
You can't, because the Creator has implanted the thought of my existence in your mind. I dwell in your mind and you in my own.

I am here to stay. Sorry.

So you are just a thought? I guess I can deal with that. But if you have no material form, how do you write your papers? Do live inside your computer's hard drive, perhaps?

falconjudge wrote:Please direct us to your own peer-reviewed papers, A.

falconjudge wrote:Please direct us to your own peer-reviewed papers, A.

Agrippina wrote:

*Waiting with bated breath for the response to this post*

Atheistoclast wrote:

falconjudge wrote:Please direct us to your own peer-reviewed papers, A.

Please follow the links to 3 of them. They were all rigorously peer reviewed by experts in the field:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 5/abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21550380

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q767h613177m34r1/

Another 2 are due to be published in the next few weeks. We live in exciting times.

Atheistoclast wrote:

Agrippina wrote:

*Waiting with bated breath for the response to this post*

Cali is all huff and puff. If he is so interested by evolutionary biology, he ought to write up and submit an appropriate manuscript (review, perspective or commentary). He could even write a research article based on the fish he keeps at home. I know he has taken many photos of them and observed their behavior. Evolutionary Ecology is a good journal. John Endler, the EIC, is one of Cali's heroes.

Shrunk wrote:

Atheistoclast wrote:

falconjudge wrote:Please direct us to your own peer-reviewed papers, A.

Please follow the links to 3 of them. They were all rigorously peer reviewed by experts in the field:

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1 ... 5/abstract

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21550380

http://www.springerlink.com/content/q767h613177m34r1/

Another 2 are due to be published in the next few weeks. We live in exciting times.

Two of those are in non-biology journals, and the third does not question evolutionary theory at all.

Still, credit where it's due, you did get them published.

Regina wrote:

Atheistoclast wrote:

Science allows us to observe the work of the Creator. Anatomists of the early 19th century studied the body in all its intricacy and complexity because it provided a direct insight into the mind of the Creator. The more we delve, the more we see just how intelligent this mind truly is. Science is a profoundly religious experience for many people.

Hang on for a sec:
The work of the Creator? Are you by any chance talking about entities that vanish the second you stop perceiving them? Which naturally includes the Creator, doesn't it? So you are the Creator of the universe, aren't you? Because your perception creates the Creator?

Shrunk wrote:
Two of those are in non-biology journals, and the third does not question evolutionary theory at all.

Still, credit where it's due, you did get them published.