Information icon.svg Voting is completed for the RationalWiki 2021 Moderator Election and the results are now posted.
Congratulations to the winners!

User talk:G.D.

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, G.D.!

Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards!

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

Nice edit on logical validity (sometimes these things get quickly created then forgotten about). As a small aside, don't forgot to sign your talkpage posts with four tildes (~~~~). Oh, and enjoy some goat. ThunderkatzHo! 01:06, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

Hi. Respect the goat. Doing otherwise is baaad. --GastonRabbit (talk) 01:34, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi. Could you remember to sign your talkpage posts? Thanks.--Bob"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence." 20:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Fischer[edit]

Nice work. ТyrannisPlead 21:43, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Genome[edit]

Hi do you know of any online criticism of Genetic Entropy & the Mystery of the Genome? I am not finding any apart from creationist positive reviews or a few blog posts. DinoCrisis (talk) 18:22, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Can't say that I do (don't know the book). I'll look around as well, though you probably know the standard resources for this kind of thing at least as well as I do.G.D. (talk) 18:28, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Nice work![edit]

I've seen your steady efforts on A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism. You're amazingly dedicated and admirably thorough. Star of David.png Radioactive afikomen Please ignore all my awful pre-2014 comments. 06:30, 12 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Thought it might be helpful to have a comprehensive resource on the signatories for quick reference if one is ever engaged in a debate where it is brought up. G.D. (talk) 20:04, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Mae-Wan Ho[edit]

I am in agreement that 98% of the scientists on A Scientific Dissent From Darwinism do not have papers out on biology etc, but Mae-Wan Ho has some peer reviews out and decent reviews of her books in journals... she is not a crank. DinoCrisis (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

I'll look into her again; she was one of the first I did, so I didn't have the same resources for finding publications - I'll try to look them up again. Regardless of her research background, however, she is definitely a crank! She is an HIV denialist, for crying out loud. Her opinion pieces on GMO are hardly anything but crankery either. And her dissent from Darwinism should be viewed in light of that. G.D. (talk) 22:58, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
Im disappointed that she is on the RethinkingAids list?? I have not heard about this, I will look into that. Ok she might be a crank about aids (if that is true) but not on evolution in my view. She published The Rainbow and the Worm, the Physics of Organisms which is the only book of it's kind which details the role of electromagnetism on biology, it has recieved very good reviews in journals etc. She also has some decent books/papers out on epigenetics. I think it would be worthwhile If I created a page about Mae-Wan- Ho on rationalwiki. She is sometimes quote-mined by creationists and is a controversial scientist. DinoCrisis (talk) 09:14, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
Hi: I wrote on your user talk as well: it may be that the RethinkingAids thing is not her fault: That list was launched as a petition with signatories, but now I notice that it has changed to a list of people whose work the RethinkingAids people think challenge HIV-Aids. I didn't notice this change when I found Mae-Wan Ho on that list, so it is surely not a given that she actually signed up for it - or even that she would have wanted to have anything to do with it. Wonder if it is possible to find the precise reason for her signature to the Darwin Dissent list.