User talk:TimS

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search

No problem, and thank you! Tmtoulouse 09:19, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

How about we put up a [[RationalWiki:Proposed Style Guidelines]] and [[RationalWiki:Style Guidelines]] similar to what we did for general guidlines and post suggestions over there and see what everyone thinks? Tmtoulouse 10:53, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

The wrath of the Neanderthals[edit]

The Neanderthals are back: bigger, meaner and more scientific than ever!

I was wondering if you would like to put some of your stuff about Human and Neanderthal DNA, in the article?

Thanks, MiddleMan

I can see by your bio that you are an anti-american coward who hates his country and its troops. You're probably a terrorist. --PalMD-Talk 15:54, 22 May 2007 (CDT)

Information Theory[edit]

I've got a challenge for you. The anti-evo's have that whole bizarre argument about new genetic information being "created", and this being invalid, etc (I never really follow them). Wanna help tackle that?--PalMD-Talk 09:06, 23 May 2007 (CDT)

Re: Wiki Extension Wishlist[edit]

Sure, I'll get right on it! ----Linus(plot evil tech) 19:35, 24 May 2007 (CDT)


Apparently, the article on gene expression doesn't exist anymore...to hard to read big words. Notice GOD is a three letter word, and Goddidit is shorter than "Evolution through natural selection" or "ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny"?--PalMD-yada yada 09:02, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Need your help here --PalMD-yada yada 10:46, 29 May 2007 (CDT) The link should take you to the right spot. It is about vaccine being produced from aborted fetuses. I think it is a quote mine problem, but perhaps you could take a look. Thanks.--PalMD-yada yada 13:41, 29 May 2007 (CDT) Well...let's add a little discussion about it then. It was quote-mined a bit, as the NHS memo went on to explain how almost all major religious denominations do not shun the vaccine, given that no ongoing harm is being done, there is no alternative, etc. Also, you could explain the difference between a cell line and a fetus.--PalMD-yada yada 14:18, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Thanks for the extraordinary help.--PalMD-yada yada 14:44, 29 May 2007 (CDT)

Genome[edit]

I'm thinking of starting a genome page, with the different genomes and the evidence for evolution. I'm not really a biochemist... Sterile 14:44, 30 May 2007 (CDT)

I'm sure you're up on this but some of this will already be on The incontrovertible evidence of common descent--Bob_M (talk) 14:46, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
Sterile, how about making pages of different genomes that can be used as references/additional material for the The incontrovertible evidence of common descent page as well as other pages. We can link and create a new category for them, this way they can be used for other arguments and as material for other articles. One each genome we could list some specialized proteins as well as some similar functions found in the animal kingdom, like PAX6 for example. This way Bob_M can use the information from the pages as article support.--TimS 14:52, 30 May 2007 (CDT)
While I'm honored to be included in your note, my work on common descent has been limited to copy editing and a few details. I don't presume to be an expert in the field. The article was created by Tmtoulouse. Still, it's a subject which interests me - so anything I can do to help.--Bob_M (talk) 14:57, 30 May 2007 (CDT)

I'll do my best. I've been really busy lately (hence my somewhat limited participation in 2.0), so I'll do my best. It's mostly finding info... I've also got to get over the Cp mindset and into the RW mindset!Sterile 15:09, 30 May 2007 (CDT)

If you need chem structures for the mol bio project, I'm available. Well, OK, I'll be away until next Friday, so not exactly currently available, but available in the future. Sterile 16:31, 1 June 2007 (CDT)



You are seriously prolific today. Thanks.DocSock 10:34, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

I like the pseudoscience template. I take it it yours?--Bob_M (talk) 12:16, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

It's definitely harder to find, seems to me.DocSock 14:39, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Sorry, i forgot to mark topic, i was speaking of breadcrumbsDocSock 14:44, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

This user likes goats...a lot.DocSock 15:03, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Re: Breadcrum stuff[edit]

I'm completely confused. What do you want me to do? ----Linus(plot evil tech) 17:04, 1 June 2007 (CDT)

Bad boy[edit]

You're a very bad boy, tryin to add all that larnin.DocSock 13:05, 5 June 2007 (CDT)

Genetics[edit]

Much assistance needed at Genetics.162.82.215.199 12:05, 21 June 2007 (CDT)

Welcome back[edit]

May all your gels run true--PalMD-Ars longa, vita brevis 17:14, 31 August 2007 (CDT)


Disproving Creationism - title[edit]

Hi Tim. There has been a bit of a debate about renaming the "Disproving" articles and the challenge article on homeopathy. In the past you have commented on Disproving Intelligent Design talk page and I thought you might want to comment at Talk:Disproving Creationism. Cheers.--Bob_M (talk) 05:07, 1 September 2007 (CDT)

Hey[edit]

Hey, would you mind taking a look at Retinoblastoma? Locke User is Vandal/sysop Always Watching...... 14:45, 9 September 2007 (CDT)

--AlphaTimSOmega!. 13:45, 2 October 2007 (EDT)

User page redlinks[edit]

Your user page is guilty of having a number of redlinks, some of which are to articles that may eventually exist, others that I am not so sure about. Would you care to re-visit your page with a view to reducing the number of red links. Thanks from someone who still thinks its better to be dead than red:--Remarcsd 00:22, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

Thanks Tim.:--Remarcsd 18:15, 4 October 2007 (EDT)

Reverst[edit]

Thanks for getting those. I tried to, but i had to leave. (PS-I allowed his comment on my talk page to stand, and I answered him.) Researcher 01:12, 7 December 2007 (EST)

Panda's thumb? The wikipedian RS?[edit]

Panda's thumb is a blog run by wikipedians to get their POV included as coming from a "reliable source". It doesn't fool anybody me. (It probably does fool a lot of others, though...the NCSE and their toadies are clever).

What?[edit]

What on earth happened here? My user page looks nothing like it used to look. Someone please tell me why? --T1mS (talk) 23:56, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Umm because it is not your user page.--TimS (talk) 14:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

yeah, I figured that out. Sorry iwas confused. --aSKTim|