Namibia Seeks German Aid for Genocide Reparations

Brenden_E said:
It's how science works. Dude...
Nothing is set in stone. Open that closed little mind a lil.
Click to expand...

The mind is open. But it requires this because I deal in fact, logic and reason only:

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor expressed by writer Christopher Hitchens. It says that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens has phrased the razor in writing as:

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Oh - Only bellends use the terms dude, bro or bruh.
 
Brenden_E said:
It's how science works. Dude...
Nothing is set in stone. Open that closed little mind a lil.
Click to expand...

So, despite testing DNA and finding no Neanderthal DNA in Negroid people for ages, they're now finding it? I call BS.
 
Cosmik Debris said:
So, despite testing DNA and finding no Neanderthal DNA in Negroid people for ages, they're now finding it? I call BS.
Click to expand...
You make a long post boasting about believing in fact and reason, yet off the cuff, you call BS on research using advanced sequencing and a more complete dataset to call into question previously held beliefs.

Clown world, baby.
 
Brenden_E said:
You make a long post boasting about believing in fact and reason, yet off the cuff, you call BS on research using advanced sequencing and a more complete dataset to call into question previously held beliefs.

Clown world, baby.
Click to expand...

The top geneticists at Harvard and the Max Planck Institute don't agree with you. So, still clown world?
 
Cosmik Debris said:
The top geneticists at Harvard and the Max Planck Institute don't agree with you. So, still clown world?
Click to expand...
The "top" scientists have been shown to be mistaken, again and again. And when they have proven wrong, we accept the new theory as the status quo until it can be disproven. That's science.

The new research has been widely published. Could they be mistaken, sure, but their methods and conclusions are solid. I do believe it has merit until proven otherwise.

So yes, you are clowning hard right now.
 
Cosmik Debris said:
Yeesh! 52 minutes, I'm not watching that. But here's something from the Max Planck Institute:

Stephen Schiffels, head of the Max Planck Institute’s Population Genetics Group, and his team have published the unprecedented findings in the May 30 Nature Communications Journal, reports Live Science. It turns out, ancient Egyptians had more in common genetically to people from today’s Syria, Lebanon, Israel, Jordan and Iraq.

The team compared the samples from the mummies with DNA (both ancient and modern) from people living between Egypt and Ethiopia. The results: DNA sequences over the span of 1,300 years didn’t change much, despite the fact that Egypt’s population was influence by both Roman and Greek invasions, according to findings. However, when the same set was compared to the DNA of modern Egyptians, a stark difference was the absence of sub-Saharan ancestry, which is prevalent in today’s population.

Remember when all the black inventors and ancient civilisation that whites stole gumpf was going around? Egypt was claimed to be a black civilisation by those proponents. This blew that idea out of the water.
Click to expand...
www.nature.com

Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods - Nature Communications

Archaeological and historical records had shown ancient Egypt before and after Ptolemaic and Roman periods to be a hub of human migration and exchange. Here, Schuenemann and colleagues analyse ancient mitochondrial and nuclear DNA to investigate the genetic history of Egypt.
www.nature.com www.nature.com
 
Brenden_E said:
The "top" scientists have been shown to be mistaken, again and again. And when they have proven wrong, we accept the new theory as the status quo until it can be disproven. That's science.

The new research has been widely published. Could they be mistaken, sure, but their methods and conclusions are solid. I do believe it has merit until proven otherwise.

So yes, you are clowning hard right now.
Click to expand...

When the research is peer reviewed, only then can it be accepted. This is making the Google bubble because it supports the leftist narrative. Just like the Egyptians being black which has been debunked by the Max Planck Institute. And all the black inventors that suddenly cropped up that has been debunked.

Having found no evidence for decades, there is a sudden spurious finding. Ever heard of a false positive?
 
Brenden_E said:
The "top" scientists have been shown to be mistaken, again and again. And when they have proven wrong, we accept the new theory as the status quo until it can be disproven. That's science.

The new research has been widely published. Could they be mistaken, sure, but their methods and conclusions are solid. I do believe it has merit until proven otherwise.
Click to expand...

Nope. Once again, that is not how science works:

Hitchens's razor is an epistemological razor expressed by writer Christopher Hitchens. It says that the burden of proof regarding the truthfulness of a claim lies with the one who makes the claim; if this burden is not met, then the claim is unfounded, and its opponents need not argue further in order to dismiss it. Hitchens has phrased the razor in writing as:

"What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence."

Until it is proven, it remains a hypothesis and does not have the status of a theory. Do you know the difference?
 
Sollie said:
www.nature.com

Ancient Egyptian mummy genomes suggest an increase of Sub-Saharan African ancestry in post-Roman periods - Nature Communications

Archaeological and historical records had shown ancient Egypt before and after Ptolemaic and Roman periods to be a hub of human migration and exchange. Here, Schuenemann and colleagues analyse ancient mitochondrial and nuclear DNA to investigate the genetic history of Egypt.
www.nature.com www.nature.com
Click to expand...

Absolutely correct. The Max Planck Institute confirms that Sub Saharan people had no influence in the Egyptian DNA until after the Romans. The pyramids were not built by the Bantu.
 
Cosmik Debris said:
When the research is peer reviewed, only then can it be accepted. This is making the Google bubble because it supports the leftist narrative. Just like the Egyptians being black which has been debunked by the Max Planck Institute. And all the black inventors that suddenly cropped up that has been debunked.

Having found no evidence for decades, there is a sudden spurious finding. Ever heard of a false positive?
Click to expand...
Leftist narrative? You are in deep and seeing ghosts methinks.
 
Cosmik Debris said:
You've never heard of the leftist narrative of a Wakanda like state where whites stole everything, even their knowledge, from blacks?
Click to expand...
Yes and neanderthal DNA in Africans due to ancient migrations being described as a leftist agenda is a bit of a stretch.

It's a theory that will either hold or not. But to put it down to a conspiracy theory, I think you need to lay off the klippies and cola.
 
Brenden_E said:
Yes and neanderthal DNA in Africans due to ancient migrations being described as a leftist agenda is a bit of a stretch.

It's a theory that will either hold or not. But to put it down to a conspiracy theory, I think you need to lay off the klippies and cola.
Click to expand...

Oh come on, you can see the leftist injection already. Same as the Black Inventors, Timbuktu and Egyptian hypothesis of 10 - 15 years ago that have now been thoroughly debunked.

It's not a theory. it's an hypothesis. Big difference. You assume I drink alcohol and can even identify the type and brand?
 
Cosmik Debris said:
Oh come on, you can see the leftist injection already. Same as the Black Inventors, Timbuktu and Egyptian hypothesis of 10 - 15 years ago that have now been thoroughly debunked.

It's not a theory. it's an hypothesis. Big difference. You assume I drink alcohol and can even identify the type and brand?
Click to expand...
To say it's a leftist agenda is such a ludicrous stretch man. It's like racists who see racism everywhere.
You see leftist agendas when it's just normal people doing science.
 
Brenden_E said:
To say it's a leftist agenda is such a ludicrous stretch man. It's like racists who see racism everywhere.
You see leftist agendas when it's just normal people doing science.
Click to expand...

The big problem is - It's not science. It's a narrative.
 
Cosmik Debris said:
The big problem is - It's not science. It's a narrative.
Click to expand...
You need to step away from the narrative juice. Just because something doesn't fit what you want doesn't mean it's malicious. People can explore the world and search for truth, and sometimes that truth may not be what you want it to be.
 
Brenden_E said:
To say it's a leftist agenda is such a ludicrous stretch man. It's like racists who see racism everywhere.
You see leftist agendas when it's just normal people doing science.
Click to expand...
I suspect I know some of the stuff Cosmik is referring to. I was watching a Youtube video recently, dished up as science. It was obviously well funded, well produced etc. Except it was totally in the realm of pseudoscience and garbage.

I watched it more out of curiosity than the content. According to the story line, the Egyptians actually used massive magnifying glasses to melt rock, Negroid Africans were actually the guys that built stuff in Central America. So it went on. What had happened is that pseudoscience was abused to drive a narrative.

I tried finding it, seems it's now gone. It's just sad that we have people doing this. In turn it leads to discussions such as this.
 
Brenden_E said:
You need to step away from the narrative juice. Just because something doesn't fit what you want doesn't mean it's malicious. People can explore the world and search for truth, and sometimes that truth may not be what you want it to be.
Click to expand...

Truth is fact. I deal in fact, reason and logic only.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X