So becuase you didn't repsond to him he's a crack pot?
Looks more like you are avoiding the issue to me.
Take into account that no one on this forum has your science background making the you the outspoken one here in that regard and when someone with a science background calls you out...... you run, so to speak.
And caling him a crack pot is the best you can do?
You have no problem getting scientific with anyone here who doesn't have a scientific back ground. But now that someone does he's a crack pot eh?
Right.
I had already refuted his arguments in other threads (He erased many of them)
But, If you want me to refute his little 'last stand' I will...As long as it shuts you up.
-humans and chimps may be able to interbreed, the genetic gap is close enough the only hurdle to such a hybridization are the complictions of antibody reaction and chromosomal splitting.
Absolutely nonsense. Firstly Human sperm couldn't even get inside of a chimp egg due to the receptors not binding. Secondly even if you used in vitro fertilization and injected the sperm into the egg it wouldn't work for many reasons. One main reason is that Humans have 46 chromosomes and Chimps have 48. So getting them to pair up would not work. To state that the only hurdle is the Antibody reacton and "chromosomal splitting" is blatantly false.
-he thinks locals on Flores island may have identified the cave in which the Hobbit skeleton was found by seeing some of the 12,000 year old Hobbit skeletons in the cave. Not through interaction with the Hobbit man. The 12,000 year old Hobbit fossils were found more than 30 feet underground.
This is irrelevant and highly unlikely. Inside of caves you don't usually get alot of sediment deposited. Most likely the bones were under a few feet of soft sediment at most. Which of course doesn't mean the Islanders couldn't of found other bones and skulls in other locations in the past that were under no sediment at all.
-he claims there is no evidence of human/neanderthal interbreeding. There is. It's called the Lapedo child, the skeleton of a human/neanderthal hybrid child dating only 28,500 (originaly dated 24,000) years old. This is a hot topic among geneticists, anthropologists and archaeologists... Johnny's never heard of it.
The "Lapedo child" was a single body found dating to about 25,000 years ago in the Lapedo Valley in Portugal. Early scientists concluded it was a "Neanderthal human mix" but this isn't very likely. Most likely this was a separated sub species of human occupying the Lapedo valley around 25,000 years ago. To conclude it was a "Neanderthal mix" just because it has Neanderthal features isn't real science it's pseudo science.
-Johnny reckons Bigfoot can't exist because there would have to be dozens of them and there simply isn't enough food to support them. Jane Goodall (chimp lady) disagrees... he dismisses her opinion.
Refering to Jane Goodall is an appeal to authority fallacy. Real scientists don't do it.
The number is probably closer to 50,000... but the food part? That's so moronic as to beggar belief... not enough food to support a couple dozen apemen in North America... weren't there 50,000,000 buffalo there just 200 years ago?
50,000 Bigfoot roaming America and we haven't found a Body,Gotten a clear picture,Hunters Shot one or captured one? Good grief...
There were many buffalo in America 200 years ago. However America couldn't possibly sustain a population of Buffalo that large ever again.
Aren't there a couple dozen million domesticated cattle there right now? Aren't there 400,000,000 people living in North America right now? Aren't there a couple of hundred thousand bears in the same woods?
Good grief...Is this "Scientist" actually comparing 400lb primates to cattle? Is he actually comparing 400lb primates to humans as an argument in support of Bigfoot?
Humans live in populated areas and Cattle live in captivity. We're talking about the wilderness here.
In reality (not in Lukes dreamland) REAL SCIENTISTS know nearly every detail of the American and even the South American or African wilderness. We know for instance each individual of numerous endangered species living in the wild. We actually have names for them and track their breeding and migration for scientific studies.
To claim that populations of 7 foot tall 400lb "Bigfoots" could be living in a place like the American north west is utterly absurd.
This quote speaks for itself:
"That means if we have a viable population of "bigfoot" living in the american wilderness..We'd have to have DOZENS of them. The amount of food just isn't there. Pure and simple."
And that's absolutely right. There would need to be a naturally breeding population meaning actually more than dozens. Meaning several hundred-several thousand AT LEAST.
I don't waste my time with crackpots and I also don't waste my time with people who are obsessed with me on a message board...That means you Ozmo.
