Uhhuh. If I did the faces you know which one would be here.
But I did, if you reread that will be obvious.
Nor was I talking about “the masses” in general. Rather I was referring to the quality of data available and the standards involved. Worlds apart, further unlike prior efforts, the science involved is largely based on standard methods of inquiry used in non-human genetics, cutting down on the occasions to use funny standards.
As for false claims of expertise and understanding, that trouble is no different from any other subject. One simply has to check that against the data, against what the body of literature is stating. If someone is making claims that do not stand up to informed scrutiny and run against the scientific consensus, there is a good sign that its fake.
Simply throwing one’s arms up in the air is nothing more than an argument from ignorance.
Actually, I have a relatively decent grasp of the materials. My work requires me to have some understanding of the field at large --genetics-- albeit nowhere near the level of researchers. By the way, the Human Genome Project is not directly relevant to the population genetic work.
I think you’re right that there’s a big gap between what scientists discover and how those discoveries are “spun” to the masses.
For example, there was a thread a while back about a newspaper article that shouted “Women are the true adventurers!” Well, if you look at the study talked about in that article, you realize that the newspaper was more interested in selling papers than accurately describing the study.
Similarly, if someone does a study and finds that the genes of whites and blacks are 99% the same, you can count on a few memoids jumping up and down proclaiming that “race doesn’t exist!”
Now, when you think about it for a second, this is a ridiculous conclusion to reach – I don’t think any examples are necessary to show that 1% can make a big difference. Heck - one single gene can mean the difference between life and death.
Oh well, “spin” is nothing new.
Nor are people who are slaves to intellectual fashion.
Of course, the actual data is quite different, but as we have seen elsewhere, the actual data doesn’t interest you now does it?
Think? An inappropriate verb here, is it not? It would be nice, mind you, if you could begin by learning what genes are, as well as alleles. In any case, have fun with hypotheticals.
Some are given to repeating the same empty phrase also, aren’t they? I guess that when you have no data…
Then I guess you’d better try Great Debates next time, G. Nome. This forum is for factual questions only. Since you openly proclaim to be uninterested in facts, I’m closing this thread.
Oh, and you might want to cut down on the hostility a bit. You’re not exactly a favourite with the Administration as it is. Got that? Good.