On Wednesday, June 23, 2021 at 12:32:22 PM UTC-7, John Harshman wrote:
> On 6/23/21 9:14 AM, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> > On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 6:39:59 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 3:24:41 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> >>> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 6:18:03 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >>>> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 3:06:00 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> >>>>> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 4:44:44 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >>>>>> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 11:14:59 AM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> >>>>>>> On Tuesday, June 22, 2021 at 12:01:20 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >>>>>>>> On Monday, June 21, 2021 at 2:46:34 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> On Thursday, June 17, 2021 at 7:21:55 PM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> On Thursday, June 17, 2021 at 2:03:36 PM UTC-7, Peter Nyikos wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, June 16, 2021 at 11:27:29 AM UTC-4, erik simpson wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> A much better bibliography (and far better review) than Bechly's is found at
> >>>>>>>>>>> ... a site where there is no mention of the concept of glide symmetry:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/pdf/10.1098/rspb.2020..3055
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Calling something a "bilaterian" without even acknowledging a crucial countervailing feature
> >>>>>>>>>>> is akin to calling a Rangeomorph a "sea pen" --- something that was once taken for granted,
> >>>>>>>>>>> but now has been thoroughly discredited.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Also, there seems to be a fallacy of begging the question in the authors' words,
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> "Based on recent work, we assume that these taxa were animals.."
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> This looks like a source of bias for their cladogram in Figure 1. By ignoring the concept
> >>>>>>>>>>> of glide symmetry, they make all but one of these Ediacarans bilaterians just on the basis
> >>>>>>>>>>> of a rough bilateral symmetry.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> What, in your opinion, makes this "a far better review"? Just the fact that the
> >>>>>>>>>>> authors are not creationists?
> >>>>>>>>>>> Peter Nyikos
> >>>>>>>>>>> Professor, Dept. of Mathematics -- standard disclaimer--
> >>>>>>>>>>> Univ. of South Carolina at Columbia
> >>>>>>>>>>> http://people.math.sc.edu/nyikos
> >>>>>>>>>>> PS I'd like to see the thread where you said this was "derailed."
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> For symmetry of Dickinsonia, see:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://storage.googleapis.com/plos-corpus-prod/10.1371/journal.pone.0176874/1/pone.0176874.pdf?X-Goog-Algorithm=GOOG4-RSA-SHA256&X-Goog-Credential=wombat-sa%40plos-prod.iam.gserviceaccount.com%2F20210617%2Fauto%2Fstorage%2Fgoog4_request&X-Goog-Date=20210617T231648Z&X-Goog-Expires=86400&X-Goog-SignedHeaders=host&X-Goog-Signature=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
> >>>>>>>>> I saw only one use of the term "glide ... symmetry", and that was a general comment in the introduction that promised no
> >>>>>>>>> resolution between conflicting claims of its existence later in the article.
> >>>>>>> This was, in fact, the only use of the word "glide" anywhere in the article.
> >>>>>>>>> Did you actually read anything tending towards a resolution later on, or did you just post this long url because
> >>>>>>>>> "Google was your friend" and this was the first research level you could find with the words "glide" and "symmetry" in it?
> >>>>>>> <crickets>
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The authors may or may not be "creationists" (I doubt it), but they are prominent scientists active in this area.
> >>>>>>>>> That doesn't answer my question about why you think their review (if that's the right word for their research article)
> >>>>>>>>> is far better than Bechly's review.
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> The previous thread is here:
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> https://groups.google.com/g/sci.bio.paleontology/c/_1O9jwW2CnU/m/SkuwXDHjAwAJY
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks. Reading it, I get the impression that you don't know the difference between a gadfly and a troll.
> >>>>>>>>> Glenn is a gadfly, but he is no more of a troll than you are.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Peter Nyikos
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I see my link doesn't work.
> >>>>>>> It worked just fine for me. On the other hand, the link you gave below doesn't show the text at all,
> >>>>>>> and nothing happens when I click on "Download PDF". I did get a practically unreadable XML document,
> >>>>>>> but not the pdf that your earlier link gave me right off the bat.
> >>>>>>>> Here's a link from which you can download the pdf:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/comments?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0176874
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> It answers your questions about "glide symmetry" and the results more completly than I care to
> >>>>>>>> summarize.
> >>>>>>> I believe, from what you write next, and what I have read of the article,
> >>>>>>> that you are hoping I will make some nasty remarks about what you've written just now.
> >>>>>>>> If this post and the following remarks in a subsequent post are any indication,
> >>>>>>>> your committment to "civility" doesn't sound too deep. Unless some changes happen, you
> >>>>>>>> may expect no further communications from me.
> >>>>>>> Do you imagine that you are displaying civility here?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> You and I made a commitment to civility here in April of 2015, along with John Harshman,
> >>>>>>> joined later by Richard Norman. Less than a year after Richard disappeared, you unilaterally
> >>>>>>> broke it in early 2018. Do you deny this?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> If you do, please tell me how you define the word "civility" in a way that distinguishes it
> >>>>>>> from "being a doormat".
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Peter Nyikos
> >>>>> I can see from your response that you have been your usual mischievous self in these last two
> >>>>> posts. It's nice to know that all your talk of "civility" was just flippant banter.
> >>>>>> Try this from my dropbox:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> https://www.dropbox.com/s/r5sqx1w1ozrg2dz/Dickensonia%20%28Evans%2C%20Droser%2C%20Gehling%29.pdf?dl=0
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> If that doesn't work, you're on your own.
> >>>>> Who cares whether it works or not? You are mischievously disregarding my assurance that your original long url worked.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And so, I also believe now that your comment,
> >>>>>>>> It answers your questions about "glide symmetry" and the results ​more completly than I care to
> >>>>>>>> summarize.
> >>>>> was just you pulling my leg (and Glenn's too) about a summary that takes 0 keystrokes to type.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Peter Nyikos
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> ??
> >>> Simulated incomprehension noted.
> >>>
> >>>> Bye.
> >>>
> >>> My logic should have been readily understandable from the following sentence:
> >>> "You are mischievously disregarding my assurance that your original long url worked."
> >>> If anyone reading this does not see why, I suggest that such a person scroll up to read this quoted sentence in context.
> >>>
> >>> Peter Nyikos
> >
> >> So sorry, but bye anyway. Have fun with Glenn.
> >
> > An appropriate word with which to end your presence: Glenn, who made the odds
> > against you and Harshman 2-2, which was so unbearable for Harshman that he
> > vanished from this thread almost a week ago and has never returned. [1]
> >
> > Even the 2-1 odds that you and he had against me without Glenn were enough to
> > make you uncomfortable, weren't they? Both of you sorely missed that rabid anti-Nyikos fanatic, Oxyaena, didn't you?
> >
> > [1] Harshman suddenly showed up in talk.origins a couple of days ago, secure in the knowledge
> > that at least a dozen people there have his back. But his dereliction
> > of duty here, with three or more posts by me left unanswered, is catching
> > up to him on the thread,
> > A Tale of Two Newsgroups: talk.origins and sci.bio.paleontology
> > https://groups.google.com/g/talk.origins/c/JaflLa7Zgdg
> Sorry, I was in Iceland for 2 weeks. What are you on about now?

I don't think it matters where you've been. I think he's moving further out of touch all the time.