Jokodo’s comments on this blog

19 Jul

I received a message from Jokodo, a poster at Freethought and Rationalism Discussion Board (FRDB) as follows: ”Wow. Just wow. You are writing a blog post repeating the same unsubstantiated claims that you didn’t get through
claiming just so in the thread. Any new non-circular arguments? Nope. Any evidence in favour of your claims? Nope. Not a single link, not even back to the discussion although you talk about it quite explicitly. How about substantiating your claims next time rather than just repeating them to everybody’s annoyment (and) giving rational reasons to believe them. What are your sources? Revelation?”

I discussed this concern with Jokodo through private messaging at the FRDB website yesterday. He did not seem to want me to copy-paste his ensuing criticisms for incorporation in this blogsite. I am therefore hereby extending Jokodo an invitation to write a fresh report on all the technical aspects of this hypothesis as presented here, with particular reference to my response to ‘Someone”s comments in the ‘Comments thread’ of my 13 July post.

I have sent Jokodo a message accordingly and his response over the next 48 hours only is awaited for analysis here.

(Snipped parts restored to the original precise words on 3.49 pm, 22 July 2012)


One Response to “Jokodo’s comments on this blog”

  1. shantanup July 19, 2012 at 9:02 am #

    Jokodo replied that I had not addressed the problems with the hypothesis. I asked him to explicitly state what these problems were for sequential consideration in this blogsite.

    Jokodo’s words in reply to this request for clarification were: ”There’s still that thing that you haven’t as much as tried to give estimates for how much difference there actually is between Chinese and Caucasian populations vs. how much you think could accrue in 50,000 years, yet you merrily go around claiming that it’s somehow “obviously” (to you) too much so there must be a deeper split.

    How do you measure “docility”, and how do you determine it’s biological? How big is the difference in “relative hairlessness”, and what tells you that the “Han Chinese” are the odd ones out, rather than “Caucasians” being more hairy than both East Asians and Africans? How’s melanin supposed to be an argument for a seperate origin of East Asians when their levels of melanin are pretty much the same as Europeans’? How do you quantify the differences in “facial features, complexion, physical stature”, and how do you determine those are too much to have arise over a few tens of thousands of years when we know substantial differences have arisen in other species over shorter timespans? Do you know how substantial or insubstantial the genetic changes involved are? Why on Earth list “culture” when we know from history that it changes substantially over timescales of decades and centuries – as a 20th century Austrian guy, I guarantee I would feel more alien culturally in 16th or even 18th century Austria than pretty much anywhere in the world today.

    After trying to quantify the differences, and if you find out that they are indeed hard to explain with a recent split (and only then), you can start to find alternative explanations for the genetic evidence (read the fucking papers!) that pretty clearly suggests a recent origin with at most minor admixture from local archaic populations. ”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: