It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by alphabetaone
It seems the scales have tipped in media, on ATS, towards the direction of sensationalism, where once the onus was on the sensationalist to provide proof of their outlandish claims, now it seems that the burden of proof is on the critical thinkers; that we must prove something MAKES no sense rather than attempting to prove it does.
Originally posted by alphabetaone
It seems the scales have tipped in media, on ATS, towards the direction of sensationalism, where once the onus was on the sensationalist to provide proof of their outlandish claims, now it seems that the burden of proof is on the critical thinkers; that we must prove something MAKES no sense rather than attempting to prove it does.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
I'm sorry, but,
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
when I make a claim and provide evidence that seems to support my hypthesis
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
only to have it dismissed out-of-hand by your "critical thinkers",
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
I have t wonder how any of them are even capable of rudimentary thought.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
To dismiss evidence without evaluation, is not a "hallmark" of a "critical thinker".
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Further, when that very same "critical thinker" accuses me of being a "hoax", a fraud, of having some mental illness or another, the burden of proof switches to the accuser.
Originally posted by petrus4
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally, I just don't like arbitrary skeptics.
Originally posted by petrus4
Being brutally honest, I'd prefer this site to be literally flooded with BS,
Originally posted by petrus4
rather than having to put up with the self-appointed guardians of atheistic rationalism, performing their supposed public service of debunking everything in sight.
Originally posted by petrus4
Fraudulent material doesn't antagonise me anywhere near as much as that.
Originally posted by petrus4
I look forward to the day when some of you realise that the service you think you are providing, has not been asked for, and is not wanted.
Originally posted by alphabetaone
Again true. IF there is actually evidence. In this case, I see only a "because I told you so".....no evidence.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
So, two DNA test results, and the compilation of ther data does not count as evidence Please explain.
Originally posted by alphabetaone
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
So, two DNA test results, and the compilation of ther data does not count as evidence Please explain.
Yes, it would count as evidence.
Simply by you TELLING us about the test results though, does not if you are the only one who has seen the evidence.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
I see So, posting images of the test results, and text copies desn't count then?
There are a limited number of ways this data can be made available, and they all must work in this networked environment. So, if you can't or won't accept evidence in an on-line format. Then you have little business engageing in argument in such an environent.
I have provided copies of the original results,
Originally posted by alphabetaone
So those are the untarnished test results then? Hence my confusion of course.
You see, I thought it was your website, where you put the results there, not the actual test results....how could I have made that error.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Was the sarcastic tone really neccessary?
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Yes, that is my website. Yes, those are the actual resultsbtained from the lab. The results, lab identity, and manager signitures, and list of rotcols, and acreditations are all there as well. You may also obtain a sample for your own analysis with the right arrangement.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
I think it is important to understand that there are limited ways in which this data can be "transmitted", and, if you don't like the available methods; that is not my issue, it is yours. The reality is that we live in a digital age, not all data will be sent in a manner that you like. In fact, the Y-STR data was sent to me by email. And, the delivery of data in this manner is accepted by nearly everyone ... except in a case like mine; right?!?
Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
Just a notation, Federal Law prohibits transmittal of DNA results or any other medical records by email, it's punishable by jail time, no reputable lab would break that protocol it's called HIPPA by the way..
Just thought you should know...
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
reply to post by alphabetaone
Damn, you two sure tryin' to do a deflect on this, huh!
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
DNA data is not neccessarily "Medical". It is biological, but, as I said, not neccessarily medical.
And no, I wasn't given an examination by anyone. An "examination" is not required, only a "cheek swab". That can be done by literally anyone; no skills required. For admissibility in US courts all that is needed "chain of custody" tracking, that starts either with the local Police or another authorized person.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Which is to say; that while skepticism is a good thing, at times you need to set aside momentarily, and allow your consciousness to "input" additional data.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
The cynicism of your species, this propensity to attack anything you don't like, or want, will eventually prove to be your downfall.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
When you fail to understand the evidence and data provided, you find a way to dismiss the data. You demand the science, then reject it when provided.
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
I have provided what limited amount of data that I could afford, if that is not good enough for you, not my problem. If you do not wish to accept what I've said, that is up to you. If you wish to learn, along with the rest of us, great! Lets get it on!
Originally posted by AnthraAndromda
Originally posted by vkey08
reply to post by AnthraAndromda
Just a notation, Federal Law prohibits transmittal of DNA results or any other medical records by email, it's punishable by jail time, no reputable lab would break that protocol it's called HIPPA by the way..
Just thought you should know...
Fine, whatever. Don't tell me, tell the labs, they are the ones with the option. Also, DNA, isn't neccessaily "medical" data. I've ntwrked with the HIPPA protcol, never had a need, so I neither know, nor care about it.
Then, as now, I don't feel the T. Human species is worthy (in general) of the additional expense.
You will never get accurate results if you continue to have some sort of superiority complex..
But the databases they use, I think we have to agree on, are not of the variety that leave a 55% margin for error with availability on the internet. If so, I think all those highly paid specialists would be out of a job.
No one is attacking. Questioning the veracity of information is a part of MY DNA, I do it as easily as breathing, I doubt I could stop it if I tried.
I'm far more convinced that our desire to conquer, warmonger and usurp will long be our demise before a hyper-skeptical mentality.
You're making an assumption. That the data is not understood. It's understood, but the quality of it is what is in question. If I told you I was jesus christ and provided evidence" by way of photos that showed scars on my head from a crown of thorns, precisely how many thousands do you think would question and want all types of verifications....I would literally be inundated, and rightfully so.
Absolutely! I would never condone someone spending more than they could afford on something that YOU already believe to be true in the first place. Waste of money and time.
I simply wont take something at face value, and less so, something on the internet within the scope of a forum that, has a history of would be hoaxsters just waiting for their opportunity.
As most STR analysis examines markers chosen for their high intra-group variation, the utility of these particular STR markers to access inter-group relationships may be greatly diminished.
autosomal tests may have a margin of error up to 15% and blind spots.
Few haplotypes will exactly match the modal values for Haplogroup G