And More Evidence for Intelligent Design in Biology- Overlapping Genes
-
Since the Human Genome Project was completed some 10 years ago we have discovered that only about 20,000-25,000 genes encode 100,000-200,000 proteins.
We have discovered two mechanisms that make this so- alternative gene splicing- in which introns are removed and exons spliced back together in different packages producing different proteins from the same gene- editting and splicing, evidence for design.
We have alo discovered overlapping genes- that is one gene actually being two or more genes.
That means there has to be a start codon and stop codon for each gene along the same sequence.
Have you even tried to make more than one complex sentence out of a given complex sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
Can you think of what planning and foresight is required to accomplish such a feat? Think about it, genes have only one start codon.
Evotards love to say that IDiosts do not like scientific research.
On the contrary- the more science unveils the better ID looks.
Since the Human Genome Project was completed some 10 years ago we have discovered that only about 20,000-25,000 genes encode 100,000-200,000 proteins.
We have discovered two mechanisms that make this so- alternative gene splicing- in which introns are removed and exons spliced back together in different packages producing different proteins from the same gene- editting and splicing, evidence for design.
We have alo discovered overlapping genes- that is one gene actually being two or more genes.
That means there has to be a start codon and stop codon for each gene along the same sequence.
Have you even tried to make more than one complex sentence out of a given complex sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
Can you think of what planning and foresight is required to accomplish such a feat? Think about it, genes have only one start codon.
Evotards love to say that IDiosts do not like scientific research.
On the contrary- the more science unveils the better ID looks.
posted by Joe G @ 7:39 AM
128 Comments:
At 8:13 AM,
Zachriel said…
Have you even tried
Have you even tried to make more than one sentence
right or left?
At 8:23 AM,
Zachriel said…
make more than one sentence
At 8:32 AM,
Zachriel said…
One sentence
At 8:32 AM,
Joe G said…
Yes I have tried- and as I said it takes planning and foresight.
At 8:37 AM,
Joe G said…
You have no idea what a sentence is.
And you don't have any clue as to the context-
Try shifting ONE letter right or left and see what you get.
Or try two letters right or left.
Stop being such an obtuse jerk.
At 8:49 AM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
It was easy!
Joe G: Yes I have tried- and as I said it takes planning and foresight.
No, it doesn't. If we use random insertion of stops, it doesn't take long before valid sentences are formed. There are 133 letters, and we can insert the stop in a number of places.
Have you?
Have you ever?
Have you ever tried?
Have you ever tried to make more?
Have you ever tried to make more than one?
Have you ever tried to make more than one sentence?
Have you ever tried to make more than one sentence just by shifting your starting point?
If we randomly insert starts and stops, and even if we limit ourselves to only a single valid target sentence, a population of a few thousand will find that sentence in a few generations.
Joe G: Try shifting ONE letter right or left and see what you get.
Alternate gene splicing usually occurs in blocks. We could try to randomly recombine a population of words and phrases, along with mutation. We could use a phrase and word dictionary, and rejected if the sequences aren't found. Do you think after a few generations that new words and phrases will evolve? Or will we be stuck with the original sentence?
At 8:55 AM,
Joe G said…
Have you?
Not a sentence.
IOW Zacho you don't know what a senetnce is.
Zachriel:
If we randomly insert starts and stops, and even if we limit ourselves to only a single valid target sentence, a population of a few thousand will find that sentence in a few generations.
No targets in the theory of evolution.
IOW thank you for proving my point.
Try shifting ONE letter right or left and see what you get.
Zacho:
Alternate gene splicing usually occurs in blocks.
Umm I am not talking about alternative gene splicing.
Are you stupid or dishonest?
At 10:21 AM,
Zachriel said…
Zachriel: Have you?
Joe G: Not a sentence.
Of course it is.
Have you?
I have.
Did you?
I did.
Can you?
I can.
Will you?
I will.
Joe G: No targets in the theory of evolution.
YOU defined the target as valid sentences formed by shifting the starting and ending points. If we use alternative splicing, which allow us to mix-and-match fragments, even more sentences are available.
Have you tried shifting right or left?
Joe G: Umm I am not talking about alternative gene splicing.
It's right in your original post. And then you drew a comparison to word splicing.
We could try to randomly recombine a population of words and phrases, along with mutation. We could use a phrase and word dictionary, and reject those sequences that aren't found. Do you think after a few generations that new words and phrases will evolve? Or will we be stuck with the original sentence?
At 10:34 AM,
blipey said…
To begin with, "Have you?" is a valid sentence. As is the sentence, "Stop." The second example uses the understood you as its subject. The first example use the concept of the understood object.
Not really the point though, is it?
At 10:37 AM,
blipey said…
Oh, and where in the OP did you state that we had to move only one letter to the right or left? Your challenge was to move right or left; Zachriel did exactly that. You seem to have changed the rules....
At 10:46 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Oh, and where in the OP did you state that we had to move only one letter to the right or left?
It is inherent with the term "overlapping genes".
At 10:48 AM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
If we use alternative splicing, which allow us to mix-and-match fragments, even more sentences are available.
OVERLAPPING GENES is the topic- not alternative splicing.
At 10:50 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
To begin with, "Have you?" is a valid sentence.
Good luck getting anywhere with just saying "Have you?"
blipey:
As is the sentence, "Stop."
But people just blurting random shit usually end up in the psych ward.
At 10:52 AM,
blipey said…
JoeG (from OP): "We have discovered to mechanisms that make this so- alternative gene splicing- in which introns are removed and exons spliced back together in different packages producing different proteins from the same gene- editting nd pcing, evidence for design."
I'm assuming this was a mistake, then? Because you now say:
"OVERLAPPING GENES is the topic- not alternative splicing."
At 10:53 AM,
blipey said…
Moving right or left (especially in the context of alternative gene splicing) in no way inherently tells us we can only move one letter at a time. Now you're just making stuff up.
At 10:54 AM,
Joe G said…
Umm I am not talking about alternative gene splicing.
Zachriel:
It's right in your original post.
Right as one of the TWO known mechanisms for getting more than one protein out of one gene.
This thread is about the OTHER known mechanism- overlapping genes.
And yes I have no doubt that intelligent agencies- even one as dumb as you- can edit and splice.
However there isn't any evidence blind, undirected processes can.
At 10:54 AM,
blipey said…
Did you miss Zachriel's sample conversation using just such sentences?
At 10:55 AM,
blipey said…
Please tell us why we aren't talking about alternative gene splicing. After all, you did bring it up in the OP.
At 11:03 AM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: We have alo discovered overlapping genes- that is one gene actually being two or more genes. That means there has to be a start codon and stop codon for each gene along the same sequence.
That's quite clear. We take a sequence, start and stop at different places to construct a new gene, or in your comparison, a new sentence.
Joe G: Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
We have. And it was easy.
Joe G: Good luck getting anywhere with just saying "Have you?"
It's a very common sentence, as in this exchange.
She already signed up.
Have you?
Not yet.
Will you?
I will.
Good.
Joe G: But people just blurting random shit usually end up in the psych ward.
Stop! is an imperative sentence, as is Go!
At 11:06 AM,
Zachriel said…
If we use random insertion of stops, it doesn't take long before valid sentences are formed. There are 133 letters, and we can insert the stop in a number of places.
If we randomly insert starts and stops, a population of a few thousand will find many valid sentences in a few generations.
At 11:58 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Please tell us why we aren't talking about alternative gene splicing.
The title of the thread should be clue enough.
At 12:01 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
We take a sequence, start and stop at different places to construct a new gene, or in your comparison, a new sentence.
Genes only have ONE start codon and three stop codons.
Good luck getting anywhere with just saying "Have you?"
Zachriel:
It's a very common sentence, as in this exchange.
She already signed up.
Have you?
Have you signed up? is the sentence.
"Have you?" is not a sentence.
You could never support that claim with a valid reference from an English paper.
At 12:02 PM,
Joe G said…
Title of thread is
I said:
We have discovered two mechanisms that make this so- alternative gene splicing- in which introns are removed and exons spliced back together in different packages producing different proteins from the same gene- editting nd pcing, evidence for design.
We have alo discovered overlapping genes- that is one gene actually being two or more genes.
At 12:04 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Did you miss Zachriel's sample conversation using just such sentences?
Did you miss your education?
Neither one of you know what a sentence is.
And that is funny...
At 12:17 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: We have alo discovered overlapping genes- that is one gene actually being two or more genes.
And, per your example, we can take your sentence, and show that it contains other sentences, depending on where we start and stop.
At 12:23 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
And, per your example, we can take your sentence, and show that it contains other sentences, depending on where we start and stop.
1- I didn't provide any example
2- With genes you only get ONE start codon
3- With overlapping genes you only get to shift letters, not complete codons. That is because if you shift codons then you need another start codon in your original gene and you would have the same existing stop codon.
This isn't what happens with overlapping genes.
Are you admitting ignorance of this mechanism?
At 12:24 PM,
Zachriel said…
She already signed up.
Have you?
Joe G: "Have you?" is not a sentence.
Are you claiming the exchange is not grammatically correct?
Are you?
At 12:26 PM,
Joe G said…
Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
So the word "have" would be the only acceptable starting point and then you need a stopping point- I have provided a ? as one. You can also use a . or !
So there you have it.
Start with "Have" or any other "have" in nthe sentence.
Don't stop until you reach a valid stop - ?.!
Good luck.
At 12:27 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
She already signed up.
Have you?
Have you signed up? is the sentence.
What part of that don't you understand?
At 12:30 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: I didn't provide any example
Sure you did. You said, "Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?"
That's what we're considering, if we read the same sequence from different starts and stops. Of course, overlapping genes are a bit different than your example, because they actually have a different reading frame. That doesn't apply properly to letters and sentences.
In any case, your claim with regards to sentences that it requires more than randomly moving the starting and stopping point is incorrect.
At 12:31 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: What part of that don't you understand?
That's not what she said.
Was it?
At 12:34 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: Start with "Have" or any other "have" in nthe sentence.
Presumably you meant starts and stops. But just moving the starts still results in
Right or Left?
which is a perfectly valid question. English has a very flexible syntatic structure. Just an inflection can turn a statement into a question.
At 12:50 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel,
I know it is your duty to be an obtuse moron but you should at least try to follow along.
This thread is about OVERLAPPING GENES- Genes have only ONE START codon and 3 STOP codons.
IOW it is obvious you do NOT get to start and stop any place you choose.
So if you are going to use my sentence:
Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?
You have the ONE starting word of "Have" and I gave you one stop in ?
At 12:52 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Right or Left?
which is a perfectly valid question.
Only in specific contexts, which you do not provide.
IOW it is meaningless gibberish, as are the bulk of your posts.
At 12:55 PM,
Joe G said…
I didn't provide any example
Zachriel:
Sure you did. You said, "Have you even tried to make more than one sentence out of a given sentence just by shifting your starting point to the right or left?"
You are confused.
YOU took wjhat I said and YOU re using it as an example.
Howver it is ibvius that you are MISUSING it as an example.
Zachriel:
In any case, your claim with regards to sentences that it requires more than randomly moving the starting and stopping point is incorrect.
1- You haven't shown that to be the case
2- Nothing random about your movement
3- All your examples are out-of-context
4- You don't have any command of the English language so you are not in any position to refute what I said
At 1:02 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: Only in specific contexts, which you do not provide.
Context provides meaning, not grammar.
As for overlapping genes, translation uses a differing reading frame, so it doesn't apply properly to sentences, and whatever value your comparison might have had is made vacuous by your meanderings.
At 1:55 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Context provides meaning, not grammar.
Non-sequitur.
Zachriel:
Right or Left?
which is a perfectly valid question.
Only in specific contexts, which you do not provide.
IOW it is meaningless gibberish, as are the bulk of your posts.
Zachriel:
As for overlapping genes, translation uses a differing reading frame, so it doesn't apply properly to sentences...
I know it uses a different reading frame and it does apply to sentences, it is just difficult to do so. Such a thing requires planning and foresight.
Zachriel:
...and whatever value your comparison might have had is made vacuous by your meanderings.
Whatever value your "refutation" might have had is made vacuous by your meaderings.
At 2:29 PM,
blipey said…
Okay, Joe. Since you haven't the imagination to come up with it yourself:
"How did you get there?"
"I ran."
"Where did you run to?"
"Iran."
We've moved only one letter and we used only the starting point.
Would you like to make up new requirements now or should we wait a few minutes?
At 2:47 PM,
Joe G said…
No, I am completely satisfied that you think your stupidity is a refutation.
But please tell me- in what way is the word "Iran" a sentence?
BWAAAAHAAAAHAAAAAAAAAAA
At 2:49 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Would you like to make up new requirements now...
The requirements have remained the same.
Ya see just because you are so stupid and twisted that you cannot understand the context doesn't mean you can just foam at the mouth and refute what I say.
At 2:56 PM,
Joe G said…
Teacher to class:
Can someone please use the word "Iran" in a sentence
Little Erik Pratt wakes from his sumber and blurts: "Iran."
And the teacher sez: "Don't be a clown."
At 3:09 PM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: I know it uses a different reading frame and it does apply to sentences, it is just difficult to do so.
That wasn't your original comparison, which said to simply shift the starting point.
Joe G: But please tell me- in what way is the word "Iran" a sentence?
What is the modern name for the nation once known as Persia?
Iran.
At 3:10 PM,
blipey said…
"Joe, where do you live?"
"New Hampshire."
"I'm sorry, where?"
"New Hampshire."
"Something must be wrong; I see your lips moving, but I don't understand anything coming out of them. Where do you live?"
"New Hampshire!"
"Where?"
"What was that? Did you say something?"
"I said, 'Where?'"
"Oh, I see."
"Huh?"
"Did you say something?"
"Not a thing."
"Oh, virtual particles?"
"What?"
Conversation must be difficult in New Hampshire.
At 3:25 PM,
Joe G said…
I know it uses a different reading frame and it does apply to sentences, it is just difficult to do so.
Zachriel:
That wasn't your original comparison
Yes it was.
Zachriel:
, which said to simply shift the starting point.
In the CONTEXT OF OVERLAPPING GENES.
But please tell me- in what way is the word "Iran" a sentence?
Zachriel:
What is the modern name for the nation once known as Persia?
Iran.
Just becuse you can resond with one word does not mean that one word response is a sentence.
But thank you for continuing to expose your ignorance.
At 3:26 PM,
Joe G said…
Erik,
Give it up- you are a freakin' clown- and you prove why that is with every post.
At 3:31 PM,
blipey said…
Have you found an English textbook that says "Stop!" isn't a sentence yet. I'm sure you're searching hard. Hint: Most grammar school English texts devote an entire chapter to this sort of sentence, so you'll probably have to look hard.
At 3:47 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Have you found an English textbook that says "Stop!" isn't a sentence yet.
It is up to YOU to find one that says it is a sentence.
Make sure it includes that it can be a sentence without any context.
At 3:48 PM,
blipey said…
Lookie here. I only searched for a link for 3 seconds and came up with this:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood.
from here.
At 3:50 PM,
blipey said…
Sentences don't have to have context, Joe. They just have to be grammatically correct. Context is for discussion. Your claim is that "Stop!" is not a sentence.
My link is a direct refutation of that (as is any English text you happen to pick up).
So I'm sure you feel bad now and that you will berate yourself for being a child-molesting clown, but don't be so hard on yourself.
At 3:52 PM,
Joe G said…
Thank you for proving my point.
Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood.
There has to be some context.
Someone just yells "Go!" and that isn't a sentence at all.
At 3:52 PM,
Joe G said…
simple sentence
The basic English language sentence is called a simple sentence. It requires a subject and a verb.
At 3:53 PM,
blipey said…
Yes it is. That link says nothing about context, Joe (unless you're a mind-reader?). It merely states that imperative sentences can be one word. Such as "Go." What context does the link give for that sentence?
At 3:55 PM,
blipey said…
An imperative sentence, as explained in the link (and any English text you care to look at), has a subject--the understood you. In fact, grammarians use the technical term "you understood" for this point.
At 3:56 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Sentences don't have to have context, Joe.
One word utterances have to have a context in order to be considered a sentence.
blipey:
Your claim is that "Stop!" is not a sentence.
It isn't a sentence.
blipey:
My link is a direct refutation of that (as is any English text you happen to pick up).
Your link says the subject is assumed, meaning there is a context you freakin' retard.
At 3:59 PM,
blipey said…
From your link, Joe:
"Wash the car.
Clean up your room.
Martin, report to the counselor.
Please donate to the community charity fund.
We say that sentences must have a subject and a verb. Note that some of the above sentences do not seem to have a subject. The subject is implied, and the implied subject is you. You wash the car. You clean up your room. You is a second person pronoun. It isn't possible to make a command statement in first person or third person."
Even your own link disagrees with your implied definition of a sentence--that a sentence must have an explicit subject.
At 3:59 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
An imperative sentence, as explained in the link (and any English text you care to look at), has a subject--the understood you.
EXACTLY, you ignorant fuck.
THAT MEANS THERE IS MORE THAN ONE WORD IN THAT SENTENCE- THE SUBJECT AND THAT SUBJECT WOULD HAVE TO KNOW THE CONEXT OR ELSE NOTHING WILL STOP.
At 4:00 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
That link says nothing about context, Joe (unless you're a mind-reader?).
You, is understood. Therefor that understood "you" means there is more than one word and there is context.
At 4:01 PM,
blipey said…
No, Joe. It means there is a subject. A subject is not a context. Please point out where in my link that it stated anything about context. You implied that it did; I can't find it.
At 4:02 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Even your own link disagrees with your implied definition of a sentence--that a sentence must have an explicit subject.
Except I never said nor implied that.
At 4:04 PM,
blipey said…
"Go!"
How many words are in that sentence? According to Joe, there are 2. Why couldn't there be 6 or 13 or 54?
How many words in the following sentence:
"Where is the calculator?"
One might answer "4". They're probably wrong, though. For everyone knows that the calculator we were just using was Joe's big blue calculator, so the correct answer for number of words in that sentence is more likely "6".
At 4:05 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
It means there is a subject. A subject is not a context.
The subject has to know the context you retarded monkey.
Yell "Stop!" in a room full of people and you may get some to stop what they are doing. But no one wil have any idea wghat you are trying to communicate, which is the purpose of a sentence.
Now how about "Iran"?
How can you jusitify your use of "Iran" as a sentence?
At 4:06 PM,
blipey said…
That's your whole argument, Joe. That "Stop!" isn't a sentence because there is no subject. That is implied by your statement:
"The basic English language sentence is called a simple sentence. It requires a subject and a verb."
At 4:07 PM,
blipey said…
"The red brick fudges the house."
What is the purpose of that sentence, Joe?
At 4:08 PM,
blipey said…
"Iran."
Technically not a sentence (as this isn't).
Now, how about, "Stop!"?
We have multiple links (yours included) that say it is a sentence. What do you say?
At 4:09 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
"Go!"
How many words are in that sentence?
It's not a sentence.
To whom are you speaking?
In what context are you using the word "Go"?
blipey:
How many words in the following sentence:
"Where is the calculator?"
Who are you talking to?
Are you talking to yourself?
Which calculator?
Sentences are for communicating- and you are a clown who thinks communication is something Catholics do in church.
At 4:11 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Now, how about, "Stop!"?
We have multiple links (yours included) that say it is a sentence.
No you don't.
You don't know how to read, and that is the whole problem with trying to have a discussion with a clown.
At 4:12 PM,
blipey said…
"Go!"
You just said that there are 2 words in this sentence. Now you are saying it is not a sentence. Which is it?
And you never answered. How many words are in the following sentence:
"Where is the calculator?"
At 4:12 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
"The red brick fudges the house."
What is the purpose of that sentence, Joe?
To prove that you are an asshole.
Hint- I don't need any more evidence.
If I find you and beat the shit out of you I have more than enough to justify the beating.
At 4:14 PM,
blipey said…
Joe, a direct quote from the link:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'"
We do have exactly what you're saying we don't: a source that says a sentence can be one word.
At 4:14 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
"Go!"
You just said that there are 2 words in this sentence.
Not me.
At 4:15 PM,
blipey said…
Can't count to four so we threaten people from thousands of miles away. WWJD?
At 4:16 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Joe, a direct quote from the link:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'"
BECAUSE THE OTHER WORDS ARE UNDERSTOOD AND DO NOT NEED TO BE REPEATED.
Are you that stupid that you keep quoting it and don't have a clue as to what it means?
At 4:18 PM,
blipey said…
Your words, Joe:
"You, is understood. Therefor that understood "you" means there is more than one word and there is context."
That means you think the sentence, "Stop!" has at least 2 words. But you also think that it is not a sentence. Which is it.
At 4:18 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Can't count to four so we threaten people from thousands of miles away.
Not a threat- a promise.
blipey:
WWJD?
I'm going to kick your ass for being a belligerent freak.
At 4:19 PM,
blipey said…
The word is not there, Joe.
It is a one word sentence, as stated in the link.
At 5:55 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Your words, Joe:
"You, is understood. Therefor that understood "you" means there is more than one word and there is context."
I know what I said assface. And wht I sad does not support your claim of what said.
blipey:
That means you think the sentence, "Stop!" has at least 2 words.
It all depends on the context as to if it is a sentence and how many words it contains.
At 5:56 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
The word is not there, Joe.
What word is not there?
The assumed word/ words?
They are not said but they are still there
blipey:
It is a one word sentence, as stated in the link.
Except the link doesn't say that.
At 9:49 PM,
blipey said…
Blipey: It's a one word sentence as stated in the link.
JoeG: The link doesn't say that.
Well, let's look at the quote yet again.
""An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'""
Hmmmm....
At 9:53 PM,
blipey said…
Blipey: Joe, you think the sentence has at least 2 words.
JoeG: No I don't.
Well, let's see what Joe actually said:
JoeG: "You, is understood. Therefor that understood "you" means there is more than one word and there is context."
I'm going out on a limb here. I think "at least 2" means "more than 1" (at least when we're speaking of sets of words).
At 8:07 AM,
Joe G said…
Blipey:
It's a one word sentence as stated in the link.
The link doesn't say that.
blipey:
Well, let's look at the quote yet again.
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'"
BECAUSE THE OTHER WORDS ARE UNDERSTOOD AND DO NOT NEED TO BE REPEATED.
Are you that stupid that you keep quoting it and don't have a clue as to what it means?
At 8:09 AM,
Joe G said…
Blipey:
Joe, you think the sentence has at least 2 words.
That is the FIRST time in this thread you have said those words.
You can't even keep up with your twisted lies.
At 8:13 AM,
Joe G said…
From clownie's link:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
IOW the word "Go" by itself is not a sentence. But if you start assuming other words, like a subject, then it becomes a sentence.
At 9:33 AM,
Zachriel said…
Fiddlesticks!
They're called Sentence words.
At 10:01 AM,
blipey said…
Comment 73:
Blipey: "That means you think the sentence, "Stop!" has at least 2 words. But you also think that it is not a sentence. Which is it."
Comment 76 (Joe quotes me):
JoeG: "blipey:
That means you think the sentence, "Stop!" has at least 2 words."
Comment 79 (Blipey quoting himself):
"Blipey: Joe, you think the sentence has at least 2 words."
Comment 82 (Joe, referring to comment 79):
"Blipey:
Joe, you think the sentence has at least 2 words.
JoeG: That is the FIRST time in this thread you have said those words.
Well, apparently not--at least fr anyone who bothers to read this idiotic thread.
Care to try again?
At 10:04 AM,
blipey said…
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word."
What's so hard about that? A clear definition of a sentence that has one word. There is nothing else there. Just because you would like there to be some sort of clause that says "but it's not really one word, just sort of has invisible words tacked on...." doesn't make it so.
For the stupid, once again, the exact definition of imperative sentences from the link:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as ONE WORD."
Pretty clear.
At 10:36 AM,
Unknown said…
Joe G:
Yell "Stop!" in a room full of people and you may get some to stop what they are doing. But no one wil have any idea what you are trying to communicate, which is the purpose of a sentence.
Well the ones who stopped seemed to have a pretty good idea. How about:
"Duck!"
Joe G:
Try shifting ONE letter right or left and see what you get.
Or try two letters right or left.
Stop being such an obtuse jerk.
How about:
"Top being such an obtuse jerk."
A difficult command to comply with, Joe, but you're a talented guy...
At 1:00 PM,
Joe G said…
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
That means there is really more than one word you ignorant freak.
blipey:
Just because you would like there to be some sort of clause that says "but it's not really one word, just sort of has invisible words tacked on...." doesn't make it so.
It is right there in the definition YOU provided- there are extra words tacked on- assumed words.
IOW thank you for continuing to prove that you are a lying little freak.
At 1:13 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Fiddlesticks!
They're called Sentence words.
They are only sentences in specific CONTEXTs- IOW other words are assumed.
For example:
"Will do do my chores for me?"
"Yes (I will do your chores for you)" asumed words are in parethesis
At 1:14 PM,
Joe G said…
allanmmiller chimes in:
Well the ones who stopped seemed to have a pretty good idea.
Nope they were just trying to see who the imbecile was.
At 1:16 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey the lying loser posted:
Blipey:
Joe, you think the sentence has at least 2 words.
JoeG: No I don't.
However that exchange NEVER took place.
That is all you get to post here clownie.
The rest of your posts will be archived and used in my defense.
At 1:30 PM,
Zachriel said…
Fiddlesticks!
At 1:37 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Fiddlesticks!
Yup that sums up your position rather nicely.
At 1:39 PM,
blipey said…
There are no other words, Joe. Otherwise, the definition would be something like:
"An imperative sentence has TWO WORDS."
OR
"An imperative sentence has MORE THAN ONE WORD."
Let's see what it actually said:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as ONE WORD."
Your only hope is to redefine "one". Would you like to do that? While doing so, you can also tell us how many words the following sentence has:
"Where is the calculator?"
Your redefinition of the word "one" could apply nicely in this instance.
At 1:51 PM,
Zachriel said…
Zachriel: Fiddlesticks!
Joe G: Yup that sums up your position rather nicely.
Yup! Here's a famous example of summing up a position in a word sentence:
Nuts!
At 4:16 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Here's a famous example of summing up a position in a word sentence:
Nuts!
You are confusing a one-word response for a one-word sentence.
Also all one-word sentences assume other words.
Go figure...
At 4:18 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
There are no other words, Joe.
According to YOUR site there are other words.
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
That means there is really more than one word you ignorant freak.
At 4:20 PM,
Joe G said…
It is funny- in a sad way- that for a thread dealing with biological evidence all evotards commenting avoided biology.
Not only that they exposed their ignorance of the English language.
Oh and they have demonstrated their dishonesty in the process.
Life is good...
At 9:09 AM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: It is funny- in a sad way- that for a thread dealing with biological evidence all evotards commenting avoided biology.
Well, actually, you are the one who introduced a faulty analogy based on shifting the starting position in a sentence to make another valid sentence. That led to a discussion of what constitutes a valid sentence. You've shown you don't understand the imperative, or even simple interrogatives.
At 9:17 AM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Well, actually, you are the one who introduced a faulty analogy based on shifting the starting position in a sentence to make another valid sentence.
Except it isn't a faulty analogy.
Zachriel:
That led to a discussion of what constitutes a valid sentence.
And you have proven that you are clueless in that regard also.
Zachriel:
You've shown you don't understand the imperative, or even simple interrogatives.
That is what you say but on closer inspection you were proven to be wrong, again, as usual.
At 9:28 AM,
Joe G said…
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
That means there is really more than one word you ignorant freaks.
Strange how both blipey and Zachriel provide references that support my claims and they both lied and said the references refute my claims.
At 11:20 AM,
blipey said…
Joe, the source I provided says "ONE WORD".
It's not my fault that you can't read or that you have some ocular disease that makes you read the word that spells "1" as "two or more".
If you would like to support your argument, it's really easy. You have yet to do that, however. Your sole argument is the ludicrous statement that "1 = 2" because you want it to.
If you answer this question, the foundation of your argument will be secure:
How many words are in the following sentence?
"Where is the calculator?"
Why can't you answer this question?
At 4:01 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Joe, the source I provided says "ONE WORD".
The source YOU provided says:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
That means there is really more than one word you ignorant freaks.
What the fuck is wrong with you?
My argument is supported by YOUR FREAKIN' SOURCE!
So eat shit and die you mangled retard...
At 10:02 AM,
Zachriel said…
There's only two letters and one word in the sentence "Go!"
At 10:03 AM,
Zachriel said…
Joe G: So eat s&)! and die you mangled retard...
Sorry. We missed that conclusive argument.
At 10:07 AM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
There's only two letters and one word in the sentence "Go!"
Not according to blipey's reference you illiterate imbecile.
Here it is AGAIN:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
That means there is really more than one word you ignorant freaks.
So it takes severe brain damage to become an evolutionist- got it...
At 11:28 AM,
Zachriel said…
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go."
At 11:28 AM,
Zachriel said…
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go."
Gotcha!
At 1:16 PM,
blipey said…
How many words are in the sentence, "Where is the calculator?"?
At 1:17 PM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go."
Only if you are an imbecile incapable of undersanding English.
At 1:20 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
How many words are in the sentence, "Where is the calculator?"?
ACCORDING TO YOUR REFERENCE THER ARE AT LEAST 5 WORDS IN THAT SENTENCE- THE FOUR WRITTEN WORDS PLUS AT LEAST ONE UNDERSTOOD WORD- THE PERSON YOU ARE ASKING.
IF YOU HAVE ANY PROBLEMS ITH TAHT TAKE IT UP WITH THE GRAMMER PROFESSIONALS.
At 1:21 PM,
blipey said…
Summing up:
Number of words in the sentence, "Go!":
blipey: 1
zachriel: 1
joe: 2
Number of words in the sentence, "Where is the calculator?":
blipey: 4
zachriel: ?
joe: ?
At 1:23 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Summing up:
Number of words in the sentence, "Go!":
blipey: 1
zachriel: 1
joe: 2
Blipey's reference says at least 2. blipey and zacho are wrong.
blipey:
Number of words in the sentence, "Where is the calculator?":
blipey: 4
zachriel: ?
joe: ?
blipey's reference says at least 5.
At 1:26 PM,
blipey said…
What do you think they meant by the following sentence:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'"
Why do you think the phrase "one word" was used? What purpose do you think it serves?
At 1:35 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
What do you think they meant by the following sentence:
"An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: 'Go.'"
Why do you think the phrase "one word" was used? What purpose do you think it serves?
It was all clarified in the part you keep omitting.
Here it is AGAIN:
An imperative sentence can be as short as one word, such as: "Go." Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood. (bold added)
IOW you are an illiterate freak.
At 1:39 PM,
blipey said…
No, Joe. You keep ignoring the "one word part".
What do YOU think they meant by "one word"?
If they really think that a sentence cannot be one word, why would they use that phrase? It would become completely useless and a waste of space. Instead, they decided too clearly state that a sentence can be "one word". Why do you think that is?
At 1:55 PM,
blipey said…
Come now, Joe; you aren't just going to "keep repeating the same thing and think you've made an argument" are you?
Explain yourself.
Also, how many words are in the following sentence?
"The red brick fudges the upstairs house."
At 4:10 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
No, Joe. You keep ignoring the "one word part".
No you ignorant freak of a clown- YOU KEEP IGNORING THE CLARIFYING PART:
Technically, a sentence must contain at least a subject and a verb, but in this case, the subject (you) is assumed and understood.
blipey:
If they really think that a sentence cannot be one word, why would they use that phrase?
Becase they clarified it the subject (you) is assumed and understood.
Obviously you are too stupid to understand taht simple concept of understood words.
Ya see moron with the word "Go!" there has to be a context and a subject- in all of that are words that are understood- where, how, who, why- that is all in that sentence- meaning it ain't a one-wrod sentence you ignorant jackass.
It is all right there IN YOUR FUCKING REFERENCE.
At 4:17 PM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Come now, Joe; you aren't just going to "keep repeating the same thing and think you've made an argument" are you?
I will keep repeating as long as you keep ignoring it.
Until you address what I am repeating you give the appearence of a lying loser not worth my time.
So either address it or fuck off.
At 4:25 PM,
blipey said…
Joe, the sentence is one word long. Does it have a meaning that can be explained with more than one word? Sure. But that's not what we're talking about. We're talking about the number of words in the sentence "Go!".
For example the sentence, "NASA is a crappy organization.", has 5 words. We could write a book about the meaning of that sentence, but that doesn't change the number of words in the sentence: 5.
The point of this is that you hold the position that it is impossible to do something as simple as count the number of words in a sentence.
If that simple task is impossible what hope do we have of calculating the information content of cake?
At 4:29 PM,
blipey said…
Summing up:
Joe says he has calculated the information content of a biological object.
Joe says it is impossible to ascertain the number of words in any sentence.
Joe also claims that his ideas are simple enough to include in grade school texts. Try asking a 3rd grader how many words are in the sentence "Where is the calculator?"
According to Joe, all those 3rd graders will be fucking ignorant, evotard, clowns....
At 7:35 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Joe, the sentence is one word long.
Not according to YOUR reference you fucking piece of shit.
Why do you keep ignoring your reference?
Do you really think your ignorance is some sort of refutation?
At 7:52 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
Joe says he has calculated the information content of a biological object.
I did and you choked on it.
blipey:
Joe says it is impossible to ascertain the number of words in any sentence.
Liar- I never said that.
blipey:
Joe also claims that his ideas are simple enough to include in grade school texts. Try asking a 3rd grader how many words are in the sentence "Where is the calculator?"
I did something better- I have asked several English teachers/ grammer profesionals.
They all agree with me- understood words are part of the sentence.
So fuck you asshole.
At 8:24 AM,
Zachriel said…
blipey: Number of words in the sentence, "Where is the calculator?":
blipey: 4
zachriel: ?
joe: ?
Joe G: blipey's reference says at least 5.
Oh, gee whiz. There are four words in the sentence. There's no missing verb or subject.
Where, adverb
is, verb
the, article
calculator, subject
We form the response by inverting the verb and subject.
The calculator is here.
-
The sentence "Go!" has one word. It's missing the subject, which is common in imperative sentences.
Go, verb
blipey: If that simple task is impossible what hope do we have of calculating the information content of cake?
Heh.
At 8:37 AM,
Joe G said…
Zachriel:
Oh, gee whiz. There are four words in the sentence. There's no missing verb or subject.
Yes there is, the person he is talking to just as i said.
Zachriel:
The sentence "Go!" has one word.
According to blipey's reference it has more than one word.
Zachriel:
It's missing the subject, which is common in imperative sentences.
That is correct and that missing subject is understood and part of the sentence.
That you are too stupid to understand that helps me understand why you are an evolutionist- you are totally clueless and live in denial.
At 9:13 AM,
Joe G said…
blipey:
For example the sentence, "NASA is a crappy organization.", has 5 words.
"NASA" is not a word.
The sentence would be:
"The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is a crappy organization." 10 words.
blipey:
The point of this is that you hold the position that it is impossible to do something as simple as count the number of words in a sentence.
Except I don't hold such a position.
At 11:01 AM,
Joe G said…
No more comments allowed that do not deal with overlapping genes.
At 11:10 AM,
blipey said…
Way to go, tough guy! You are unable to support your statement. You are unable to recognize the differing points that are brought against your statement. You are unable to address these differing points. However...
WATERLOO!!!!!!!
Nicely done, chap. Nicely done.
So anyway, how many words in the following sentence?
"The red brick fudges the upstairs house."
One would say that this question is simple enough to be answered by a second grader, but you think differently. Maybe you can enlighten us?
At 11:13 AM,
Joe G said…
Hey asshole I have supported my statements.
All you can do is ignore what I say.
You are a piece of shit and a lying loser.
Now go pollute some other blog...
Post a Comment
<< Home