Welcome to Gaia! ::

George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.
Nityananda-rama dasa's avatar

Devout Fairy

rpglol101
Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.


Genie would disagree...
Nityananda-rama dasa
rpglol101
George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.


Genie would disagree...
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.
Nityananda-rama dasa's avatar

Devout Fairy

rpglol101
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.


There is very strong indication that Genie's environment effected her behavior.
Nityananda-rama dasa's avatar

Devout Fairy

It is also worth noting that you are somewhat misrepresenting what Price proposed, as it simply states that the more closely related two individuals are, the more likely that they are to be altruistic to each other. So far as I can tell, there is no mention in his equation of tracking chromosomes for kindness, though, if you have a link that claims otherwise, please share it.
Interitum's avatar

Malevolent Phantom

10,450 Points
  • Super Tipsy 200
  • Champion 300
  • Mark Twain 100
Maybe to a certain degree, but people mostly act as they were raised.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

14,050 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Hero 100
rpglol101
George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.

rpglol101
Nityananda-rama dasa
Genie would disagree...
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.

I notice you don't cite your sources and rather than address the actual citation someone else made, you make an appeal to a vague authority.

Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am" And then the person does read up on the subject and it turns out the person who performed the fallacy was full of s**t.

Anybody know what that is? Because he totally just did that. "Just ask a biology teacher," instead of "Oh, well, that was proven wrong, here's X article, and here's a further study by Y."

I'm just saying, guys. It's Extended Discussion, not "I'm going to make an argument, now do my work for me" discussion.

Not that I ever keep to that principle myself.
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?
Xiam
rpglol101
George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.

rpglol101
Nityananda-rama dasa
Genie would disagree...
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.

I notice you don't cite your sources and rather than address the actual citation someone else made, you make an appeal to a vague authority.

Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am" And then the person does read up on the subject and it turns out the person who performed the fallacy was full of s**t.

Anybody know what that is? Because he totally just did that. "Just ask a biology teacher," instead of "Oh, well, that was proven wrong, here's X article, and here's a further study by Y."

I'm just saying, guys. It's Extended Discussion, not "I'm going to make an argument, now do my work for me" discussion.

Not that I ever keep to that principle myself.
Where am I high school?
Lucky~9~Lives
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?
Hey I have a math formula that has been proven for decades. It's math people not some crazy a** bible.
rpglol101
Lucky~9~Lives
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?
Hey I have a math formula that has been proven for decades.


That's what Pythagoras, himself, said.
- ninja
Lucky~9~Lives
rpglol101
Lucky~9~Lives
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?
Hey I have a math formula that has been proven for decades.


That's what Pythagoras, himself, said.
- ninja
Well disprove the formula then.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

14,050 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Hero 100
rpglol101
Xiam
rpglol101
George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.

rpglol101
Nityananda-rama dasa
Genie would disagree...
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.

I notice you don't cite your sources and rather than address the actual citation someone else made, you make an appeal to a vague authority.

Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am" And then the person does read up on the subject and it turns out the person who performed the fallacy was full of s**t.

Anybody know what that is? Because he totally just did that. "Just ask a biology teacher," instead of "Oh, well, that was proven wrong, here's X article, and here's a further study by Y."

I'm just saying, guys. It's Extended Discussion, not "I'm going to make an argument, now do my work for me" discussion.

Not that I ever keep to that principle myself.
Where am I high school?

No. You're in Morality & Religion, which is a subforum of Extended Discussion. So you had better be damn ready to show evidence for your case before you start posting. Especially if you try touting around words like "fact" and "could not disprove."
Xiam
rpglol101
Xiam
rpglol101
George Price a profound Mathematica came up with a formula to track the chromosome which holds kindness. To The day he died George could not disprove his own formula and neither can the scientists to this day. Everything you do is because of your genetic make up.

rpglol101
Nityananda-rama dasa
Genie would disagree...
That's not how genetics works just ask a biology teacher.

I notice you don't cite your sources and rather than address the actual citation someone else made, you make an appeal to a vague authority.

Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am" And then the person does read up on the subject and it turns out the person who performed the fallacy was full of s**t.

Anybody know what that is? Because he totally just did that. "Just ask a biology teacher," instead of "Oh, well, that was proven wrong, here's X article, and here's a further study by Y."

I'm just saying, guys. It's Extended Discussion, not "I'm going to make an argument, now do my work for me" discussion.

Not that I ever keep to that principle myself.
Where am I high school?

No. You're in Morality & Religion, which is a subforum of Extended Discussion. So you had better be damn ready to show evidence for your case before you start posting. Especially if you try touting around words like "fact" and "could not disprove."
math correspond to math. That's evidence by itself.
Xiam's avatar

Anxious Humorist

14,050 Points
  • Forum Regular 100
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Hero 100
Lucky~9~Lives
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?

Oh, maybe... I saw that, but I wasn't entirely certain what I was reading. I think I was really damn tired at the time.

rpglol101
Lucky~9~Lives
Xiam
Guys? Is there a proper term for that kind of fallacy? A sort of "look it up" fallacy? I've been wondering that for a while. Where someone can't actually prove what they're saying is true, so they request the opponent to look it up instead, as if to prove their argument correct purely because "Oh, you don't know? How sad. Read up and then come back later when you're as well-learned as I am"


Ipse dixit?
Hey I have a math formula that has been proven for decades. It's math people not some crazy a** bible.

I notice you didn't post the mathematical formula.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games