Mihos Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Listen up Kenuchelover and I did type Indun.

So, were you being randomly spastic but inoffensive, or were you MEANING "Injun" irregardless of what you actually typed?

> YOu claimed to be "Native American" yet you speak
> like an Apple.

You speak like one overly fond of stereotypes.

Just how do you expect a college educated Native American to speak?

> For those of you who have never
> lived or visited Indian Reservations you'll know
> from today on
> that this is an endearing term used when speaking
> to other indigene who prefer to not be defined as
> Native Americans or Indians as both are incorrect.
> Some use the term First Nations and others prefer
> good old fashioned Indun.

Liar. NOBODY says "Indun".

And while "Injun" is used on rare occasions, as an insiders term (as blacks might use the N-word in reference to each other), it is HIGHLY offensive coming from outsiders.

> The only kids that befriended me in America lived
> on the Pauite reservation. There are several First
> Nations students in my classes and my ranch
> foreman is Nemu as well.
> So just about every day over the phone or over
> email i get a
> Hey Indun. Speak it Indun. Tagwe Indun. Tokechow
> Indun. Aaay just say Indun. ITs a way of avoiding
> getting sticky in the cloak of rightmanness. If
> you always right you might get crook necked. No
> one wants to be crook necked. So be it Indun.

Do you perchance have a hearing disorder? Otherwise, provide SOME kind of cite for "Indun".

Funny, I've met Paiutes from several different reservations.... none used "Indun".

> I've provided a specific reference about the the
> genetic disperal and origins of the domestic fowl.
> ANYONE that actually read it would catch the
> important data.

You've provided generic papers dealing with Gallus evolution many millions of years ago, with the initial domestication of Gallus from a DIFFERENT species than you claimed.

And yes, we caught the important data.... which is the fact that you have absolutely no valid cites re pre-Columbian chickens in the Americas.

> If you want to weigh in with authority it is
> important that you not get so full of yourself
> that you start talking sauce. That is talking over
> people and insulting them to make a point.

No, this is a case of my not giving you the respect YOU feel you deserve.

I do this because:

1) You are using personal insults, racial slurs, and deliberate parodies of my net name.

2) You make wild claims without offering any relevant evidence, and have shown no sign that you know what you're talking about.

> In the original paper on genetic dispersal there
> is a clear discussion of three issues Ive covered
> since.
> 1. Gallus bankiva is genetically distinct from
> Gallus gallus
> 2. the Rflp types derived of bankiva are
> exceedingly rare in tested domestic fowl.
> HAve a look where the tissue samples were
> collected please and actually read the paper.
> 3. the Rflp types of three listed "breeds" found
> throughout Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, Oceania
> and South America are listed
> Ayam kedu, Ayam katai, Ayam pelung.

Provide cites that these 3 Ayam breeds were found in South America.... PARTICULARLY that they were found in South America PRIOR to Spanish introduction of numerous Asian chicken breeds during the 16th century.

> Hard citation there Mr. and you are so sure of
> your authority that you never bothered to actually
> try and think about what what I attempted to share
> with you.

You have not tried to share anything relevant to the discussion of pre-Columbian chickens.

Chicken evolution is as offtopic as primate evolution would be here.

> And granted email sucks for knowing what
> the other person is thinking but Kenuchelover,
> your over the top in the attitude department. Im
> certain Im not the only person who has been singed
> by your freeze burn analysis. If all the secrets
> and mysteries of the world were known with such
> authority there wouldn't be any need for Trolls
> like myself

Ah, translation: You are speaking of secrets & mysteries rather than known scientific data.... and you admit yourself to be a troll.

> or Pedantsauces either.

And you descend to pathetic insults when you're shown up as emptyheaded. Please, show a little class in the level of your insults.... actually look up what "Kenuche" is, and make a pun on it that makes some kind of sense!

> In the meantime our banter is not that interesting
> to anyone.
>
>
> As you clearly don't know anything about
> Yamashina, his family or his institute what are
> you doing making assumptions? Our families are
> very close. I looked after his collection as a
> child and worked for his brother and his cousins
> in college. I earned my reputation as a reliable
> research assistant.

Then why can't you provide any credible cites?

You make wild claims, but haven't backed up anything.

> I don't need to prove myself
> to you or to anyone and I certainly havent asked
> for any qualifications from you save for what
> state of apple your mind is.

Racial slurs.... worse yet, assimilationist racial slurs. How pathetic.

> Our two families
> respective foundations created the Western
> Foundation of Vertebrate Zoology and provide
> annual grants to enumerous institutions and
> researchers in the fields of sustainable
> development, archeology, intrepetive exhibit
> design, the permanent secretariate on indigenous
> affairs and wildlife conservation.

With this personal AND family connection, I'm sure you can manage to dredge up credible cites SOMEWHERE?

Can't you......?

> A curatorial
> intern or a stewards apprentice is responsible for
> specific duties. CHewing up and regurgitating
> great science is not one of them.

So.... you didn't actually learn any of the data?

> I also think it is more important that anyone
> reading the thread is capable of following a line
> of logic.

Which you haven't given even a pretense of presenting.

> Links and citations are essential. But
> roosters are known to fight the fence even when
> there are chicken hawks and weasels after the hens
> and snakes and rats after the eggs.
>
> Your assertion that junglefowl are barely species
> and as such my waste of hours

HOURS? Really?

> typing this
> manifesto is all the more pathetic underlines the
> flaw of your self perpetuating hegemony.
> The different species of junglefowl share what is
> described in evolutionary biology terminology as
> conservative morphology. This means for those of
> you that havent eaten any books lately that the
> different species LOOK similar. Their similar
> shapes don't make them the same species. They are
> actually very ancient and have many millions of
> years in genetic isolation from one another hence
> the species nomenclature.

Sigh... read papers like "Slow Evolutionary Loss of the Potential for Interspecific Hybridization in Birds: A Manifestation of Slow Regulatory Evolution" by Prager & Wilson (free online access in PNAS!).

Remember, "species" is a somewhat loose term, the boundaries of which the lumpers & splitters are NOT in agreement concerning.

With birds, even several tens of millions of years of isolation won't usually prevent succesful hybridization. It's NOT a matter of time that makes species, it's genetic differentiation.

> When you call my credibility into question you are
> crossing a line.

Not when you've consistantly refused to provide evidence.

Come on, TRY! One lousy archaeological site with accepted evidence for South American chickens prior to 1492..... One lousy scientific paper SPECIFICALLY dealing with South American & Polynesian chickens, that concludes on a credible basis that the two are significantly connected & that this was NOT a Spanish introduction of Asian/Pacific chickens to South America.

If you'd even make an effort I'd respect you.... but you haven't.

> I am more than the sum of my experiences. There is
> more to being me than I have stated.

I'm not impressed by metaphysical hints from someone who has refused to post credible evidence, whose cites are NOT relevant & don't always say what he claims they do, and who evidences an ignorance of things genetic and archaeological.

Sorry, but that's the way it is.

> Dont
> presuppose me off your life raft. I am the river.

You are eating WAY too much of that fermented applesauce. Uh oh, does it have moldy grey or blue circles on it? That would explain a lot.

Also see above re metaphysical hints.

> What is more Im not accustomed to people speaking
> to me or about me with any level of disrespect.

Then at least make the effort to TRY to provide evidence of your claims instead of wandering all over the place, STOP the puerile personal insults, and show a little respect yourself.

Anonymously coming here & spouting hyperdiffusionistic nonsense that you refuse to back up with facts will NOT get you any respect from folk on this board.

I respect people I disagree with, no problem. What I don't respect is people who act like trolls or don't even TRY to support their positions.

> Being an Indigene myself

Eh, you've claimed that you are teaching here in North America.

Nothing you've said suggests you're indigenous HERE..... more the opposite. You sound exactly like a iimigrant European descendant immigrant who feels resentment & an inferiority complex towards actual American Natives.

> I have thick skin and am
> not insulted easily. My sense of humor escapes
> everyone at times. Ill assume for now yours does
> as well.

Neh, I've not made any jokes on Ma'at that weren't understood, or appreciated, that I know of.

Kenuchelover.






Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/02/2005 04:42PM by kenuchelover.