RE: Circumcision in various populations (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion



Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 5:26:04 AM)

quote:

That list is not quite correct: Celiac disease is not a genetic disorder.


Celiac disease affects people in all parts of the world. Originally thought to be a rare childhood syndrome, celiac disease is now known to be a common genetic disorder. More than 2 million people in the United States have the disease, or about 1 in 133 people.1 Among people who have a first-degree relative—a parent, sibling, or child—diagnosed with celiac disease, as many as 1 in 22 people may have the disease.

http://digestive.niddk.nih.gov/ddiseases/pubs/celiac/

Someone let supergenious know he, once again, doesnt know what he is talking about.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 6:31:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle
Having said that Rule is 100% wrong, as usual.

I am? Well, I am willing to learn and improve myself! Pray tell me why I am wrong. Pray also tell me in what other posts I have been evidently wrong.



FullCircle -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 6:32:13 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead
I think the 'hygiene" thing is a bit more specific than that.

Think about it: Islam and Judaism both started as desert religions. The other groups who have historically practised circumcision as a cultural thing also tend to live in deserts. Sand under the foreskin is not fun, as any uncut man who's ever had a storker on a beach can tell you...

I agree, they had no such concerns when they started it.

If you ask the question why it still exists in the modern western world, this tends to be the justification put forward. People even come up with all these retrospective studies showing how they are right that self mutilation is the best practice. It's kind of like chopping off your earlobes to reduce the risk of infection from ear piercings.



tazzygirl -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 6:32:15 AM)

LOL... Rule is such a joke.



DomKen -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 6:53:47 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)

And we've already discussed why genetic diseases are more common in smaller populations that do not outbreed frequently. It has nothing what ever to do with circumcision.



Hippiekinkster -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:00:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)

And we've already discussed why genetic diseases are more common in smaller populations that do not outbreed frequently. It has nothing what ever to do with circumcision.
Did the nazi Hollander really claim that the Pennsylvania Deutsch Amish aren't European Christians? Christ, what a fucking maroon. This is why I have this racist asshole on hide.



DomKen -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:00:22 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
The only - and evolutionary HUGE - biologically relevant distinction between both populations is that the one is practicing circumcision and the other is not. (I have been looking for other biologically relevant distinctions between both populations, but I could not find any.)

Actually there are many biological differences that could account for the rates of genetic disease being different.

Size and diversity of founding population, rate of outbreeding, rate of close inbreeding and exposure to mutagens to name the most obvious.



mnottertail -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:05:03 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)


Ever here of French Canadians in Quebec?  They would be European Christian Populations at their core.

They have the same incidence of Tay-Sachs as the Jews descended from the Ashkenazi (that would be German Jews) so, European as well, there is no statistically significant higher incidence in muslims of German extraction, or of any fucking extraction. 

So yeah, our perspectives on idocy differ a great deal.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:44:57 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
And we've already discussed why genetic diseases are more common in smaller populations that do not outbreed frequently. It has nothing what ever to do with circumcision.

I refer you to the totality of my post 41.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:55:21 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hippiekinkster
Did the nazi Hollander really claim that the Pennsylvania Deutsch Amish aren't European Christians? Christ, what a fucking maroon. This is why I have this racist asshole on hide.

I am not a nazi.

As far as racism is concerned, it is an incontrovertible fact that the gene pools of various populations - such as those of butchers and of Maori - have different allele frequencies. (If they had the same allele frequencies, then they would be two different, but identical gene pools; I am not aware of any such existing, whether human, plant or animal.) Whatever recognizing this fact is called, I gracefully accept.

Incidentally, not recognizing this incontrovertible fact is called by such concepts as 'ignorance', 'ostrich politics', 'political correctness' and 'stupidity'.

I appreciate being put on Hide by rude people and by those who lack grace.

Edited to add: Since Pennsylvania Deutsch Amish have a much higher frequency of inherited diseases than prevalent among European Christians, obviously they do not belong to the population of the European Christians. Duh! (Well, I suppose that chemists can not be expected to comprehend the basics of population genetics. Hm, can I explain it in concepts that a chemist teacher might comprehend? I know! It is something like the groups sixteen and seventeen in the periodic table: they resemble each other in some ways, but they are two different populations because of having different properties. Do you get it now - at least a bit?)



tazzygirl -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 7:59:18 AM)

quote:

I appreciate being put on Hide by rude people and by those who lack grace.


Another way of saying... He prefers those (who do not agree with him and prove him wrong) ignore him



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 8:26:53 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Actually there are many biological differences that could account for the rates of genetic disease being different.

Size and diversity of founding population

That evidently is not correct, since the Jewish and Muslim populations differ hugely in size and in diversity, yet they have the same frequency of inherited diseases.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Actually there are many biological differences that could account for the rates of genetic disease being different.

rate of outbreeding

That evidently is not correct either, since there are all kinds of out-breeding rates within the various populations of European Christians, yet I am not aware of one of those many populations having a frequency of inherited diseases that differs significantly from that of the other European Christian populations.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Actually there are many biological differences that could account for the rates of genetic disease being different.

rate of close inbreeding

In case the out-breeding argument was shown to be false, you hedged your bets by gambling on the opposite concept?

That evidently is not correct either, since populations of Muslims and Jews have been inbreeding nearly since they started the practice of circumcision, yet in just about all of those populations the frequency of inherited diseases is the same.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen
Actually there are many biological differences that could account for the rates of genetic disease being different.

exposure to mutagens to name the most obvious.

That evidently is not correct either, as most mutations do not arise because of mutagens, but because of copying errors made by the DNA polymerases that copy the DNA.

DomKen, you are outclassed. Now be a dear and go play with your toys, as I already recommended in my post 41.



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 8:45:27 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

quote:

ORIGINAL: FullCircle
Having said that Rule is 100% wrong, as usual.

I am? Well, I am willing to learn and improve myself! Pray tell me why I am wrong. Pray also tell me in what other posts I have been evidently wrong.



Your statement that everybody with a missing foreskin is Jewish (regardless of their own religious grouping), and your statement that circumcision causes genetic diseases, for a start.

You've been asked (repeatedly) to substantiate both of these statements, and have made no effort whatsoever to do so.

As you appear to be unable to demonstrate that you're not talking bollocks in both cases, then you're wrong. That's how that one tends to work, you'll find...



Lucylastic -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 11:13:18 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Moonhead

I think the 'hygiene" thing is a bit more specific than that.

Think about it: Islam and Judaism both started as desert religions. The other groups who have historically practised circumcision as a cultural thing also tend to live in deserts. Sand under the foreskin is not fun, as any uncut man who's ever had a storker on a beach can tell you...

Best post of the entire thread
LMAO



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 11:16:20 AM)

Thanks, I'm here all week. [;)]



Lucylastic -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 11:19:43 AM)

Ill tip the waiter!! geddit geddit?



Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 11:23:10 AM)

[:D]



jlf1961 -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:23:30 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: DomKen


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule

Our perspectives on silliness differ.

It is well known to me that inherited diseases in Jewish and Muslim populations are six times more frequent than in the European Christian population. Ever hear of Tay-Sachs disease?

When Christian populations - such as the USA Americans do - start to circumcise their males, eventually their frequency of inherited genetic diseases will increase to that same high level.

(And no: Mennonites and Amish are not European Christian populations.)

And we've already discussed why genetic diseases are more common in smaller populations that do not outbreed frequently. It has nothing what ever to do with circumcision.



I had my tonsils removed as a kid, which according to rule would mean my kids would have been born without tonsils. If that was true, what did my son have removed when he was 10?


I dont care if I get modspanked, Rule is a super ignoramus.



Rule -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:43:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I had my tonsils removed as a kid

That is horrible. Did one of your parents smoke?

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
which according to rule would mean my kids would have been born without tonsils.

Trolling again, jlf1961? Either that or you have not read nor comprehended my posts.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961
I dont care if I get modspanked, Rule is a super ignoramus.

Oh, but I am a super-ignoramus. I have no problem with that and I am not offended by the remark. A mod cannot spank you for that.

However, a mod might spank you for trolling and ask you to prove your point by quoting pertinent texts posted by me. Please do not put words in my mouth. You cannot possibly conceive any of my thoughts, as you lack the wherewithal.




Moonhead -> RE: Circumcision in various populations (2/5/2011 12:48:48 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rule
However, a mod might spank you for trolling and ask you to prove your point by quoting pertinent texts posted by me.

Would there be any point him bothering given your habit of ignoring any posts made in reply to you which you can't evade answering a comment or query in?

If that's your definition of "trolling", I suggest that you find a ncie gaff under a bridge and wait for some goats to come along.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875