This is his modus operandi. Flood forums (loads and loads of them) with grandiose titled sciency threads.
Some of it quite interesting but the underlying intention stinks.
Such dishonesty is to be expected I guess. After all it has been their tactics through the ages.
Looks like the tinfoil hat brigade has arrived. Might I suggest this section rather for you and a bucket of mud? There everybody’s intentions stink and they all have a modus operandi… to chuck mud and feel special.
I have a feeling most of your threads will end up there. The people here are bound to take less of your bullshit than certain other forums.
Stop with the fucking agenda already or declare it openly and honestly and engage people who will confront you on it. Be a man for once in your life and stop the clandestine war for Jesus you are engaging in.
Yes, I also have a feeling that is going to happen. This place is not keen on actually discussing scientific data. Rather the MODS here like to chuck scientifically relevant information into the Flame Wars section so that cute cartoons and insults can be discussed. Highly amusing though. Kinda shows how “pro-scientific” this site is, or pretends to be anyway.
Discuss preadaptations and how it affects evolutionary trajectories? Naa aah, posting funny cartoons in the Flame Wars section seems to be the order of the day here.
Discuss the functions of DNA that was provisionally labelled as “junk”? Naa aah, not want to read about that in the science section here.
In case you have not noticed, this is the science section, and discussing the optimality of the genetic code is strictly scientific. But you knew that. Mind you, what have you actually contributed so far?
Now take that bucket of mud and that filthy mouth of yours and go play in the section that was intelligently designed for you… Flame Wars.
You should know by now that you cannot dictate to me what and where I post. That you still try to is a clear indication of how your mind functions. ie not very well.
People see past your cut and paste nonsense and easily understand that you cannot contribute anything other than said cut and paste jobbies. You are incapable of discussing anything scientific and incapable of expressing any of these ideas in a meaningful way so as to clearly demonstrate your own understanding.
You are useless as anything but entertainment and even that has gone stale for me. Enjoy your bullshit if you must, but please don’t think you are fooling anyone other than yourself.
Still not contributing to this thread…? Tsk tsk. Guess if you can’t you can always rely on your ability to insult others and throw around a few ad hominems to derail a thread about scientific data related to the genetic code. Pity.
That you always pretend your own posts are add homm and insult free is amusing. Whether I am ‘foul mouthed’ or not, for instance, has got nothing to do with my argument or opinion expressed. Ride your high horse for all its worth, you ain’t getting anywhere fast. 
Hey look. 4 posts and cyghost has not said one thing that is relevant to this thread. Will the MODS do anything about your behaviour? Probably not. Pity.
It would have been one if you didn’t decide to follow me down the hole like you always do. So fucking predictable.
Here are two just to still your fluttering heart:
Where does the code come from? How did the code become so optimal?
Now all of a sudden you decide to try and be on topic :o ???. Tsk tsk, that filthy little mouth of yours though does not actually contribute to a discussion being carried out in a civil manner. You know that. But to each his own I guess.
A) Where does the code come from?
Who knows… Although it seems it fits on a fitness landscape somewhere and it did come from something. Or are there skeptics that think it came from nowehere and/or nothing?
B) How did the code become so optimal?
Heritability and selection on a fitness landscape seems plausible.
You have been harassing me to, I gave in :
Tsk tsk, that filthy little mouth of yours though does not actually contribute to a discussion being carried out in a civil manner. But to each his own I guess.Fuck you and your add homms ;D
A) Where does the code come from? Who knows... Although it seems it fits on a fitness landscape somewhere and it did come from something. Or are there skeptics that think it came from nowehere and/or nothing?B) How did the code become so optimal?
Heritability and selection on a fitness landscape seems plausible.
What ad homs? You insult yourself if you think that filthy little mouth of yours is going to contribute to a civil discussion.
Who said anything about God? You know, for person that pretends to be all scientific and stuff, you sure are bothered with God. Rather leave discussions about God for the Philosophical section ;).
As suspected you are clueless about what add homms actually entail. Who said I am interested in a civil discussing with you in the first place? You are far too dishonest and cowardly for any such attempt to be fruitful or worthy of my time. I’m just happy to give my opinion of you.
Who said anything about God? You know, for person that pretends to be all scientific and stuff, you sure are bothered with God. Rather leave discussions about God for the Philosophical section ;).::)
Another few questions came up. Why “optimal”? It couldn’t possibly have been better? Large parts of DNA doesn’t actually do anything? Is it the way it is simply because it couldn’t be any other way?
This whole “optimal” story is part of the TeleoPhroneticMechanoPerson’s view that bebeh Jebus set things in motion in such a way that humans would inevitably result so that said bebeh Jebus could pop down from heaven to save them. Sadly for him some of his own quote-mining efforts have boomeranged on another forum - one rather clever bit of research demonstrating that tiny chance happenings can radically alter genetic futures. So, maybe “optimal”, but we could have been “optimal” baboons, or toads instead.
Ah! Here’s the link he quote-mined:
http://www.pnas.org/content/105/23/7899.full.pdf+html
Great conclusion:
In any case, our study shows that historical contingency can have a profound and lasting impact under the simplest, and thus most stringent, conditions in which initially identical populations evolve in identical environments. Even from so simple a beginning, [b]small happenstances of history may lead populations along different evolutionary paths[/b]. A potentiated cell took the one less traveled by, and that has made all the difference.
Not to be mean… but i have encountered a huge amount of interesting theories on this site, and i think it is quite inappropriate for one person to refute another person’s opinion especially if his/her own opinion is the only ammunitions that he/she has available without any substantiating facts.
cant we all just get along?.. 
seriously, we are just exchanging ideas here, right?