Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?

  • 192 Replies
  • 4995 Views
*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #90 on: September 27, 2022, 10:08:07 PM »
These are behavioral studies... Zero mention of anything even remotely related to biology
Oh dear.

Oh dear is right...You completely fabricated your conclusion out of thin air. Which pretty much calls into question all of your other conclusions. Why do you feel the need to make things up?

How did you derive from the paper that, in your words, "Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."

Here's the paper you cited again. Zero mention of anything cellular, let alone "damage".
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263101200_The_Effect_of_Moonlight_on_Activity_Patterns_of_Adult_and_Juvenile_Prairie_Rattlesnakes_Crotalus_viridis_viridis

Why lie about something when anyone can just look at the source?
I stated the authors conclusions verbatim. I shared the paper openly.

Re: My upon further review comment, it matches quite well with what has been found historically and is a comparison to the literature. I'm going to share another paper:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/118836v1
Over the last couple of decades the role of epigenetics has increased dramatically. No longer is it just genetic coding that can lead to harm on a cellular level but the way in which DNA is transcribed or prevented from transcription. In that paper, it shows another instance of snakes responding to their environment with displayed greater regions of methylation. Aka alteration of what is transcribed. This methylation, common in animals, disrupts and regulates normal gene expression. This variability was seen even on the 19 bio climatic environmental variables. The strongest correlation was also seen between epigenetic distance and isolation + geographic difference. Not as much for genetic.
Snakes have been found in multiple studies to display epigenetic responses to the environment. This in turn affects behavior and activity. It is also why we see odontogenic shifts throughout their lifespan.
So for you to say that behavioral studies don't mention anything remotely related to biology is incorrect. It is biology that completely dominates the discussion of why we observe the animal activities we do. That is why lowered activity in moonlight is so significant on multiple scales.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #91 on: September 28, 2022, 12:14:58 AM »
These are behavioral studies... Zero mention of anything even remotely related to biology
Oh dear.

Oh dear is right...You completely fabricated your conclusion out of thin air. Which pretty much calls into question all of your other conclusions. Why do you feel the need to make things up?

How did you derive from the paper that, in your words, "Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."

Here's the paper you cited again. Zero mention of anything cellular, let alone "damage".
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263101200_The_Effect_of_Moonlight_on_Activity_Patterns_of_Adult_and_Juvenile_Prairie_Rattlesnakes_Crotalus_viridis_viridis

Why lie about something when anyone can just look at the source?
I stated the authors conclusions verbatim. I shared the paper openly.

The prairie rattlesnake study you referenced mentions zero regarding cellular damage, let alone caused by moonlight. Zip, zilch.

Re: My upon further review comment, it matches quite well with what has been found historically and is a comparison to the literature. I'm going to share another paper:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/118836v1
Over the last couple of decades the role of epigenetics has increased dramatically. No longer is it just genetic coding that can lead to harm on a cellular level but the way in which DNA is transcribed or prevented from transcription. In that paper, it shows another instance of snakes responding to their environment with displayed greater regions of methylation. Aka alteration of what is transcribed. This methylation, common in animals, disrupts and regulates normal gene expression. This variability was seen even on the 19 bio climatic environmental variables. The strongest correlation was also seen between epigenetic distance and isolation + geographic difference. Not as much for genetic.
Snakes have been found in multiple studies to display epigenetic responses to the environment. This in turn affects behavior and activity. It is also why we see odontogenic shifts throughout their lifespan.
So for you to say that behavioral studies don't mention anything remotely related to biology is incorrect. It is biology that completely dominates the discussion of why we observe the animal activities we do. That is why lowered activity in moonlight is so significant on multiple scales.

Yes, epigenetic responses to the environment, not moonlight. And again, in this new paper you cite, just like the last one, there is zero mention of cellular damage caused by moonlight. There's actually zero mention of the moon, moonlight, anything at all lunar. Nothing.

How do you make the leap from the studies you cite saying that they found cellular damage caused by moonlight when the studies you cite mention nothing regarding cellular damage caused by moonlight? How does that work?
I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #92 on: September 28, 2022, 12:16:54 AM »
I stated the authors conclusions verbatim. I shared the paper openly.

And then inserted a completely fabricated claim.

Quote
Re: My upon further review comment, it matches quite well with what has been found historically and is a comparison to the literature.

In other words no cell damage was found in the rattlesnakes, and no one even examined their cells to look for cell damage.

Quote
I'm going to share another paper:
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/118836v1
Over the last couple of decades the role of epigenetics has increased dramatically. No longer is it just genetic coding that can lead to harm on a cellular level but the way in which DNA is transcribed or prevented from transcription. In that paper, it shows another instance of snakes responding to their environment with displayed greater regions of methylation. Aka alteration of what is transcribed. This methylation, common in animals, disrupts and regulates normal gene expression. This variability was seen even on the 19 bio climatic environmental variables. The strongest correlation was also seen between epigenetic distance and isolation + geographic difference. Not as much for genetic.
Snakes have been found in multiple studies to display epigenetic responses to the environment. This in turn affects behavior and activity. It is also why we see odontogenic shifts throughout their lifespan.
So for you to say that behavioral studies don't mention anything remotely related to biology is incorrect. It is biology that completely dominates the discussion of why we observe the animal activities we do.

A paper which has nothing do to with moonlight.  Unless some of the islands the samples were taken from are somehow completely shielded from moonlight?

Quote
That is why lowered activity in moonlight is so significant on multiple scales.

Hilarious.

Would you like to try again with a paper that actually backs up your claims?

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #93 on: September 28, 2022, 04:55:10 AM »
In fact I provided an example of directly measured altered transcription due to environment factors in snakes. Same as what I quoted. Transcription.

Apparently light is not an environmental factor according to you or Stash.

Who also still won't answer why he thinks animal activity is separate from biology.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #94 on: September 28, 2022, 12:01:32 PM »
"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."

When were those rattlesnake cells studied to find damage from incorrect codon pairing, again?

Was it never?  It was never, wasn't it.  It never happened.  Why did you say it?

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #95 on: September 28, 2022, 12:13:40 PM »
In fact I provided an example of directly measured altered transcription due to environment factors in snakes. Same as what I quoted. Transcription.

Zero mention of moonlight causing cellular damage. You completely made that up. Fabricated out of thin air.

Apparently light is not an environmental factor according to you or Stash.

Sure, light is part of an environment. So what?

Zero mention of moonlight in any of the studies you cite causing cellular damage. You completely made that up. Fabricated out of thin air.

Who also still won't answer why he thinks animal activity is separate from biology.

I never said activity is separate from biology. I'm just calling out that you straight up lied and fabricated a conclusion that doesn't even remotely appear in the studies you cited. Why do you feel the need to lie.
I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

*

sokarul

  • 19114
  • Extra Racist
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #96 on: September 28, 2022, 04:41:24 PM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago. 
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #97 on: September 28, 2022, 06:42:00 PM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago.
lmao very wild imagination.

And yet globularists accuse me of lying when I present research that directly supports my point in snakes and transcription.  O:-)

I'm glad you agree moonlight is an environmental factor Stash. Now one step more until recant your statement of animal activity not reflecting "anything even remotely related to biology"
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #98 on: September 28, 2022, 09:24:45 PM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago.
lmao very wild imagination.

And yet globularists accuse me of lying when I present research that directly supports my point in snakes and transcription.  O:-)

You provided research that in no way supported your point. Where in the rattlesnake research did it support your claim that moonlight caused cellular damage?

You keep just claiming that and there is absolutely no mention of that whatsoever. Do I need to link the research you cited again so you can point out where it supports your claim?

I'm glad you agree moonlight is an environmental factor Stash. Now one step more until recant your statement of animal activity not reflecting "anything even remotely related to biology"

Where in the research you cited does it support your cellular damage claim? It doesn't exist. Stop deflecting and show us the support for your claim or admit that you completely fabricated it.

Here it is again for your convenience:

Here's the paper you cited again. Zero mention of anything cellular, let alone "damage".
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263101200_The_Effect_of_Moonlight_on_Activity_Patterns_of_Adult_and_Juvenile_Prairie_Rattlesnakes_Crotalus_viridis_viridis

Here's the conclusion of the paper you cited:

In  conclusion,  moonlight  appears  to  play a role in shaping the activity patterns adopted by adult prairie rattlesnakes. This is not to say that moonlight  is the most important factor affecting activity;  rather,  it  is  probably  superseded  by factors  such  as  temperature,  level  of  hunger, and  reproductive  state.  However,  moonlight should  not be overlooked,  especially  when  one considers  the  potential  influence  of  predators on the  nocturnal activity patterns of snakes,  as well  as the availability  of  the snakes' prey. We suggest  that the prairie rattlesnake  is only  one of many snake species  which  suppress  activity in the open on brightly  moonlit nights and that moonlight  avoidance  may  be even  more  pro-nounced  in snake species which  are strictly nocturnal.

Where does it say moonlight causes cellular damage?
I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #99 on: September 29, 2022, 05:16:28 AM »
Quote from: Pound Shop Sandokahn
recant your statement…

The words of someone who knows they are thoroughly busted.


*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #100 on: September 29, 2022, 05:39:51 AM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago.
lmao very wild imagination.

And yet globularists accuse me of lying when I present research that directly supports my point in snakes and transcription.  O:-)

You provided research that in no way supported your point. Where in the rattlesnake research did it support your claim that moonlight caused cellular damage?

You keep just claiming that and there is absolutely no mention of that whatsoever. Do I need to link the research you cited again so you can point out where it supports your claim?

I'm glad you agree moonlight is an environmental factor Stash. Now one step more until recant your statement of animal activity not reflecting "anything even remotely related to biology"

Where in the research you cited does it support your cellular damage claim? It doesn't exist. Stop deflecting and show us the support for your claim or admit that you completely fabricated it.

Here it is again for your convenience:

Here's the paper you cited again. Zero mention of anything cellular, let alone "damage".
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263101200_The_Effect_of_Moonlight_on_Activity_Patterns_of_Adult_and_Juvenile_Prairie_Rattlesnakes_Crotalus_viridis_viridis

Here's the conclusion of the paper you cited:

In  conclusion,  moonlight  appears  to  play a role in shaping the activity patterns adopted by adult prairie rattlesnakes. This is not to say that moonlight  is the most important factor affecting activity;  rather,  it  is  probably  superseded  by factors  such  as  temperature,  level  of  hunger, and  reproductive  state.  However,  moonlight should  not be overlooked,  especially  when  one considers  the  potential  influence  of  predators on the  nocturnal activity patterns of snakes,  as well  as the availability  of  the snakes' prey. We suggest  that the prairie rattlesnake  is only  one of many snake species  which  suppress  activity in the open on brightly  moonlit nights and that moonlight  avoidance  may  be even  more  pro-nounced  in snake species which  are strictly nocturnal.

Where does it say moonlight causes cellular damage?
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #101 on: September 29, 2022, 06:04:56 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #102 on: September 29, 2022, 06:40:10 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."
Methylation of coding pairs as I showed
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #103 on: September 29, 2022, 06:48:43 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."
Methylation of coding pairs as I showed

You’ve shown nothing.  The rattlesnakes’ cells weren’t studied for that paper. 

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #104 on: September 29, 2022, 07:01:22 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."
Methylation of coding pairs as I showed

You’ve shown nothing.  The rattlesnakes’ cells weren’t studied for that paper.
That's why I said I found it in review. And now in this thread to support that, I literally provided you with a paper that shows the transcription alteration in snakes due to the environment. I've given you free access examples of both points in the literature.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #105 on: September 29, 2022, 07:14:37 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."
Methylation of coding pairs as I showed

You’ve shown nothing.  The rattlesnakes’ cells weren’t studied for that paper.
That's why I said I found it in review. And now in this thread to support that, I literally provided you with a paper that shows the transcription alteration in snakes due to the environment. I've given you free access examples of both points in the literature.

Don’t be ridiculous.  You can’t review nonexistent data.  You can’t find damage in cells that were never studied for damage.

At best you can make a hypothesis  about possible damage, but that’s not what you said.

Since your other paper has nothing to do with moonlight, it doesn’t even point to your hypothesis.  You have nothing but speculation

 

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #106 on: September 29, 2022, 07:25:44 AM »
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Not even remotely what Stash said.

Explain how this can be true:

"Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing."
Methylation of coding pairs as I showed

You’ve shown nothing.  The rattlesnakes’ cells weren’t studied for that paper.
That's why I said I found it in review. And now in this thread to support that, I literally provided you with a paper that shows the transcription alteration in snakes due to the environment. I've given you free access examples of both points in the literature.

Don’t be ridiculous.  You can’t review nonexistent data.  You can’t find damage in cells that were never studied for damage.

At best you can make a hypothesis  about possible damage, but that’s not what you said.

Since your other paper has nothing to do with moonlight, it doesn’t even point to your hypothesis.  You have nothing but speculation

 
When I lit reviewed the activity experiment, I was able to find that snakes were found to have severed transcription when exposed to different environmental factors. This is not speculation but data. Data that everyone is free to review as I posted. It is not non-existent as you claim.

The only way you are correct is if you continue to suggest transcription is not cellular. Which is ridiculous of course, but then again this is the same thread that we saw such gems as promoting animal activity is not related to biology and that moonlight is not an environmental factor. Both are ridiculous.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #107 on: September 29, 2022, 07:37:16 AM »
When I lit reviewed the activity experiment, I was able to find that snakes were found to have severed transcription when exposed to different environmental factors.

But not moonlight, and not the snakes that you claimed cell damage was found in.

Quote
This is not speculation but data. Data that everyone is free to review as I posted. It is not non-existent as you claim.

You have a couple of bits of data, filled in with a lot of speculation you present as data. 

Quote
The only way you are correct is if you continue to suggest transcription is not cellular. Which is ridiculous of course, but then again this is the same thread that we saw such gems as promoting animal activity is not related to biology and that moonlight is not an environmental factor. Both are ridiculous.

I have claimed no such thing.  Try harder.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #108 on: September 29, 2022, 07:42:27 AM »
When I lit reviewed the activity experiment, I was able to find that snakes were found to have severed transcription when exposed to different environmental factors.

But not moonlight, and not the snakes that you claimed cell damage was found in.

Quote
This is not speculation but data. Data that everyone is free to review as I posted. It is not non-existent as you claim.

You have a couple of bits of data, filled in with a lot of speculation you present as data. 

Quote
The only way you are correct is if you continue to suggest transcription is not cellular. Which is ridiculous of course, but then again this is the same thread that we saw such gems as promoting animal activity is not related to biology and that moonlight is not an environmental factor. Both are ridiculous.

I have claimed no such thing.  Try harder.
Moonlight for activity was my direct quote. Transcription my reviewed snakes as I mentioned.

You are free to look at the direct data. It even includes distancing.

Yes. You repeatedly say nothing cellular was found in the reviewed and posted paper. But that is only possible if you claim transcription is not cellular

I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #109 on: September 29, 2022, 08:47:07 AM »
When I lit reviewed the activity experiment, I was able to find that snakes were found to have severed transcription when exposed to different environmental factors.

But not moonlight, and not the snakes that you claimed cell damage was found in.

Quote
This is not speculation but data. Data that everyone is free to review as I posted. It is not non-existent as you claim.

You have a couple of bits of data, filled in with a lot of speculation you present as data. 

Quote
The only way you are correct is if you continue to suggest transcription is not cellular. Which is ridiculous of course, but then again this is the same thread that we saw such gems as promoting animal activity is not related to biology and that moonlight is not an environmental factor. Both are ridiculous.

I have claimed no such thing.  Try harder.
Moonlight for activity was my direct quote. Transcription my reviewed snakes as I mentioned.

You are free to look at the direct data. It even includes distancing.

You have one paper on the behavior of rattlesnakes under simulated moonlight, and one paper on the epigenetic variation of tiger snakes populations on different islands.

Neither study even investigated the effect of moonlight on cells at all, let alone found any sign of damage or a mechanism for the damage.  You made that up.

Quote
Yes. You repeatedly say nothing cellular was found in the reviewed and posted paper. But that is only possible if you claim transcription is not cellular

Oh for gods sake.  Just one question- do you really believe this or are you taking the piss?

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #110 on: September 29, 2022, 09:22:21 AM »
When I lit reviewed the activity experiment, I was able to find that snakes were found to have severed transcription when exposed to different environmental factors.

But not moonlight, and not the snakes that you claimed cell damage was found in.

Quote
This is not speculation but data. Data that everyone is free to review as I posted. It is not non-existent as you claim.

You have a couple of bits of data, filled in with a lot of speculation you present as data. 

Quote
The only way you are correct is if you continue to suggest transcription is not cellular. Which is ridiculous of course, but then again this is the same thread that we saw such gems as promoting animal activity is not related to biology and that moonlight is not an environmental factor. Both are ridiculous.

I have claimed no such thing.  Try harder.
Moonlight for activity was my direct quote. Transcription my reviewed snakes as I mentioned.

You are free to look at the direct data. It even includes distancing.

You have one paper on the behavior of rattlesnakes under simulated moonlight, and one paper on the epigenetic variation of tiger snakes populations on different islands.

Neither study even investigated the effect of moonlight on cells at all, let alone found any sign of damage or a mechanism for the damage.  You made that up.

Quote
Yes. You repeatedly say nothing cellular was found in the reviewed and posted paper. But that is only possible if you claim transcription is not cellular

Oh for gods sake.  Just one question- do you really believe this or are you taking the piss?
In your reply, you did the same exact thing I just mentioned. Refused to acknowledge transcription is cellular.
What do you mean by taking piss? Is that a globularist tradition?
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #111 on: September 29, 2022, 09:45:47 AM »
In your reply, you did the same exact thing I just mentioned. Refused to acknowledge transcription is cellular.
What do you mean by taking piss? Is that a globularist tradition?

Bollocks.  I refuse to accept your claim to have found evidence of moonlight causing cell damage in snakes, because you haven’t.  That is all. 

But now we’re just repeating ourselves.  You don’t appear to have anything else to back up your hypothesis.  So if you’re not just having a laugh (taking the piss), and really can’t see the enormous hole in your logic, then I guess this stands as a fine example of flat earth “science”.  Congrats.

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #112 on: September 29, 2022, 11:53:26 AM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago.
lmao very wild imagination.

And yet globularists accuse me of lying when I present research that directly supports my point in snakes and transcription.  O:-)

You provided research that in no way supported your point. Where in the rattlesnake research did it support your claim that moonlight caused cellular damage?

You keep just claiming that and there is absolutely no mention of that whatsoever. Do I need to link the research you cited again so you can point out where it supports your claim?

I'm glad you agree moonlight is an environmental factor Stash. Now one step more until recant your statement of animal activity not reflecting "anything even remotely related to biology"

Where in the research you cited does it support your cellular damage claim? It doesn't exist. Stop deflecting and show us the support for your claim or admit that you completely fabricated it.

Here it is again for your convenience:

Here's the paper you cited again. Zero mention of anything cellular, let alone "damage".
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/263101200_The_Effect_of_Moonlight_on_Activity_Patterns_of_Adult_and_Juvenile_Prairie_Rattlesnakes_Crotalus_viridis_viridis

Here's the conclusion of the paper you cited:

In  conclusion,  moonlight  appears  to  play a role in shaping the activity patterns adopted by adult prairie rattlesnakes. This is not to say that moonlight  is the most important factor affecting activity;  rather,  it  is  probably  superseded  by factors  such  as  temperature,  level  of  hunger, and  reproductive  state.  However,  moonlight should  not be overlooked,  especially  when  one considers  the  potential  influence  of  predators on the  nocturnal activity patterns of snakes,  as well  as the availability  of  the snakes' prey. We suggest  that the prairie rattlesnake  is only  one of many snake species  which  suppress  activity in the open on brightly  moonlit nights and that moonlight  avoidance  may  be even  more  pro-nounced  in snake species which  are strictly nocturnal.

Where does it say moonlight causes cellular damage?
So the inability to transcribe is not cellular? Please feel free to try and explain your way out of that one

Where does it say moonlight causes cellular damage?

In the first study where you claimed "Upon further review of the experiment, the cells within the rattlesnakes were found to have damage in such a way that proteins geared towards transcription were acutely damaged an in such a manner created a causation of incorrect codon pairing." here are the facts:

- There is no mention of cellular damage, let alone caused by moonlight
- There is no mention of even examining any snake cells

In the second study where you claimed

Yes. You repeatedly say nothing cellular was found in the reviewed and posted paper. But that is only possible if you claim transcription is not cellular

Here are the facts:

- There is no mention of cellular anything in the first study you cited
- And in the second study you cited, there is no mention of the moon, moonlight, lunar anything
- You completely made up your conclusions out of thin air, yet you continually point to studies saying they back up your claims when they do no such thing. Not even remotely.

How in the world do you arrive at the notion that moonlight causes cellular damage when the study doesn't even mention moonlight as an environmental factor or otherwise? In short, the study doesn't have anything to do with the Moon.

Anyone can read through these studies and plainly see that they don't support anything you claim.

You have completely fabricated your conclusions based upon these studies that you cite. And you've been doing so for over a dozen years. You claim things in these studies that don't even exist.
I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #113 on: September 29, 2022, 01:03:17 PM »
1. Moonlight affected activity in snakes.
2. Snakes were unable to transcribe based on environmental factors. This is a cellular process.

Not sure why you disagree with any of that when it's in the studies.
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #114 on: September 29, 2022, 01:20:33 PM »
1. Moonlight affected activity in snakes.

Correct. And the study concludes:

In conclusion, moonlight appears to play a role in shaping the activity patterns adopted by adult prairie rattlesnakes. This is not to say that moonlight is the most important factor affecting activity; rather, it is  probably superseded by factors such as temperature, level of hunger, and reproductive state.

Moonlight avoidance may be a strategy employed by adult prairie rattlesnakes to reduce detection by  visually hunting predators.

Moonlight may also enhance adult snakes hunting success. 


No mention of cells, cellular damage. Nothing.

2. Snakes were unable to transcribe based on environmental factors. This is a cellular process.

Zero mention of the moon, moonlight, lunar anything as an environmental factor that leads to cellular damage.

You might as well mention all environmental factors, Sun, wind, terrain, rain, heat, cold, etc.

Again, zero mention of the Moon.

Not sure why you disagree with any of that when it's in the studies.

Not sure why you claim that moonlight causes cellular damage when none of the studies you cite even remotely mention that.

You've completely fabricated your claim.
I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #115 on: September 29, 2022, 04:17:44 PM »
If a cell loses it's ability to transcribe it is affected cellularly. Thankfully we are shown that is a snake's response moreso than gene mutation to it's environment
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

*

Stash

  • 11417
  • I am car!
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #116 on: September 29, 2022, 05:34:21 PM »
If a cell loses it's ability to transcribe it is affected cellularly. Thankfully we are shown that is a snake's response moreso than gene mutation to it's environment

Then show us in those studies where a cell loses its ability to transcribe it is affected cellularly due to moonlight.

This appears nowhere in the studies you cite. You completely made this up. A complete and utter fabrication.

I claim nobody has gone to Chile from Australia. So somebody is killing passangers.

*

sokarul

  • 19114
  • Extra Racist
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #117 on: September 29, 2022, 06:48:15 PM »
Time for me to reappear.

The moon's harm to plant life is indisputable. Only a fool would ignore the science which we have shared through first hand experimentation.

Science! What science?
Using the word in a sentence in some vain hope to embellish your statement is pretty lame.

The moon exerts a gravitational ‘force’ on the earth, the earth likewise does the same back. Our tides as we all know are the result.

To say the moon causes harm to plant life is just silly. To say it’s supported by science is ludicrous.

Like all flat earth notions they are no more than unsupported brain farts that have zero substance. Using the word science in no way changes their ‘fatty’ nature.
Too bad I have shared first hand experimental data that shows just how metabolically harmful moonlight is to plants.

There is no embellishment with the use of science. Flat earthers invented science. Then we ascended to the next plane of experimentation.

Is that the one where you used the roof which was blocking moonlight to trap heat and skew the results?
What are you talking about? Also, why do you think heat would increase collenchyma? The main mechanism of increasing this is mechanical stress...

Ichi performed an experiment where he used an apparatus to block moonlight from sone plant. But he failed to realize it acted as a greenhouse. He said the plants exposed to moonlight didn’t grow as well. But his experiment was flawed. This was years ago.
lmao very wild imagination.

And yet globularists accuse me of lying when I present research that directly supports my point in snakes and transcription.  O:-)

I'm glad you agree moonlight is an environmental factor Stash. Now one step more until recant your statement of animal activity not reflecting "anything even remotely related to biology"
What imagination? That's how it went. I had to teach you that clouds can hold in heat too. You designed a poor experiment. That's not funny.
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Ichimaru Gin :]

  • Undefeated FEer
  • Planar Moderator
  • 8869
  • Semper vigilans
Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #118 on: September 29, 2022, 07:45:21 PM »
Sokarul was I the one you talked about clouds and greenhouse with? I honestly don't ever recall discussing anything like that with you. Was that with a different FEer?
I saw a slight haze in the hotel bathroom this morning after I took a shower, have I discovered a new planet?

Re: Are people really still going to push the moon is harmless?
« Reply #119 on: September 30, 2022, 03:23:45 AM »
1. Moonlight affected activity in snakes.
2. Snakes were unable to transcribe based on environmental factors. This is a cellular process.

Not sure why you disagree with any of that when it's in the studies.

1. A affects B
2. C affects D

What does that tell us about the relationship between A and D?

Answer: Nothing
« Last Edit: September 30, 2022, 03:26:30 AM by Unconvinced »