cteappv is back

I had a short exchange of messages with Mark from the ToS Reports department of WordPress.com.

First of all I would like to thank Mark, not for restoring my account, but, for the clarity of his replies, which is not often the case with people I had to communicate for other issues on various blogging platforms.

Anyway, I haven’t decided yet if I will continue with WordPress.com, confirm my migration back to Blogger, or have a WordPress blog hosted by some other provider than WordPress.com. I’ll need legal advice for the matter 😉

The comment with Fleury’s IP and professional e-mail is hold for editing and it will certainly not contain the same info when it will come back. The info is available for who needs it via channels that don’t involve WordPress.com, but I think it’s not necessary anymore as Fleury’s movement tends to indicate that he really is the author of the weird comments posted at PZ’s and certainly the message PZ published.

I don’t understand why providing the IP and (already public) e-mail of someone could be threatening for his privacy. Wikipedia, including the French section, should be covered by complaints (maybe they are and they don’t give a shit about them).

Anyway, this is not the subject of this blog, just an accident, so I’ll resume with the critic of Fleury’s paper ASAP.



Is the surge of affluence due to the mention of ones blog even at the comments of Pharyngula.

Welcome guys.

E26B3C1D-43EF-4380-A83B-83F725FFE011.jpgFeel comfortable but be afraid, I’m the one manipulating the Master!
Using noodly appendages of course.

help a fellow hang himself

A funny side-effect of PZ Myers “An ontogeny of toilet drain behavior” was to bring Fleury’s theory within the range of one of the famous crackpot detectors, Suzan Mazur.

Continue reading

Now, that’s a clarification!

At least!

Vekris : the antero-posterior construction of animals is bullshit, the induction of limbs by genes is bullshit, the colinearity of hox genes is bullshit, the selection of tetrapods by evolution is bullshit, the duplication of genes between hindlimbs and forelimbs is bullshit

and you now know it, better than anyone else.

Well, no, I don’t know it and cteappv certainly don’t explain it and it’s not by not providing evidence that anybody could support such claims. And “anybody” includes physicists.

But that little burst is quite informative, isn’t it? Clarifying the authors position in the scientific landscape.
Now, a lot more people know what Vincent Fleury believes.

There is only one point of interest for me, as it is my main disagreement with Fleury:

the selection of tetrapods by evolution is bullshit

Quite clear, received 5/5, thank you Dr Fleury.

Now, he certainly misread my comment, but that’s not news. Let’s continue with the science of cteappv; maybe with a small stop before that 😉

comments on comments

Short replies to almost a third of the comments posted to PZ’s “An ontogeny of toilet drain behavior”

Continue reading

comments, elsewhere

Posted by: Jerry Coyne | June 17, 2009 3:40 PM

Man, I’m glad YOU did this rather than I. We keep hearing that this kind of idea presages a revolution in evolutionary biology, in which natural selection will be relegated to a minor role. That revolution, however, always seems to be just a wee bit around the corner. . .

I was planing to ask Jerry Coyne for complementary comments, but I didn’t dared as I wanted him free to discuss accommodationism 😀

Posted by: Sili | June 17, 2009 3:52 PM

There’s only one question that needs be asked: Who does Fleury know on the editorial board of The European Physical Journal: Applied Physics?

I suspect the editor in chief.

Posted by: JimF | June 17, 2009 7:31 PM

Did he call that a Homo habilis skull? It’s not; that’s a drawing based on the Peking Man (Homo erectus) skulls.

Logged, thank you JimF

Oops 090618

Posted by: JimF | June 17, 2009 7:31 PM

Did he call that a Homo habilis skull? It’s not; that’s a drawing based on the Peking Man (Homo erectus) skulls.