Well, I could do with the practice. You're asking for honesty, so it won't be entirely pleasant. Sherlock scan as thus:

You're:

Arrogant - Post with an 'I'm right', non-open minded attitude. Sure... when I'm right. I'm not always right, but when I know that I'm right, can show ample evidence indicating such, I'm right. You say a ball will fly if you drop it from the roof, I say it doesn't, you argue with me, I get arrogant. Because I'm right.

Jealous - beratement of Rh negatives, which leads to the next point... Jealous? Of what? Misinformation and false rumours?

Ridiculed, and made to feel inferior (you're emulating the same behaviour that was used on you, hence the over-reliance on evidence), so I'd imagine you were bullied at school. Hence 'anonymous coward' and no real name to go with it (wary of the backlash). Which leads to the next point... Nope. Never bullied, never a bully, especially not at school. The AC is because I'm mostly lazy. How would not putting a name in avoid backlash? Do you want my full legal name? Phone number? Address? Credit card numbers and expiry dates?

You're over-relying on evidence to verify claims, because at one point in your life you were made to feel inferior (get ready for the next point, it's a surprise!), so you formulated the reliance on proof and evidence as the defensive mechanism against being ridiculed, because who could ridicule a fact? No-one, hence the insistence on proof. You call it over-reliance on evidence, I call it accepting reality. If you refuse to believe in genetics, there's nothing I can do about that except let other people reading the misinformation know and provide links and explanations that said people can then look up on their own.

Intelligent. Hence the ridicule. Your peers, were, surprise, jealous - but don't let it get to your head because people have different sets of unique skills. This follows on the next point... Thanks, I do think I'm fairly intelligent, despite my blood handicap in that department. However, I don't think I view intelligence the way you think I do. I'm well aware that people have different kinds of smarts and I don't think intelligence comes from a number on an IQ test. I consider myself much more of an artist than a scientist, but then again, I view them as two sides of the same creative mind coin. I don't advocate unquestioning faith in anything.

...That you probably, as a result, liked science (where's the proof? - You take after what you like... and also what you don't like) and mathematics, and no doubt you're a gamer (but, modern day society, who isn't?). Given the amount of aggression I'd say first person shooters are your style of game given the competitive nature of play. I like science. And math. And patterns. And understanding the world around me. I never play video games and I detest first person shooters. I like board and card games, but I'm not very competitive, except when I'm gambling or playing with myself.

As a result, loner. Or rather, narrow social circle of friends ("believe it or not, this is me being tactful" - a lack of understanding of social diplomacy and thus a lack of social experience). Hence the ridgidity and near-literal mindedness of analysis. Do you really think I'd be on GLP if I was so rigid and closed-minded? As for my circle of friends, I love them dearly and have been friends with my best friends since childhood and I am always expanding my circle of friends. I also run several support groups for chronically ill patients and their loved ones and live a good portion of my life immersed in social diplomacy. Still doesn't change genetics.

Atheist. World's unjust, why is it so wrong, how could it be so stotic, where's the proof? There's a small amount of doubt showing in most of your posts though, so you suspect something is there, you just can't yet prove it (and you're not going to say anything out of fear of ridicule - sure, you don't fear being ridiculed but you're afraid to step outside the boundary into the grey area... all inventors stepped into the grey area at some point...). Huh? Trust me, that is so far from the truth, it's laughable. I just don't subscribe to any religious doctrine. But I absolutely believe there is something akin to God and I don't shy away from talking about that. But, yeah, lots of people assume I'm atheist.


As a result of feeling inferior and feeling this knee-jerk drive in order to prove yourself, you decided that you would appeal to the group consensus (that's a logical fallacy, look it up) by ridiculing a strawman point (also a fallacy, look it up) in the hopes people would agree in order to boost your flailing self-esteem from your diminishing social circle. What?!? Strawman, maybe. Ad populum? Really? This isn't about winning an argument, it's about discussing on a discussion forum. But, still, wrong is still wrong. Carrying an unexpressed gene for CF doesn't mean you have cystic fibrosis. Saying that all AB+ people are psychic, inhumanly strong, and make wicked chocolate chip cookies, then dismissing anyone who's AB+ with STFU liar who disagrees and dismissing AB- people who say that they fit those criteria as full of shit doesn't make you right. Especially if the only evidence of your argument comes from a pseudoscientific website where you have to pay a monthly membership fee.


In summary, you need to have more confidence in yourself, and less of a focus on facts. Many ideas started out as unproven concepts which had no factual basis before finally reaching acceptance. A lack of evidence for something does not mean it does not exist, just there is a lack of evidence. Don't point out the lack, search for the answer. In summary, thanks for your analysis. It was an interesting read. I fully agree with your statement that a lack of evidence for something does not mean it doesn't exist. Search out the answer for yourself, but eventually you're going to need evidence. (Hence my suggestion of an unbiased questionnaire) If you can't get any evidence, then chances are pretty good that your hypothesis is faulty. If you need to rearrange biology and suspend belief to fit your the-o-ry, it's probably time to start reevaluating.