RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 19 2007,11:29   

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ April 19 2007,10:32)
I don't think there's much doubt that Joe is the most stupidest of the stupid.

I'm afraid I'll have to agree.  A few random goodies from a recent "conversation" with him:

A computer's future state does not depend on its current state.
There isn't any way to objectively test the premise that chimps and humans shared a common ancestor and I know there isn't anything in any journals about it.
If I were involved [with the Dover trial] the outcome would have been different.
Philosophers of science set up the rules by which science plays.
Me: The fact remains that Dembski invented the term "Explanatory Filter", and he alone defined it to refer to a series of steps.
Joe: I doubt you are correct.
Me: The first step [of the EF] is to ask whether the event has high probability under a chance hypothesis.
Joe: That is false.
Me: CSI is measured in bits.
Joe: Wrong.

And for some double howlers, watch Joe demonstrate that he doesn't know what "strawman" means, and simultaneously deny that computers operate via fixed law and chance:
It is also a strawman to say that computers operate via fixed law and chance.
And in the end to say that computers run via fixed law and chance is a strawman.

"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]