Joined: July 2006
Joe must like the humiliation.
I mean, who does he think he is fooling?
|I will leave you to take care of that and will join Dembski in giving you the “response” you deserve.|
That's right Joe, you've learnt the main "trick" behind ID. Never engage with your critics, however reasoned their arguments.
However he's not fooling everybody, like JWT:
|To onlookers it looks like you have some issues you have to resolve… Like developing the ability to answer questions.|
Joe's reply: Comedy gold.
Any onlookers who think that don’t know anything anyway. So why should I care about know-nothings?
I told R0bb what was wrong with his examples and he can’t take it. I am done- if Dembski wants to chime in to protect his work- if he thinks it is threatened- then let him do it. Why am I in charge of protecting Dembski?
When was the last time Dembski "chimed in" Joe? You've been talking about (for example) FSCIO (or whatever) yet Dembski has never once commented.
A little doubt starting to creep in round the edges Joe?
Yes, you might have think you've told R0bb what was wrong with the examples
|Your random walk search in no way exemplifies anything Dembski and Marks were talking about. Yours is a strawman, period, end of story- and you deserve to be ignored.|
but all you really did was show how little you understand what's being discussed. Walking away and "ignoring" the actual issues is somehow preferable to admitting your ignorance.
Yet, Joe, admitting your ignorance is a necessary precondition to fixing that ignorance. It's nothing to be ashamed of.
Rather what you should be ashamed of is your behaviour when confronted by that ignorance.
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand