Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Uncommonly Dense Thread 3

Pages: (501) < ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 ... >

khan Posts: 1554 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2009,17:33    Page not working? -------------- "It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad Frequency is just the plural of wavelength... -JoeG

dhogaza Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2009,19:38    Quote The US is really turning into 2 nations isn't it. The Barrys and Clives of your country have their own history, science, TV channels, web sites etc. Not to mention that they'll soon have their own Bible ... A couple of favorites ...   Quote First Example - Liberal Falsehood The earliest, most authentic manuscripts lack this verse set forth at Luke 23:34:[7] Jesus said, "Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing." Is this a liberal corruption of the original? This does not appear in any other Gospel, and the simple fact is that some of the persecutors of Jesus did know what they were doing. This quotation is a favorite of liberals but should not appear in a conservative Bible. and   Quote Third Example - Socialism Socialistic terminology permeates English translations of the Bible, without justification. This improperly encourages the "social justice" movement among Christians. For example, the conservative word "volunteer" is mentioned only once in the ESV, yet the socialistic word "comrade" is used three times, "laborer(s)" is used 13 times, "labored" 15 times, and "fellow" (as in "fellow worker") is used 55 times.

keiths Posts: 2195 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2009,22:43    Quote (MichaelJ @ Oct. 08 2009,15:03) The US is really turning into 2 nations isn't it. The Barrys and Clives of your country have their own history, science, TV channels, web sites etc. UD is one of the few interfaces and even there reality has a hard time to poke its head through. Do we even know that Clive is American?  I'm holding on to the hope that he's a furriner. -------------- And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 08 2009,23:30    In the "Reaping the Whirlwind" thread, absolutist has a little reading comprehension problem:     Quote 1 Ritchie 3:36 pm A tragedy, truly. But we would indeed be fools to think this is just China’s problem. The world has finite space, and the population is growing exponentially, and at an alarming rate, despite the efforts of countries such as China to curb the population growth. The obvious answer – keep families small! Contraception and sexual education widely available (obviously not irresponisbly so) so we teach the next generation about safe sex and encourage them to be responsible. And that includes not having large families. Otherwise, sooner or later, we may find ourselves in a similar situation to China.     Quote 3 absolutist 3:53 pm Ritchie, are you suggesting that overpopulation be solved with homicide? Sounds like a great idea. Perhaps we can submit that in our new Healthcare Plan. I can see it clearly: “once your citizenry gets over, say, 10000 per 1 sq/mile shoot to kill.”   Quote 4 absolutist 3:58 pm Seriously, are you saying abortion is tragic, female abortion is tragic or overpopulation? What about teaching the next generation that abortion is murder? Nah, let’s just give criminals newer guns and an education on how to use them safely. And the thread actually gets worse from there.  I'm developing a visceral loathing for all things UD (and fundamentalism of all stripes.) Immoral perverts.

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,00:01    Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 08 2009,21:30) In the "Reaping the Whirlwind" thread, absolutist has a little reading comprehension problem: Quote 1 Ritchie 3:36 pm A tragedy, truly. But we would indeed be fools to think this is just China’s problem. The world has finite space, and the population is growing exponentially, and at an alarming rate, despite the efforts of countries such as China to curb the population growth. The obvious answer – keep families small! Contraception and sexual education widely available (obviously not irresponisbly so) so we teach the next generation about safe sex and encourage them to be responsible. And that includes not having large families. Otherwise, sooner or later, we may find ourselves in a similar situation to China.       Quote 3 absolutist 3:53 pm Ritchie, are you suggesting that overpopulation be solved with homicide? Sounds like a great idea. Perhaps we can submit that in our new Healthcare Plan. I can see it clearly: “once your citizenry gets over, say, 10000 per 1 sq/mile shoot to kill.”     Quote 4 absolutist 3:58 pm Seriously, are you saying abortion is tragic, female abortion is tragic or overpopulation? What about teaching the next generation that abortion is murder? Nah, let’s just give criminals newer guns and an education on how to use them safely. And the thread actually gets worse from there.  I'm developing a visceral loathing for all things UD (and fundamentalism of all stripes.) Immoral perverts. Absolutist is apparently laboring under the delusion that it is still the 1950s: Quote Are you a communist (endorsing Chinese policy of one child per family) saying things like “despite the efforts of countries such as China to curb the population growth”? Or do you value freedom? You just know they'd all love to resurrect HUAC.  I can just see it:  "The federal government is infested with materialists. I have here in my hands a list...." "Are you now or have you ever been a Darwinist?  ANSWER THE QUESTION 'PROFESSOR' MYERS!!!" -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,00:08    Oh, for fuck's sake!  Weasel.  Again. Supposedly, this covers "every conceivable interpretation" of the program described in Blind Watchmaker.  Here be the source.  Haven't looked at it yet myself. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,00:10    Yeesh, it's been said many times before, but it's still kind of mind-boggling that DaveScot was the only thing holding a lid on this pot of boiling tard. Now, it's overflowed and oozing everywhere. Hah, I like it. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,00:25    More from the "Reaping the Whirlwind" thread: William J. Murray is a Deep Tard:   Quote Materialists throw out the golden rule as if it is an objective standard. What if my golden rule is “might makes right”? What makes one golden rule more moral than the other? Billy J., have you ever heard of the Golden Rule?  You know, the one that starts with, "Do unto others ..."?  It was once advocated by a guy named Jesus.  I'm sure you at least know that name.

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,01:04    I remember a "discussion" with a YEcreonaut who, when I mentioned the "Golden Rule,"  said something to the effect of: " evolutionists are sado-masochists who only believe in a cruel world -- treating them as they treat others means I don't have to care about their lives at all, they want to be abused and abuse other people " Apparently that view is kinda widespread. Dehumanize and demonize. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,03:05    Clive is such an amazingly shallow thinker. He is asked:   Quote Please explain how, if slavery is objectively wrong, could people accept its practice as moral for hundreds, if not thousands, of years? His reply:   Quote Because people do wrong things, if there were no objective morality, you can’t really say that slavery is wrong. In acting as if it really is wrong, and that others “should” agree, you have to know that you have to assert this on firmer ground than your own personal and private preference. So people did "wrong things" for generations all the time knowing it was wrong when "objective morality" was considered. Clive does not actually address the question asked in any meaningful way. I guess it's because he could not find a suitable pre-packaged quote from Lewis. Link -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

BillB Posts: 388 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,05:32    Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 09 2009,09:05) Clive is such an amazingly shallow thinker. He is asked:     Quote Please explain how, if slavery is objectively wrong, could people accept its practice as moral for hundreds, if not thousands, of years? His reply:     Quote Because people do wrong things, if there were no objective morality, you can’t really say that slavery is wrong. In acting as if it really is wrong, and that others “should” agree, you have to know that you have to assert this on firmer ground than your own personal and private preference. So people did "wrong things" for generations all the time knowing it was wrong when "objective morality" was considered. Clive does not actually address the question asked in any meaningful way. I guess it's because he could not find a suitable pre-packaged quote from Lewis. Link Somehow I doubt this will see the light of day:   Quote 107 BillB 10/09/2009 5:30 am Your comment is awaiting moderation. Clive:   Quote    Because people do wrong things, if there were no objective morality, you can’t really say that slavery is wrong. In acting as if it really is wrong, and that others “should” agree, you have to know that you have to assert this on firmer ground than your own personal and private preference. I still don’t understand how you know objectively that slavery is morally wrong – or to put it another way: How do you know objectively that the Christians who supported slavery were wrong and that you are right?

BillB Posts: 388 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,05:34    I predict lots of hate fuelled posts at UD about this (From the Guardian):   Quote The US president, Barack Obama, was today awarded the 2009 Nobel peace prize "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and co-operation between peoples". The Nobel committee said "only rarely has a person such as Obama captured the world's attention and given his people hope for a better future". "His diplomacy is founded in the concept that those who are to lead the world must do so on the basis of values and attitudes that are shared by the majority of the world's population," the citation said. The committee said Obama, who only took up the presidency in January, had been acknowledged for his calls to reduce the world's stockpile of nuclear weapons and working for world peace. "Obama has as president created a new climate in international politics. Multilateral diplomacy has regained a central position, with emphasis on the role that the United Nations and other international institutions can play." ...

Amadan Posts: 1337 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,05:47    I've no doubt it's intended to complement Carter's prize as a comment on Bush/Cheney & co.  Sad, really. I sympathise with the sentiment, but I don't think Obama did anything like what you'd expect of someone who really deserves the prize. It would be simpler to institute the anti-Nobels. -------------- "People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011 JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,06:51    ALERT! Learned Hand says he's locked in a closet with J. Davison and D. Scott! He's obviously desperate. Quote Hi - I was recently banned from UD as Learned Hand. (I assume, as a man of erudition, that you were a fan of my work.) Id love to contribute to the ATBC board, but for some reason Im stuck in limbo. Ive sent some emails, but Im still awaiting authorization, and cannot post or contact members whose email addresses are private. Is there a feedback link Im missing somewhere, or some part of the process Ive skipped? Its hugely frustrating to be barred from UD and ATBC simultaneously! Probably not many people are unwelcome at both boards, after all. I feel as if Im locked in a closet with J. Davison and D. Scott. For the love of god, and the spite of Barry Arrington, please help free me from this indignity! Please lend Learned Hand a hand! anfractuous at gmail.com -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,07:31    Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 09 2009,05:47) I've no doubt it's intended to complement Carter's prize as a comment on Bush/Cheney & co.  Sad, really. I sympathise with the sentiment, but I don't think Obama did anything like what you'd expect of someone who really deserves the prize. It would be simpler to institute the anti-Nobels. -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

franky172 Posts: 160 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,07:57    Quote (didymos @ Oct. 09 2009,00:08) Oh, for fuck's sake!  Weasel.  Again. Supposedly, this covers "every conceivable interpretation" of the program described in Blind Watchmaker.  Here be the source.  Haven't looked at it yet myself. The amazing part? You don't have to write 5 versions of "Weasel", most of which have nothing to do with GA's to prove anything.  Just one correct one will do.

dvunkannon Posts: 1377 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,08:01    Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 09 2009,06:47) I've no doubt it's intended to complement Carter's prize as a comment on Bush/Cheney & co.  Sad, really. I sympathise with the sentiment, but I don't think Obama did anything like what you'd expect of someone who really deserves the prize. It would be simpler to institute the anti-Nobels. I think Obama should turn it down. Put it in a time delay capsule or something. He knows he doesn't deserve it yet. Sad to see such overt political messaging from the Nobel committee. -------------- I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

N.Wells Posts: 1836 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,08:58    A lot of the award was probably for being Not-Bush, but even so, Obama has already earned it.  He inspired America to elect a biracial president, which will be a milestone of gigantic significance in social progress (consider just exactly how unlikely that was).  He led the charge to pull America back from being a bullying and torturing nation with no regard for human rights or the rule of law.  He unseated the republicans and discredited them, which is a general boon for humanity.  He has significantly softened a global recession, with significant contributions even before taking office.  Also, giving Obama additional motivation to do the right thing will, I think, be a wise investment on the part of the Nobel Peace Prize Committee.  Tellingly, the only people who have spoken vociferously against it are the Taliban, Hamas, and the Republicans, all sounding remarkably similar. (However, turning it down on the grounds that he felt he hadn't earned it yet would be one heck of an impressive political move.) Still no awards of any sort for Billy D. and the IDists. That has to rankle.

Touchstone Posts: 28 Joined: Sep. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,10:19    Just getting around to reading this trainwreck of a thread, I'm struck by Dembski's finish to this comment: Quote If so, why not cheer Polanski on when he has the wisdom to see through the illusion and sample the choice flesh of a 13-year old? http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments Am I the only that finds the way he expressed that more than a little creepy? It's little comments like that has me thinking that Dembski really is self-medicating some deep, dark problem with his fundy faith - a cage he puts himself in to protect himself and others from himself. I read the question "why not" from him and fight the urge to laugh -- such a ludicrous question. But he's quite serious; if the bones of Jesus were found tomorrow and Christianity falsified for once and for all, it seems Dembski *would* have trouble coming up with a "why not". Creepy, I tell ya.

BillB Posts: 388 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,10:32    Quote (Zachriel @ Oct. 09 2009,12:51) ALERT! Learned Hand says he's locked in a closet with J. Davison and D. Scott! He's obviously desperate.   Quote Hi - I was recently banned from UD as Learned Hand. (I assume, as a man of erudition, that you were a fan of my work.) Id love to contribute to the ATBC board, but for some reason Im stuck in limbo. Ive sent some emails, but Im still awaiting authorization, and cannot post or contact members whose email addresses are private. Is there a feedback link Im missing somewhere, or some part of the process Ive skipped? Its hugely frustrating to be barred from UD and ATBC simultaneously! Probably not many people are unwelcome at both boards, after all. I feel as if Im locked in a closet with J. Davison and D. Scott. For the love of god, and the spite of Barry Arrington, please help free me from this indignity! Please lend Learned Hand a hand! [EMAIL=anfractuous@gmail.com" target="_blank] anfractuous at gmail.com[/EMAIL] I think I had this problem when I signed up here - I got no verification e-mail - it turned out that googlemail had put it in the junk mail folder.

Quack Posts: 1961 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,10:43    Quote (dvunkannon @ Oct. 09 2009,08:01)   Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 09 2009,06:47) I've no doubt it's intended to complement Carter's prize as a comment on Bush/Cheney & co.  Sad, really. I sympathise with the sentiment, but I don't think Obama did anything like what you'd expect of someone who really deserves the prize. It would be simpler to institute the anti-Nobels. I think Obama should turn it down. Put it in a time delay capsule or something. He knows he doesn't deserve it yet. Sad to see such overt political messaging from the Nobel committee. We are surprised here in Norway too. It is premature. But I don't think we need fear an embarrassment like we did by awarding the prize to Kissinger. Just listened to Obama's speech, being awarded the prize so soon after ascending to presidency must have been a challenge to him too, but as usual he made a good impression. He inspires hope. -------------- Rocks have no biology.               Robert Byers.

Advocatus Diaboli Posts: 198 Joined: Nov. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,11:52    Quote (Quack @ Oct. 09 2009,10:43) Just listened to Obama's speech, being awarded the prize so soon after ascending to presidency must have been a challenge to him too, but as usual he made a good impression. He inspires hope. Just more evidence that he is the anti-christ. -------------- I once thought that I made a mistake, but I was wrong. "I freely admit I’m a sociopath" - DaveScot "Most importanly, the facts are on the side of ID." - scordova "UD is the greatest website of all time." stevestory

keiths Posts: 2195 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,12:32    StephenB: Quote —-camanintx: “So we agree that, regardless of the ontological nature of morality, people can have differing opinions of what is right or wrong.” No one who is proposing the existence of an objective moral code believes that or has even come close to saying anything like that. The implication of Stephen's statement is that he believes either that people cannot differ on moral issues, or that their ability to differ depends on morality's ontological status. Is he really that stupid? Never mind.  Don't answer.  I already know the sad truth. -------------- And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

J-Dog Posts: 4402 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,14:15    Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 09 2009,05:47) I've no doubt it's intended to complement Carter's prize as a comment on Bush/Cheney & co.  Sad, really. I sympathise with the sentiment, but I don't think Obama did anything like what you'd expect of someone who really deserves the prize. It would be simpler to institute the anti-Nobels. I see your point - and agree, BUT... anyone that pisses off all the arseholes at FOX NOISE and Rush, Glenn Beck, Hanity and O'Reilly has GOT to be doing a hell of a good job for humanity. -------------- Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10 Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08 UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

J-Dog Posts: 4402 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,14:25    HaHa! The POPE Hates ID! FL and UD to burn in hell for being teh stupid! Pope's New Evo PR - ID is the suck -------------- Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10 Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08 UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,14:27    I don't see right-wingers being pissed off. Mostly they are laughing; the Peace Prize has been a joke more often than not. Obama is now enshrined along with Kissinger. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Dr_Dave Posts: 2 Joined: Mar. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,14:38    After years of being amused and perplexed by UD, this past month or so has me feeling disturbed, infuriated and exhausted in equal measure. This idiotic obsession with objective morality is just depressing. They endlessly chase their own tails by repeating the same "yes, but how do you know?" questions over and over again. Kudos to our brave boys over there, laying their sanity on the line trying to combat the likes of Arrington and Hayden. I fear their brave sacrifice will come to naught though. I miss DaveScott :( Dave

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,14:52    Quote I fear their brave sacrifice will come to naught though. Only if your goal is to change their minds. If you goal is to sharpen your own understanding, it's worthwhile. I've been at this since the early 70's. I discovered Gould's essays in Natural History a few months after he started writing them. I've been following the argument on the net since 1998. Over the years I've seen the debate narrow quite a bit. For those not clinically insane, Dover pretty much defined the issues. Nothing since then has changed much. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

someotherguy Posts: 398 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,15:25    Does anybody else think that the latest explosion of stupidity and banninations at UD is a perfect excuse to actually try our much talked about (but never actually attempted) Tard boycott?  At this point, I'm of the opinion that any non-sock UD posters who aren't either banned or so disgusted that they've given up have to be so far gone that they aren't even worth laughing at anymore.  I'm sure there are a few exceptions, but in general, I think it's true. ETA:  What I mean is that when all it takes to be labeled as a moral monster is to calmly point out that a moderator is blatantly misrepresenting the opinions of another poster, maybe it's time to shake the dust off your sandals* and leave them to their misery. *New-testament style, of course. -------------- Evolander in training

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 09 2009,15:51    New socks will emerge. This thread makes Barry look so unhinged I suspect a 404 / server burp is on the way. Any sort of reasoned dialogue with them makes them look assclowns, and it needs to happen for that reason. -------------- "Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield "You magnificent bastard! " : Louis "ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard "I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932 "...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

Pages: (501) < ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard