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... > Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread

Pages: (1000) < ... 352 353 354 355 356 [357] 358 359 360 361 362 ... >

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,16:22    Quote TroutMac comes clean about Creationism and ID   Quote These folks are so bankrupt that they're playing games with the language so as to cover their tracks. They talk out of both sides of their mouth, twist definitions to suit their whim for that moment. They hope that the ignorant will fall for their charade just because they call themselves "scientists" and this, they think, gives them credibility enough to make any claim they want. The problem is, many people are ignorant enough to fall for it. They're not about explaining and clarifying evolution… anything but that. They want to confuse the issue - while appearing to have explained something - as much as possible. We just don't understand because we're not scientists like they are. Well, change "evolution" for ID and it's accurate! Absolutely. But what gets me is that this seems such a sincere statement. He’s wrong (and I’ve certainly never called myself a scientist), but it creeps me that he may actually mean what he says. If that’s true, there’s a major problem here beyond the amusement factor. For pity sakes, I don’t want to mislead anyone, and no scientist that I know wants to, either! I don’t associate with liars. Science is our greatest hope to answer certain questions (which is not to say that I expect it to answer all questions, such as what Captain Ahab’s true motivation could be, or when in the film Psycho Lila Loomis figures out that her sister was probably murdered, etc.). What’s going on with these people? I’m beginning to think that this has nothing to do with ID itself. ID is an excuse to feel personally lied to and picked on by the people who are curious about how nature works, who want to cure people’s diseases and improve their lives. At times I am just dumbfounded at what I read at UD, the ingratitude toward scientists, the paranoia. Where is all this anger coming from? Because if it’s based in a sincere belief, then something is really, really wrong. -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,16:33    Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 17 2007,16:16) For American readers who are confused about the whole North-South thing, here is a link to an actual documentary about Liverpudlians (or "scouse gits" as they are known affectionately in the South) which should go a long way to clarifying it. And with this everything falls into place. -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Dr.GH Posts: 2333 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,16:44    Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 17 2007,07:25) In the last couple of days, Dembski has posted two ID experiments to UD: the empty cage, and the green goo. Do you think he's working on a science fair project? If so, Bill, there are lots of other neat ideas here! I think I am able to understand them much better now! AWWW.  It was such a good image.  You all will just have to follow the link, and look for the "tinfoil" (aluminium foil) cap! Edited by Dr.GH on Jan. 17 2007,17:06 -------------- "Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy." L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,16:46    Quote (Zachriel @ Jan. 17 2007,09:45) One of the basic claims that Joseph makes is that if we can't explain a phenomena as due to natural causes, then it was due to Intelligent Design. Of course, the greater Joseph's areas of ignorance, the more that can be ascribed to the Designer. Next thing you know, he will claim the Moon's orbit is due to Design rather than gravity and historical contingency. Too late.  They already do that.  That's the whole fine-tuning/Privileged Planet Schtick. Here's an example from Heddle: http://helives.blogspot.com/2007/01/rtb-du-jour.html

Steviepinhead Posts: 532 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,17:17    Richard T.--ta for the link to Mark CC's math blog.  That was so entertaining I lost (another) hour of work. Sal-tard at its nadir-est!  Everybody and her brother coming out of the woodwork to nail him on his usual derail-and-bail schtick...amateurs and professional scientists of about eight different disciplines piling on...priceless hilarity: Sal giving a desperate imression of the wicked witch trying to shimmy between raindrops during Katrina. JAD gets banned again, despite Mark's turning himself into a backwards pretzel attempting to elicit some factual argument on it. ___ Edit: Inaccurate (not to mention humor-tarded) footnote deleted.

2ndclass Posts: 182 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,18:03    At OE, quizzlestick states, presumably with a straight face: Quote More importantly we are on the verge of some of the most important scientific discoveries in the entire history of science which could yield benefits to the whole of mankind were it not for a conspiracy of Darwinists who will stop at nothing to preserve the reputation of their absurd science. Yes, he actually used the word "conspiracy".  Then, after quoting and pretending to understand a salad of modern physics buzzwords from Kazmer Ujvarosy, quizzlestick says: Quote For example, to falsify we merely have to observe a Higgs boson to see if it has the expected properties. What could be simpler? Maybe the DI will hire quizzlestick to observe a Higgs boson.  A few hundred bucks should be more than enough for such a simple task. -------------- "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

2ndclass Posts: 182 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,18:50    How come none of you mentioned this Kazmer Ujvarosy guy until recently?  I can't believe you would hold out on me like this.  The man is an absolute gem.  I'm still trying to decide whether he's another invention of Lou FCD. -------------- "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

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,20:47    Quote How come none of you mentioned this Kazmer Ujvarosy guy until recently? Because I'd toss my tiramisu.   Quote I can't believe you would hold out on me like this.  The man is an absolute gem.  I'm still trying to decide whether he's another invention of Lou FCD. He's real, if you want to call him that, and interacting with JAD. Enjoy. -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

Zarquon Posts: 71 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,21:12    Quote Richardthughes: 5IVE TIMES 5-0

Freelurker Posts: 82 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2007,21:22    Hey, show some respect for Kazmer Ujvarosy. He has published a book. And he doesn't even brag about it. The UFO connections of Jesus Christ EDIT - Full citation: The ufo connections of Jesus Christ / Kazmer Ujvarosy. - New York : Vantage Press, 1977. - 121 s. Referenced here: http://www.skepticreport.com/ufo/ufo-u.htm EDIT - Find an extract here: http://tinyurl.com/yrg83p -------------- Invoking intelligent design in science is like invoking gremlins in engineering. [after Mark Isaak.] All models are wrong, some models are useful. - George E. P. Box

Altabin Posts: 308 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,02:53    Quote (2ndclass @ Jan. 18 2007,01:50) How come none of you mentioned this Kazmer Ujvarosy guy until recently?  I can't believe you would hold out on me like this.  The man is an absolute gem.  I'm still trying to decide whether he's another invention of Lou FCD. Yeah, both Ujvarosky's magazine article (whoops!, sorry, "peer-reviewed paper") and quizzlestick's fawning puffery are completely beyond parody. Ujvarosky:   Quote The elusive Higgs boson – so vital to the Standard Model of particle physics that it is dubbed “the God particle” – is identical with the genotype of the phenotype universe, and each human genome is its reproduction. Based on this identification we posit that mass-giving is life-giving because the elementary particles that come into contact with the cosmic seed's biofield or quantum vacuum receive their mass and property as a result of that interaction. quizzlestick:   Quote If Kazmer were still laboring under the shackles of materialism would any of this have been possible? Of course not – these are the kinds of discoveries that can only come about when we first reject the rigid dogma of the philosophy behind atheism and Darwinism's only life-support. The 'shrooms must help, too. --------------

Altabin Posts: 308 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,02:57    Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 17 2007,22:20) Guy Ritchie you talentless twat, Sort it awwwt, its a daaaarn saaaarf fing, innit geezer? You're about as London as Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins, you're a propper art-school tarquin you muppet. More old British comedy Oh, and this one's for k.e. [Must. Get. Back. To. Work.] --------------

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,04:11    Nope sorry you're all wrong. THIS is for all you cocky Aussies. We may have fallen far and fast since, but THAT is a moment of unbridled glory. Stuffing the convicts in their own home. 20-17 Louis -------------- Bye.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,06:31    Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 17 2007,07:25) Quote 53. Were all the animals friendly to man before the Flood? Idea: raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older. That one may not have such a happy ending.  Next time try it with a lion and a lamb. DaveScot claims you quoted the Bible. But I don't see any quotemarks. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,06:52    DaveScot           Quote Orthodox evolutionists tell us that mutations are random when plotted against fitness but this is not the case. Zachriel: Orthodox probability tells us that Roulette is random but this is not the case. DaveScot           Quote random failures seldom if ever result in improved performance. Random mutations are in fact random degradations.   Zachriel: Roulette seldom if ever result in me winning. Roulette is in fact random losers. (The "seldom" is crucial. And DaveScot doesn't apparently know what "random" means in science. Probability Theory was developed in France by a lawyer and an indulgent pleasure-seeker to resolve a gamblers' dispute. It's ALL about the winners and losers.) DaveScot           Quote The weakness is arrival of the fittest.   It turns out that we can observe beneficial variations in populations, variations that are subject to selection. Modern genetics has determined that the source of novel variation is mutation. (Note: mutations are not quite random with respect to position in the genome.) Addendum: When I shoot Craps, there seems to an inordinate number of sevens rolled — more than any other number. Are my dice loaded? -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Altabin Posts: 308 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,07:11    Quote (Zachriel @ Jan. 18 2007,13:31)   Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 17 2007,07:25)     Quote 53. Were all the animals friendly to man before the Flood? Idea: raise several baby animals like snake and mouse together to see if they remain friends as they are older. That one may not have such a happy ending.  Next time try it with a lion and a lamb. DaveScot claims you quoted the Bible. But I don't see any quotemarks. Sweet!  And I didn't even know I had been banned!  Anyway, it's given me a new sig.   Quote He misquoted the bible of course. 1: It wasn't a quote, it was an allusion. 2: You really want to make an issue of this, Dave?  Then take it up with Jesusart.  No, somehow I didn't think you would. 3: Cute pets (we can all be friends when it comes to ickle animals, can't we?  Even though, as a Darwinist, I regularly drown kittens just to improve my odds in the struggle for existence.  Those little f*ckers will take your food if you don't get them first). --------------

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,07:17    Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 18 2007,02:57) Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 17 2007,22:20) Guy Ritchie you talentless twat, Sort it awwwt, its a daaaarn saaaarf fing, innit geezer? You're about as London as Dick van Dyke in Mary Poppins, you're a propper art-school tarquin you muppet. More old British comedy Oh, and this one's for k.e. [Must. Get. Back. To. Work.] hahahahahahahahahahaha Last time I saw the guy with the mo' was in "A League of Gentlemen" (I think that's the right name) you can't beat British humour ...unless it's Irish .....or Jewish...or Russian (Did I tell you about the Russian bloke I met who claimed the icebreaker he sailed on, had a billiard table? ...oh that's a true story .....but they do have a sense of humour too) ..or oarstrayleeanne 'Didyahearaboutthe %$#^ &**(   withthe ##@!%% &&^%$#  (()*&^%$V ?....oh never mind I don't think it works without the ^&&%$#.   Anyway everyone except the Germans. -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,07:25    Quote (Louis @ Jan. 18 2007,04:11) Nope sorry you're all wrong. THIS is for all you cocky Aussies. We may have fallen far and fast since, but THAT is a moment of unbridled glory. Stuffing the convicts in their own home. 20-17 Louis Well you friggin' poms exported more than convicts, this was my last game of rugby buggery english style. Staff vs the Students -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Louis Posts: 6436 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,08:40    Quote (k.e @ Jan. 18 2007,13:25) Quote (Louis @ Jan. 18 2007,04:11) Nope sorry you're all wrong. THIS is for all you cocky Aussies. We may have fallen far and fast since, but THAT is a moment of unbridled glory. Stuffing the convicts in their own home. 20-17 Louis Well you friggin' poms exported more than convicts, this was my last game of rugby buggery english style. Staff vs the Students Oh you were playing for the students were you? "We'll take the foreplay as read shall we dear?" Louis -------------- Bye.

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,08:54    I've almost forgotten how hard we laughed at that stuff. -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Steverino Posts: 411 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,08:56    Quote (phonon @ Jan. 17 2007,15:39) Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Jan. 17 2007,15:36) "Thy two breasts are like two young roes that are twins, which feed among the lilies." - Song of Solomon 4:5 "Thine Adam's Apple is like mine." - Song of Dembski to Coulter 3:16 LOL... "Man Coutler" Couldn't resist. -------------- - Born right the first time. - Asking questions is NOT the same as providing answers. - It's all fun and games until the flying monkeys show up!

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,09:02    snicker ....that's why g$d gave us Dembscott/AFD/Haggart/Hovind/GWB(my fellow umbrella stands)/Anne Elk etc..etc..completely un-ironic Pythonesque golden moments of pure inanity .....and free!! -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,09:08    Awww, the kitty and the puppy get along! Now we need more of that stuff. A total love-in. Evilutionists marrying creationists, Coulter the “apple” of Demb’s eye…wait a minute. Ann Coulter and Dembski… I’m getting jealous here… Dammit! Where she at? I’ll kill her! I’m waiting for the bottle blond (and I’m not talking hydrogen peroxide) out by the bicycle racks. She doesn't misunderstand you like I do, Bill. No mercy! -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

Altabin Posts: 308 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,09:18    Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 18 2007,16:08) Awww, the kitty and the puppy get along! Hold on... lower left of the picture... the red thing... is that a dog toy or a butt plug? --------------

Mike PSS Posts: 428 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,09:42    Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 18 2007,10:18)   Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 18 2007,16:08) Awww, the kitty and the puppy get along! Hold on... lower left of the picture... the red thing... is that a dog toy or what?? a butt plug? A rhetorical comment leaves a little bit to the imagination.  It's also self-censored for fragile little minds.  The rest of us will probably get what's inferred anyway. Intelligent Designed commenting?  Have I discovered a new pathway for enlightenment?

Altabin Posts: 308 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,09:48    Quote (Mike PSS @ Jan. 18 2007,16:42) Quote (Altabin @ Jan. 18 2007,10:18)     Quote (Kristine @ Jan. 18 2007,16:08) Awww, the kitty and the puppy get along! Hold on... lower left of the picture... the red thing... is that a dog toy or what?? a butt plug? A rhetorical comment leaves a little bit to the imagination.  It's also self-censored for fragile little minds.  The rest of us will probably get what's inferred anyway. No, that would be way too subtle for me.  I would probably amend my comment to: "Hold on... lower left of the picture... the red thing... is that a dog toy or a butt plug?  And, if it is a butt plug, has it been up Dave's butt?  And now the dog is playing with it?  That's gross."  There, much clearer!  (Though you are right - sorry if I did gross anyone out). More on-topic: that thread is puttering along nicely now.  Is it my imagination, or is it all YEC all the time at UD these days?  They can't talk about anything without bringing in the Flood.  Any pretence, even, that it's not about religion has fallen away.  (Yet, the next time someone in the media uses the term "creationist" to refer to ID,  you can bet everyone will be jumping up and down and asking where journalists get these ideas from). --------------

Faid Posts: 1143 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,10:45    OMG, is Dave defending the plausibility of the Pre-Fall world now? BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Hey Dave, that "Radiometric dating method exploding" post is long overdue... HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA -------------- A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty: "The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information" "...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,10:51    Janice #29       Quote It seems to me that most of the work done in trying to define science (so as to distinguish it from pseuodoscience) revolves around things like how you express your hypotheses (are they testable?), what research methodology you use (is it repeatable and verifiable?) and what you are measuring (is it observable?). But I hadn’t been able to find anything on how you interpret the data that your research effort produces except for these lines from Meyer. It’s in the last paragraph in the article I referenced previously. Science is a practical human endeavor. Generalizations (theories) are devised that are then judged on their ability to make valid predictions of future observations. So, for instance, without trying to determine the essence of "gravity", Newton was able to generate specific mathematical relationships that led to reasonable predictions concerning the movements of planets. From Darwin's Theory of Common Descent, he predicted fossils of organisms with intermediate characteristics might be found in strata of the appropriate age; and though he couldn't directly observe it, he predicted that organisms adapt slowly to their environment, microevolution being directly observed with modern techniques. He even predicted the existence of a species of moth that was not observed until after his death. Meyer       Quote “A rational historical biology must not only address the question “Which materialistic or naturalistic evolutionary scenario provides the most adequate explanation of biological complexity?” but also the question “Does a strictly materialistic evolutionary scenario or one involving intelligent agency or some other theory best explain the origin of biological complexity, given all relevant evidence?” To insist otherwise is to insist that materialism holds a metaphysically privileged position. Since there seems no reason to concede that assumption, I see no reason to concede that origins theories must be strictly naturalistic.” There is nothing within science that precludes the investigation of intelligent agency. The basic rules of science apply, that's all. The standard questions are Who? What? When? Where? Why? How? Any theory must make specific empirical predictions that distinguish it from other such theories. And all theories are provisional, in any case. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Arden Chatfield Posts: 6657 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,11:00    Quote (Faid @ Jan. 18 2007,10:45) OMG, is Dave defending the plausibility of the Pre-Fall world now? BUAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Will 2007 see Slovenly Old Uncle Dave slowly transforming into a Young Earth Creationist? Can we expect him to start defending 'flood geology'? I can't wait! -------------- "Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

Reciprocating Bill Posts: 4265 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2007,11:03    DaveScot, autodidact that he is, is unfamiliar with much of the literature pertaining to evolutionary biology.  But does he read what he himself writes?  Apparently not. Start here.   Quote Since natural selection must by definition act on changes in fitness (differential reproduction), and those changes in fitness caused by random mutation are always or almost always detrimental, natural selection is really natural deselection as it works in almost all cases to deselect organisms whose genome has wandered from its optimized incarnation through random degradation. OK Dave. We get that you can’t grasp the sense in which mutations are random – that mutations are random in the sense that they occur without respect to the local fitness of the organism in which they occur – and that you insist on conflating “random” in this sense with the false assertion that evolutionary theory predicts that mutations are equally likely to be beneficial, neutral, or deleterious.  We get that you missed the fact that ALL standard models of mutation+natural selection posit that benficial mutations are relatively rare.  We GET that.  No need to make a fool of yourself. But there is more. In the above quote you assert that natural selection is really “deselection, as it works in almost all cases to deselect organisms whose genome has wandered from its optimized incarnation through random degradation.”  Hence it shouldn’t be a surprise that adapted organisms remain, well, consistent with their “kind,” and retain the integrity of their genome.   But just Monday you marveled as follows:   Quote Frankly it’s a bloody miracle that life still exists at all in the presence of random mutation and natural selection. It’s a clear testimony to the elegance of the initial front-loaded genome billions of years ago that it got life this far with so many obstacles in the way. Ok, Dave, which is it?  Does NS work to conserve forms? Or to degrade them? And, given that in your first post you identify stabilizing selection as a mechanism for removing deleterious mutations and ensuring the integrity of adapted organisms, why also posit an elegantly designed genome that is maintained over time by means of error correction (as you have argued elsewhere many times)? -------------- Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be. "The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you." - David Foster Wallace "Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down." - Barry Arrington

Pages: (1000) < ... 352 353 354 355 356 [357] 358 359 360 361 362 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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