RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < ... 256 257 258 259 260 [261] 262 263 264 265 266 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,10:27   

Could be. I'm certain that UD "Patrick" is Behe.

Edit for spelling.

Edited by midwifetoad on Mar. 06 2013,10:28

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,11:10   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Mar. 06 2013,08:22)
Quote (keiths @ Mar. 06 2013,01:55)
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 05 2013,05:29)
Timaeus is a weapons-grade douche.

 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 05 2013,00:04)
He's a prick...

And a pompous, insecure ass:
 
Quote
I thus infer what I had already inferred, i.e., that you have no serious academic training of any kind, or, if you do, it is in something technical like computer programming or economics, not something involving the interpretation of books and ideas...

The rest of your comments are a wild rant about Dover and ID... I suspect that you are of the Internet generation that does not read books but only web sites...

As for your note 5.1.1, I’m intimately familiar with the Dover Trial and the documents and arguments advanced there. Your trying to teach me about the Lemon test is like a freshman calculus student trying to teach Einstein math. Save your schoolmasterish lectures for someone who doesn’t have a Ph.D. and hasn’t studied the Dover material far more deeply than you have.

Goodbye, lastyearon. I can honestly say that you are one of the most intellectually insignificant people I’ve had the pleasure (?) of knowing on the internet. You make Petrushka and Nakashima look like careful scholars, and that takes some doing.

T.

Given all these adjectives, may I suggest that Timaeus is Dr. Dr. ?

Nah.  He's only claiming one doctorate.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,11:16   

Quote (JohnW @ Mar. 06 2013,11:10)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Mar. 06 2013,08:22)

Given all these adjectives, may I suggest that Timaeus is Dr. Dr. ?

Nah.  He's only claiming one doctorate.

Timaeus also claims to be three years older than Fuller, which would make his year of birth 1956. Dembski was born in 1960.

Could be subterfuge, of course.

--------------
If you are not:
Galapagos Finch
please Logout »

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1180
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,17:06   

Diogenes is having fun over there, although I cannot see him lasting long. His latest, pasted here, because, well, you know:

 
Quote

Here I proved that creationist frauds Scambrey and Barry Arrington were lying about the fossil record.

Among other evidence, I linked to images of gradual transitions in the fossil record.

Here is one that BA77 calls “deterioriation” and “genetic entropy”.

Look at the first shell in that series. Look at the middle shell. Look at the last shell. BA77 calls that “entropy”!!

Having been crushed on the fossil record, BA77 tries to change the subject! Of course. On the fossil record, I concede your surrender. We have the fossils. We win.

Trying to Gish Gallop, BA77 blathers moronically about a fraudulent quantity he calls “genetic entropy” which he won’t define and can’t compute! Sure, change the subject, loser.

Since you blather moronically about “genetic entropy” please provide me with an equation to compute the genetic entropy of a genome before and after a process. Any process.

For simplicity, consider a sequence:

CTACTAGGCTACTGGC

What is its genetic entropy?

Oh wait, I forgot. None of you creationists can compute ANYTHING, *NOT* specified complexity and *NOT* genetic entropy.

Where is your equation, genius?

If anyone besides BA77 reads this, take a look at what BA77 calls “genetic entropy”. No equation, no math skills, no science, no fossils, no integrity.

BA77 won’t define “genetic entropy and can’t compute it because Intelligent Design is fraud.

BA77 won’t copy and paste the equation because Intelligent Design is a fraud.

UD link. Emphasis in original, 2 hyperlinks not copied across.

Edited by Ptaylor on Mar. 07 2013,10:06

--------------
We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.”
-PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,17:16   

When you can't come up with a slightly new whine, quote an "expert" who doesn't know the difference between accuracy and precision:

 
Quote
“I disagree that Darwin’s theory is as “solid as any explanation in science.” Disagree? I regard the claim as preposterous. Quantum electrodynamics is accurate to thirteen or so decimal places; so, too, general relativity. A leaf trembling in the wrong way would suffice to shatter either theory. What can Darwinian theory offer in comparison? ”


Yeah, but physics is in doubt because you're never going to be able to predict where the next lightning strike will take place in Rhode Island.

Might as well junk all of science, just to be on the safe side.

Glen Davidson

PS  Really, are they that dumb, or that much in denial?  Probably a meaningless question, since their denial feeds their stupidity, and their stupidity feeds their denial, in a vicious, or at least pathetic, cycle.

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,17:18   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Mar. 06 2013,15:06)
Diogenes is having fun over there, although I cannot see him lasting long. His latest, pasted here, because, well, you know:

     
Quote

Here I proved that creationist frauds Scambrey and Barry Arrington were lying about the fossil record.

Among other evidence, I linked to images of gradual transitions in the fossil record.

Here is one that BA77 calls “deterioriation” and “genetic entropy”.

Look at the first shell in that series. Look at the middle shell. Look at the last shell. BA77 calls that “entropy”!!

Having been crushed on the fossil record, BA77 tries to change the subject! Of course. On the fossil record, I concede your surrender. We have the fossils. We win.

Trying to Gish Gallop, BA77 blathers moronically about a fraudulent quantity he calls “genetic entropy” which he won’t define and can’t compute! Sure, change the subject, loser.

Since you blather moronically about “genetic entropy” please provide me with an equation to compute the genetic entropy of a genome before and after a process. Any process.

For simplicity, consider a sequence:

CTACTAGGCTACTGGC

What is its genetic entropy?

Oh wait, I forgot. None of you creationists can compute ANYTHING, *NOT* specified complexity and *NOT* genetic entropy.

Where is your equation, genius?

If anyone besides BA77 reads this, take a look at what BA77 calls “genetic entropy”. No equation, no math skills, no science, no fossils, no integrity.

BA77 won’t define “genetic entropy and can’t compute it because Intelligent Design is fraud.

BA77 won’t copy and paste the equation because Intelligent Design is a fraud.

UD link. Emphasis in original, 2 hyperlinks not copied across.

Batshit fights back:
 
Quote
This following video brings the point personally home to us about the effects of genetic entropy:

Aging Process – 80 years in 40 seconds – video
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....YmGro_Y

Verse and music:

John 8:24
I said therefore unto you, that ye shall die in your sins: for if ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your sins.

Lecrae Live at Passion 2013
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....YLVTfV0

Must be equations.  They've got numbers in them.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,17:27   

Is it any coincidence that batshit and giggles each rely on argumentum ad youtubeum?  I leave it to you, dear reader, to decide.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
REC



Posts: 638
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 06 2013,19:06   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Mar. 06 2013,17:16)
When you can't come up with a slightly new whine, quote an "expert" who doesn't know the difference between accuracy and precision:

   
Quote
“I disagree that Darwin’s theory is as “solid as any explanation in science.” Disagree? I regard the claim as preposterous. Quantum electrodynamics is accurate to thirteen or so decimal places; so, too, general relativity. A leaf trembling in the wrong way would suffice to shatter either theory. What can Darwinian theory offer in comparison? ”


Yeah, but physics is in doubt because you're never going to be able to predict where the next lightning strike will take place in Rhode Island.

Might as well junk all of science, just to be on the safe side.

Glen Davidson

PS  Really, are they that dumb, or that much in denial?  Probably a meaningless question, since their denial feeds their stupidity, and their stupidity feeds their denial, in a vicious, or at least pathetic, cycle.

So it isn't science if it doesn't match the precision of the most stringent test humans have ever accomplished? He's gotten it wrong, too. QED and Special Relativity have been tested that precisely, but not General Relativity.

Any sock want to toss Theobald's paper up there?

Quote
Therefore, UCA is at least 10^2,860
times more probable than the closest competing hypothesis. Notably, UCA is the most accurate and the most parsimonious hypothesis. Compared to themultiple-ancestry hypotheses,UCA provides a much better fit to the data (as seen from its higher likelihood), and it is also
the least complex (as judged by the number of parameters).


doi:10.1038/nature09014

Edited by REC on Mar. 06 2013,21:22

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2013,01:02   

I'll be damned.  'Ras has resurrected his 'jerry' sock.

--------------
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

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2013,08:27   

Quote (keiths @ Mar. 07 2013,02:02)
I'll be damned.  'Ras has resurrected his 'jerry' sock.

Quote
Drosophilia





you magnificent bastards you know what to do

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2013,09:37   

Anyone have the link to Gordon's page where he calculates information content?

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2013,12:54   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 06 2013,06:52)
He remembers me fondly.  Sniff...

That's better than fondling you rememberingly...

I, too, am touched that he remembers Nakashima. Hard to believe a sock several years dead still gets a mention over there.

I think the last time Timaeus and Nakashima squared off was over ring species as evidence for evolution. Nak's point was that ring species demonstrate in space the course of evolution over time. Once Timmy figured it out, it was time to change the subject...

--------------
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

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 07 2013,14:41   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 07 2013,07:37)
Anyone have the link to Gordon's page where he calculates information content?

Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.angelfire.com/pro........nce.htm

You might also want to take a look at these:


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-of-csi


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....r-other


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....esaurus


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-method


http://goo.gl/BQtm3......3....m3



ETA: fixed links

Edited by The whole truth on Mar. 07 2013,13:11

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,08:46   

Quote (The whole truth @ Mar. 07 2013,14:41)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 07 2013,07:37)
Anyone have the link to Gordon's page where he calculates information content?

Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.angelfire.com/pro........nce.htm

You might also want to take a look at these:


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-of-csi


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....r-other


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....esaurus


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-method


http://goo.gl/BQtm3......3....m3



ETA: fixed links

Thank you.

After reading part of this, I'm shocked that anyone can even talk about it with these people.  I'm doing a blog post about it and the misinformation and quote mining in Gordon's article is pretty crazy.

I love the part where he quotes a Wiki article about theoretically Shannon entropy is the same as thermodynamic entropy, then ignores the two paragraphs later on that state specific conditions under which this might hold true.

Basically, through a slight of hand trick (i.e. anything x 0 = anything else x 0), he's equating information with work.  Awesome.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Henry J



Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,11:29   

Quote
Basically, through a slight of hand trick (i.e. anything x 0 = anything else x 0), he's equating information with work.  Awesome.

So what you're saying is that this person is a piece of work? :p

  
Freddie



Posts: 371
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,12:57   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 08 2013,11:29)
Quote
Basically, through a slight of hand trick (i.e. anything x 0 = anything else x 0), he's equating information with work.  Awesome.

So what you're saying is that this person is a piece of work? :p

Perhaps he's even the joule in the crown ...

--------------
Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy.
Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people.
Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,13:27   

Quote
If two species share similar genes then they must share a common ancestor, from which those genes originated.


Really.  So if BT genes are found in corn, do we insist that corn and bacillus thuringiensis share a common ancestor (that is, after those genes arose)?

Thought not, vicious liar.  What we insist upon is that a meaningful cause exist for it.  "God," "magic," what-not, hardly qualifying for science.

 
Quote
Evolutionists don’t think twice about this metaphysical claim.


It isn't a metaphysical claim, it's one based upon cause and effect, genetic processes explaining the distribution of genes (no, morally bankrupt jackass, the "exceptions" aren't explained ad hoc, they're explained by known processes, such as gene transfers in (primarily) prokaryotes), design and purpose only working as causes for certain genes that we've deliberately introduced.

But no one really thinks twice about accepting that "metaphysical claim" contingent upon the apparent limits of our world, including fuckwit creationists like Corny, until it starts stepping upon religious toes (and the occasional crank with uncertain, but real, tendencies toward woo, like Berlinski).  Then the hatred of the very basics of science, such as the pattern recognition that is behind evolutionary science (by the way, not actually fitting Popperian standards--which is why many philosophers won't accept his claims, except as a good rule of thumb for developed sciences) comes out, and witless wonders like Corny insist that science can't be done.

Oh, of course they're selective.  Pattern recognition is fine for "microevolution" with undeterminable boundaries for the creationist version, and it's fine for language evolution for many of them ("ad hoc" fixes for all of the "exceptions" are just fine there), they don't actually intend to destroy all sciences.  It's just that they have to deny any possibility for science where evolution has the evidence, and there's nothing inherent to stop them from denying all of science.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,13:49   

I learned a new word yesterday:

"Compurgation".

Before about the 13th century, if you could get a bunch of people in court to say something wasn't true, that was considered evidence. Because if you had sworn to tell the truth, a lie would catch in your throat.

Just sayin'...

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 08 2013,23:25   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 08 2013,06:46)
Quote (The whole truth @ Mar. 07 2013,14:41)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 07 2013,07:37)
Anyone have the link to Gordon's page where he calculates information content?

Is this what you're looking for?

http://www.angelfire.com/pro........nce.htm

You might also want to take a look at these:


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-of-csi


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....r-other


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....esaurus


http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-method


http://goo.gl/BQtm3......3....m3



ETA: fixed links

Thank you.

After reading part of this, I'm shocked that anyone can even talk about it with these people.  I'm doing a blog post about it and the misinformation and quote mining in Gordon's article is pretty crazy.

I love the part where he quotes a Wiki article about theoretically Shannon entropy is the same as thermodynamic entropy, then ignores the two paragraphs later on that state specific conditions under which this might hold true.

Basically, through a slight of hand trick (i.e. anything x 0 = anything else x 0), he's equating information with work.  Awesome.

You're welcome.

I read some of gordo's spewage and then read most of the mathgrrl/CSI thread and parts of the other threads. I had to stop because smoke was billowing out of my ears. I've read those threads before but it has been quite awhile since I've been to UD. The dishonesty, evasiveness, ignorance, arrogance, hypocrisy, sanctimony, etc., by the IDiots there is astounding.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 09 2013,18:54   

Habitually offended Gordon E Mullings:

Quote
AF:

At this point, some remarks on level of behaviour are, sadly, in order.

For, with all due respect, you are being willfully obtuse and in denial of easily accessible facts to the contrary; indeed, you are speaking with willful disregard to easily observed truth and fact you know or full well should know.

...


And in the rest of the post he asserts some big numbers, but calculates no probabilities.

Alan, why don't you remind him about The_Weasel_Incident and motes / eyes / beams?

--------------
"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

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,01:50   









ETA: I meant to click on quote but hit edit instead. I mistakenly added some text but then removed it.

Edited by The whole truth on Mar. 14 2013,03:37

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,06:40   

Let me translate that quote from Gordonese into English:

Gordon:  "you are being willfully obtuse and in denial of easily accessible facts to the contrary; indeed, you are speaking with willful disregard to easily observed truth and fact you know or full well should know."

English: "You don't share my delusions because you're stupid and evil."

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,10:54   

Quote (The whole truth @ Mar. 10 2013,01:50)

POTW!!!!!1111 4-EVAH!!!!111

ADDED IN EDIT:  i Am breathlessly looing forward to Issue #2!  
Including:  How 2 B A Martyr for Fun & Profit
                Cooking With Oil Of AdHominum
                Killing For Christ Made EZ
                My Favorite, Heart-Warming Stories From The Spanish Inquistion.

Edited by J-Dog on Mar. 10 2013,10:59

--------------
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

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,15:44   

More asswipery from Timaeus:
Quote
So you want to watch sadomasochistic pornography, but the idea that God might disapprove makes you feel a bit guilty about it? Fine! Deny that God exists, buy lots of New Atheist books and devour them, until they have convinced you (which wasn’t hard, when you wanted to be convinced) that you are right, and then there’s no God to disapprove. You want to be a selfish person, double-parking and cutting off people in traffic and barging ahead of people in lines? — don’t worry about it; there is no God keeping track of when you’re selfish and you’re not; there are only Darwinian processes, which justify your actions, because by putting Number 1 first, you increase your chances of worldly success, and worldly success is the only happiness for an organism that there is. You’re a male university professor of philosophy, and you “fall in love” with a foxy 25-year-old grad student, and decide to ditch your loyal middle-aged wife of 20 years, and some preacher or rabbi tells you that God says this is wrong? No problem; tell the teacher or rabbi to go to — a place that you no longer believe exists, and proudly bellow that you have the “right” to “happiness” or “fulfillment” (of course, your wife doesn’t have the same right, your wedding vows not being binding on you), and you don’t intend to let God stand between you and your desires. You want an abortion? Don’t let the thought that a fetus might be in the image of God deter you; there is no God for it to be in the image of.

I’m not of course saying that all atheists are pure libertines who are driven by selfish ends; I have met principled atheists, moral atheists, etc. But much modern atheism is found in the circles of well-educated middle-class professionals who want an intellectual justification for their rejection of the constraints of traditional middle-class morality and traditional social mores. The idea that individuals, or societies, ought to be restricted in their actions, choices, entertainments, etc. is anathema to such people.


--------------
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

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,16:40   

Sometimes one thinks that these IDiots must never have heard of Pascal's Wager.  All one has to do is to remind oneself of how well they think, though, and the fact that spectacular rewards promised are on their side becomes meaningless to their actual "thought."

Yes, we just want to sin and either go to hell or rot away.  We'd never want to give something up to have eternal life, none of us has ever searched hopefully for evidence of God and Paradise, only for those hopes to be dashed by the sheer nothingness of the "evidence."  

Obviously the weight of hopeful thinking should be, and is, on the other side.  We're just stuck with evidence, and a reality that hardly fits our hopes and desires.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,17:16   

Whatever happened to Gil Dodgen?  He hasn't been on UD since July 7th of last year.

  
REC



Posts: 638
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,18:12   

Sal Cordova, Jonathan M(cLatchie), and Johnny B(artlett) also seem absent.

We're in the KF era now. I'm just waiting for Joe to get original post privileges.

  
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,21:22   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Mar. 10 2013,18:16)
Whatever happened to Gil Dodgen?  He hasn't been on UD since July 7th of last year.

 
Quote (REC @ Mar. 10 2013,19:12)
Sal Cordova, Jonathan M(cLatchie), and Johnny B(artlett) also seem absent.

We're in the KF era now. I'm just waiting for Joe to get original post privileges.

You two strike me as the type who ignore the warnings of all the natives, break into the heavily protected ancient tomb, and read the inscriptions on the walls out loud.

Then you're surprised when the sarcophagi start to open....

  
Henry J



Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,22:07   

Quote
You two strike me as the type who ignore the warnings of all the natives, break into the heavily protected ancient tomb, and read the inscriptions on the walls out loud.

Then you're surprised when the sarcophagi start to open....

That sounds like an opening scene for a movie - maybe either Indiana Jones or Laura Croft! :p

  
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 10 2013,22:14   

Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 10 2013,23:07)
 
Quote
You two strike me as the type who ignore the warnings of all the natives, break into the heavily protected ancient tomb, and read the inscriptions on the walls out loud.

Then you're surprised when the sarcophagi start to open....

That sounds like an opening scene for a movie - maybe either Indiana Jones or Laura Croft! :p

I'm thinking more like:

Ph'nglui mglw'nafh Cthulhu R'lyeh wgah'nagl fhtan.

Ia! Ia! Cthulhu fhtagn!

Cthulhu R'lyeh fhtagn!


Then all the named IDists return.

Edited by Patrick on Mar. 10 2013,23:14

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < ... 256 257 258 259 260 [261] 262 263 264 265 266 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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