Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::Uncommonly Dense Thread 2

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,07:26

Quote (Goffr @ Aug. 22 2009,02:36)

Dumski thinks he is a clever dick. From his paper

Quote

Partitioned search is a “divide and conquer” procedure best introduced by example. Consider the L = 28 character phrase

METHINKS ? IT ? IS ? LIKE ? A ? WEASEL. (19)

Suppose that the result of our first query of L = 28 characters is

SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM. (20)

Two of the letters {E, S} are in the correct position. They are shown in a bold font. In partitioned search, our search for these letters is finished. For the incorrect letters, we select 26 new letters and obtain

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL. (21)

Oh wait what is that random phrase reversed?

SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM = MAS EVOLUTIONARY INFROMATICS

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL = LISTEN ARE THESE DESIGNED TOO.

oh ha ha.

It's a shame Dawkins' program DOESN'T MUTATUTE EVERY CHARACTER EACH GENERATION. Man is this guy full retard.

Great catch, Goffr -- I'm amazed no one else noticed this earlier (on any site that I read). It's relevant in terms of Dembski/Marks' thought processes and motives.

Heh. They really don't like Dawkins, do they? Wankers.

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,07:40

Gordon Mullings still doesn't get the joke:

Quote

84
kairosfocus
08/22/2009
1:58 am

YD:

Kindly look at part I of my comment at 79 above, which I specifically gave as first priority.

You will see there how the further analysis extends the frame of thought for inference to design.

Also the onward, linked Atom comment and exchange with Rob make for interesting insights from one active with the EIL.

Fresh meat.

GEM of TKI

PS: When a red herring-strawman-ad hominem distractor has been heavily used [and, rememeber I have been accused now of "gutter politics" and just over a week ago or so was threatened -- if it was just a threat (why I emailed and have written) -- with being reported to the US HS Dept as a potential terrorist threat to be put on a watch list for pointing out that this is an increasingly commopn and dangerous rhetorical pattern], it is necessary to address it correctively, and that justified what is part II.

He is so totally void of anything resembling a sense of humor, I would be loath to ask him why the chicken crossed the road for fear of the resulting torrent of Lewontin soaked straw red herrings.

--------------
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!)

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:08

Quote (Goffr @ Aug. 22 2009,10:36)

Dumski thinks he is a clever dick. From his paper

Quote

E. Partitioned Search
Partitioned search [12] is a “divide and conquer” procedure
best introduced by example. Consider the L = 28 character
phrase

METHINKS ? IT ? IS ? LIKE ? A ? WEASEL. (19)

Suppose that the result of our first query of L = 28 characters
is

SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM. (20)

Two of the letters {E, S} are in the correct position. They are
shown in a bold font. In partitioned search, our search for these
letters is finished. For the incorrect letters, we select 26 new
letters and obtain

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL. (21)

Oh wait what is that random phrase reversed?
SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM

MAS EVOLUTIONARYINFROMATICS

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL

LISTEN ARE THESE DESIGNED TOO.

oh ha ha.

It's a shame Dawkins' program DOESN'T MUTATUTE EVERY CHARACTER EACH GENERATION. Man is this guy full retard.

He just can't resist can he?

Somehow I think the IEEE pub scam was just a little spin of the marketing wheel so the sheep grazing at the mega church cafe bookshops could have another pathetic excuse to justify more junk book purchases.

As for the school answering machine gaff, all I can say is Dembski has zero sense of humour.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his ~~clown~~ DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

Zachriel

Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:26

Quote (BillB @ Aug. 21 2009,07:52)

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Aug. 21 2009,13:49)

welcome, oh venerable one

Thank you, although I have been lurking for many months.

Gee, BillB. You were doing such a good job, I was hoping you were my sock-puppet. But I'm afraid you don't stand a chance against kairosfocus's latest argument.

Quote

kairosfocus: The latest wave of Darwinist rhetorical wave attacks on “Weasel” are clearly intended to distract attention from, distort our understanding of and get us to dismiss the latest key ID peer reviewed paper, and its author. (As well as of course those who would support it.)

tot hat end a by now all too familiar ruthless and destructive pattern of rhetoric has been deployed by the Darwinists: distractive red herrings, led out to strawman misrepresentations soaked in ad hominems and ignited to cloud, confuse, choke, poison and polarise the atmosphere. And, if you dare point this out, you will be attacked through turnabout false accusations, in my case now amounting to accusing me of “gutter politics.” {That's why I have publicly stated to BillB that he has gone beyond the pale of civil discourse. Sadly, he is now an example of what not to do. Prayers, of course are always indicated; for all of us finite, fallible, fallen, struggling sinners.}

He'll deign to pray for you. You're in trouble now.

Quote

kairosfocus: I] First things first:
1 –>
2 –>
3 –>
4 –>
5 –>
6 –>
7–>
8–>
9–>
10 –>

OOPS!

II] The Distraction
a –>
b –>
c –>
d –>
e –>
f –>
g –>
h –>
i –>
j –>

GEM of TKI

And if that is not enough for you, BillB. The dreaded PS.

Quote

kairosfocus:
PS:
PPS:

Quote

kairosfocus: PPPS: BTW

Quote

kairosfocus: OOPS: a –>

Quote

kairosfocus: NB

Add to that the 24-point manifesto (with a second set of PS's) directed at YB. Let's face it BillB, you're out of your league and out for the count from sheer exhaustion.

...

But lo! {wipes a tear} Lo! What is that we see rising from the smoking strawman soaked in ad hominems and ignited to cloud, confuse, choke, poison and polarise the atmosphere?

Quote

BillB: Again, I’ll turn my cheek to your insults, accusations of dishonesty, and abuse.

Raise kairosfocus a Matthew 6:5
And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by men. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full.

Quote

BillB: PPPPSSSSS

Please try and actually read my post @88 instead of coming up with excuses to avoid dealing with the issue on its merits.

Oh no you didn't. Oh no you didn't. A PPPPSSSSS!!!! Snap!

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

You never step on the same tard twiceâ€”for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Zachriel

Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:32

Quote

kairosfocus: Since the filter rewards the closest to target in any one generatio0n, with big enough generations, and big enough mutation rates, multiple mutation cases may become common enough that we begin to see other effects in the runs of champions: substitutions where one letter advances to correct even as another reverts, and cases of double etc letter advances. So, I think there is a band on pop size to see the latching and quasi-latching IMPLICIT effects. As I vaguely recall, once I started to push Atom’s adjustable Weasel up to the 999 pop limit and also push mutation rates, some of these effects popped out of the woodwork.

Higher populations are better 'behaved'. Low populations are more likely to show reversions and step-backs in overall fitness for a given mutation rate.

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

You never step on the same tard twiceâ€”for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Tracy P. Hamilton

Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:40

Quote (Goffr @ Aug. 22 2009,02:36)

Dumski thinks he is a clever dick. From his paper

Quote

E. Partitioned Search
Partitioned search [12] is a “divide and conquer” procedure
best introduced by example. Consider the L = 28 character
phrase

METHINKS ? IT ? IS ? LIKE ? A ? WEASEL. (19)

Suppose that the result of our first query of L = 28 characters
is

SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM. (20)

Two of the letters {E, S} are in the correct position. They are
shown in a bold font. In partitioned search, our search for these
letters is finished. For the incorrect letters, we select 26 new
letters and obtain

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL. (21)

Oh wait what is that random phrase reversed?
SCITAMROFN ? IYRANOITULOVE ? SAM

MAS EVOLUTIONARYINFROMATICS

OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL

LISTEN ARE THESE DESIGNED TOO.

oh ha ha.

It's a shame Dawkins' program DOESN'T MUTATUTE EVERY CHARACTER EACH GENERATION. Man is this guy full retard.

Demski is backward masking, and there is a hidden Freudian message in the forward order:

"OOT ? DENGISEDESEHT ? ERA?NETSIL."

Poot. Denyse is Hot. I are a Nut, SOL.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world." PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

olegt

Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:54

O, I don't think it's Dembski. This is classic Marks. Gloppy is strong in him.

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

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,08:58

Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 22 2009,12:11)

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Aug. 21 2009,23:17)

Quote (Maya @ Aug. 21 2009,16:40)

Davey Lives!

(I must not finish with "Too bad." I must not finish with "Too bad." I must not . . .)

Dave's the quintessential groupie: months after being fired, he's STILL tossing Dembski's salad on his own time.

In fairness, Dave pretty much gets it

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 8:48 PM

The Dembski and Marks paper is essentially correct although I don't agree that information can ever be lost. For many years theoretical physicists were arguing over whether dropping an encyclopedia into a black hole could destroy the information in it. The argument continues although Hawkings, who made the famous bet, conceded that the information would not be lost and would eventually reemerge in subtle patterns of Hawking radiation. So Dembski is in good company as far as conservation of information goes.

I remarked to him that the response from the chance & necessity crowd (the informed responses anyhow) would be that the information leading to diversification and adaptation of life comes from the environment. Said information has been in the environment since the creation of the universe. Mutation provides a constant source of queries to the environment and acquires active information from that source. The active information then becomes endogenous information through heredity. Therefore I didn't see how this casts any additional doubt on the sufficiency of the genetic search, given the resources (time and number of organisms) available to the mechanism, to transform all that exogenous information to endogenous.

The big question is where did the information come from in the first place rather than how it changed form. Inevitably the question leads to cosmology and the fine tuning problem. I don't really have a bone to pick with modification with descent over billions of years turning mud to man. What I have a problem with is the probability of it happening without the deck being stacked to make it happen. This is more or less in alignment with the thinking of deists like Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and Albert Einstein so I don't feel like I'm in totally bad company.
(emphasis added)

OK, I don't see the necessity for the deism angle, but at least he sees that the argument isn't a problem for evolution.

HA HA HOMOS YOU MISSED THIS

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 9:08 PM

P.S. not moderating UD is a great time liberator. I gave up the job when Dembski gave up control of the blog. Not surprisingly I pushed too many of Arrington's buttons in condemning the demonization of Darwin by trying to turn him into a "necessary factor" in the holocaust. I understand the straw that broke the camel's back was when I pointed out that Timothy McVeigh was a member of the Christian Identity movement. There's plenty of blame to go around for the holocaust. Implicating Charles Darwin is just so wrong on so many levels...

IT WAS RELGION & THUS INFORMATION NOT GENETIC CHANCE AND NECESSITY THAT MADE HIM A TERRORIST....ERM I'LL GET BACK ON THAT.

WHEN THE REVOLUTION COMES AND CONCEALED SHOTGUNS REPLACE MONEY I WON'T HAVE TO GROW SURVIVAL MUSHROOMS ANYMORE AND BILL WILL APOLOGIZE AND DENSE WILL HAVE TO SHAVE HER HOLOCAUST ASS, ARRINGTON CAN UPDATE ID AS THE XXVIII (TH) AMENDMENT

AS FOR INFORMATION GETTING LOST BETWEEN THE BIG BOOM AND THE FIRST MUD TO DARWIN ON EARTH WELL HAWKINGZ SAID NO AND I AGREE WITH HIM ....AND EINSTEIN OF COURSE. d.t.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his ~~clown~~ DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

Arden Chatfield

Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,10:12

Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 22 2009,06:58)

Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 22 2009,12:11)

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Aug. 21 2009,23:17)

Quote (Maya @ Aug. 21 2009,16:40)

Davey Lives!

(I must not finish with "Too bad." I must not finish with "Too bad." I must not . . .)

Dave's the quintessential groupie: months after being fired, he's STILL tossing Dembski's salad on his own time.

In fairness, Dave pretty much gets it

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 8:48 PM

The Dembski and Marks paper is essentially correct although I don't agree that information can ever be lost. For many years theoretical physicists were arguing over whether dropping an encyclopedia into a black hole could destroy the information in it. The argument continues although Hawkings, who made the famous bet, conceded that the information would not be lost and would eventually reemerge in subtle patterns of Hawking radiation. So Dembski is in good company as far as conservation of information goes.

I remarked to him that the response from the chance & necessity crowd (the informed responses anyhow) would be that the information leading to diversification and adaptation of life comes from the environment. Said information has been in the environment since the creation of the universe. Mutation provides a constant source of queries to the environment and acquires active information from that source. The active information then becomes endogenous information through heredity. Therefore I didn't see how this casts any additional doubt on the sufficiency of the genetic search, given the resources (time and number of organisms) available to the mechanism, to transform all that exogenous information to endogenous.

The big question is where did the information come from in the first place rather than how it changed form. Inevitably the question leads to cosmology and the fine tuning problem. I don't really have a bone to pick with modification with descent over billions of years turning mud to man. What I have a problem with is the probability of it happening without the deck being stacked to make it happen. This is more or less in alignment with the thinking of deists like Thomas Jefferson, Ben Franklin, and Albert Einstein so I don't feel like I'm in totally bad company.
(emphasis added)

OK, I don't see the necessity for the deism angle, but at least he sees that the argument isn't a problem for evolution.

HA HA HOMOS YOU MISSED THIS

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 9:08 PM

P.S. not moderating UD is a great time liberator. I gave up the job when Dembski gave up control of the blog. Not surprisingly I pushed too many of Arrington's buttons in condemning the demonization of Darwin by trying to turn him into a "necessary factor" in the holocaust. I understand the straw that broke the camel's back was when I pointed out that Timothy McVeigh was a member of the Christian Identity movement. There's plenty of blame to go around for the holocaust. Implicating Charles Darwin is just so wrong on so many levels...

IT WAS RELGION & THUS INFORMATION NOT GENETIC CHANCE AND NECESSITY THAT MADE HIM A TERRORIST....ERM I'LL GET BACK ON THAT.

WHEN THE REVOLUTION COMES AND CONCEALED SHOTGUNS REPLACE MONEY I WON'T HAVE TO GROW SURVIVAL MUSHROOMS ANYMORE AND BILL WILL APOLOGIZE AND DENSE WILL HAVE TO SHAVE HER HOLOCAUST ASS, ARRINGTON CAN UPDATE ID AS THE XXVIII (TH) AMENDMENT

AS FOR INFORMATION GETTING LOST BETWEEN THE BIG BOOM AND THE FIRST MUD TO DARWIN ON EARTH WELL HAWKINGZ SAID NO AND I AGREE WITH HIM ....AND EINSTEIN OF COURSE. d.t.

This is classic old-school Davetard, tho:

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 5:41 PM
Hey PZ, when was the last time YOU published something in a peer reviewed rag?
Near as I can tell, in the last 10 years, it's Dembski:1 Myers:0.

Dave talks pretty well for someone with his mouth full.

I'll get me coat.

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

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,10:40

Poor R0b tries mightily to educate Clive:

Quote

And having no goal does mean that there is no goal, not even fitness as a goal, for you would have no criterion for fitness, for there is nothing to compare any accumulation to.

Dawkins says that life has no “distant ideal target” or “long-term goal” or “long-distance target” or “final perfection”. Here is how he describes life: “In real life, the criterion for selection is always short-term, either simple survival or, more generally, reproductive success.”

“No long-term goal” does not mean “not even fitness as a goal.” You seem to be of the opinion that fitness must be evaluated against a long-term goal. If so, you’re wrong. In life, as well as in many virtual environments, fitness is not forward-looking at all. Perhaps organisms need only be better than their cousins at something in order to reproduce, and that “something” may even change over time.

It is a good try, R0b, but you cannot expect Clive to read that far into The Blind Watchmaker and understand there is no long term evolutionary target, when he seems to lack the ability to get past Genesis 1:27.

--------------
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!)

oldmanintheskydidntdoit

Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,11:13

Joseph:

Quote

1- Dawkins uses the weasel program to illustrate cumulative selection

2- Cumulative means to increase by succesive additions

3- Dawkins used cumulative selection to show that once something is found you don’t have to keep searching for it- you have it. You don’t keep searching for something you already have.

4- Dembski/ Marks used the words “partitioned search” and “ratcheting”.

5- In a partioned search once you have something needed you don’t need to search for it any more/

6- Ratchet means to move in degrees in one direction only.

So the bottom line is anyone familiar with the English language can see that Dembski and Marks were not wrong and their reference to TBW supports their claim.

Aww how sweet. He's almost trying to be scientific about it.

Quote

Any targeted search is evidence for ID as non-telic processes to not have a target in mind.

Finally, evidence for ID! Submit your "evidence" to a journal Joseph!

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

oldmanintheskydidntdoit

Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,11:19

Joseph asks:

Quote

And please tell me how “cumulative elevation gain” is of any relevance to the weasel program?

Chortle.

Joseph also kicks back on Weasel. It seems to me he's using Weasel words himself now

Quote

Given realsitic numbers Dawkins’ weasel will never show a reversal.

Never.

Now the modifier is "realistic numbers". Odd how Dawkins' own numbers were somehow not suitable.

Quote

IOW for all intents and purposes it is latched in place.

Except when it changes.

Then again

Quote

If reaslistic numbers are used there will never be a reversal.

Never? What are these realistic numbers Joseph? Can you get specific?
He then engages the Weasel words again

Quote

Dawkins whole point about cumulative selection was that once it is found the search for it is over.

That is the big difference between that and a random search.

Now it's suddenly about the difference between Weasel and a random search when a moment ago it was about latching.

Way to poorly attempt to misdirect Joseph. Keep up the sub-par work, it's vastly amusing watching you thrash about.

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

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,11:25

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Aug. 22 2009,11:13)

Joseph:

Quote

1- Dawkins uses the weasel program to illustrate cumulative selection

2- Cumulative means to increase by succesive additions

3- Dawkins used cumulative selection to show that once something is found you don’t have to keep searching for it- you have it. You don’t keep searching for something you already have.

4- Dembski/ Marks used the words “partitioned search” and “ratcheting”.

5- In a partioned search once you have something needed you don’t need to search for it any more/

6- Ratchet means to move in degrees in one direction only.

So the bottom line is anyone familiar with the English language can see that Dembski and Marks were not wrong and their reference to TBW supports their claim.

Aww how sweet. He's almost trying to be scientific about it.

The Evil Darwinian Conspiracy™ has implanted a microscopic camera inside Joseph's head.

What we capture moments ago.

--------------
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!)

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,12:02

Quote (carlsonjok @ Aug. 22 2009,19:25)

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Aug. 22 2009,11:13)

Joseph:

Quote

1- Dawkins uses the weasel program to illustrate cumulative selection

2- Cumulative means to increase by succesive additions

3- Dawkins used cumulative selection to show that once something is found you don’t have to keep searching for it- you have it. You don’t keep searching for something you already have.

4- Dembski/ Marks used the words “partitioned search” and “ratcheting”.

5- In a partioned search once you have something needed you don’t need to search for it any more/

6- Ratchet means to move in degrees in one direction only.

So the bottom line is anyone familiar with the English language can see that Dembski and Marks were not wrong and their reference to TBW supports their claim.

Aww how sweet. He's almost trying to be scientific about it.

The Evil Darwinian Conspiracy™ has implanted a microscopic camera inside Joseph's head.

What we capture moments ago.

Now that Marks (1333 gold club member) and Dembski (L333 paid subscribtion) have publicly outed themselves as Dawkins fans in a semi respectable trade rag with the rest of the bus singing- "Dawkins, Dawkins, Dawkins what's he saying? We don't know."

What's the next scene.....k.e.. checks crystal ball

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his ~~clown~~ DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

Lou FCD

Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,13:47

--------------
â€œWhy do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linkyâ€œ. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Henry J

Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:07

Quote

He is so totally void of anything resembling a sense of humor, I would be loath to ask him why the chicken crossed the road for fear of the resulting torrent of Lewontin soaked straw red herrings.

Colonel Sanders missed one?

Henry

Henry J

Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:09

Quote

Bob O'H, posted 8/22/09 3:11 AM
In fairness, Dave pretty much gets it

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 8:48 PM
[...]
The big question is where did the information come from in the first place rather than how it changed form. Inevitably the question leads to cosmology and the fine tuning problem.
[...]

Looks to me like he's regarding "information" as if it were a substance independent of the environment for which it is a description. But as the information is a description of the particular environment (and thus different for every different environment), it doesn't make sense to ask where the information came from.

Henry

Reciprocating Bill

Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:16

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

Re self-esteem – A suicide watch may be needed for the girl who studied all the time, who only scored in the 99th percentile and had hoped for a 100th.

That girl would be a good hire if only she would get over the idea of killing herself.

Any chance Denyse understands what is amusing about this little falsehood?

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

"Hereâ€™s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

Lou FCD

Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:25

Speaking of GrannyTARD,

Quote

Hilarious! I sometimes write curriculum for public education, and can certainly identify with that frosty lady’s frustration.

(my emph.)

omg.

Somebody please tell me that this is just pure bullshit.

ETA: same comment:

Quote

About algebra, I won’t say anything, because math was my worst subject.

srsly? Worse than Language Arts and Science? Are you still learning to count to ten?

Edited by Lou FCD on Aug. 22 2009,15:29

--------------
â€œWhy do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linkyâ€œ. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Lou FCD

Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:36

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Aug. 22 2009,15:16)

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

Re self-esteem – A suicide watch may be needed for the girl who studied all the time, who only scored in the 99th percentile and had hoped for a 100th.

That girl would be a good hire if only she would get over the idea of killing herself.

Any chance Denyse understands what is amusing about this little falsehood?

Same comment, but just before the piece you quoted and after getting all dizzy about half-naked high school girls:

Quote

Gil, and anyone who cares: The school can do little – unless it is a boarding school, where the matron can be held responsible for any such case.

Yes, schools could do far more than they are often doing today – I totally agree. But you would be amazed at the number of edu lobbies that oppose any real reform. Many may get taxpayer funds for the purpose.

(my emph)

um, Granny? What was that you were saying about being worse at math?

ETA: Oh and by the way, Bill? No. None at all.

Edited by Lou FCD on Aug. 22 2009,15:37

--------------
â€œWhy do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linkyâ€œ. ~ Steve Story, Legend

Albatrossity2

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:36

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Aug. 22 2009,14:16)

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

Re self-esteem – A suicide watch may be needed for the girl who studied all the time, who only scored in the 99th percentile and had hoped for a 100th.

That girl would be a good hire if only she would get over the idea of killing herself.

Any chance Denyse understands what is amusing about this little falsehood?

Denyse probably considers herself to be in the 100th percentile of Canadian tard journalists, so that little story would make sense to her.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
- Pattiann Rogers

Bob O'H

Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,14:54

Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 22 2009,14:09)

Quote

Bob O'H, posted 8/22/09 3:11 AM
In fairness, Dave pretty much gets it

Quote

Posted by: Dave Springer | August 21, 2009 8:48 PM
[...]
The big question is where did the information come from in the first place rather than how it changed form. Inevitably the question leads to cosmology and the fine tuning problem.
[...]

Looks to me like he's regarding "information" as if it were a substance independent of the environment for which it is a description. But as the information is a description of the particular environment (and thus different for every different environment), it doesn't make sense to ask where the information came from.

Henry

Well, you can re-interpret the question to be "how did the universe come to be the way it is", which is then the fairly standard origins problem. as such, Dave is just shifting the problem back to cosmological ID. I like this: it gets IDists out of the hair of us biologists.

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,15:07

Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 22 2009,14:54)

as such, Dave is just shifting the problem back to cosmological ID. I like this: it gets IDists out of the hair of us biologists.

I thought that was part of the biologist's social structure?

--------------
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!)

deadman_932

Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,15:08

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Aug. 22 2009,14:16)

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

Re self-esteem – A suicide watch may be needed for the girl who studied all the time, who only scored in the 99th percentile and had hoped for a 100th.

That girl would be a good hire if only she would get over the idea of killing herself.

Any chance Denyse understands what is amusing about this little falsehood?

Ah, but you see,the mind is immaterial. Thus the girl's mind achieved a 100th percentile while her body is in the 100 percent of students that the mind has conclusively been shown superior to. QED, heathen materialist-worshipper.

P.S. : It seems kind of weird that one can accurately "interpret" Scooter & the tardation of Densey (or others of the Uncommonly Dense "kind" ).

I'd be really creeped out if this ~~hobby~~ sport? (tard-baiting?) wasn't so consistently amusing

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

J-Dog

Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,16:43

Quote (deadman_932 @ Aug. 22 2009,15:08)

I'd be really creeped out if this ~~hobby~~ sport? (tard-baiting?) wasn't so consistently amusing

Not to worry...

IMO it's not a hobby or sport, it's science, and we do it for the sake of knowlege. We do it for teh sake of humanity, dammit!

Our Tard-Watching is Anthropology in its most pure form. We are all like Little Margaret Meads, immersed in a very strange culture, living with the natives of Tard-Ola and trying to make sense of their wierd rituals.

After I publish, with all regulars listed as authors, be ready to book your flights to Stockholm.

Which will be immediately after Paul Nelson gets back to us with answers to our questions, and after Ben Stein apologizes for being a dishonest shill, and after Dembski sends us all that single-malt bottle of scotch.

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

khan

Posts: 1554
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,16:49

Quote (J-Dog @ Aug. 22 2009,17:43)

Quote (deadman_932 @ Aug. 22 2009,15:08)

I'd be really creeped out if this ~~hobby~~ sport? (tard-baiting?) wasn't so consistently amusing

Not to worry...

IMO it's not a hobby or sport, it's science, and we do it for the sake of knowlege. We do it for teh sake of humanity, dammit!

Our Tard-Watching is Anthropology in its most pure form. We are all like Little Margaret Meads, immersed in a very strange culture, living with the natives of Tard-Ola and trying to make sense of their wierd rituals.

After I publish, with all regulars listed as authors, be ready to book your flights to Stockholm.

Which will be immediately after Paul Nelson gets back to us with answers to our questions, and after Ben Stein apologizes for being a dishonest shill, and after Dembski sends us all that single-malt bottle of scotch.

I must confess, I do feel like any anthropologist observing the aliens.

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

someotherguy

Posts: 398
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,16:59

Quote (khan @ Aug. 22 2009,16:49)

Quote (J-Dog @ Aug. 22 2009,17:43)

Quote (deadman_932 @ Aug. 22 2009,15:08)

I'd be really creeped out if this ~~hobby~~ sport? (tard-baiting?) wasn't so consistently amusing

Not to worry...

IMO it's not a hobby or sport, it's science, and we do it for the sake of knowlege. We do it for teh sake of humanity, dammit!

Our Tard-Watching is Anthropology in its most pure form. We are all like Little Margaret Meads, immersed in a very strange culture, living with the natives of Tard-Ola and trying to make sense of their wierd rituals.

After I publish, with all regulars listed as authors, be ready to book your flights to Stockholm.

Which will be immediately after Paul Nelson gets back to us with answers to our questions, and after Ben Stein apologizes for being a dishonest shill, and after Dembski sends us all that single-malt bottle of scotch.

I must confess, I do feel like any anthropologist observing the aliens.

I don't recall Margaret Mead mocking the natives quite so much. Her loss. :D

--------------
Evolander in training

oldmanintheskydidntdoit

Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,19:26

Gil

Quote

Clay occurs naturally. Bricks are made from clay. Some houses are made from bricks. Therefore, houses made of bricks can spontaneously emerge from clay.

This is a quintessentially stupid idea, but it is the basic Darwinian argument, and it’s just unimaginably naive in light of what is known about information in living systems.

Gil is unimaginably something too.

Quote

This is not hard, folks. Complex information and information-processing systems don’t just self-generate by random processes. Random processes degrade information, and the more time allowed, the more degradation produced.

Gil, if you believe it, prove it. If it's that easy, don't just say it.

Oh, that's right...

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

Henry J

Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

Posted: Aug. 22 2009,19:55

Quote

This is not hard, folks. Complex information and information-processing systems don?t just self-generate by random processes. Random processes degrade information, and the more time allowed, the more degradation produced.

But he's talking about a process that's entirely random. Mutations and genetic drift are random; selection effects aren't.

One can't refute something by deliberately ignoring half of it.

And in other news...

Henry

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007