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... > Joe G.'s Tardgasm

Pages: (919) < ... 262 263 264 265 266 [267] 268 269 270 271 272 ... >

The whole truth Posts: 1554 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,11:16    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,07:46) Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 22 2014,09:39) So humans aren't material... dang, who knew? What are we Joey? If not material things? Question, is your designer just really long lived (more than the age of the universe) or is it a group? ... are the Illuminati the designers? And you would think that "Darwinian evolution" means "Darwinian evolution", but then I remembered you think that if it happens in a lab, that the results were designed. Sorry, I forgot how you cling to ridiculous beliefs that make no sense. And Tiktaalik was in response to your second question. It was a prediction. But thanks for showing your intellectual dishonesty by moving the goal posts... again. Again with the ignorance. Information is not material- real information not the type you believe in. Our thoughts and concepts are not material. Intelligent Design is not about the designer. Yes you would think Darwinian evolution meant Darwinian evolution. But to those of us who know what Darwinian evolution entails Darwinian evolution on a chip doesn't cut it. And no I do NOT think that because just because it happens in a lab it is designed. You are just an ignorant asshole, as I have been saying. All you do is fight strawmen and then turn around and wrongly accuse me of doing that. And Tiktaalik was NOT a prediction of NDE. My claim pertained to NDE. You are the most dishonest or ignorant fuck there is. joey, define NDE. Shubin didn't find Tiktaalik by using ID 'theory' (aka 'God-did-it'). He used a combination of biological evolutionary theory, geology, paleontology, etc. "Intelligent Design is not about the designer." Actually it is about the alleged designer-creator-god but you god pushing IDiot-creationists are too dishonest to admit it. ETA: a few more words to my last sentence. Edited by The whole truth on Oct. 22 2014,09:32 -------------- 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

rossum Posts: 289 Joined: Dec. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,13:15    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:49) Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'. The different lines of bacteria developed immunity to the bacteriophage at different times, i.e. randomly.  Some lines developed it early, some developed it later and some didn't develop it at all.  The mutations did not occur in response to future need and happened at random times. Quote And in what way is NDE science? It doesn't make any predictions based on the mechanisms and it is untestable. NDE predicts that we will not find a rabbit in Cambrian rocks.  NDE predicted that we would find the ancestor of amphibians in rocks that are older than the first amphibians.  Tiktaalik is the result. -------------- The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,13:25    Quote (rossum @ Oct. 22 2014,11:15) Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:49) Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'. The different lines of bacteria developed immunity to the bacteriophage at different times, i.e. randomly.  Some lines developed it early, some developed it later and some didn't develop it at all.  The mutations did not occur in response to future need and happened at random times. That's not what he's asking, rossum.  He wants us to prove that God, acting in mysterious ways his wonders to perform, didn't create the history of mutations in a manner indistinguishable from randomness.  God can do whatever the hell he likes, and he's sneaky that way. So we'd probably need to separate the strains into two right at the start, and put a big sign above one group saying "Dear God: Please act, in mysterious ways your wonders to perform, non-randomly over here." -------------- 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

Quack Posts: 1961 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,02:15    There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. -------------- Rocks have no biology.               Robert Byers.

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,03:12    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:48) Quote (Driver @ Oct. 21 2014,05:19) Fishy bite. Heh. I like the claim about moving the sun making it act like a black hole. Joe, will you show your calculations proving the "black hole effect" or will you dazzle us with your inspired retorts? Or just run away for a bit? Show me where I made that claim I'm asking for your calculations to show that if the sun were "moved into the space of the orbit of Mars" everything would fall into it. -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Jim_Wynne Posts: 1208 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,08:37    Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. -------------- Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,09:16    Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. Design is not fabrication, it does not provide reificiation. -------------- "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

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,09:25    Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. But Joey's hero... Michael Behe stated, under oath, that there is no mechanism. Quote A Again, it does not propose a mechanism in the sense of a step-by-step description of how those structures arose. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs....m2.html -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,09:28    Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 23 2014,09:25) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. But Joey's hero... Michael Behe stated, under oath, that there is no mechanism. Quote A Again, it does not propose a mechanism in the sense of a step-by-step description of how those structures arose. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs.......m2.html Quote As for your example, I’m not going to take the bait. You’re asking me to play a game: “Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your ID position as I do for my Darwinian position.” ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If ID is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. True, there may be dots to be connected. But there may also be fundamental discontinuities, and with IC systems that is what ID is discovering. - Dembski -------------- "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

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:25    Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. Design is a mechanism. And saying that is just as valid as saying natural selection is a mechanism. That said there are specific design mechanisms such as Dr Spetner's non-random evolutionary hypothesis which posits "built-in responses to environmental cues". There are targeted searches which are utilized in genetic and evolutionary algorithms. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:26    Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 23 2014,09:25) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. But Joey's hero... Michael Behe stated, under oath, that there is no mechanism. Quote A Again, it does not propose a mechanism in the sense of a step-by-step description of how those structures arose. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs.......m2.html Kevin, Behe said ID is not about the specific mechanism. That is because how something was designed always comes after design has been determined. That is how it works with archaeology, forensic science and SETI. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:29    Quote (rossum @ Oct. 22 2014,13:15) Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 22 2014,09:49) Please provide the methodology that determined the changes were differential accumulation of 'genetic accidents'. The different lines of bacteria developed immunity to the bacteriophage at different times, i.e. randomly.  Some lines developed it early, some developed it later and some didn't develop it at all.  The mutations did not occur in response to future need and happened at random times.   Quote And in what way is NDE science? It doesn't make any predictions based on the mechanisms and it is untestable. NDE predicts that we will not find a rabbit in Cambrian rocks.  NDE predicted that we would find the ancestor of amphibians in rocks that are older than the first amphibians.  Tiktaalik is the result. LoL! That has nothing to do with blind and undirected processes, ie accumulations of genetic accidents. Please point to the NDE and the prediction about rabbits. Thanks. Also Tiktaalik was found in strata younger than tetrapod tracks. Meaning tetrapods already existed when Tiktaalik roamed around the swamps. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:30    Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. How comes after. However that proves ID is not a scientific dead-end as we will try to figure out the how just as we do with archaeology and forensics. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:31    Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,09:16) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. Design is not fabrication, it does not provide reificiation. Design includes fabrication as design is a way or means to achieve a result. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:34    Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,09:28) Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 23 2014,09:25) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37)   Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. But Joey's hero... Michael Behe stated, under oath, that there is no mechanism.   Quote A Again, it does not propose a mechanism in the sense of a step-by-step description of how those structures arose. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs.......m2.html Quote As for your example, I’m not going to take the bait. You’re asking me to play a game: “Provide as much detail in terms of possible causal mechanisms for your ID position as I do for my Darwinian position.” ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. If ID is correct and an intelligence is responsible and indispensable for certain structures, then it makes no sense to try to ape your method of connecting the dots. True, there may be dots to be connected. But there may also be fundamental discontinuities, and with IC systems that is what ID is discovering. - Dembski LoL! How many times does this have to be explained to you, Dick? ID is NOT about the how. ID is about the detection and study of intelligent design. The how, ie the specific mechanism, comes after. And that is how archaeology and forensics does it. OTOH yours is the position that sez it has a mechanism capable of producing living organisms and their diversity. That you are incapable of understanding that just demonstrates how ignorant you are. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:35    Quote (Driver @ Oct. 23 2014,03:12) Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 21 2014,14:48) Quote (Driver @ Oct. 21 2014,05:19) Fishy bite. Heh. I like the claim about moving the sun making it act like a black hole. Joe, will you show your calculations proving the "black hole effect" or will you dazzle us with your inspired retorts? Or just run away for a bit? Show me where I made that claim I'm asking for your calculations to show that if the sun were "moved into the space of the orbit of Mars" everything would fall into it. Show me where I made that claim. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:43    Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 23 2014,15:27) Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,12:35) The whole thread - for your enjoyment - http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196 Utter magnificence from Joe:   Quote 23 Joe October 23, 2014 at 12:29 pm Alan Fox:   Quote Now, I can go to many sources and learn about evolutionary theory. Yet you cannot link to this alleged evolutionary theory. Last you said is we have to read several books and papers and put it together. Science is hard.  Too much reading.  Too much thinking. At least you admit that there isn't any theory of evolution. There can't be if one has to do what Alan suggested. Thank you, JohnW -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,07:44    Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 22 2014,21:03) Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 22 2014,16:37)       Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Oct. 21 2014,23:16)         Quote (sparc @ Oct. 21 2014,21:59) My old login does work again but what is left to say? I always could can use my (already second) sock. Still, I just commented rarely because UD is just boring. What is actually left to discuss? And who is left there to seriously discuss with? The self-contained KF? Video-slingshot Bornagain77 aka chorus-and-verse? Bully Arrington when one cannot really be sure that he is trying to hide that he just fucked up UD's file management? It's a less than subtle ploy to drive the hit count back up.  Even Barry is smart enough to realize UD is a losing proposition with just the IDiots doing their incestual circle jerk all the time. I say fuck 'em, let UD starve. Ya know - It's tough to play Devil's Advocate when you don't believe in all that crap, so with apologies to Voltaire, if UD did not exist - we would be forced to tardvent it.   Fixed that for you. Even the absurdly long URLs are shorter (though sometimes, the posts seem wider). UD has become a yaaaawwwwnnnfest. Wouldn't it be funny if it died before the date that Dembski predicted evolution would? Remember that one? :) ("I therefore foresee a Taliban-style collapse of Darwinism in the next ten years. Intelligent design will of course profit greatly from this." - Measure of Design: A Conversation About the Past, Present & Future of Darwinism & Design, [i]Touchstone, volume 17, issue 6, pages 60-65, at page 64 (July/August 2004).) Heck, that's two years before the 10-year countdown I started at my old blog! Evolutionism is dead. It just hasn't rolled over yet. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:20    It's amazing. Joe has totally failed to learn a single thing in more than three years. 1) Forensics, SETI, and the rest are looking for things that have known designers or things that cannot exist in nature. ID specifically doesn't know anything about their 'designer' and only considers things that DO have a plausible natural source. 2) Tiktaalik is transitional. The definition of transitional doesn't have a time requirement and you know it. But you can't admit it, because then your argument is dead. It's not like you've never heard this before. But you can't accept being wrong. Joe is never wrong. As long as you keep that delusion, then all you will ever be is a joke. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:24    Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 24 2014,08:20) It's amazing. Joe has totally failed to learn a single thing in more than three years. 1) Forensics, SETI, and the rest are looking for things that have known designers or things that cannot exist in nature. ID specifically doesn't know anything about their 'designer' and only considers things that DO have a plausible natural source. 2) Tiktaalik is transitional. The definition of transitional doesn't have a time requirement and you know it. But you can't admit it, because then your argument is dead. It's not like you've never heard this before. But you can't accept being wrong. Joe is never wrong. As long as you keep that delusion, then all you will ever be is a joke. LoL! Everything in archaeology exists in nature, dumbass. The same goes for forensics. ID is NOT about the designer. Tiktaalik just looks like a transitional form to you. You are one ignorant fuck, Kevin. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:26    Quote Forensics, SETI, and the rest are looking for things that have known designers or things that cannot exist in nature. That is incorrect. Archaeology and forensics may assume a designer but they actually get to one by studying the design and all relevant evidence. And everything they study exists in nature otherwise they couldn't examine it. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

Joe G Posts: 12011 Joined: July 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:27    Quote (Quack @ Oct. 24 2014,02:00) Wonderful indeed! What now remains for CSI aficionados is to test their pet hypothesis by the calculation of the CSI of any subject of their chosing. Is that too much to ask? Wouldn't that be the proper way of doing it, sciency, like? Doesn't the claim that there are objects of complexity beyond computability imply that there are objects below that limit, and therefore are computable? A demonstration of the computability of CSI therefore is what the world needs right now. The world is waiting for the Sunrise, according to Les Paul and Mary Ford. We have done that. We have told you how to do that and we have referenced a peer-reviewed article that follows the methodology. -------------- "Facts are Stupid"- Timothy Horton aka Occam's Afterbirth "Genetic mutations aren't mistakes"-ID and Timothy Horton Whales do not have tails. Water turns to ice via a molecular code-  Acartia bogart, TARD YEC is more coherent than materialism and it's bastard child, evolutionism

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:41    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 24 2014,15:44) Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 22 2014,21:03) Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 22 2014,16:37)         Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Oct. 21 2014,23:16)         Quote (sparc @ Oct. 21 2014,21:59) My old login does work again but what is left to say? I always could can use my (already second) sock. Still, I just commented rarely because UD is just boring. What is actually left to discuss? And who is left there to seriously discuss with? The self-contained KF? Video-slingshot Bornagain77 aka chorus-and-verse? Bully Arrington when one cannot really be sure that he is trying to hide that he just fucked up UD's file management? It's a less than subtle ploy to drive the hit count back up.  Even Barry is smart enough to realize UD is a losing proposition with just the IDiots doing their incestual circle jerk all the time. I say fuck 'em, let UD starve. Ya know - It's tough to play Devil's Advocate when you don't believe in all that crap, so with apologies to Voltaire, if UD did not exist - we would be forced to tardvent it.   Fixed that for you. Even the absurdly long URLs are shorter (though sometimes, the posts seem wider). UD has become a yaaaawwwwnnnfest. Wouldn't it be funny if it died before the date that Dembski predicted evolution would? Remember that one? :) ("I therefore foresee a Taliban-style collapse of Darwinism in the next ten years. Intelligent design will of course profit greatly from this." - Measure of Design: A Conversation About the Past, Present & Future of Darwinism & Design, [i]Touchstone, volume 17, issue 6, pages 60-65, at page 64 (July/August 2004).) Heck, that's two years before the 10-year countdown I started at my old blog! Evolutionism is dead. It just hasn't rolled over yet. If that were true chumps you wouldn't be over here crying your little ID eyes out. -------------- "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

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:48    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 24 2014,15:25) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. Design is a mechanism. And saying that is just as valid as saying natural selection is a mechanism. That said there are specific design mechanisms such as Dr Spetner's non-random evolutionary hypothesis which posits "built-in responses to environmental cues". There are targeted searches which are utilized in genetic and evolutionary algorithms. Design is a plan nothing more and a mechanism has a process. ID doesn't go into the pathetic level of detail of process. Dr Who? So ID now non random evolution? Why bother? -------------- "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

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,10:20    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 24 2014,08:26) Quote Forensics, SETI, and the rest are looking for things that have known designers or things that cannot exist in nature. That is incorrect. Archaeology and forensics may assume a designer but they actually get to one by studying the design and all relevant evidence. And everything they study exists in nature otherwise they couldn't examine it. Really, so if a murder is committed by a GSW, then we can't assume that a human is responsible? Really? ID Detective Dialogue. "Well ma'am, we've confirmed that your husband was murdered." "That's horrible. Do you have any leads?" "No ma'am, we don't look for murderers, just confirm that they were murdered. Fifteen years of looking at this kind of thing and I've confirmed that every human death has been murder, but I'm not interested in finding the murderer. Have a nice day." -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

The whole truth Posts: 1554 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,10:49    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 24 2014,05:25) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Oct. 23 2014,08:37) Quote (Quack @ Oct. 23 2014,02:15) There is one thing I don't get. Life is made of matter. The designer manipulate matter. That's what design is about - first the design, then manipulation of matter to realize the design as live beings. I only want to know, how is design implemented? Like all designers known to mankind do, that is by a work force manipulating matter with material tools/methods - or by his own mind power alone, i.e. magic? The latter is of course a way of doing thing unknown to human designers so I think it is a reasonable inference to say that Intelligent Design is something pulled from somebody's a$$. Joey doesn't understand the difference between a design and the implementation of a design.  He dismisses requests for identification of mechanisms by asserting that design *is* a mechanism. Design is a mechanism. And saying that is just as valid as saying natural selection is a mechanism. That said there are specific design mechanisms such as Dr Spetner's non-random evolutionary hypothesis which posits "built-in responses to environmental cues". There are targeted searches which are utilized in genetic and evolutionary algorithms. Hey joey, have you seen this entry about your fellow creationist Spetner? http://americanloons.blogspot.com/2014....er.html I'm curious about something else too. When dinosaurs, ammonoids, and lots of other organisms became extinct due to the K-T asteroid impact, was it because of their "built-in responses to environmental cues"? If so, why does the allegedly loving, merciful, omnibenevolent 'designer-creator-god-allah-yhwh-jesus-holy-ghost' design and install the extinction response into some of the organisms that it creates? And joey, no matter how many times you say that design is a mechanism, and that ID isn't a religious and political agenda, and that you IDiots can and have observed and calculated CSI-FSCO/I-dFSCI or whatever you're calling it this week, you're wrong. -------------- 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

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,11:05    Quote (Joe G @ Oct. 24 2014,05:43) Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 23 2014,15:27) Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,12:35) The whole thread - for your enjoyment - http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196 Utter magnificence from Joe:   Quote 23 Joe October 23, 2014 at 12:29 pm Alan Fox:   Quote Now, I can go to many sources and learn about evolutionary theory. Yet you cannot link to this alleged evolutionary theory. Last you said is we have to read several books and papers and put it together. Science is hard.  Too much reading.  Too much thinking. At least you admit that there isn't any theory of evolution. There can't be if one has to do what Alan suggested. Thank you, JohnW So "requiring the reading of books" is a sufficient criterion for rejecting a theory.  I see. At least ID passes muster for Joescience.  "Looks designed to me" doesn't need any of that fancy book-larnin'. -------------- 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

The whole truth Posts: 1554 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,11:24    Hey, joey, you and other IDiot-creationists have been asked these questions many times before and you god pushers either avoid the questions or give answers that are vague, irrelevant, and stupid. However, I'll ask them again just in case you can come up with better answers: For the sake of theses questions, let's assume that 'intelligent design-creation' of the entire universe by 'allah-yhwh-jesus-holy-ghost' has been fully accepted by scientists. Now, what difference would that make in doing science? What avenues of research would it change or open? What new discoveries would be made? What new technology would be invented? How would it benefit humanity or anything else? Be very specific. -------------- 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: Oct. 24 2014,12:43    For your amusement: Quote 293 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:13 am rich, why are you such a liar? Metabolism? Really? Metabolism with RNAs? Really? What an ignorant cupcake you are, rich. The SAME functionality. The new variants could just do it faster. 294 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:15 am Someone come help me stitch my side shut, please. Rich owes me a new keyboard and monitor. 295 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:19 am Joe, write your angry letter to “Nature”: http://www.nature.com/subject....abolism Get an adult to help you with the stamp, address and envelope. ID – so happy he’s one of yours ;) 296 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:24 am Well rich, there still wasn’t any new functionality, even Joyce said that in his interview in SciAm. And it wasn’t self-replication. True, I was unaware they redefined metabolism, but you are still wrong on all the other counts. They could out-compete by using the same function, just faster. Still stands. 297 drc466October 24, 2014 at 11:24 am AF @ 288, 1 – Uncontroversial. Also unhelpful to evolution – proving you can take existing function and mix/match to get new variations on existing functions, doesn’t help you get new functions. 4 – No, I’m satisfied w/ my phrasing. I eagerly wait your disproof. 5 – Rich’s link in 286 will serve. Or any major human innovation in the last 5000 years. 298 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:25 am But Joe – your sides! Your keyboard! 299 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:26 am RNA metabolism refers to any events in the life cycle of ribonucleic acid (RNA) molecules, including their synthesis, folding/unfolding, modification, processing and degradation. Their synthesis was artificial. 300 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:27 am rich, my side and keyboard went after your first post on the subject. 301 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:29 am Strange that everything I am reading on RNA metabolism refers to what goes on onside a cell… 302 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:29 am And it took you until post 294 to register it. Perhaps you need a faster metabolism to be competitive? 303 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:31 am That’s an impressive 4 minutes of reading, Joe (Less commentating time). -------------- "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

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,17:58    Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 24 2014,20:43) For your amusement: Quote 293 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:13 am rich, why are you such a liar? Metabolism? Really? Metabolism with RNAs? Really? What an ignorant cupcake you are, rich. The SAME functionality. The new variants could just do it faster. 294 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:15 am Someone come help me stitch my side shut, please. Rich owes me a new keyboard and monitor. 295 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:19 am Joe, write your angry letter to “Nature”: http://www.nature.com/subject....abolism Get an adult to help you with the stamp, address and envelope. ID – so happy he’s one of yours ;) 296 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:24 am Well rich, there still wasn’t any new functionality, even Joyce said that in his interview in SciAm. And it wasn’t self-replication. True, I was unaware they redefined metabolism, but you are still wrong on all the other counts. They could out-compete by using the same function, just faster. Still stands. 297 drc466October 24, 2014 at 11:24 am AF @ 288, 1 – Uncontroversial. Also unhelpful to evolution – proving you can take existing function and mix/match to get new variations on existing functions, doesn’t help you get new functions. 4 – No, I’m satisfied w/ my phrasing. I eagerly wait your disproof. 5 – Rich’s link in 286 will serve. Or any major human innovation in the last 5000 years. 298 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:25 am But Joe – your sides! Your keyboard! 299 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:26 am RNA metabolism refers to any events in the life cycle of ribonucleic acid (RNA) molecules, including their synthesis, folding/unfolding, modification, processing and degradation. Their synthesis was artificial. 300 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:27 am rich, my side and keyboard went after your first post on the subject. 301 JoeOctober 24, 2014 at 11:29 am Strange that everything I am reading on RNA metabolism refers to what goes on onside a cell… 302 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:29 am And it took you until post 294 to register it. Perhaps you need a faster metabolism to be competitive? 303 richOctober 24, 2014 at 11:31 am That’s an impressive 4 minutes of reading, Joe (Less commentating time). Gee do they let Joe read in between serving fries? -------------- "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

Pages: (919) < ... 262 263 264 265 266 [267] 268 269 270 271 272 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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