RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 828 829 830 831 832 [833] 834 835 836 837 838 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Kristine



Posts: 3061
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 02 2008,17:18   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 02 2008,15:56)
Idiotnet.com.au:
Quote
Do personal beliefs change behavior?
idnet.com.au

Do our beliefs about free will change our behavior? It seems they do. Here researches primed some subjects to believe that our behavior is wholy determined by environment and genes, and that free will is a myth. (This is a theme of Dawkins who says that punishing a criminal is like kicking your car when it breaks down) Those subjects acted less ethically than those not primed. Beliefs influence behavior.

What would a similar experiment show if the belief challenged was that there is Design behind the universe and life? Do people act the same after reading and believing “The God Delusion”?

None of this addresses the actual truth of the belief, just whether believing it changes behavior. Fascinating!

Pssst. Dude. The experimental demonstration that simple priming - which occurs and remains OUTSIDE of the one's awareness - governs to a significant degree one's subsequent ethical choices is NOT good news for advocacy of free, rational agency.

Better keep that one under your hat.

What? People like Dawkins act less ethically than charlatans who try to manipulate gullible people for their own increasingly meaningless purpose? And then ban whoever is interested enough to show up and comment at this point because they're turning into an inbred bunch of snake handlers?

Apparently, if these jokers think they're right no matter what they do, because they have "the truth," they can do just about anything, including deleting their own posts and commenter's comments. Then they can accuse "Darwinists" of doing the very thing that they are guilty of, and act like whatever the hell it is that they're going to produce as "evidence" to kill "Darwinism" or whatever is going to go down in history with them rather than their sorry behavior over the years.

Unbelieveable! :D So this is how a "movement" dies. Thanks for the circus, UDudes.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 02 2008,17:53   

Quote (steve_h @ Feb. 02 2008,17:12)
Bannination
Quote
Q

applying the claim that intelligent agency must precede intelligent living agency

Nowhere in the definition does it say this. No more warnings. Adios.
 
Sigh. I've always been rather fond of the letter Q.

Of course, this means that Uncommon Descent is no longer equipped with the prerequisites of scientific inquiry.

--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 02 2008,20:30   

Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 02 2008,23:53)
Sigh. I've always been rather fond of the letter Q.

Of course, this means that Uncommon Descent is no longer equipped with the prerequisites of scientific inquiry.

larrynormanfan on the other hand, manages to scrape by uite well without it.
edit: for the time being.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10758
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 02 2008,22:00   

Quote (steve_h @ Feb. 02 2008,20:30)
Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 02 2008,23:53)
Sigh. I've always been rather fond of the letter Q.

Of course, this means that Uncommon Descent is no longer equipped with the prerequisites of scientific inquiry.

larrynormanfan on the other hand, manages to scrape by uite well without it.
edit: for the time being.

Arf!

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

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2153
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,01:45   

This ID challenge is great.  Whether deliberate or not, Musgrave has set up a huge trap, and they're all walking straight into it, claiming the reason you can't see the ball is because they've hit it over the pavilion.  And not given a dolly to short fine leg.

Even DaveScot is taking part:  
Quote
Imagine asking a criminal investigator to determine whether someone who died in a fall from a tall building was accident or homicide by looking at nothing but the hat the person was wearing when he fell. This is what Ian is asking us to do.

I think that's a pretty good description of what the Explanatory Filter tries to do.

Bob

--------------
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)

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,06:58   

Does DaveScot say more them he means to?
Quote
How can we say whether or not random mutation and natural selection was sufficient to produce the end state when we don’t know what the start state was?

He continues digging
Quote
And no, we don’t need to know anything at all about the intelligent designer. All we need to know is what is reasonably possible absent a designer.

Huh? He explains...
Quote
If the change we observe goes beyond what we believe is reasonably possible without a designer then we make a design inference.

Ahh, it's all clear now. So, was that an example of the explanatory filter then?
Of course the legendary DS ego makes it's inevitable appearance
Quote
Is this rocket science or something so complex that it just goes over the heads of Darwin’s faithful so I might as well be trying to teach a hamster how to balance a checkbook as describe how to make a design inference to an ebola boy?

It’s very frustrating because this is just straightforward, simple problem solving to me.

Simple problem solving? Then please do demonstrate. Give us a worked example!

So Davescot, I know you read this thread.

Please demonstrate the design inference for me. In the same message you say
Quote
Of course we’ll have to make more estimations of the probabilistic resources such as how long the period of time rm+ns had to work, how many potential replications (opportunities to produce change), and the mutation rate of the organism.

We could get all that, or at least a close enough approximation, just by knowing the species from which the sequence came. In the real world we would know the species we were dealing with.

So, pick an organism/sequence that has the documentation you desire and attempt the "design inference" please.

Tard

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

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2153
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,07:20   

Oh, this is hilarious (read: Dave, you need to leap into action to stop it!).  The
DO personal beliefs change behavior thread descended into a theological.
Quote
4

larrynormanfan

02/02/2008

10:58 pm

I wonder if the same results would have occurred if the subjects had been given a Christian treatise against free will (such as Martin Luther’s The Bondage of the Will).

5

Mapou

02/02/2008

11:45 pm

larrynormanfan wrote: I wonder if the same results would have occurred if the subjects had been given a Christian treatise against free will (such as Martin Luther’s The Bondage of the Will).

I take this as a not so subtle attack against Christianity. You are apparently aiming to discredit the Christian faith by pointing out its inconsistencies and conflicts. But so what if Christianity is inconsistent and filled with conflicts? Do you have something else in mind for Christians to fall back on? Is science (the atheistic kind) somehow free from inconsistencies and conflicts?

Christians worship Jesus Christ and his Father. That’s it. We honor and admire but we don’t worship human beings (Martin Luther included) regardless of their apparent greatness. At any rate, debates and arguments on free will are notoriously fuzzy. It is highly likely that you are misinterpreting Luther’s original intent.

6

larrynormanfan

02/02/2008

11:55 pm

Mapou, I’m a Christian, so no, it’s not an attack against Christianity. It’s an attack against an idiotic study that proves nothing and makes unwarranted assumptions. And as it happens, I agree with Luther on the whole. I read The Bondage of the Will over twenty years ago and have never forgotten it.


...


8

Mapou

02/03/2008

12:06 am

larrynormanfan wrote: Mapou, I’m a Christian, so no, it’s not an attack against Christianity.

My apologies.

9

Gerry Rzeppa

02/03/2008

12:46 am

“Christians worship Jesus Christ and his Father. That’s it.” - Mapou

“…And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.” - Nicene Creed

10

Mapou

02/03/2008

3:17 am

Gerry, thanks for that quote. Even though I’m Christian, I don’t have much knowledge or understanding about the nature and function of the Holy Spirit. I just assume it to be a part of the Godhead. There is no doubt in my mind, however, that the Father and the Son are like the right and left hemispheres of the God’s brain respectively. I find it easier to identify with this metaphor.


What's the going rate for apostasy these days?

--------------
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)

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,08:26   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 02 2008,22:00)
   
Quote (steve_h @ Feb. 02 2008,20:30)
   
Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 02 2008,23:53)
Sigh. I've always been rather fond of the letter Q.

Of course, this means that Uncommon Descent is no longer equipped with the prerequisites of scientific inquiry.

larrynormanfan on the other hand, manages to scrape by uite well without it.
edit: for the time being.

Arf!

More tributes to the letter Q pour in.

Quote
larrynormanfan: I can’t see how intelligence is not reuired for life or how this interpretation (while perhaps uestionable) reuires a banning.

(Sorry about the spelling. I’m trying to write without the banned letter.)

Bob O'H: larrynormanfan - it may only be the capital ” that’s banned.

Bob O'H: Oh dear, obviously all ’s are banned.

Heh.

Elsewhere, DaveScot explains some technical ID terminology.

Quote
larrynormanfan: “ebola boy”? Can I ask for clarification? I don’t understand what that term is supposed to mean or imply.

DaveScot: larry

“Ebola boy” is short for “Church Burnin’ Ebola Boy” which is an affectionate name I gave to a group of my antangonists who congregate on an ancillary message board attached to the blog “Panda’s Thumb”. I liked it, they liked it, so it’s all in good sport.


--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,09:11   

Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 03 2008,14:26)
DaveScot: larry

“Ebola boy” is short for “Church Burnin’ Ebola Boy” which is an affectionate name I gave to a group of my antangonists who congregate on an ancillary message board attached to the blog “Panda’s Thumb”. I liked it, they liked it, so it’s all in good sport.

and here's the post where Dave Scot affectionately first accuses the Pandas Thumb of hate speech and encouraging violent acts.

  
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,09:43   

Magnan is channeling Alan Sokal:
Quote
The phenomena of parapsychology are strong evidence that at least human minds are able to regularly transcend the physical brain and at least apparently act as mobile centers of consciousness. Quantum theories of conscioiusness are some of the most advanced today and posit an immaterial conscious mind biasing the collapse of state vectors of quantum phenomena in the brain in order to manipulate brain activity (firing of synaptic junctions).


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

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,10:16   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 03 2008,06:58)
Does DaveScot say more them he means to?
   
Quote
How can we say whether or not random mutation and natural selection was sufficient to produce the end state when we don’t know what the start state was?


Should somebody tell DaveScot that the reason that evolution is scientific is that we can get a reasonable idea of what the start point was?  For example, the last common ancestor of chimps and humans would have the same genetic makeup as that which humans and chimps have in common, is a huge start.  Then perhaps a really clever person could make a tree diagram using various levels of ancestor - descendant relationships.  It is a pity that it can't be done, or else a genius like Dave Scot would have done it. :)

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

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2709
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,11:28   

It's always fun to watch a recreation of a classic comedy bit.

The Black Knight



BLACK KNIGHT: None shall pass.
ARTHUR: I have no quarrel with you, good Sir Knight, but I must cross this bridge.
BLACK KNIGHT: Then you shall die.
ARTHUR: I command you, as King of the Britons, to stand aside!
BLACK KNIGHT: I move for no man.
ARTHUR: So be it!


Quote
Testability

Details Of Nuclear Pore Complex With Spin

DLH: ID hypothesis on the same data:

1) Nuclear pores are essential to DNA function and duplication.

hrun0815: DLH, how are nuclear pores essential to DNA function and duplication if there are countless organisms that get by without a nucleus in the first place?


ARTHUR and BLACK KNIGHT: Aaah!, hiyaah!, etc.
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's left arm off]



ARTHUR: Now stand aside, worthy adversary.


Quote
DLH: Good observation. That demonstrates that an ID hypothesis can be tested and thus be part of the scientific process.


BLACK KNIGHT: 'Tis but a scratch.
ARTHUR: A scratch? Your arm's off!
BLACK KNIGHT: No, it isn't.
ARTHUR: Well, what's that, then?
BLACK KNIGHT: I've had worse.


Quote
Hypothesis

DLH: Now lets proceed with the ID process of reverse engineering from a teleological perspective...

In which case hypothesis 1) would be refined to:
1) Nuclear pores regulate material flows that are important to the accuracy of DNA replication and/or expression. Look forward to what data you can provide to refine this.

hrun0815: Again, why is that the ‘teleological perspective’? I don’t understand. I would think that every biologist agrees that since DNA is sequestered into a nucleus that there is a reason for this.

hrun0815: Sorry, you don’t understand the article correctly. I would urge you to actually read the two nature articles.


[clang]
Huyah!
[clang]
Hiyaah!
[clang]
Aaaaaaaah!
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right arm off]



ARTHUR: Victory is mine!
[kneeling]
We thank Thee Lord, that in Thy mer--
BLACK KNIGHT: Hah!
[kick]
Come on, then.
ARTHUR: What?
BLACK KNIGHT: Have at you!
[kick]




Quote
Conspiracy

Michaels7: And a claim of historic evolutionary process is bogus additions due to the Nick Matzke brow beating of all scientist to add qualifiers in every research paper.

idnet.com.au: When researchers do amazing things and discover wonderful designs in cells, they feel compelled to bow their knee to the great Evolutionary Designer. If they do not science, and their grants, will be threatened and people may bow and worship at the feet of the Other God.

hrun0815: I bet you’d be surprised at how few researchers have even heard of Nick Matzke... Do you think they invested years of research and writing because of Nick Matzke’s marching orders?

{Ouch! Nick was an et al. in the discovery of the famous intermediate species “cdesign proponentsists”. That's got to count for something!}

hrun0815: It’s surprising that you are not willing to give the researchers who performed this incredibly complex study more credit. They are smart enough to figure out the composition, structure and function of the NPC, but are unaware that they have been performing the study from a teleological point of view?


ARTHUR: Eh. You are indeed brave, Sir Knight, but the fight is mine.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh, had enough, eh?
ARTHUR: Look, you stupid bastard. You've got no arms left.
BLACK KNIGHT: Yes, I have.
ARTHUR: Look!
BLACK KNIGHT: Just a flesh wound.
[kick]


Quote
Sciencey

DLH: Regarding DNA and NPCs, the next step could be to explore what requirements there are for regulating Na, K, & Ca ions within the nucleus, and/or buffering the nucleus from such changes within the cytoplasm, as needed for DNA replication, expression, cell division etc.

hrun0815: DLH, this is really a little shocking to me. I can only conclude that you still have not found the time to study a single paper on the nuclear pore complex.

The nuclear pore complex is freely permeable to proteins of the size of roughly 30kd. Thus, ions, which are many of orders of magnitudes smaller than such proteins diffuse freely through the numerous pores.


ARTHUR: Look, I'll have your leg.
[kick]
Right!
[whop]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's right leg off]




Quote
Irreducible Complexity

DLH: If NPC is irreducibly complex, then removal of any gene/protein causes failure, and mutations probably cause reduced function or loss of function.

hrun0815: DLH, again, it’s rather surprising that you make the assertion/hypothesis that the NPC is irreducibly complex without really looking into any of this. You can, in fact, remove a surprisingly large chunk of Nups or even some Nups in combination without a loss of function of the NPC. I suggest to at least read one of the reviews on the NPC.

DLH: Retaining function after deleting a large portion of Nups shows high robustness - an important design function.

hrun0815: So retaining function after deleting a large portion would be an important design function and loss of function after deletion of any component would also be an important ‘design function’ (indicating irreducible complexity).

DLH: One way to test this is what happens when ALL of the Nups are deleted? Is ALL functionality still present?

hrun0815: Again, DLH, I can only assume that you STILL have not read a single paper in the NPC. If you delete ALL Nups then there will be no NPC, thus there will be no function. What does that show?

DLH: You just made my point. The full functionality must also be considered when addressing irreducible complexity and robustness.

hrun0815: DLH, I honestly do not understand how I made your point. You proposed to remove THE COMPLETE NPC and then test if ALL functionality of the NPC is still retained. If that is your measure then everything that has a function is irreducibly complex. If you remove it, it’s function is lost.


BLACK KNIGHT: Right. I'll do you for that!
ARTHUR: You'll what?
BLACK KNIGHT: Come here!
ARTHUR: What are you going to do, bleed on me?
BLACK KNIGHT: I'm invincible!
ARTHUR: You're a looney.
BLACK KNIGHT: The Black Knight always triumphs! Have at you! Come on, then.


Quote
RM & NS

DLH: My understanding of Random Mutation and Natural Selection (RM & NS) is that it has no goal or purpose. It is only evaluated based on effective reproductive capability.

hrun0815: Exactly. And that’s why researchers continually study the function of complex structures within cells to see how they impact efficient growth, survival and reproduction.

DLH: That appears to be working from an implicit teological view even though it is frequently stated as an evolutionary point of view.

hrun0815: How do you figure? So the non-teleological asserts that there are numerous complex structures within cells that serve no function towards survival and reproduction? You just previously stated the opposite, namely that everything in evolution is selected for efficient reproduction.


[whop]
[ARTHUR chops the BLACK KNIGHT's last leg off]



Quote
Yo Mama!

hrun0815: I can only assume that you STILL have not read a single paper in the NPC.

DLH: This is an ad hominem attack. Please desist.


BLACK KNIGHT: Oh? All right, we'll call it a draw.
ARTHUR: Come, Patsy.
BLACK KNIGHT: Oh. Oh, I see. Running away, eh? You yellow bastards! Come back here and take what's coming to you. I'll bite your legs off!



YouTube


--------------
Proudly banned three four five times by Uncommon Descent.
There is only one Tard. The Tard is One.

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 2153
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,11:45   

I think Zachriel has Post of the Week for this week sewn up, then.

I'll only add that Hrun is the name of the barbarian in The Colour of Magic.  This is the English version of the Pratchett book some of you may have read that was translated as The Color of Magic.

Bob

--------------
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)

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10758
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,11:54   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 03 2008,11:45)
I think Zachriel has Post of the Week for this week sewn up, then.

I'll only add that Hrun is the name of the barbarian in The Colour of Magic.  This is the English version of the Pratchett book some of you may have read that was translated as The Color of Magic.

Bob

YES BOB!!!1111 STICK IT TWO THE COLONIALS!!!

YOU GET MY.

PPOST OF TEH WEAK

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10758
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,12:43   

This is fantastic - from an genius, but anonymous contributor:





Sir / Madame, I salute you, and doff my Tardcap.

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

  
mongo



Posts: 1
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,12:46   

Quote
DLH: If NPC is irreducibly complex, then removal of any gene/protein causes failure, and mutations probably cause reduced function or loss of function.

hrun0815: DLH, again, it’s rather surprising that you make the assertion/hypothesis that the NPC is irreducibly complex without really looking into any of this. You can, in fact, remove a surprisingly large chunk of Nups or even some Nups in combination without a loss of function of the NPC. I suggest to at least read one of the reviews on the NPC.

DLH: Retaining function after deleting a large portion of Nups shows high robustness - an important design function.


Now that's a hypothesis...any result is a confirmation. I wonder if DLH even paused a moment before crafting that reply.

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,13:28   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 03 2008,12:43)
This is fantastic - from an genius, but anonymous contributor:





Sir / Madame, I salute you, and doff my Tardcap.

Great picture.  Good thing he didn't use Casey Luskin's picture, or else he would get a severe ankle biting!

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

  
Maya



Posts: 702
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,13:40   

StephenB writes (on UD):
Quote
My experience has been that ID critics are given a lot of room to criticize on this blog.

Wow.  Just . . . wow.

  
tsig



Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,14:25   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 01 2008,15:55)
Quote (Mister DNA @ Feb. 01 2008,02:16)
 
Quote (CeilingCat @ Feb. 01 2008,02:04)
The buggers just 404'd the entire debate thread!  Luckily, I saved it:

Excellent work, Ceiling Cat. You ARE watching, apparently...

The other debate thread is still there, but it doesn't have any of the "We just got pwned" comments.

Omniscience is a wonderful thing, but it has a dark side.  For instance, I know exactly what Ann Coulter looks like nude.

For the love of sanity keep that to yourself.

Thanks.

  
jeannot



Posts: 1201
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,14:31   

DLH could be a sock-puppet. He's a bit too stupid.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10758
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,17:25   

Bob O'H. I wants a words with yous:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-168750



Quote

34

DaveScot

02/03/2008

6:08 pm
Bob O’hara has been a valued member of this blog for a long time. He’s a biologist who is quite well informed on the issues and willing to listen to views he doesn’t share. More importantly, as far as scientist critics of ID go, he’s the epitomy of civility. I expect he be treated in a like manner. If I see anyone unduly harrassing him someone will get the boot and it won’t be Bob.

His respect for others here is hypocritical since he goes on other forums to disparage what is being discussed on this blog.

He’d be expelled by his peer group on those other forums if he didn’t is my guess. Very few of them are allowed to be members here because they’re almost all either ignorant or asshats or both


The evil atheist science conspiracy meet tonight to discus your Sternberging.

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

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,18:29   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 03 2008,17:25)
Bob O'H. I wants a words with yous:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-168750



Quote

34

DaveScot

02/03/2008

6:08 pm
Bob O’hara has been a valued member of this blog for a long time. He’s a biologist who is quite well informed on the issues and willing to listen to views he doesn’t share. More importantly, as far as scientist critics of ID go, he’s the epitomy of civility. I expect he be treated in a like manner. If I see anyone unduly harrassing him someone will get the boot and it won’t be Bob.

His respect for others here is hypocritical since he goes on other forums to disparage what is being discussed on this blog.

He’d be expelled by his peer group on those other forums if he didn’t is my guess. Very few of them are allowed to be members here because they’re almost all either ignorant or asshats or both


The evil atheist science conspiracy meet tonight to discus your Sternberging.

Looks like DaveScot has a man-crush on Bob O'.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
Annyday



Posts: 583
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,18:30   

Why even have a meeting? I think the evidence is pretty damning.

DaveScot doesn't want to ban him. QED. Start with the shunning.

--------------
"ALL eight of the "nature" miracles of Jesus could have been accomplished via the electroweak quantum tunneling mechanism. For example, walking on water could be accomplished by directing a neutrino beam created just below Jesus' feet downward." - Frank Tipler, ISCID fellow

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10758
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,18:49   

Quote (Hermagoras @ Feb. 03 2008,18:29)
Looks like DaveScot has a man-crush on Bob O'.

Bob who?  I know no Bob O'.


*Crosses arms and turns back*

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

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,19:20   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 03 2008,18:49)
Quote (Hermagoras @ Feb. 03 2008,18:29)
Looks like DaveScot has a man-crush on Bob O'.

Bob who?  I know no Bob O'.


*Crosses arms and turns back*

Don't be mad at Bob.  Now he has to deal with the stubble-burn on his ass.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
Mister DNA



Posts: 466
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 03 2008,21:19   

ERV was right - nobody reads Uncommon Descent. My blog's dashboard notes the incoming link from Uncommon Descent, but according to my access logs, it's business as usual.

Denyse gave me and another blogger (Canadian Cynic) a nice little plug:
 
Quote
Second, I was surprised by the sheer, gratuitous and usually profane hatred of anyone who thinks that the case for (or against) design can be argued in a civilized manner. If you need evidence, go here, here, and here. This is the confidence of the dockside bully, not the confidence of the person who has a solution in his jacket pocket.


--------------
CBEB's: The Church Burnin' Ebola Blog
Thank you, Dr. Dembski. You are without peer when it comes to The Argument Regarding Design. - vesf

    
Bob O'H



Posts: 2153
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 04 2008,02:57   

Quote
Don't be mad at Bob.  Now he has to deal with the stubble-burn on his ass.

Please.  That's one image I didn't
want associated with me.

Anon.

--------------
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)

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 04 2008,03:31   

More of Denyse's trenchant analysis:
Quote
Seven years ago, when I Googled “intelligent design”, I would get some thousands of entries, which included ergonomic desks and such. Now there are over 5.5 million entries. That is partly the growth of the Internet, but surely not all.

So, obviously, the ID guys must have something going for them.


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

  
Advocatus Diaboli



Posts: 198
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 04 2008,03:56   

Quote (keiths @ Feb. 04 2008,03:31)
More of Denyse's trenchant analysis:
Quote
Seven years ago, when I Googled “intelligent design”, I would get some thousands of entries, which included ergonomic desks and such. Now there are over 5.5 million entries. That is partly the growth of the Internet, but surely not all.

So, obviously, the ID guys must have something going for them.

Well, she's correct. Now ID has dozens of anti-ID blogs for each pro-ID blog.

--------------
I once thought that I made a mistake, but I was wrong.

"I freely admit I’m a sociopath" - DaveScot

"Most importanly, the facts are on the side of ID." - scordova

"UD is the greatest website of all time." stevestory

   
Occam's Toothbrush



Posts: 555
Joined: April 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 04 2008,06:12   

Quote (Advocatus Diaboli @ Feb. 04 2008,04:56)
 
Quote (keiths @ Feb. 04 2008,03:31)
More of Denyse's trenchant analysis:
   
Quote
Seven years ago, when I Googled “intelligent design”, I would get some thousands of entries, which included ergonomic desks and such. Now there are over 5.5 million entries. That is partly the growth of the Internet, but surely not all.

So, obviously, the ID guys must have something going for them.

Well, she's correct. Now ID has dozens of anti-ID blogs for each pro-ID blog.

Uncommon Descent:  We delete more comments before 9 AM than most anti-ID sites get all day.

--------------
"Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers
------
"You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < ... 828 829 830 831 832 [833] 834 835 836 837 838 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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