RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (501) < ... 122 123 124 125 126 [127] 128 129 130 131 132 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 3, The Beast Marches On...< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,13:43   

jerry is heading for a fall
Quote
“Jerry, can you provide a list of biological artifacts in order of their “biological complexity”?”

I love the way to not answer a question, by asking another question. I am sure that if we posed this as a thread here at UD, we could get an interesting discussion. I am also sure if it was posted it on any biological oriented thread in the world there would be a huge response till they were told to be careful that it may provide fodder for ID. It would include all the ways various species can be complex and be very informative. But as soon as someone is told to be careful, you might be helping the ID people, they will be tongue tied.

Let’s put out an arbitrary order in alphabetical order. We can add or subtract as someone sees fit.

alligator
amoeba
ant
ant eater
archaea
bacteria – Lenski latest
bacteria – Lenski start
bat
beetle
butterfly
chimpanzee
cichlid
eagle
eucaryote
giraffe
horse
human
humming bird
koala
lamprey
lobster
malaria
mustela nivalis
octupus
prokaryote
puffin
rat
shark
shrew
shrimp
snake
spider
sponge
star fish
tasmanian devil

I look forwards to Jerry and Joseph's attempts to order that list by biological complexity, CSI and FSCI.

Link

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11172
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,13:45   

Human most complex because God made him last.

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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,13:50   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Jan. 16 2010,13:43)
jerry is heading for a fall

I wonder if this will turn into one of those moments like when Sal Cordova was going to calculate CSI over at The Sci Phi Show discussion board*.

* Alas, the board has apparently been deleted. Shame, too.

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

  
Freddie



Posts: 371
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,15:07   

Quote
168
h.pesoj
01/16/2010
2:05 pm

Could I be sliently banned please? What’s the hold up? The hammer in for repair?

h.pesoj is on a rampage.  To quote Lister on Rimmer's alter-ego, Ace ... "What a guy!"

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

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2717
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,15:13   

Quote
Timaeus: Darwin had never even seen a cell, except possibly as an obscure dot in a primitive microscope

"Primitive" is a relative term. Darwin was quite aware of cell structure, as has already been pointed out. Leeuwenhoek discovered the cell nucleus in the early 18th century with a ~200x microscope. Darwin's achromatic compound microscope was ~1000x, which was quite sufficient for him to independently confirm that "a cell is complex structure."


Darwin's aquatic microscope


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

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2717
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,15:27   

Quote
Timaeus: Would it be reasonable to say that these early Darwinians asserted far, far more than they could prove about the powers of chance and natural selection?  

No. Darwin proposed a testable and well-supported theory.

Quote
Timaeus: And that their “science” was largely based on hunch and faith that evidence would some day be forthcoming?

No. Darwin marshalled evidence from every corner of biology, including from his historic circumnavigation of the globe. Indeed, even without his Theory of Evolution, Darwin would be considered one of the foremost biologists of his day.

Quote
Timaeus: Is that a model for serious science?

Yes. By proposing and testing hypotheses, science can make progress—even when lacking knowledge of all the particulars.

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

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,20:25   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 16 2010,13:59)
Voice Coil has this response to Timaeus in moderation:

   
Quote
Timaeus:

You write well, but in the end make assertions that either evaporate upon scrutiny or may be seen to be time-worn creationist rhetorical devices.

"Evaporation" characterizes the fate of the thesis you articulate in response to the departed Zachriel, in your several posts above:

Zachriel @ 24:
   
Quote
Intelligent Design is not specific enough to yield clear entailments. Indeed, that’s why Intelligent Design Advocates hardly ever bother with the messy details of biological research.

You prefaced your position that only a cinematically detailed model of evolutionary events will compel your assent with the following:

Timaeus @ 24:
   
Quote
I agree that scientific theories should deal with “messy details”. The difficulty is that neo-Darwinism is not in a position to lecture anyone about this, as it is so barren of messy details itself.

But you subsequently contradict yourself in 72:
   
Quote
ID’s job isn’t to provide detailed pathways, because ID isn’t a historical theory of origins. Neo-Darwinism is a historical theory of origins. It thus commits itself to the explication of detailed pathways. To the extent that it cannot deliver such pathways, it has failed by its own lights.

ID is committed only to showing that living systems have informational properties that cannot be explained by chance and necessity alone, but require the input of intelligence. If it can show this, it has succeeded by its own lights.

Baldly, unequivocally, you here state that only evolutionary biology is subject to your (arbitrary) demand for cinematic levels of detail (and 500 page treatises); intelligent design is a theory that articulates no levels of detail whatsoever, and should not be asked for any "by its own lights." In short, you agree that scientific theories should deal with "messy details," but advocate a viewpoint (that of ID) that does not, and indeed, cannot. I suggest you take the next short step: ID is not, and cannot be, a scientific theory.

Your documentation of several domains in which ID offers no significant empirical entailments is thorough (in 86, above):
   
Quote
Some ID supporters accept macroevolution from molecules to man; others accept only limited macroevolution, mixed in with supplementary miracles; others reject macroevolution entirely. Some ID supporters allow a limited role for Darwinian processes. Some ID supporters are young earth creationists. Some are old earth creationists.

To note that ID is neutral with respect to these hugely significant questions vis the history of life is to note that it offers no entailments and hence is useless as a guide to empirical research relevant to these questions. This is almost precisely the point made by Zachriel: Scientific theories must generate clear entailments that, by modus tollens, specify messy details that are subject to empirical investigation, ultimately providing dispositive tests of those entailments. ID addresses no such details, as you unequivocally state in 72 and document in 86.

Zachriel's observation does honor a distinction that you subsequently blur, resulting in a mischaracterization of what evolutionary biology demands of itself. To revisit his statement:
   
Quote
Intelligent Design is not specific enough to yield clear entailments.

You respond with your hypocritical demand for detailed findings, not clear entailments, a subtle dodge. What current models in evolutionary biology provide that ID does not, and indeed cannot (by your own "lights" above), are testable empirical entailments, entailments that motivate and guide research worldwide. THAT is what an empirical science requires of itself, and by its own lights evolutionary biology meets that demand, as there are huge literatures documenting efforts to articulate and test such entailments. Whether that process will ever culminate in cinematic levels of detail will be a contingent fact, given the reality that such detail is extremely difficult to recover for events that occurred millions or billions of years in the past, and indeed must always reflect inference rather than observation.

Lastly, it is worth noting that you have already in essence stated, in another thread, that there is NO level of detail that can logically compel your embrace of evolutionary biology, and that your demand for such details is therefore disingenuous. In that thread Zachriel cited the well-documented evolution of the mammalian middle ear as an example of a detailed description of the stepwise evolutionary emergence of a complex, and indeed irreducibly complex biological system. Your response was a side-step to the observation that it is logically possible that the homologies from which that stepwise evolutionary event is inferred could have arisen by means of "common design," and therefore state that his response assumes the conclusion that this was in fact an evolutionary emergence. But this response is equivalent to the also logically possible response of "last Thursdayism," one that could be offered even if details with resolution down to the an unbroken succession of specific genetic events and transformations were supplied. Even given that level of detail, you may still maintain that "common design" accounts for the observed homologies, and that assent to evolutionary biology is not "logically compelled."

In short, you aren't really interested in details at all, and your call for cinematic detail is a calculated rhetorical one, only, a time-worn bit of creationist obscurantism.

Like Timaeus' argument, Voice Coil's comment evaporated.

ETA: Voice Coil is no more.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

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

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2717
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2010,21:28   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 16 2010,20:25)
Like Timaeus' argument, Voice Coil's comment evaporated.

ETA: Voice Coil is no more.

It was an excellent comment, on-topic, directly addressed issues in dispute, and had a negligible snark-index. Elsewhere, jerry continues to "make up stuff."

Quote
jerry: Many have implied that people are banned here for asking embarrassing questions they ask on ID. This is nonsense of course.  


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

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,07:30   

Unpleasant Blowhard throws his weight around:
 
Quote
I’m not trying to be overqualified here, but as a person with almost 30 years experience as a Research Director in private enterprise...

The Red Plastic Ball division of Happy Meal free toy R&D?

Don't worry about qualifications-dropping, Blowhard: we don't believe you.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

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

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,07:48   

This won't be up long:



--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

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

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5419
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,09:11   

Yet more bluster, but no ordered list with FCSI/CSI/CFSI (or any combination thereof) calculations, I see.

What's up, Joseph? Can't do it?

Funny that.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,09:51   

Jerry's capacity for stupidity is boundless:
Quote
Is Voice Coil the same person as Reciprocating Bill who kept repeating the same nonsense argument last year. The constant harping on the word “entail” is similar.

Jerry, you're never gonna get it. Quit trying.
Quote
Most of the comments banned and persons banned are for reasons of treating others with contempt. It is interesting because I have no respect for the anti ID people here. They hardly ever present anything relevant and dodge and deflect. So I get sarcastic often because they have never provided anything that is appropriate to their point.

Translated: "Most persons banned are for treating others with contempt. I feel nothing but contempt for them."

Please, never stop.

[edit for plumpness]

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

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

  
k.e..



Posts: 5319
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,10:23   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 17 2010,17:51)
Jerry's capacity for stupidity is boundless:
Quote
Is Voice Coil the same person as Reciprocating Bill who kept repeating the same nonsense argument last year. The constant harping on the word “entail” is similar.

Jerry, you're never gonna get it. Quit trying.
Quote
Most of the comments banned and persons banned are for reasons of treating others with contempt. It is interesting because I have no respect for the anti ID people here. They hardly ever present anything relevant and dodge and deflect. So I get sarcastic often because they have never provided anything that is appropriate to their point.

Translated: "Most persons banned are for treating others with contempt. I feel nothing but contempt for them."

Please, never stop.

[edit for plumpness]

Apologies to Jimi

Quote
HEY JOE, WHERE YOU GOIN' WITH THAT GUN IN YOUR HAND
HEY JOE, I SAID WHERE YOU GOIN' WITH THAT GUN IN YOUR HAND
I'M GOIN' DOWN TO SHOOT ME SU' CONTEMPT
YOU KNOW I CAUGHT THEM MESSIN' 'ROUND ON
A-t-B-C
YEAH, I'M GOIN' DOWN TO SHOOT ME SU' CONTEMPT
YOU KNOW I CAUGHT THEM MESSIN' 'ROUND ON
A-t-B-C

HUH! AND THAT AIN'T TOO COOL

A-HEY JOE, I HEARD YOU SHOT YOUR ID CRITICS DOWN
YOU SHOT THEM DOWN NOW
A-HEY JOE, I HEARD YOU SHOT YOUR ID CRITICS DOWN
YOU SHOT THEM DOWN IN THE GROUD

YEAH!

YES, I DID, I SHOT VOICE COIL
YOU KNOW I CAUGHT VOICE COIL MESSIN' ROUND MESSIN' ROUND TOWN
UH, YES I DID I SHOT VOICE COIL
YOU KNOW I CAUGHT MY ID CRITICS MESSIN' 'ROUND TOWN
AND GAVE THEM THE GUN
AND I SHOT THEM

ALRIGHT
SHOOT THEM ONE MORE TIME AGAIN BABY!
YEAH!
OH DIG IT
OH ALRIGHT

HEY JOE,
WHERE YOU GONNA RUN TO NOW WHERE YOU GONNA RUN TO NOW
HEY JOE, I SAID
WHERE YOU GONNA RUN TO NOW WHERE YOU GONNA GO
I'M GOIN' WAY DOWN SOUTH
WAY DOWN TO DIXIE WAY, ALRIGHT
I'M GOIN' WAY DOWN SOUTH
WAY DOWN WHERE I CAN BE FREE
AIN'T NO ONE GONNA FIND ME
AIN'T NO HANG-MAN GONNA
HE AIN'T GONNA PUT A ROPE AROUND ME
YOU BETTER BELIEVE IT RIGHT NOW
I GOTTA GO NOW
HEY, JOE
YOU BETTER RUN ON DOWN
GOODBYE EVERYBODY
HEY HEY JOE


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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,10:44   

Giggle.
 
Quote

31
efren ts
01/17/2010
10:44 am

Joseph:
   
Quote

   How can we test the premise that humans “evolved” from knuckle-walkers via an accumulation of genetic accidents OR an accidental shifting of developmental processes?

If humans evolved from knuckle-draggers, why are there still knuckledraggers?

And Joseph responds:
 
Quote
32
Joseph
01/17/2010
10:50 am

efren ts,

Thank you for proving my point.

How can we test the premise that humans “evolved” from knuckle-walkers via an accumulation of genetic accidents OR an accidental shifting of developmental processes?

You say:
 
Quote

   If humans evolved from knuckle-draggers, why are there still knuckledraggers?

That has nothing to do with what I asked, however-

Because there is a niche for them to occupy

So close to awareness, yet so far.

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

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,11:12   

k.e. - Re:  Jimi and the IDCists

Nice effort, I can hear him singing it.

BUT... I don't think the IDCists know who in the hell Jimi Hendrix was - they were probably lining up to get tickets to hear The Archie's sing "Sugar, Sugar" live.

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

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5419
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,11:57   

...and still no ordered list or calculations...

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
k.e..



Posts: 5319
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,12:27   

Quote (J-Dog @ Jan. 17 2010,19:12)
k.e. - Re:  Jimi and the IDCists

Nice effort, I can hear him singing it.

BUT... I don't think the IDCists know who in the hell Jimi Hendrix was - they were probably lining up to get tickets to hear The Archie's sing "Sugar, Sugar" live.

I don't know why he was at least a saint

Just tell them they are mistaking him for Phineas Freak who sold aspirin as LSD outside Disneyland for $25 a cap.

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

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2367
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,15:35   

Hahahahaaa!
Quote
29

Mustela Nivalis

01/17/2010

10:24 am

h.pesoj at 26,

Any chance of sorting *that list* by biological complexity? CSI? FSCI?

As an item on that list, I propose sorting it by “Most Entertaining When Dropped In Someone’s Trousers.”

Ferret legging is so last century.


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

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 2367
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,15:37   

Hmmmm  
Quote


39

Clive Hayden

01/17/2010

4:26 pm

Joseph,

Quote
Don’t ask for help you intellectual coward.


I’m afraid this qualifies you for moderation.


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

   
BillB



Posts: 388
Joined: Aug. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,15:44   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 17 2010,21:37)
Hmmmm  
Quote


39

Clive Hayden

01/17/2010

4:26 pm

Joseph,

 
Quote
Don’t ask for help you intellectual coward.


I’m afraid this qualifies you for moderation.

So I guess we can expect him to be released from moderation by the end of the day.  Clive is to much of a coward to let UD run for more than a few hours without his Gestapo captain on duty, besides, I think Joseph knows where Clive lives.

  
Marion Delgado



Posts: 89
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,16:01   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Jan. 17 2010,09:11)
Yet more bluster, but no ordered list with FCSI/CSI/CFSI (or any combination thereof) calculations, I see.

What's up, Joseph? Can't do it?

Funny that.

Keep pushing Lou, I bet it ends up being a hilarious list - kittens are more complex than marmosets because "I like kittens. Kittens are cute. They obviously have more CSI." Or what have you. We should act Very Afraid of Being Proven Wrong By the List until it's made.

  
Maya



Posts: 702
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,16:02   

Number 1 in the Top Ten ID Science Stories of the year ("ID science"?) is:
 
Quote
Authors William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II use computer simulations and information theory to challenge the ability of Darwinian processes to create new functional genetic information.

No reference to the paper included, but O'Leary must be referring to the IEEE paper.  Wasn't that the one that had nothing to do with biology and merely mangled (again) the weasel?

O'Leary once again confuses word processor with food processor and produces this salad in a double parenthetical remark:
 
Quote
And while we are here, Dawkins claims he cannot produce an original statement of his big no-design theory - though professionals associated with the goals of this site reconstructed it - and it doesn't work.

Is this more weasel bashing?

This big a headache from a quick glance at the front page of UD.  I'm going to lie down now.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,16:31   

Quote (Maya @ Jan. 17 2010,16:02)
Is this more weasel bashing?

I think it is. And I think that O'Leary thinks that evolution stands or falls on a toy example from decades ago.

It's cargo cult science.

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

  
khan



Posts: 1539
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,16:57   

Quote (Maya @ Jan. 17 2010,17:02)
Number 1 in the Top Ten ID Science Stories of the year ("ID science"?) is:
 
Quote
Authors William A. Dembski and Robert J. Marks II use computer simulations and information theory to challenge the ability of Darwinian processes to create new functional genetic information.

No reference to the paper included, but O'Leary must be referring to the IEEE paper.  Wasn't that the one that had nothing to do with biology and merely mangled (again) the weasel?

O'Leary once again confuses word processor with food processor and produces this salad in a double parenthetical remark:
 
Quote
And while we are here, Dawkins claims he cannot produce an original statement of his big no-design theory - though professionals associated with the goals of this site reconstructed it - and it doesn't work.

Is this more weasel bashing?

This big a headache from a quick glance at the front page of UD.  I'm going to lie down now.

I would have given a failing grade just for the punctuation.

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

  
Reg



Posts: 112
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,17:12   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Jan. 17 2010,16:31)
     
Quote (Maya @ Jan. 17 2010,16:02)
Is this more weasel bashing?

I think it is. And I think that O'Leary thinks that evolution stands or falls on a toy example from decades ago.

It's cargo cult science.

It's all a bit sad, really:
"Top Ten Darwin and Design Science News Stories for 2009."
Remember, these are the ten most important things to have happened in evolution and in ID (which totally so too does have an active research programme) in the past year. In reverse order as presented by the Access Research Network...

[10]  Human engineers learn some things from biology, thus biology is engineered.
[9] Peppered moths are changing colour yet again as their environment changes. Try explaining that with your "science", darwinists.
[8]  The Ardi fossil, which is just yet another dead ape. Pah, that's no transition; it's got two arms and two legs and looks a lot like other apes of the period and still doesn't show us a monkey giving birth to a Southern Bapist so there aren't any transitional fossils.
[7]  The Ida fossil looks more like a dead monkey, nothing to see that tells us anything; it also stubbornly possesses two arms and two legs and lacks a birth certificate so there still aren't any transitional fossils.
[6] The Cambrian Explosion's difficult to study, thus ID. And we made a movie!
[5] Michael Behe's found the edge of evolution in a proper published biology paper. The paper's author disagrees with this, but Behe wrote about it on his blog and that's where real science happens.
[4] Some biologists admitted they don't yet know everything!
[3] Some biologists admitted they don't yet know everything!
[2] Stephen Meyer wrote a book, which got a good review in a magazine, and we made an animation.

 And in the treasured Number One spot, the most significant thing in Intelligent Design in the whole of 2009...
drumroll...

[1] Dembski got a paper published! About math. In an engineering journal. Which didn't mention biology at all. The darwinianist edifice is crashing down! It's like WATERLOO all over again!

--------------
"Even though I am not a creationist by any reasonable definition ... the Cambrian explosion was doubtless the work of God in my view but I would say that of all creation." - Denyse O'Leary, Oct 17, 2009.

  
steve_h



Posts: 538
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,18:39   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 17 2010,14:48)
This won't be up long:


According to UnDembski, at least 6 comments by h.pesoj have been removed from that thread. (The next version should have a nifty quoting mechanism, but I had some problems with it and then I got busy with other stuff)

ETA: And at least one on the "Eugenie Scott" thread
ETA: And at least seven on the "ID and common descent" thread

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5419
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,19:22   

Jerry punts:

 
Quote
 
Quote
“If you aren’t the person who is capable of calculating FCSI, then perhaps you could let us know who is and we can wait for them to start the discussion.”


Oh, I can make a calculation but I am not an expert. I suggest you google, Hazen, Abel, Kalinsky.

 
Quote
” I am new to ID and here trying to figure it out.”


If you are trying to figure it out, go by this rule. Those who are anti ID have only one purpose, try to catch an pro ID person in something they said that is wrong or they can not back up. And never admit the someone from the other side has a point. The other side keeps answering their questions till they get fed up.

You say you are new but you already know about FCSI. That is a start. FCSI is nothing more than the transcription/translation process.


Wanker. Coward. Liar.

ETA:



Quote
pants on fire, by Mike Licht, NotionsCaptial on Flickr.


Edited by Lou FCD on Jan. 17 2010,20:26

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,21:24   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 17 2010,16:37)
Hmmmm  
Quote


39

Clive Hayden

01/17/2010

4:26 pm

Joseph,

 
Quote
Don’t ask for help you intellectual coward.


I’m afraid this qualifies you for moderation.

I think our man Clive was getting tired of Joseph dominating the airwaves. As were the rest of us...

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
k.e..



Posts: 5319
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 17 2010,23:22   

Quote (dvunkannon @ Jan. 18 2010,05:24)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 17 2010,16:37)
Hmmmm    
Quote


39

Clive Hayden

01/17/2010

4:26 pm

Joseph,

 
Quote
Don’t ask for help you intellectual coward.


I’m afraid this qualifies you for moderation.

I think our man Clive was getting tired of Joseph dominating the airwaves. As were the rest of us...

I don't know about that.

Clive is aware that an intellectual is an oxymoron at UD.

--------------
"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: 5419
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2010,07:03   

Quote (dvunkannon @ Jan. 17 2010,22:24)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 17 2010,16:37)
Hmmmm    
Quote


39

Clive Hayden

01/17/2010

4:26 pm

Joseph,

   
Quote
Don’t ask for help you intellectual coward.


I’m afraid this qualifies you for moderation.

I think our man Clive was getting tired of Joseph dominating the airwaves. As were the rest of us...

Seems a lot like two second grade bullies fighting to see who gets to pretend to be captain of the college football team.

Doesn't really matter who wins, the head of the cheerleading squad isn't really interested in snogging a second grader.

Edited by Lou FCD on Jan. 18 2010,08:06

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
  15001 replies since Sep. 04 2009,16:20 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (501) < ... 122 123 124 125 126 [127] 128 129 130 131 132 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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