RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (501) < ... 235 236 237 238 239 [240] 241 242 243 244 245 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 3, The Beast Marches On...< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,16:54   

StephenB is living in the past:
Quote
—Petrushka: “Haeckel’s drawings are not defrauding any children.”

Thank you for your honest answer. In your judgment, the Darwinists who knowingly publish Haeckel’s bogus drawings are not lying, they are telling the truth.


He reminds me of a gutter journalist who whatever you say jots down the worst possible interpretation instead.

It would take more to correct the misrepresentations then you'd care to spend. Why bother. He probably knows perfectly well how wrong he is, but some thing wrong in the brain with that one I think.

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

  
Maya



Posts: 702
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,20:17   

Quote (Raevmo @ July 28 2010,15:00)
macho UD crew

"Null set" is shorter and easier to type.

  
Maya



Posts: 702
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,20:23   

Quote (tsig @ July 28 2010,15:21)
Quote (Ptaylor @ July 27 2010,20:50)
Off topic, but Google News has just suggested I go here for an article headed      
Quote
The Intelligent Design Facts Institute Launches Top Rated New Website To Defend Intelligent Design Through New Scientific Research

The site itself is here. It's chock full of stuff that I'd never thought of, such as how evolution cannot account for the origin of life and how it's mathematically impossible anyway. Best of all is this:
     
Quote
We look forward to your comments, which will be published in anonymity unless you request your name to be shown. All comments will be published regardless of viewpoint, except for those which contain expletives and flaming.

This could become a lot of fun.

Wonder if that site will drain away all five of UDs' regular commentators(non-sock)

I suspect that Gordon's logorrhea is sufficient for any number of blogs.

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1584
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,20:48   

Quote (Maya @ July 28 2010,20:23)
Quote (tsig @ July 28 2010,15:21)
Quote (Ptaylor @ July 27 2010,20:50)
Off topic, but Google News has just suggested I go here for an article headed        
Quote
The Intelligent Design Facts Institute Launches Top Rated New Website To Defend Intelligent Design Through New Scientific Research

The site itself is here. It's chock full of stuff that I'd never thought of, such as how evolution cannot account for the origin of life and how it's mathematically impossible anyway. Best of all is this:
     
Quote
We look forward to your comments, which will be published in anonymity unless you request your name to be shown. All comments will be published regardless of viewpoint, except for those which contain expletives and flaming.

This could become a lot of fun.

Wonder if that site will drain away all five of UDs' regular commentators(non-sock)

I suspect that Gordon's logorrhea is sufficient for any number of blogs.

If Denyse spreads herself out over any more blogs we may get a test of the homeopathic theory of TARD.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
MichaelJ



Posts: 462
Joined: June 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,21:36   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 29 2010,07:54)
StephenB is living in the past:
 
Quote
—Petrushka: “Haeckel’s drawings are not defrauding any children.”

Thank you for your honest answer. In your judgment, the Darwinists who knowingly publish Haeckel’s bogus drawings are not lying, they are telling the truth.


He reminds me of a gutter journalist who whatever you say jots down the worst possible interpretation instead.

It would take more to correct the misrepresentations then you'd care to spend. Why bother. He probably knows perfectly well how wrong he is, but some thing wrong in the brain with that one I think.

I bet if you tried to asked Stephen to name 2 textbooks published in the last 20 years that has the drawings you would be instantly banned.

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1059
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,22:23   

Quote (MichaelJ @ July 29 2010,14:36)
I bet if you tried to asked Stephen to name 2 textbooks published in the last 20 years that has the drawings you would be instantly banned.


God, what an insufferable, demanding twat. He is now asking Petrushka whether he has stopped beating his wife:
Quote
Quote
—Petrushka:”There’s nothing of substance on this thread that I haven’t responded to.”


On the contrary. You have been evading my question all afternoon and evening. Here it is again: Are those Darwinists who knowingly publish pictures of Haeckel’s bogus drawings in public school textbooks lying or are they telling the truth?

Link

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

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2729
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2010,23:00   

Quote (Texas Teach @ July 28 2010,18:48)
Denyse spreads herself out...

Okay, right there I went EWWWWWWW!!!!

Ew Ew Ew.

Ew.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2118
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,02:17   

Quote
Better to meet a bear robbed of her cubs than a fool in his folly.
Proverbs 17:12

Even the Bible knows about UD.

Thanx and a tip of the hat to "Good Book: The Bizarre, Hilarious, Disturbing, Marvelous, and Inspiring Things I Learned When I Read Every Single Word of the Bible" by David Plotz

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,04:09   

Quote (fnxtr @ July 29 2010,05:00)
Quote (Texas Teach @ July 28 2010,18:48)
Denyse spreads herself out...

Okay, right there I went EWWWWWWW!!!!

Ew Ew Ew.

Ew.

MY BRAIN!!!!!! MY PRECIOUS BRAIN!!!!!!! I CANNOT UNTHINK WHAT I JUST THUNKED!!!!!! NEED BRAIN BLEACH!!!!!! NEEED IT NAO!!!!!! THE HORROR!!!!! THE HORROR!!!!! I'M MELTING!!!!!!! I'M MELTING!!!!!!!!!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,04:13   

Quote (Texas Teach @ July 29 2010,02:48)
Quote (Maya @ July 28 2010,20:23)
Quote (tsig @ July 28 2010,15:21)
 
Quote (Ptaylor @ July 27 2010,20:50)
Off topic, but Google News has just suggested I go here for an article headed        
Quote
The Intelligent Design Facts Institute Launches Top Rated New Website To Defend Intelligent Design Through New Scientific Research

The site itself is here. It's chock full of stuff that I'd never thought of, such as how evolution cannot account for the origin of life and how it's mathematically impossible anyway. Best of all is this:
       
Quote
We look forward to your comments, which will be published in anonymity unless you request your name to be shown. All comments will be published regardless of viewpoint, except for those which contain expletives and flaming.

This could become a lot of fun.

Wonder if that site will drain away all five of UDs' regular commentators(non-sock)

I suspect that Gordon's logorrhea is sufficient for any number of blogs.

If Denyse spreads herself out over any more blogs we may get a test of the homeopathic theory of TARD.

Sorry but I disagree. Denyse is providing tard at full concentration everywhere she goes. Her every word is pure, undiluted tard wherever she utters them.

After all remember Einstein's words regarding human stupidity. In the case of Denyse, she's a source of dumb so profound that her wider dissemination of tard is practically limitless in potential scope.

I say we take off and nuke the site from space. It's the only way to be sure.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,04:45   

Denyse is back:

And utterly confused DATCG, blissfully ignorant of WAD's past, mentions that
Quote
One of my ancestors, great, great Aunt was a member of the first co-ed graduating class of Baylor University in Waco. Today what a few people sowed has turned into a world-class university in many areas.

Did she like the food?

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,04:56   

Meanwhile, a certain Petrushka Strawinsky made a donation to MSF to celebrate the fact that in spite of provoking uncivil attacks from the ususal gang of IDiots by providing rational arguments for ToE he has not yet been banninated:


--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,05:07   

If you follow the links from that "Advice for Young Intelligent Design Scientists" post on UD it seems ID is progressing fast!
 
Quote
Intelligent Design in the Natural Sciences is designed for college-level juniors, seniors, and first-year graduate students who intend to pursue graduate studies in the natural sciences or the philosophy of science.

Intelligent Design in the Social Sciences and Humanities is designed for college-level juniors, seniors, and first-year graduate students who intend to pursue graduate studies in the social sciences (including law) or the humanities (including theology).

Both seminars will run concurrently and explore cutting-edge ID work in molecular biology, biochemistry, embryology, developmental biology, zoology, paleontology, computational biology, ID-theoretic mathematics, cosmology, physics, philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, evolutionary ethics, bioethics, criminology, law, education, and economics. Each seminar will also include frank treatment of the academic realities that ID researchers confront in graduate school and beyond, and strategies for dealing with them.


Who exactly is doing all that cutting-edge ID research? The fridge? The photocopier?

Worth checking out the application form.
Quote
Do you have a commitment to truth and to following the evidence where it leads? Do you have the desire, the vision and the determination necessary to breathe new purpose into the scientific enterprise and influence its self-understanding in ways that will benefit both science and humanity? Apply to become one of a select group of students participating in these exciting workshops.

Sounds exciting. And you've not even seen the list of speaker!
Quote
Past seminars have included such speakers as William Dembski, Charles Thaxton, Jonathan Wells, Stephen Meyer, Paul Nelson, Douglas Axe, Ann Gauger, Robert Marks, Scott Minnich, Bruce Gordon, John West, Jonathan Witt, and Casey Luskin.


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

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,05:47   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 29 2010,11:07)
If you follow the links from that "Advice for Young Intelligent Design Scientists" post on UD it seems ID is progressing fast!
   
Quote
Intelligent Design in the Natural Sciences is designed for college-level juniors, seniors, and first-year graduate students who intend to pursue graduate studies in the natural sciences or the philosophy of science.

Intelligent Design in the Social Sciences and Humanities is designed for college-level juniors, seniors, and first-year graduate students who intend to pursue graduate studies in the social sciences (including law) or the humanities (including theology).

Both seminars will run concurrently and explore cutting-edge ID work in molecular biology, biochemistry, embryology, developmental biology, zoology, paleontology, computational biology, ID-theoretic mathematics, cosmology, physics, philosophy of science, philosophy of mind, evolutionary ethics, bioethics, criminology, law, education, and economics. Each seminar will also include frank treatment of the academic realities that ID researchers confront in graduate school and beyond, and strategies for dealing with them.


Who exactly is doing all that cutting-edge ID research? The fridge? The photocopier?

Worth checking out the application form.
 
Quote
Do you have a commitment to truth and to following the evidence where it leads? Do you have the desire, the vision and the determination necessary to breathe new purpose into the scientific enterprise and influence its self-understanding in ways that will benefit both science and humanity? Apply to become one of a select group of students participating in these exciting workshops.

Sounds exciting. And you've not even seen the list of speaker!
 
Quote
Past seminars have included such speakers as William Dembski, Charles Thaxton, Jonathan Wells, Stephen Meyer, Paul Nelson, Douglas Axe, Ann Gauger, Robert Marks, Scott Minnich, Bruce Gordon, John West, Jonathan Witt, and Casey Luskin.

Sounds bloody interesting! Is the pay any good? Because I think I might just have what it takes to join the Big Tent (i.e: nothing at all, I'm a failled student who stopped school at 17. Should be more than enough...)!

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,06:45   

Quote (Ptaylor @ July 28 2010,22:23)
Quote (MichaelJ @ July 29 2010,14:36)
I bet if you tried to asked Stephen to name 2 textbooks published in the last 20 years that has the drawings you would be instantly banned.


God, what an insufferable, demanding twat. He is now asking Petrushka whether he has stopped beating his wife:
 
Quote
 
Quote
—Petrushka:”There’s nothing of substance on this thread that I haven’t responded to.”


On the contrary. You have been evading my question all afternoon and evening. Here it is again: Are those Darwinists who knowingly publish pictures of Haeckel’s bogus drawings in public school textbooks lying or are they telling the truth?

Link

If I am not mistaken, Albatrossity did a survey of contemporary high school biology texts and found that almost none of them use Haeckel's drawings (although they do use similar embroyology photographs.  And, those that did use Haeckel's drawings only use them in the context of explaining what was wrong with them.

Does anyone have a link to that?

Added in Edit:  Found it!

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

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,08:23   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 28 2010,16:54)

Quote
StephenB is living in the past:


...and he's thick as a brick.

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,10:05   

StephenB:
Quote
I know of textbooks dated as late as 2004 that use colorized versions of Haeckel-like drawings and they are not there to provide “historical context.” On the contrary, they are used to argue on behalf of evolution.


Could be interesting....

Will he be able to provide a specific title? I doubt it.

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

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2729
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,10:16   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 29 2010,08:05)
StephenB:
 
Quote
I know of textbooks dated as late as 2004 that use colorized versions of Haeckel-like drawings and they are not there to provide “historical context.” On the contrary, they are used to argue on behalf of evolution.


Could be interesting....

Will he be able to provide a specific title? I doubt it.

"colorized versions of Haeckel-like drawings"

leaves lots of wiggle room.

Plus he spelled "colour" wrong.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,10:23   

Quote
Meanwhile, a certain Petrushka Strawinsky made a donation to MSF to celebrate the fact that in spite of provoking uncivil attacks from the ususal gang of IDiots by providing rational arguments for ToE he has not yet been banninated:


Nothing but an oil-soaked straw man.

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

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:02   

Granville's back with possibly his stupidest SLOT argument yet:
Quote

I replied:
Quote


   Tell your wife she has made a perfectly valid application of the second law of thermodynamics. In fact, let’s take her application a bit further.

   Suppose you and your wife go for vacation, leaving a dog, cat and a parakeet loose in the house (I put the animals there to cause the entropy to increase more rapidly, otherwise you might have to take a much longer vacation to see the same effect). When you come back, you will not be surprised to see chaos in the house. But tell her some scientists say, “but if you leave the door open while on vacation, your house becomes an open system, and the second law does not apply to open systems…you may find everything in better condition than when you left.”

   I’ll bet she will say, if a maid enters through the door and cleans the house, maybe, but if all that enters is wind, rain and other animals, probably not.


--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2715
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:05   

Quote
Granville Sewell: I was discussing the second law argument with a scientist friend the other day, and mentioned that the second law is sometimes called the “common sense law of physics”.

Oddly enough, the first mention on Google for "the common sense law of physics" is Granville Sewell on Uncommon Descent. See! It really is sometimes called that. Granville Sewell just said it, so there.

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

   
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:15   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 29 2010,08:05)
StephenB:
 
Quote
I know of textbooks dated as late as 2004 that use colorized versions of Haeckel-like drawings and they are not there to provide “historical context.” On the contrary, they are used to argue on behalf of evolution.


Could be interesting....

Will he be able to provide a specific title? I doubt it.

Well, let's start a-checkin'.  StephenB actually came through:
Quote


—San Antonio Rose: “Which books? I was thinking my text had photographs comparing embryos. But now I wonder if they were color drawings. I may have been brainwashed without even knowing it. LMHO.”

Here are a few of the more recent ones of which I am aware. There may be more.

I. Peter H Raven & George B Johnson, Biology (5th ed, McGraw Hill, 1999)*

II. Peter H Raven & George B Johnson, Biology (6th ed, McGraw Hill, 2002)*

III. Textbook III. Douglas J. Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology (3rd ed, Sinauer, 1998)

IV. Cecie Starr and Ralph Taggart, Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (8th ed, Wadsworth, 1998)

V. Joseph Raver, Biology: Patterns and Processes of Life (J.M.Lebel, 2004, draft version presented to the Texas State Board of Education for approval in 2003)

VI. Cecie Starr and Ralph Taggart, Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (Wadsworth, 2004, draft version presented to the Texas State Board of Education in 2003)

VII. William D. Schraer and Herbert J. Stoltze, Biology: The Study of Life (7th ed, Prentice Hall, 1999)

VIII. Michael Padilla et al., Focus on Life Science: California Edition (Prentice Hall, 2001)

IX. Kenneth R Miller & Joseph Levine, Biology: The Living Science (Prentice Hall, 1998)

X. Kenneth R Miller & Joseph Levine, Biology (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998)


Oh, BTW, wanna take a guess how Stephen "knows of" these books.  Well, if you said "direct, personal experience" you do not win a prize:
Quote
By the way, the above list [@64] was taken from Casey Luskin’s article, “What do Modern Textbooks Really Say about Haeckel’s Embryos.” It’s well worth reading.

I left in the asterisks since I don’t want to tamper with the evidence.


A Luskin article? Oh, Jesus. What a weaselly prick. Creationist argumentum ad cut-and-paste at it's finest. Gotta love the "well worth reading" bit, too.  Nice touch.

--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:17   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ July 29 2010,11:05)
StephenB:
 
Quote
I know of textbooks dated as late as 2004 that use colorized versions of Haeckel-like drawings and they are not there to provide “historical context.” On the contrary, they are used to argue on behalf of evolution.


Could be interesting....

Will he be able to provide a specific title? I doubt it.

This is, as usual, horseshit from StephenB.

These drawings were used to summarize embryological evidence for the common descent of otherwise apparently widely disparate organisms.

StephenB has explicitly stated that he accepts common descent. So he ought to just STFU.

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

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:33   

Ah, Casey done did some of the work for us.  Here's the image  allegedly used in the first entry on the list, "Peter H Raven & George B Johnson, Biology (5th ed, McGraw Hill, 1999)":



I say "allegedly", because when I saved the image the file name was "RavenJohnson_2002big.JPG", suggesting it's actually from entry number two, "Peter H Raven & George B Johnson, Biology (6th ed, McGraw Hill, 2002)"  Mr. Luskin says that's because both editions used the same image, and I guess that I'll take his word for it, not that the lying little bastard deserves such leniency.

In any case:  not "Haeckel's bogus drawings", and not "as late as 2004". StephenB/Luskin FAIL.  Two down, eight to go.

--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,11:54   

Quote
28 July 2010
William Dembski’s Advice for Young Intelligent Design Scientists
O'Leary
Click here to listen.

On this episode of ID the Future, Anika Smith interviews mathematician and philosopher William Dembski on a break from teaching at Discovery Institute’s Summer Seminars on Intelligent Design. Listen in as Dr. Dembski shares his advice for young scientists interested in ID and the hope he has for the future of intelligent design


These blurbs for ID the Future podcasts usually come out with someone eles's name. There is none of that famous O'Leary verve in this paragraph.

If Denyse had actually written it, it would sound like this:

Grandmothers, we know how to pull in the young ones with milk and cookies. Do gorillas do that? Then why do you think you're a gorilla? Why would Anika Smith talk to me? Toronto hack journalists don't rate. At least cookies used to work. William Dembski thinks he can get them interested in ID. Can he? Find out what he has to say to young scientists before they are broken by the academic Darwinist stranglehold on freethought. Buy my book.

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

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,12:12   

OK, I just put the rest up at my image host. And...here...we...go:

Douglas J. Futuyma, Evolutionary Biology (3rd ed, Sinauer, 1998):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Cecie Starr and Ralph Taggart, Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (8th ed, Wadsworth, 1998):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Joseph Raver, Biology: Patterns and Processes of Life (J.M.Lebel, 2004, draft version presented to the Texas State Board of Education for approval in 2003):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Actually (sorta) from 2004. Still, StephenB FAIL.


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

Cecie Starr and Ralph Taggart, Biology: The Unity and Diversity of Life (Wadsworth, 2004, draft version presented to the Texas State Board of Education in 2003):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Actually (sorta) from 2004. Still, StephenB FAIL.


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

William D. Schraer and Herbert J. Stoltze, Biology: The Study of Life (7th ed, Prentice Hall, 1999):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Michael Padilla et al., Focus on Life Science: California Edition (Prentice Hall, 2001):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Kenneth R Miller & Joseph Levine, Biology: The Living Science (Prentice Hall, 1998):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Kenneth R Miller & Joseph Levine, Biology (4th ed., Prentice Hall, 1998):


Result:

Not "Haeckel's bogus drawings".  Not from 2004. StephenB FAIL.


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

Conclusion: StephenB is full of FAIL (and shit).

--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

  
Robin



Posts: 1431
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,12:16   

[quote=didymos,July 29 2010,11:02][/quote]
Quote
...leaving a dog, cat and a parakeet loose in the house (I put the animals there to cause the entropy to increase more rapidly,


WT...???

--------------
we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo

The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1266
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,12:22   

Quote (didymos @ July 29 2010,12:12)
Conclusion: StephenB is full of FAIL (and shit).

At least he had the presence of mind to mention that it is actually Luskin's FAIL, the weasel.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,12:43   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ July 29 2010,10:22)
Quote (didymos @ July 29 2010,12:12)
Conclusion: StephenB is full of FAIL (and shit).

At least he had the presence of mind to mention that it is actually Luskin's FAIL, the weasel.

Oooh, some more pre-emptive weaseling on his part that I hadn't noticed 'til now (bolding mine):
Quote

However, my question still stands: Are Darwinists who use [and used]Haeckel’s drawings lying or were they [are they] telling the truth. Please answer the question. Or, are those who use remakes of Haeckel’s drawing promoting a double lie–i.e. the lie itself and the shameless plagiarism, lying or are they telling the truth.

You have not yet answered the question on the table. Please address it.


The actual original question on the table:

"Are those Darwinists who knowingly publish pictures of Haeckel’s bogus drawings in public school textbooks lying are they telling the truth?"

Honestly, I'm worried about his back, what with carting those goalposts around everywhere he goes.

--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

  
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2010,12:54   

Quote (Zachriel @ July 29 2010,11:05)
Quote
Granville Sewell: I was discussing the second law argument with a scientist friend the other day, and mentioned that the second law is sometimes called the “common sense law of physics”.

Oddly enough, the first mention on Google for "the common sense law of physics" is Granville Sewell on Uncommon Descent. See! It really is sometimes called that. Granville Sewell just said it, so there.

I invite you to visit the tardmine known as Common Sense Science.  

Quote
Common Sense Science is a body of theory regarding matter and forces that describes the physical world using geometric models, absolute time and Galilean space in a way that strives to be consistent with experimental observations and free of internal contradictions. The foundational principles of CSS theory are based upon the law of cause and effect and the assertion that the universe and all natural phenomena are fundamentally electrical in character.


Maybe some sock should invite Sewell to join them.

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

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

Pages: (501) < ... 235 236 237 238 239 [240] 241 242 243 244 245 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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