RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (325) < ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 ... >   
  Topic: Joe G.'s Tardgasm, How long can it last?< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
PTET



Posts: 133
Joined: Jan. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: May 02 2011,16:31   

Quote
Kottke: There's a serious proposal to build an undersea electrical grid as part of the infrastructure for future offshore wind turbines.

Pfft. Joe could tell them that's not gonna work.

--------------
"It’s not worth the effort to prove the obvious. Ridiculous ideas don’t deserve our time.
Even the attempt to formulate ID is a generous accommodation." - ScottAndrews

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 03 2011,22:43   

Joe asked to put the debate rebuttals up early.  Mine is up.  I haven't checked for Joe's yet.

Also, new dolphin photos!!!

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 04 2011,03:05   

Looks like Joe/John knows how to use Wikipedia after all

Quote
(cur | prev)  12:20, 2 May 2011 GoJoeG (talk | contribs) m (5,805 bytes) (?Employee involved in Intelligent Design controversy) (undo) (Tag: section blanking)
(cur | prev)  12:20, 2 May 2011 GoJoeG (talk | contribs) m (6,215 bytes) (?External links) (undo)


http://en.wikipedia.org/w....history

Now you've got an account Joe you can go and fix all those lies in Wikipedia about evolution.....

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

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: May 04 2011,10:02   

According to Joe, the whole debate is about semantics:  
Quote
This is just too funny- OgreMKV has conflated "evolution" the word with the theory of evolution.

Thanks for proving that you are totally clueless. I even provided definitions of the word, not the theory. The theory is about the HOW evolution took place. The debate wasn't about that. The debate was about the word- "evolution" and its definition.

There is a huge difference between the two.


All this time we've been arguing over the definition of a word?  Where's the science in that?

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

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 04 2011,10:28   

Quote (Hermagoras @ May 04 2011,10:02)
According to Joe, the whole debate is about semantics:  
Quote
This is just too funny- OgreMKV has conflated "evolution" the word with the theory of evolution.

Thanks for proving that you are totally clueless. I even provided definitions of the word, not the theory. The theory is about the HOW evolution took place. The debate wasn't about that. The debate was about the word- "evolution" and its definition.

There is a huge difference between the two.


All this time we've been arguing over the definition of a word?  Where's the science in that?

I think that's pretty much all he's got.

evolution is natural selection, common descent, all that stuff and ID has no problem with it.

Materialist evolution is natural selection, common descent and all that stuff, but ID has a major issue with it.

based on what Joe has said and my research the only difference is that materialistic evolution says God isn't involved.  evolution doesn't say that God isn't involved.

semantics... sigh...

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4880
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: May 04 2011,22:35   

What are hail stones made of ?????

ETA: I changed the link. Remove the "-POSSIBLE-MALWARE" part at the end if you want to follow the link. It was just supposed to be a Failbook screenshot of someone asking just that question at Facebook.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on May 05 2011,00:40

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1786
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 04 2011,22:42   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ May 04 2011,22:35)
What are hail stones made of ?????

Careful guys

When I clicked on that link my Norton security reported a serious malware attack on my browser, Firefox 4.0.1

[WRE - altered link as in quoted comment.]

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on May 05 2011,00:41

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4880
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: May 05 2011,00:38   

I don't intend to link to malware sites. I browsed if via Firefox 4.0.1 myself, but on a Mac. The Mac didn't notify me of a problem.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 05 2011,01:37   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ May 04 2011,03:05)
Looks like Joe/John knows how to use Wikipedia after all

 
Quote
(cur | prev)  12:20, 2 May 2011 GoJoeG (talk | contribs) m (5,805 bytes) (?Employee involved in Intelligent Design controversy) (undo) (Tag: section blanking)
(cur | prev)  12:20, 2 May 2011 GoJoeG (talk | contribs) m (6,215 bytes) (?External links) (undo)


http://en.wikipedia.org/w....history

Now you've got an account Joe you can go and fix all those lies in Wikipedia about evolution.....

Change it back!

Joe - you're not allowed to edit as you're the person in question..

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

  
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: May 05 2011,10:38   

What an asshole, and a busy one, besides.  It's almost like he's an historical revisionist or something.  

SAY IT AIN'T SO, JOE!!!11!!!!

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,08:53   

Joe is grappling with three problems at once: the age of the Earth, formation of the solar system, and radiometric dating. The case seems hopeless. A typical exchange:
Quote

Me: The age of the oldest material in the Earth's crust is 4.4 billion years. In contrast, the oldest meteorites are 4.57 billion years old.

Joe: Except they used one to get the other. So if that one is wrong...

Me: no, the ages of the rocks and meteorites are determined independently of each other.

Joe: That is not my understanding but I will look for the reference.

Me: yes, read some references about radiometric dating.

Joe: I have read many. I just need to find the one that supports my claim.


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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,09:22   

Quote (olegt @ May 06 2011,08:53)
Quote

Joe: I have read many. I just need to find the one that supports my claim.

Creationism in a nutshell...  I think that's sig worthy,

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1786
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,09:24   

Big bad Joe is back to making his implied physical threats again too:

Quote
Joe G said...

Rich Hughes: And sunshine, you're the biggest coward of them all.

Just tell me where you live an we will see about that.


What an utter smeghead.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1786
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,09:25   

Quote (OgreMkV @ May 06 2011,09:22)
 
Quote (olegt @ May 06 2011,08:53)
 
Quote

Joe: I have read many. I just need to find the one I can quote mine to supports my claim.

Creationism in a nutshell...  I think that's sig worthy,

Fixed it.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,09:53   

Just figured I'd respond to Joe's comments here...

Quote
At 7:11 AM,  Joe G said…

So OgreMKV equivicates "evolution" with the theory of evolution.

What a moron...


So, you seem to be saying that the fact of evolution has nothing to do with the theory of evolution?  Interesting...

Quote


Ogre:
Of course you can’t Joe, because ‘materialistic evolution’ is the exact same thing as ‘evolution’.

Not according to the definitions I provided. And seeing you failed to provide any definitions off evolution YOU CAN'T SAY!


Joe, according to the definitions YOU PROVIDED, the sum total of differences between materialistic evolution and evolution is that materialists ignore any chance of the supernatural being involved... maybe because there is absolutely no evidence for it.

I'll repeat my statement from my rebuttal.  ID would be fine with evolution, if scientists would just admit that evolution is controlled by God.

Quote

 
At 7:14 AM,  Joe G said…

ogre:
But that’s not correct; at least it’s not correct with the prevailing view of evolution that new species and novelties can come about without intelligence.

No shit dumbass- that is the DIFFERENCE between the THEORY of evolution and ID. However we were discussing "evolution" not the theory- there is a difference you dolt.



So very, very sad Joe.

Thank you for proving that ID is anti-evolution.  If there is a character that ID describes one way and evolution describes another way, as long as both cannot be correct at the same time, then the two are competitors, opposites, rivals, ANTI- each other.

Thanks again Joe.  I'm glad you've seen the light.


Quote

 
At 7:16 AM,  Joe G said…

ogre:
There is no version of evolutionary theory that supports any design.

There is intelligent design evolution, front loaded evolution and a prescribed evolutionary hypothesis. That is three versions that support design right there.


I'm sorry, Joe. I thought you understood that I meant any 'real, scientifically supported version of evolution'.

I really don't consider your (and other ID/creationists) strawmen of evolution to be legitimate.

Quote

 
At 7:17 AM,  Joe G said…

And BTW seeing that you failed to provide a definition of "evolution" you cannot say it excludes design. Not one of the definitions I provided makes that claim. And you aren't in any position to make that claim.

 


Why should I provide a defintion Joe?  You know what evolution is and I even agreed with your definitions.

Besides, this isn't about evolution, it's about ID.

Quote

At 8:33 AM,  Joe G said…

ogre:
If, Demsbki (and Joe for that matter), think that biological novelties require an intelligence, then they should examine the Scottish fold breed of cat.

Artificial selection- there was a designer involved.


Really, so Susie (the first scottish fold cat ever) who was born in a barn, was designed.  

Tell me Joe, who designed her?  When was she designed (not year, but when was her genome designed, stage of life will be fine)?

Do you have any evidence that this is so?

Are you willing to commit some money to a laboratory examination of the genomes in the test I described in order to see if the mutation that causes the scottish fold ear is within the realm of simple evolutionary theory?

Quote

 
At 8:35 AM,  Joe G said…

ogre:
In other words, ID is OK with all of the aspects of evolution, but it’s not OK that it happens naturally without a designer being present.

Wrong again- the designer(s) need not be present. Are computer programmers present and at theb ready standing by your computer? Or can it function without their presence?


Joe, I'm saying that ID requires a designer.  Or are you changing what ID is... again?

Quote

 
At 8:39 AM,  Joe G said…

ogre:
If ID is perfectly fine with every part of evolution, as Joe says, then why are virtually all ID arguments, anti-evolution arguments?

They're not. They are anti-blind watchmaker arguments and there is a difference.

It appars that I was correct and Ogre "learned" about ID from reading the trial transcripts and reading evotard sound bites.


No Joe, I learned about ID by reading what the actual inventors of the ID movement said.  

If you weren't cherrypicking the things you say about them, then you would understand that.

http://intelligentreasoning.blogspot.com/2011....7155149


Isn't it interesting how these types of people, once they get started on this path, even have to cherrypick and quotemine their supporters?

That's one thing I've learned through this activity.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,10:04   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ May 06 2011,09:24)
Big bad Joe is back to making his implied physical threats again too:

 
Quote
Joe G said...

Rich Hughes: And sunshine, you're the biggest coward of them all.

Just tell me where you live an we will see about that.


What an utter smeghead.

In his tiny mind. He must be a spritely 52 year old..

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

  
Wolfhound



Posts: 468
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: May 06 2011,10:28   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ May 06 2011,10:24)
Big bad Joe is back to making his implied physical threats again too:

 
Quote
Joe G said...

Rich Hughes: And sunshine, you're the biggest coward of them all.

Just tell me where you live an we will see about that.


What an utter smeghead.

If he comes up to Washington State, I'll be sure to show him a good time, lads.  But, I'm guessing he never leaves his mom's basement home.

--------------
I've found my personality to be an effective form of birth control.

  
clamboy



Posts: 217
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 08 2011,21:35   

OgreMkV, thank you for calling out Joe G, and for handing him his posterior. But I am sure others have noticed that, once again, an IDiot/creationist/whateverthehell has claimed knowledge and unique insight into a plethora of topics, the mastery of which would require years of study per topic; yet, as per usual, said IDiot/creationist/whateverthehell displays his ignorance as a shield, all the while telling you and others that he is the only one to truly get these topics. Madre de dios, it reminds me of afDave, only less "aw shucks." It makes me wonder: how many of these autodidact  IDiots/creationists/whateverthehellists can there be out there?!?

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 09 2011,09:23   

CB, thanks for the kind words.

I just read a few pages of Joe's blog.  He hasn't done his debate conclusion yet.

OTOH, his new sockpuppet is in full swing and the silent ban-hammer appears to be active as well.

I half expect Joe's debate conclusion to be:

"neener, neener, neener.

Did NOT, did NOT, did NOT.

I can't hear you!  LALALALALALALALALA!!!"

I guess we'll never know.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 09 2011,13:55   

One word of disagreement with Clamboy. These IDCist/Creationist/Whatevers are not autodidacts. They are not self taught. They are not even taught. That would imply they have learned something.

They haven't.

Ever.

Louis

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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 09 2011,14:04   

Quote (Louis @ May 09 2011,13:55)
One word of disagreement with Clamboy. These IDCist/Creationist/Whatevers are not autodidacts. They are not self taught. They are not even taught. That would imply they have learned something.

They haven't.

Ever.

Louis

I don't know Louis.

Certainly, they haven't learned anything about science, or scientific principles, or reality.

But they sure have learned how to double talk, move goal posts, distract.

They've learned that if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then bury them in bullshit.

They've learned that they get their asses kicked in any forum where they can't control the outcome, or the opponent.  (Dembski was smart enough not to show up at the Kitzmiller trial.)

They've learned how to be concern trolls, and aggressive trolls, and internet tough guys (when they think we can't find them... as if we actually cared).

They've learned to type people's names into google.  And they've learned that you can have more than one account on a forum, even their own.

So, I think they have learned quite a bit.

To bad none of it is actually useful in the real world.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
clamboy



Posts: 217
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 09 2011,15:21   

Quote (Louis @ May 09 2011,13:55)
One word of disagreement with Clamboy. These IDCist/Creationist/Whatevers are not autodidacts. They are not self taught. They are not even taught. That would imply they have learned something.

They haven't.

Ever.

Louis

Louis - my mistake, mea culpa. I of course meant to say "autoanalcephalics".

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 09 2011,16:02   

Proctocephalitis is a common (and well documented) affliction among creationists.

There is a wide range of associated paraneoplastic syndromes, but the list would be too long to post here...

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

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,03:13   

Quote (OgreMkV @ May 09 2011,20:04)
Quote (Louis @ May 09 2011,13:55)
One word of disagreement with Clamboy. These IDCist/Creationist/Whatevers are not autodidacts. They are not self taught. They are not even taught. That would imply they have learned something.

They haven't.

Ever.

Louis

I don't know Louis.

Certainly, they haven't learned anything about science, or scientific principles, or reality.

But they sure have learned how to double talk, move goal posts, distract.

They've learned that if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, then bury them in bullshit.

They've learned that they get their asses kicked in any forum where they can't control the outcome, or the opponent.  (Dembski was smart enough not to show up at the Kitzmiller trial.)

They've learned how to be concern trolls, and aggressive trolls, and internet tough guys (when they think we can't find them... as if we actually cared).

They've learned to type people's names into google.  And they've learned that you can have more than one account on a forum, even their own.

So, I think they have learned quite a bit.

To bad none of it is actually useful in the real world.

Learned?

The Nature vs Nurture debate! Woot!

Louis

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

  
KCdgw



Posts: 376
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,07:59   

They have learned cunning. But that's about it.

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,08:51   

I will agree that some part of their 'skills' may be genetically based.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1786
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,09:13   

Ooooh!  OM brings the pain to Joe

 
Quote
OM said...

   Joe:  But anyway OM I understand that you are upset by having your lying diatribe booted from wikipedia.

   Given that I've spoken to HR at Stratus at some length about you, including some comments they did not want on the record, what specific part was a lie?

   I'm currently working with them with regard to putting out a statement/press release that distances them from your activities while you where there and furthermore that statement will be usable at Wikipedia to support the edits that are currently reverted.

   So, how do you like them apples?


I'm pretty surprised that Joe even let the post through since he's really stepped up his deleting/censoring at his blog the last week or so.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
KCdgw



Posts: 376
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,09:26   

How is Stratus 'working with' OM? Why would they discuss anything with him over what looks like an internal matter with an ex-employee? Who is OM anyway?

Edited by KCdgw on May 10 2011,09:27

--------------
Those who know the truth are not equal to those who love it-- Confucius

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 1786
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,09:35   

Quote (KCdgw @ May 10 2011,09:26)
How is Stratus 'working with' OM? Why would they discuss anything with him over what looks like an internal matter with an ex-employee? Who is OM anyway?

Don't know.  It may be OM is one of the people Joe actually made threats to while working at Stratus, and who contacted Stratus with a complaint.   That would certainly explain the inside conversations with HR.

--------------
"Science is what got us to the humble place we’re at, and what hard-won progress we might realize comes from science, with ID completely flaccid, religious apologetics bitching from the sidelines." - Eigenstate at UD

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 10 2011,09:53   

Nah, OM is me and I'm mostly just yanking Joe's chain.

Or am I Joe, or am I..........

(imagine the font just get's smaller and smaller at this point).

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

  
  9747 replies since Feb. 24 2010,12:00 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (325) < ... 75 76 77 78 79 [80] 81 82 83 84 85 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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