RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:41   

Quote (GCT @ Mar. 30 2006,13:26)
"ID is completely science and has nothing to do with religion.  So, now that we got that out of the way, let's talk about Jesus."

Look you church burning atheist scumbag. ID is not religious. Got that, you spawn of Satan!?-ds

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:47   

I'm just relieved that SteveStory's count is up to 667 now. He probably won't burn any churches anymore. Probably.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:48   

Quote
I'm just relieved that SteveStory's count is up to 667 now. He probably won't burn any churches anymore. Probably.


tell me what church you attend and I'll make an exception. -ss

   
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:54   

I wonder why they haven't put up an area at uncommonly dense devoted to mocking Panda's Thumb. Perhaps because we already came up for the best name for such a site, The Panda's Bum, and they want neither to give us credit or use an inferior name.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:54   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 30 2006,13:41)
Look you church burning atheist scumbag. ID is not religious. Got that, you spawn of Satan!?-ds

And by way, I'm an agnostic. But you're still an atheist scumbag. Got that?-dt

Oh, one more thing? You're outta here. Homo.-dt


--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,07:59   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 30 2006,13:54)
I wonder why they haven't put up an area at uncommonly dense devoted to mocking Panda's Thumb. Perhaps because we already came up for the best name for such a site, The Panda's Bum, and they want neither to give us credit or use an inferior name.

Because none of the UD regulars are anywhere near imaginative or creative enough to pull it off. Besides, most of them seem to be completely humorless, unless you count things like DT making fun of Wesley's name or Nick Matzke's accent.

Maybe it's also because it would diminish the reputation for scientific seriousness of purpose they're trying to maintain.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,08:44   

UD is the gift that keeps on giving...

(Jim Wynne at PT caught this one.)

Note DT's correction as it stands now:

Quote
Update: Awe shucks. It looks like I was wrong. The adversary is Dr. Robert C. Newman who was awarded a doctorate in theoretical astrophysics from (Ivy League) Cornell in 1967. Nick has not only failed to attain a doctorate, he switched his major at an unremarkable school from chemistry and biology to the much more lightweight field of geography. What’s next for Nick, a doctorate in basket weaving from the ITT Technical Institute? Theoretical Astrophysics is pretty much your stereotypical rocket science and far beyond Nick’s meager intellectual abilities. My abject apologies to Dr. Newman for the comparison.


Now, is that 'abject apology' line at the end of the paragraph there a recent addition, or did I just miss it first time? Are we actually seeing Dave being abject? ? ?

Either way, it's nice to see that DT has accepted angels as an integral part of the scientific landscape.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Sanctum



Posts: 88
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,09:10   

It's new.


I think.

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,09:52   

Poor Dave had to do the "update" when he found out that, in spite of his wackiness, Mr. Newmann is in fact an ID contributor. I can only imagine the look on his face...
Even so, something tells me this thread won't be around  for long. It certainly won't get many comments...

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
edmund



Posts: 37
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:08   

Quote
Give me a concrete example of what you mean by an “evolutionist” research program. I’m curious about what practical benefits there are in any “evolutionist” research programs to begin with. My opinion is that there is no practical benefit that comes from presuming that bacteria somehow morphed into mammals via time & chance and constructing phylogenetic trees with everything placed just-so in a presumably historically accurate manner has no practical benefit either. -ds

As someone pointed out on one of the threads at PT, this quote by Dave is an excellent example of the boxing strategy known as "leading with your chin".

At the risk of interrupting the MST3000 snarkiness of this thread (which I confess I'm enjoying), I'd like to take up a collection: bring me all the research programs you can think of that rely on evolutionary theory to deliver practical benefits! There are a couple of caveats which would make this collection even more fun:

1) The macro-er, the merrier. Since ID types supposedly accept microevolution, I'd like to collect research that relies on evolutionary theory that they don't accept.

2) If possible, said research programs should rely on those hated hobgoblins, RM and NS. (A lot of research relies on the similarities among related organisms, for example, but IDers claim that ID "predicts" those similarities too.) I'd like to collect research based specifically on the stuff that Dave & Co. can't stand.

Here are a couple of ideas, just to get the ball rolling: By comparing sequences, it's possible to predict what unknown genes code for. My understanding is that if you include phylogenetic relationships in your analysis, instead of relying only on sequence similarities, your ability to accurately predict the function of an unknown gene improves significantly. If I understand correctly, this approach is currently being used in "genomic prospecting".

Another great example is the use of synonymous/nonsynonymous subsititution ratios to infer which parts of a gene are under strong selection. I think this is being used to home in on the important parts of important proteins in parasites and pathogens, which is important in treating and curing diseases. (I like this example because using S/NS ratios can only work if the species in question diverged from a common ancestor due to random mutation and natural selection.)

I'll have to look up some specific citations for those. Please donate your practical applications of macroevolutionary theory! It would be neat to compile a TO page or some such document, with up-to-date information about how macroevolutionary theory is actually useful.

  
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:11   

Indeed, one of the little joys of Uncommonly Dense is when Davetard (or someone else) says something indefensibly boneheaded and you see the post sit for days with no or very few comments, because Davetard is having to delete handfulls of people trying to correct him.

   
bourgeois_rage



Posts: 117
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:14   

The "abject" comment was there at 10:58 this morning, when I posted on this thread. Page 64, 10 posts from the bottom.

--------------
Overwhelming Evidence: Apply directly to the forehead.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:24   

Quote (bourgeois_rage @ Mar. 30 2006,16:14)
The "abject" comment was there at 10:58 this morning, when I posted on this thread. Page 64, 10 posts from the bottom.

Ah, I see. Hm. So perhaps it was in the 'first draft'.

Anyway, it's a minor point compared to the overall delightful spectacle of Dave doing a 180 degree turn from ridiculing someone mercilessly to abjectly bowing and scraping before them.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:39   

LOL
Quote


Finally, Nick Matzke Finds An Opponent That Makes Him Look Smart

I’d like to be the first to congratulate Nick Matzke on finding an adversary that makes Nick look well versed in science by comparison. It’s about time. Maybe if Nick starting fisking nursery rhymes for bad science he could appear even smarter than he does now.

Update: Awe shucks. It looks like I was wrong. The adversary is Dr. Robert C. Newman who was awarded a doctorate in theoretical astrophysics from (Ivy League) Cornell in 1967. Nick has not only failed to attain a doctorate, he switched his major at an unremarkable school from chemistry and biology to the much more lightweight field of geography. What’s next for Nick, a doctorate in basket weaving from the ITT Technical Institute? Theoretical Astrophysics is pretty much your stereotypical rocket science and far beyond Nick’s meager intellectual abilities. My abject apologies to Dr. Newman for the comparison.
Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 4:01 am




2 Comments »

  1.

     Boy,
     I just read the article, then I read the post on Panda’s Thumb and all the comments. It is a constant stream of ridicule and spitefulness. Not a single constructive comment on the whole thing. Very hostile and closedminded.

     Who are these guys? THey seem to know who UD and Dave Scot are. My next point would have to be removed by the moderator for being overtly hostile so I will moderate it myself.

     It’s worth reading the comments though just to see how they think.

     Comment by Doug — March 30, 2006 @ 12:12 pm
  2.

     It’s just ridicule and spitefulness…you mean, as opposed to Dave’s highly substantive post above that you are replying to?

     Coming from the crown prince of Darwinian flame artists I’ll take that as a compliment, Ed. Thanks!

     Comment by Ed Brayton — March 30, 2006 @ 1:39 pm

   
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,10:49   

Wow. The Crown Prince of Darwinian Flame Artists? What's your THACO, Ed?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,11:04   

Quote
I just read the article, then I read the post on Panda’s Thumb and all the comments. It is a constant stream of ridicule and spitefulness. Not a single constructive comment on the whole thing. Very hostile and closedminded


It is a shame. None of the PT crowd will openmindedly consider just how helpful angels could be in any explanation of the workings of evolution.

(Even though Dave also thought the article was ridiculous when HE first read it! )   :p

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,11:11   

That's the great part. When davetard read what Newman wrote he called it garbage. When he found out what a big name Newman is in the ID movement, he had to eat his words or face the spectre of Philip Johnson etc calling garbage brilliant.

He was right the first time. Newman's stuff is garbage, and Philip Johnson etc are calling garbage brilliant.

   
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,12:06   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 30 2006,17:11)
That's the great part. When davetard read what Newman wrote he called it garbage. When he found out what a big name Newman is in the ID movement, he had to eat his words or face the spectre of Philip Johnson etc calling garbage brilliant.

He was right the first time. Newman's stuff is garbage, and Philip Johnson etc are calling garbage brilliant.

Are you claiming Dave Scots opinions are biased? Shame on you! He is a computer genius and far more qualified in biology than a biologist.

I know this to be true, Dave Scot said so.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,13:27   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 30 2006,18<!--emo&:0)
Are you claiming Dave Scots opinions are biased? Shame on you! He is a computer genius and far more qualified in biology than a biologist.

I know this to be true, Dave Scot said so.

Well that makes it true.

But I believe DS is not a genius, so therefore, he isn't, either.

Oh shlt. Not that problem again!

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,14:23   

LOL!

Quote
#

PZ is an icon of hypocrisy:
-He blasts ID proponents for not understanding biology, yet he himself does not understand the ID concept of complex specified information (otherwise he wouldn’t post rants like this one)
...
Comment by Qualiatative — March 30, 2006 @ 7:13 pm
and in case you're confused, no, the words 'this one' in Qualitarded's post goes to exactly where i linked it. It's a link to the page you're already at.

Edit: it's effectively a link to the page you're already at. It's a broken link, technically.

   
stevestory



Posts: 9021
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,15:32   

#

“He quotes ID proponents that make metaphysical statements in order to discredit them, yet on his very own blog Myers makes a habit of proselytizing his atheism.”

I always thought that Myers is an atheist or agnostic. Then I read this. What do you all think of his claim to be a Christian?

Comment by crandaddy — March 30, 2006 @ 7:44 pm
#

crandaddy,

You linked to a comment made by PvM, not PZ.

Comment by Qualiatative — March 30, 2006 @ 8:29 pm

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,15:56   

Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 30 2006,21:32)
#

“He quotes ID proponents that make metaphysical statements in order to discredit them, yet on his very own blog Myers makes a habit of proselytizing his atheism.”

I always thought that Myers is an atheist or agnostic. Then I read this. What do you all think of his claim to be a Christian?

Comment by crandaddy — March 30, 2006 @ 7:44 pm
#

crandaddy,

You linked to a comment made by PvM, not PZ.

Comment by Qualiatative — March 30, 2006 @ 8:29 pm

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: “O Lord, make my enemies ridiculous.” And God granted it.
--Voltaire


--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Renier



Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,21:01   

Talk about angels, it IS scientific, look!:

Quote
Praise! Evilution has been a “theory on the ropes” for some time now, and is clearly down for the count. I agree that it is time to give our attention to some of science’s other demonic doctrines.

* Gravity - This one is already on the ropes, soon to be replaced by the Intelligent Falling Theory, where objects are guided back down to the ground by guardian angels.
* Relativity - Relativity leads to relative morality, and is therefore both evil and false. God is absolute and unchanging. Relativity is a lie, and I wouldn’t trust anything that whoever the author of so-called “relativity” has to say.
* Inertia - Inertia says that objects at rest stay at rest, and objects in motion stay in motion. If inertia is true, then how am I able to leave my house to go to church, and how am I able to stop once I get there?
* Global Warming - The Earth is climate controlled by God Himself. If He wants to fiddle with the temperature controls, who are we to ask a bunch of stupid questions? To be replaced by Divine Thermostat Theory.
* Continental Drift - The continents are in exactly the same spot where they have been since The Flood. To be replaced by the Sin Theory of Earthquakes.
* Probability - “God does not play dice with the universe.” — Albert Einstein.

However, I want to hold off debunking String Theory for a while, because there are some things that I like about it.

String theory postulates 11 dimensions (seven more than sinful man can perceive), and that all of the individual particles that make up the world are actually strings that have been plucked to vibrate at a particular frequency.

Well, I think we all know Who is plucking those strings, amen. If we could peer into those extra dimensions, we would see the LORD, and he would be playing the largest stringed instrument you have ever seen! HALLELUJAH!

Pastor Billy-Reuben
landoverbaptist.net

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,22:10   

Quote
DS: This is illustrative of the mindset of Darwinists. Demonstrate simplicity and extrapolate to complexity. This is the stuff of science fiction - like imagining that because a cannon can launch a shell a few miles a sufficiently large cannon can shoot a manned shell to another planet.
So kind of like imagining that because your explanatory filter can spot when someone has rigged an election or cheated on the lottery it's perfectly reasonable to assume it can detect design in biological organsims?

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2006,22:16   

With regards to DS making a fool of himself by using innapropriate language to describe an ID luminary, he has replied to some critiscism over here:

http://www.hells-handmaiden.com/?p=928

So you can all go and read his excuse.

  
GCT



Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2006,03:26   

Red Reader is back, and as a new character:

Quote
(By the commentor formerly known as Red Reader)

Comment by GlennJ - Houston — March 30, 2006 @ 3:16 pm

I just want to make sure that his future idiotic comments will be correctly attributed to the right person.

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2006,03:55   

Talk about angels, it IS scientific, look!:

[long quote from Pastor Billy-Reuben landoverbaptist.net]

Just in case there's any confusion, "Landoverbaptist" is a spoof. I've seen a lot of people - mostly from outside America - that don't realize this. And who can blame them? I was sure Newman's piece was a hoax. At this point, I assign it to the unknowable, like so much of anti-evolution. It's impossible to tell the difference between a hoax and the real thing. Either Newman is nuts, or he's a high-level mole from our side of the Looking Glass.

But Landover is a spoof. I'm sure of that.

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2006,04:21   

Quote (Russell @ Mar. 31 2006,09:55)
Talk about angels, it IS scientific, look!:

[long quote from Pastor Billy-Reuben landoverbaptist.net]

Just in case there's any confusion, "Landoverbaptist" is a spoof. I've seen a lot of people - mostly from outside America - that don't realize this. And who can blame them? I was sure Newman's piece was a hoax. At this point, I assign it to the unknowable, like so much of anti-evolution. It's impossible to tell the difference between a hoax and the real thing. Either Newman is nuts, or he's a high-level mole from our side of the Looking Glass.

But Landover is a spoof. I'm sure of that.

Landover Baptist IS a spoof. It's apparently done by some refugee from Liberty University or something. But the remarkable thing is how many Christians DON'T know it's a spoof -- for mind-boggling verification of this, check out LB's letters section. About 90% of the letters are from people who think it's real but are appalled (YOU GUYS ARE SICK! HOW CAN YOU TELL KIDS TO TURN IN THERE [sic] PARENTS? THATS NOT WHAT JESUS PREACHED I WILL PRAY FOR YOU), another 9% think it's real but approve of it (I THOUGHT YOU'RE [sic] ARTICLE ON DEMONIC POSSESSION WAS VERY INTERESTING), and about 1% know it's a joke and are very cross about it (YOU ALL THINK THIS IS A BIG JOKE THIS IS JUST HATE SPEECH I HOPE YOU GET AIDS AND DIE I WILL PRAY FOR YOU). Then there's the once-in-a-blue-moon letter by someone who gets the joke and thinks it's funny.

LB does have a disclaimer where it describes itself as a 'parody', but it's not in a very prominent place and maybe most of these readers don't know what the word 'parody' means.

This all makes some points about how much of a self-parody American Fundamentalism has become, but that's too obvious to go into...

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2006,04:52   

It might be enlightening to re-examine Dave's 'explanation':

Quote
Here’s what happened. I glanced at Newman’s article, saw it was some whacky treatment on angels, and dismissed it as nonsense. I thought it was a pretty cheap shot for Matzke to point it out (cherry picking; taking the low hanging fruit). So I wrote the initial trackback saying congratulating Nick for finally discovering the level where he could be a player. Then I thought maybe I ought to see who Newman is as maybe he’s really a genius out of Matzke’s league and forgot to take his meds or something when he wrote about the angels. Lo and behold I find the guy’s got a degree in theoretical astrophysics from Cornell. Granted in 1967 and a lot can damage a mind in 40 years but even so, once upon a time Newman was an egghead’s egghead and even if he doesn’t have two brain cells left to rub together today that’s still out of Matzke’s junior-league baby-bottle ballpark so I took it back.


This doesn't tell us anything we didn't know, but it is quite interesting as a glimpse into DT's mindset, and his groupie-like worship of people with things like physics PhD's. He's essentially telling us here that no matter how full of shlt and crackbrained Newman is, he's still 'way out of Matzke's league', simply because he has a PhD in physics and Matzke does not. Essentially, if you have a physics PhD and you're 'on Dave's side' you're always more right than anyone without that kind of degree who disagrees with Dave, no matter how senile you might later get.

It begs the question of how relevant a physics PhD is to ID research, since DT does not extend this kind of deference to biology PhD's, but given DT's, uh, autodidact background, it's not too surprising that he'd be rather confused about this.

Anyway, DT never lets us down.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 31 2006,05:24   

From his UD "explanation":
Quote
Actually I didn’t read the article until after I’d written both the opener and the update. I pretty much dismissed it as nonsense from the opening talking about angels. I didn’t change my opinion after reading the whole thing. It is utter nonsense not remotely connected to ID or science. I can’t imagine what Newman was thinking. Maybe it’s an early April Fool’s joke. Be that as it may, he’s still head and shoulders above Matzke based upon his past. Matzke has accomplished nothing noteworthy in his short life and deserved every bit of criticism for picking such low hanging fruit. -ds


Translation

"Well, I didn't read it at first, see, I just saw the opening and thought it was garbage. Then I read the whole thing and... Well, I still thought it was garbage... Whatever. Point is, Newman has a friggin PhD and that makes him way superior to that illiterate Matzke, who should be ashamed for picking on someone so inferior and...
No wait, how did that go again"?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

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

Pages: (1000) < ... 60 61 62 63 64 [65] 66 67 68 69 70 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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