RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (341) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... >   
  Topic: UnReasonable Kansans thread, AKA "For the kids"< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 30 2007,02:41   

Quote (blipey @ Mar. 30 2007,06:34)
Way back in the good old days of UDoJ: the Sting Operation, DaveTard told me to look him up when I was in Austin.  Since I'll be passing through Austin on my show tour, I'm going to take him up on it.

I merely want to see how he behaves in person as none of know anything about that situation.  I have a list of questions that I'll try to get him to answer.  As I'm certainly no biologist, most of the questions are philosophical, political, or behavioral in nature.

Of course, in the same thread, DaveTard threatened to thrash me with chainsaws.  So, it could be fun.

He boasts he 'carries concealed' ......so if he invites you to feel his equalizer, don't look straight at his crotch.

He may be just wanting to do a bit of male bonding and is probably thinking about firing at the inuit/polar bear target  he floats off the back of his scurvy sloop, so as long as he doesn't want to hold your arm when you shoot it should be OK.

When you see him ask him if he has any hot stock picks for creationist/ID bio-tech startups .......new species without RM+NS and anti chance worship amulets ..that sort of thing.

Or where he can get virgin birth prevention kits or 'rising after death' protectors .....oh and SPEAKING OF RISING AFTER DEATH WHERE does he get his illicit Viagra from?

ROLFING HOMOS. 'ROUND THESE PARTS I PREVENT VIRGIN BIRTHS ALL BY MYSELF. ITS A THANKLESS JOB BUT SOMEONE HAS TO DO IT.-dt

HO RAH SEMPER TURD *fart*

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

   
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 01 2007,17:41   

Well, I have joined you all in the list of folks who ridicule FtK and thus will have their comments banned at her blog. So much for the "slightly neurotic obsession for finding truth" that she claims to have. Truthiness, perhaps. Without real commenters, that blog will degenerate into a conversation between Larry Fafarman and her, which is a black hole of vacuity if e'er there was one!

I have a backlog of at least three comments that I sent before my fall from grace, so I will dig those up and post them here when I get the time, since this post is for crossposting items that never get to her comment board. But frankly, I'm not sure if it is worth it, since all it does is attract attention to a fairly standard parroting of creationist canards, gushing over the latest DI press releases, and the occasional right-wing rant. Do we really want to attract more attention to that?

Frankly, almost every item she posts could be answered the same way. All you have to do is ask "What is the evidence for that assertion?" (or perhaps, "On what planet did the evidence for that assertion originate?"). Then she will ignore that question and proceed to the next post. Not a lot of room for real intellectual interchange, alas.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
blipey



Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,00:02   

Quote
Without real commenters, that blog will degenerate into a conversation between Larry Fafarman and her, which is a black hole of vacuity if e'er there was one!


This is certainly nothing new.  Welcome, Albatrossity2, to the world OF IDiots.  Most, if not all, ID blogs (not to mention books, conferences, and other events) involve the same sort of incestuous participation (or lack thereof).

For other not-so-stunning examples visit: <a href="www.uncommondescent.com" target="_blank">Uncommon Descent</a>, <a href="www.intelligentreasoning.com" target="_blank">Intelligent Reasoning</a>, or <a href="www.overwhelmingevidence.com" target="_blank">Overwhelming Evidence</a>.

I would like to thank you, Albatrossity2, for being outraged at these people.  But, I would also like to remind you to take them with the grain of salt which they deserve.  Otherwise they will drive you crazy.  They are not to be taken seriously.  That is, until they want to educate your children--then make a fuss and their stupidity will become obviousl (even to the American judicial system).

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,08:57   

She *must* protect her worldview. It is so fragile, being based on a barley relevant work of fiction written long ago. I suspect she knows she is dishonest, though.

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

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,11:07   

See

http://www2.blogger.com/comment....0867407

wherein DT gets all sciency with his physician (single experiment, no controls = proof positive), appears to believe that hyperproteinemia is a good thing, and endorses a dietary product that has "some enzymes" which he apparently believes will survive digestion in the stomach and get to the right place to "accelerate fat burning". Lots of good stuff here.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,11:17   

BEEFCAKE, BEEEEEEEFCAKE!!!!

BloaterTard.

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

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,11:58   

Dave,

The reason I haven't put your comments through is because I've been watching you ridicule me here and at RSR while at the same time trying to act as though you are interested in carrying on a sincere conversation with me on my blog.

I decided long ago that I'm not going to deal with those who are insincere.   There is no point in it.

I had been putting every single one of your comments through, although your first attempt at conversation with me was to refer to me as "Eff" the kids.  I looked past it and thought perhaps you really were interested in understanding the general public and how they feel about these issues.  

But, since then I've found that you are not sincere.  

I have your comments waiting on hold and have not deleted them.  If I ever feel that you are making an attempt at sincerity again, I'll put them through.

I very much enjoyed our conversations when you displayed some semblance of respect for me.  

Any of you who take the time to go through my blog archives will see that I regularly carry on lengthy conversations with those who treat me with respect.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,12:12   

FtK

Cart before horse.

When my comments were going through on your blog, I didn't post here. When they stopped going through, this seemed like an appropriate place to comment.

Oh, and BTW, it is not "ridicule" to point out truths such as your tendency to ignore questions and move to the next post, your tendency to link uncritically to anything posted by Luskin or Egnor, and your recycling of creationist deceptions. Ridicule is usually fact-free and malicious. In other words, it is what DaveScot does. But I'm sure he is "sincere", so that makes it all better.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,12:28   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,11:58)
Dave,

The reason I haven't put your comments through is because I've been watching you ridicule me here and at RSR while at the same time trying to act as though you are interested in carrying on a sincere conversation with me on my blog.

I decided long ago that I'm not going to deal with those who are insincere.   There is no point in it.

I had been putting every single one of your comments through, although your first attempt at conversation with me was to refer to me as "Eff" the kids.  I looked past it and thought perhaps you really were interested in understanding the general public and how they feel about these issues.  

But, since then I've found that you are not sincere.  

I have your comments waiting on hold and have not deleted them.  If I ever feel that you are making an attempt at sincerity again, I'll put them through.

I very much enjoyed our conversations when you displayed some semblance of respect for me.  

Any of you who take the time to go through my blog archives will see that I regularly carry on lengthy conversations with those who treat me with respect.

I am also a member of the general public. Please don't think that you speak on my behalf.

Can you explain why I can't find a single pro-ID site that allows general comments and critical posts, while #### near every anti-ID site does so?

A few years ago I was also an ID suporter. It didn't take long once I started to "follow the evidence no matter where it leads" to see exactly which side had the evidence.

No matter what you pretend to stand for, you are ignoring mountains of evidence and pointing at molehills of philosophy/apologetics/analogy to counter it.

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,12:59   

That's incorrect.  You didn't start posting here when I decided to put your comments on hold.  Your first post appeared some time ago, and I overlooked that one.  Your second post came when I signed up here.

Apparently, for some strange reason, you felt that would be a good time to come in here and join in the juvenile attacks on people whose views differ from their own.

I'd imagine it was an ego thing.  You saw that they were congratulating the "Dave" who was discussing various issues with me, and you decided to let them know it was you.  That way you could receive your accolades in person.

BTW, it's interesting that you bring up DaveScot and act as if I would allow him to ridicule others merely because he supports ID.  I believe you probably recall that I don't allow ridicule regardless of who it's coming from.

BTW, I signed up here for occasions such as this.  If I feel I am being unjustly accused of something by various posters in this forum, I may choose to comment on it.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:07   

Hello and welcome FTK. Please note that all your posts go through instantly, although if they contain profanity they may get moved to "the bathroom wall".

I look forward to your contributions, in this thread and others.

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

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:10   

Stephen,

I was banned from KCFS and PT, and PZ Myers doesn't allow some of my stuff to go through either.

Miraculously, after months of not being able to post at PT, suddenly I'm allowed to comment again.

You may believe that only ID blogs moderate or ban because obviously that is where you're most likely to be banned from posting.  I doubt you'd find yourself in the position of being banned at an anti-ID blog or forum.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:12   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,13:10)
Stephen,

I was banned from KCFS and PT, and PZ Myers doesn't allow some of my stuff to go through either.

Miraculously, after months of not being able to post at PT, suddenly I'm allowed to comment again.

You may believe that only ID blogs moderate or ban because obviously that is where you're most likely to be banned from posting.  I doubt you'd find yourself in the position of being banned at an anti-ID blog or forum.

Nice of you to take the moral high-ground and show us how it should be done!

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

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:19   

Thanks for the welcome, Richard.  

My contributions to this forum will be sparse.  I find no reason to carry on sincere conversations with people who are incapable of respectfully considering perspectives that differ from their own.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1373
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:24   

Quote
I look forward to your contributions, in this thread and others.


Whilst in no way wishing to cramp FTK's style, I have no great expectations of a meeting of minds. Let's see.

Unfortunately for FTK, ID is defunct as a political movement (and then limited to the US) and never was science, so I wonder if FTK has any thoughts on what strategy they might try next and why?

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:30   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,13:10)
Stephen,

I was banned from KCFS and PT, and PZ Myers doesn't allow some of my stuff to go through either.

Miraculously, after months of not being able to post at PT, suddenly I'm allowed to comment again.

You may believe that only ID blogs moderate or ban because obviously that is where you're most likely to be banned from posting.  I doubt you'd find yourself in the position of being banned at an anti-ID blog or forum.

Hi FTK.
I honestly hope that you do stay around for awhile.
Lenny Flank was also banned from PZMyers site (but I doubt you will consider Lenny an ally).

Maybe you missed the part where I said that I originally came "here"* as an ID suporter. I was convinced (at the time) that evolution was rubbish and ID was the way forward. I found that I had been lied to. You have been too. Just really do check out the evidence and arguments. This side is far more honest and open.

*Here=evolutionist/science sites and not specifically this one.

As an experiment FTK, name me one ID site that is as open to critics as this site. I will guarantee that you will not find one.

If you are genuinely searching FTK, you are in for a shock.

Best wishes.

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1373
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:31   

Quote
...people who are incapable of respectfully considering perspectives that differ from their own.


How on earth can you debate issues "respectfully". If I am wrong, I expect people to tell me I am wrong, and I wouldn't respect someone who patronised me by equivocating on their opinion to avoid hurting my feelings.

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:40   

Quote (Alan Fox @ April 02 2007,13:31)
Quote
...people who are incapable of respectfully considering perspectives that differ from their own.


How on earth can you debate issues "respectfully". If I am wrong, I expect people to tell me I am wrong, and I wouldn't respect someone who patronised me by equivocating on their opinion to avoid hurting my feelings.

I think that you may have hit upon something there.
Most of the population do not think that way. They will make conversation around a bar and not expect to be held accountable on "niggling" details. I think that is the way normal people behave. Coming to a site like this is a culture shock for the "average Joe". It certainly was for me.

I am not objecting, just looking/saying.

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:43   

Alan,

Would you mind if I make a list of words and phrases taken from this forum which are highly inappropriate when discussing the issues surrounding this debate? It may take quite some time to put together as there is a lot to work with here, but I'd be willing to point them out to you.

Stating your case is one thing -- nasty and vulgar responses on a regular basis is another, and you're certainly not going to convince someone of your point when you act in such an unprofessional and childish manner.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1373
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:46   

Actually, Stephen, I thought after posting my comment that I sometimes do refrain from unadorned honesty, especially when talking to my mother :)

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,13:50   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,12:59)
Quote
That's incorrect.  You didn't start posting here when I decided to put your comments on hold.  Your first post appeared some time ago, and I overlooked that one.  Your second post came when I signed up here.

snip...

I'd imagine it was an ego thing.  You saw that they were congratulating the "Dave" who was discussing various issues with me, and you decided to let them know it was you.  That way you could receive your accolades in person.

Quote
That's incorrect.  You didn't start posting here when I decided to put your comments on hold.  Your first post appeared some time ago, and I overlooked that one.  Your second post came when I signed up here.

snip...

I'd imagine it was an ego thing.  You saw that they were congratulating the "Dave" who was discussing various issues with me, and you decided to let them know it was you.  That way you could receive your accolades in person.


Wrong again. My first post addressing you directly, which is what I thought we were talking about, came after you blocked my comments. Revisionist history only works if the folks who were involved have died, and rarely works on the internet, where everything is archived for everyone to see. It is harder to pin down, however, when my comments don't appear on your blog, because then nobody knows when I submitted them!

And yes, I admit I was pleased that all of my efforts to bring a note of reason to the ReasonableKansans blog were noticed here. That is not the same thing as signing up just to collect my "accolades", however. I came out of the closet because I despise anonymity, and because I was actually hoping that you had seen the light and would be willing to discuss things here in an open forum. Hope springs eternal...

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
Alan Fox



Posts: 1373
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:02   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,08:43)
Alan,

Would you mind if I make a list of words and phrases taken from this forum which are highly inappropriate when discussing the issues surrounding this debate? It may take quite some time to put together as there is a lot to work with here, but I'd be willing to point them out to you.

Stating your case is one thing -- nasty and vulgar responses on a regular basis is another, and you're certainly not going to convince someone of your point when you act in such an unprofessional and childish manner.

FTK

You certainly don't need my permission for whatever you wish to do. I have no ambition to convince you of anything. You have the opportunity to broaden your outlook or not,as you choose.

I doubt you will find any comment of mine that contains vulgarity or nastiness, but I will certainly apologise if you prove me mistaken.

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:03   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,13:43)
Alan,

Would you mind if I make a list of words and phrases taken from this forum which are highly inappropriate when discussing the issues surrounding this debate? It may take quite some time to put together as there is a lot to work with here, but I'd be willing to point them out to you.

Stating your case is one thing -- nasty and vulgar responses on a regular basis is another, and you're certainly not going to convince someone of your point when you act in such an unprofessional and childish manner.

FTK,

Could you please consider this?

Scientific arguments are not about polite debate. Somebody spends time discovering evidence and then spends time to prepare and present it. At any time their hard work can be ridiculed and/or torn to shreds by counter evidence. Scientists accept this.

Science is not a polite conversation. Accept that or do not post on blogs that have scientists posting science.

I was also shocked at the way conversations happened on science blogs when I first started posting. BTW you really should check the talkorigins site before making arguments that got refuted years ago.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:11   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,12:59)
BTW, it's interesting that you bring up DaveScot and act as if I would allow him to ridicule others merely because he supports ID.  I believe you probably recall that I don't allow ridicule regardless of who it's coming from.

From your Blog:

Quote
DaveScot said...
Curious about what school district in their right mind would include a book on family illustrating a homo household for students only five years old I googled Lexington "David Park" and found it was Lexington, Massachusetts. Figures. I wonder if the parent can get a fair trial in that homo haven where the jury won't be a jury of peers but rather a jury of queers. ROFLMAO - I crack me up. Am I allowed to use the word "queer" here or is calling a poofter a queer considered name-calling?




.....

Quote
Forthekids said...
Holy crap, Dave. You are going to get me in all kinds of trouble...

I'm going to have to post a disclaimer somewhere...

"I will not be held responsible for what comes out of DaveScot's mouth".

LOL...

8:02 AM


OH NO! THE IRON FIST OF FTK!

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

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:15   

Dave wrote:
“My first post addressing you directly, which is what I thought we were talking about, came after you blocked my comments.”

This is the first sentence in your second post here:

“Well, now that FtK has joined up here, I can come out of the closet!”

I noticed another post soon after that one, so at that point I started holding your comments on my blog.

you wrote:
“When my comments were going through on your blog, I didn't post here. When they stopped going through, this seemed like an appropriate place to comment.”

Your comment I highlighted above came *before* I started holding your comments on my blog.  Of course no one here will take my word for it, but in your first post you did not mention that I had banned you, neither did you state that I wasn’t responding to you.  

I actually enjoyed our conversations and I had thought you were sincere.  I was mistaken.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Ftk



Posts: 2239
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:20   

Richard,

You might notice that DaveScot got the point.  I haven't seen anything inappropriate since that post.

--------------
"Evolution is a creationism and just as illogical [as] the other pantheistic creation myths"  -forastero

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10324
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:27   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,14:20)
Richard,

You might notice that DaveScot got the point.  I haven't seen anything inappropriate since that post.

You don't allow, or you don't allow any more? No double secret moderation for DaveTard.

You seem to take umbrage over people saying nasty things elsewhere. I've highlighted to you numerous indiscretions from Dave in various blogs and yet he still posts on your blog. I'm having trouble understanding how this is not a double standard. Please help, FTK!

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

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:32   

Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,14:15)
Dave wrote:
“My first post addressing you directly, which is what I thought we were talking about, came after you blocked my comments.”

This is the first sentence in your second post here:

“Well, now that FtK has joined up here, I can come out of the closet!”

snip

I actually enjoyed our conversations and I had thought you were sincere.  I was mistaken.

What part of "addressing you directly" is unclear to you?  Was that post addressing you directly (i.e. commenting on things you said on your blog)?  Or was it addressed to Richard and J-Dog and others? Since I was the one writing it, I'll have to vote for door #2 and conclude that I was not, at least in my own mind, addressing you directly.

But we digress, per usual, by focusing on nit-picky he-said/she-said sideshows.

You can bet that I am sincere; I sincerely desire a better understanding of the issues, both for me and for you. I don't know how insincerity can be the accusation when I post public messages on blogs that I know you read. How sneaky is that?

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
stevestory



Posts: 9030
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:33   

Quote (Richardthughes @ April 02 2007,15:07)
Hello and welcome FTK. Please note that all your posts go through instantly, although if they contain profanity they may get moved to "the bathroom wall".

I look forward to your contributions, in this thread and others.

I won't bother to defend our moderation policy vs that of ID blogs', the difference is obvious.

I will remind everyone, though, that there is one basic rule here--discuss things respectfully with each other as you would in, say, a college classroom. Unnecessary insults will be moved to the bathroom wall.

(I know that rule has been absent lately on that thread where GoP, Skeptic, Lenny etc intersect, but I'll deal with that shortly.)

   
stevestory



Posts: 9030
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: April 02 2007,14:44   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ April 02 2007,16:03)
Quote (Ftk @ April 02 2007,13:43)
Alan,

Would you mind if I make a list of words and phrases taken from this forum which are highly inappropriate when discussing the issues surrounding this debate? It may take quite some time to put together as there is a lot to work with here, but I'd be willing to point them out to you.

Stating your case is one thing -- nasty and vulgar responses on a regular basis is another, and you're certainly not going to convince someone of your point when you act in such an unprofessional and childish manner.

FTK,

Could you please consider this?

Scientific arguments are not about polite debate. Somebody spends time discovering evidence and then spends time to prepare and present it. At any time their hard work can be ridiculed and/or torn to shreds by counter evidence. Scientists accept this.

Science is not a polite conversation. Accept that or do not post on blogs that have scientists posting science.

I was also shocked at the way conversations happened on science blogs when I first started posting. BTW you really should check the talkorigins site before making arguments that got refuted years ago.

Science gets heated sometimes, and it's impolite in the sense that scientists routinely challenge each others' fundamental beliefs, but it still needs to be respectful in the college classroom sense I mentioned.

To assist this discussion away from meta-issues about moderation and sincerity and things like that, and onto the meat of the scientific, legal, and political issues ID raises, I'll post here some questions for FtK to get the ball rolling:

1 ID claims to be revolutionary science. Real scientific revolutions lead to what Kuhn called 'normal science', where the new theory is used to solve lots of unsolved problems. ID isn't solving any problems. The ID journal PCID hasn't published an issue in a year and a half. What's wrong?

2 If William Dembski's work is a revolution in Information Theory, why has he never even been mentioned in an IEEE ITSOC publication? Not even once?

3 The Discovery Institute spends ~$4 million per year. A biology lab which spent that kind of money could hire 30-40 postdocs and would generate over 50 scientific publications per year. The discovery institute's money has generated 0 publications in the last year. Does that seem funny to you?

4 No matter how disturbing or unwanted, scientific revolutions only make headway when the revolutionaries convince their colleagues of its merits. The big bang, quantum mechanics, plate tectonics theory, none of these theories advanced by the lobbying of school boards. Rather, the researchers showed that the new hypothesis got results, and after a period of resistance, their colleagues relented. How are IDers hoping to achieve that without any new results in biology?

5 ID supporter and super-religious guy David Heddle used to be a nuclear physicist at Cornell. After much exposure to Dembski's works, he eventually concluded last year that
a) some ID efforts made christians look like fools
b) ID things like Irreducible Complexity aren't real science and don't lead to real experiments
c) Dembski's math is bogus
d) ID really is religious
e) the School Board efforts were a disaster
and finally "I am embarrassed by the ID movement: its tactics as well as the lack of intellectualism of many (though not all) of its leaders."

(http://helives.blogspot.com/2006/09/color-me-id-cynical.html)

Feel free to explain why Mr. Heddle is wrong on any of those points. Especially c.

(and if Dave Heddle wants to complain that I misrepresented anything he said, he's welcome to do so. It isn't my intention to quote mine. The 'S' in my name is followed by 'teve', not 'alvador'. )

6 The guy who proved the No Free Lunch theorems says Dembski's math doesn't prove anything. Is he wrong about his own theorem?

   
  10202 replies since Mar. 17 2007,23:38 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (341) < 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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