Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Uncommonly Dense Thread 4

Pages: (297) < ... 135 136 137 138 139 [140] 141 142 143 144 145 ... >

midwifetoad Posts: 3138 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,08:10    They are well insulated. -------------- ... a poster child for irresponsible and deceitful misrepresentation of design theory on the Internet. http://tinyurl.com/9axtwbe....9axtwbe

Richardthughes Posts: 9474 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,10:02    Barry pulls out the old "Tornado in a junkyard" http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-424310 Quote Barry ArringtonApril 30, 2012 at 10:14 pm @Arthur Hunt re [9], And then put a bunch of scrabble letters in that same blender, hit the puree button, dump it out, and voila! you get the sonnets of Shakespeare. It’s magic. -------------- "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

NormOlsen Posts: 104 Joined: Nov. 2011 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,14:53    Barry is now asking for examples of Astonishingly Stupid Arrogance How about:   Quote I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29).

paragwinn Posts: 376 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,17:27    Quote (NormOlsen @ May 01 2012,12:53) Barry is now asking for examples of Astonishingly Stupid Arrogance How about:     Quote I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29). Someone should ask him if he will he accept some of his own statements for submission. -------------- All women build up a resistance [to male condescension]. Apparently, ID did not predict that. -Kristine 4-19-11 F/Ns to F/Ns to F/Ns etc. The whole thing is F/N ridiculous -Seversky on KF footnote fetish 8-20-11 The geological maps that realist use to make money are all surface maps. -forastero

J-Dog Posts: 4303 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,21:19    Quote (paragwinn @ May 01 2012,17:27) Quote (NormOlsen @ May 01 2012,12:53) Barry is now asking for examples of Astonishingly Stupid Arrogance How about:       Quote I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29). Someone should ask him if he will he accept some of his own statements for submission. FIXED THAT FOR YOU! Quote Someone should ask tell him if  he will he   could accept some any of his own statements for submission. Edited by J-Dog on May 01 2012,21:21 -------------- Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10 Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08 UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

Richardthughes Posts: 9474 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,22:41    Quote (NormOlsen @ May 01 2012,14:53) Barry is now asking for examples of Astonishingly Stupid Arrogance How about:   Quote I predict that in the next five years [by 2003] intelligent design will be sufficiently developed to deserve funding from the National Science Foundation (Dembski, Mere Creation, 1998, p. 29). -------------- "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

Woodbine Posts: 454 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 01 2012,22:53    Bruce David needs to get out more.... Quote Well, another rather obvious one is that while the biological establishment is claiming that “evolution is a fact”, we are in the midst of a genuine Kuhnsian paradigm shift in biology—from the neo-Darwinian synthesis to ID. Fuck.....I fell off the wagon. .....climbs back on.

Soapy Sam Posts: 363 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: May 02 2012,02:41    Quote (Woodbine @ May 01 2012,22:53) Bruce David needs to get out more....     Quote Well, another rather obvious one is that while the biological establishment is claiming that “evolution is a fact”, we are in the midst of a genuine Kuhnsian paradigm shift in biology—from the neo-Darwinian synthesis to ID. Fuck.....I fell off the wagon. :angry: .....climbs back on. Kuhn's Law! Whatever we know is wrong. 1859 or thereabouts - paradigm shift from Designer-implemented lifeforms to gradual modification filtered by environmental survival. Two thousand and ... something, expect that 'paradigm shift' ... er ... back to where we started. Kuhn's yo-yo. -------------- Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad. The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

Bob O'H Posts: 1865 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 02 2012,03:50    I was going to point out that Barry was quote-mining, but I almost lost the will to live. Anyway, this is where Hacking's quote comes from. He doesn't sound arrogant. -------------- ID theorists don’t postulate a designer for their arguments. - Crandaddy There is no connection between a peppered moth, natural selection, and religion that I can see. - FtK

CeilingCat Posts: 1496 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 02 2012,06:59    VJTorley is soiling himself again in an article on Dan Savage's "Bible Bullshit" speach:   Quote Incidentally, is Savage aware that slavery remains legal in the United States to this day, under the Thirteenth Amendment to the Constiution, which permits it “as a punishment for crime, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted”? The 13th Amendment:   Quote Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction. Section 2. Congress shall have power to enforce this article by appropriate legislation. -------------- Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.   Edward Feser ‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

REC Posts: 421 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 02 2012,09:18    Their 'scientists' are channelling JoeG: Quote gauger May 1, 2012 at 10:06 pm Nick, All the evolutionary hypotheses concerning the evolution of CPS that I have seen are based on sequence and structural analysis only. No testing. In fact it would quite interesting to see if the hypothetical fusions and duplications that supposedly formed the first CPS in the first cells can be accomplished by purely undirected processes. A worthy experiment indeed. But until it has been shown that such a process can in fact generate an enzyme capable of channeling unstable intermediates from one active site to the next, these remain hypotheses only. The problem is that similarity of sequence *alone* does not establish the existence of a plausible evolutionary path. "purely undirected processes" So take your genome sequences and x-ray crystallography and shove it. Forget reconstructions of ancestral enzymes, that's design. What you have to do is design a living organism without CPS, toss it is some media, and wait until it evolves CPS. And no frontloading the Kinase domains and other domains CPS is built up of. That isn't a viable organism? Tough shit-better get you some prebiotic soup and wait till multicellular life comes out.

Patrick Posts: 459 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: May 02 2012,19:14    Quote (midwifetoad @ May 01 2012,09:10) They are well insulated. If only they were isolated. Nick Matzke, Neil Rickert, and one or two others keep injecting just enough reality to prevent the collapse that will forever put the ID denizens beyond the tard event horizon.

Soapy Sam Posts: 363 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,03:43    Quote (REC @ May 02 2012,09:18) Their 'scientists' are channelling JoeG:         Quote gauger May 1, 2012 at 10:06 pm Nick, All the evolutionary hypotheses concerning the evolution of CPS that I have seen are based on sequence and structural analysis only. No testing. In fact it would quite interesting to see if the hypothetical fusions and duplications that supposedly formed the first CPS in the first cells can be accomplished by purely undirected processes. A worthy experiment indeed. But until it has been shown that such a process can in fact generate an enzyme capable of channeling unstable intermediates from one active site to the next, these remain hypotheses only. The problem is that similarity of sequence *alone* does not establish the existence of a plausible evolutionary path. "purely undirected processes" So take your genome sequences and x-ray crystallography and shove it. Forget reconstructions of ancestral enzymes, that's design. What you have to do is design a living organism without CPS, toss it is some media, and wait until it evolves CPS. And no frontloading the Kinase domains and other domains CPS is built up of. That isn't a viable organism? Tough shit-better get you some prebiotic soup and wait till multicellular life comes out. LOL! If it did, you can bet your life Design was at the back of it, 'cos you can't have complexity without it. And even if you have a plausible evolutionary path doesn't mean it was the actual evolutionary path. IOW all you have to do is step up and provide some EVIDENCE taht blind, undirected processes can be a designer-mimic. Edited by Soapy Sam on May 03 2012,04:16 -------------- Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad. The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

Woodbine Posts: 454 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,06:06    Quote (Soapy Sam @ May 03 2012,09:43) LOL! If it did, you can bet your life Design was at the back of it, 'cos you can't have complexity without it. And even if you have a plausible evolutionary path doesn't mean it was the actual evolutionary path. IOW all you have to do is step up and provide some EVIDENCE taht blind, undirected processes can be a designer-mimic. Taht was scarily realistic!

Amadan Posts: 1198 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,06:12    Quote (Woodbine @ May 03 2012,12:06) Quote (Soapy Sam @ May 03 2012,09:43) LOL! If it did, you can bet your life Design was at the back of it, 'cos you can't have complexity without it. And even if you have a plausible evolutionary path doesn't mean it was the actual evolutionary path. IOW all you have to do is step up and provide some EVIDENCE taht blind, undirected processes can be a designer-mimic. :O Taht was scarily realistic! It just needs "Ya see" and a few "evotards" and . . .  you'd win a bunny. -------------- "People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011 JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

k.e.. Posts: 2498 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,07:47    Quote (Amadan @ May 03 2012,14:12) Quote (Woodbine @ May 03 2012,12:06) Quote (Soapy Sam @ May 03 2012,09:43) LOL! If it did, you can bet your life Design was at the back of it, 'cos you can't have complexity without it. And even if you have a plausible evolutionary path doesn't mean it was the actual evolutionary path. IOW all you have to do is step up and provide some EVIDENCE taht blind, undirected processes can be a designer-mimic. :O Taht was scarily realistic! It just needs "Ya see" and a few "evotards" and . . .  you'd win a bunny. IS IT REALLY WORTH TEH EFFORT? HOMOS! Those clowns ought to consider joining an insurance company because they're doing a piss poor job at the circus. -------------- "I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clownDaveTard suit." dogdidit Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror. DAVE TARD

Soapy Sam Posts: 363 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,07:51    Quote (Amadan @ May 03 2012,06:12)     Quote (Woodbine @ May 03 2012,12:06)     Quote (Soapy Sam @ May 03 2012,09:43) LOL! If it did, you can bet your life Design was at the back of it, 'cos you can't have complexity without it. And even if you have a plausible evolutionary path doesn't mean it was the actual evolutionary path. IOW all you have to do is step up and provide some EVIDENCE taht blind, undirected processes can be a designer-mimic. :O Taht was scarily realistic! It just needs "Ya see" and a few "evotards" and . . .  you'd win a bunny. Ah, this stuff writes itself! I had to ETA "that" to "taht", for added Joeyness.   I reckon he has some of this stuff on speed-dial - that could account for the frequency of 'obvioulsy', as well as the ease of mimicry. -------------- Evolutionists trust entropy for creation of life but are like men who horse a crocodile to get across a river - niwrad. The organism could already metabolize citrus. Joe G

REC Posts: 421 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,13:18    PaV blusters some BS: mike: Quote We recently had a rehash discussion about that here at UD. The argument comes down to what constitutes an homologous protein. One protein–can’t remember it’s name–had only ONE amino acid in common with another protein, yet it was termed “homologous.” WTF is he talking about? Not only clueless about how homology is determined-but two proteins of, say, 300 amino acids can't share just 1 amino acid in common!

rossum Posts: 148 Joined: Dec. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,14:46    Quote (REC @ May 03 2012,13:18) PaV blusters some BS: mike: Quote We recently had a rehash discussion about that here at UD. The argument comes down to what constitutes an homologous protein. One protein–can’t remember it’s name–had only ONE amino acid in common with another protein, yet it was termed “homologous.” WTF is he talking about? Not only clueless about how homology is determined-but two proteins of, say, 300 amino acids can't share just 1 amino acid in common! Two strands of Poly-A DNA would give two strands of nothing but lysine. Perhaps that is what he meant, tough I doubt it. rossum -------------- The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

Henry J Posts: 3735 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,14:50    Maybe if one of them is made from only ten of the amino acids, and the other is made from only the other ten?

REC Posts: 421 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,15:45    I had just read that comment--on second look, the OP is from PaV, too. He's, lets say....confused. He starts off with the bacterial flagella.... Then quotes a paper: "The protozoan has four flagella. The family it belongs to is somewhere between excavates, the oldest group with two flagella, and some amoebae, which is the oldest group with only one flagellum." So we're clearly talking Eukaryotes here....except: PaV: "Now, although scientists have chosen (why?) to call this organism “The Protozoa,” it actually belongs at the base of all eukaryotes, which means that it is not really a “protozoa”, and hence likely does not share so-called “common descent” with bacteria." The probability he has a clue about what he's blathering  about is <4.

midwifetoad Posts: 3138 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 03 2012,20:21    A quick trip to Wikipedia might have forestalled some humiliation. -------------- ... a poster child for irresponsible and deceitful misrepresentation of design theory on the Internet. http://tinyurl.com/9axtwbe....9axtwbe

CeilingCat Posts: 1496 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 04 2012,06:08    Matteo sums it up:   Quote Although I’m an ID supporter, I do need to point out that conflating the flagella of bacteria and those of Protozoa constitutes a rookie mistake. but not before Nick Matzke gives a link to a devastating review of the original press release PaV's post is based on. PaV, meanwhile, he don't say so much any more. -------------- Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.   Edward Feser ‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

midwifetoad Posts: 3138 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 04 2012,08:35    Quote (CeilingCat @ May 04 2012,06:08) Matteo sums it up:   Quote Although I’m an ID supporter, I do need to point out that conflating the flagella of bacteria and those of Protozoa constitutes a rookie mistake. but not before Nick Matzke gives a link to a devastating review of the original press release PaV's post is based on. PaV, meanwhile, he don't say so much any more. This couldn't possibly imply that there is more than one kind of flagellum or that flagella have evolved in different ways or that the icon of ID is reducible or at least buildable in different ways. -------------- ... a poster child for irresponsible and deceitful misrepresentation of design theory on the Internet. http://tinyurl.com/9axtwbe....9axtwbe

MichaelJ Posts: 453 Joined: June 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 04 2012,17:55    Have the graphs about site visits etc been redone to include April? (hint-hint)

olegt Posts: 1301 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 04 2012,22:08    If there is some naive soul who still thinks that ID is not about interventionist God, Timaeus dispels any doubts. Quote That is where ID people strongly differ from TE/EC people — they have a much greater commitment to retaining the uncompromised theologies of the various ancient Christian traditions — Reformed, Lutheran, Anglican, Catholic, and Orthodox. The TE/EC people are generally much more enthralled with post-Enlightenment developments in Christian theology. But the “theism” of post-Enlightenment thought is quite different from the “theism” of pre-Enlightenment thought. The theism of pre-Enlightenment thought was not the captive slave of naturalism in origins. ... Would it be rude to ask you, Gregory, if you agree with the working understanding of BioLogos, i.e., that ultimately the origin of life, species, and man will all be explained in wholly naturalistic terms, i.e., as requiring no “intervention” but only “natural laws” devised by and sustained by God? I don’t believe you have ever spoken to this subject. It may be your silence in this area that makes your position so hard for people at UD to understand. -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

Woodbine Posts: 454 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 04 2012,22:56    Quote I don’t believe you have ever spoken to this subject. It may be your silence in this area that makes your position so hard for people at UD to understand. Hah! Translation..... Quote Would you please tell us which Jesus you believe in so we can treat you accordingly? Edited by Woodbine on May 05 2012,05:00

sparc Posts: 1469 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 05 2012,00:57    Now this is true: -------------- "[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God." - William Dembski -

Woodbine Posts: 454 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 05 2012,01:38    UD are reporting JAD has died*. RIP you crazy bastard. These blog posts seem to be his final dispatches.... * Considering the source there's every chance JAD is actually in the rudest of health.

Freddie Posts: 331 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 05 2012,01:46    Quote (Woodbine @ May 05 2012,01:38) UD are reporting JAD has died*. RIP you crazy bastard. These blog posts seem to be his final dispatches.... * Considering the source there's every chance JAD is actually in the rudest of health. If not then there is certainly some good fodder for a conspiracy post, here's his Obit (PZ posted this earlier): JAD Obituary [ETA: Just realized the link was posted previously on Bathroom Wall as well ... sorry for dupe!] -------------- Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy. Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people. Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.

Pages: (297) < ... 135 136 137 138 139 [140] 141 142 143 144 145 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard