RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (117) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >   
  Topic: Telic Thoughts Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Zachriel



Posts: 2595
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 07 2008,06:27   

MikeGene blogs,

Quote
MikeGene: The analogy between The Design Matrix and a police investigation is useful in many ways.

MikeGene demonstrates his powers of suspiciosity.

Quote
MikeGene: At this point, we ask a question. Did Zachriel try to derail the thread on purpose or was it an accident?
...
Yes, it's a function of evidence, and the evidence indicates you tried to derail the thread.

No, MikeGene. Your powers of suspiciosity are faulty. From shoe-leather to Sherlock Holmes, I made every attempt to contribute to the analogy.



--------------
Tard Acquisition and Repository Department

   
JackT



Posts: 4
Joined: May 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 07 2008,17:38   

Mike,

Wow.  You are either being willfully blind to counter-evidence or you are being outright dishonest.  You failed to mention that most of my posts were *not* made from an anonymous proxy.

I do use a proxy when I post from work.  I would advise everyone to use a proxy when posting from work.  Given the ideologically charged nature of the subject, it is not unlikely that a deranged kook could launch a DoS (or some other) attack on the originating IP address.  This does not matter so much for an anonymous residential ISP, where one can either ask the ISP to block the attacks or obtain a new IP by resetting the cable modem.  But for a work IP address the problem is huge, causing loss of business while threatening one's job security in the process.  If it is not commonplace for people to use a proxy from work, then it should be.

Now if I had *always* used an anonymous proxy then the situation would be completely different.  There would be no anchor point at all, no unique signature.  But you do have a unique signature: the Comcast Cable IP address used for the vast majority of my posts, which is obviously not a proxy.  By omitting this fact you have willingly made a fraudulent argument.  How many of my posts used a proxy?  One?  Two?  Shame on you.

So that explains the proxy.  No case there.  Next:

   
Quote

1. If we go back to the thread where you ask your multiple questions, many of us immediately recognized the disrespectful nature of that posting. You tried to spin it differently by portraying the questions as follows: "The questions certainly are direct, and they constitute a challenge." A couple of weeks later, anon9 is the only one to repeat this very spin: "His last posts were challenging Mike directly."


As I said previously in email, my questions were no more strident than what a British journalist would ask a British politician.  And as olegt said, it seems that it wasn't just my tone that offended you.  My tone is a different matter, however, which may be set aside for the moment.

Wait!  I just mentioned olegt, and I used almost the same phrase as he did: "it seems that it wasn't just my tone that offended you."  Does this mean I am a sock puppet of olegt?  No, I referenced olegt by name and attributed the quote to him.  In the same manner, anon9 referenced my post directly and repeated the same phrasing.  That you we see this as suspicious is odd to say the least.

   
Quote

2. Bilbo makes an understandable mistake in his OP – he refers to JackT as Jack T. I myself made this mistake in my early replies to you, as it comes from not paying close attention to a new person's screen name. anon9 neither makes the same mistake nor follows Bilbo's lead from the OP. He gets this trivial detail right – it's JackT from the start.


In anon9's post, he or she made reference to a weeks-old post.  If you do not assume what you are trying to prove, namely that anon9 is me, then the conclusion is that anon9 is a lurker.  He's talking about a post in the past!  He was lurking and he knows about JackT.  The vast majority of posters have *not* made the "Jack T"-instead-of-"JackT" mistake.  This puts anon9 into that vast majority.  Again I am quite amazed that you would view something like this as "evidence."

   
Quote

3. Mostly importantly, anon9 knows JackT’s very last posting: “His very last one embarrassed Joy (though deservedly so).” How many lurkers could accurately cite the very last posting of another TT member that was a couple of weeks old, especially a member who is new and hasn’t posted much? At the time, JackT wasn’t banned and no one had reason to think he was banned (anon9 is the first and only one to make that accusation). It gets even better. JackT’s questioning of Joy is buried in a thread with close to 200 comments and no one else seemed to notice that brief line of off-topic questioning (at least no one commented on it or followed it up). I noticed it only because I was looking for JackT while I was waiting for JackT to reply to my questions and answers. And then there is the fact that Joy shows no evidence of being embarrassed, but one might imagine the giggling JackT thought he had embarrassed Joy (JackT: “No results found in the standard legal databases. *giggle*”). Again, anon9 seems to be the only one who agrees.


Again, if you do not already assume what you are trying to prove, then the conclusion is that anon9 is a lurker.  And again I am in near disbelief that I have to point the following out to you.  The thread was about JackT.  It was an apology to JackT from Bilbo.  But Bilbo does not link to or reference what he is apologizing for.  Before the days of google, you *may* have had a point.  But since we do not live in the early 90s, and since anon9 is probably motivated to find the wrongdoing on behalf of Bilbo, he conducts the simple search:

http://www.google.com/search?....+Search

And with that he sees the complete history of JackT at Telic Thoughts.  Whether I made a post in a thread with 200 comments, 20000 comments, or 20 comments is immaterial.  My comments are all in plain view.  As you mentioned, there aren't many of them.

Joy made an extraordinary claim: that she witnessed "the only legally established miracle in American jurisprudence."  Just pause for a moment consider how significant this would be.  If there were such a "legally established miracle," it would be made famous by apologists and trumpeted ad infinitum.

When asked for a way to verify her claim, Joy did not answer.  A skeptical person would conclude that in all likelihood Joy is mistaken.  Thus your argument here boils down to: "JackT and anon9 are both skeptical, ergo they are the same person."

And Mike, I *hope* you did not mean to imply that anon9 made his post *after* I was banned.  That would indeed be suspicious.  But in fact I anon9 posted *before* I was banned.  Big difference.

   
Quote

Okay, we’re supposed to believe you stumbled upon this blog and were simply perplexed, wondering "What the heck is going on here?" But go back to one of your disrespectful questions: “Will you still be wagging your finger at Dawkins and PZ Myers?” Do you notice the problem?


I need only quote the first sentence of the first post I made at Telic Thoughts, http://telicthoughts.com/the-rabbits-eye-view-of-the-duck

Quote

Hello Mike,

I've skimmed through the archives here in order to get some bearing on your point of view, but frankly I haven't been able to get a clear picture.


Most or many of my posts at Telic Thoughts were focused on trying to understand your position, up to and including the last questions I asked you.  As you see above, I said at the very beginning that I was reading the archives.

And again you are operating under early-90s assumptions.  Google is your friend.  A key ingredient in assessing a person's point of view of ID is his attitude toward religion.  If you google "site:telicthoughts.com MikeGene religion", Myers is the third hit and Dawkins is the tenth.  Both are on the first page.  Since I read Dawkins and Myers, my curiousity was piqued.  You may choose not to believe me, but you cannot claim that your argument has merit, especially when I told you explicitly that I was rummaging through the history of Telic Thoughts.

The rest of your response consists of the proxy red herring, which I have already covered.

JackT

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 07 2008,18:07   

Joy wrote:
Quote
Thanks for cool subject matter, sorry I've been so busy. Carry on, I hope you all settle the matter. But I doubt that it'll be settled between critics in a manner satisfactory to me. That's okay, since if everybody agreed with me I'd think something was very, very wrong with the world.

If everybody agreed with Joy, I'd commit suicide.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4471
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: June 07 2008,18:18   

Quote

Again I am quite amazed that you would view something like this as "evidence."


I'm not. Of course, I've been reading "Julie Thomas/Mike Gene" stuff since the early 90s. There's no bar too low for confirmatory "evidence" there.

Edit: The other way works, too, in that "Mike Gene"-land there is no bar too high for disconfirmatory evidence.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on June 07 2008,18:29

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

    
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2008,21:32   

For the amusement of those who know Thought Provoker and Joy:

(Warning -- not suitable for those who have recently eaten)

Quote (Thought Provoker @ June 10 2008, 8:46 pm)

Hi Joy,

Thank you.

I am honored to know you too.

There aren't many people who can surprise and challenge me with their insight.

You have done that and more.


--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5377
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2008,21:39   

Quote (keiths @ June 10 2008,22:32)
For the amusement of those who know Thought Provoker and Joy:

(Warning -- not suitable for those who have recently eaten)

 
Quote (Thought Provoker @ June 10 2008, 8:46 pm)

Hi Joy,

Thank you.

I am honored to know you too.

There aren't many people who can surprise and challenge me with their insight.

You have done that and more.

Didn't Thought Provoker troll here for a bit before tucking his tail?

Seems like there was a real spanking involved...

ETA: or am I thinking of someone else?

Edited by Lou FCD on June 10 2008,22:42

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2008,22:18   

Quote (Lou FCD @ June 10 2008,21:39)
 
Quote (keiths @ June 10 2008,22:32)
For the amusement of those who know Thought Provoker and Joy:

(Warning -- not suitable for those who have recently eaten)

   
Quote (Thought Provoker @ June 10 2008, 8:46 pm)

Hi Joy,

Thank you.

I am honored to know you too.

There aren't many people who can surprise and challenge me with their insight.

You have done that and more.

Didn't Thought Provoker troll here for a bit before tucking his tail?

Seems like there was a real spanking involved...

ETA: or am I thinking of someone else?

Yeah, TP is the one who came over here and tried to lecture several of us on physics, before deciding he was safer in a woo-friendly environment like Telic Thoughts.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Henry J



Posts: 4046
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2008,22:30   

Quote
Didn't Thought Provoker troll here for a bit before tucking his tail?


Remember "The Traveling Twin Takes a Short Cut", from late January and early February this year?

Henry

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5377
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2008,23:39   

Thanks, I'm glad I'm not senile, and that...

...what was I saying?

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
olegt



Posts: 1386
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2008,07:32   

Quote (Henry J @ June 10 2008,22:30)
Quote
Didn't Thought Provoker troll here for a bit before tucking his tail?


Remember "The Traveling Twin Takes a Short Cut", from late January and early February this year?

Henry

Some of us also followed TP to Telic Thoughts.

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

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2595
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2008,10:49   

Quote
Salvador T. Cordova: I see [sic] Rubin you've not even attempted to create a set of differential equations which will inevitably lead to a self replicating computer.

No I refutued that even your mischaracterization didn't hold water, [sic] Robbin.

By the way, [[sic] sick] Rubin, for the readers benefit ...

Robin had properly used the term sic (thus) to indicate that a misspelling was not a transcription error, but found in the original comment. Salvador T. Cordova turns it into self-parody.

--------------
Tard Acquisition and Repository Department

   
k.e..



Posts: 2875
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 11 2008,11:02   

Quote (Zachriel @ June 11 2008,18:49)
Quote
Salvador T. Cordova: II see [sic] Rubin you've not even attempted to create a set of differential equations which will inevitably lead to a self replicating computer.

No I refutued that even your mischaracterization didn't hold water, [sic] Robbin.

By the way, [[sic] sick] Rubin, for the readers benefit ...

Robin had properly used the term sic (thus) to indicate that a misspelling was not a transcription error, but found in the original comment. Salvador T. Cordova turns it into self-parody.

Then he will get this joke on misused latin "SEEK TRAINSEAT GLORIA MONDAY"

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard 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
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus

  
stevestory



Posts: 8878
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2008,18:45   

Salvador, Telic Thoughts, and Walt Brown

The tard density threatens to tear a hole in the Space Time Continuum.

   
olegt



Posts: 1386
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2008,18:52   

Quote (stevestory @ June 15 2008,18:45)
Salvador, Telic Thoughts, and Walt Brown

The tard density threatens to tear a hole in the Space Time Continuum.

That thread is pretty long.  Here is a direct link to Sal's comment on Brown.

ETA: Walt's name was brought up by Thought Provoker who offered this delightful euphemism:
Quote
Hi Mike,

I think, therefore I am.

I can only presume that other people think at all, much less what they think unless they present it.

I find it difficult to trust people who do not honestly and openly present what they think and defend it.

I offer Walt Brown as a religiously oriented thinker willing to honestly present and defend his hypothesis.

I must say that I actually enjoy TP's company there.  He's a good sport.

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

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1237
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2008,22:04   

Quote (olegt @ June 15 2008,18:52)
Quote (stevestory @ June 15 2008,18:45)
Salvador, Telic Thoughts, and Walt Brown

The tard density threatens to tear a hole in the Space Time Continuum.

That thread is pretty long.  Here is a direct link to Sal's comment on Brown.

ETA: Walt's name was brought up by Thought Provoker who offered this delightful euphemism:
 
Quote
Hi Mike,

I think, therefore I am.

I can only presume that other people think at all, much less what they think unless they present it.

I find it difficult to trust people who do not honestly and openly present what they think and defend it.

I offer Walt Brown as a religiously oriented thinker willing to honestly present and defend his hypothesis.

I must say that I actually enjoy TP's company there.  He's a good sport.

TP has quantum on the brain, so to speak.  :D

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
stevestory



Posts: 8878
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,02:35   

I've been reading Telic Thoughts lately. I don't know much about the site, but reading the comments today I got the feeling that it's like an intervention, and a lot of the commenters are sympathetic and trying to talk "Mike Gene" out of saying such stupid things. Anybody else get that feeling.

   
olegt



Posts: 1386
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,06:26   

The thread Evidence and Truth is a gem.  The opening post ends in the following way:
Quote
Right there, in that scene, we see the difference between evidence and truth.  Relying solely on the evidence may very well deliver only a superficial, or even false, understanding of the world.


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

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2595
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,06:42   

Quote (olegt @ June 16 2008,06:26)
The thread Evidence and Truth is a gem.  The opening post ends in the following way:
 
Quote
Right there, in that scene, we see the difference between evidence and truth.  Relying solely on the evidence may very well deliver only a superficial, or even false, understanding of the world.

Your first comment is a concise summation.

Quote
olegt: Evidence, Shmevidence…


--------------
Tard Acquisition and Repository Department

   
olegt



Posts: 1386
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,07:33   

The Pixie, puzzled by Mike's opening post, asks:
Quote

What else are you suggesting we use, Mike?

Have at it, boys.  

My entry: Use the Force, Luke.

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

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,21:28   

Have you ever wondered what life would be like under a theocracy?

Watch what happens when a commenter named 'robin' confronts the Telic Tards with these two Bible verses:
Quote
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
(Deuteronomy 25:11-12, NIV)

Quote
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
(Exodus 21:20-21, NIV)

Priceless.

Link

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10094
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2008,21:41   

Quality thread. BUT IT MUST BE MORAL, IT COMES FROM GOD...

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 8878
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2008,17:20   

Here's an interesting bit I saw recently at TT:

Quote
#  robin Says:
June 21st, 2008 at 4:09 pm |

Since this is a 'Speak Your Mind' thread, I'd like to mention something that has been bothering me for a long time.

Salvador Cordova has earned a reputation among those involved in the ID/creationism/evolution debate for blatant and chronic quote-mining, deceitful ad hominems, questionable debate tactics, and general dishonesty. The evidence shows that this reputation is deserved (I'm happy to provide examples if requested, but I think they might be unnecessary given how notorious Sal's behavior has become).

What bothers me is the lack of public condemnation of this behavior from Sal's fellow ID supporters.

I'm not saying that every ID supporter should police every statement made by fellow supporters. We are not our brothers' keepers, after all. I'm also not saying that ID supporters at Telic Thoughts should go out of their way to monitor statements made on other blogs. That would be an unreasonable expectation. But Sal has behaved this way on this very blog, and certainly many of his offensive actions elsewhere have been noted here by critics. It seems odd that he has been criticized so rarely, if at all, by ID supporters here. (If you think I'm wrong about this, I'm happy to consider evidence to the contrary).

Though I may disagree with ID supporters on many issues, I do believe that almost all of you take morality seriously, and that your moral codes do not sanction the kind of behavior Sal consistently indulges in.

His dishonesty and weird ad hominems are not just distasteful, they are downright counterproductive to his aims. Since Sal likes to portray himself as being among the leaders of the ID movement, those who don't know better might think that this is what ID is about, and that this is how IDers argue. I also suspect that the lack of repudiation by fellow ID supporters leads some observers to the conclusion that Sal's tactics enjoy general approval. That is a terrible message to be sending.

Perhaps some of you haven't said anything because you thought that ID critics were taking care of the problem. Indeed, ID critics have learned to keep an eye on Salvador and are pretty quick to point out his offenses, so it's possible that many of you have felt no reason to add anything when the critics have already weighed in.

If so, perhaps now is a good time to go on record with your feelings about Sal's methods. Do you approve of his quote-mining and absurd ad hominems? What about his debate tactics? Do you think his behavior is an asset or a liability to the ID movement?

I'm also especially interested in hearing from people who think highly of Salvador and his efforts.

The more opinions, the better.

Thanks. I feel better, having gotten that off my chest.

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 21 2008,17:32   

Quote (stevestory @ June 21 2008,15:20)
Here's an interesting bit I saw recently at TT:

   
Quote
#  robin Says:
June 21st, 2008 at 4:09 pm |

Since this is a 'Speak Your Mind' thread, I'd like to mention something that has been bothering me for a long time.

Salvador Cordova has earned a reputation among those involved in the ID/creationism/evolution debate for blatant and chronic quote-mining, deceitful ad hominems, questionable debate tactics, and general dishonesty. The evidence shows that this reputation is deserved (I'm happy to provide examples if requested, but I think they might be unnecessary given how notorious Sal's behavior has become).

What bothers me is the lack of public condemnation of this behavior from Sal's fellow ID supporters.

I'm not saying that every ID supporter should police every statement made by fellow supporters. We are not our brothers' keepers, after all. I'm also not saying that ID supporters at Telic Thoughts should go out of their way to monitor statements made on other blogs. That would be an unreasonable expectation. But Sal has behaved this way on this very blog, and certainly many of his offensive actions elsewhere have been noted here by critics. It seems odd that he has been criticized so rarely, if at all, by ID supporters here. (If you think I'm wrong about this, I'm happy to consider evidence to the contrary).

Though I may disagree with ID supporters on many issues, I do believe that almost all of you take morality seriously, and that your moral codes do not sanction the kind of behavior Sal consistently indulges in.

His dishonesty and weird ad hominems are not just distasteful, they are downright counterproductive to his aims. Since Sal likes to portray himself as being among the leaders of the ID movement, those who don't know better might think that this is what ID is about, and that this is how IDers argue. I also suspect that the lack of repudiation by fellow ID supporters leads some observers to the conclusion that Sal's tactics enjoy general approval. That is a terrible message to be sending.

Perhaps some of you haven't said anything because you thought that ID critics were taking care of the problem. Indeed, ID critics have learned to keep an eye on Salvador and are pretty quick to point out his offenses, so it's possible that many of you have felt no reason to add anything when the critics have already weighed in.

If so, perhaps now is a good time to go on record with your feelings about Sal's methods. Do you approve of his quote-mining and absurd ad hominems? What about his debate tactics? Do you think his behavior is an asset or a liability to the ID movement?

I'm also especially interested in hearing from people who think highly of Salvador and his efforts.

The more opinions, the better.

Thanks. I feel better, having gotten that off my chest.

My explanatory filter predicts that Sal will never change and that after attacking Robin, ID supporters will ignore Robin's advice.

Got that? Write it 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

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5377
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2008,10:22   

There are now at least 13 Telic Tards currently trying to pry their offended eyes from their sockets (well, as soon as they finish reading the smut and scrolling with the wrong hand evaluating the depravity of the enemy of Jesus).

Thank you robin.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5377
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2008,15:29   

Quote (Lou FCD @ June 22 2008,11:22)
There are now at least 13 Telic Tards currently trying to pry their offended eyes from their sockets (well, as soon as they finish reading the smut and scrolling with the wrong hand evaluating the depravity of the enemy of Jesus).

Thank you robin.

35 and counting.  Boy are they thoroughly loving investigating the evils of
The Lilith Obsession and Cinderella's Big Score.

Really eating it up getting to understand the enemy of Jesus so they can pray for the conviction of JanieBelle's soul, I tell you.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
windy



Posts: 1
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 23 2008,21:43   

Quote (Lou FCD @ June 22 2008,10:22)
There are now at least 13 Telic Tards currently trying to pry their offended eyes from their sockets (well, as soon as they finish reading the smut and scrolling with the wrong hand evaluating the depravity of the enemy of Jesus).

Thank you robin.

I went over to TT to find the "smarter creationist" that was mentioned at the start of this thread. Guess how I feel now.

Although I think bringing up Salvador's antics might have been an unwise move, since now they are all "how can you be so petty, we would never!" But still, this was funny:

Mikegene:
Quote
It's not our fault that you think Salvador is more important and interesting than science.

robin:
Quote
Am I entitled to conclude that you think Richard Dawkins is more important and interesting than science simply because there are so many non-science-related posts here dealing with his atheism, his personality, who he's 'slumming' with, and even whether he's sexy?

  
Art



Posts: 69
Joined: Dec. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: June 23 2008,23:15   

MikeGene:  
Quote
Since he did try to stir up a witch hunt against you, I suppose the ethical and fair thing to do is to allow you to question your accuser. I'll leave the thread open a little longer.

The concept of a telic thinker behaving ethically boggles the mind.  (And ruins keyboards...)

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 24 2008,19:24   

I was robin (now banned).  Bannings at TT are silent affairs, because the mods are afraid of the reaction they'll get if they announce them.  In that respect they are even slimier than UD.

Anyway, this has to be one of my favorite moments from the thread:

I asked Salvador:
Quote
What do you think about the fact that only one person, out of the entire membership at TT — a pro-ID blog — was willing even to partially defend your tactics?

Has that sunk in?

Bradford, in an apparent effort to make Salvador feel better, wrote this in response:
Quote
Salvador, you're not Attila the Hun and I've witnessed much, much worse on the web and in person during my life.

Gee, thanks, Bradford!

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 24 2008,20:55   

Cross-post from the UD thread:
Quote (keiths @ June 24 2008,20:52)
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 24 2008,15:43)
I must admit, UD has been poor entertainment of late.

Sadly true, which is why I started commenting at Telic Thoughts again (as 'robin').

In my brief tenure there (I've been banned), I mined a few good tard seams:

ID and Morality:
Watch as good, upstanding Christians defend the morality of Bible verses such as these:
Quote
If two men are fighting and the wife of one of them comes to rescue her husband from his assailant, and she reaches out and seizes him by his private parts, you shall cut off her hand. Show her no pity.
(Deuteronomy 25:11-12, NIV)

Quote
If a man beats his male or female slave with a rod and the slave dies as a direct result, he must be punished, but he is not to be punished if the slave gets up after a day or two, since the slave is his property.
(Exodus 21:20-21, NIV)


Trained Microbes!:
Joy gloats over a paper in Science:
Quote
Yeah, I know I'm being smug here. I've had a bit of a rough spring out in the real world, so it feels pretty good to 'win' something for a change... So, Culture Warriors. What say you about this evidence of intelligent design in life and evolution? Is this science? Should the researchers be expelled from academia for heresy? Should the journal Science be taken to task and forced to issue a retraction?

...until Raevmo and I point out what the paper actually says, and Joy stops gloating and decides that the authors are dogmatic Darwinists after all.

Evidence and Truth:
Mike Gene explains why evidence is overrated.

Speak Your Mind:
I accept the invitation and speak my mind regarding Salvador Cordova's behavior in the blogosphere, asking TTers whether they approve of it.  None of the ID supporters can bring themselves to express approval -- or disapproval.  Except for DaveScot, who says he disapproves of the quotemining but approves of the way Sal "bends over backwards trying not to offend anyone"!

To make Sal feel better, Bradford offers this:
Quote
Salvador, you're not Attila the Hun and I've witnessed much, much worse on the web and in person during my life.

Long-time tardaholics know that it is good to have a back-up supply in case your primary source runs dry.  Telic Thoughts will never match the pure, uncut tard at UD, but it's better than withdrawal.


--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
stevestory



Posts: 8878
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 24 2008,21:01   

Quote (windy @ June 23 2008,22:43)
Mikegene:  
Quote
It's not our fault that you think Salvador is more important and interesting than science.

robin:  
Quote
Am I entitled to conclude that you think Richard Dawkins is more important and interesting than science simply because there are so many non-science-related posts here dealing with his atheism, his personality, who he's 'slumming' with, and even whether he's sexy?

A long time ago I learned that if I was about to swing a sword, I should check and make sure it wasn't double-edged.

   
  3492 replies since Sep. 22 2007,13:50 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (117) < ... 6 7 8 9 10 [11] 12 13 14 15 16 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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