RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 442 443 444 445 446 [447] 448 449 450 451 452 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:07   

Quote (jujuquisp @ Mar. 16 2007,13:34)
I have interweb cooties?  Actually, I'm the only guy with enough balls to directly stand up to DaveTard around here.  I confront the guy directly while all of you cower away into AtBC and take your potshots from afar.

LOL!
EDIT: Forgot to say, that was pretty #### funny.

  
2ndclass



Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:14   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Mar. 16 2007,08:53)
TRoutMac:  
Quote
Consider the title chosen for Darwin's famous book… "Origin of Species." I would suppose that the first form of life to appear on this planet was some species of something.

And since there's a book called "The Origin of Humankind", it follows that the first form of life must have been human.  So much for the Genesis creation story.

--------------
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

  
phonon



Posts: 396
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:17   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,13:50)
I for one, do tend to pay attention to the scientific evidence if I can understand it. I doubt phonon is any different.

I guess I pay attention, but not much. :)

 
Quote
Couldn't simple human building projects also be causing the warming? Isn't it at least possible that paving over green land with tarmac and other synthetically produced material be adding to global warming?

I do know that the heat island effect was taken into account in simulations. I think that the consensus is that the effect is negligible. IIRC.

 
Quote
I am not a global warming denier. I have changed some of my light sources to use less fuel intensive bulbs but read today that they are likely to require 150% more fuel to make and contain other polutants such as mercury. It is all damned confusing. My car is now off-the-road as I haven't used it in over a year because of environmental concerns. Basically I do care, I want our planet to be habitable and pleasant for my grandchildren to live on.

I wouldn't call myself a GW denier at all either. But, I'm not the type of person that will pretend to know something when I don't.

I also do my best to be "enviro-conscious." I live really close to work so that I don't have to drive. I made a point to do that. Even when I do drive, I have a little compact car. If I could afford it, I'd buy a hybrid and get it rigged to be a plug in hybrid. I recycle everything I consume that is made of paper, metal, or #1 or #2 plastic and I try to avoid buying things that aren't packaged in these materials. If I could afford it, my house would be as solar powered as possible. But, I'll also tell you that my decision to do all these things has little to do with global warming. Even if global warming weren't considered a problem, I'd still do these things and try to do more.

I hate urban sprawl. I hate superhighways. I hate oil refineries. I hate coal mines. I hate concentrated animal feeding operations (try to buy meat from family farms, not easy or cheap). I hate the fur industry. I hate puppy farms. I hate clear cut logging. I hate the population explosion. on and on...

So, if anyone wants to characterize me as some sort of redneck republican science hater, try again.

--------------
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

  
2ndclass



Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:25   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,09:00)
FOR THE KIDS!

https://www2.blogger.com/comment....6864891

       
Quote
A little googling points to the fact that jujquisp is one of THEM, and that tells me that he is not interested in the real issues surrounding this debate.

He merely gets off on being a part of those who ridicule others. It's a game for them, nothing more. They are the type of people who truly enjoy poking fun of others, and they follow DaveS around everywhere he goes. It's sick if you ask me. Stalking comes to mind.

The only reason I let them post here occassionally is because they need to read stuff written by people who are truly concerned about the issues surrounding this debate. Not all of us are out here merely to get our jollies from harrassing others.


C'mon guys, quit harassing FTK and DaveScot.  This isn't a game for them; they're very serious about it.  They're working hard to educate themselves by way of technical journals college curricula ID blogs.

--------------
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

  
phonon



Posts: 396
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:34   

John Baez:
 
Quote
It’s no good to work on string theory with a glum attitude like “it’s the only game in town.” There are lots of other wonderful things for theoretical physicists to do. Things where your work has a good chance of matching experiment… or things where you take a huge risk by going out on your own and trying something new. . . .

That's a strange attitude for a physicist. Why stop investigating string theory? It's fruitful as a math program and interesting hypothetical models spring out of it.

And he's saying that you could go out on a limb and try something new, you know, like the people who contributed to the synthesis of string theory.

To me, it's just weird for this guy to say this.

Didn't he have a song about "you don't know what you've got till it's gone?" Maybe that's what his plan is. Ditch string theory, then it'll all makes sense.

jaredl:
Quote
Might it be said that ID luminaries represent the valley-crossers, and the establishment biologists represent the hill-climbers?
Or maybe they're more like the windmill attackers?

--------------
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10323
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:35   

Quote (jujuquisp @ Mar. 16 2007,13:34)
I have interweb cooties?  Actually, I'm the only guy with enough balls to directly stand up to DaveTard around here.  I confront the guy directly while all of you cower away into AtBC and take your potshots from afar.

FTK wont post any of my comments. They're too facty.

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

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:35   

Quote (phonon @ Mar. 16 2007,14:17)
I wouldn't call myself a GW denier at all either. But, I'm not the type of person that will pretend to know something when I don't.

I also do not think that I know this subject. I don't. It is damned confusing.

Now I got sucked in by the ID non-sense. I am totally out of my depth on this one.

To add to my problems, I don't trust the UN. Their scientist list has as much credibility to me as the DIsco's (discent from Darwin) scientist list.

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:38   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,13:50)
 

Calm down a bit please. I for one, do tend to pay atention to the scientific evidence if I can understand it. I doubt phonon is any different.

A few simple questions to you.
Is it true that in the historical records CO2 rises lagged temperature rises by aproximately 800 years?
Is it true that CO2 in the atmosphere increases warming?
IF both previous questions are answered as yes, then why does this not result in a positive feedback loop that eventually boils the Earths oceans?



The absorption of IR by CO2 is exponentially decreasing as CO2 concentration increases.  As in absorption of light by any chemical species.  I = I[0] exp{-ebc}.  I is the intensity of transmitted light.

The larger epsilon is, the more absorption, and less intensity of light getting through is.

The higher the concentration, the more absorption, and I is smaller.

b is path length, presumably not changing for the atmosphere.

This is regardless of other factors tha scatter light vs. absorption.

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,13:50)


I have been reading over at realclimate but it is much harder on the eyes than this site and also apears to be as entrenched as any ID/evolution site and I don't have the relevant education to spot lies/distortions (and no, I am not saying "all climate scientists are in some conspiracy").

Couldn't simple human building projects also be causing the warming? Isn't it at least possible that paving over green land with tarmac and other syntheticaly produced material be adding to global warming?



The big issue with the heat island effect is not letting it compromise temperature measurements of average temperature.

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

  
Stephen Elliott



Posts: 1754
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,15:57   

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Mar. 16 2007,14:38)
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,13:50)
 

Calm down a bit please. I for one, do tend to pay atention to the scientific evidence if I can understand it. I doubt phonon is any different.

A few simple questions to you.
Is it true that in the historical records CO2 rises lagged temperature rises by aproximately 800 years?
Is it true that CO2 in the atmosphere increases warming?
IF both previous questions are answered as yes, then why does this not result in a positive feedback loop that eventually boils the Earths oceans?



The absorption of IR by CO2 is exponentially decreasing as CO2 concentration increases.  As in absorption of light by any chemical species.  I = I[0] exp{-ebc}.  I is the intensity of transmitted light.

The larger epsilon is, the more absorption, and less intensity of light getting through is.

The higher the concentration, the more absorption, and I is smaller.

b is path length, presumably not changing for the atmosphere.

This is regardless of other factors tha scatter light vs. absorption.

 
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,13:50)


I have been reading over at realclimate but it is much harder on the eyes than this site and also apears to be as entrenched as any ID/evolution site and I don't have the relevant education to spot lies/distortions (and no, I am not saying "all climate scientists are in some conspiracy").

Couldn't simple human building projects also be causing the warming? Isn't it at least possible that paving over green land with tarmac and other syntheticaly produced material be adding to global warming?



The big issue with the heat island effect is not letting it compromise temperature measurements of average temperature.

This is very difficult for me to understand.

Are you saying that the amount of light available at the surface is reduced due to air-bound particles? I think that is what you said but I am uncertain.

To move on I am going to assume I was corect in the above paragraph.

If the light reaching the Earth is reduced by particles, wouldn't that mean that evolution would favour the selection of red-light synthesising plants? Did this happen?

As for the  "heat island" idea. Surely at some point those islands would meet up over time and regularity would they not? If so, when would that be? (probably said that badly: to rephrase: At what point would the "heat islands" be so numerous as to have a global rather than a local effect?).

  
Faylen



Posts: 19
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,16:37   

Quote (Kristine @ Mar. 15 2007,18:45)
Too bad I don't dance with a sword.
This would make a great costume. (Maybe not for the kiddies, tho...)

My mom used to dance with a sword.  I still have it, but it's kind of dull by now. . .

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,17:17   

GilDodgen:
Quote
So, the next time a global-warming advocate or a Darwinist tries to convince you of the validity of a computer model that can tell you what will happen in the future or what happened in the past, don’t pay much attention.
One computer model? If that were the case, yes, I would consider this to be sound advice.

However, Gil, if you were to play (and I'm not advocating this!) Russian roulette, you cannot predict with absolute certainty if the bullet is in the chamber the first time you pull the trigger, or the second, etc. But it's still stupid to play Russian roulette, right?

Likewise, I cannot predict what anyone at UD will say next. But I can assert with some confidence that whatever it is, it will raise the blogosphere's CH4 [supposed to be a subscript] level...

And Jujuquisp, you're my hero.    
Quote
My mom used to dance with a sword.
Cool mom!

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,17:27   

Look who just figured out how to quote people (no giggling!;)  
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,09:25)

Ps - it was only popularized in the States by Twain, Disraeli is the most cited source but it was used before he said it.

Do you have a source prior to the Disraeli attribution by Twain? Really? I'd be curious to know - my entire class couldn't find one.

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,17:29   

Quote
As for the  "heat island" idea. Surely at some point those islands would meet up over time and regularity would they not? If so, when would that be? (probably said that badly: to rephrase: At what point would the "heat islands" be so numerous as to have a global rather than a local effect?)


The problem isn't so much that "heat islands" (in common English, "cities") contribute to global warming, but rather they can impact local temperatures, particularly near the ground, where measurements have been taken for decades.

An early denialist claim was that global temperatures haven't really been rising, but rather the air surrounding thermometers located in cities has been rising because of the increase in pavement as the auto took hold, etc etc.

Well, we have thirty-odd years of satellite and more of radiosonde (weather balloon) measurements.  When all sources are tweaked for known problems (i.e. different biases in different generations of reporting equipment in balloons, heat island effects, etc) all three agree.

This is why all but the most entrenched, most unscientific denialists no longer argue that the earth isn't warming.  They now argue that sure, there's warming, but a) it's natural (solar etc) and b) it will be good for us or at least not harmful.

As far as Real Climate coming across as being "entrenched", well ... if you go to a physics site, don't you expect them to be "entrenched", too, in regard to things that are settled?  Do you expect them to act in any other way if, say, someone comes along and says some unknown and unmeasured force causes the orbital positions of the planets to affect life on earth, and that we can determine a person's future if we know their birth date and the positions of the planets?

Medical researchers are likewise "entrenched" in regard to homeopathy, because homeopathic preparations are indistinguishable from distilled water.

As far as not trusting the UN as being a reason to not trust an entire field of scientific endeavor ... wow.  BTW, they're not UN scientists, maybe that will help you ...

Do you trust the National Academy of Sciences, by any chance?  AAAS?  The other dozens of national and international scientific organizations that endorse the basic science underlying climate science?

Phonon: no, it's not hypocritical for me to point you a web site run by scientists after flogging your for your random google efforts.  Real Science cites the published research upon which their articles are based.  You can go beyond the website to the scientific literature if you want, that's the point.  And they discuss in detail many of the papers cited by denialists - generally older papers which have later been shown to be wrong.  They'll provide you cites to the original papers, and then those that show them to be in error, etc.

That's useful.  One paper cited by the C4 documentary, for instance, was published in 1991 and in the intervening 16 years was shown to be in error.   The same technique - citing old work and ignoring more recent work - would undoubtably fool many of the public into believing that Pons was right about Cold Fusion after all, and that the truth is being supressed because physicists can't allow a chemist to trump them, or because Utah's largely Mormon, or  ...

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,17:44   

Quote
Is it true that in the historical records CO2 rises lagged temperature rises by aproximately 800 years?
Is it true that CO2 in the atmosphere increases warming?
IF both previous questions are answered as yes, then why does this not result in a positive feedback loop that eventually boils the Earths oceans?

It happened on Venus, which is quite toasty as a result.

Someone above pointed out that temperature doesn't increase linearly as CO2 is added to the atmosphere.  BTW this is why climatologists talk about doublings of CO2 (an exponential series) rather than the adding of a certain amount (say 100 ppm).

So at some point, even if you add a lot of CO2, not much happens.

And of course the amount of carbon available to put in the atmosphere as CO2 is limited anyway.

The short answer to your question, as I understand it, is that the only way we could have a runaway greenhouse effect like happened on Venus is if the water on earth boiled away (as happened on Venus).  The combination of the chemistry of our atmosphere, physics, and our distance from the sun (Venus gets a lot more energy per square meter than the earth because it's closer to the sun) means that it will never get hot enough to boil off all the water on earth, and our planet won't enter a runaway greenhouse effect.

Maybe the water will boil off if the sun novas but we won't care at that point :)

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,17:44   

Quote (Faylen @ Mar. 16 2007,15:37)
Quote (Kristine @ Mar. 15 2007,18:45)
Too bad I don't dance with a sword.
This would make a great costume. (Maybe not for the kiddies, tho...)

My mom used to dance with a sword.  I still have it, but it's kind of dull by now. . .

Gee, I have three swords hanging on my wall (a Viking broadsword, an Italian rapier, and a German longsword), plus two daggers (three if you count my scramasax), a crossbow, a mace, a spear, two daneaxes, a half-finished English longbow, and a shield. And two drinking horns.  My chainmail and helmet are on a nearby stand.

If the fundies ever do return us to the Dark Ages, I'm all ready.    :)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,18:34   

Just to add to the fun about CO2, I was reading soemthing written recently by a climatologist, and he said that the error on the 800 years fo CO2 increase after ice begins melting, was around 500 years either way.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,19:17   

TroutMac, unbelievable even for A IDiot, says:

 
Quote
I have not read "Origin of the Species." Nor do I plan to.

Should I have? If so, why?

Why should I be concerned with what someone thought about origins of--whatever--when, at the time the book was written, they had so little knowledge and understanding of how biology worked? At that time, scientists thought that a cell was very, very simple. They had no technology to discover otherwise. As a result, the grander claims of evolution seemed plausible. I'll grant you that wasn't Darwin's fault. But it is the fault of Darwinists that they cannot let go of an obsolete theory.

I would suggest that reading books such as Michael Behe's "Darwin's Black Box" would be more useful, since it reflects contemporary knowledge and understanding of biology.


Didnt DBB come out in like 96? Hardly Contemporary ;)

EDIT: Found this review of DBB
Quote

Michael Behe is a biophysics professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania and his book, released last summer, has been causing a firestorm of activity in academic circles ever since.

The stranglehold that Darwinism has had in the biological sciences for decades has already been weakened over the last 30 years due to the new creationist movement and more recently by the push from intelligent design theorists. But Behe's new book may end up being the straw that broke the camel's back.

You'd never guess the review was from 97 :)
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwinbx.html

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4369
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,20:02   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Mar. 16 2007,18:17)
Didnt DBB come out in like 96? Hardly Contemporary ;)

EDIT: Found this review of DBB  
Quote

Michael Behe is a biophysics professor at Lehigh University in Pennsylvania and his book, released last summer, has been causing a firestorm of activity in academic circles ever since.

The stranglehold that Darwinism has had in the biological sciences for decades has already been weakened over the last 30 years due to the new creationist movement and more recently by the push from intelligent design theorists. But Behe's new book may end up being the straw that broke the camel's back.

You'd never guess the review was from 97 :)
http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/darwinbx.html

Heres the c.v. for Behe's book "reviewer":
Raymond G. Bohlin - is executive director of Probe Ministries. He is a graduate of the University of Illinois (B.S., zoology), North Texas State University (M.S., population genetics), and the University of Texas at Dallas (M.S., Ph.D., molecular biology). He is the co-author of the book The Natural Limits to Biological Change, served as general editor of Creation, Evolution and Modern Science, and has published numerous journal articles. Dr. Bohlin was named a 1997-98 and 2000 Research Fellow of the Discovery Institute's Center for the Renewal of Science and Culture.


Probe Ministries?  Ouch, that's got to hurt...
I also like that they were still including the "Renewal" in the DI's title...

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

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,20:26   


No, shady dealings and friendly book reviews? I won't have it!  ;P
And that firestorm of activity?
Imagine somebody in '97 lighting a match....

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,20:50   

Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,13:00)
Jesus H Christ on a crutch, I should know better by now!

All the critical comments are gone... poofed by The Designert into the same spot that AFDave's Global Flood Waters went away to.

J-Dog, how am I ever gonna make a librarian outta you? Cut-n-paste 'em here, my good fellow, because I never got to see those comments! And I would have enjoyed that! :D

"Designert"? Designert-a-r...

--------------
Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip?

AtBC Poet Laureate

"I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive

"Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1016
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 16 2007,23:34   

Quote (Kristine @ Mar. 16 2007,19:50)
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,13:00)
Jesus H Christ on a crutch, I should know better by now!

All the critical comments are gone... poofed by The Designert into the same spot that AFDave's Global Flood Waters went away to.

J-Dog, how am I ever gonna make a librarian outta you? Cut-n-paste 'em here, my good fellow, because I never got to see those comments! And I would have enjoyed that! :D

"Designert"? Designert-a-r...

Yes J-Dog cutting and pasting is sooo easy a caveman can do it :D

--------------
Church burning ebola boy

FTK: I Didn't answer your questions because it beats the hell out of me.

PaV: I suppose for me to be pried away from what I do to focus long and hard on that particular problem would take, quite honestly, hundreds of thousands of dollars to begin to pique my interest.

   
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,03:52   

Quote
I have three swords hanging on my wall (a Viking broadsword, an Italian rapier, and a German longsword)

I got a few by Jim Hrisoulas: a short sword, two long , one bronze Greek "hoplite" leaf-shaped. He does good work, but real pricey : http://www.atar.com/old/ A bronze Luristan antennae-hilt sword that's an archaeological piece, some cheaper swords from Atlanta cutlery and a very nice WW II katana that was re-worked from a slightly older sword (new hilt sharkskin, tsuba and sheath ) You'd appreciate this stuff, I think. http://www.atlantacutlery.com/webstor....tpUISo=

And yes, it's all totally phallic, RICHARD. ( I know how your perverse mind works )

Glad to see you folks are still tormenting the willing tards over there.      :D

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

  
k.e



Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,09:31   

Quote (2ndclass @ Mar. 16 2007,22:25)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,09:00)
FOR THE KIDS!

https://www2.blogger.com/comment....6864891

       
Quote
A little googling points to the fact that jujquisp is one of THEM, and that tells me that he is not interested in the real issues surrounding this debate.

He merely gets off on being a part of those who ridicule others. It's a game for them, nothing more. They are the type of people who truly enjoy poking fun of others, and they follow DaveS around everywhere he goes. It's sick if you ask me. Stalking comes to mind.

The only reason I let them post here occassionally is because they need to read stuff written by people who are truly concerned about the issues surrounding this debate. Not all of us are out here merely to get our jollies from harrassing others.


C'mon guys, quit harassing FTK and DaveScot.  This isn't a game for them; they're very serious about it.  They're working hard to educate themselves by way of technical journals college curricula ID blogs.

Boo hoo hoo.

One of THEM?

Hey FTK here's a deal you stop telling lies and I'll stop telling the truth.

Here's something else to keep in mind FTK

Quote
The great liberal John Stuart Mill was correct when he said not all stupid people are conservatives, but most conservatives are stupid people. I would add that many who call themselves conservatives are reactionary and ruled by their hate and fears.

- Mike Hersh




FTK and DT love being professional martyrs, it's a calling. Life without being someone else's joke would be meaningless.

It must be hard being Ms 29% ...a GWD given president (who FTK and DT missoverestimated) and almost perfect purging of the judicial system except for a fricken Calvinist Judge who obviously doesn't believe in Gott, Heil George.

So close but yet so far eh? FTK.

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

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2612
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,09:35   

kairosfocus              
Quote
...something is wrong in the presentation of the statistics in the relevant case study [1965] in the textbook. HH’s excerpt in no 58 — which comes from a 1999 peer reviewed journal article [long after the story we are discussing gained wide circulation and general acceptance] — is telling, unless it is demonstrably false:

Longitudinal study of Plasmodium falciparum infection and immune responses in infants with or without the sickle cell trait                                    
Quote
Haemoglobin S could have a protective role against malaria but evidence is sparse and the operating mechanisms are poorly known.

kairosfocus adds                                
Quote
So, which is it: has htre story gained currency based on solid evidence but i the teeth of absence of it? Has there been subsequent to 1999, the provision of the missing evidence and mechanisms?

For some reason kairosfocus

1) doesn't understand that the original conclusions from the case study [1965] were tentatively reached based on limited data.

2) doesn't read, because the 1999 study flatly concludes            
Quote
Sickle cell trait related antimalarial protection varies with age.

3) never learned the scientific method.

What happened after the original case study [1965]? What came next? Class? ...blank stares... Class!? ...mumble, mumble... Right. Hypothesis and further testing. Guided by the original study, scientists collected more data ... And further testing supported the original finding while adding important details. ...blank stares...

So statistics and an understanding of evolutionary biology can help us in the fight against disease that causes so much suffering, especially in children. ...eyes open...

--------------
Not joey

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2612
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,10:50   

PaV may be having trouble reading, as well.

Predicted declines in sickle allele frequency in Jamaica using empirical data.                  
Quote
The high frequency of the sickle allele in some parts of Africa is understood to be a consequence of high malarial endemicity. One corollary of this is that the sickle allele frequency should be declining in populations of African ancestry that are no longer exposed to malaria. We have previously shown that there has been no change in sickle allele frequency in malaria-free Jamaica between two large-scale neonatal screening exercises conducted in 1973-1981 and 1995-2003.

PaV                  
Quote
Now I’ve demonstrated that S-allele frequency hasn’t changed in the absence of the “natural-selector”, i.e., malaria.

In fact, S-trait prevalence is reduced in nearly all geographic areas of the African diaspora without malaria. Jamaica has only been malaria-free for about 50 years. The paper suggests their results may be due to a "recent, marked increase" in fitness of SS homozygous individuals.



Predicted declines in sickle allele frequency in Jamaica using empirical data.                  
Quote
We found that although model predictions were broadly consistent with observed values in the 1973-1981 cohort, the predicted change in allele frequency between the two cohorts was larger than the observed, nonsignificant, reduction. Close agreement between predicted and observed values was only achieved by simulating a recent, marked increase in HbSS fitness. Thus, the "unexpected" persistence of the sickle allele in Jamaica may reflect the fact that the actual fitness among SS individuals is higher than that previously realized.

So, PaV. Let's assume your intuition is correct and this anomaly supports your contrarian position. So then what comes next? Class? ...hypothesis! ..more data! ... recess, heh... Very good! Class dismissed.  ...yeah!... Oh, and next week, we relax our assumptions and allow individuals to mate nonrandomly! There will be lab work and a very stimulating simulation. I'm sure you'll enjoy that topic.


By the way, PaV, you may want to take your malaria pills when you travel to Jamaica to collect your data. Though Jamaica has been considered non-endemic for 50 years, hundreds of cases of malaria have recently been reported.

--------------
Not joey

   
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,12:24   

[quote=J-Dog,Mar. 16 2007,21:00]  
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,12:22)
 
Quote (steve_h @ Mar. 16 2007,11:25)
   
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,17:47)
Gil shows us why he's uncommonly dense:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

 

Actually, this is a very interesting post at UD, in that several posters call Gil out on being a moron, and their posts haven't been Magicaly Disapeared.  Even DaveScot, the Tardmaster "hisself", has been chastised in writing!?

Maybe too much Old Bushmills for DaveScott?  (I don't want him drinking Jamesons - that for us good guys - Dave can stick with the Proddy product)

Jesus H Christ on a crutch, I should know better by now!

All the critical comments are gone... poofed by The Designert into the same spot that AFDave's Global Flood Waters went away to.

I assumed that you were talking about the old Dodg'em post (archives/1660). Gil and DS were criticised there by people not immediately banned. It was too soon after DS's return to the fold.

AFAICT, all the comments  have remained unchanged since I made my copy in october last year. They are still all there.

Shortly afterwards of course, Gil tried to move the discussion to his home turf, Parachute drops He and DS received further drubbings from Karl Pfluger and Tom English.  Gil tried to make out that his previous post was a joke (maybe he was just taking the piss out of creationists or something?) and then the thead mutated into a discussion about simulation of electronics which caused much amusement here. And then the bannings started.

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,13:52   

[quote=steve_h,Mar. 17 2007,11:24]  
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,21:00)
     
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,12:22)
       
Quote (steve_h @ Mar. 16 2007,11:25)
       
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,17:47)
Gil shows us why he's uncommonly dense:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

 

Actually, this is a very interesting post at UD, in that several posters call Gil out on being a moron, and their posts haven't been Magicaly Disapeared.  Even DaveScot, the Tardmaster "hisself", has been chastised in writing!?

Maybe too much Old Bushmills for DaveScott?  (I don't want him drinking Jamesons - that for us good guys - Dave can stick with the Proddy product)

Jesus H Christ on a crutch, I should know better by now!

All the critical comments are gone... poofed by The Designert into the same spot that AFDave's Global Flood Waters went away to.

I assumed that you were talking about the old Dodg'em post (archives/1660). Gil and DS were criticised there by people not immediately banned. It was too soon after DS's return to the fold.

AFAICT, all the comments  have remained unchanged since I made my copy in october last year. They are still all there.

Shortly afterwards of course, Gil tried to move the discussion to his home turf, Parachute drops He and DS received further drubbings from Karl Pfluger and Tom English.  Gil tried to make out that his previous post was a joke (maybe he was just taking the piss out of creationists or something?) and then the thead mutated into a discussion about simulation of electronics which caused much amusement here. And then the bannings started.

Here and here are links to those threads.  

I was among the few, the proud, and the banned in that discussion.  I shortly after discovered AtBC, and was healed.

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10323
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,14:05   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Mar. 17 2007,12:52)
[quote=steve_h,Mar. 17 2007,11:24]    
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,21:00)
       
Quote (J-Dog @ Mar. 16 2007,12:22)
       
Quote (steve_h @ Mar. 16 2007,11:25)
         
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2007,17:47)
Gil shows us why he's uncommonly dense:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

 

Actually, this is a very interesting post at UD, in that several posters call Gil out on being a moron, and their posts haven't been Magicaly Disapeared.  Even DaveScot, the Tardmaster "hisself", has been chastised in writing!?

Maybe too much Old Bushmills for DaveScott?  (I don't want him drinking Jamesons - that for us good guys - Dave can stick with the Proddy product)

Jesus H Christ on a crutch, I should know better by now!

All the critical comments are gone... poofed by The Designert into the same spot that AFDave's Global Flood Waters went away to.

I assumed that you were talking about the old Dodg'em post (archives/1660). Gil and DS were criticised there by people not immediately banned. It was too soon after DS's return to the fold.

AFAICT, all the comments  have remained unchanged since I made my copy in october last year. They are still all there.

Shortly afterwards of course, Gil tried to move the discussion to his home turf, Parachute drops He and DS received further drubbings from Karl Pfluger and Tom English.  Gil tried to make out that his previous post was a joke (maybe he was just taking the piss out of creationists or something?) and then the thead mutated into a discussion about simulation of electronics which caused much amusement here. And then the bannings started.

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/a-realistic-computational-simulation-of-random-mutation-filtered-by-natural-selection-in-b

iology/]Here[/URL] and here are links to those threads.  

I was among the few, the proud, and the banned in that discussion.  I shortly after discovered AtBC, and was healed.

Funny how Davetard had the last 3 comments unanswered. Insecure prick.

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

  
phonon



Posts: 396
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,14:30   

Just wanted pass along a tidbit.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-03/uoc--res031407.php

Quote
RNA enzyme structure offers a glimpse into the origins of life

SANTA CRUZ, CA -- Researchers at the University of California, Santa Cruz, have determined the three-dimensional structure of an RNA enzyme, or "ribozyme," that carries out a fundamental reaction required to make new RNA molecules. Their results provide insight into what may have been the first self-replicating molecule to arise billions of years ago on the evolutionary path toward the emergence of life.

In all forms of life known today, the synthesis of DNA and RNA molecules is carried out by enzymes made of proteins. The instructions for making those proteins are contained in genes made of DNA or RNA (nucleic acids). The circularity of this process poses a challenge for theories about the origins of life.

"Which came first, nucleic acids or proteins? This question once seemed an intractable paradox, but with the discovery of ribozymes, it is now possible to imagine a prebiotic 'RNA World' in which self-replicating ribozymes accomplished both tasks," said William Scott, associate professor of chemistry and biochemistry at UC Santa Cruz.

Scott and postdoctoral researcher Michael Robertson determined the structure of a ribozyme that joins two RNA subunits together in the same reaction that is carried out in biological systems by the protein known as RNA polymerase. Their findings are published in the March 16 issue of the journal Science.


--------------
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

  
phonon



Posts: 396
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 17 2007,14:40   

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ Mar. 16 2007,14:35)
To add to my problems, I don't trust the UN. Their scientist list has as much credibility to me as the DIsco's (discent from Darwin) scientist list.

Mixing politics and science is usually bad.

The funny thing is that science has its own politics.

It seems that the human survival instinct tends to cause the infusion of politics (social survival) into every aspect of life.

Even dancing isn't immune.

--------------
With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

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

Pages: (1000) < ... 442 443 444 445 446 [447] 448 449 450 451 452 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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