RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (9) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: IDC Advocates Speak, Experiencing TARD Benders< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,12:28   

My life, my love, and my lady-- fair Casey Luskin-- will grace Oklahoma with his presence this Friday.  Hes also bringing along John 'Heil Hitler!' West.

Tips?  Tricks?  Bids for a pic of me and lovely Luskin?

Ive got some ideas of my own, but I would like your alls input as well.

:O

Carlson, you gonna be there?

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,12:35   

ooohhh!!! A bottle of single malt if you can get a pic of him wearing a "I love atheists" shirt*!

*A "PZ RULEZ!!!" would do, too.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,12:46   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 17 2009,12:28)
My life, my love, and my lady-- fair Casey Luskin-- will grace Oklahoma with his presence this Friday.  Hes also bringing along John 'Heil Hitler!' West.

Tips?  Tricks?  Bids for a pic of me and lovely Luskin?

Ive got some ideas of my own, but I would like your alls input as well.

:O

Carlson, you gonna be there?

I am going to try. However, I usually go out to dinner with she-who-must-be-obeyed on Friday night, so I need to clear it with her first.

BTW, would those pictures involve nudity?  I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Added in edit:  WTF?  They are lecturing at the Sam Noble Museum?  For reals or are they just going to stage a sit-in / prayer circle?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
American Saddlebred



Posts: 111
Joined: May 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,13:00   

A picture of him with Prof. Steve Steve would totally win teh internets.

<edit>  unless it involves him ripping it apart, or some act of beastiality (errm...fluffiality?)

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,13:04   

Abbie - Thanks for asking!

1.) I think the OK Chapter of Liars For Jesus Club should put in an appearance.  it will consist of students holding bibles, and chanting "Hell No We Ain't No Bonobo" as they eat bananas, fling feces at passers by, and copulate for favors and dominance within the group.

A couple of bad Power Point Pages with Genesis Chapter and verse quoted will seal the deal for the on lookers.  Extra Bonus points available for putting contradictory Genesis stories on neighboring slides.  ( The 2 vs 7 animals on Teh Ark would work).

2.) Alternatively, a couple - three geeky boys with short hair and no social lives (Recruit from Teh Young Republican Club - there has to be one on campus) to form a competing IDEA Club.

They will have GiNormous eyebrows (from the theater dept or Groucho costumes), be dressed in long sweaters from 20 years ago, and trained to be so over the top gung-ho ID-Nutz that they wind up recruiting the other OK Idea club.

They will all be wearing LARGE crucifixes and  insist that ID has nothing to do with Christianity, as they chant Bible versus.

3.) Get hawt Evo / Anthro Babes - the kind that would never even look twice at an IDEA geek, and have them pretend to be godless, atheist chicks.  The Idea geeks will compare Casey Luskin vs Hotness and realize that Evolution winz again.  

Have I caused enough trouble, or do you need more of my sure-fire guaranteed ideas?

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

  
American Saddlebred



Posts: 111
Joined: May 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,13:11   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 17 2009,13:04)
3.) Get hawt Evo / Anthro Babes - the kind that would never even look twice at an IDEA geek, and have them pretend to be godless, atheist chicks.  The Idea geeks will compare Casey Luskin vs Hotness and realize that Evolution winz again.

I somehow doubt they would be pretending.


100 posts in just under 4 years, I must be the most prolific poster on this forum.  Yay me!

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,13:47   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,12:46)
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 17 2009,12:28)

Carlson, you gonna be there?

I am going to try. However, I usually go out to dinner with she-who-must-be-obeyed on Friday night, so I need to clear it with her first.

I'm in.  

I've tried, without luck, to find the Seven Myths of Darwinism that John West is going to present. Anyone happen to have a copy?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,13:55   

I would suggest recording whatever audio/visual stuff they use so we have a record of who they swiped what from.

As a related aside, I showed Inner Life to my PASS students yesterday.

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

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,14:54   

Do I still have time to add an IDEA?

"Resurrected" from the past - BUT, since Casey will be there, I think it was worth re-working.

By the DESIGN PEOPLE - I-D-E-A Lyrics
(Y-M-C-A for all you youngsters out there)

Design Man, there's no need to be smart.
I said, Design Man, pickin’ science apart.
I said, Design Man, 'cause you're such a liar
For Jesus your pants should be on fire.

Design Man, there's a place you can go.
I said, Design Man, cuz your brain is so slow.
You can stay there, and I'm sure you will find
Suckers to fleece and school boards to blind

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like Stein...

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

You can get some new lies, you can whine a great deal,
You can make ID whatever you feel ...

Design Man, are you listening to me?
I said, Design Man, what do you want to be?
I said, Design Man, you can make it all up.
But you got to know this one thing!

Howard Ahmanson don’t do it all by himself.
I said, Design Man, put your pride on the shelf,
And just go there, to the I.D.E.A.
I'm sure they can help you today.

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like O’Leary ...

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

You can get thrown out of Dover, you can whine a great deal,
You can do whatever you feel ...

Design Man, I was once in your shoes.
I said, I was down and without a clue too.
And now I lie for the Discovery Institution
And try to overthrow the U S Constitution

So when Moonie Wells came up to me,
And said, Design Man,pretend it’s not theology.
There's a place there called the I.D.E.A.
You can help to overthrow the U.S. A. today.

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you real men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like John West

I-D-E-A ... you'll find it at the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, there's no need to feel down.
Design Man, Design Man, you’re such a clown.

I-D-E-A ... you'll find it at the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, there's no need to be smart.
Design Man, Design Man, you can just play a part.

I-D-E-A ... just go to the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, are you listening to me?
Design Man, Design Man, what do you wanna be?




Edited by Lou FCD on Feb. 17 2009,16:25

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

  
sledgehammer



Posts: 531
Joined: Sep. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,15:05   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 17 2009,14:54)
Do I still have time to add an IDEA?

"Resurrected" from the past - BUT, since Casey will be there, I think it was worth re-working.

By the DESIGN PEOPLE - I-D-E-A Lyrics
(Y-M-C-A for all you youngsters out there)

POTW!
That one got my co-workers to my office after hearing me choke on my coffee, followed by loud guffaws! It may be resurrected but it's new to me.  Thanks for that!

--------------
The majority of the stupid is invincible and guaranteed for all time. The terror of their tyranny is alleviated by their lack of consistency. -A. Einstein  (H/T, JAD)
If evolution is true, you could not know that it's true because your brain is nothing but chemicals. ?Think about that. -K. Hovind

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,15:17   

Why thank you my man...

Of course those damn dirty apes liking the naked apes is what has Casey all outraged...

THIS is why Casey is so motivated to Lie For Jesus I think



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

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,15:25   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 17 2009,15:54)
Do I still have time to add an IDEA?

"Resurrected" from the past - BUT, since Casey will be there, I think it was worth re-working.

By the DESIGN PEOPLE - I-D-E-A Lyrics
(Y-M-C-A for all you youngsters out there)

Design Man, there's no need to be smart.
I said, Design Man, pickin’ science apart.
I said, Design Man, 'cause you're such a liar
For Jesus your pants should be on fire.

Design Man, there's a place you can go.
I said, Design Man, cuz your brain is so slow.
You can stay there, and I'm sure you will find
Suckers to fleece and school boards to blind

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like Stein...

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

You can get some new lies, you can whine a great deal,
You can make ID whatever you feel ...

Design Man, are you listening to me?
I said, Design Man, what do you want to be?
I said, Design Man, you can make it all up.
But you got to know this one thing!

Howard Ahmanson don’t do it all by himself.
I said, Design Man, put your pride on the shelf,
And just go there, to the I.D.E.A.
I'm sure they can help you today.

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like O’Leary ...

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

You can get thrown out of Dover, you can whine a great deal,
You can do whatever you feel ...

Design Man, I was once in your shoes.
I said, I was down and without a clue too.
And now I lie for the Discovery Institution
And try to overthrow the U S Constitution

So when Moonie Wells came up to me,
And said, Design Man,pretend it’s not theology.
There's a place there called the I.D.E.A.
You can help to overthrow the U.S. A. today.

It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.
It's fun to stay at the I-D-E-A.

They have everything for you real men to enjoy,
You can hang out with all the boys like John West

I-D-E-A ... you'll find it at the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, there's no need to feel down.
Design Man, Design Man, you’re such a clown.

I-D-E-A ... you'll find it at the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, there's no need to be smart.
Design Man, Design Man, you can just play a part.

I-D-E-A ... just go to the I-D-E-A.

Design Man, Design Man, are you listening to me?
Design Man, Design Man, what do you wanna be?



If that didn't win PotW the first time, it should have.

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

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,15:46   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 17 2009,13:55)
I would suggest recording whatever audio/visual stuff they use so we have a record of who they swiped what from.

I have a small digital recorder*  I picked up from an empty desk when we were vacating a building I had worked in. It supposedly can record up to 290 minutes. Alas, I pulled the instructions down of the intertubes and it doesn't appear to have a means of downloading into a computer.**

* It is of the "note to self, LOL the cat when you get home" variety. I've never used it so I have no idea how it would work in a lecture setting.

** Unless someone knows how to take the output meant for an ear-piece and get that into a computer.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,16:01   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,10:46)
I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Dude. Please. Even Louis is better looking than Casey.

At least Louis has the sense to shave that space between his eyebrows.

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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,16:09   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 17 2009,16:01)
 
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,10:46)
I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Dude. Please. Even Louis is better looking than Casey.

At least Louis has the sense to shave that space between his eyebrows.

That is a notdenial worthy of Dr2 Dembski.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,16:49   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 17 2009,22:01)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,10:46)
I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Dude. Please. Even Louis is better looking than Casey.

At least Louis has the sense to shave that space between his eyebrows.

Untrue. The unabrow is sign of virility and manhood in old country.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,16:52   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 17 2009,17:49)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 17 2009,22:01)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,10:46)
I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Dude. Please. Even Louis is better looking than Casey.

At least Louis has the sense to shave that space between his eyebrows.

Untrue. The unabrow is sign of virility and manhood in old country.

Louis

Cro-Magnon?

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,16:53   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 17 2009,18:28)
My life, my love, and my lady-- fair Casey Luskin-- will grace Oklahoma with his presence this Friday.  Hes also bringing along John 'Heil Hitler!' West.

Tips?  Tricks?  Bids for a pic of me and lovely Luskin?

Ive got some ideas of my own, but I would like your alls input as well.

:O

Carlson, you gonna be there?

Abbie,

Take a rolled up newspaper with you and every time Luskin or West curl out a stinky, little, standard dishonest creationist turd, get up out of your chair, walk to the stage, and whap them on the nose with the rolled up newspaper loudly uttering the words "No! No! Bad Creationist! No!".

Perhaps offering to rub their noses in it too might help.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,17:04   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,22:46)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 17 2009,13:55)
I would suggest recording whatever audio/visual stuff they use so we have a record of who they swiped what from.

I have a small digital recorder*  I picked up from an empty desk when we were vacating a building I had worked in. It supposedly can record up to 290 minutes. Alas, I pulled the instructions down of the intertubes and it doesn't appear to have a means of downloading into a computer.**

* It is of the "note to self, LOL the cat when you get home" variety. I've never used it so I have no idea how it would work in a lecture setting.

** Unless someone knows how to take the output meant for an ear-piece and get that into a computer.

Regarding connections, the best I could offer is to use a minijack-minijack connector, and plug your recording device directly to your laptop's audio-in plug.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,17:28   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Feb. 17 2009,17:04)
Regarding connections, the best I could offer is to use a minijack-minijack connector, and plug your recording device directly to your laptop's audio-in plug.

So, you can fly in from Paris in time for the "Tard-Conference"?

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

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,18:41   

Oh, Oh, I know! Over here, pick me ERV, pick me! afarensis jumps up and down Pick me dammit, I got one

How about a picture, with Casey, of someone wearing this!

Hijinks and hilarity will ensue!

Edit to add: NO, WAIT! I have a better idea. What if everybody in the audience wore them? Can you imagine the shocked looks on the faces of West and Luskin? A picture of that would be great.

--------------
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.

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,20:15   

Quote (afarensis @ Feb. 17 2009,18:41)
Oh, Oh, I know! Over here, pick me ERV, pick me! afarensis jumps up and down Pick me dammit, I got one

How about a picture, with Casey, of someone wearing this!

Hijinks and hilarity will ensue!

Edit to add: NO, WAIT! I have a better idea. What if everybody in the audience wore them? Can you imagine the shocked looks on the faces of West and Luskin? A picture of that would be great.

Yes Indeed!  There's nothing like fun with a sagital crest!

uh.. not that I would actually know.  I just knew somene that told me about it ya know?

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

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 17 2009,20:37   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 18 2009,00:49)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 17 2009,22:01)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,10:46)
I have it on very good information that Arden has a man-crush on Casey and I'll bet he'd be willing to fork over some serious green.

Dude. Please. Even Louis is better looking than Casey.

At least Louis has the sense to shave that space between his eyebrows.

Untrue. The unabrow is sign of virility and manhood in old country.

Louis

..uh yeah...


AMONGST THE WOMEN!!!! the men are all gay.

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

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,09:46   

Abbie - From a post by Amadan - Even the Pope and the Papists are beating up on ID!  Be sure to ask Casey about this! :)

Organisers of a papal-backed conference next month marking the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species said that at first it had even been proposed to ban Intelligent Design from the event, as “poor theology and poor science”. Intelligent Design would be discussed at the fringes of the conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University, but merely as a “cultural phenomenon”, rather than a scientific or theological issue, organisers said.

added in edit - The damn link!  Times OnLine

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

  
JLT



Posts: 740
Joined: Jan. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,09:50   

I'd print out some of these:

and put them on the seats for others to find.



Edited by Lou FCD on Feb. 18 2009,18:51

--------------
"Random mutations, if they are truly random, will affect, and potentially damage, any aspect of the organism, [...]
Thus, a realistic [computer] simulation [of evolution] would allow the program, OS, and hardware to be affected in a random fashion." GilDodgen, Frilly shirt owner

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,09:57   

Quote (JLT @ Feb. 18 2009,09:50)
I'd print out some of these:

and put them on the seats for others to find.


EXCELLENT!!!!
My suggestion is to replace "JOKER" in middle with 'LOSER LUSKIN" or perhaps just LUSKIN (loser of course inclusive in the Luskin).

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

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,12:30   

Quote (JLT @ Feb. 18 2009,07:50)
I'd print out some of these:

and put them on the seats for others to find.

POTW III

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,12:49   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Feb. 17 2009,17:04)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 17 2009,22:46)
Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 17 2009,13:55)
I would suggest recording whatever audio/visual stuff they use so we have a record of who they swiped what from.

I have a small digital recorder*  I picked up from an empty desk when we were vacating a building I had worked in. It supposedly can record up to 290 minutes. Alas, I pulled the instructions down of the intertubes and it doesn't appear to have a means of downloading into a computer.**

* It is of the "note to self, LOL the cat when you get home" variety. I've never used it so I have no idea how it would work in a lecture setting.

** Unless someone knows how to take the output meant for an ear-piece and get that into a computer.

Regarding connections, the best I could offer is to use a minijack-minijack connector, and plug your recording device directly to your laptop's audio-in plug.

What he said.

If you have a MP3 recorder, I have done this, you connect the MIC side of the MP3 recorder to the headphone connector of the old recorder.

You then save the output in MP3 format.

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 18 2009,12:52   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 18 2009,09:46)
Abbie - From a post by Amadan - Even the Pope and the Papists are beating up on ID!  Be sure to ask Casey about this! :)

Organisers of a papal-backed conference next month marking the 150th anniversary of Darwin’s On the Origin of Species said that at first it had even been proposed to ban Intelligent Design from the event, as “poor theology and poor science”. Intelligent Design would be discussed at the fringes of the conference at the Pontifical Gregorian University, but merely as a “cultural phenomenon”, rather than a scientific or theological issue, organisers said.

added in edit - The damn link!  Times OnLine

Oh come on.  Everyone knows that Papal followers and Mary worshipers are not real christians like the Trootm christian fundie.

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 20 2009,21:56   

Highlights from My Night with the Discovery Institute

1. John West Says it isn't about Religion, except for those Damn Dirty Atheists

2. Carlsonjok Takes on a DI Fellow and ducks into the punch

3. ATBC Becomes the Poster Child for Academic Freedom

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

5. And in a heartwarming conclusion sure to touch the depths of your cold, black Darwinist heart, Casey rises above it all and forgives everyone, especially Wesley Elsberry.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 20 2009,23:45   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,19:56)
Highlights from My Night with the Discovery Institute

1. John West Says it isn't about Religion, except for those Damn Dirty Atheists

2. Carlsonjok Takes on a DI Fellow and ducks into the punch

3. ATBC Becomes the Poster Child for Academic Freedom

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

5. And in a heartwarming conclusion sure to touch the depths of your cold, black Darwinist heart, Casey rises above it all and forgives everyone, especially Wesley Elsberry.

Naturally we'd love details about all.

#2 had to have been West, eh? Hard to imagine Luskin packing much of a wallup. Be a good story to tell the kids someday, though.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 20 2009,23:58   

Quote (bfish @ Feb. 20 2009,23:45)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,19:56)
Highlights from My Night with the Discovery Institute

1. John West Says it isn't about Religion, except for those Damn Dirty Atheists

2. Carlsonjok Takes on a DI Fellow and ducks into the punch

3. ATBC Becomes the Poster Child for Academic Freedom

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

5. And in a heartwarming conclusion sure to touch the depths of your cold, black Darwinist heart, Casey rises above it all and forgives everyone, especially Wesley Elsberry.

Naturally we'd love details about all.

#2 had to have been West, eh? Hard to imagine Luskin packing much of a wallup. Be a good story to tell the kids someday, though.

Yes, it was West. I will say this, the man is a gifted speaker and he knows all the tricks to avoid hard questions. He never really answered my question, but sounded good avoiding it.

I took 21 pages of notes and I am in the process of a first pass to clean them up.  It is going slow and I have a busy couple of weeks coming up in real life.

Oh, and I forgot that the absolute #1 highlight of the night was Casey Luskin saying "tits."  That alone was worth the price of admission.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,00:08   

It was the most boring night of my life  (seriously, I was reading papers for work I was so bored) until shit hit the fan.

SHIT HIT THE FAN.

Bountiful lulz were had.  Casey loves everyone at AtBC.  Also, tits.

Unfortunately, the gays got me drunk, so Im not posting anything until tomorrow.

Also, tits.

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,01:52   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,21:58)
Oh, and I forgot that the absolute #1 highlight of the night was Casey Luskin saying "tits."  That alone was worth the price of admission.

Really?

??

He didn't even start with

??

This wouldn't be related to  
Quote

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

in any way, would it? It seems that she has, as they say, a pair.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,01:59   

Quote (bfish @ Feb. 21 2009,01:52)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,21:58)
Oh, and I forgot that the absolute #1 highlight of the night was Casey Luskin saying "tits."  That alone was worth the price of admission.

Really?

Yes.  God as my witness, he said "tits" and he weren't talking about no birds neither.  If you know what I mean and I think you do.
Quote

This wouldn't be related to    
Quote

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

in any way, would it? It seems that she has, as they say, a pair.

Yes, again.  But, I am going to have to save this for another time,  I have just finished cleaning up my 9 pages of notes from John West's talk and I am tired.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,04:53   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,21:56)
Highlights from My Night with the Discovery Institute

1. John West Says it isn't about Religion, except for those Damn Dirty Atheists

2. Carlsonjok Takes on a DI Fellow and ducks into the punch

3. ATBC Becomes the Poster Child for Academic Freedom

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

5. And in a heartwarming conclusion sure to touch the depths of your cold, black Darwinist heart, Casey rises above it all and forgives everyone, especially Wesley Elsberry.

Quote

Then there’s the issue that Casey Luskin has a curious connotation for “forgiveness”. In a comment supposedly left by Casey in the thread he cited, Casey specifically “forgives” me for the rough treatment he received there. Yet here we are several months later with Casey apparently retracting that forgiveness. Casey, you can either get props for sincerely forgiving someone for a transgression (though it helps if there actually was a transgression by that person), or you can bash them with the alleged transgression ad infinitum. It simply doesn’t work to try to get props for the sincerity of your “forgiveness” and still be using the supposed fault as your favorite rhetorical billy club.



Link

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

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,04:54   

Oh, and if anybody needs a new card for bingo, check this out.

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

    
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,06:06   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,04:53)
 
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 20 2009,21:56)
Highlights from My Night with the Discovery Institute

1. John West Says it isn't about Religion, except for those Damn Dirty Atheists

2. Carlsonjok Takes on a DI Fellow and ducks into the punch

3. ATBC Becomes the Poster Child for Academic Freedom

4. Abbie Smith Flips off Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq.

5. And in a heartwarming conclusion sure to touch the depths of your cold, black Darwinist heart, Casey rises above it all and forgives everyone, especially Wesley Elsberry.

   
Quote

Then there’s the issue that Casey Luskin has a curious connotation for “forgiveness”. In a comment supposedly left by Casey in the thread he cited, Casey specifically “forgives” me for the rough treatment he received there. Yet here we are several months later with Casey apparently retracting that forgiveness. Casey, you can either get props for sincerely forgiving someone for a transgression (though it helps if there actually was a transgression by that person), or you can bash them with the alleged transgression ad infinitum. It simply doesn’t work to try to get props for the sincerity of your “forgiveness” and still be using the supposed fault as your favorite rhetorical billy club.



Link

The close of Casey's presentation was to put up a slide showing all the nasty things that were said about him on the Casey Luskin thread (douchebag, attack mouse, etc) and to highlight an incident where Abbie disemvoweled a troll and then made some less-than-prim comments (the aforementioned tits incident) to the troll on her blog, ERV (details to follow later).  It was then he proffered his sincerest apologies.

His argument, in no small part, was that people are mean  at AE.org and on blogs, so therefore we need Academic Freedom Bills. *

It is my opinion that his forgiveness is debate tactic disguised as a magnanimous gesture.  His closing statements were classic poisoning the well (particularly towards Abbie). But by offering absolution he is trying to make anyone who gets up to challenge him in the Q&A look bitter and angry and, thus, diffuse any rhetorical points they might have scored by confronting  him. Casey wasn't offering anyone forgiveness, he was playing the crowd.

*Casey, since you are reading this,this is for you:  Science doesn't get done on message boards and in blog comments.  You ought to know that, you are one of the few Discovery Institute folks who has done real science in the past.  Maybe you should see if the DI will peel off some of it's $4 Million budget, so you can get into a lab or out in the field. When you have offered your work up to the Academy, if people call you names, then you can feel free to complain.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,06:21   

Weird... people exercising free speech means that people don't already have free speech? What sort of argument is that?

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

    
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,06:31   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,06:21)
Weird... people exercising free speech means that people don't already have free speech? What sort of argument is that?

Wes, I am starting to think you are a little slow.  After all your years defending science, you are still expecting logical consistency?  Casey doesn't want free speech, he wants affirmative action in the high school science class for his ideas.  Oh, and everyone has to be nice to ID advocates too.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,06:34   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 21 2009,12:31)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,06:21)
Weird... people exercising free speech means that people don't already have free speech? What sort of argument is that?

Wes, I am starting to think you are a little slow.  After all your years defending science, you are still expecting logical consistency?  Casey doesn't want free speech, he wants affirmative action in the high school science class for his ideas.  Oh, and everyone has to be nice to ID advocates too.

NEVER. GOING. TO. HAPPEN.

I'll be nice the day they stop relying on bullshit.

Promise.

That should happen about ooooooooh never.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,06:36   

Is there audio available of the presentation? Link or PM me, please.

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

    
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,07:03   

A topical comment at Abbie's place

Quote
To those wanting to know how Casey defends "Cdesign proponentsists," go read his mind-numbing article over at US News, as he offers it there. It's buried in the middle of that morass, starting about nine paragraphs after a lengthy inset quoting Monton's testimony and rambling on quite a ways afterwards. He mainly bases it on excuses offered by Thaxton at Dover. My best effort at summarizing (with maybe just a hint of editorial snark):

--We'd adopted ID as a term before the Edwards decision. In fact, the Greeks invented it so we're just copying them. So no court-evasion was involved.

--ID is not creationism, so we needed a term that wasn't "creationism."

--It was VERY IMPORTANT that we stick to the "empirical domain" and so not mention creationism.

--Did I mention it was VERY IMPORTANT we stick to the empirical domain? 'Cause it was. But not because of Edwards! Nuh-uh. It was just because...um...because.

--We always meant to use ID in Pandas, but because (even though we've been using ID as a term since the Greeks) all of our friends who we wanted to interview and work with us on it didn't know what ID WAS and only understood "creationism," we used that as a placeholder and planned to replace it with ID later. That way they'd know what the book was about. You know, kinda like "From Darwin to Hitler" as a working title for "Expelled?" But it was never about creationism!

--We did a lot of hard work on fitting our arguments to only the empirical domain (I did mention how VERY IMPORTANT but NOT AT ALL ABOUT EDWARDS that was, right?)

--(actual Casey quote): "Any arguments that ID is creationism because early pre-publication drafts of the Pandas textbook used "creation" terminology are false conspiracy theories based not upon substance, but semantics and revisionist history. The very fact that Darwinists must resort to such arguments shows just how weak is their case that ID is creationism."


The whole mess is one of the most muddled, incoherent, laughable exercises in excuse-making and "I meant to do that!"-claiming I've ever seen. But the real gem is the bit about "creationism" being used as a placeholder for their friends. That paragraph deserves reprinting for full admiration (and remember, this is Thaxton speaking):

"I realize that the charge was that we were trying to just use a substitute word for creation, but that isn't the case at all. In the early days of writing the Pandas book for example, although we understood what we were doing, most other people who we were talking to didn't know our objectives really. And if you have a whole culture that knows about creation as a term ... So we used that word early on, not for deception so we could later switch on them but because we wanted the materials to be understood that we were focused on. It was always clearly within the empirical domain, even the things that we wrote early on."

I hadn't read this part of the transcripts before. I understand even better now how Jones could end up so pissed. He knew how dumb they thought he was.

Posted by: rrt | February 21, 2009 3:01 AM



Also, tits.

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

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,07:16   

And the Great Search-and-Replace just happened to occur just after the Edwards decision came out. Total coincidence, yeah.

These guys really hate it when people do make a design inference.

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

    
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,07:32   

and do it without using FSCI or the EF or UPB or CSI or the NFL.  

just tits.

carlson quit stalling!!!!!  share your thesis.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,07:37   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Feb. 21 2009,07:32)
and do it without using FSCI or the EF or UPB or CSI or the NFL.  

just tits.

carlson quit stalling!!!!!  share your thesis.

Dude, real life calls.  I will try to get my John West notes up tonight.

Huh-huh-huh. Casey said tits.



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,08:45   

TITS!!!

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,09:11   

I take it that Casey didn't bother to mention that when people requested a place to talk about the DI's "Explore Evolution" textbook, Paul Nelson said that he'd check into that on the DI site (which still has nothing in that direction), but I had the thread here at AtBC up within a couple of hours of the request. Compare that with what the DI calls debate, where they post their responses to stuff, but they don't let those other opinions appear using their bandwidth.

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

    
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,09:20   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,09:11)
I take it that Casey didn't bother to mention that when people requested a place to talk about the DI's "Explore Evolution" textbook, Paul Nelson said that he'd check into that on the DI site (which still has nothing in that direction), but I had the thread here at AtBC up within a couple of hours of the request. Compare that with what the DI calls debate, where they post their responses to stuff, but they don't let those other opinions appear using their bandwidth.

Yeah, I was pissed for a minute that night about Casey pulling "ABBIE HATES FREEDOM!" after the shit they pull, but to be in the company of the other people they attacked last night (including you, Wes), its an honor.

I updated the John West post too.  Alas, no tits.

  
1of63



Posts: 126
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,09:59   

So!

Are you saying the whole ID case went TITS-up at this shindig or no?

--------------
I set expectations at zero, and FL limbos right under them. - Tracy P. Hamilton

  
FrankH



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,10:38   

George Carlin on "tits", from the 7 dirty words:

http://www.lyricsdownload.com/george-....cs.html

--------------
Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,16:24   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the First

Note:  I am going to try to report this as accurately as I can. When I interject my own comment, I will highlight those comments in red.  Further understand that I am composing this in MS Word and will be formatting it such that it is readable in Word.  The formatting may not translate onto ikonboard, which has limited formatting options.  I apologize up front if the formatting on AtBC comes across as poor.  I will gladly make the WORD file available to anyone who wants it.


Opening Comments by Don Ewert

> There are great controversies around evolution – particularly around implications of its meaning.  He makes reference to Origin of Species specifically mentioning the subtitle about preservation of “favored races”.  Not sure what he was going for here. I presume he is tipping his hat to the current preferred theme that Darwinism = racism, but Don doesn’t specifically state that. It seems more like he wants to leave a specific impression in peoples mind without actually committing himself on the record. My opinion only.

> He thanked Trinity Baptist Church for helping to organize the event and immediately states something to the effect that, of course, they would be interested in this since it is a controversy of materialism vs. theism.  It would be more accurately stated that it is a controversy between science and a narrow subset of theist thought, but that doesn’t fit with one  of the themes of the night <wink, wink> that invites the listener to think of evolution as just a competing religious doctrine.

John West – 7 Myths of Darwin Debate

Myth 1. There is no scientific debate over Darwin

> He asks what we mean by evolution?
    o Change over time
    o Small changes like antibiotic resistance and beak sizes
    o Large scale changes and development of new features (Cambrian Explosion)
    o Universal Common Ancestry
    o Natural Selection acting on random mutation as primary creative force

> He said the first two are not really controversial (I will come back to this), but the other 3 are. Although, admittedly, with a minority of scientists. Personally, I thought his separation of the last definition is logically incoherent.  Even if you accept the first 4 as distinct conceptualizations of evolution, RM+NS is still part of what drives the first four definitions. In retrospect, I think that he is setting up RM+NS as a strawman to knock over later.

> He brings up New Scientist article “Was Darwin Wrong?” as proof  that scientists think Darwinist’s tree of life needs to be pitched and the fundamentials of biology need to change.  He points out these are not creationists.(Creationist was his word, not mine. Also note that John Lynch brought this article up in his talk at OU last week and described the idea contained that the tree of life conceptualized with a single trunk is changing and it is really more like a thicket of life due to HGT.  West certainly misrepresented the article to make a rhetorical point)

> Developmental Biology 173:357-372 (1996)My notes don’t say what his point was. Maybe some can look at the article.

> Goodwin 1995 – “origin of species-Darwin’s problem-remains unsolved”

> Biologists have been questioning neo-Darwinism since the 1970s.  Someone needs to introduce West to Casey Luskin who says scientists are afraid to speak out. I would put my money on West in the ensuing doneybrook.  West appears to be a big ole boy and Luskin, a little feller.

> Lynn Margulis – “New mutations don’t create new species, they create offspring that are impaired.” He mentions link between malaria resistance and sickle cell.

> No unambiguous literature showing that natural selection only works to create novelty. Two thoughts: first nothing is unambiguous to the committed denialist so this statement is scientifically empty but not obviously so to the unschooled observer.  Second, the idea that NS is not the sole creator of novelty is a “dog bites man” statement.  I thought immediately of Allen MacNeill’s list of dozens of mechanisms.

> Douglas Axe (He has a PhD!) article in The Journal of Microbiology studying functional protein signaling (not sure I got that right) found that only one in a trillion- trillion- trillion- trillion- trillion possible combinations work (there may have been a sixth trillion in there. I wasn’t counting) West says the Discovery Institute funded this research but had to keep it on the down-low so that Axe wouldn’t be persecuted.

> Showed video of Axe. He talks about sitting in Caltech lecture about how cells make triptophin.  Is very elegant regulatory mechanism at molecular level. More elegant than anything he learned as an engineer. In fact, brilliant engineering!  He is amazed how our preconceptions color how we look at and understand data.  (No comment) He, on the other hand, always asks questions.

> Durat and Schmidt in Genetics
    o mathematical calculation of probability of a 2 step mutation happening.  Very simple point mutations. First inactivates one bonding site and the second activates another site. He says again that this is a trivial change
    o They found it would take an enormous amount of time for this type of change. 100M years in a human. But wait!  Primates have only been around for 55M years.
    o Also looked at fruit flies and still calculated it would take several million years.  But even that assumed that the first mutation was not harmful. Changing the calculation so that the first mutations could be harmful, it increased to several hundred M years.
    o Here is where I think West is knocking down the strawman he set up earlier. Here he is saying that even simple mutations wouldn’t happen except over huge expanses of time.  But this would nominally contradict his early admission that changes (like antibiotic resistance) do happen and are uncontroversial. He has to separate out RM+NS as he did above to avoid wrapping himself around the axle.

> Scientific Dissent from Darwin – over 700 scientists!  We wouldn’t teach flat earth because we couldn’t find 700 flat earthers.  But we haver 700 dissenting from Darwin so much teach. (The Dissent list has been thoroughly fisked. No need to recount that here)

> Why are Darwinists afraid of questions?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,16:31   

This is great, Carlson!

You were taking great notes, while I was being a crappy student and looking at lolcats to entertain myself... *embarassed*

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,16:47   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 21 2009,16:31)
This is great, Carlson!

You were taking great notes, while I was being a crappy student and looking at lolcats to entertain myself... *embarassed*

One of the occupational hazards of being a corporate middle management drone project manager. You are always taking and publishing meeting minutes.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,17:32   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,04:21)
Weird... people exercising free speech means that people don't already have free speech? What sort of argument is that?

I see that argument constantly, esp. from conservatives -- "you're criticizing me, therefore you're suppressing my freedom of speech".

The spooky thing is, most people who use this argument actually think it makes sense.

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

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,17:48   

The developmental biology article is open access. It's by Gilbert, Opitz, and Raff.Here is the abstract:

 
Quote
A new and more robust evolutionary synthesis is emerging that attempts to explain macroevolution as well as microevolutionary events. This new synthesis emphasizes three morphological areas of biology that had been marginalized by the Modern Synthesis of genetics and evolution: embryology, macroevolution, and homology. The foundations for this new synthesis have been provided by new findings from developmental genetics and from the reinterpretation of the fossil record. In this nascent synthesis, macroevolutionary questions are not seen as being soluble by population genetics, and the developmental actions of genes involved with growth and cell specification are seen as being critical for the formation of higher taxa. In addition to discovering the remarkable homologies of homeobox genes and their domains of expression, developmental genetics has recently proposed homologies of process that supplement the older homologies of structure. Homologous developmental pathways, such those involving the wnt genes, are seen in numerous embryonic processes, and they are seen occurring in discrete regions, the morphogenetic fields. These fields (which exemplify the modular nature of developing embryos) are proposed to mediate between genotype and phenotype. Just as the cell (and not its genome) functions as the unit of organic structure and function, so the morphogenetic field (and not the genes or the cells) is seen as a major unit of ontogeny whose changes bring about changes in evolution.


So he was probably making a similar argument to what they made with the Altenburg 16.

Edited to correct formatting and a few spelling errors.

--------------
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.

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,17:59   

Quote (afarensis @ Feb. 21 2009,17:48)
The developmental biology article is open access. It's by Gilbert, Opitz, and Raff.Here is the abstract:

So he was probably making a similar argument to what they made with the Altenburg 16.

Edited to correct formatting and a few spelling errors.

So, basically he was taking changes or controversies within the evolutionary framework and misrepresenting them as challanges to the entire edifice?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,18:08   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 21 2009,17:59)
Quote (afarensis @ Feb. 21 2009,17:48)
The developmental biology article is open access. It's by Gilbert, Opitz, and Raff.Here is the abstract:

So he was probably making a similar argument to what they made with the Altenburg 16.

Edited to correct formatting and a few spelling errors.

So, basically he was taking changes or controversies within the evolutionary framework and misrepresenting them as challanges to the entire edifice?

That is what it sounds like based on the article he was citing.

Edit to add: The Durrett and Schmidt paper is available here. They also published a reply to Behe that I haven't been able to find as open access. If you have access to genetics the reply can be found here

--------------
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.

   
olegt



Posts: 1387
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,18:36   

Casey is such a crybaby.  He submits Rob Crowther (his superior at DI) a report entitled Pro-Evolution Blogger Abbie Smith Flipped Me Off on Friday Night, and Here’s the Story.  Rob publishes said report on Evolution News & Views.  

And what was this forgiveness spiel about?  Here's a quote from the talk:
 
Quote
I’m not interested in holding grudges. I’m interested in forgiving so we can all move forward in a spirit of civility! …There Is a Better Way: Free Speech, Civility, and Peaceful Co-Existence in the Academy

Peaceful co-existence, huh?  I thought your  Wedgie Manifesto called for "direct confrontation", no?

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

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,18:41   

I have also tracked down the Goodwin 1995 cite and that refers to a book called How the Leopard Changed Its Spots: the evolution of complexity. I haven't read it but the reviews and so forth make it sound like Kauffman's stuff.

--------------
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.

   
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,18:41   

Quote (olegt @ Feb. 21 2009,18:36)
Casey is such a crybaby.  He submits Rob Crowther (his superior at DI) a report entitled Pro-Evolution Blogger Abbie Smith Flipped Me Off on Friday Night, and Here’s the Story.  Rob publishes said report on Evolution News & Views.  

And what was this forgiveness spiel about?  Here's a quote from the talk:
     
Quote
I’m not interested in holding grudges. I’m interested in forgiving so we can all move forward in a spirit of civility! …There Is a Better Way: Free Speech, Civility, and Peaceful Co-Existence in the Academy

Peaceful co-existence, huh?  I thought your  Wedgie Manifesto called for "direct confrontation", no?

More spewing from Casey Cloaca (and yes, Casey, I do hope that you include that in your next presentation about AtBCers insulting poor little you)  
Quote
After reviewing some of the problems with the Kitzmiller ruling, my talk focused on the importance of protecting academic freedom. I made the point that Darwinists use a vareity (sic) of tactics to shut down free and open debate on intelligent design (ID) and evolution.

This was posted on a site where comments are not allowed.

You want free and open debate, Casey? Please open comments over there, or come over here.

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

   
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,19:13   

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Feb. 21 2009,18:41)
Quote (olegt @ Feb. 21 2009,18:36)
Casey is such a crybaby.  He submits Rob Crowther (his superior at DI) a report entitled Pro-Evolution Blogger Abbie Smith Flipped Me Off on Friday Night, and Here’s the Story.  Rob publishes said report on Evolution News & Views.  

And what was this forgiveness spiel about?  Here's a quote from the talk:
     
Quote
I’m not interested in holding grudges. I’m interested in forgiving so we can all move forward in a spirit of civility! …There Is a Better Way: Free Speech, Civility, and Peaceful Co-Existence in the Academy

Peaceful co-existence, huh?  I thought your  Wedgie Manifesto called for "direct confrontation", no?

More spewing from Casey Cloaca (and yes, Casey, I do hope that you include that in your next presentation about AtBCers insulting poor little you)  
Quote
After reviewing some of the problems with the Kitzmiller ruling, my talk focused on the importance of protecting academic freedom. I made the point that Darwinists use a vareity (sic) of tactics to shut down free and open debate on intelligent design (ID) and evolution.

This was posted on a site where comments are not allowed.

You want free and open debate, Casey? Please open comments over there, or come over here.

AAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

WIN!!!

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1005
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,19:41   

Even I pwnd Casey in a discussion.

Luskin is such a pathetic and, possibly, pathological liar that it's easy to do.  Just read the original article he's misquoting, usually someone who's DEAD, and call him on the facts.

Then he runs like the whipped attack gerbil he is.

Hey, Casey, if you're reading this, Nobody Likes You.  You're an Idiot and an IDiot.

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,19:46   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 21 2009,19:13)
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Feb. 21 2009,18:41)
Quote (olegt @ Feb. 21 2009,18:36)
Casey is such a crybaby.  He submits Rob Crowther (his superior at DI) a report entitled Pro-Evolution Blogger Abbie Smith Flipped Me Off on Friday Night, and Here’s the Story.  Rob publishes said report on Evolution News & Views.  

And what was this forgiveness spiel about?  Here's a quote from the talk:
       
Quote
I’m not interested in holding grudges. I’m interested in forgiving so we can all move forward in a spirit of civility! …There Is a Better Way: Free Speech, Civility, and Peaceful Co-Existence in the Academy

Peaceful co-existence, huh?  I thought your  Wedgie Manifesto called for "direct confrontation", no?

More spewing from Casey Cloaca (and yes, Casey, I do hope that you include that in your next presentation about AtBCers insulting poor little you)    
Quote
After reviewing some of the problems with the Kitzmiller ruling, my talk focused on the importance of protecting academic freedom. I made the point that Darwinists use a vareity (sic) of tactics to shut down free and open debate on intelligent design (ID) and evolution.

This was posted on a site where comments are not allowed.

You want free and open debate, Casey? Please open comments over there, or come over here.

AAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

WIN!!!

I think he has a crush on you - in a heterosexually chaste creepy christian kind of way - because you say tits and let gay people get you drunk. It's the "dangerous boy" syndrome in reverse.

--------------
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.

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,19:50   

"attack gerbil"

I had just changed "attack hamster" to "attack gerbil." Maybe I should change it to some other rodent?

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,20:13   

Quote (Dr.GH @ Feb. 22 2009,03:50)
"attack gerbil"

I had just changed "attack hamster" to "attack gerbil." Maybe I should change it to some other rodent?

No 'attack gerbil' is fine.

.....a gerbil that's as flash as a rat with a gold tooth.

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

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,20:20   

Quote (afarensis @ Feb. 21 2009,19:46)
I think he has a crush on you - in a heterosexually chaste creepy christian kind of way - because you say tits and let gay people get you drunk. It's the "dangerous boy" syndrome in reverse.

That would explain why he was fidgeting nervously with his wedding ring all night.

Also: MOAR TITS!!!!!

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,20:39   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the Second

Note:I am trying to represent the talks as accurately as possible.  My comments/editorials will be in red.

Myth 2 - ID is repackaged creationism

>   He asks what we mean by creationism?
    o Belief in God?  What about Francis Ayala and Kenneth Miller, are they creationists?  Bill Dembski thinks so, maybe you should have talked to him first, John. Link
    o YEC – literal reading of Genesis? But ID doesn’t require that, so it isn’t creationism. ID is considered a creationist enterprise, not because it necessarily hews to a literal Genesis, but  because it repackages arguments with long history in creationist literature. John also engages in the fallacy of the excluded middle. These aren't the only two options, but it serves his purposes to pretend it is.

>   ID theory holds that some features are better explained by intelligent processes  rather than undirected processes.

>   ID seeks to determine if apparent design is real design. Even Dawkins admits that there is apparent design.

>   He makes a comment about even Darwin thinking some things are outside science and others adjudicable.  I’ve lost the context of this statement.  Not sure what his point was.

>   Philosopher of science Phillip Kitchener thought that declaring that ID is not science was philosophically untenable and a cheap shot.

>   N.B. The next two points are presented here in a different sequence than they were in my notes, which were taken directly from the talk.  I change the order only to attempt to make West’s points clearer. I don’t think changing the sequence changes the point

>   Center for Inquiry has ID timeline – it starts in 1983 (after McLean v. Arkansas?) Not true,  ID goes back to the Greeks and Romans like Socrates and Cicero. Hold this thought because we are going to hit Casey Luskin over the head with it a bit later on. Don't these guys coordinate their messages? Srsly.

>   Everyone says that ID is only a negative argument against evolution, but it is also a positive argument
    o  Positive: From uniform and repeatable experiments, we know that intelligent causes produce certain kinds of highly ordered complexity (specified complexity) I find it an interesting bit of equivocation that he didn’t say that only intelligent causes can produce specified complexity.
    o  Negative: natural selection acting on random mutation does not have such a good track record generating such complexity.  Note again the equivocation.  He is making sure he doesn’t get painted into a corner like Behe did in KvD with regard to the blood clotting cascade.

>   He seems to accuse Darwinists of taking an anti-intellectual view of Western Civilization by not allowing questions. I'll get a little more into West's tactics in the Q&A session that belie the notion that West is interested in questions.  Also see comments above about why doesn't EN&V allow comments.

>   He then wraps himself in the flag by an appeal to American intellectual history when he plays an audio of a quote about regularities in nature taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams.  He makes the point that Jefferson wasn’t a Christian and was often hostile to Christianity.  Props to West for correctly presenting Jefferson’s views on Christianity.  All too often TJ is claimed by conservative Christians as one of their own.  However, West squanders what little capital he gained through this honesty by not mentioning that TJ died 28 years before Origin was published and a case might be made that he would have embraced Darwin’s theory.

>   Alfred Russell Wallace – co-discoverer of evolution but disagreed with Darwin regarding how much natural selection could do.  Didn’t think it could create the human brain and consciousness. He wrote about this to Darwin and it pained Darwin greatly.  West made the “pained greatly” comment twice.  Not sure why but I suspect that he is trying to make it seem like Darwin saw this as a problem to his theory.  But West was rather obtuse here, so I am speculating what he wants us to think here.

>   The ACLU wouldn’t let Jefferson and Wallace into schools to explain their views!  West is overplaying his hand almost to the point of hysteria here.  Both Jefferson and Wallace would be valuable contributors to an educational environment on a wide variety of topics. However, in the narrow area where West claims that Jefferson and Wallace support him (an assertion he makes, in Jefferson's case, on the flimsiest of evidence), they probably wouldn't find themselves contributing to a high school biology class. Indeed, biology has advanced so much in the last century that Jefferson and Wallace would more appropriately be placed behind a desk and not a lectern in such a biology class.West is just hamhandedly pushing emotional buttons by invoking the ACLU.

>    The modern revival of ID is to see what can be known from empirical data without recourse to theology. West might want to have a conversation with Bill Dembski about that whole John 1:1 thing

>    ID, like evolution, may have implications for religion, but does not start from religious premises (this statement figures prominently in the question I asked West during Q&A)

>   Ron Numbers, distinguished anti-ID scholar thinks the ID=creationism equivalence is a rhetorical device to de-legitimize ID and is nothing more than a smear so people won’t look at evidence. West talking about rhetorical equivalences as smears conjures up images of pots and kettles. Making such equivalences will become a recurring theme in the rest of West's talk.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
jeffox



Posts: 531
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,20:46   

Dr. GH wrote:

Quote
I had just changed "attack hamster" to "attack gerbil." Maybe I should change it to some other rodent?


Pick whichever one has the biggest tits.

:)      :)       :)         :)

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,20:47   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 21 2009,20:39)
My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the Second

Note:I am trying to represent the talks as accurately as possible.  My comments/editorials will be in red.

Myth 2 - ID is repackaged creationism

>   He asks what we mean by creationism?
    o Belief in God?  What about Francis Ayala and Kenneth Miller, are they creationists?  Bill Dembski thinks so, maybe you should have talked to him first, John. Link
    o YEC – literal reading of Genesis? But ID doesn’t require that, so it isn’t creationism. ID is considered a creationist enterprise, not because it necessarily hews to a literal Genesis, but  because it repackages arguments with long history in creationist literature. John also engages in the fallacy of the excluded middle. These aren't the only two options, but it serves his purposes to pretend it is.

>   ID theory holds that some features are better explained by intelligent processes  rather than undirected processes.

>   ID seeks to determine if apparent design is real design. Even Dawkins admits that there is apparent design.

>   He makes a comment about even Darwin thinking some things are outside science and others adjudicable.  I’ve lost the context of this statement.  Not sure what his point was.

>   Philosopher of science Phillip Kitchener thought that declaring that ID is not science was philosophically untenable and a cheap shot.

>   N.B. The next two points are presented here in a different sequence than they were in my notes, which were taken directly from the talk.  I change the order only to attempt to make West’s points clearer. I don’t think changing the sequence changes the point

>   Center for Inquiry has ID timeline – it starts in 1983 (after McLean v. Arkansas?) Not true,  ID goes back to the Greeks and Romans like Socrates and Cicero. Hold this thought because we are going to hit Casey Luskin over the head with it a bit later on. Don't these guys coordinate their messages? Srsly.

>   Everyone says that ID is only a negative argument against evolution, but it is also a positive argument
    o  Positive: From uniform and repeatable experiments, we know that intelligent causes produce certain kinds of highly ordered complexity (specified complexity) I find it an interesting bit of equivocation that he didn’t say that only intelligent causes can produce specified complexity.
    o  Negative: natural selection acting on random mutation does not have such a good track record generating such complexity.  Note again the equivocation.  He is making sure he doesn’t get painted into a corner like Behe did in KvD with regard to the blood clotting cascade.

>   He seems to accuse Darwinists of taking an anti-intellectual view of Western Civilization by not allowing questions. I'll get a little more into West's tactics in the Q&A session that belie the notion that West is interested in questions.  Also see comments above about why doesn't EN&V allow comments.

>   He then wraps himself in the flag by an appeal to American intellectual history when he plays an audio of a quote about regularities in nature taken from a letter from Thomas Jefferson to John Adams.  He makes the point that Jefferson wasn’t a Christian and was often hostile to Christianity.  Props to West for correctly presenting Jefferson’s views on Christianity.  All too often TJ is claimed by conservative Christians as one of their own.  However, West squanders what little capital he gained through this honesty by not mentioning that TJ died 28 years before Origin was published and a case might be made that he would have embraced Darwin’s theory.

>   Alfred Russell Wallace – co-discoverer of evolution but disagreed with Darwin regarding how much natural selection could do.  Didn’t think it could create the human brain and consciousness. He wrote about this to Darwin and it pained Darwin greatly.  West made the “pained greatly” comment twice.  Not sure why but I suspect that he is trying to make it seem like Darwin saw this as a problem to his theory.  But West was rather obtuse here, so I am speculating what he wants us to think here.

>   The ACLU wouldn’t let Jefferson and Wallace into schools to explain their views!  West is overplaying his hand almost to the point of hysteria here.  Both Jefferson and Wallace would be valuable contributors to an educational environment on a wide variety of topics. However, in the narrow area where West claims that Jefferson and Wallace support him (an assertion he makes, in Jefferson's case, on the flimsiest of evidence), they probably wouldn't find themselves contributing to a high school biology class. Indeed, biology has advanced so much in the last century that Jefferson and Wallace would more appropriately be placed behind a desk and not a lectern in such a biology class.West is just hamhandedly pushing emotional buttons by invoking the ACLU.

>    The modern revival of ID is to see what can be known from empirical data without recourse to theology. West might want to have a conversation with Bill Dembski about that whole John 1:1 thing

>    ID, like evolution, may have implications for religion, but does not start from religious premises (this statement figures prominently in the question I asked West during Q&A)

>   Ron Numbers, distinguished anti-ID scholar thinks the ID=creationism equivalence is a rhetorical device to de-legitimize ID and is nothing more than a smear so people won’t look at evidence. West talking about rhetorical equivalences as smears conjures up images of pots and kettles. Making such equivalences will become a recurring theme in the rest of West's talk.

Carlson - Outstanding work, and I am sure I speak for all of us, that we really appreciate you giving up your nite and day and reporting back to us.  However, Abbie keeps showing us TITS, TITS AND MOAR TITS.

I just thought you should know.

Carry On!

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

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,21:03   

Just for variety, some small, cute boobies:

and some moar tits:
to entertain Casey and his little friend Johnny:



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

  
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,21:04   

On the Darwin thing, Charles was quite clear on the subject. This is from a letter Darwin wrote:

Quote
Sir,—I am very busy, and am an old man in delicate health, and have not time to answer your, questions fully, even assuming that they are capable of being answered at all.3 Science and Christ have nothing to do with each other, except in as far as the habit of scientific investigation makes a man cautious about accepting any proofs. As far as I am concerned, I do not believe that any revelation has ever been made. With regard to a future life, every one must draw his own conclusions from vague and contradictory probabilities. Wishing you well, I remain, your obedient servant,

CHARLES DARWIN.


The number three refers you to a footnote that explains:

Quote
Mengden wrote to Darwin on 2 April 1879 asking if a believer in his theory could also believe in God. A reply in the affirmative was written by Emma Darwin. Mengden wrote again stating that Haeckel disbelieves in the supernatural, what did Darwin think? This letter was Darwin's response.


So, even if you did know the context I'm not sure that West's argument would be supported by the evidence.

--------------
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.

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,21:06   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 21 2009,20:47)
Carlson - Outstanding work, and I am sure I speak for all of us, that we really appreciate you giving up your nite and day and reporting back to us.  However, Abbie keeps showing us TITS, TITS AND MOAR TITS.

Well, my thing is really more LOLCats, but just for you:


   
Quote

I just thought you should know.

Carry On!

Not tonight, but I will keep forging ahead through West's talk tomorrow.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,21:19   

The "intelligent design" timeline... is irrelevant.

The issue isn't whether somebody put "intelligent" next to "design" before 1987, like the old Reese's commercials discussed putting "chocolate" next to "peanut butter". The issue is about the use of "intelligent design" as if that meant a field of human inquiry. Plenty of people before had used "intelligent design" as a descriptive phrase about a property that they attributed to certain phenomena. That sloppy, unfocused sort of rhetoric does indeed have a long, long history.

But "intelligent design" meaning a field of study, a scientific field of study that would have a place in a K-12 science classroom? That usage uniquely first appears in the just-post-Edwards v. Aguillard decision period in the draft manuscript that eventually got published as Of Pandas and People.

West may be able to handwave fast enough in front of a debate audience to obfuscate the vast difference there, but in a courtroom this will be developed at length and such that there is no confusion left for the IDC advocates to hide behind.

So far as I can tell, the Thaxton claim that anybody in the movement had a notion to push "intelligent design" rather than creationism in the pre-Edwards run-up to OPAP is completely lacking in substantiation. If they actually had that, do you suppose they would not have presented it during the Kitzmiller trial?

No, neither do I.

Ron Numbers does think that there is a distinction between creationism and "intelligent design". It's becoming an increasingly fringe position. For almost everybody else who actually studies the antievolution movement, the evidence from the Kitzmiller case completely demolished the notion that "intelligent design" represented a legitimate field of scholarly inquiry. And it wasn't "the Darwinists" that put them in that position; it was the record of their actions, painstakingly analyzed and presented to the court. They only have themselves to blame. They could have taken their own rhetoric in the Wedge document seriously and convinced the scientific community first, if they were going to. They chose to give that a pass and push on with the culture war. It's not our fault that they did their own cause damage that way, and it is not our fault that they absolutely make it necessary to lay all this out in the plainest of terms.

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

    
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,21:56   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 21 2009,21:19)
... It's not our fault that they did their own cause damage that way, and it is not our fault that they absolutely make it necessary to lay all this out in the plainest of terms.

Thanks Wes.  I copied and pasted and saved your work.  With proper attribution and date, because your post was so clear & concise.

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

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 883
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 21 2009,22:03   

I'd just like to register my personal offence at the title of this thread.

--------------
“To surrender to ignorance and call it God has always been premature, and it remains premature today.” - Isaac Asimov

"Grow up, assface" - Joe G., grown up ID spokesperson, Sandwalk, April 2014

  
simmi



Posts: 38
Joined: Aug. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,03:46   

You never know, Casey might be into:



(thought I should add some balance to this thread)

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,06:58   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the Third

Note: My comments or editorials will appear in red.

John West - 7 Myths of the Darwin Debate

Myth 3 - ID proponents want to unify Church and state


>    The Darwinists don't have much evidence is this is what they are reduced to arguing.

>    He is offended!  He wrote a book, The Politics of Revelation and Reason: Religion and Civic Life in the New Nation , published by the University Press of Kansas, that supports the separation of church and state, but makes the case for people of faith participating in civic life.  As described, this is entirely uncontroversial. I am not aware of anyone serious that advocates the disenfranchisement of people of faith. Not even the ACLU, despite what folks like West would have you believe.  See Ed Brayton's blog (link) for more on this.

>     He accused Barbara Forrest of quotemining his book to make it look like he is a theocrat.

>    That is it. The sum total of his defense against accusations that the DI are theocrats, as if the entire case of them being theocrats rests on a quote mine by Barbara Forrest.  I think the case is a bit more complex than that and I would have liked to hear West justify the Discovery Institute's acceptance of significant funding from Howard Ahmanson, Jr.

>   West's book actually looks interesting, although not particularly provocative.  It's premise sounds similar to Jon Meacham's American Gospel: God, the Founding Fathers, and the Making of a Nation, a book I tried to read last year but put down because it read like a series of Newsweek articles, addressing the topic too superficially. Anyone have a copy of West's book they'd be willing to lend me? I wouldn't mind testing his accusation against Forrest with my own read.


Myth 4 - ID proponents are motivated by religion, while Darwinists are motivated by a dispassionate search for truth

>   Darwinists are hypocritical.  90% of people believe in God.

>   Darwinists are motivated by evangelical atheism

>   He plays a video of a bunch of nerds scientists singing an anti-ID song. He likens it to a revival meeting.

>   Dawkins (atheist!) is bad because he says religion is a great evil.

>    Barbara Forrest (atheist!) - 90% of BF's schtick is to examine the motives of ID proponents, but refuses to answer questions about her own beliefs.  A local Lousiana reporter asked her and she refused to answer, essentially telling him to MYOB.

>    Michael Shermer (atheist!) - said that science was his savior and rescued him from religion.

>    Eugenie Scott - she is agnostic or atheist. Don't really know because she answers differently. She signed the Humanist Manifesto.

>    We need to look at their motives

>    Breakdown of biologists in National Academy of Science
     o    65% atheist
     o    29% agnostic
     o    only 6% believers!

>  2003 survey of leading evolutionists by Cornell
     o    87% don't believe in God
     o    88% don't believe life after death
     o    90% don't believe in directed evolution

>    In retrospect, I don't see West's talk as necessarily about dispelling any myths. It seems more a talk building to a specific premise using the myths as MacGuffins.  As the talk progressed, West became more animated in his speaking and he builds toward his premise. Myth 1 was, as advertised, about establishing there is a controversy. Myth 2 and 3 were about establishing the "nice cred" of ID proponents on one side of the controversy.  In Myth 4 here, West turns his attention to demonizing Darwinists on the other side and continues that theme throughout. In the Q&A, I challenged him on this broad brush demonization and he backed away a little, but never really answered the question.  But, we will get to that in due time.

>     The tactic becomes clear here.  As much as West objects to being characterized by equivalences, he is more than happy to engage in that himself.  He reduces the entirety of evolutionary biology down to a few scary figureheads (Dawkins, Forrest, Scott, Shermer- atheists, one and all!) then takes them on. Here he ignores significant personalities like Miller, Ayala, Collins that are not atheists.(umm, I'm not implying that Wes Elsberry isn't a significant personality.  Far from it. He does a yoeman's job fighting antievolutionism and (unlike West and Luskin) actually does real science.  Also, he is our gracious benefactor here and we loves him. Mwwahhh.


--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,07:17   

Carlson, thanks a lot for the heads-up so far. Nothing really new, but it's always interesting to keep updated about the "latest" ID strategies.

Can't wait for part the fourth. Your report reads better than any TV novellas.

Thanks again, that's commitment!

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,07:28   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Feb. 22 2009,07:17)
Carlson, thanks a lot for the heads-up so far. Nothing really new, but it's always interesting to keep updated about the "latest" ID strategies.

True, I didn't really hear anything new.  But, I found the structure of West's presentation cleverly crafted to evoke specific emotional reactions in the audience and documenting this has really reinforced, for me, West's role as a propagandist. Documenting this has been an interesting exercise that I have enjoyed.  Unfortunately, you guys get to suffer through my musings. I am not nearly as entertaining as Abbie is.
Quote
Can't wait for part the fourth. Your report reads better than any TV novellas.

Just wait for the Abbie on Casey scene.  HAWT!!!!

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,07:51   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,14:28)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Feb. 22 2009,07:17)
Carlson, thanks a lot for the heads-up so far. Nothing really new, but it's always interesting to keep updated about the "latest" ID strategies.

True, I didn't really hear anything new.  But, I found the structure of West's presentation cleverly crafted to evoke specific emotional reactions in the audience and documenting this has really reinforced, for me, West's role as a propagandist. Documenting this has been an interesting exercise that I have enjoyed.  Unfortunately, you guys get to suffer through my musings. I am not nearly as entertaining as Abbie is.
 
Quote
Can't wait for part the fourth. Your report reads better than any TV novellas.

Just wait for the Abbie on Casey scene.  HAWT!!!!

I think PR and propaganda have been ID's strongest (only?) tool so far. No one could deny that West, Behe or even Dembsky (up to a point) are well versed in the craft of public speaches. But by documenting as much of it as possible, the holes and fallacies come out stronger, and a quick debunk is thus made easier.

Your musings are actualy welcome, as they can enlighten the lurker or the casual poster (such as myself) by dissecting and pointing out something that is not always obvious at first sight. That's the beauty of such forums.

As for Abbie, I've been reading her lattest posts on ERV, and the seksyhawt factor sure helps. A cross examination of both your reports will be something to keep and balance against whatever the IDiots can muster.

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Richard Simons



Posts: 425
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,08:10   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,07:28)
I am not nearly as entertaining as Abbie is.

But I find your writing is a lot more coherent.

--------------
All sweeping statements are wrong.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,08:18   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the Fourth

Note: My comments or editorials will appear in red.  I apologize that, as we go along my comments tend to become longer and longer vis-a-vis my documentation of West's talk.  But as we go along, his tactics become more evident and I think it bears commenting. A few prime examples below.

John West - 7 Myths of the Darwin Debate

Myth 5 - ID proponents want to teach religion in science classes, and Darwinists only want to teach science


>    Actually it is the other way around. ID proponents want more science taught in science classes, like Lynn Margulis and the Cambrian Explosion.   The Discovery Institute has publicly stated that they don't want ID to be mandated in science class. So, to burnish their "we want more science" theme, they can't invoke ID. So the tactic is to hijack settled science as if it was controversial and say that that is what they want taught.  Early on, West drafts Margulis into his camp as a tacit anti-evolutionist.  Now he trots her back out as a poster child for academic freedom.  I would be curious if anyone familiar with high school biology curriculum (TexasTeach, Albatrossity?) would like to comment regarding whether Lynn Margulis or the Cambrian Explosion really need the Discovery Institute's protection.

>     West references two articles from American Biology Teacher magazine.
       o    First article says goal of teaching evolution is to get students to drop "non-scientific views" like the existence of the soul or if people are created by god.I think West is employing misdirection here.  Prima facie, ID proponents say they only want science taught in science class. Setting aside the issue as to whether ID is science, we can still assume that they would publicly agree with the statement that non-science shouldn't be in science class. Thus, it would seem that West is taking an article that is about teaching students to recognize scientific vs non-scientific ideas and conflating it with making them drop those non-scientific ideas altogether. He is tugging here at the emotions of those who consider their faith an integral part of their life.
      o He references a second article that was indoctrination intended to make people think there is no contrary evidence.

>    He asks: who is teaching religion here?  Another equivalence from West

>   Now he turns his attention to Ken Miller. He mentions how Miller's book is one of the most popular high school biology texts. The presentation on the screen, though, shows a picture of Miller's book Finding Darwin's God. West states that Miller is pushing religion. Here we see West's tactics in full display.  It is certainly true that Miller has written a widely used biology text (Biology:The Living Science with J. Levine). But by showing FDG in the presentation material the audience is invited to think that FDG is the textbook, rather than the mass market book it really is. It seems to me that this seeks to evoke an emotional response in the audience by implying that the Darwinists are using FDG to bring indoctrination into the classroom.  He doesn't state this specifically. In fact, he never actually mentions the book title, but the implication seems clear.

>    He turns back to Eugenie Scott and mentions something about a brainstorming exercise, but I didn't catch his point.  He also shows a screencap of the NCSE webpage showing links to various religious denominations positions on evolution.  He accuses Scott of quoting The Pope out of context, but provides no detail as to what she said and what the Pope really said.

>    He talks about an exercise where students in Minnesota went out and inteviewed their pastors on evolution. He says this is government endorsement of a theological view of evolution.

>    He talks again about the NCSE website on various liberal denominations views on evolution. Yes, he specifically said "liberal". He says this was funded with a government grant and is, therefore, clearly unconstitutional.  Wasn't the University of California sued over a similar website?  Was that case decided on the merits or tossed based on standing?

Okay that is all for now.  The sun is up, it is going to be a beautiful day, and I have horses to ride.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,08:35   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,14:18)
Okay that is all for now.  The sun is up, it is going to be a beautiful day, and I have horses to ride.

Thanks for the write-up!


--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,08:54   

I think I just lost a significant amount of braincells, reading West's blabbering. It comes to the point where it almost hurts.

Next episode (I hope):

-Is science the work of the Devil?
-Did God create the world using C++ or Python?
-Does Luskin have tits?

Can't wait. What's the rate for neuronal regeneration again? I have to be careful...

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,09:22   

@Carlson - The Understanding Evolution case was dismissed on standing. Link

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,11:40   

The Caldwells sued the UC system over pages on the Understanding Evolution website. The case got tossed on issues of standing.

But it doesn't look like it would go anywhere even if standing weren't an issue. The government can fund projects that tell students true things about religion. This is trivially true, else all civics classes that mention the first amendment would be right out, as well as history classes that mention the religious reasons some of the original colonies were founded.

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

    
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,11:44   

One of the people who joined NCSE shortly after I did was more cautious about some of the statements that we made concerning the IDC movement than most. Were they really that bad? Then there was a radio interview pairing them up with John West. After that, there was better appreciation for the depths the IDC movement would sink to.

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

    
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,11:50   

Quote
I would be curious if anyone familiar with high school biology curriculum (TexasTeach, Albatrossity?) would like to comment regarding whether Lynn Margulis or the Cambrian Explosion really need the Discovery Institute's protection.


We cover endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts. We might or might not do the Cambrian Explosion - the curriculum focuses more on mechanisms than on timeline. Maybe I'll work it in there.

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,11:53   

Jesus, West is a piece of friggin' work.

A lying steaming pile of work, couldn't lie straight in bed.

A weaseling little shit no balls preacher/theocrat.

Why doesn't he just come out and say Darwin and Evolution is an athiest conspiracy and that he's defendin' Amerika's gods; guns and oil.

And he's an anti tit gay.

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

  
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,12:03   

Quote (k.e.. @ Feb. 22 2009,12:53)
Jesus, West is a piece of friggin' work.

A lying steaming pile of work, couldn't lie straight in bed.

A weaseling little shit no balls preacher/theocrat.

Why doesn't he just come out and say Darwin and Evolution is an athiest conspiracy and that he's defendin' Amerika's gods; guns and oil.

And he's an anti tit gay.

I went to ERV and clicked on those 'mens news' links.  

Eeeeew!

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
Amadan



Posts: 1244
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,12:37   

Video of an anti-ID song???


You have got to track that down for us to see.

--------------
"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.

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,12:55   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute - Part the Fifth

Note:  My comments/editorials will be in red.

Myth 6 - There is no connection between Darwin and social Darwinism

>    Evolutionists are papering over the real historical record.

>    West shows a cartoon of Darwin kicking two men, labelled "laissez faire" and "eugenics", out of his house.  We always hear that Darwinism led to Marxism, but apparently it is also responsible for unrestrained capitalism. Evolution really can do anything!

>    These people haven't read Darwin and (to audience) have you? He asks for a show of hands. I only saw one or two go up.

>     West brings up the recently released book "Darwin's Sacred Cause".  He acknowledges that Darwin was an abolitionist and, in a strange aside, mentions that Wilberforce was also an abolitionist.

>    He admits he hasn't read DSC completely, but found it odd that they didn't discuss Darwin's comments, in Descent of Man, about the mental faculties of "men of distinct races" or Darwin's statement of the break in evolution between the Negro/Australian and the gorilla. (I assume here he means the aboriginal Aussies)  West says Darwin thought they were closer to monkeys than white men.

>    West played an audio of someone reading a statement of Darwin's about asylums, vaccinations saving 1000s allowing them to propogate.  The audio included something about anyone who knows/breeds domestic animals knows this is injurious.  Okay, they are trying to hang eugenics on Darwin.  I assume someone out here has the real quote and it shows, in situ, something different?

>    He puts up a quote that I think included the phrase "bear bad effects" and then complains because people don't read further where they would see a comment about it being okay because natural selection still works.  More Darwin = eugenics. Darwin scholars, any comment?

>    He talks about (but doesn't show) a comment from the end of Descent of Man that says (to paraphrase) man is still like an animal in a struggle for existence and if he wants to evolve higher he must remain subject to severe struggle.

>      West puts in a plug for his book (Darwin Day in America, I assume) and talks about the link of the eugenics movement to evolutionist  Cauthorn who was at Princeton and a head of the NAS. Remember the NAS that bed of atheism!!!!

>   Most questions about eugenics were not raised by scientists, but the Catholic Church.  Okay, maybe a few scientists.

>    Kansas SBOE - evolutionists removed criticisms of eugenics and the Tuskegee syphilis experiments from the science standards.  West implies they are hiding something and asks "Who are the real extremists?"  Albatrossity or Jack Krebs, care to comment regarding the real reason?

Myth 7 - Modern Biology and Medicine would collapse without evolution

>    The Scientist 19(16):10 (2005) - Phillip Skell interviewed scientists about if they use Darwin. Almost all said no.  Also asked if they used it was it integral or superfluous.  He found the latter.

>    Is ID a science stopper? No. Minnich and and Axe show that isn't true.  Interesting that John didn't mention Behe.  Poor Mike doesn't even get respect from his ideological compatriots.

>   He showed a Washington Post article from 6/24/2007 by Rick Weiss about junk DNA.  Dembski predicted 10 years ago that junk DNA may not be junk after all.  An email was sent to Weiss pointing this out but no response was ever received Darn liberal media!  I expect that there was plenty of scientists that were saying that we'd find functions for what was previously considered non-coding DNA long before Dembski ever made his "prediction". But, West leaves the audience with the impression that the discovery that there are functions for "junk DNA" just happened in 2007 and Dembski was ahead of everyone else.  FWIW, the idea that Dembski predicted this reminds me of a comment about someone running around the block to get to the front of a parade that already left without him.

>     He quotes Guiseppi Sermonti that Darwinism is just political correctness.  Isn't Sermonti the person behind that crank journal Rivista?

>    West closes with Darwin's "fair result" quote and suggests we should follow that approach.

That is the end of West's formal talk.  I'll have a summary of the Q&A and a few personal comments later tonight.  Then, during the week, I'll get to Casey Luskin. And tits!

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Jasper



Posts: 76
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,13:08   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,13:55)
>    Kansas SBOE - evolutionists removed criticisms of eugenics and the Tuskegee syphilis experiments from the science standards.  West implies they are hiding something and asks "Who are the real extremists?"  Albatrossity of Jack Krebs, care to comment regarding the real reason?

Jack Krebs responded to this on PT when West first made the accusation in 2007:
Quote
The Board was not “deleting” this statement. The Board was replacing the entire set of standards written by the IDists with the standards written by the duly-appointed committee, and we on the committee never even considered a sentence like the one inserted by the IDists. We didn’t edit or revise the old ID standards, deleting this and adding that - we just ignored the ID standards and went back to the standards we were writing before the ID folks were allowed to take over.

There are two things about this that upset me. The first is the implication that we on the committee and on the state Board, because we are “evolutionists,” are somehow supportive of the above “violations of human dignity” but don’t want students to know about them. This is insulting, and shows how low the DI will go to stir up divisive and hateful emotions.

Secondly, this illustrates again that the ID movement has no shame in abusing the educational system for their own purposes. It should be clear that if the topics mentioned belong in standards of any kind, they belong in social studies standards, not science standards. Throughout this whole affair, and repeatedly in other states, the anti-evolutionists are using the educational system as a convenient vehicle for their cultural agenda, and our children don’t deserve this.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,13:26   

Notes of John West's talk:

Quote

Positive: From uniform and repeatable experiments, we know that intelligent causes produce certain kinds of highly ordered complexity (specified complexity)


West ignores the fact that the stuff he is talking about here concerns ordinary design inferences and does not speak at all to justifying the rarefied design inferences that they wish people to adopt. IDC has contributed nothing to understanding the former, and has no basis to urge the adoption of the latter. There is no "positive" case here for IDC.

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

    
Dr.GH



Posts: 1956
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,13:34   

Quote
"With savages, the weak in body or mind are soon eliminated; and those that survive commonly exhibit a vigorous state of health. We civilised men, on the other hand, do our utmost to check the process of elimination; we build asylums for the imbecile, the maimed, and the sick; we institute poor-laws; and our medical men exert their utmost skill to save the life of every one to the last moment. There is reason to believe that vaccination has preserved thousands, who from a weak constitution would formerly have succumbed to small-pox. Thus the weak members of civilised societies propagate their kind. No one who has attended to the breeding of domestic animals will doubt that this must be highly injurious to the race of man. It is surprising how soon a want of care, or care wrongly directed, leads to the degeneration of a domestic race; but excepting in the case of man himself, hardly any one is so ignorant as to allow his worst animals to breed.

The aid which we feel impelled to give to the helpless is mainly an incidental result of the instinct of sympathy, which was originally acquired as part of the social instincts, but subsequently rendered, in the manner previously indicated, more tender and more widely diffused. Nor could we check our sympathy, if so urged by hard reason, without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The surgeon may harden himself whilst performing an operation, for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it could only be for a contingent benefit, with a certain and great present evil. Hence we must bear without complaining the undoubtedly bad effects of the weak surviving and propagating their kind; ..."


Darwin, C. R. 1871. "The Descent of Man" London: John Murray. Volume 1. 1st edition, Chapter V.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,14:03   

To everyone who is responding to fill in the gaps in my knowledge, I have only one thing to say:



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1691
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,14:11   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,21:03)
To everyone who is responding to fill in the gaps in my knowledge, I have only one thing to say:


That's so gay! But I'm okay with gay, so carry on..

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,15:20   

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Feb. 22 2009,14:11)
That's so gay! But I'm okay with gay, so carry on..

Since you are French, this one is for you.



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
bystander



Posts: 301
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,15:25   

What was the crowd like? Was it a sellout? Was the crowd pro ID?

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:03   

I have no idea.  75 people?  100?

I couldnt even guess on the split-- Lots of kids came to say hi to me, but some were OU kids, some were Trinity kids, some were nice older people, some were bitter ass Trinity fogies trying to suck up.  I dunno-- 50-50?  Lots of people clapped after the evilution song, and when Casey announced the academic freedom bill was dead, but lots of people started praising Jesus at the end of Caseys speech.

*shrug*

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:18   

Quote (bystander @ Feb. 22 2009,15:25)
What was the crowd like? Was it a sellout? Was the crowd pro ID?

The room capacity was stated at 173 and I'd estimate it at 2/3 full. So call it 100-120.  I didn't get a sense of the breakdown between pro and anti.  For the most part, everyone was well behaved and respectful.  Well, there was this one chick.......

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:20   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,16:18)
Quote (bystander @ Feb. 22 2009,15:25)
What was the crowd like? Was it a sellout? Was the crowd pro ID?

The room capacity was stated at 173 and I'd estimate it at 2/3 full. So call it 100-120.  I didn't get a sense of the breakdown between pro and anti.  For the most part, everyone was well behaved and respectful.  Well, there was this one chick.......


  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:26   

Quote
For the most part, everyone was well behaved and respectful.  Well, there was this one chick.......

Like this?


--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:26   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,17:20)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,16:18)
 
Quote (bystander @ Feb. 22 2009,15:25)
What was the crowd like? Was it a sellout? Was the crowd pro ID?

The room capacity was stated at 173 and I'd estimate it at 2/3 full. So call it 100-120.  I didn't get a sense of the breakdown between pro and anti.  For the most part, everyone was well behaved and respectful.  Well, there was this one chick.......


Cool.

:)

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,16:31   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,17:20)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,16:18)
 
Quote (bystander @ Feb. 22 2009,15:25)
What was the crowd like? Was it a sellout? Was the crowd pro ID?

The room capacity was stated at 173 and I'd estimate it at 2/3 full. So call it 100-120.  I didn't get a sense of the breakdown between pro and anti.  For the most part, everyone was well behaved and respectful.  Well, there was this one chick.......


We <3 Abbie. How could we not?

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

   
utidjian



Posts: 185
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,18:33   

LULZ! Good pick for a pic Abbie.

Too bad that series never made it.

-DU-

--------------
Being laughed at doesn't mean you're progressing along some line. It probably just means you're saying some stupid shit -stevestory

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,19:03   

It wasnt really like that.

I was just bitching at Casey/TrinityAsses for like 5 minutes.  If I had known what post he was referring to (I had my laptop, I should have looked it up to refresh myself), I would have totally River Tamed out.

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,19:06   

OH!  Bright side!

Im going to be presenting at our big OK Americans United meeting again this year on the Academic Freedom bills-- And it will be recorded and available on the interwebz!  So even though I didnt get my 'academic freedom' point in, it will actually be available soon to a larger audience.

Tits might make an appearance.

  
Amadan



Posts: 1244
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,19:45   

You see, that's the difference.

The creos have been trotting out the same arguments for 200 years now.

The rest of us keep abreast of things.

--------------
"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.

   
EyeNoU



Posts: 115
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,20:12   

Quote (Amadan @ Feb. 22 2009,19:45)
You see, that's the difference.

The creos have been trotting out the same arguments for 200 years now.

The rest of us keep abreast of things.

Some keep two.......

  
Amadan



Posts: 1244
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,20:20   

Maybe they just want to keep us in suspense.

--------------
"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.

   
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,20:44   

So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

  
Gunthernacus



Posts: 232
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,20:53   

Quote (simmi @ Feb. 22 2009,04:46)
You never know, Casey might be into:




--------------
Given that we are all descended from Adam and Eve...genetic defects as a result of intra-family marriage would not begin to crop up until after the first few dozen generations. - Dr. Hugh Ross

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,21:14   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:44)
So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

Never mind.  The troll is a high school kid.  How sad.

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,21:33   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,19:14)
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:44)
So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

Never mind.  The troll is a high school kid.  How sad.

A high school student in Seattle? Better not be one of my kids!

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,21:40   

My Night with the Discovery Institute

John West - Q & A Session


I am going to dispense with my previous formatting and convention of putting my own comments in red to differentiate them. I didn’t take very good notes during the Q&A, since I was up in line to ask my own question.  Thus what follows is almost completely from my recollection of the Q&A and anything attributed to West should be considered as heavily paraphrased.  

The Q&A session was interesting. Not because of the questions asked so much as how John West conducted himself.  On the face of it, he conducted himself with collegiality.  However, his treatment of questioners was, below the surface, poor.  For one thing, the volume on his microphone was considerably louder than that provided for questioners.  He used this to his advantage by drowning out/cutting off  questioners mid-sentence. This allowed him to control the landscape. Second, he tended to equivocate a bit on hard questions.  His answers were nominally related to the question they never really definitively answered them (at least not to my satisfaction YMMV).  When pressed on a point in a follow-up, West consistently used the same tactic. He would go on the offensive and ask the questioner a “do you still beat your wife” question.  For our foreign friends who may not recognize that phrase, this is a question for which there is not a correct answer.  At least not one that the person answering can influence the audience with.

The first question was from a college student named Tyler, who asked why this is being presented by a political scientist rather than a biologist.  My first inclination was that it was a weak question.  However, West seemed to stumble on the question and struggled to search for an answer. The only memorable part of West’s answer was a statement that you don’t need to be a biologist to recognize that Lynn Margulis questions Darwinism.  Once again, they trot out Margulis as their ally. I have to wonder if she really would find common cause with the Discovery Institute?  And, in retrospect, it was an interesting question making the point that ID is more a political movement than a scientific endeavor.  Good job, Tyler.

The second question was none other than the infamous Abbie challenging West on his use of the New Scientist article “Was Darwin Wrong?”  It seemed like Abbie was trying to explain the real premise of the article, but by virtue of the louder volume of his microphone West managed to drown her out (at least it seemed this way from where I was).  Abbie did manage, without West’s interference, to make the point that the article is available for anyone to read online and suggested people should read it for themselves. West agreed.  I wonder how many people in that room will actually go out and read the article? I am guessing few and guessing further that West is counting on it.

There was another question, but I remember nothing of it because I was on-deck and was checking my notes.

My question was intended to point out West’s use of equivalences while he was decrying their use against him.  The question was this:  In your talk about Myth 2 you said that ID, like evolution, was not built on religious premises. Yet you spent Myth 4 linking evolution to “evangelical atheism”, Myth 5 claiming that biology teachers are indoctrinating students in atheism, and Myth 6 calling the Kansas SBOE “extremists”. Which is it? Do you believe that evolution is science or religion?  He said science and that he wasn’t referring to all teachers.  He also said that their personal beliefs shouldn't matter, only their science. I followed up with the question that, if their personal beliefs shouldn’t matter then why does he make so much effort to link evolution to atheism?  It was at this point he asked the “are you still beating your wife” question. The question he asked me was “do you think it is fair that Barbara Forrest can question Bill Dembski motives but no one can question her motives.”  It is here that I ducked into the punch.  The question is set up so that there is no “acceptable” answer. I can either say the it is okay to apply different standards thus “proving” the need for Academic Freedom.  Or I can answer it is fair to question her motives, thus enabling their evolution=atheism equivalence.  I wanted to answer that I thought Forrest’s objections are informed by her view of science rather than her atheism.  But, I started out with the preface “You need to understand where she is coming from.”  At this point, West cut me off with “You just proved my point!”

In retrospect, that would have been his answer no matter how I answered.  As I walked back to my seat, Abbie whispered something in my ear that I wish I had thought of.  There is no way to honestly answer an “are you still beating your wife” question and come out looking good to the audience. That is why West uses those questions.  He isn’t interested in a academic exchange of ideas, he is only interested in scoring rhetorical  points.  These types of questions are only win-win for him if the other person tries to answer honestly.  The only way to respond is to turn the question back on him.   The answer I should have given to his question is “Are you referring to the same Bill Dembski that said that intelligent design is the Logos Theory of St. John’s Gospel restated in the idiom of information theory” and then walk away. But, as I have said elsewhere, my thing is LOLCats, not culture war. If I had Google and 5 minutes, I could have icanhascheezburgered West within an inch of his life.  But I didn't.  

So, in summary:

ME



JOHN WEST



ABBIE



ME AGAIN



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,21:45   

I wanted to say that Dembski quote SO BAD, but youre right, Wests volume (grabbed Carlsons arm as he walked away with the 'right answer', just in case he didnt know it, because I didnt know it was Carlson :P )

  
Henry J



Posts: 4058
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:01   

Quote
If I had known what post he was referring to (I had my laptop, I should have looked it up to refresh myself), I would have totally River Tamed out.

Never find Serenity that way...

Henry

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:01   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,21:45)
(grabbed Carlsons arm as he walked away with the 'right answer', just in case he didnt know it, because I didnt know it was Carlson :P )

'tis true. I told her in advance what I would be wearing, but apparently wasn't specific enough for Abbie to ID me.

The real me.



What Abbie was looking for



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:06   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,21:45)
(grabbed Carlsons arm as he walked away with the 'right answer', just in case he didnt know it, because I didnt know it was Carlson :P )

'tis true. I told her in advance what I would be wearing, but apparently wasn't specific enough for Abbie to ID me.

The real me.



What Abbie was looking for


Blipey wasn't in attendance, was he?

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:12   

Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,21:33)
 
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,19:14)
 
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:44)
So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

Never mind.  The troll is a high school kid.  How sad.

A high school student in Seattle? Better not be one of my kids!

You all already know him.It was this kid.

Actually, Carlson, I was looking for this:

Not kidding. "Ill have a quarterhorse shirt on!" LOL!

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1020
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:14   

Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,11:50)
Quote
I would be curious if anyone familiar with high school biology curriculum (TexasTeach, Albatrossity?) would like to comment regarding whether Lynn Margulis or the Cambrian Explosion really need the Discovery Institute's protection.


We cover endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts. We might or might not do the Cambrian Explosion - the curriculum focuses more on mechanisms than on timeline. Maybe I'll work it in there.

It's been a couple years since I taught Bio, but I covered Margulis' ideas when I taught the parts of the cell.  The kids were surprisingly interested.  I never spent long on life's timeline other than to emphasize the extreme length.

Rather than the IDC manfactuversies I did go into some actual disagreements in evolution: whether or not Neanderthals were ancestral to us, whether "Out of Africa" or "Regional Continuity" has convincing support.  These, of course, are not going to give the creationists anywhere to hide.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,22:40   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 22 2009,22:14)
 
Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,11:50)
   
Quote
I would be curious if anyone familiar with high school biology curriculum (TexasTeach, Albatrossity?) would like to comment regarding whether Lynn Margulis or the Cambrian Explosion really need the Discovery Institute's protection.


We cover endosymbiotic origin of mitochondria and chloroplasts. We might or might not do the Cambrian Explosion - the curriculum focuses more on mechanisms than on timeline. Maybe I'll work it in there.

It's been a couple years since I taught Bio, but I covered Margulis' ideas when I taught the parts of the cell.  The kids were surprisingly interested.  I never spent long on life's timeline other than to emphasize the extreme length.

Rather than the IDC manfactuversies I did go into some actual disagreements in evolution: whether or not Neanderthals were ancestral to us, whether "Out of Africa" or "Regional Continuity" has convincing support.  These, of course, are not going to give the creationists anywhere to hide.

So, let me see if I have this right.  Margulis and her work is already being taught in high schools.  Therefore, when West says Academic Freedom bills are necessary to allow students to learn about Lynn Margulis and her work, he is talking out his ass?



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
argystokes



Posts: 766
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,23:02   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:12)
Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,21:33)
 
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,19:14)
   
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:44)
So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

Never mind.  The troll is a high school kid.  How sad.

A high school student in Seattle? Better not be one of my kids!

You all already know him.It was this kid.

Actually, Carlson, I was looking for this:

Not kidding. "Ill have a quarterhorse shirt on!" LOL!

Not actually a highschooler:
Quote
FreedomFighterXL said...

   I guess if people quote me as being 17 (I would go even lower then that but I never go 10 years below my real age when posting on the web, and besides that blogger would prevent me from saying I'm younger than 13), then they must view me as someone of significance if they are willing to look that far into my profile. Glad you're paying attention.

http://patriotprodigy.blogspot.com/2007....sm.html

--------------
"Why waste time learning, when ignorance is instantaneous?" -Calvin

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 22 2009,23:11   

Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,23:02)
Not actually a highschooler:
 
Quote
FreedomFighterXL said...

   I guess if people quote me as being 17 (I would go even lower then that but I never go 10 years below my real age when posting on the web, and besides that blogger would prevent me from saying I'm younger than 13), then they must view me as someone of significance if they are willing to look that far into my profile. Glad you're paying attention.

http://patriotprodigy.blogspot.com/2007....sm.html

No, hes 17.  I found his friend Trevor on MySpace.  Trevor seemed like a really smart kid, so I just sent him an encouraging message and was like 'Common man, dont troll'.

He didnt know what I was talking about.  F2XL was using his name.  And Trevor is definitely a high school kid, and he IDed F2XL.  Hes going to call him Cindy tomorrow in 2nd period for the lulz.

Hes a high school kid.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,02:35   

That thread won't make any sense at all to anyone not familiar with /b/ and ed.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,06:47   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,22:40)
So, let me see if I have this right.  Margulis and her work is already being taught in high schools.  Therefore, when West says Academic Freedom bills are necessary to allow students to learn about Lynn Margulis and her work, he is talking out his ass?

Margulis is, in fact, a poster child for how the IDiots ought to approach science. If you have a controversial theory (endosymbiosis), supported by some evidence, you need to work hard, publish papers, convince other scientists on the basis of the evidence, and you will, if your theory is correct, be vindicated. Your theory will then be taught in the schools in appropriate classes. That needs to be pointed out every time one of the IDiots mentions her name!

She is no IDiot. She has made some unjustifiable claims in recent years, extending her theory. The unjustifiable claims might make her attractive to the IDiots), but this quote, from p. 202 of her book "Acquiring Genomes: A Theory of the Origin of Species", needs to be used anytime Dembski or the Gerbil or one of the other IDiots invoke her.
 
Quote
Anthropocentric writers with a proclivity for the miraculous and a commitment to divine intervention tend to attribute historical appearances like eyes, wings, and speech to “irreducible complexity” (as, for example, Michael Behe does in his book, Darwin’s Black Box) or “ingenious design” (in the tradition of William Paley who used the functional organs of animals as proof for the existence of God). Here we feel no need for supernatural hypotheses. Rather, we insist that today, more than ever, it is the growing scientific understanding of how new traits appear, ones even as complex as the vertebrate eye, that has triumphed.


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

   
Spottedwind



Posts: 83
Joined: Aug. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,08:30   

Been lovin' the write-ups Carlson, thanks a lot!  I've yet to make it to Abbie's site for her version...I'm not sure I can handle the rough language that M. Luskin says comes from such a bawdy den.  Just thinking about it gives me the vapors.

You do a great job of pointing out the inconsistencies, hypocrisy, and out right lies of these guys.  Thanks to everyone else that added more information too.  I know it shouldn't, but it constantly fascinates me that we could just cut and paste from every other time they parrot these talking points.  Nothing against you (far from it) but just that they can't ever adapt their tactics.  I guess the thing is, their tactics keep working on those that want to believe, so why change?

One other thing I do find interesting is that we all use the same words but we don't speak the same language.  So, Michale Sermer said something to the effect that that science was his savior and rescued him from religion.  To me, without seeing the context, Sermer is simply being wryly poetic.  Now I doubt even West, with his intellectual dishonesty, believes that Sermer worships science in any way similar to a religion, but he does know that his target audience might believe it, or at least use it as an attack that science = religion.

I know we often debate whether they are incompetent, liars, or perhaps incompetent liars, but the cognitive dissonance and selective denial just amaze me at times.  I don't want to be wrong but I'd rather change my mind than struggle against reality like a stubborn 3-year old trying to shout down the wind.

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 1969
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,11:58   

Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,22:12)
Quote (argystokes @ Feb. 22 2009,21:33)
 
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,19:14)
   
Quote (ERV @ Feb. 22 2009,20:44)
So 'someone' from Seattle is leaving threating (ie you better shut up) and sexist comments on Caseys Butthurt thread.

Who here is good with IP addresses?  I can only get the city.

Never mind.  The troll is a high school kid.  How sad.

A high school student in Seattle? Better not be one of my kids!

You all already know him.It was this kid.

Damn.  You've outed me.  :-(

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

   
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,13:41   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
The real me.


Really? That's you? Somehow I had pictured a more cartoonish-looking fellow, with a blue cap. And wearing glasses.

The internet is a confusing place.

  
AmandaHuginKiss



Posts: 150
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,14:59   

Quote (bfish @ Feb. 24 2009,06:41)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
The real me.


Really? That's you? Somehow I had pictured a more cartoonish-looking fellow, with a blue cap. And wearing glasses.

The internet is a confusing place.

and who is that on your back?

(I had to do this so Louis wont have to bother)

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,15:10   

Quote (AmandaHuginKiss @ Feb. 23 2009,14:59)
Quote (bfish @ Feb. 24 2009,06:41)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
The real me.


Really? That's you? Somehow I had pictured a more cartoonish-looking fellow, with a blue cap. And wearing glasses.

The internet is a confusing place.

and who is that on your back?

(I had to do this so Louis wont have to bother)

Do you want to know who is in the front side of the horse costume too?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,15:18   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 23 2009,13:10)
 
Quote (AmandaHuginKiss @ Feb. 23 2009,14:59)
 
Quote (bfish @ Feb. 24 2009,06:41)
   
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
The real me.


Really? That's you? Somehow I had pictured a more cartoonish-looking fellow, with a blue cap. And wearing glasses.

The internet is a confusing place.

and who is that on your back?

(I had to do this so Louis wont have to bother)

Do you want to know who is in the front side of the horse costume too?

The real question is why is Carlson facing away from the camera in that picture?

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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,16:05   

Quote (AmandaHuginKiss @ Feb. 23 2009,20:59)
Quote (bfish @ Feb. 24 2009,06:41)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 22 2009,20:01)
The real me.


Really? That's you? Somehow I had pictured a more cartoonish-looking fellow, with a blue cap. And wearing glasses.

The internet is a confusing place.

and who is that on your back?

(I had to do this so Louis wont have to bother)

Most kind.

I think.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,17:16   

ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE!

I just got word of this:

Quote
Michael Behe to Speak on Intelligent Design
2/20/2009 11:04:20 AM
Print E-Mail

Lehigh University biochemistry professor and author Michael Behe will present "Answering Objections to the Argument for Intelligent Design in Biology" at 7 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 26 in the Cultural Arts Building Beckwith Recital Hall.

Behe is known for developing the concept of irreducible complexity. His provocative book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, was a major catalyst in the emergence of the intelligent design movement. His theory of irreducible complexity is defined as "a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning."

Behe graduated from Drexel University in 1974 with a B.S. in chemistry and then earned his Ph. D. in biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1978. Since then, he has published more than 35 articles in biochemical journals, as well as written editorial features in the Boston Review, American Spectator and the New York Times. His book, Darwin's Black Box, was recently named by the National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century. This event is free and no tickets are required. For more information, contact event host Donald Furst, professor of art, at x23440.


UNC Wilmington is about an hour from here. It's where Doc got his master's, and where I'm going after Coastal.

Guess who's going to see your boyfriend?

Yup, bo'fus. I'll of course be reporting here.

(It's awful funny that he was invited by the art department, though, ain't it? How come the Biology department didn't invite him, I wonder? I'll ask him.)

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

   
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,18:33   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 23 2009,17:16)
ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE!

I just got word of this:

Quote
Michael Behe to Speak on Intelligent Design
2/20/2009 11:04:20 AM
Print E-Mail

Lehigh University biochemistry professor and author Michael Behe will present "Answering Objections to the Argument for Intelligent Design in Biology" at 7 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 26 in the Cultural Arts Building Beckwith Recital Hall.

Behe is known for developing the concept of irreducible complexity. His provocative book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, was a major catalyst in the emergence of the intelligent design movement. His theory of irreducible complexity is defined as "a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning."

Behe graduated from Drexel University in 1974 with a B.S. in chemistry and then earned his Ph. D. in biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1978. Since then, he has published more than 35 articles in biochemical journals, as well as written editorial features in the Boston Review, American Spectator and the New York Times. His book, Darwin's Black Box, was recently named by the National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century. This event is free and no tickets are required. For more information, contact event host Donald Furst, professor of art, at x23440.


UNC Wilmington is about an hour from here. It's where Doc got his master's, and where I'm going after Coastal.

Guess who's going to see your boyfriend?

Yup, bo'fus. I'll of course be reporting here.

(It's awful funny that he was invited by the art department, though, ain't it? How come the Biology department didn't invite him, I wonder? I'll ask him.)

Oh!  Oh!  Call On Me!  I know This!~ I know this!!~

Ahem:  Michale Behe was invityed by the Art Department becasue the Art Department does design.  

Behe was not invited by the science Department, because ID AIN'T SCIENCE!

Congratulations BTW!  We'll be expectig you to continue the New Excellent Tradition of "The One Finger Salute To ID" and it's lying liars that back it.

And of course, it goes without saying, don't forget the tits.

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

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,19:26   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 23 2009,17:16)
ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE!

I just got word of this:

Guys, we are going to OD on TARD.

Thats their plan.

They know we are addicts, and they are targeting us all, one-by-one, for high-doses of irl TARD.

And there is nothing we can do to stop it.

NEED MOAR!!!

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,19:55   

Mainlining the TARD can be fatal:



Who writes good? I want a good eulogy.

--------------
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: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,19:57   

Which one is Abbie the other night?



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

   
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,19:59   

"A dirge for him the doubly dead in that he died so young."
--Edgar Allan Poe

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,20:02   

Quote (khan @ Feb. 23 2009,20:59)
"A dirge for him the doubly dead in that he died so young."
--Edgar Allan Poe

It's hard to do better than Poe.

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

   
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,20:05   

I come to bury Lou, not to praise him;
The evil that men do lives after them,
The good is oft interred with their bones,
...
But here I am to speak what I do know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then to mourn for him?
O judgement! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason…. Bear with me;
My heart is in the coffin there with Lou,
And I must pause till it come back to me.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,20:59   

My Evening with the Discovery Institute

Notes:
Summary of the lecture in black. My comments/editorials in red.  Casey is not the gifted presenter West was.  Casey talked very fast and his presentation slides tended to be pretty dense with text.  This makes it hard to capture alot of the context.  On the plus side, having gone to law school, Casey is a bit obsessive about citations.  So, I have tried to at least capture the citiations.  I am considering putting all these posts out on a blog and then developing a more detailed write-up.  Here I will just try to capture his point and save the citiations in case I do decide to do a more detailed write up.

Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq. on Kitzmiller v Dover and Academic Freedom

>   Don Ewert provided an introductory comment where he stated he was the fifth person to sign the Dissent from Darwin list.  When he moved to Oklahoma, two of his future colleagues found out that he signed the list and tried to have him fired.  Don provided an introductory  biography of Casey, which included a rapid fire list of articles he had published.  There was some scientific publications from his time at Scripps, but I didn't catch the journal names.  I did catch Touchstone Magazine and PCID (Progress in Complexity, Information and Design).  PCID is published by the International Society for Complexity, Information and Design in Princeton, NJ which had William Dembski as it's Executive Director. ISCID appears to be defunct as an organization and PCID was last published in November 2005. It is not known whether ISCID has maintained their tony offices in Princeton.  However, take a look at how the other side lived. Jealous Darwinoids?



>    Casey opened by stating his premise that reasonable people can disagree and we should all strive to stick to the issues and engage in civil dialogue.  As I will discuss later, and as you all undoubtedly already know, Casey's reach exceeded his grasp relative to this goal.

> The talk was broken down into two sections.  A critique of the Kitzmiller v Dover decision (Forgive me for spoiling the surprise, but he didn't like it. :O ) and a discussion of the need for academic freedom bills.

>    He plans to challenge Judge Jones KvD decision based on 5 fronts:
      o     ID and the Supernatural
      o     Peer review
      o     ID Testing and Research
      o     Contrived Dualism
      o     Why inaccurate

>    His first point is it was that the statement in question in Dover was just one short paragraph. Wafer thin.

>    He disagreed with some, but not all of it.  He didn't say what he disagreed with.

>    He said the policy was unconstitutional and the DI opposed mandating ID.  I could use some confirmation from anyone else in attendance.  It seems odd that they have spent 3 years flailing away at a decision they agree was, on the constitutionality issue, correctly decided.  I know they are pissed at Jones for deciding on the "is it science issue", but surely they must have challenged him at some point on deciding constitutionality wrong.

>    He challenged Jones statement that ID violated methodological naturalism and invoked the supernatural.  He used quotes from Pandas and People to show the book stayed on the correct side of the demarcation issue.  One quote was from page 7. I think I did locate the quote independently (emphasis mine).  It reads "If science is based upon experience, then science tells us the message encoded in DNA must have originated from an intelligent cause. But what kind of intelligent agent was it? On its own, science cannot answer this question; it must leave it to religion and philosophy. But that should not prevent science from acknowledging evidences for an intelligent cause origin wherever they may exist. This is no different, really, than if we discovered life did result from natural causes. We still would not know, from science, if the natural cause was all that was involved, or if the ultimate explanation was beyond nature, and using the natural cause." From my read of this quote, in particular the word "must", they are assuming that the designer is supernatural.  This seems to fly in the face of the notion that ID only detects design and doesn't seek to determine the identity, methods or motives of the designer. They have already shown that they have drawn a conclusion about the designer, specifically that he/she is outside nature.

>   He mentions SETI and archeology doing design detection.

>   He accuses Jones of quote mining Pandas. In particular the phrase I bolded above.  He says the next sentence (which I include above) changes the context and refutes Jones.

>  He turned to the issues revolving around the pre-publication drafts of OPAP.  Presumably this is the "cdesign proponentists" issue.  He says we will hear all about it fron Nick Matzke later. But, he wants to show the quotes.  This is where Luskin's poorly designed (heh! ) presentation material gets in the way of understanding his point. He wants to show how the pubs changed over time (double heh! ) but his charts are constructed in such a way that you can't honestly see what he is trying to show.

>     He complains that the evolutionists draw a link back to Paley. But ID doesn't go back to Paley, because Paley invoked the supernatural and ID is only about the science.  Here is where I think we can beat Luskin over the head with West.  Recall here where West said ID goes back to the Greeks and Romans.  I believe the Greeks and Romans posited gods as designers. If that can be confirmed then West and Luskin are contradicting each other.  Casey may also want to talk to the brain trust over at Uncommon Descent, who say on their comment policy page: ID is a modern scientific offshoot of philosophic arguments from design such as Aristotle’s first cause and Paley’s watchmaker, which predate unconstitutional creation science by thousands and hundreds of years respectively.

>    Some master intellect is the creator of life. Can't say if natural or supernatural. OPAP sticks to empirical domain.  It even said that you can't eliminate the supernatural because you cannot learn about it through sensory experience.

>   Casey says that OPAP was about something substantially different than creationism prior to Edwards v. Aguillard.  Thaxton was not comfortable with typical creationist vocabulary and didn't want to bring God into it.  Even if we take Luskin's claim that the change from creationism to intelligent design predated E v A, I still don't find that they wanted to change the vocabulary a compelling argument. Vocabularly? Seriously?

>    He turns to the KvD trial transcript and two different questions to Minnich about the supernatural. Both times Minnich says ID is not about the supernatural.

>    What about Behe.  He shows a quote from (presumably) one of Behe's books disclaiming ID is supernatural. He shows an exchange from Behe's testimony. Where Behe says it is not accurate that ID holds that the designer is God. For obvious reasons, Luskin didn't bring up the astrology testimony.

>    Casey now turns to Jones statement that there was no peer-reviewed ID articles. Jones said it 5 times! He puts a list up that showed 5-6 supposedly peer reviewed ID papers, including Stephen Meyer's infamous paper in the Proceedings of the Biological Society of Washington. The second paper was authored by Donnig.  I didn't catch the others because Casey changed slides quickly. He says Jones made all of them disappear.  5 or 6 papers Casey?  That is it? How many papers supporting, or premised upon, evolutionary theory are published every year?

That is all for tonight. More tomorrow night hopefully.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,21:17   

Jones didn't say no peer-reviewed papers of any sort for IDC.

Jones relied on Behe's sworn testimony:

 
Quote

[173]Q. And, in fact, there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred, is that correct?

[174]A. That is correct, yes.

[175]Q. And it is, in fact, the case that in Darwin's Black Box, you didn't report any new data or original research?

[176]A. I did not do so, but I did generate an attempt at an explanation.


Here's what Jones said:

 
Quote

The evidence presented in this case demonstrates that ID is not supported by any peer-reviewed research, data or publications. Both Drs. Padian and Forrest testified that recent literature reviews of scientific and medical-electronic databases disclosed no studies supporting a biological concept of ID. ([193]17:42-43 (Padian); [194]11:32-33 (Forrest)). On cross-examination, Professor Behe admitted that: "There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred." ([195]22:22-23 (Behe)). Additionally, Professor Behe conceded that there are no peer-reviewed papers supporting his claims that complex molecular systems, like the bacterial flagellum, the blood-clotting cascade, and the immune system, were intelligently designed. ([196]21:61-62 (complex molecular systems), [197]23:4-5 (immune system), and [198]22:124-25 (blood-clotting cascade) (Behe)). In that regard, there are no peer-reviewed articles supporting Professor Behe's argument that certain complex molecular structures are "irreducibly complex."^[199]17 ([200]21:62, [201]22:124-25 (Behe)). In addition to failing to produce papers in peer-reviewed journals, ID also features no scientific research or testing. ([202]28:114-15 (Fuller); [203]18:22-23, 105-06 (Behe)).


Jones wasn't looking for just any peer-reviewed paper by an IDC advocate; he was looking for peer-reviewed papers on IDC that made a positive case for IDC. The DI's own people testified that they didn't have any. It's a bit late for Casey to call them liars, and besides, Casey would be wrong. The Meyer 2004b paper is not about making a positive case for IDC, and neither are the rest of what he flashed on screen.

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

    
Timothy McDougald



Posts: 1008
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,22:20   

Quote
I am considering putting all these posts out on a blog and then developing a more detailed write-up.  Here I will just try to capture his point and save the citiations in case I do decide to do a more detailed write up.


I don't know exactly what you have in mind but if you would like I can see about getting you access and you can guest post them on my blog.

Edit to add: Alternatively, maybe Wesley can talk to Reed about posting them on PT?

--------------
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.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 23 2009,23:45   

I'm thinking more like a resource on AE while talk.origins generates comments, then including in the FAQs on the TOA.

Certainly a PT post pointing to it will be appropriate when Carlson has assembled it. In the meantime, this thread can serve as a place to help expand the annotations. (Actually, a PT post pointing here to assist in the annotating would probably be good, too.)

This looks to be more than a simple blog post in the making, and it promises to be a terrific aid for those confronted with the latest re-naming of the DI's religious antievolution content. There is also the issue of general regard for blog material. I think that taking this more toward FAQ construction rather than a blog post or blog post series will make it easier for Citizens for Science groups to reference it when dealing with legislators or administrators.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Feb. 24 2009,00:05

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

    
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,03:58   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 23 2009,23:45)
I'm thinking more like a resource on AE while talk.origins generates comments, then including in the FAQs on the TOA.

It was really more about just wanting to playing around with Blogger.  Plus, as I wwrote up more and more of my notes, the makings of a purely personal editorial/rant on the whole experience began forming in my mind. I didn't think I should place it here.  Not sure why I thought that, since we put up with Mornington Crescent, rugby, LOLCats, and Arden. I'll just forge ahead here this week.  That last post was only a little more than two pages of notes.  Six more to go.   ???

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,04:35   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 24 2009,09:58)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 23 2009,23:45)
I'm thinking more like a resource on AE while talk.origins generates comments, then including in the FAQs on the TOA.

It was really more about just wanting to playing around with Blogger.  Plus, as I wwrote up more and more of my notes, the makings of a purely personal editorial/rant on the whole experience began forming in my mind. I didn't think I should place it here.  Not sure why I thought that, since we put up with Mornington Crescent, rugby, LOLCats, and Arden. I'll just forge ahead here this week.  That last post was only a little more than two pages of notes.  Six more to go.   ???

Hey some of us are disadvantaged by living in a country where we don't get quite so many religiously inspired fuckwits roaming around making speeches about IDC that get taken (apparently) seriously by universities.

The MC and rugby are just distractions to help us get passed the trauma of distance from the TARD mines. IRL TARD? One can but dream, I'd go along with a flame thrower....

On that subject, since the "claims-remain-the-same"* so often in IDCist arguments I'm thinking along the lines of Mark Isaak's Index to Creationist Claims but on placards. Every time little Casey Whiny Bollocks opens his gob and unfurls a turd onto the ears of his audience how about a segment of that audience, calmly, quietly, and oh so ever politely, lifts the relevant placard? These could be small (A4 size) so as not to interfere too greatly, but just enough to make the point. ten or so people quietly sat in the front row each holding up a placard briefly explaining the lie/fallacy being presented (title of placard would be large and easily legible). Leaflets could be produced which explained the common fallacies and gave references to more extensive works.

It would take a bit of setting up, and attendees at a few of Casey (or whoever's) lectures would need to get transcripts (or recordings for later transcriptions) so that the work could be distributed. IIRC that also won't fall foul of copyright (it's fair use as long as you translate from one medium to another for the purposes of criticism IIRC, IANAL).

Thoughts?

Louis

*Album title anyone? The first ripping LP from the Church Burnin' Ebola Boys, AtBC's house band? Come onnnnn, you know you want to.

--------------
Bye.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,06:18   

Louis: Before calling it quits The Hellacopters made a suitable soundtrack.

The Hellacopters - Same lame story

ETA: Language.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,06:40   

Quote (dnmlthr @ Feb. 24 2009,12:18)
Louis: Before calling it quits The Hellacopters made a suitable soundtrack.

The Hellacopters - Same lame story

ETA: Language.

DAMN YOU GODS OF SWEDISH ROCK!!!!!! DAMN YOU!!!!!!

Still, I reckon the song I would have written would have been better and you can't prove otherwise so there! ;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:00   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,12:40)
Quote (dnmlthr @ Feb. 24 2009,12:18)
Louis: Before calling it quits The Hellacopters made a suitable soundtrack.

The Hellacopters - Same lame story

ETA: Language.

DAMN YOU GODS OF SWEDISH ROCK!!!!!! DAMN YOU!!!!!!

Still, I reckon the song I would have written would have been better and you can't prove otherwise so there! ;-)

Louis

An iron clad line of reasoning, I stand corrected and very much look forward to the awaiting gold records, world tours and inevitable implosion due to fights over drugs and groupies differences of opinion over wholly artistic decisions.

Any day now. Waterloo!

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Richard Simons



Posts: 425
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:05   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,04:35)
On that subject, since the "claims-remain-the-same"* so often in IDCist arguments I'm thinking along the lines of Mark Isaak's Index to Creationist Claims but on placards. Every time little Casey Whiny Bollocks opens his gob and unfurls a turd onto the ears of his audience how about a segment of that audience, calmly, quietly, and oh so ever politely, lifts the relevant placard? These could be small (A4 size) so as not to interfere too greatly, but just enough to make the point. ten or so people quietly sat in the front row each holding up a placard briefly explaining the lie/fallacy being presented (title of placard would be large and easily legible). Leaflets could be produced which explained the common fallacies and gave references to more extensive works.

It would take a bit of setting up, and attendees at a few of Casey (or whoever's) lectures would need to get transcripts (or recordings for later transcriptions) so that the work could be distributed. IIRC that also won't fall foul of copyright (it's fair use as long as you translate from one medium to another for the purposes of criticism IIRC, IANAL).

Thoughts?

I, too, do not live in an area with rampant creationists being taken seriously, but I had similar thoughts. Sit near the front and, if something incorrect is said, just stand up and politely say 'Excuse me, but that is not correct.' This could quickly tail off to just putting your hand up each time, but I'm sure it would make the point to the rest of the audience and also be very disconcerting for a speaker - not something I'd consider fair against normal opponents but given the tactics of Gish, Luskin, etc . . .

--------------
All sweeping statements are wrong.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:20   

I think a placard with "That Was A Falsehood" would serve admirably. One would likely be able to flash it more often than saying the thing aloud before being ejected from the proceedings. Fumbling through a stack of different placards listing all the many and various common falsehoods told would be inefficient. This way, one is not disrupting the speaker in the usual sense, so it becomes an eloquent statement when the goons appear beside you to take you out the door.

Even better... a double-sided placard, with "That Was A Falsehood" on one side, and "Teach The Controversy" on the other might shame them slightly, and permit one to flash it a few more times. It might even take a bit longer for them to take offense if one consistently raises the "Teach The Controversy" side toward the speaker... he might think that you are IDC cheerleading. ETA: This assumes that you get a seat near the front of the audience.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Feb. 24 2009,08:21

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

    
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:21   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,05:17)
Jones didn't say no peer-reviewed papers of any sort for IDC.

Jones relied on Behe's sworn testimony:

   
Quote

[173]Q. And, in fact, there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred, is that correct?

[174]A. That is correct, yes.

[175]Q. And it is, in fact, the case that in Darwin's Black Box, you didn't report any new data or original research?

[176]A. I did not do so, but I did generate an attempt at an explanation.


Here's what Jones said:

   
Quote

The evidence presented in this case demonstrates that ID is not supported by any peer-reviewed research, data or publications. Both Drs. Padian and Forrest testified that recent literature reviews of scientific and medical-electronic databases disclosed no studies supporting a biological concept of ID. ([193]17:42-43 (Padian); [194]11:32-33 (Forrest)). On cross-examination, Professor Behe admitted that: "There are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred." ([195]22:22-23 (Behe)). Additionally, Professor Behe conceded that there are no peer-reviewed papers supporting his claims that complex molecular systems, like the bacterial flagellum, the blood-clotting cascade, and the immune system, were intelligently designed. ([196]21:61-62 (complex molecular systems), [197]23:4-5 (immune system), and [198]22:124-25 (blood-clotting cascade) (Behe)). In that regard, there are no peer-reviewed articles supporting Professor Behe's argument that certain complex molecular structures are "irreducibly complex."^[199]17 ([200]21:62, [201]22:124-25 (Behe)). In addition to failing to produce papers in peer-reviewed journals, ID also features no scientific research or testing. ([202]28:114-15 (Fuller); [203]18:22-23, 105-06 (Behe)).


Jones wasn't looking for just any peer-reviewed paper by an IDC advocate; he was looking for peer-reviewed papers on IDC that made a positive case for IDC. The DI's own people testified that they didn't have any. It's a bit late for Casey to call them liars, and besides, Casey would be wrong. The Meyer 2004b paper is not about making a positive case for IDC, and neither are the rest of what he flashed on screen.

Holy Crap!!!!!!! fuck if those ID guys start out saying there is a positive case for ID then where in the hell is that going to lead tehm???? Yes Tehm!

DOWN A SLIPPERY SLOPE THAT's FRIKKIN' WHERE!

hell if a positive case = (YES EQUAL) to Darwinism is brought up then where does that leave ID

I'LL TELL YOU WHERE RIGHT NOW HOMO'S

ID will have to compete with the greatest test for lies ever invented by mankind AND STILL COME UP SMELLING LIKE ROSES.

CASEY please please please don't do this. You will end the game, the chase, the fun, the LULZ, the pure joy of rubbing your dick wad face in shit.

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

  
Richard Simons



Posts: 425
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:31   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:20)
I think a placard with "That Was A Falsehood" would serve admirably. One would likely be able to flash it more often than saying the thing aloud before being ejected from the proceedings. Fumbling through a stack of different placards listing all the many and various common falsehoods told would be inefficient. This way, one is not disrupting the speaker in the usual sense, so it becomes an eloquent statement when the goons appear beside you to take you out the door.

Even better... a double-sided placard, with "That Was A Falsehood" on one side, and "Teach The Controversy" on the other might shame them slightly, and permit one to flash it a few more times. It might even take a bit longer for them to take offense if one consistently raises the "Teach The Controversy" side toward the speaker... he might think that you are IDC cheerleading. ETA: This assumes that you get a seat near the front of the audience.

Better still! I am almost regretting that I'm unlikely to get the chance to try it out.

--------------
All sweeping statements are wrong.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:35   

For larger type, a shorter message is called for... "That Was False" or just a great big "FALSE" might be even better.

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

    
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:43   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:35)
For larger type, a shorter message is called for... "That Was False" or just a great big "FALSE" might be even better.

In this time of vanishing resources and increasing expenses, don't we owe it to the world - and the kidz - to use less ink whrever possible?

I think that "LIE" is short, sweet, eco-friendly and true, and so should be used rather than "False".

My $.02

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

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:48   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 24 2009,16:43)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:35)
For larger type, a shorter message is called for... "That Was False" or just a great big "FALSE" might be even better.

In this time of vanishing resources and increasing expenses, don't we owe it to the world - and the kidz - to use less ink whrever possible?

I think that "LIE" is short, sweet, eco-friendly and true, and so should be used rather than "False".

My $.02

How about ?

CASEY YOU LYING SNIVELING SHIT!

same size paper and if anyone complains about the ink just say

...eh whatever

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

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,08:57   

Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 24 2009,08:43)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:35)
For larger type, a shorter message is called for... "That Was False" or just a great big "FALSE" might be even better.

In this time of vanishing resources and increasing expenses, don't we owe it to the world - and the kidz - to use less ink whrever possible?

I think that "LIE" is short, sweet, eco-friendly and true, and so should be used rather than "False".

My $.02

If you use "FALSE", then you aren't impugning the speaker's character, save the huffiness over pointing out ignorance. If you use "LIE", then you are likely to be ejected sooner. It depends on whether your goal is to inform the audience of untrue statements as they happen, or to get expelled as soon as possible. That will inform your choice of word.

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

    
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,09:01   

How about this:

"False" in big letters, followed by
"Correction available upon request"

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,09:11   

Quote (dnmlthr @ Feb. 24 2009,17:01)
How about this:

"False" in big letters, followed by
"Correction available upon request"

and on the other side have
Curious George slouching off to prison


THEOCRATS GO TO GITMO DO NOT COLLECT $200

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10114
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,09:14   

Quote (k.e.. @ Feb. 24 2009,09:11)
Quote (dnmlthr @ Feb. 24 2009,17:01)
How about this:

"False" in big letters, followed by
"Correction available upon request"

and on the other side have
Curious George slouching off to prison


THEOCRATS GO TO GITMO DO NOT COLLECT $200

He'll be Bicurious George by the time he gets out...

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

  
k.e..



Posts: 2881
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,09:27   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 24 2009,17:14)
Quote (k.e.. @ Feb. 24 2009,09:11)
Quote (dnmlthr @ Feb. 24 2009,17:01)
How about this:

"False" in big letters, followed by
"Correction available upon request"

and on the other side have
Curious George slouching off to prison


THEOCRATS GO TO GITMO DO NOT COLLECT $200

He'll be Bicurious George by the time he gets out...

Casey gave the whole of the DI a handjob and they all thought they had Stockholms syndrome.

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

  
creeky belly



Posts: 205
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,10:33   

Quote
How about this:

"False" in big letters, followed by
"Correction available upon request"

XKCD has something similar

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,10:36   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,14:20)
I think a placard with "That Was A Falsehood" would serve admirably. One would likely be able to flash it more often than saying the thing aloud before being ejected from the proceedings. Fumbling through a stack of different placards listing all the many and various common falsehoods told would be inefficient. This way, one is not disrupting the speaker in the usual sense, so it becomes an eloquent statement when the goons appear beside you to take you out the door.

Even better... a double-sided placard, with "That Was A Falsehood" on one side, and "Teach The Controversy" on the other might shame them slightly, and permit one to flash it a few more times. It might even take a bit longer for them to take offense if one consistently raises the "Teach The Controversy" side toward the speaker... he might think that you are IDC cheerleading. ETA: This assumes that you get a seat near the front of the audience.

A much, much better idea.

See now that's why you get all that big, big Darwinist money and Nazi gold.

I shall have my winged monkey butler (ahhh genetic engineering) make some placards up right away.

Louis

ETA: How about one of the electronic transfer placards used in sports matches and modified for the purpose. So instead of several placards, you have just one with the TO ICC programmed in, all you have to do is enter the correct code and it's number is displayed under the "falsehood" or what have you. At least that way one could claim it was an attempt at argument!

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,10:45   

Quote (Richard Simons @ Feb. 24 2009,14:05)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,04:35)
On that subject, since the "claims-remain-the-same"* so often in IDCist arguments I'm thinking along the lines of Mark Isaak's Index to Creationist Claims but on placards. Every time little Casey Whiny Bollocks opens his gob and unfurls a turd onto the ears of his audience how about a segment of that audience, calmly, quietly, and oh so ever politely, lifts the relevant placard? These could be small (A4 size) so as not to interfere too greatly, but just enough to make the point. ten or so people quietly sat in the front row each holding up a placard briefly explaining the lie/fallacy being presented (title of placard would be large and easily legible). Leaflets could be produced which explained the common fallacies and gave references to more extensive works.

It would take a bit of setting up, and attendees at a few of Casey (or whoever's) lectures would need to get transcripts (or recordings for later transcriptions) so that the work could be distributed. IIRC that also won't fall foul of copyright (it's fair use as long as you translate from one medium to another for the purposes of criticism IIRC, IANAL).

Thoughts?

I, too, do not live in an area with rampant creationists being taken seriously, but I had similar thoughts. Sit near the front and, if something incorrect is said, just stand up and politely say 'Excuse me, but that is not correct.' This could quickly tail off to just putting your hand up each time, but I'm sure it would make the point to the rest of the audience and also be very disconcerting for a speaker - not something I'd consider fair against normal opponents but given the tactics of Gish, Luskin, etc . . .

EXACTLY!

In civilised, rational, intellectual discourse about a series of ideas it would not only be unnecessary. Hell, in a decent discussion ridicule, mockery, derision etc are totally unnecessary.

Casey's whines fail to address the issue, civility is not just not using the word "fuck" or failing to mention he is a clueless, slimy little pissant. Granted those things ARE a part of a civil discussion, but so is acting honestly and in good faith which IDCists like Casey et al absolutely do not do.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,10:52   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,08:45)
Hell, in a decent discussion ridicule, mockery, derision etc are totally unnecessary.

Unless Louis is involved. Then they're mandatory.

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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:03   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,16:52)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,08:45)
Hell, in a decent discussion ridicule, mockery, derision etc are totally unnecessary.

Unless Louis is involved. Then they're mandatory.

Simply not true, as you know. Granted I have a low tolerance threshold for mendacity, but sorry, you're just wrong.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:40   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,10:36)
I shall have my winged monkey butler (ahhh genetic engineering) make some placards up right away.

Louis

You've managed to train Carlson ?



By golly, so you have. Kudos, sir.  

P.S. I shall have my revenge.

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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:47   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,11:40)
P.S. both of you are evil, and I shall have my revenge.

Hey you! Deadman! Get a room, wouldya!



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:50   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 24 2009,17:47)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,11:40)
P.S. both of you are evil, and I shall have my revenge.

Hey you! Deadman! Get a room, wouldya!


I admire your skills of Google, sir. I entered the terms "squirrel" and "fucking" into the search engine and ended up getting fired!*

Damn hypersensitive work environment.

Louis

*This is not true. My workplace, as with that of any good and inclusive employer, encourages self expression. Just not during work hours or in any manner that leaves things sticky. Deadman, you have been warned.

ETA: Although I will say this, Carlson. Your ability to find dubious pictures of squirrels at short notice is...."interesting". I'll leave it at that.

--------------
Bye.

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:52   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,11:50)
My workplace, as with that of any good and inclusive employer, encourages self expression.



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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,11:54   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,17:52)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,11:50)
My workplace, as with that of any good and inclusive employer, encourages self expression.


Errors:

1) No tail.

2) Not that good looking.

Other than that, I'll give you a C. Well done, champ, well done. With suitable training you might manage simple tasks.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:11   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,09:54)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,17:52)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,11:50)
My workplace, as with that of any good and inclusive employer, encourages self expression.


Errors:

1) No tail.

2) Not that good looking.

3) Not enough body hair.

4) Not that well dressed.

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

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:13   

5) Needs a fez

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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:14   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,18:11)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,09:54)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,17:52)
 
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,11:50)
My workplace, as with that of any good and inclusive employer, encourages self expression.


Errors:

1) No tail.

2) Not that good looking.

3) Not enough body hair.

4) Not that well dressed.

Both good points. You too get a C. That was almost witty of you. In fact, judging by your performance I'd say you were halfway there.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:17   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,18:13)
5) Needs a fez

FAIL!



Deadman's sexual fantasy, yesterday.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10114
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:22   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,12:13)
5) Needs a fez

6) and roller-skates.

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

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,12:38   

First,
and:

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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,13:01   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,12:38)
First,

Whoa!



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,13:04   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,10:38)


My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

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

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,13:40   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,13:04)

My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

For some reason, monkey-in-fez depictions have become a theme in Tiki art (thus the pufferfish) : http://www.monkeyskull.net/photos/voodoolounge/artists.htm . See the Dave Wong stuff.
I *like* tiki kitsch and I'm collecting Tiki-style stuff for my home bar, but I'll be damned if I'll find a place for fez-monkey paintings.

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

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,13:45   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,13:40)
I *like* tiki kitsch and I'm collecting Tiki-style stuff for my home bar, but I'll be damned if I'll find a place for fez-monkey paintings.

My wife loves tiki.  Our kitchen is decorated with a few skull and Easter Island glasses from the old Kahiki Supper Club in Columbus. Alas, it has been closed for over 8 years now.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,14:25   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,19:04)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,10:38)


My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

That's my favourite bit too.

Possibly for different reasons. Tetrodotoxin is a fascinating synthetic target after all.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,14:41   

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,12:25)
 
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,19:04)
   
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,10:38)


My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

That's my favourite bit too.

No, no, no. It's my favorite bit. Not my favourite.
:angry:

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

  
deadman_932



Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,14:56   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 24 2009,13:45)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,13:40)
I *like* tiki kitsch and I'm collecting Tiki-style stuff for my home bar, but I'll be damned if I'll find a place for fez-monkey paintings.

My wife loves tiki.  Our kitchen is decorated with a few skull and Easter Island glasses from the old Kahiki Supper Club in Columbus. Alas, it has been closed for over 8 years now.

Srsly, Tiki Kitsch isn't so highly desirable right now (kinda what your wife said about you) so it's reasonably priced. ebay has great bargains, and if you broke down and bought the wife a few tasteful gifts, she might put out more instead of just throwing old shoes at you. Just a thought.

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10114
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,14:59   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,14:41)
Quote (Louis @ Feb. 24 2009,12:25)
   
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,19:04)
   
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,10:38)


My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

That's my favourite bit too.

No, no, no. It's my favorite bit. Not my favourite.
:angry:

Colour me unimpressed with this colonial language masher. We reserve the right to retract your licence for the English language. There is a rumour you'll then have to speak French. You can honour the cheese eating surrender monkeys - the flavour and smell of garlic will be your armour if we invade again.

Its obviously information being destroyed, per ID theory. All mutations are harmful, yada yada SHARON'S ENTROMPY and SLOT VIOLATIONS.

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

  
Ra-Úl



Posts: 93
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,15:00   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,13:40)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,13:04)

My favorite bit would have to be the pufferfish inexplicably hanging from the ceiling.

For some reason, monkey-in-fez depictions have become a theme in Tiki art (thus the pufferfish) : http://www.monkeyskull.net/photos/voodoolounge/artists.htm . See the Dave Wong stuff.
I *like* tiki kitsch and I'm collecting Tiki-style stuff for my home bar, but I'll be damned if I'll find a place for fez-monkey paintings.

When (if) you come to Vegas I'll take you Frankie's Tiki Room. Home away from home, strange drinks and tiki decor by Bamboo Ben.

--------------
Beauty is that which makes us desperate. - P Valery

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,15:38   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,14:56)
Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 24 2009,13:45)
 
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,13:40)
I *like* tiki kitsch and I'm collecting Tiki-style stuff for my home bar, but I'll be damned if I'll find a place for fez-monkey paintings.

My wife loves tiki.  Our kitchen is decorated with a few skull and Easter Island glasses from the old Kahiki Supper Club in Columbus. Alas, it has been closed for over 8 years now.

Srsly, Tiki Kitsch isn't so highly desirable right now (kinda what your wife said about you) so it's reasonably priced. ebay has great bargains, and if you broke down and bought the wife a few tasteful gifts, she might put out more instead of just throwing old shoes at you. Just a thought.

Wait a minute? Are you telling me that throwing shoes isn't foreplay?

The Kahiki was wonderful.  Good Polynesian food and decorated within an inch of bad taste. Okay, decorated an inch into bad taste. One whole wall was a tropical fish tank and the opposite wall was an arboretum with tropical birds. Every ten minutes or so, they would flash the lights in the arboretum, play some thunder sounds, and run the misters. Ahh, good times.

Unfortunately, they got an offer for their property from Walgreens that they couldn't refuse. They closed and focused on their frozen food business. You can find Kahiki foods in the freezer case at most groceries, but it is just the typical Chinese fare. No Polynesian dishes.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1020
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,16:58   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:57)
Quote (J-Dog @ Feb. 24 2009,08:43)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Feb. 24 2009,08:35)
For larger type, a shorter message is called for... "That Was False" or just a great big "FALSE" might be even better.

In this time of vanishing resources and increasing expenses, don't we owe it to the world - and the kidz - to use less ink whrever possible?

I think that "LIE" is short, sweet, eco-friendly and true, and so should be used rather than "False".

My $.02

If you use "FALSE", then you aren't impugning the speaker's character, save the huffiness over pointing out ignorance. If you use "LIE", then you are likely to be ejected sooner. It depends on whether your goal is to inform the audience of untrue statements as they happen, or to get expelled as soon as possible. That will inform your choice of word.

Since the attack gerbil <waves at Casey> reads this, shouldn't we worry they'll expell anyone carrying placards as they enter his talks?  Perhaps we could get Prof. Dawkins to carry some in (he apparently has a cloaking device that works on creationists)?

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,17:06   

Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,12:56)
Srsly, Tiki Kitsch isn't so highly desirable right now (kinda what your wife said about you) so it's reasonably priced. ebay has great bargains, and if you broke down and bought the wife a few tasteful gifts, she might put out more

Don't worry, Louis's wife puts out plenty. Trust me.

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

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4482
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,17:34   

Quote

Since the attack gerbil <waves at Casey> reads this, shouldn't we worry they'll expell anyone carrying placards as they enter his talks?


They don't seem to pay attention to anything else I say, so why should this be any different?

:-)

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

    
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,17:51   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 24 2009,23:06)
Quote (deadman_932 @ Feb. 24 2009,12:56)
Srsly, Tiki Kitsch isn't so highly desirable right now (kinda what your wife said about you) so it's reasonably priced. ebay has great bargains, and if you broke down and bought the wife a few tasteful gifts, she might put out more

Don't worry, Louis's wife puts out plenty. Trust me.

You seem to have confused my wife with your mother. That means your lack of ability to see is only matched by your lack of ability to think. Crikey. Blind and stoopid, Arden, a veritable twofer from Dame Nature {shakes head}. My pity, you has it. At least 'Ras has an excuse, that many years on the pipe will do that to a...a...ok I'm going to go with "man" because "anthropoid" might upset the orang utans and I quite like them.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 24 2009,19:35   

My Night with the Discovery Institute, Continued

Notes:
Lecture black. My comments red


Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq. on Kitzmiller v Dover and Academic Freedom


>    Judge Jones said there was no ID testing and research.  But if you look at the trial transcript, Scott Minnich was asked if he used ID concepts and principles in his research and he answered affirmatively.  Minnich described the knockout experiments that he did with the bacterial flagellum.  I have to say I have never found the knock-out experiment a real compelling argument against evolution.  It seems to presume that whatever is being experimented on currently performs the same function as all its predecessors.  I think there is ample evidence this assumption is unwarranted.  I will say this though, Minnich does get point from me for a sense of humor. His response to Jones comment about having seen the bac. flag before was hilarious: "I kind of feel like Zsa Zsa Gabor's fifth husband. As the old adage goes, I know what to do, but I just can't make it exciting."

>  Sig worthy material alert: Luskin said Talkorigins is a great website.

>    Luskin talked about ongoing work at the Biologic Institute on Stylus that is similar to what Lenski did with Avida. They are also doing work related to functional and design constraints and cosmic design. Guillermo Gonzalez is on staff at the Biologic Institute now.

>    Judge Jones stated that there is no positive case for ID and it employs the same "flawed dualism". But, what is the definition of intelligent design?
      a.   So complex, evolution can't create it.
      b.   Some things are so complex that they are best explained by an intelligent cause.

>    Casey tells us it is b!  

>    Charles Lyell - uniformitarianism - can study what is happening today and can apply it to the past. The present is the key to the past.  The creation of information is habitually associated with conscious activity. Luskin references Henry Quastler a famous information theorist and in an odd moment he tells us that Quastler commit suicide. Not sure why that is relevant.

>    Specified complexity - Steven Meyers article in PBSW.Didn't we already cover this?

>   Scientific method of the Design Inference.  Observation --> Hypotheses --> Experiment --> Conclusion.  Can add Peer review and replication if you want.
     o   Hypothesis - if something is designed it will have high CSI
     o   Experiment - High CSI - Irreducibly complex (knockout experiments and simulations.
     o    Conclusion - Design!>   Just once I'd like to see someone actually calculate CSI.  The only one I have ever get close was Sal Cordova over at the sciphishow.com and he ran away before I could even turn on my calculator.

>   Even Dawkins admits there is appearance of design for a purpose. If he can make the claim, why can't we?

>  You may not agree, but you cannot claim this is faith. Dembskit got it from the data.How about you, Casey, want to take a crack at calculating CSI? Dembski doesn't seem to want to delve into pathetic levels of detail. Maybe as the Junior ID scientist you could do the grunt work
                     

>   Dembski predicted that we'd find functions for junk DNA

>   He references the Wells article in the November 2004 issue of PCID  Using Intelligent Design Theory to Guide Scientific Research. Abstract:
   
Quote
Intelligent Design theory (ID) can contribute to science on at least two levels. On one level, ID is concerned with inferring from the evidence whether a given feature of the world is designed. This is the level on which William Dembski's explanatory filter and Michael Behe's concept of irreducible complexity operate. It is also the level that has received the most attention in recent years, largely because the existence of even one intelligently designed feature in living things (at least prior to human beings) would overturn the Darwinian theory of evolution that currently dominates Western biology.

On another level, ID could function as a "metatheory," providing a conceptual framework for scientific research. By suggesting testable hypotheses about features of the world that have been systematically neglected by older metatheories (such as Darwin's), and by leading to the discovery of new features, ID could indirectly demonstrate its scientific fruitfulness.


>    So, how many new features have been discovered using an ID metatheory?  Bueller?  Bueller?

>    He references a Sternberg paper in the Annals of the NY Academy of Science, but I didn't catch the subject.

>    Balakirev and Ayala in Genetics 37:123-151 (2003).  This article is apparently about pseudogenes. Apparently, ID predicted this.

>    Gibbs in Scientific American 11/2003 about introns that were thought to be junk, but weren't. ID apparently predicted this too.

>    This is science stopping!  It is medicine stopping!  HE contends that an ID paradigm would have lead to these discoveries earlier.  Of course, it is those darn, dirty Darwinists that are discovering all this stuff. If you paradigm is better, Casey, then discover something already.  If you get Doug Axe, Minnich, or Behe to discover something important with implications for medicine, I am willing to bet that the private sector medical community will beat a path to your door with a truckload of money.

>    90% of what Judge Jones wrote in his decision came directly from the ACLU. It isn't plagiarism. Judges can and do incorporate like this, but it is discouraged because of the overzealous advocacy of lawyers.

>     The stack of papers put in front of Behe on the stand was what his immunology friends call a literature bluff. None of them provided the detailed step-by-step path that Behe was looking for. I think Behe first asked for possible pathways and only moved to detailed step-by-step after possible pathways emerged.

>     The bluff worked because Jones didn't read any of those papers.  Neither did Behe. That is the point.

>     Judge Jones said there was no peer reviewed research.  Minnich had 7-10 papers and it was all in the briefs submitted to Jones.  But he ignored all of it.

>     This was the end of the discussion of KvD. Luskin moved on to academic freedom. But there was one point in the academic freedom discussion that Casey returned to KvD. So I am going to pull it up into this section. I'll probably refer to it again in context.

>      Luskin stated that some anti-ID legal scholars like Jay Wexler said that it was wrong for Judge Jones to decide on the question of whether ID was science or not. He says that the plaintiffs asked the judge to decide this.  Luskin forgot to mention that the defendants attorney, Richard Thompson, also asked Jones to decide that issue.

Tomorrow: Academic freedom, but not for tits.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Paul Flocken



Posts: 290
Joined: Dec. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,08:32   

Quote (Lou FCD @ Feb. 23 2009,18:16)
ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE! ABBIE!

I just got word of this:

 
Quote
Michael Behe to Speak on Intelligent Design
2/20/2009 11:04:20 AM
Print E-Mail

Lehigh University biochemistry professor and author Michael Behe will present "Answering Objections to the Argument for Intelligent Design in Biology" at 7 p.m. on Thursday, Feb. 26 in the Cultural Arts Building Beckwith Recital Hall.

Behe is known for developing the concept of irreducible complexity. His provocative book, Darwin's Black Box: The Biochemical Challenge to Evolution, was a major catalyst in the emergence of the intelligent design movement. His theory of irreducible complexity is defined as "a single system composed of several well-matched, interacting parts that contribute to the basic function, wherein the removal of any one of the parts causes the system to effectively cease functioning."

Behe graduated from Drexel University in 1974 with a B.S. in chemistry and then earned his Ph. D. in biochemistry from the University of Pennsylvania in 1978. Since then, he has published more than 35 articles in biochemical journals, as well as written editorial features in the Boston Review, American Spectator and the New York Times. His book, Darwin's Black Box, was recently named by the National Review and World magazine as one of the 100 most important books of the 20th century. This event is free and no tickets are required. For more information, contact event host Donald Furst, professor of art, at x23440.


UNC Wilmington is about an hour from here. It's where Doc got his master's, and where I'm going after Coastal.

Guess who's going to see your boyfriend?

Yup, bo'fus. I'll of course be reporting here.

(It's awful funny that he was invited by the art department, though, ain't it? How come the Biology department didn't invite him, I wonder? I'll ask him.)

Yep, yep,

I have been waiting a month for this, ever since I missed Eugenie Scott's visit in Jan(frakkin work).  If I can't be a Eugenie groupie then I can be a Hehe heckler :)

Paul

ps you have a pm

--------------
"The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie--deliberate, contrived, and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive, and unrealistic.  Belief in myths allows the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought."-John F. Kennedy

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,19:13   

My Night with the Discovery Institute, Part the Last

Notes:
Lecture black. My comments red


Casey Luskin, MS JD Esq. on Kitzmiller v Dover and Academic Freedom


>    Luskin begins his talk on academic freedom by showing a graphic for Expelled.  He says the persecution is real, because if it wasn't, he wouldn't have a job.  Part of his job is to provide defense and assist in the defense of such persecution victims.  Luskin was admitted to the California Bar in November 2005 and remains an active member.  This means, at a minimum he pays his annual dues and complies with Continuing Legal Education requirements of 25 hours every 3 years.  Luskin is not a member of the Washington State Bar.  To join the WA Bar he would either need to take and pass the WA Bar Exam or qualify for admission under a reciprocity agreement. I think he went to the DI right after law school, so it is unlikely that he would qualify under reciprocity.

>  Guillermo Gonzalez was a Cuban refugee.  He was persecuted at ISU, where he had 65 peer review papers published. I believe GG sctually had 65 papers published over the course of his entire academic career, not just at ISU.  As stated, Luskin did imply that it was 65 papers at ISU.  It was one sentence and could have been mangled in the telling.

>    He was told it was a mistake to publish The Privileged Planet and it would factor into his tenure decision.  His colleagues were against him because of it.

>    Luskin references a newspaper article where John Hauptman states  ""I participated in the initial vote and voted no, based on this fundamental question: What is science? "

>     He shows a quote from Hector Avalos that reads "ID...has now established a presence...at ISU"The ellipsis caught my eye. I looked a but further into the quote and I have read Avalos response, but didn't find his defense particularly compelling

>    Joerg Schmalian: "If we go on record, we give Gonzalez a clear sign that his ID efforts will not be considered as science by the faculty."   and also something from John Harmon about how GG should know that they are not going to count his ID work for him in tenure decision.  Basically, what Luskin wants us to think here is that GG's ID work was a negative to his tenure application.  That may be so, but it could also be read that his ID work was considered a nullity.

>    He talks about how Eli Rosenberg, department chair, instructed voting members of the tenure committee to make ID a litmus test in the decision and his support for ID "disqualifies him from serving as a science educator."

>   KvD was cited by ISU in the report to the President on GG's tenure decision.  Luskin states that the DI gave warning to Judge Jones to not decide on the question of whether ID is science because it could have serious consequences.  The implication here is that JJ decision cost GG his job.  I don't find that compelling.  GG record of publications, raising grant money, and graduating students was poor after arrival at ISU.  That a judge half a continent away said ID isn't science was the least of GG problems.

>    Scott Minnich was also the victim of targetted discrimination.   A speech code was implemented at the U of Idaho stating that only evolution was appropriate to teach. Context anyone?  A lot of organizations have statements regarding what is considered to be part of sound science education.  That hardly seems like a speech code.  Was there really a speech code put in at U of Idaho or is Luskin just trying to push some buttons with the Baptists?

>  The next example of persecution was Rodney LeVake, who wanted to be a biology teacher for years.  However, he was demoted because he wanted to teach the strengths and weaknesses of evolution.  Actually, LeVake wanted to teach something other than the cirriculum approved by the school.

> LeVake sued the school district on the grounds that they violated his right of free speech, right of free exercise of religion, and due process. Right of free religious expression?  Are the pickings so thin that this is one of your poster children?

> To demonstrate the lack of academic freedom at the high school level, Luskin showed the following quote from a decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.    I find the use of this quote odd.  They are basically admitting that their boy was insubordinate.  Since you probably noticed the ellipsis in their as well, I pulled the missing text from the decision.  I don't think the missing text necessarily changes the idea that LeVake just didn't want to teach what was in teh curriculum.

                           
Quote


"The classroom is a 'marketplace of ideas,' and academic freedom should
be safeguarded. But LeVake, in his role as a public school teacher
rather than as a private citizen, wanted to discuss the criticisms of
evolution. LeVake's position paper established that he does not believe
the theory of evolution is credible. Further, LeVake's proposed method
of teaching evolution is in direct conflict with respondents' curriculum
requirements ... Based on LeVake's belief that evolution is not a viable
theory, respondents' concern about his inability to teach the prescribed
curriculum was well-founded."


>  The quote Luskin provided is damning enough.  For the sake of completeness, here is what was missing.
                           
Quote

See Clark v. Holmes, 474 F.2d 928, 931 (7th Cir. 1972) (recognizing teacher had no First Amendment right to override judgment of superiors regarding proper course content). Accordingly, the established curriculum  [*509]  and LeVake's responsibility as a public school teacher to teach evolution in the manner prescribed by the curriculum overrides his First Amendment rights as a private citizen. See Webster v. New Lenox Sch. Dist. No. 122, 917 F.2d 1004, 1007 (7th Cir. 1990) (recognizing compelling state interest in choice and adherence to suitable curriculum for benefit of young students overrides individual teachers' desire to teach what they please).



>  Academic freedom bills. Introduced in 6 states last year and 5 states this year.  And failed to pass in everyone except Louisiana. The Louisiana law charges the state education department to approve supplemental material that can be used to teach "strengths and weakness".  I am not aware that, to date the department

> The crucial section (Note the singular) in the bills (note the plural) is section F, which states that the bill only protects the teaching scientific info, not religion or non-religion.Is their sufficient evidence to assume all these bills evolved from a common ancestor?

>  Even the ACLU cannot deny the facial constitutionality. The problem comes in when someone starts to teach weaknesses that have antecedents in creationist literature and no scientific support.

>  In reference to the LA bill, it says what is taught can't be religion.  He then apparently quotes Barry Lynn of Americans United. The phrases quoted are chosen to make Lynn look bad " laughingstock of world", "Smelly crap" Luskin asks the rhetoical question "How can you argue against such logic?"Casey seems to have forgotten to mention that it is Reverend Barry Lynn. Wouldn't want anyone to know their nemesis is a preacher.  That will just not do.

>  Luskin talked about how to OU professors circulated a flyer about the recent bill.  They apparently called it a Trojan Horse Bill and said those professors were engaging in fearmongering, conspiracy theories, and scare tactics. Thus proving the need for Academic Freedom Bills.  He also said that they said something about lawsuits resulting from the LA bill, but there are no lawsuites. Are there no lawsuits because there is no approved material for teaching "strengths and weaknesses?"

>  Luskin states "Ladies and Gentleman of the supposed jury, I rest my case!"  Seriously, his whole case wasn't even as coherent as the Chewbacca Defense.

>  Casey goes on to make a further case for Academic Freedom by showing that Darwinists are mean.  He brings up slides with regard to ERV's treatment of a troll involving disemvowelling and the joke "Tits or STFU" and claims that this is not free and open debate! It is a freaking blog, Casey. It isn't a classroom, a laboratory, a journal, or a scientific conference. A blog.  

>  At this point, he puts up a slide showing all the nasty things that people have said about him here.Casey, you really need to get over yourself. We say worse things to each other and we like each other.  Except that homo Chatfield.

>  He mentions the Pennock column in US News that says the IDers don't deserve civility.

>  But he forgives us! Especially you, Wes! He was very much Master Thespian. Way too grandiloquent for me to take seriously, but maybe everyone else just realized what a nice young Christian man he is.

>  He closes with a plea for free speech, civility, and peaceful coexistence in the Academy.  

Q&A

> Q & A was basically a disaster. There were already 6 or so Trinity members lined up by the microphone when Casey finished.  Abbie cut to the front of the line (How rude!) to offer a defense.  There was alot of cross-talk and the lower volume of the Q&A mike might have made it difficult for her to be understood. I heard Abbie try and discuss how poorly she was treated at UD and by Behe. She was obviously upset.  At the time, I wasn't watching Luskin to see how he was reacting. I was watching host Don Ewert who was visibly angry and demanding that Abbie yield the microphone. I don't know if Ewert will ever read this, but if he does I want him to know that I think poorly of him. Even if Luskin was right and we are all mean nasty oppressors, and Abbie is a Super-King-Kamehameha bitch, human decency would dictate that, after Luskin attacked a person in the audience, the person would have the opportunity to respond.  Ewert, you are no gentleman. This puts in clear relief just how interested you are in free and open exchanges. In short, you aren't.    

>  Casey states "res ipso loquitor".  After seeing your assassination of Abbie and your apparent unwillingness to allow her opportunity to respond, all I can say is: Indeed, it does.

As a conclusion, this all reminded me of December 2007 when Abbie was dusting it up with Behe and the knotheads over at UD.  I had a PM exchange with an ID cheerleader in which they expressed their disappointment in me for defending Abbie. Here is what I said then and it is still true today.
             
Quote
But allow me the privilege of stating clearly why I feel the way I do.  Sure, ERV is a bitch. So what? She is dedicating her life to working towards a cure for a horrible disease that afflicts millions.  That scores alot of points in my book.  While I don't expect folks like Sal or Behe to actively participate in that effort, they should at least not hinder the progress of those that do.  But they won't do that. In addition to spreading demonstrable falsehoods, they want to destroy the science education system that has produced the cures for polio and many other such diseases.  A system that will, God willing, produce a cure for AIDS someday.

You will undoubtedly say you don't see it that way. You will say that you think the ID folks are onto something. Fine, maybe they do have a better way. Then it is high time that they stop publishing mass market books [and lobbying legislatures] and get on with curing diseases. Who's hands are you willing to put your families lives in?  Me, I will take a single potty mouthed bitch who is working cure a disease any day over a roomful of IDers who can't seem to get beyond heckling her.  


And that is all I have to say about that.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
khan



Posts: 1482
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,19:33   

Dear carlsonjok:

I appreciate your efforts, and your exposure of the steaming pile of manure that is DI.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,19:43   

Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 25 2009,19:13)
     
Quote
But allow me the privilege of stating clearly why I feel the way I do.  Sure, ERV is a bitch. So what? She is dedicating her life to working towards a cure for a horrible disease that afflicts millions.  That scores alot of points in my book.  While I don't expect folks like Sal or Behe to actively participate in that effort, they should at least not hinder the progress of those that do.  But they won't do that. In addition to spreading demonstrable falsehoods, they want to destroy the science education system that has produced the cures for polio and many other such diseases.  A system that will, God willing, produce a cure for AIDS someday.

You will undoubtedly say you don't see it that way. You will say that you think the ID folks are onto something. Fine, maybe they do have a better way. Then it is high time that they stop publishing mass market books [and lobbying legislatures] and get on with curing diseases. Who's hands are you willing to put your families lives in?  Me, I will take a single potty mouthed bitch who is working cure a disease any day over a roomful of IDers who can't seem to get beyond heckling her.  


And that is all I have to say about that.

Carlson - Excellent!  Thank for the effort and the summaries.

And your final wrap up is a keeper!

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

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,19:49   

Creationists: SHES A BITCH!

Carlson: Yeah, but shes our bitch.  *cocks gun* So cut her the hell down.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4362
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 25 2009,19:57