RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 992 993 994 995 996 [997] 998 999 1000 >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4244
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,20:37   

BarryA calls "materialists" on their faith. It is by faith alone that materialists assume they aren't subject to Descartes' demon, aren't brains in beakers, aren't in the grip of the Matrix:

 
Quote
Faith and Reason
BarryA

...Philosophers have known for hundreds of years that data provided to us by sense impressions cannot be the basis of absolute knowledge. Renee Descartes, for example, famously demonstrated this with his “evil demon” thought experiment. In this experiment Descartes posited an evil demon “as clever and deceitful as he is powerful, who has directed his entire effort to misleading me.” The evil demon is so powerful he is capable of presenting an illusion of the entire world, including Descartes’ sense impressions of his own body, to Descartes’ mind. If such an evil demon actually existed, Descartes’ sense impressions would be misleading him, and the outside world, including Descartes’ own body, would not in fact exist even though Descartes’ sense impressions confirmed unequivocally that they did.

Here’s the fascinating part of the experiment. How do we know the evil demon does not exist? Answer. By definition, the data presented to our minds by our senses cannot demonstrate his non-existence. In fact, we cannot know with absolute certainty he does not exist. We take his non-existence purely as a matter of faith.

But Barry, you too may be a Boltzman brain, a brain in a beaker, in the grip of the matrix. Your faith, your thoughts about God, your deepest communing with Christ: perhaps all were programmed into your experience for malicious purposes. You are confident of your moral absolutes. But there are no babies, there are no bayonets, there are no mothers, and there never have been - only virtual babies and virtual atrocities designed to arrest your attention. Your absolute certainty on moral issues is not simply mistaken. It has no referents at all.  

Seems to me, then, with beakers, Cartesian demons and matrices in both the numerator and denominator of the "faith/reason" debate, that the faiths that sustain our mutual rejection of this possibility cancel.

But even with this algebraic simplification (we both accept on faith that we aren't brains in beakers), you grind on with many uncanceled and painfully unrequited faiths, faiths in baroque, concrete, obsolete propositions about the supernatural, God, absolute morality, resurrections, and other notions that lie forever beyond confirmation. Faiths with no analog within the worldview of naturalism. And among those baroque objects of faith we find, in fact, demons. So Descarte's demon is rather a more real possibility to you than to me.

All the while, those of us who embrace methodological naturalism return to our concerns, employing that powerful set of assumptions to build an edifice of consilient knowledge and predictive theory derived from our empirical explorations.

I'm going to tend my beakers now. You're in one of them.

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

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

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

  
sparc



Posts: 1712
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,22:33   

DaveScot
Quote
Roy Spencer
Quote
Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years.
Didn't ID run under a different name back in 1988? Something starting with "C" and ending on "ism"?

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 1670
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,00:34   

In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.


--------------
Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.  Edward Feser

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,01:07   

Quote (CeilingCat @ July 14 2008,22:34)
In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.    
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.

KeithS deems that paragraph Denyse-worthy.

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

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

  
bystander



Posts: 301
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,02:06   

And bystander's Fathers younger son would agree.

Michael

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,05:32   

Quote (CeilingCat @ July 15 2008,00:34)
In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.    
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.

It isn't immediately obvious, but he is quoting an article (that he did not write) from the website linked at the top of his comment.  You can also find Patrick's personal blog there.

--------------
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!)

  
dogdidit



Posts: 315
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,09:43   

Quote (keiths @ July 15 2008,01:07)
   
Quote (CeilingCat @ July 14 2008,22:34)
In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.          
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.

KeithS deems that paragraph Denyse-worthy.

Indeed. From this nugget I learn that
- Florida is an area near Patrick (which puts him in...Georgia??);
- there is a Church of Patrick (!);
- it has a brother named Michael (presumably a church as well??);
- (Church of?) Michael is being ensnared by Bentley's enticing words;
- those words seem to emanate from the leadership (of...something??), Michael's friends, and echelons in-between.

Clearzabell.

I greatly enjoy the thought-derailing, zen-like state of standing waves that my brain enters when confronted with Denyse's prose, and I am glad to see others getting into the act. Patrick needs only to fall face first into the keyboard every now and then to add the requisite number of typos and misplaced punctuation and the act is complete!

--------------
"Humans carry plants and animals all over the globe, thus introducing them to places they could never have reached on their own. That certainly increases biodiversity." - D'OL

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,09:47   

Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,09:43)
I greatly enjoy the thought-derailing, zen-like state of standing waves that my brain enters when confronted with Denyse's prose, and I am glad to see others getting into the act.

HA HA THIS IS 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!)

  
dogdidit



Posts: 315
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,09:57   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 15 2008,09:47)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,09:43)
I greatly enjoy the thought-derailing, zen-like state of standing waves that my brain enters when confronted with Denyse's prose, and I am glad to see others getting into the act.

HA HA THIS IS YOU


BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

--------------
"Humans carry plants and animals all over the globe, thus introducing them to places they could never have reached on their own. That certainly increases biodiversity." - D'OL

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,10:02   

Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,15:57)
BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

{sound of bubbling and inhaling}

Huh? Is that the pizza guy? Did he bring the extra brownie ice cream too?

Have you ever looked at your hands, I mean REALLY looked at them?

Etc.

Yeah, Dogdidit, I've {ahem} heard that too. Maybe the same friend told us both. Damn smelly hippies. Some of them are Nazis I've heard from UD.

UD: source of all that is "true", for a given value of "true". A very low value at best. Possibly a negative one.

Louis

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

  
dogdidit



Posts: 315
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,10:02   

Trouble in paradise:
 
Quote
50
tb
07/15/2008
9:36 am

blockquote does not work properly here any longer, it shows good in the preview yet it turns out terribly in the site itself!

Can anyone FIX THIS PLEASE!

And no editory function. Unintelligently designed? Failure to evolve?

--------------
"Humans carry plants and animals all over the globe, thus introducing them to places they could never have reached on their own. That certainly increases biodiversity." - D'OL

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2779
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,13:28   

In the "Most Bizarre Wishful Thinking" category, the Oscar goes to Peter at UD, who tells us how ID relates to real life  
Quote
I saw the new move “Hancock” the other day. The movie was alright, but what caught my attention was an explanation as to where our superhero came from. The was told that “we were made in pairs.” That is very interesting. This is a major summer box office movie. It did not say “we evolved along a separate path.” While it may be possible to be made by evolution, that would be a stretch. It seems to me that the movie makers are acknowledging an important shift in their audience. This tells me that ID has been making significant progress.

A synopsis of the movie's plot at IMDB adds some texture to the plot  
Quote
A hard-living superhero who has fallen out of favor with the public enters into a questionable relationship with the wife of the public relations professional who's trying to repair his image.

Fallen out of favor? Public relations professional? Questionable relationship?

Yeah, that sounds like ID to me too!

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

   
Kristine



Posts: 3046
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,16:26   

Quote (sparc @ July 14 2008,22:33)
DaveScot  
Quote
Roy Spencer  
Quote
Twenty years ago, as a PhD scientist, I intensely studied the evolution versus intelligent design controversy for about two years.
Didn't ID run under a different name back in 1988? Something starting with "C" and ending on "ism"?

Remember "creation science"? "Balanced treatment," teach both sides, UFOs come from the devil, etc. Those creationists look like naive Boy Scouts next to today's savvy(?) IDers.

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

AtBC Poet Laureate

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

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 8947
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2008,21:48   

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ July 15 2008,14:28)

it's bad form to post spoilers. some of us haven't seen Hancock yet.

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 1670
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,01:30   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 15 2008,05:32)
     
Quote (CeilingCat @ July 15 2008,00:34)
In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.            
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.

It isn't immediately obvious, but he is quoting an article (that he did not write) from the website linked at the top of his comment.  You can also find Patrick's personal blog there.

Thanks, I missed that, possibly because of the total lack of quotes or anything else that might lead one to think the words were copied from somewhere else.

Speaking of somewhere else, that's quite a web site.  Right now, it's carrying this ad:      
Quote
Your Angel's Astrology
Revealed in a Free Horoscope, yours now from an real Expert Astrologer!
www.aboutastro.com
 That's an real expert astrologer, as compared to an unreal one.  This is combined with ads for "Who is Satan?", "Hulk", "Incredible Hulk Cheats" and "The Incredible Hulk Movie".  WTF?

I've often wondered if the person who named our species "homo sapiens" might have been having a little joke.

Anyhow, I have a new sig:

Ceiling Cat, ArchCardinal in the Church of Patrick.

--------------
Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.  Edward Feser

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1670
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,01:52   

Talk about damning with faint praise!  This is actually off topic, but go to Amazon, search for "The Design Matrix" and read the customer reviews.  From a favorable review by Glen Yates:
 
Quote
Very nearly a top-tier ID book

No wonder MikeGene is retiring from the fray.

--------------
Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.  Edward Feser

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,02:15   

In his tirade against materialists, Barry pontificates:
Quote
Johnson most certainly did NOT refute Berkeley as a matter of pure logic. Boswell was correct. It is impossible to refute Berkeley’s idealism, just as it is impossible to refute Descartes’ demon, or the existence of the Matrix, or that at this moment I am a Boltzman Brain. The internal logic of these systems is seamless and flawless.

That's funny.  It seems like just yesterday that Barry was  citing Johnson's "refutation" of Berkeley as a valid argument. Until a Darwinist (gasp!) materialist (gasp!) set him straight, that is.

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

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

  
uriel



Posts: 22
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,02:17   

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ July 14 2008,20:37)
BarryA calls "materialists" on their faith. It is by faith alone that materialists assume they aren't subject to Descartes' demon, aren't brains in beakers, aren't in the grip of the Matrix:

   
Quote
Faith and Reason
BarryA

...Philosophers have known for hundreds of years that data provided to us by sense impressions cannot be the basis of absolute knowledge. Renee Descartes, for example, famously demonstrated this with his “evil demon” thought experiment. In this experiment Descartes posited an evil demon “as clever and deceitful as he is powerful, who has directed his entire effort to misleading me.” The evil demon is so powerful he is capable of presenting an illusion of the entire world, including Descartes’ sense impressions of his own body, to Descartes’ mind. If such an evil demon actually existed, Descartes’ sense impressions would be misleading him, and the outside world, including Descartes’ own body, would not in fact exist even though Descartes’ sense impressions confirmed unequivocally that they did.

Here’s the fascinating part of the experiment. How do we know the evil demon does not exist? Answer. By definition, the data presented to our minds by our senses cannot demonstrate his non-existence. In fact, we cannot know with absolute certainty he does not exist. We take his non-existence purely as a matter of faith.

But Barry, you too may be a Boltzman brain, a brain in a beaker, in the grip of the matrix. Your faith, your thoughts about God, your deepest communing with Christ: perhaps all were programmed into your experience for malicious purposes. You are confident of your moral absolutes. But there are no babies, there are no bayonets, there are no mothers, and there never have been - only virtual babies and virtual atrocities designed to arrest your attention. Your absolute certainty on moral issues is not simply mistaken. It has no referents at all.  

Seems to me, then, with beakers, Cartesian demons and matrices in both the numerator and denominator of the "faith/reason" debate, that the faiths that sustain our mutual rejection of this possibility cancel.

But even with this algebraic simplification (we both accept on faith that we aren't brains in beakers), you grind on with many uncanceled and painfully unrequited faiths, faiths in baroque, concrete, obsolete propositions about the supernatural, God, absolute morality, resurrections, and other notions that lie forever beyond confirmation. Faiths with no analog within the worldview of naturalism. And among those baroque objects of faith we find, in fact, demons. So Descarte's demon is rather a more real possibility to you than to me.

All the while, those of us who embrace methodological naturalism return to our concerns, employing that powerful set of assumptions to build an edifice of consilient knowledge and predictive theory derived from our empirical explorations.

I'm going to tend my beakers now. You're in one of them.

Wow bill- that's just very, very nicely done. Hats off, and such.

  
uriel



Posts: 22
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,02:21   

Quote (Albatrossity2 @ July 15 2008,13:28)
In the "Most Bizarre Wishful Thinking" category, the Oscar goes to Peter at UD, who tells us how ID relates to real life    
Quote
I saw the new move “Hancock” the other day. The movie was alright, but what caught my attention was an explanation as to where our superhero came from. The was told that “we were made in pairs.” That is very interesting. This is a major summer box office movie. It did not say “we evolved along a separate path.” While it may be possible to be made by evolution, that would be a stretch. It seems to me that the movie makers are acknowledging an important shift in their audience. This tells me that ID has been making significant progress.

And to be fair to the other side:

Wow, peter that's just.... ummm... wow. Really. Wow.

  
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,04:00   

Barry A:
Quote
I will then show that far from being a bastion of pure reason, materialism actually requires greater faith commitments than theism.

We'll see about that.
Quote
Materialist believe that a real world exists outside of themselves and that they have trustworthy perceptions of this real world from their senses.

Not true.  If we assumed on faith that our senses were trustworthy, we'd be unable to detect their failures, as in the case of optical illusions.  Even the existence of the real world need not be taken on faith.  We take our sense perceptions as provisional evidence that the real world exists, but that doesn't prevent us from entertaining the possibility that it does not, as this entire discussion illustrates.
Quote
Again, as a matter of pure logic, I cannot prove that I am not at this moment a Boltzman Brain.

True, and as RB pointed out, it remains true for those who are theists.  The uncertainties in the numerator and denominator cancel out, as he put it, and so Barry cannot claim an advantage for the theist on this basis.
Quote
Materialists’ faith commitments do not stop there. Consider the following statement: “The universe is subject to rationale inquiry.” This statement is a “rock kicking” statement. All scientific inquiry is based on the assumption that it is true. Nevertheless, the truth of the statement cannot be established to a logical certainty or confirmed absolutely by examination of physical evidence.

Again, this need not be taken on faith. We can give science a try.  If it yields nothing but gibberish, we can consider the possibility that the world is not intelligible.  Faith is not necessary.
Quote
Finally, consider the very definitional presupposition of materialism, which can be reduced to the following statement: “The universe consists of space, matter and energy and nothing else.” Has this assertion been proven true?

Once again, we don't hold this position as a matter of faith, but because of the evidence.  Further evidence could change our minds.
Quote
Reason has a limit, and at the end of reason are first principles, and first principles must be accepted on faith; they cannot be demonstrated.

The validity of reason itself must be assumed by both the materialist and the theist.  Interestingly, the materialist can justify the idea that human reason is more or less trustworthy, because natural selection has shaped it.  Faulty reason would be a liability to its possessors, who would tend to be outcompeted by their more rational counterparts.

Theists, on the other hand (at least those who deny macroevolution), have no justification for saying that human reason is trustworthy.  They claim that God would surely grant us a reliable faculty of reason -- but this is purely assumption -- an article of faith.  Oops.
Quote
Far from being a blind leap, authentic Christian faith is a reasoned faith. It does not fly in the face of the evidence; rather it goes one step further than the evidence.

In other words, that "one step" is a blind leap.
Quote
For example, Christians, by definition, believe in the existence of God. Is this belief a blind “the moon is made of green cheese” leap? Certainly not, because, in a manner of speaking, God’s existence has been proved.
Certainly the existence of God has not been proven in the apodictic sense of the word, but it has been proven in every fair sense of the word “proven.”

Here Barry is arguing that if someone has presented a "proof", and it at least sort of makes sense, then God's existence can be said to be "proven".  But in that same retarded sense of the word, we can say that God's nonexistence has been "proven" because "proofs" of his nonexistence have been presented and make sense.

The burden of proof is on the theists, just as it is on the Celestial Teapotists -- and strong evidence, much less solid proof, has not been forthcoming.
Quote
Similarly, many people believe that such things as the existence of evil or the suffering of innocents counts as evidence against the existence of God. It is beyond the scope of this post to answer these objections, but they have been answered.

The question isn't whether someone has responded; it's whether someone has responded effectively.  The problem of evil has been giving theist philosophers the fits for thousands of years and continues to do so today, even if that fact is conveniently "beyond the scope of this post."

Incidentally, the problem of evil goes away if the theist drops the assumption that God is benevolent.  Why not follow the evidence and drop this assumption?  Could it be that you're hanging onto this belief as a matter of faith?
Quote
More to the point of this post, the fact that many people believe there is evidence that points away from the existence of God does not undermine my original conclusion. Authentic Christian faith is not a leap in the dark. It is a rational faith based upon a reasoned consideration of the evidence.

Really, Barry?  Then perhaps then you can outline for us the "reasoned consideration of the evidence" that leads you to the dogma of the Trinity, or any of a number of bizarre claims made by you and your coreligionists.
Quote
Consider two instances of the materialist faith dilemma. First, how does the materialist answer the question: “Why is there something instead of nothing?” For the theist this is an easy question. God, the uncaused first cause, created all things that exist.

To which the materialist can just as easily respond:  "Why is there God instead of nothing?"
Quote
Secondly, consider biological origins. By definition the materialist must believe that particles of matter, starting as the detritus of the nuclear furnaces at the center of long burned out stars, organized themselves with absolutely no plan or guidance into first elements and then planets and then organic compounds and then into animals and plants and humans and computers and space stations. The phrase “mud to mind” does not even begin to encompass the absurdity of the proposition.

This is just the old argument from incredulity.  It's interesting that Barry doesn't apply it to aspects of his own faith, such as (again) the doctrine of the Trinity.
Quote
I call materialists’ belief in these two propositions “materialist fideism.” It really is amusing to listen to materialists blast leap-in-the-dark faith, when their faith commitments dwarf those of even the most fundamentalist believer.

Hardly.  Theists end up making almost all of the same "faith commitments" as materialists, and most of these don't even involve faith, as I've already pointed out.  But the theist adds a doozy:  the assumption that there's an uncreated, eternally existing God.

Pretty lopsided, but not in the direction that Barry was thinking (or hoping).

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

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

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1670
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,06:04   

Nice takedown.  Too bad bad that BarryA will never read it.

--------------
Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.  Edward Feser

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1670
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,06:30   

Denyse finds her twin:

Denyse O'Leary appears to have opened up a fresh new vein of tard.  Said tard is named Susan Mazur and she works for something called "Scoop", which is some kind of journalism outfit in New Zealand.
Samples:    
Quote
But the scientific community has known for some time that natural selection has nothing to do with evolution.  It also knows that self-organization is real, that is, matter can form without a genetic recipe – like the snowflake (non-living). It does this without external guidance.

     And that the Hydra (living), for example, can self-assemble its scattered cells even after being forced through a sieve. Yet, science elites continue to term self-assembly and self-organization "woo woo".
I don't actually think that science is ignorant of snowflakes and I'd hardly call the Hydra's putting itself back together again "self organization", since that term is reserved for non-living things and Hydras are made of living cells.  We're gradually learning about the chemical attractors and gradients that help cells assemble.        
Quote
Some of the Altenberg 16 or A-16, as I like to call them, have hinted that they’re trying to steer science in a more honest direction, that is, by addressing non-centrality of the gene.
 You can see how Denyse couldn't possibly resist raw uncut tard like this.  (By the way, science says the genes are central because it somehow missed "morphology", according to Ms Mazar.      
Quote
Meanwhile, Swedish cytogeneticist Antonio Lima-de-Faria, author of the book Evolution without Selection, sees any continuance of the natural selection concept as "compromise". He says Darwinism and neo-Darwinism deal only with the biological or "terminal" phase of evolution and impede discovery of the real mechanism, which is "primaeval" – based on elementary particles, chemical elements and minerals (Chapter 6, "Knight of the North Star").
This is multiple-orgasm stuff for a certain Toronto based Journalist.

--------------
Like every other academic field, philosophy of religion has its share of hacks and mediocrities.  Edward Feser

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5378
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,07:15   

Quote (CeilingCat @ July 16 2008,07:30)
Denyse finds her twin:

Denyse O'Leary appears to have opened up a fresh new vein of tard.  Said tard is named Susan Mazur and she works for something called "Scoop", which is some kind of journalism outfit in New Zealand.
Samples:        
Quote
But the scientific community has known for some time that natural selection has nothing to do with evolution.  It also knows that self-organization is real, that is, matter can form without a genetic recipe – like the snowflake (non-living). It does this without external guidance.

     And that the Hydra (living), for example, can self-assemble its scattered cells even after being forced through a sieve. Yet, science elites continue to term self-assembly and self-organization "woo woo".

Hey YO!

Since I'm going to be a biology teacher now, I should be getting the memos.

Would one of you guys please get my name on the list?  How am I supposed to know what secrets to keep from the kids, without the damned memos?

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

   
Jkrebs



Posts: 328
Joined: Sep. 2004

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,07:51   

Yes, good post by keiths.  I like the short, to-to-the-point way he addressed a lot of issues.  It would be interesting to take a few and wade in over at UD, but I've got to go to work.  :) (And, I'm trying to kick the habit.)

  
dogdidit



Posts: 315
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,07:51   

Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,15:57)
BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

{sound of bubbling and inhaling}

Huh? Is that the pizza guy? Did he bring the extra brownie ice cream too?

Have you ever looked at your hands, I mean REALLY looked at them?

Ah, Daniel-san! How's the horses?

 
Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)

UD: source of all that is "true", for a given value of "true". A very low value at best. Possibly a negative one.

More like square-root of negative one.

(Get it? GET IT? HAR HAR I MAID A MATHS JOKE)

--------------
"Humans carry plants and animals all over the globe, thus introducing them to places they could never have reached on their own. That certainly increases biodiversity." - D'OL

  
ERV



Posts: 329
Joined: Sep. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,08:19   

Quote (CeilingCat @ July 16 2008,06:30)
Denyse finds her twin:

Denyse O'Leary appears to have opened up a fresh new vein of tard.  Said tard is named Susan Mazur and she works for something called "Scoop", which is some kind of journalism outfit in New Zealand.
Samples:      
Quote
But the scientific community has known for some time that natural selection has nothing to do with evolution.  It also knows that self-organization is real, that is, matter can form without a genetic recipe – like the snowflake (non-living). It does this without external guidance.

     And that the Hydra (living), for example, can self-assemble its scattered cells even after being forced through a sieve. Yet, science elites continue to term self-assembly and self-organization "woo woo".
I don't actually think that science is ignorant of snowflakes and I'd hardly call the Hydra's putting itself back together again "self organization", since that term is reserved for non-living things and Hydras are made of living cells.  We're gradually learning about the chemical attractors and gradients that help cells assemble.        
Quote
Some of the Altenberg 16 or A-16, as I like to call them, have hinted that they’re trying to steer science in a more honest direction, that is, by addressing non-centrality of the gene.
 You can see how Denyse couldn't possibly resist raw uncut tard like this.  (By the way, science says the genes are central because it somehow missed "morphology", according to Ms Mazar.        
Quote
Meanwhile, Swedish cytogeneticist Antonio Lima-de-Faria, author of the book Evolution without Selection, sees any continuance of the natural selection concept as "compromise". He says Darwinism and neo-Darwinism deal only with the biological or "terminal" phase of evolution and impede discovery of the real mechanism, which is "primaeval" – based on elementary particles, chemical elements and minerals (Chapter 6, "Knight of the North Star").
This is multiple-orgasm stuff for a certain Toronto based Journalist.

Mazur is an idiot.  Weve been dealing with her for months.
Example.

Thats who PZ and I were talking about on BloggingHeads (epigenetics).

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10235
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,08:27   

Quote (ERV @ July 16 2008,08:19)
...

Thats who PZ and I were talking about on BloggingHeads (epigenetics).

I found that to be a very educational exchange, and I thought coming at it from different perspectives was good.

Next time, try biting your bottom lip then whispering "I LUV YOU RICHTARD" into the camera.

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

  
jeffox



Posts: 533
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,09:26   

NEWSFLASH!!!!   Recently discovered photo of Dennis O'Leary's English Comp. instructor emerges!!  Story at 11:00!!!


  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,09:52   

Quote (dogdidit @ July 16 2008,13:51)
Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,15:57)
BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

{sound of bubbling and inhaling}

Huh? Is that the pizza guy? Did he bring the extra brownie ice cream too?

Have you ever looked at your hands, I mean REALLY looked at them?

Ah, Daniel-san! How's the horses?

 
Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)

UD: source of all that is "true", for a given value of "true". A very low value at best. Possibly a negative one.

More like square-root of negative one.

(Get it? GET IT? HAR HAR I MAID A MATHS JOKE)

Imaginative.....

;-)

Louis

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

  
olegt



Posts: 1387
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,10:10   

Tard advisory

Tardmeters around the world registered a strong uptick this morning, indicating an influx of fresh, unscreened tard in the environment.  The source was traced to a naked singularity in the tard field that had escaped from the UD bunker and was last seen at Telic Thoughts.  

Click on the link AT YOUR OWN RISK.  You have been warned.

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

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

Pages: (1000) < ... 992 993 994 995 996 [997] 998 999 1000 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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