RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < ... 241 242 243 244 245 [246] 247 248 249 250 251 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,17:57   

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,16:29)
I wish we had a dramatis personae--I've been out of the loop a bit and don't really know who these UD folk are anymore. Who is Mung, vjtorley, axel, boringagain, upright biped...?

I'm a dinosaur from the DaveScot GilDodgen era.

bung is a deepcover poe or fully retarded spiteful self-loather.  knows nothing and is viciously proud of it.  also polluted TT before it died a PSCID like death

vjtorley is a Forever Alone expatriate who teaches english as a third language to geishas or ghanans or something somewhere far away from the culture war he dreams about.  he apparently is a phd, philosophy iirc, and a reifier of the rarefied.  i think he burned out on acid or something in the 1960s

bat^shit77, aka Phillip Cunningham, used to post his paranoid and hysterical diatribes peppered with strange typographical errors or tics,,, such as ,,, instead of , and using sym^bols to break up words that looked like they  might trip a na^nny fil^ter.  we hypothesized from the content, timing and perceived intent of his posts that he was a drunk or homeless person posting from the public library or from a halfway house after just (i mean just becoming sober).  he has a hilarious y00t00b channel and his FB wall used to be public

Upright Bi-tard is another self-loather who would probably kill the pope in order to participate in a three way with GK Chesterton and C.S. Lewis.  He knows nothing much except that he is certain he is right.  Semantics and snipery, then long winded evasive rhetorical flanking maneuvers.  I think he and Stephen B probably meat up each other in real life but they have never said this overtly.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Nov. 29 2012,19:00

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

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,17:58   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 29 2012,18:00)
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,16:43)
I don't think it would be ethical of me to suggest that you open up page 1 of Uncommon Descent thread 1 and begin the journey. That first thread alone is 30,000 comments. You could lose too much of your life there. But it would probably be entertaining.

Actually, sometimes I open one of those old threads at random and read some pages; it's hilarious.

the entire UD saga is that good.  i don't know if i ever looked at page 1

but

somebody (I AM LOOKING AT THE ARCHIVIST) could easily work up a who's who of tard from those threads.  i would love to see that.

Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Nov. 29 2012,19:01

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

  
steve_h



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,18:12   

Dembski appears to have "disappeared" all of the "content" from www.designinference.com; Now it's just:

An expelled link (comments closed) about the persecution of christians.
A link to the "green fail site" (comments closed) - an anti-green site which consists only of content from  pro-green sites with similar urls edited towards a final conclusion that "green is bad".

Everthing else: gone.  Just like when behe closed his blog and recreated it  at uncommon descent sans all of the comments that disagreed/agreed with him.


The  Internet archive will continue to provide partial historical information about this site until Dembski's lawyers, hereonuntorwhatever referred to as the "bully" Barry "the bully" Arrington, petitions them to "do otherwise or else"

edited (within a few minutes) for emphasis. And again for Behe. Promise no more edits.

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 879
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,18:23   

Gil still turns up every few weeks/months to shout "B1!" or whatever.

BTW has anyone spotted Clive lately?

--------------
“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

  
keiths



Posts: 2040
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 29 2012,19:40   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Nov. 29 2012,16:23)
BTW has anyone spotted Clive lately?

I haven't seen him at UD for the last year or so. He's still listed as the principal of the Bible college, though.

--------------
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: 1651
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,00:50   

vjtorley has another post.  7,769 words this time.  It's about something.

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

‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1651
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,06:27   

Quote (Ptaylor @ Nov. 29 2012,18:23)
Gil still turns up every few weeks/months to shout "B1!" or whatever.

BTW has anyone spotted Clive lately?

You know who I haven't seen much lately?  Denyse.  I wonder if being a co-author with Dembski has gone to her head?  

I mean, it shouldn't, but what if it did?  What if she thinks she's just too good to post at UD* now that she's co-fucked up her second book?

People have had worse delusions.  For instance, I've heard that Michele** Bachmann thinks she's a member of congress.

*She is actually known to be one of the very few people in the entire world who is not too good to post at UD, along with everybody else who posts there.
**Michelle Bachmann if you're a Denver bill collector.

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

‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1651
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,06:31   

Ras: "bung is a deepcover poe or fully retarded spiteful self-loather.  knows nothing and is viciously proud of it.  also polluted TT before it died a PSCID like death"

He was also instrumental in killing ARN.

Bung went full retard.

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

‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2090
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,09:00   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 29 2012,22:50)
vjtorley has another post.  7,769 words this time.  It's about something.

I bet it isn't.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

  
Woodbine



Posts: 747
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,09:47   

Quote (steve_h @ Nov. 30 2012,00:12)
Dembski appears to have "disappeared" all of the "content" from www.designinference.com....

According to Dembski's egotastically long C.V. he's a 'full time' employee of the Discovery Institute and 'part time' at Southern Evangelical Seminary (aka the Meth Lab).

God knows how much the DI are paying him....whatever the amount it's not working. My understanding was that he was to release a second edition of NFL plus the book with Denyse; any sign of these?

  
onlooker



Posts: 17
Joined: Sep. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,11:51   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 30 2012,06:31)
Ras: "bung is a deepcover poe or fully retarded spiteful self-loather.  knows nothing and is viciously proud of it.  also polluted TT before it died a PSCID like death"

He was also instrumental in killing ARN.

Bung went full retard.

I may have to check out the old ARN threads for the lulz.  After a few bracing drinks, I imagine.

I see Mung as combining Joe's intellectual prowess with Barry's charm.  It took about two comments at UD before I stopped reading anything he wrote.

  
keiths



Posts: 2040
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,11:53   

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,10:48)
I was kinda curious how sincerely torley believes what he's saying, so I created a fiendishly good disguise Username that they'll never figure out is me (notstevestory) and posted this question:

Quote
Moreover, even in the case where the unborn child threatens its mother’s health, there is an important difference between the ac of expelling the child from her body (and thereby killing it) and the act of shooting an innocent zombie or malevolent individual who is endangering her health. In the former case, the mother wills to kill the unborn child by cutting it off from its normal means of life support; whereas in the latter, the mother wills to kill the attacker by cutting him down before he can reach her. I think that’s a morally relevant difference. So I would say that the fact that an unborn child is harming its mother’s health is not a sufficient ground to justify aborting it.


Ever? Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally, but causing Hypothetical Disease X, which has no known cure and is 100% lethal to the mother in 2 weeks if an abortion is not performed. Abort, or not?

--but my comment is in moderation so I thought I'd preserve it here. Just in case it somehow...accidentally...disappears.

Steve, you got a nibble:
Quote
Hi notstevestory,

In answer to your question, the purpose of my remark (which you quoted above) was to argue that a danger to the mother’s health per se was not a sufficient reason to justify abortion. If it were, then a mother could abort a fetus whose growth was robbing her bones of calcium, increasing her risk of developing osteoporosis. A threat to the mother’s life is a very different matter. Hope that helps.


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

  
JohnW



Posts: 2202
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,12:15   

Quote (keiths @ Nov. 30 2012,09:53)
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,10:48)
I was kinda curious how sincerely torley believes what he's saying, so I created a fiendishly good disguise Username that they'll never figure out is me (notstevestory) and posted this question:

Quote
Moreover, even in the case where the unborn child threatens its mother’s health, there is an important difference between the ac of expelling the child from her body (and thereby killing it) and the act of shooting an innocent zombie or malevolent individual who is endangering her health. In the former case, the mother wills to kill the unborn child by cutting it off from its normal means of life support; whereas in the latter, the mother wills to kill the attacker by cutting him down before he can reach her. I think that’s a morally relevant difference. So I would say that the fact that an unborn child is harming its mother’s health is not a sufficient ground to justify aborting it.


Ever? Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally, but causing Hypothetical Disease X, which has no known cure and is 100% lethal to the mother in 2 weeks if an abortion is not performed. Abort, or not?

--but my comment is in moderation so I thought I'd preserve it here. Just in case it somehow...accidentally...disappears.

Steve, you got a nibble:
Quote
Hi notstevestory,

In answer to your question, the purpose of my remark (which you quoted above) was to argue that a danger to the mother’s health per se was not a sufficient reason to justify abortion. If it were, then a mother could abort a fetus whose growth was robbing her bones of calcium, increasing her risk of developing osteoporosis. A threat to the mother’s life is a very different matter. Hope that helps.

...and some deep thought from Mung:
Quote
25 Mung November 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Quote
Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally… Abort, or not?

Say the fetus is at two months and developing normally but you’ve been invited to be in a wedding and don’t want to look fat. Abort, or not?

... because that happens all the time.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it.
- Robert Byers

  
onlooker



Posts: 17
Joined: Sep. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,12:34   

Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 30 2012,12:15)
Quote
25 Mung November 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Quote
Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally… Abort, or not?

Say the fetus is at two months and developing normally but you’ve been invited to be in a wedding and don’t want to look fat. Abort, or not?

... because that happens all the time.

Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally but will be homosexual.  Abort, or not?

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1254
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,12:40   

The Attack Gerbil has got a new fan: Gregory, whom I find far more honest and intelligent that the usual gang of IDiots, disses him in two threads. I'm hoping for an interesting development.

The Seattle debate is announced:  
Quote
I had lunch with Casey and have met him several times. Not a bad guy, but certainly not qualified or competent of high level discussion in philosophy of science (PoS). I’m sure he’d admit this is not his home field. Luskin is a lawyer with a degree in geology so that is not a surprise. Why Luskin’s pretense to pontificate on PoS (ID *is* science) at evolutionnews?

 
Quote
I teach this topic to 18-20 yr-old Eastern Europeans who are generally more developed in their understanding of PoS than Casey. This can be understood in part by the gross absence of courses in PoS in the USA. I doubt Casey ever took a course in PoS in his university studies (which doesn’t take away from his gigantic prowess as an attorney of Law).

 
Quote
That doesn’t make him a bad guy, just a guy one can’t trust or perhaps even take seriously on the topic of PoS.

 
Quote
2) Do you wish to say that you think Casey Luskin (law, geology) is qualified at (anywhere near) the highest level to teach about Philosophy of Science ?

3) I would be willing to publically debate Casey on much of what he wrote in his recent PoS article (“More on How We can Know…”) and on the topic “Is Intelligent Design Science?”. The conditions would be agreeable to him (re: editing/message control). But I don’t think he’d risk it, given his weakness in PoS. You can pass that challenge along to him if you’d like.


The Seattle debate is discussed:
 
Quote
(quoting Luskin; - Kattarina)“ID is indeed science, regardless of whether it is correct.”

What does that say for ‘science’? Oh, so po-mo…


--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10073
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,14:01   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Nov. 29 2012,17:58)
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 29 2012,18:00)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,16:43)
I don't think it would be ethical of me to suggest that you open up page 1 of Uncommon Descent thread 1 and begin the journey. That first thread alone is 30,000 comments. You could lose too much of your life there. But it would probably be entertaining.

Actually, sometimes I open one of those old threads at random and read some pages; it's hilarious.

the entire UD saga is that good.  i don't know if i ever looked at page 1

but

somebody (I AM LOOKING AT THE ARCHIVIST) could easily work up a who's who of tard from those threads.  i would love to see that.

Get a list of voulenteers and a list of IDists. Randomly assign - make a thread (read only) and assign a sticky?

profiles, classic comments, inability to learn or be wrong...

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

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1234
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,14:31   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 30 2012,12:40)
The Attack Gerbil has got a new fan: Gregory, whom I find far more honest and intelligent that the usual gang of IDiots, disses him in two threads. I'm hoping for an interesting development.


       
Quote
I teach this topic to 18-20 yr-old Eastern Europeans who are generally more developed in their understanding of PoS than Casey. This can be understood in part by the gross absence of courses in PoS in the USA. I doubt Casey ever took a course in PoS in his university studies (which doesn’t take away from his gigantic prowess as an attorney of Law).

   


<Emily Latella> Casey is an expert on PoS.

What, PoS means Philosophy of Science?

Nevermind.

</Emily Latella>

Edited by Tracy P. Hamilton on Nov. 30 2012,14:32

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

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

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

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,14:51   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,15:01)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Nov. 29 2012,17:58)
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 29 2012,18:00)
 
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 29 2012,16:43)
I don't think it would be ethical of me to suggest that you open up page 1 of Uncommon Descent thread 1 and begin the journey. That first thread alone is 30,000 comments. You could lose too much of your life there. But it would probably be entertaining.

Actually, sometimes I open one of those old threads at random and read some pages; it's hilarious.

the entire UD saga is that good.  i don't know if i ever looked at page 1

but

somebody (I AM LOOKING AT THE ARCHIVIST) could easily work up a who's who of tard from those threads.  i would love to see that.

Get a list of voulenteers and a list of IDists. Randomly assign - make a thread (read only) and assign a sticky?

profiles, classic comments, inability to learn or be wrong...

just figuring there was an automated way to do this.  like, push a button.  and stuff.

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 8826
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,16:35   

Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 30 2012,13:15)
Quote
25 Mung November 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
Quote
Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally… Abort, or not?

Say the fetus is at two months and developing normally but you’ve been invited to be in a wedding and don’t want to look fat. Abort, or not?

... because that happens all the time.

Ima reply to dat

   
REC



Posts: 552
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,16:53   

Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 30 2012,09:00)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 29 2012,22:50)
vjtorley has another post.  7,769 words this time.  It's about something.

I bet it isn't.

It really isn't. Skimmed the first 1/10th of it. Boo on me.  

VJ doesn't realize that quotes from the science education literature saying science has and will continue to proceed most usefully by invoking natural causes and quotes that IF it could be reliably and consistently documented that Jesus Christ is returning to Earth and fucking with my experiments that I'd have to invoke supernatural causes in science aren't contradictory.

There is an if in there.... But a priori, science is supernatural, ID wins, God done it, bleh bleh bleh.... and there's still 6000 words past where I tuned out.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10073
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,16:57   

Gah - now on the right thread:

There's a fire at a fertility clininc. You are in charge. there is only time to save either 10,000 embryos or 1 lab assistant. Which do you choose?

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
stevestory



Posts: 8826
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,17:29   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,17:57)
Gah - now on the right thread:

There's a fire at a fertility clininc. You are in charge. there is only time to save either 10,000 embryos or 1 lab assistant. Which do you choose?

I've often wondered if there were any anti-abortion nuts who would choose the embryos. Very unlikely. Wonder what their justification is, though?

My other question for them is, why not charge several dozen million american women with premeditated murder?

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10073
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,17:30   

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 30 2012,17:29)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,17:57)
Gah - now on the right thread:

There's a fire at a fertility clininc. You are in charge. there is only time to save either 10,000 embryos or 1 lab assistant. Which do you choose?

I've often wondered if there were any anti-abortion nuts who would choose the embryos. Very unlikely. Wonder what their justification is, though?

My other question for them is, why not charge several dozen million american women with premeditated murder?

Life begins at conception, I'm told.

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10073
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,17:33   

Mung:

Quote
I say let natural selection do it’s job.

Since we’re speaking hypothetically, maybe the fetus will develop an immunity and we can harvest the stem cells and save all future women from Disease X so they can go back to aborting their fetusus for arbitrary reasons instead of hypothetical medical reasons.


Okay Mung, should you get any 'fatal if not treated desease', you'll no doubt resist aid to further science. TARD.

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

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1254
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,17:35   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,16:57)
Gah - now on the right thread:

There's a fire at a fertility clininc. You are in charge. there is only time to save either 10,000 embryos or 1 lab assistant. Which do you choose?

If the lab assistant is lucky, it's a pregnant woman.

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
JLT



Posts: 740
Joined: Jan. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,18:32   

So, I still have the UD comments in my feed reader, although nowadays I mostly ignore them. But this one caught my eye.
Quote
JDH

So I think we already have proof of the supernatural.

1. Place X number of intelligent people in a room who all speak the same language.
2. Provide an accurate clock which can be seen by all.
3. Tell them them to raise their right hands precisely Y seconds from NOW.

Given our fore-knowledge of crowd behavior ( see for exapmle films of the Nazi army before Hitler ) we can assume such an experiment would be successful ( all right hands raised in the precise time as humanly measured ) and that X and Y are completely arbitrary ( space and time constraints allowing ).

I contend there is no natural explanation for the above.

1. From what we know about human beings, it was a voluntary response to raise the right hand ( they have the ability to NOT do). We can show this by before hand telling an arbitrary population of the group that they will receive 1 million dollars if they do not follow the command given.
2. There is no conceivable natural way that the mere speaking of the words at T=0 formed a natural set of preconditions in all X people causing the raising of the right hand at T=Y. This solution is highly improbable.
3. Therefore it only makes sense that the X people made a willful decision to tie some abstract future event ( the ticking of clock hands arbitrarily forward in time ) to a willful act of raising their hands.
4. But booth of the above willful acts ( deciding to tie the act to a future event, and executing the act at that time ) being determined by an immaterial will lies outside the realm of the natural and are supernatural events.
5. Thus the existence of the supernatural is proven.

TL;DR: people raising their hands when told to do so proves the existence of the supernatural (and Jesus, presumably).

I just had to post this, it's such a fine example of pure and undiluted TARD, brought tears to my eyes.

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

  
khan



Posts: 1479
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,18:43   

Pardon my female orientation, but I do despise the fucking fundie fetus fetishists (vast overlap with creationists, AGW denialists...)

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

  
khan



Posts: 1479
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,18:44   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,18:30)
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 30 2012,17:29)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 30 2012,17:57)
Gah - now on the right thread:

There's a fire at a fertility clininc. You are in charge. there is only time to save either 10,000 embryos or 1 lab assistant. Which do you choose?

I've often wondered if there were any anti-abortion nuts who would choose the embryos. Very unlikely. Wonder what their justification is, though?

My other question for them is, why not charge several dozen million american women with premeditated murder?

Life begins at conception, I'm told.

Life begins when he rolls over and goes to sleep.

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

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 1651
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,18:46   

25 Mung November 29, 2012 at 6:23 pm
 
Quote

Say the fetus is at two months, and developing normally… Abort, or not?

Say the fetus is at two months and developing normally but you’ve been invited to be in a wedding and don’t want to look fat. Abort, or not?

Say the fetus is at two months and developing normally but it will turn into Mung.  Abort.

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

‘Anything is a “real possibility” in the mind of one seeking to deny the obvious.’ – William J Murray

  
Patrick



Posts: 549
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 30 2012,19:44   

Quote (JLT @ Nov. 30 2012,19:32)
So, I still have the UD comments in my feed reader, although nowadays I mostly ignore them. But this one caught my eye.
 
Quote
JDH

So I think we already have proof of the supernatural.

1. Place X number of intelligent people in a room who all speak the same language.
2. Provide an accurate clock which can be seen by all.
3. Tell them them to raise their right hands precisely Y seconds from NOW.

Given our fore-knowledge of crowd behavior ( see for exapmle films of the Nazi army before Hitler ) we can assume such an experiment would be successful ( all right hands raised in the precise time as humanly measured ) and that X and Y are completely arbitrary ( space and time constraints allowing ).

I contend there is no natural explanation for the above.

1. From what we know about human beings, it was a voluntary response to raise the right hand ( they have the ability to NOT do). We can show this by before hand telling an arbitrary population of the group that they will receive 1 million dollars if they do not follow the command given.
2. There is no conceivable natural way that the mere speaking of the words at T=0 formed a natural set of preconditions in all X people causing the raising of the right hand at T=Y. This solution is highly improbable.
3. Therefore it only makes sense that the X people made a willful decision to tie some abstract future event ( the ticking of clock hands arbitrarily forward in time ) to a willful act of raising their hands.
4. But booth of the above willful acts ( deciding to tie the act to a future event, and executing the act at that time ) being determined by an immaterial will lies outside the realm of the natural and are supernatural events.
5. Thus the existence of the supernatural is proven.

TL;DR: people raising their hands when told to do so proves the existence of the supernatural (and Jesus, presumably).

I just had to post this, it's such a fine example of pure and undiluted TARD, brought tears to my eyes.

Ahh, that's the good stuff.  Slipping in "immaterial will" takes it from the ridiculous to the sublime.

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < ... 241 242 243 244 245 [246] 247 248 249 250 251 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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