Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Uncommonly Dense Thread 4

Pages: (356) < ... 246 247 248 249 250 [251] 252 253 254 255 256 ... >

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 01 2013,22:11    In other words, while Paley could argue without invoking analogy (partly because he didn't actually deal with all of the obviously non-designed aspects of life) because he was actually discussing what seemed to him to actually be what an architect or artificer would produce, today's IDiots can only argue from analogy because they don't identify anything like aspects of real design in life. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,10:45    So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*.

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,20:43    Cornelius says that genetics is falsified by horizontal genetic transfer in eukaryotes. Oh, did I write "genetics"?  No, it's never anything but evolution that is falsified by any new knowledge.  The dispassionate search for knowledge continues... Is there any sin against intellectual honesty that this hypocritical know-it-all doesn't commit?  And why doesn't Gaga try to team up with such a similar loser? Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,21:55    Quote Cornelius says that genetics is falsified by horizontal genetic transfer in eukaryotes. What? But genetics is a subject, not a hypothesis. Henry

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,22:36    Lewontin! Kairosfocus is dissatisfied with Wikipedia.

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,22:58    Quote (CeilingCat @ Jan. 02 2013,22:36) Lewontin! Kairosfocus is dissatisfied with Wikipedia. It's a well known fact that if you say the same thing over and over it becomes true. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

sparc Posts: 2088 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 02 2013,23:03    Quote (CeilingCat @ Jan. 02 2013,22:36) Lewontin! Kairosfocus is dissatisfied with Wikipedia. He's even dissatisfied with potential commenters at UD Quote Comments are closed. -------------- "[...] 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 -

MichaelJ Posts: 462 Joined: June 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,06:02    Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 03 2013,01:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. No wonder Denyse jumped ship. She was probably paid a share of the revenue.

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,07:45    Quote (CeilingCat @ Jan. 02 2013,22:36) Lewontin! Kairosfocus is dissatisfied with Wikipedia. Oh dear lord! I can't imagine anyone having the patience to read that drivel past the first 100 words. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,07:52    Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 02 2013,10:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. Just curious, but what does the Rank mean? Is that as in "first most popular, second most popular,..." and so on? If so, I wonder what other blogs are being ranked against it. I mean, what constitutes a popular religious blog? And how does one drop to 300,000th most popular? EEP! Also, I can't help but wonder what the average amount of time viewing UD per visit is along with the pages per visit. I bet few, if any, folks go browsing through the site any more. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Robin Posts: 1431 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,07:56    Quote (sparc @ Jan. 02 2013,23:03) Quote (CeilingCat @ Jan. 02 2013,22:36) Lewontin! Kairosfocus is dissatisfied with Wikipedia. He's even dissatisfied with potential commenters at UD   Quote Comments are closed. Not entirely... Quote PS: To comment on this post, please go to the discussion thread here, for the root article. So there is a discussion going on about the post, it's just a continuation from a previous whine-fest. -------------- we IDists rule in design for the flagellum and cilium largely because they do look designed.  Bilbo The only reason you reject Thor is because, like a cushion, you bear the imprint of the biggest arse that sat on you. Louis

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,13:59    Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 02 2013,11:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. made my day -------------- 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

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,14:35    Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 02 2013,16:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. The March spike might be car-crash gawkers after the LNC/DrREC debacle. The Aug/Oct ones might be 'TSZ-and-Jerad' or similar finger-pointing across the canyon. Which certainly supports a hypothesis that most UD traffic is generated by people who think it's baloney - and, further, that bannination is actually good for business, if not credibility. KF needs to dream something else up, pronto. -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

REC Posts: 638 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,14:37    Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Jan. 03 2013,13:59) Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 02 2013,11:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. made my day I'm beating a not only dead, but now decaying horse, but don't forget the hundreds of daily visits from google image searches for "scoville dangerous" or "dangerous pepper" and related searches that lead to a UD post as the top hit. I think that this embarrassment led to the deletion of the "Daily Popular" box. They seem to have reset the counts on that page several times, also. Subtract that traffic, and you've got a very few idiots mumbling to themselves.

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,14:55    pettily, i am pleased by the apparent impending demise of UD as a money making venture for dishonest shitherders like Harry Barrington and Tranmaw and on a more positive note, i was greatly served by finding my tard somewhere else for a while.  there is soooooooo much of the good shit out there that it seems silly to try to talk sense into dipshits with logorrhea.   do you know just how many JoeG type assfaces there are in the world?  hooboy.  i got a rolodex -------------- 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

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,16:42    JoeGs are like electrons. Possibly there is just one that time travels. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 03 2013,18:05    Quote (midwifetoad @ Jan. 03 2013,14:42) JoeGs are like electrons. Possibly there is just one that time travels. The Joe G's of the world are more like the slowest, densest particle known: the moron. -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

damitall Posts: 331 Joined: Jan. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,04:01    Quote (MichaelJ @ Jan. 03 2013,06:02) Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 03 2013,01:45) So, there's this site.... Attention Meter ....that apparently aggregates the data from a bunch of different web-traffic thingies. Here are the stats for Uncommonly Dense.... Looks good to me. If only people would stop giving in to temptation and actually engaging the fools those graphs would look even healthier - you know who you are *scowls*. No wonder Denyse jumped ship. She was probably paid a share of the revenue. Quite obviously, Densey's departure has ACCELERATED the decline in visits. She was, after all, an inexhaustible mine of comedy tard and ignorance, and unintentionally brightened many a gloomy day by posting the most amazing rubbish

REC Posts: 638 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,13:20    Evidence for damitall's hypothesis: O'Leary's transfer to www.thebestschools.org/bestschoolsblog coincides with a dramatic increase in traffic. Looks like it is pulling 4X the unique visitors to UD, and beats it in rank by ~250,000 sites. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/embed_c....m

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,15:20    Quote (REC @ Jan. 04 2013,19:20) Evidence for damitall's hypothesis: O'Leary's transfer to www.thebestschools.org/bestschoolsblog coincides with a dramatic increase in traffic. Looks like it is pulling 4X the unique visitors to UD, and beats it in rank by ~250,000 sites. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/embed_c...._c....m Confirming part of the hypothesis. The more worrying part is that people may be following her because of the rock-solid common sense she gives out. -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,15:31    i have never.  ever.  ever.  met someone who said "you know that tranmaw, it write real good and i likes to read it" or any variant thereof how likely is it that it just knows how to linkfarm blogwhore enough to get stats like that by itself? Edited by Erasmus, FCD on Jan. 04 2013,16:31 -------------- 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

Soapy Sam Posts: 659 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,15:39    Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Jan. 04 2013,21:31) i have never.  ever.  ever.  met someone who said "you know that tranmaw, it write real good and i likes to read it" or any variant thereof how likely is it that it just knows how to linkfarm blogwhore enough to get stats like that by itself? Mebbe so. But nothing would surprise me in Mirrorworld, where horseshit is the finest gravy. I have seen people write admiringly of KF and BA77, claiming they read them closely, f'rinstance. They may have been lying. -------------- SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,15:42    Quote (Soapy Sam @ Jan. 04 2013,14:20) Quote (REC @ Jan. 04 2013,19:20) Evidence for damitall's hypothesis: O'Leary's transfer to www.thebestschools.org/bestschoolsblog coincides with a dramatic increase in traffic. Looks like it is pulling 4X the unique visitors to UD, and beats it in rank by ~250,000 sites. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/embed_c...._c....m Confirming part of the hypothesis. The more worrying part is that people may be following her because of the rock-solid common sense she gives out. Maybe she gave it all out and didn't keep any for herself?

Quack Posts: 1961 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,16:08    Quote I have seen people write admiringly of KF and BA77, claiming they read them closely, f'rinstance. They may have been lying. Or worse, much worse. You don't have to be an idiot to tell a lie. (You don't have to be a baby to cry, all you need is for love to go wrong. Remember that song?) -------------- Rocks have no biology.               Robert Byers.

Reciprocating Bill Posts: 4265 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,16:44    VJ asks: "How many things can dance on the head of a thing?" Link [edited for tinyurlness] Edited by Reciprocating Bill on Jan. 04 2013,17:58 -------------- 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

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 04 2013,17:48    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 04 2013,14:44) VJ asks: "How many things can dance on the head of a thing?" Link [edited for tinyurlness] Fascinating...  so Poof! has been established to everyone's satisfaction, and UD is now discussing which kind of Poof! it was. All science so far. -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

damitall Posts: 331 Joined: Jan. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 05 2013,04:40    Quote (REC @ Jan. 04 2013,13:20) Evidence for damitall's hypothesis: O'Leary's transfer to www.thebestschools.org/bestschoolsblog coincides with a dramatic increase in traffic. Looks like it is pulling 4X the unique visitors to UD, and beats it in rank by ~250,000 sites. http://siteanalytics.compete.com/embed_c...._c....m There's a corollary to my hypothesis, viz; Densey is (most likely) female: females are not really welcome in religious fundy groups of any type, except to make coffee and cupcakes and supply - er - certain personal services (sorry about that, - brain-bleach is readily available) There have been very few female posters at UD One only has to remember how the mild-mannered and generous Dr Liddle (Febble) was treated at UD - much of which was because,  am convinced, she is a female, and a smart one at that.

olegt Posts: 1405 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 05 2013,12:05    Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 04 2013,17:48)   Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 04 2013,14:44) VJ asks: "How many things can dance on the head of a thing?" Link [edited for tinyurlness] Fascinating...  so Poof! has been established to everyone's satisfaction, and UD is now discussing which kind of Poof! it was. All science so far. A preview of coming attractions:   Quote According to Professor Feser, creation is entirely a top-down process. God can make a man from dust simply by saying, “Dust, become a man.” In so doing, He does not – indeed, could not – achieve His result by tinkering with the dust particles. I maintain, on the contrary, that in the process of making a man from dust, God would have to rearrange the dust particles from the bottom up, while simultaneously bestowing the substantial form of a man on the underlying (prime) matter. Simply telling dust to become a man fails to specify what kind of man God wants – e.g. how tall he should be, what blood type he should have, what kind of face he should have, and so on. It also fails to specify the micro-level properties of the man in question – e.g. how many cells his body should have, and exactly what sequence of bases he should have in his DNA. Torley has way too much time on his hands. -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 05 2013,13:30    Quote (olegt @ Jan. 05 2013,10:05) Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 04 2013,17:48)   Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 04 2013,14:44) VJ asks: "How many things can dance on the head of a thing?" Link [edited for tinyurlness] Fascinating...  so Poof! has been established to everyone's satisfaction, and UD is now discussing which kind of Poof! it was. All science so far. A preview of coming attractions:   Quote According to Professor Feser, creation is entirely a top-down process. God can make a man from dust simply by saying, “Dust, become a man.” In so doing, He does not – indeed, could not – achieve His result by tinkering with the dust particles. I maintain, on the contrary, that in the process of making a man from dust, God would have to rearrange the dust particles from the bottom up, while simultaneously bestowing the substantial form of a man on the underlying (prime) matter. Simply telling dust to become a man fails to specify what kind of man God wants – e.g. how tall he should be, what blood type he should have, what kind of face he should have, and so on. It also fails to specify the micro-level properties of the man in question – e.g. how many cells his body should have, and exactly what sequence of bases he should have in his DNA. Torley has way too much time on his hands. I didn't come from no stinkin' bottom! -------------- Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

olegt Posts: 1405 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 05 2013,14:02    Torley posts another very long essay. It contains, inter alia, this bit of wisdom: Quote Corpses constitute a severe problem for Thomistic metaphysics. According to Aquinas, a living human being has one and only one substantial form, the soul, which grounds all of that human being’s biological and physicochemical properties. When a human being dies, the soul ceases to inform the body, which then becomes a corpse: a new form (that of a dead body) replaces the old one (the human soul). After death, the soul and the biological and physicochemical properties associated with it no longer remain. Aquinas and modern-day Thomists like Professor Feser hold that the only thing which still remains of the old human being after death is prime matter, which is matter devoid of any form whatsoever, and hence devoid of any positive features. Thus a corpse has absolutely nothing positive in common with the living person whose body it once was. In my opinion (and that of most medieval philosophers), this position of Aquinas’ is a very counter-intuitive notion. Since the only thing remaining after death – prime matter – lacks any positive attributes of its own, it is a profound mystery why a corpse should retain the size and weight of the person whose body it once was, even after that person’s death. Why do these positive properties remain? Thomistic metaphysics gives us absolutely no reason to expect that they should. Man's capacity for mental masturbation is absolutely amazing. -------------- If you are not: Galapagos Finch please Logout »

Pages: (356) < ... 246 247 248 249 250 [251] 252 253 254 255 256 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard