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 3

Pages: (501) < ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... >

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,10:46    zachriel is just repeating what the solarists would have you believe.  yet they repress all other points of view. -------------- 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

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,12:13    LOL: Quote 1 osteonectin 10/13/2009 11:21 am Quote How important pedantry is depends on the believability or significance of the body of evidence. Indeed, e.g. when one compares Thylacine and modern wolfves. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

dnmlthr Posts: 565 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,14:34    Quote A mathematician is a device for turning coffee into theorems. -- Paul Erdös (or perhaps Alfréd Rényi) Mathematics violates SLoT, clear as day. -------------- Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

keiths Posts: 2195 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,19:06    Denyse is some kind of (im)moral freak: Quote If neuroscience claims to tell us whether Jimmy “the jimslamm” is lying, well, yes of course he is. If his lips are moving and intelligible sounds are coming out of his mouth, he is lying. I’ve dealt with lots of people like him so I can tell you for free and save you trouble. -------------- 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

sledgehammer Posts: 533 Joined: Sep. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,19:44    [quote=dvunkannon,Oct. 13 2009,08:44]   Quote Enriched Corn Meal (Corn Meal, Ferrous Sulfate, Niacin, Thiamin Monoitrate, Riboflavin, and Frolic Acid), <snip>Ingredients. Does the package actually say "Frolic Acid"? That and MSG is a dangerous combination, but would explain a lot.[/qoute] That was the best kind of acid evah. The favorite of the Merry Pranksters.  Even better than Owsley's. -------------- 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

sledgehammer Posts: 533 Joined: Sep. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,19:54    Quote (Zachriel @ Oct. 13 2009,07:16)   Quote niwrad: But the entropic order is not true organization and as such cannot account for the complexity of organisms, which are highly organized systems... ID theory says that organization is different from the simple energy decrease in entropy because the former implies CSI while the latter doesn’t. Ouch.  Doesn't it hurt when you do the stoopid, nirwad? -------------- 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

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,22:04    Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 13 2009,17:54)   Quote (Zachriel @ Oct. 13 2009,07:16)     Quote niwrad: But the entropic order is not true organization and as such cannot account for the complexity of organisms, which are highly organized systems... ID theory says that organization is different from the simple energy decrease in entropy because the former implies CSI while the latter doesn’t. Ouch.  Doesn't it hurt when you do the stoopid, nirwad? BTW, since when is Niwrad a contributor to UD?  Is this his first post? ETA: Nevermind.  I just re-read the first sentence of this one: Quote Since in my last post a commenter put on the table thermodynamics to support evolution I decided to offer my personal answer in a specific post, although UD already dealt with this issue. Guess I just failed to notice him previously. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,22:45    Osteonectin appears to be courting a bannination. Osty's added a follow up to his earlier Thylacine crack:   Quote Obviously, ID is robust enough to allow for some sloppiness and thus doesn’t require as much pedantry as natural sciences. To quote Dr. Dembski:   Quote [...] it’s not ID’s task to match your pathetic level of detail [...] (http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi....152;p=3) So far, that and the earlier one are the only two comments on Densey's pedantry post. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2009,23:05    Well of course changes in energy and entropy are separate from changes in organization. Metabolism does the first two, growth and reproduction involve both. Evolution is a side effect of reproduction, and any entropy changes connected to it are swamped by the much more prominant entropy changes associated with metabolism and growth. Henry

steve_h Posts: 544 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,06:05    I can't find the "pathetic level of detail quote" on that page - or that thread in the index.  If I switch to a different page, I get the same page again. Has there been some sort of tragic accident at ISCID?

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,06:18    Quote (steve_h @ Oct. 14 2009,06:05) I can't find the "pathetic level of detail quote" on that page - or that thread in the index.  If I switch to a different page, I get the same page again. Has there been some sort of tragic accident at ISCID? http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi....=000035 or maybe this? http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000152-p-3.html -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,06:29    Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 14 2009,04:18) Quote (steve_h @ Oct. 14 2009,06:05) I can't find the "pathetic level of detail quote" on that page - or that thread in the index.  If I switch to a different page, I get the same page again. Has there been some sort of tragic accident at ISCID? http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi....=000035 or maybe this? http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-6-t-000152-p-3.html Sorry.  The original post on UD had tacked a parenthesis onto the URL.  I fixed it in my quote above.  The Dembski post in question is about halfway down the page. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

Maya Posts: 702 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,06:56    Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 13 2009,19:54) Quote (Zachriel @ Oct. 13 2009,07:16)   Quote niwrad: But the entropic order is not true organization and as such cannot account for the complexity of organisms, which are highly organized systems... ID theory says that organization is different from the simple energy decrease in entropy because the former implies CSI while the latter doesn’t. Ouch.  Doesn't it hurt when you do the stoopid, nirwad? I need to keep my brain tard-free this week, but has anyone with an active sock noted in that thread that no one has yet calculated CSI for, well, anything?

dvunkannon Posts: 1377 Joined: June 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,07:03    I think it is interesting to see UDers such as niwrad and DLH acknowledge the Stryer and Bunn papers on evolution and SLOT. Here's my prediction: These papers are so short and simple that they are very difficult to dispute. Instead, they will be absorbed into the creationist Borg almost whole. Remember how plate tectonics and evolution were fiercely resisted, and then suddenly the argument got switched around that they happened at fantastically high rates during and after the Flood? The same thing will happen here. Bunn concludes that evolution had to take at least 10^7 seconds for SLOT to be safe, less than a year! With a little shaving of an order of magnitude here and there, AiG will get that down to six days. Voila! Now they will argue that their theory is equally well suppported by this argument, therefore the argument is worthless to choose between theories. Not that anyone ever used SLOT to criticize YEC, of course! -------------- I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

Reciprocating Bill Posts: 4265 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,08:23    WAD's perfect apologetics: Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. -------------- 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

Erasmus, FCD Posts: 6349 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,08:27    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,09:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. he doesn't believe anything is real. just like plantigna who has devised fanciful gloryhole bait and switch tactics to deny that very point these guys probly think they will walk on water someday -------------- 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

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,08:35    And this Quote As I note in THE END OF CHRISTIANITY, I would be a young-earth creationist in a heart-beat if I didn’t see the evidence for an old earth as so strong. The young-earth old-earth debate, however, is only about 20 percent of the book. Most of it will be of interest to Christians of either stripe and even to theistic evolutionists. hahaha. There is no *debate* to be had over a young earth, unless you are totally deluded. -------------- I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies". FTK if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand Gordon Mullings

Bob O'H Posts: 2564 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,08:58    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,08:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. wMad sounds like a frustrated SF writer. -------------- It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

Amadan Posts: 1337 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,09:20    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,08:23) wMad sounds like a frustrated SF writer. Hmmmmm. Now there's an idea... -------------- "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.

RDK Posts: 229 Joined: Aug. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,10:04    Wait, WTF?  The Design Inference, No Free Lunch, and The End of Christianity aren't science fiction? Goddammit.  I want my money back. -------------- If you are not: Leviathan please Logout under Meta in the sidebar. ‘‘I was like ‘Oh my God! It’s Jesus on a banana!’’  - Lisa Swinton, Jesus-eating pagan

didymos Posts: 1828 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,10:15    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,06:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. That's a Star Trek episode. -------------- I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

FrankH Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:13    Quote (didymos @ Oct. 14 2009,10:15) Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,06:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. That's a Star Trek episode. No, I think it became a religion. "Dianetics" anyone? -------------- Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

keiths Posts: 2195 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:27    Dr. Dr.: Quote ...the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. Including entropy.  The 2nd Law is a result of the Fall. Take note, niwrad. This means that prior to the Fall, Adam and Eve could unstir their soup. Evolution would have happened if they hadn't eaten the forbidden fruit.  Thus, ultimately, the Darwinists are wrong for the same reason that certain adolescent boys masturbate compulsively, which is the same reason that certain other adolescent boys post phony book reviews on Amazon and turn people in to the Department of Homeland Security. Help us, Jesus! Thank you.  I will accept my Doctorate of Divinity now. -------------- 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

khan Posts: 1554 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:34    Quote (keiths @ Oct. 14 2009,12:27) Dr. Dr.: Quote ...the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. Including entropy.  The 2nd Law is a result of the Fall. Take note, niwrad. This means that prior to the Fall, Adam and Eve could unstir their soup. Evolution would have happened if they hadn't eaten the forbidden fruit.  Thus, ultimately, the Darwinists are wrong for the same reason that certain adolescent boys masturbate compulsively, which is the same reason that certain other adolescent boys post phony book reviews on Amazon and turn people in to the Department of Homeland Security. Help us, Jesus! Thank you.  I will accept my Doctorate of Divinity now. A fine thesis indeed. -------------- "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 Frequency is just the plural of wavelength... -JoeG

dmso74 Posts: 110 Joined: Aug. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:38    Over on Corny's blog, he's now claiming that Ken Miller would agree with the doctrinal statement of Biola University: doctrinal statement i think he would def agree with the part about how humans were specially created and share no common ancestry with other animals (in the explanatory note section). the thylacine-wolf debacle really was a window into the twisted lying tard that is Corny linky

bfish Posts: 267 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:46    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,06:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. As if it's not fucked up enough that you can be eternally punished for something your great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great-great grandfather did eons before you were even born, NOW you can be eternally punished for something your great-great-great-great grandson did ages after you were dead. As Kyle would say, "That's fucked up, right there." ETA: Guess I'm not used to thinking through my YEC logistics. I was thinking Flood, but Dembski's talking about the Fall, so the retroactive effects were not on humans, but on the beasts and, um, rocks and stuff.

deadman_932 Posts: 3094 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,11:49    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2009,08:23) WAD's perfect apologetics:   Quote My approach, in a nutshell, is to argue that just as the salvation in Christ at the Cross saves backward in time as well as forward (the OT saints were saved in virtue of the Cross), so the effects of the Fall can be retroactive. This, it seems to me, preserves the most important thing that young-earth creationism has attempted to preserve, namely, that the sin of Adam brought ruin on the human race and on the physical world. That is lunatic talk. -------------- AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

FrankH Posts: 525 Joined: Feb. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,12:37    Has anyone tried to start a thread at UD where there are multiple design style so therefore multiple designs? One could start with the differences in the Squids' eye vs the Mammalian one.  One has a more competent designer as the blood vessels are are behind the layer of light gathering cells instead of infront of it..... -------------- Marriage is not a lifetime commitment, it's a life sentence!

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,12:41    Quote (FrankH @ Oct. 14 2009,12:37) Has anyone tried to start a thread at UD where there are multiple design style so therefore multiple designs? One could start with the differences in the Squids' eye vs the Mammalian one.  One has a more competent designer as the blood vessels are are behind the layer of light gathering cells instead of infront of it..... ID is not a mechanistic theory, and it's not ID's task to match your pathetic level of detail in telling mechanistic stories. Or so I'm told. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2009,12:47    I suppose I should have put that in quotes, but who could mistake the authorship? -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Pages: (501) < ... 29 30 31 32 33 [34] 35 36 37 38 39 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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