RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (527) < ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 5, Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
paragwinn



Posts: 539
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 22 2014,21:54   

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 22 2014,19:07)
P.S. JAD is dead, otherwise opening the portal would serve them right. An opportunity missed.

Pehaps JAD's disembodied non-materialist mind will acquire the ability to manipulate the levers insides someone's brain, such that of Barry or Gordon, in order to remind us that Mind is Universal and Eternal and to write that down. If we are especially good boys and girls, maybe he'll let us in on the D/designer's nature.

--------------
All women build up a resistance [to male condescension]. Apparently, ID did not predict that. -Kristine 4-19-11
F/Ns to F/Ns to F/Ns etc. The whole thing is F/N ridiculous -Seversky on KF footnote fetish 8-20-11
Sigh. Really Bill? - Barry Arrington

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,01:02   

Quote
15
NewsOctober 22, 2014 at 7:12 pm
Barry Arrington at 4 and 10: Busy here. Islamist attack.


Wow. Denyse fighting Isamists! Gordon facing constitutional criseseses!

They are like Teh_Abengors: Crack Widow, Bore, .. but where's Banner gone?

--------------
"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: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,14:35   

The whole thread - for your enjoyment -

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196

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

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,15:27   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,12:35)
The whole thread - for your enjoyment -

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196

Utter magnificence from Joe:
Quote
23 Joe October 23, 2014 at 12:29 pm
Alan Fox:
Quote
Now, I can go to many sources and learn about evolutionary theory.

Yet you cannot link to this alleged evolutionary theory. Last you said is we have to read several books and papers and put it together.

Science is hard.  Too much reading.  Too much thinking.

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

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,16:29   

Barry is starting a meltdown again:
Quote
Answer the question Tin. Is DNA complex like the excerpt from Timon of Athens or is it simple like the snippit from the monkey simulation?

You know that after you have answered the question (we all know what the answer is after all), I will demonstrate how the premise of the question is not faulty and destroy your blind faith.

You cannot contemplate having your faith destroyed. You are afraid. That is why you refuse to answer. Coward.

All of this because Tintinnid refused to answer a loaded question. Tintinnid explained this to him and received the following in return:
Quote
Tin @ 31. You’ve been downgraded from “coward” to “pathetic sniveling coward.” We’re done.

And finally:
Quote
tintinnidOctober 23, 2014 at 3:18 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.

I guess this is the end of the amnesty. But at least it lasted two days. And I guess that I also outed myself.

LinkLink

  
socle



Posts: 322
Joined: July 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,16:52   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 23 2014,16:29)
Barry is starting a meltdown again:
   
Quote
Tin @ 31. You’ve been downgraded from “coward” to “pathetic sniveling coward.” We’re done.

Jesus.  He's really lost control of himself.

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,17:42   

Quote (socle @ Oct. 23 2014,16:52)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 23 2014,16:29)
Barry is starting a meltdown again:
   
Quote
Tin @ 31. You’ve been downgraded from “coward” to “pathetic sniveling coward.” We’re done.

Jesus.  He's really lost control of himself.

You should actually read the OP and the string of comments. Barry is acting like a spoiled little kid being told that he can't have ice cream.

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,17:47   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,19:35)
The whole thread - for your enjoyment -

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196

Wow. Quoting WJM on ID being the one that actually does the math*.  That's Chutzpah.


*Except when girls ask. Or boys pretending to be girls.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,17:56   

as someone (i forget who) recently reminded us:

Quote
In the next five years, molecular Darwinism—the idea that Darwinian processes can produce complex molecular structures at the subcellular level—will be dead. When that happens, evolutionary biology will experience a crisis of confidence because evolutionary biology hinges on the evolution of the right molecules. I therefore foresee a Taliban-style collapse of Darwinism in the next ten years. Intelligent design will of course profit greatly from this.

--William Dembski, ten years ago

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,19:31   

He did get the Taliban style collapse right.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1180
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,20:37   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,10:42)
     
Quote (socle @ Oct. 23 2014,16:52)
     
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 23 2014,16:29)
Barry is starting a meltdown again:
           
Quote
Tin @ 31. You’ve been downgraded from “coward” to “pathetic sniveling coward.” We’re done.

Jesus.  He's really lost control of himself.

You should actually read the OP and the string of comments. Barry is acting like a spoiled little kid being told that he can't have ice cream.

That and what stevestory just said.
The post and subsequent comments underscore what a dismal failure ID has been over the years. None of the five year goals given in the Wedge Document have been achieved and as we are getting closer to the 20 year mark none of the longer term goals look anywhere close to being fulfilled either. Intelligent design has gained no traction in the scientific community as far as I can tell, and the more influential people from that world - the very folk who they would hope to come around to and endorse their point of view - are vilified by ID supporters.
No, ten years on and Barry can't point to any real successes, no court room victories, no mainstream educational syllabus changes, no new high profile scientific converts - all he has got to declare after 10 years is that no-one has been able to sway him from his opinion that he dint come from no monkey.

ETA - Opinions expressed here have been conveyed much more eloquently - and charitably - by Learned Hand here (UD link). Worth a read IMO.

Edited by Ptaylor on Oct. 24 2014,15:17

--------------
We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.”
-PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 23 2014,23:45   

Here is a wonderful comment from fifthmonarchyman:

Quote
The burden of proof is on those who would deny the existence of non computable things.


1. Non computable things exist.
2. CSI can't be computed.
3. Therefore CSI exists.

Also works for gods and bilenkenhoffs.

I hope fifthmonarchyman is genuine.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,02:00   

Wonderful indeed!

What now remains for CSI aficionados is to test their pet hypothesis by the calculation of the CSI of any subject of their chosing. Is that too much to ask? Wouldn't that be the proper way of doing it, sciency, like?

Doesn't the claim that there are objects of complexity beyond computability imply that there are objects below that limit, and therefore are computable?

A demonstration of the computability of CSI therefore is what the world needs right now. The world is waiting for the Sunrise, according to Les Paul and Mary Ford.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,08:23   

Quote (Driver @ Oct. 23 2014,18:47)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,19:35)
The whole thread - for your enjoyment -

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196

Wow. Quoting WJM on ID being the one that actually does the math*.  That's Chutzpah.


*Except when girls ask. Or boys pretending to be girls.

Yeah, like anyone would do that.

  
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,10:58   

While I don't encourage supporting Intelligent Design Creationism by giving Uncommon Descent page hits, if you're going to argue CSI with IDCists, here are some links I've found valuable:

- Dembski's original CSI paper, Specification: The Pattern That Signifies Intelligence
- VJ Torley's first calculation of CSI, in which he gets the wrong answer and shows how known evolutionary mechanisms can, in fact, generate it.
- Several threads at The Skeptical Zone discussing CSI and identifying some very core problems.

When confronted with challenges to actually calculate CSI, the IDCists tend to retreat in a few standard ways.
1) Deny that CSI can be calculated, as VJ Torley did after getting the "wrong" answer.  This directly contradicts Dembski's claims and equations.
2) Present some alternative metric (dFSCI, FSCO/I, etc.) that they then also fail to calculate.
3) Claim to have already done so, but either fail to provide links to the calculation or provide links to sites that don't actually contain calculations.

If you're going to give the IDCists attention, please hold their feet to the fire regarding a mathematically rigorous definition of what they are calculating, whether or not their metric is in fact the same as Dembski's, and how that metric can be objectively calculated.

You won't get an answer from any of them, but it's mildly amusing to watch them squirm.  Plus, while they're answering you they have less time to push their anti-science agenda on local school boards.

ETA: The alternative metrics that the IDCists propose, when they are rigorous at all, tend to assume a completely random mechanism with a uniform distribution.  In other words, they completely fail to model evolution in any way.

Edited by Patrick on Oct. 24 2014,12:16

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,11:00   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 24 2014,10:58)
While I don't encourage supporting Intelligent Design Creationism by giving Uncommon Descent page hits, if you're going to argue CSI with IDCists, here are some links I've found valuable:

- Dembski's original CSI paper, <i>Specification: The Pattern That Signifies Intelligence</i>
- VJ Torley's first calculation of CSI, in which he gets the wrong answer and shows how known evolutionary mechanisms can, in fact, generate it.
- Several threads at The Skeptical Zone discussing CSI and identifying some very core problems.

When confronted with challenges to actually calculate CSI, the IDCists tend to retreat in a few standard ways.
1) Deny that CSI can be calculated, as [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-csi-scanner-or-reasonable-and-unreasonable-demands-relating-

to-complex-specified-information/]VJ Torley did[/URL] after getting the "wrong" answer.  This directly contradicts Dembski's claims and equations.
2) Present some alternative metric (dFSCI, FSCO/I, etc.) that they then also fail to calculate.
3) Claim to have already done so, but either fail to provide links to the calculation or provide links to sites that don't actually contain calculations.

If you're going to give the IDCists attention, please hold their feet to the fire regarding a mathematically rigorous definition of what they are calculating, whether or not their metric is in fact the same as Dembski's, and how that metric can be objectively calculated.

You won't get an answer from any of them, but it's mildly amusing to watch them squirm.  Plus, while they're answering you they have less time to push their anti-science agenda on local school boards.

;)

Oh, give them hits. The entertainment is worth it.

--------------
"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: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,11:02   

Patrick, where is the 'money shot' of VJT creating CSI (which post)?

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

  
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,11:06   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 24 2014,12:02)
Patrick, where is the 'money shot' of VJT creating CSI (which post)?

I think the link is in my comment above, but here's the raw URL:  http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/on-the-non-evolution-of-irreducible-complexity-how-arthur-hunt-fails-to-refute-behe/#comment-373760

Torley concludes:
Quote
I note that for the duplicated genome, the specified complexity Chi is much greater than 1, so Dembski’s logic seems to imply that any instance of gene duplication is the result of intelligent agency and not chance.

Followed shortly thereafter by:
Quote
I therefore conclude that CSI is not a useful way to compare the complexity of a genome containing a duplicated gene to the original genome....

Wrong answer, therefore we shouldn't use it in this one particular instance.  He was so close to understanding!

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,12:53   

I have been banned again.  Apparently it is not OK to criticize Gord (Kairosfocus) Mullings for outing the full name of another commenter.
Quote
Didn’t I recently read about the despicable act of outing someone in a blog? Someone got very upset about this. Up until now, I have only known him as Rich. That could be a reference to his financial status for all I know.

His response was quick and decisive:
Quote
AB, 267: if you were to have bothered to look before you tried to bring my personal name out, you would have noticed that the article in question at TSZ as is onward linked, bears as byline, Richard T Hughes. Your turnabout fails and just earned you a just exposure as a false accuser. KF

YOU ARE FIRED

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,13:34   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,12:53)
I have been banned again.  Apparently it is not OK to criticize Gord (Kairosfocus) Mullings for outing the full name of another commenter.
Quote
Didn’t I recently read about the despicable act of outing someone in a blog? Someone got very upset about this. Up until now, I have only known him as Rich. That could be a reference to his financial status for all I know.

His response was quick and decisive:
Quote
AB, 267: if you were to have bothered to look before you tried to bring my personal name out, you would have noticed that the article in question at TSZ as is onward linked, bears as byline, Richard T Hughes. Your turnabout fails and just earned you a just exposure as a false accuser. KF

YOU ARE FIRED

That Richardthughes *is* a terrible fella, though.

KF will be call out on his faux persecution repeatedly, I suspect.

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

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,14:29   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 24 2014,13:34)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,12:53)
I have been banned again.  Apparently it is not OK to criticize Gord (Kairosfocus) Mullings for outing the full name of another commenter.
 
Quote
Didn’t I recently read about the despicable act of outing someone in a blog? Someone got very upset about this. Up until now, I have only known him as Rich. That could be a reference to his financial status for all I know.

His response was quick and decisive:
 
Quote
AB, 267: if you were to have bothered to look before you tried to bring my personal name out, you would have noticed that the article in question at TSZ as is onward linked, bears as byline, Richard T Hughes. Your turnabout fails and just earned you a just exposure as a false accuser. KF

YOU ARE FIRED

That Richardthughes *is* a terrible fella, though.

KF will be call out on his faux persecution repeatedly, I suspect.

I guess that I will be commenting under a different username.

I admit that Gordo wasn't really outing this terrible "Rich" guy, but I just couldn't resist yanking his chain. I must have yanked hard enough to cause it to flush.

But old Gord has a long way to go to match Barry's insightful and astute debating style. According to Barry I am a pathetic snivelling little coward. I wonder if he uses those words in front of a judge.

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,20:58   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 24 2014,11:34)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,12:53)
I have been banned again.  Apparently it is not OK to criticize Gord (Kairosfocus) Mullings for outing the full name of another commenter.
 
Quote
Didn’t I recently read about the despicable act of outing someone in a blog? Someone got very upset about this. Up until now, I have only known him as Rich. That could be a reference to his financial status for all I know.

His response was quick and decisive:
 
Quote
AB, 267: if you were to have bothered to look before you tried to bring my personal name out, you would have noticed that the article in question at TSZ as is onward linked, bears as byline, Richard T Hughes. Your turnabout fails and just earned you a just exposure as a false accuser. KF

YOU ARE FIRED

That Richardthughes *is* a terrible fella, though.

KF will be call out on his faux persecution repeatedly, I suspect.

Comment 231 in this thread:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

"LH, FSCO/I is an extension of the work of Orgel and Wicken in the ’70′s. It is effectively the same thing as what we see in common computer or multimedia file sizes: functionally specific, complex organisation and associated information. With trillions of known cases, it reliably indicates design. It can be quantified e.g. Chi_500 = I*S – 500, functionally specific bits beyond the solar system needle in haystack threshold. It has been on the table since the 1970′s. The response of committed evolutionary materialist zealots and fellow travellers is to try to obfuscate or twist it into pretzels and pretend it is not valid, as we can fairly easily see. Evidence and logic and inductive reasoning are not the real problem, on much smaller grounds any number of scientific laws are routinely accepted. The problem is selective hyperskepticism and linked ideological lock in of a materialist origins narrative impervious to evidence. It can only be exposed to the point here it can no longer be got away with, and those who undertake such a task can count on being viciously attacked every inch of the way by inherently amoral ideologues with worldviews that open the door to nihilism. Personalities, nastiness, bully-boyism, expulsion if the nihilists have power, outing tactics, cyberstalking, stalking uninvolved family including minor children and more. Some of the more unhinged and obsessive fanatics we describe as using such tactics give evidence of anger management problems, drink and or drugs, being gun nuts, possible post traumatic stress disorders and more. KF"  

gordo has definitely called out his faux persecution and is making outrageous accusations ("outing tactics, cyberstalking, stalking uninvolved family including minor children and more") that are aimed directly at me, and I'm sure that all of them include me. I'm surprised that he didn't include 'slander' in his accusations and a bunch of stuff about oily ad hominem red herrings and rom 1. He must not have had time for all that because he was busy rescuing Montserrat from another Constitutional crisis.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Patrick



Posts: 666
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 24 2014,21:56   

Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 24 2014,21:58)
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

"LH, FSCO/I is an extension of the work of Orgel and Wicken in the ’70′s. It is effectively the same thing as what we see in common computer or multimedia file sizes: functionally specific, complex organisation and associated information. With trillions of known cases, it reliably indicates design. It can be quantified e.g. Chi_500 = I*S – 500, functionally specific bits beyond the solar system needle in haystack threshold. It has been on the table since the 1970′s. The response of committed evolutionary materialist zealots and fellow travellers is to try to obfuscate or twist it into pretzels and pretend it is not valid, as we can fairly easily see. Evidence and logic and inductive reasoning are not the real problem, on much smaller grounds any number of scientific laws are routinely accepted. The problem is selective hyperskepticism and linked ideological lock in of a materialist origins narrative impervious to evidence. It can only be exposed to the point here it can no longer be got away with, and those who undertake such a task can count on being viciously attacked every inch of the way by inherently amoral ideologues with worldviews that open the door to nihilism. Personalities, nastiness, bully-boyism, expulsion if the nihilists have power, outing tactics, cyberstalking, stalking uninvolved family including minor children and more. Some of the more unhinged and obsessive fanatics we describe as using such tactics give evidence of anger management problems, drink and or drugs, being gun nuts, possible post traumatic stress disorders and more. KF"  

I feel a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of innocent words cried out in terror and were suddenly mangled.

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,03:01   

I've recently begun to speculate, are the CSI's of these two strings:

1) ID
2) Intelligent Design

a) similar
or
b) different

because of ?

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,03:19   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,12:29)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 24 2014,13:34)
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Oct. 24 2014,12:53)
I have been banned again.  Apparently it is not OK to criticize Gord (Kairosfocus) Mullings for outing the full name of another commenter.
 
Quote
Didn’t I recently read about the despicable act of outing someone in a blog? Someone got very upset about this. Up until now, I have only known him as Rich. That could be a reference to his financial status for all I know.

His response was quick and decisive:
 
Quote
AB, 267: if you were to have bothered to look before you tried to bring my personal name out, you would have noticed that the article in question at TSZ as is onward linked, bears as byline, Richard T Hughes. Your turnabout fails and just earned you a just exposure as a false accuser. KF

YOU ARE FIRED

That Richardthughes *is* a terrible fella, though.

KF will be call out on his faux persecution repeatedly, I suspect.

I guess that I will be commenting under a different username.

I admit that Gordo wasn't really outing this terrible "Rich" guy, but I just couldn't resist yanking his chain. I must have yanked hard enough to cause it to flush.

But old Gord has a long way to go to match Barry's insightful and astute debating style. According to Barry I am a pathetic snivelling little coward. I wonder if he uses those words in front of a judge.

gordo makes it easy to find his real name. All it takes is a click on his kairosfocus username at UD which will take you to one of his blog pages, scroll down that page a little way and click on Homepage (just above Contents), scroll down to Cell Leader's Manual (lower right) and click on it. Now look at the "byline" on that page.

His name is in many places on that blog, and it's easy to find elsewhere too.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,03:35   

At UD rich said to gordo, in this thread:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

"If this happened, it is reprehensible. If you can provide details we’ll see what can be done on ‘our end”."

And:

"KF – can you PM me here?

If you can forward the relevant communications from the wrong-doers I’ll work with the moderators at the sites I frequent to try and take action."

Hi Rich, why via PM? Why not out in the open? gordo's false accusations are aimed at me, and I have no problem with keeping everything out in the open. I have nothing to hide. gordo is just making shit up and has no "details" or "relevant communications" to provide. You'll see when he doesn't provide any.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,07:47   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 24 2014,16:23)
Quote (Driver @ Oct. 23 2014,18:47)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 23 2014,19:35)
The whole thread - for your enjoyment -

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-521196

Wow. Quoting WJM on ID being the one that actually does the math*.  That's Chutzpah.


*Except when girls ask. Or boys pretending to be girls.

Yeah, like anyone would do that.

I'LL TAKE THAT ON BOARD THE FLOATING COMMAND CENTER HOMO.
© Dave tard

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,07:52   

Quote (Quack @ Oct. 24 2014,10:00)
Wonderful indeed!

What now remains for CSI aficionados is to test their pet hypothesis by the calculation of the CSI of any subject of their chosing. Is that too much to ask? Wouldn't that be the proper way of doing it, sciency, like?

Doesn't the claim that there are objects of complexity beyond computability imply that there are objects below that limit, and therefore are computable?

A demonstration of the computability of CSI therefore is what the world needs right now. The world is waiting for the Sunrise, according to Les Paul and Mary Ford.

No ,what it means is when they ask their pet (preferably an African Grey) what is the CSI of a sock or mouth, the answer is foot.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,08:42   

Android dupe

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 25 2014,13:39   

Quote
centrestreamOctober 25, 2014 at 12:25 pm
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
It’s hard to take them seriously when they post a schedule for accepting death threats.


I guess Barry Arrogant's foray into open and fair discussion is over. Even new usernames are again being placed under moderation. But I have detected a new strategy, if you can use that word for anything Barry does. In the past he would always announce when someone was banned. But he no longer does this even though there have been numerous bannings. A quick look at recent comments will show that it has essentially returned to his jackbooted following and three or four token evolutionists.

  
  15792 replies since Dec. 29 2013,11:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (527) < ... 57 58 59 60 61 [62] 63 64 65 66 67 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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