RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (622) < ... 425 426 427 428 429 [430] 431 432 433 434 435 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 20 2015,23:21   

Quote
the leadership of the ID movement seriously is too busy promoting religion to even care about their own theory

And in other news, the ocean is still wet.

  
Lethean



Posts: 292
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,05:30   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 20 2015,23:07)
It is not in my best interest (or science) to divide the movement.


So, instead of Gary *plus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory" you've opted for Gary *minus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory".

That's one forum down, one more to go.

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,06:35   

Quote (Lethean @ Jan. 21 2015,05:30)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 20 2015,23:07)
It is not in my best interest (or science) to divide the movement.


So, instead of Gary *plus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory" you've opted for Gary *minus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory".

That's one forum down, one more to go.

And for the record: The theory has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal. I have not yet submitted it to one.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,07:25   

It's not a theory.  A theory has reached a sufficiently broad level of acceptance (at least enough to have garnered serious attention) and a certain quality of work (decent operational definitions, some supporting evidence, some valid proposed tests).  You have none of that, and you haven't even published it, plus no one supports it and it's self-evidently rubbish.  It's just a proposed idea, and a very bad one at that.

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,07:43   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 21 2015,07:35)
 
Quote (Lethean @ Jan. 21 2015,05:30)
 
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 20 2015,23:07)
It is not in my best interest (or science) to divide the movement.


So, instead of Gary *plus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory" you've opted for Gary *minus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory".

That's one forum down, one more to go.

And for the record: The theory has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal. I have not yet submitted it to one.

Also for the record,  your nonsense that you continue to misname a "theory" has not been accepted at any web site on which it has been presented.
Not. One. Single. Web. Site.
Not. One. Single. Supporter.

Expect that to continue.  There is nothing of merit in your work.  This has been so exhaustively demonstrated, so well-documented in all the details, so consistently everywhere it has been presented* as to have been annihilated down to its component quarks.
In fact, one  suspects you are aware of this or you would have submitted it long before now.

*Presented as a "theory"; we are not talking about the software that has 4 mild supporters but no relationship to the "theory".

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,10:49   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 21 2015,04:35)
Quote (Lethean @ Jan. 21 2015,05:30)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 20 2015,23:07)
It is not in my best interest (or science) to divide the movement.


So, instead of Gary *plus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory" you've opted for Gary *minus* the people who don't give a shit about Gary's "Theory".

That's one forum down, one more to go.

And for the record: The theory has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal. I have not yet submitted it to one.

The theory that Bruce Springsteen is a seven-legged blue aardvark has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal either.  Which makes it every bit as good as Gary's theory.

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

  
jeffox



Posts: 671
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,11:44   

Twitwrit:  
Quote
And for the record: The theory has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal. I have not yet submitted it to one.


Dear Sir/Maam:

We regret to inform you that the material you submitted is not up to the standards of scientific quality required for publication in our journal.  Please rewrite with an eye towards a more coherent and logical progression of ideation before resubmitting.  Any subsequent peer review will then be applied, once a satisfactory copy has been submitted.  

Thank you for your attention to this matter, as well as your interest in the subject matter that we print.

Yours Very Truly,
Bladeblah
Fill-In-the-Blank Scientific Journal

There you are, Goo-Goo!  I just prepared you for any rejection slips you will obtain from any potential publishers.  

Enjoy, and thank me for this service whenever you please.

Gadzooks, but you're a good hoot!  :)  :)  :)

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,21:14   

From: http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....y240874
 
Quote (Lethean @ Jan. 21 2015,05:51)
   
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ Jan. 20 2015,21:20)
Learned Hand responded to Scary Barrington as follows:

         
Quote
I don’t think that your blogging demonstrates the quality of your briefs; just the quality of your thinking and character.


Fruiting bodies!
http://www.uncommondescent.com/news.......-543349

-

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 21 2015,22:36   

Quote (N.Wells @ Jan. 17 2015,15:34)
E) Irrelevant music video
F) Massive irrelevant detail regarding latest "advance" in model
G) Irrelevant medical complaints
H) Unjustified insult, likely including language justifiably charged against him a couple of pages back (OK, that's more or less the same as D).
I)  Something entirely unpredictable about a completely irrelevant detail, like his mouse, written in excruciatingly hideous English    
Quote
(You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either)
.

Who says this guy is not versatile???

Quote
Ignore the black helicopters circling your tracksite, Gary.
 Particularly the extremely tiny drone helicopters that are getting really hard to distinguish from flies, unless you look very close, preferably with a large magnifying glass.

Add
J) Sbowing a distinct lack of imagination and originality by lazily posting someone else's irrelevant lame smackdown as though it's his own.
K)Displaying a pathological envy against education and educators seemingly due to his own incompetence.
L) Huge servings of Identity Politics.

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

  
Woodbine



Posts: 1218
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2015,13:20   

Hey Gary, do you still believe Judge Jones of Kitzmiller fame was monitoring you and your theory?

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2015,14:57   

Quote (k.e.. @ Jan. 21 2015,22:36)
Add
J) Showing a distinct lack of imagination and originality by lazily posting someone else's irrelevant lame smackdown as though it's his own.
K)Displaying a pathological envy against education and educators seemingly due to his own incompetence.
L) Huge servings of Identity Politics.

Quote
The power of science itself made it possible to control the destiny of the Theory of Intelligent Design and not even the world’s top scientists can stop me/us! So of course it’s hard for someone like myself to pass up a chance like that, even though the responsibility to not do harm with that power is tremendous and getting there takes patience.


And so humble as well!!!

  
Henry J



Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 22 2015,20:13   

Of course, if ID was science, some of the world's top scientists would be studying it already.

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 23 2015,09:47   

Quote (N.Wells @ Dec. 31 2014,09:31)
You've got a whole lot of transparent and ineffective distraction going on, Gary.
As NoName said earlier,
   
Quote
Stop deflecting, distracting, and denying.  Man up and deal with the facts on the ground:

A phenomenon is not properly called 'emergent' when it arises from a set of phenomena to which it is properly called 'self-similar'.  And vice versa.
Not all acts of 'intelligence' are motor acts, yet your "theory" insists otherwise.  This flies in the face of your assertion that your, or any competing, "theory" must "explain how ANY intelligence system works."
Deal with the fact that you smuggle 'intelligence' into your module with the undefined and uncharacterized 'guess' function.
Deal with the fact that 'guess' does not equal 'plan'.  Your "theory" is useless as a 'theory of intelligence' if it cannot deal with plans and planning.
Deal with the fact that many acts of intelligence involve imagination, and your "theory" does not deal with imagination at all.
Deal with the fact that some of the most crucial constraints on life are thermodynamic and that your "theory" simply ignores any and all thermodynamic issues.
Etc.

   
Quote
What is the ‘something’ that must be controlled when an intelligence creates a theory?  a musical composition?  a plan?  a story plot line?
Note that none of these require muscle activity of any sort.

What are the senses that address what memory/memories when an intelligence creates a theory?  a musical composition?  a plan?  a story plot line?
Note that each of these has been performed by individuals who lack the 'obvious' sensory modalities one would expect for the product.
Sub-question — what does it mean for memory to be sensory-addressed?  The naive view that has the senses directly writing to memory or directly “indicating” what memory to use and what to store there has been debunked many many years ago.  So what are you talking about here?

What is the measure of confidence to gauge failure and success when an intelligence creates a theory?  a musical composition?  a plan?  a story plot line?
Sub-question — what senses address what memory/memories in the creation, storage, and retrieval of the ‘confidence’ factor?  Is it analog or digital?  What process(es) modify it, at what points, and what difference does it make?

What is the ‘ABILITY TO TAKE A GUESS’?  How is it manifested and how is it utilized when  an intelligence creates a theory?  a musical composition?  a plan?  a story plot line?

What is a guess?  How does ‘guess’ relate to ‘plan’ and to ‘imagination?  Are there factors that feed into/influence the guess?  Is a guess random?  If not, what regularity does it exhibit?  Is it algorithmic?  What algorithm?  Or how is the specific algorithm used chosen?
What justifies embedding ‘guess’ into the “flow” that defines “intelligence” when the ability to guess is generally taken to be an act of intelligence?  How is it we only find guessing happening when we find ‘molecular intelligence’ in your sense, i.e., biology?
(You do realize that a random number generator in a computer program does not ‘guess’?)


And questions from me:
   
Quote
Why is your rubbish not made obsolete by Edgar Postrado's rubbish?

   
Quote

It is also unreasonable to expect out of place detail that would limit the theory to only one level of intelligence (brains) of a model that has to work for any behavior, intelligent or not.


Since you see intelligence darn near everywhere at all levels, in your opinion what behavior would qualify as not intelligent, and why?

...


We're still waiting, Gary.  Running away doesn't make the questions stop, it just makes your inability to answer that much more apparent.

  
Lethean



Posts: 292
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,03:54   

Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 22 2015,13:20)
Hey Gary, do you still believe Judge Jones of Kitzmiller fame was monitoring you and your theory?


Wait ... wut ?

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,09:30   

Quote (N.Wells @ Jan. 22 2015,22:57)
Quote (k.e.. @ Jan. 21 2015,22:36)
Add
J) Showing a distinct lack of imagination and originality by lazily posting someone else's irrelevant lame smackdown as though it's his own.
K)Displaying a pathological envy against education and educators seemingly due to his own incompetence.
L) Huge servings of Identity Politics.

 
Quote
The power of science itself made it possible to control the destiny of the Theory of Intelligent Design and not even the world’s top scientists can stop me/us! So of course it’s hard for someone like myself to pass up a chance like that, even though the responsibility to not do harm with that power is tremendous and getting there takes patience.


And so humble as well!!!

M) The humility of a bed bug.
N)  Always busy scientificating on scientifical science-ing as a model modern multi media mediationist
O) Black Helicopters

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

  
Woodbine



Posts: 1218
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,10:43   

Quote (Lethean @ Jan. 24 2015,09:54)
     
Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 22 2015,13:20)
Hey Gary, do you still believe Judge Jones of Kitzmiller fame was monitoring you and your theory?


Wait ... wut ?

Yeah..... :(

Around the time of Kitzmiller, Gary couldn't help but notice that Judge John E. Jones (the fucking third) had not yet contacted him to stop work on his own theory of ID.

In Gary's mind Judge Jones' implicit endorsement is confirmation that there are no legal barriers to his 'theory' being taught in schools.

I know.....I know.

If the search thing was working I'd dredge it up.

Edited by Woodbine on Jan. 24 2015,16:44

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,14:05   

I have been busy with UD related discussions where it was necessary to explain what I know or else the ID movement will be in conflict with theory instead of making scientific progress using what they have to their scientific advantage.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-543402
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-543605
http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-543727
http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-....-543792
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-543844
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-543834

To a not fooling theory UD is like a bed of love waiting to tease it to an ecstatic scientific climax:

Def Leppard - Foolin
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....mwTsi08

Hopefully all can forgive my reasons for having been there not here where it's more like playing with my head just to yank my chain to piss me off. The rumor mill here is making an issue over my saying that where Judge Jones checks for pro-ID activity in their local discussion forums he's not expected to get overly worried about what in time led to a computer model at Planet Source Code for the York/Dover community to be thankful came out of the chaos that seemed to have no silver lining to it at all. The most vocal in their community found their way to the action that started with bitter debate that had something to be thankful for emerge from it that all on all sides of the issue can be proud of helping to make happen. This provided the most vocal in the York/Dover community something lasting that makes it possible to not have to look back in anger over. What it is now able to do at UD only makes the aftermath of the Dover trial a success story where it was better to get it out in the open where science can do its thing then it's over with all having had fun. A judge that would rather a happy ending has little to worry about from the theory I work on, wherever it most needs working on.

I can now from here link to what is at UD and this forum will have better served its purpose of informing of unusual activities the Darwinian camp needs to beware of. Thankfully though its best strategy is still:

Sheryl Crow - Soak Up The Sun
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....GA_rIls

So yes, nice birthday cake Wesley. Scribe on!


--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,14:18   

In case anyone needs to research back at the York/Dover Exchange then this url might help:

[searchInKey]=members&search_app_filters[members][members][sortKey]=date&search_term=gary+gaulin&search_app=forums]http://exchange.ydr.com/index.p....=forums

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,14:30   

On second though the url worked in preview but was garbled after submitting it. To monitor my past activities just search from there for "theory of intelligent design" or "Gary Gaulin".

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,15:35   

We're still waiting.
Thousands of pages of your evasions exist all over the net.
Not one single supporter.
Not one single piece of positive evidence.

  
khan



Posts: 1554
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,19:12   

Quote
The rumor mill here is making an issue over my saying that where Judge Jones checks for pro-ID activity in their local discussion forums he's not expected to get overly worried about what in time led to a computer model at Planet Source Code for the York/Dover community to be thankful came out of the chaos that seemed to have no silver lining to it at all.


Can anyone translate that from derp?

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

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,19:28   

Quote (khan @ Jan. 24 2015,19:12)
Quote
The rumor mill here is making an issue over my saying that where Judge Jones checks for pro-ID activity in their local discussion forums he's not expected to get overly worried about what in time led to a computer model at Planet Source Code for the York/Dover community to be thankful came out of the chaos that seemed to have no silver lining to it at all.


Can anyone translate that from derp?

Gary thinks he found a diamond in the pile of shit that is ID.  He is unaware that it is simply a turd he polished.  He fantasizes that Judge Jones read the online fora discussing Kitzmiller, saw Gary's polished turd, and declared it better than the breathtaking inanity he ruled on.

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 24 2015,20:27   

P) (hilariously he) Imagines important people read and are influenced by his drivel.

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2015,10:06   

Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 21 2015,11:49)
The theory that Bruce Springsteen is a seven-legged blue aardvark has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal either.  Which makes it every bit as good as Gary's theory.

The theory that Bruce Springsteen is a seven-legged blue aardvark is way, way better than Gary's Garbage, because "Bruce Springsteen", "blue", "seven", "legged", and "aardvark" are well-defined, whereas gibberish like "molecular intelligence" etc is not.

   
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 25 2015,10:46   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 25 2015,11:06)
Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 21 2015,11:49)
The theory that Bruce Springsteen is a seven-legged blue aardvark has never been rejected by any non-ID science journal either.  Which makes it every bit as good as Gary's theory.

The theory that Bruce Springsteen is a seven-legged blue aardvark is way, way better than Gary's Garbage, because "Bruce Springsteen", "blue", "seven", "legged", and "aardvark" are well-defined, whereas gibberish like "molecular intelligence" etc is not.

Indeed.  That 'theory' is merely wrong.
Gary's effluent is far far worse than 'merely wrong'.

  
jeffox



Posts: 671
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 26 2015,11:55   

Quote
We're still waiting.
Thousands of pages of your evasions exist all over the net.
Not one single supporter.
Not one single piece of positive evidence.


Hammer these points home with Mjolnir itself . . . .

Whatta hoot!

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 26 2015,19:17   

Sorry for the semi-lewd spur of the moment thought, about what UD means to a theory that spent much of it's life being abused inside forums like this one. Finally getting out in the world to find partners and friends lead to love novel level thoughts that went away soon after my posting them. It's a song Febble might remember from the TalkRational forum. UD reported that their Skeptical Zone blog is no longer active, which I found not to be fully true but either way thoughts of Febble are in the mind of UD.

For some reading (to maybe help ride out the snowstorm too) is this you probably never saw said at UD:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-....-544092
http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-....-544125
http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-....-544128
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-544104

And for Wesley I have this fun one, with Avida in it!

http://www.uncommondescent.com/biology....-544337

In this case we can say "good things come to those who wait" even though in this case it's best for science progress elsewhere that UD finds Avida just as boring (or more) as before.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 26 2015,19:28   

Have your comrades in tard picked up keyboards to code with you, Gary?


Why is that, do you think?

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

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 26 2015,19:32   

And another turd of a sentence:
 
Quote
At one time Earth’s oxygen poor environment allowed carbon to not burn like it would now by having enough atmospheric oxygen to ignite it into CO2 and H2O that plants and other living things will likely many times put back into the biomass again by consuming.


 
Quote


This is an excellent topic. From what I know Avida is now like the Holy Grail of Darwinian evolution education. This is what it has for variables:

 
Quote
The basic components of the Darwinian evolutionary mechanism are variation (V), inheritance (I), natural selection (S) and time (T).


http://avida-ed.msu.edu/....msu....msu.edu
http://avida-ed.msu.edu/curric.....out.pdf

I bolded the words that precisely describe what it demonstrates, the “Darwinian evolutionary mechanism”.

What matters to ID is that the Darwinian model is not to demonstrate “intelligent cause” or even “intelligence” it’s limited to “Darwinian evolution” only. The winning strategy is to provide the models required to demonstrate what ID theory is premised to explain. That’s why the multiple level model explained by the theory was so vital to the success of ID in science. Only needed this, which is the same url my name links to:
http://theoryofid.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com

It’s good to know how the Darwinian evolution model works. And for the ID movement it’s even better to know how the ID model works. So does anyone want to code a simple as possible model to demonstrate intelligence? Which of the three intelligence levels to model up from is all up to you.

Avida is useful because it has comprehensible and logical operational definitions for well-validated parameters.  No one can model your nonsense with any guarantee of usefulness when you refuse to define your terms operationally and when you can't provide any evidence that your mechanisms actually exist and can do what you assert.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 26 2015,20:15   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 26 2015,19:28)
Have your comrades in tard picked up keyboards to code with you, Gary?


Why is that, do you think?

Why does that even matter to the ID theory that I defend? As far as the theory is concerned the only stable home it knows is on Planet Source Code and it's a good thing none at UD are close to beating the model. What happens next at UD is up to those who are there, with whatever they ultimately do not much mattering to science.

Or did you actually expect the Discovery Institute to have become a giant supercomputing center by now? Not even someone as optimistic as I am could picture that happening.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

   
  18634 replies since Oct. 31 2012,02:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (622) < ... 425 426 427 428 429 [430] 431 432 433 434 435 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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