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... > The Magic of Intelligent Design

Pages: (9) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... >

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,22:29    This one has potential. TP, welcome and thank you for spicing up a dull evening but I have a few issues. I sit firmly is the "no random acts" camp and if I interpret Gene correctly then life becomes inevitable as I also believe but to echo k.e., creeky, et. al. this falls well short of ID in any form. Even dropping "intelligent" you're still left with "design" and that means "intent".  Whether is is the "intent" of God, the Cosmic Mind or the Circle of Life doesn't matter because it is an unmeasurable property.  Using science to attempt to support the existence of an unmeasurable property violates NOMA in a very sneaky way.  Just because our ignorance creates the appearance of "magic" doesn't establish the possibility of other truly magical claims.  I fear you fall into the same trap as other IDers by extrapolating science outside of it's valid application. That being said, this is very entertaining and I await more.  Go ahead, convince me.

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,22:34    Hi qetzal, If you have heard a better pro-ID presention, I would like to know where. I would even be interested in knowing about any that matched this one. Ok, let's play the game... "The purpose of our teleological universe is to be internally consistent." This is a falsifiable statement.  It is being tested each and every day.  It the universe should suddenly quit being consistent we will know it.  Then again, maybe we won't. "The wavefunction is purposeful design." This follows from the first statement and the reference to Anthropic principle that you skipped over.  Your problem may be in the word "design".  I had indicated earlier that design, for all practical purposes, means non-random. "Whether via anthropic principle or divine whim, life may be necessary to make the teleological universe complete." You did notice the word "may", right?  I provided an example of how it "may" be necessary. "If the universe needs something to be consistent, than interconnected quantum effects will make it happen and time order isn’t a restriction." I posted three long comments explaining this one. "While quantum effects are inherent in both living and non-living material, living material is inherently more flexible." Don't like the word "flexible"?  How about more utilitarian? "MikeGene’s front loading is essentially looking for a preponderance of clues that a future need was satisfied by a past feature." Are you demanding citations and references to MikeGene's works? "Retrocausality would be something that interconnected quantum effects would demonstrate." Interconnected via space and time, means interconnected via space and time.  Time is just another dimension that extends in two directions.

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,22:58    Hi Skeptic, You wrote...   Quote This one has potential. TP, welcome and thank you for spicing up a dull evening Thank you and you are welcome.   Quote I sit firmly is the "no random acts" camp and if I interpret Gene correctly then life becomes inevitable as I also believe but to echo k.e., creeky, et. al. this falls well short of ID in any form. Getting past the "no random acts" is usually the tough one.  We are agreeing more than we are disagreeing. Quote Even dropping "intelligent" you're still left with "design" and that means "intent".  Whether is is the "intent" of God, the Cosmic Mind or the Circle of Life doesn't matter because it is an unmeasurable property. au contrare...  The lord of all things ID provides the measuring stick called CSI.  And, by eliminating all chance hypotheses (by eliminating randomness itself) I get a perfect score for calling this design. At least using Dembski's definitions.   Quote Using science to attempt to support the existence of an unmeasurable property violates NOMA in a very sneaky way.  Just because our ignorance creates the appearance of "magic" doesn't establish the possibility of other truly magical claims.  I fear you fall into the same trap as other IDers by extrapolating science outside of it's valid application. Are you sure you are not conflating "design" with "purpose"? I agree that I am hedging over the NOMA line a little bit to suggest a purpose.  But, gee golly, it is such a modest purpose.  At one time I played with the idea that the purpose of the universe was to exist.  But I thought that might be too cute and, besides, it amounts to the same thing as being intentionally consistent. Other than that, I have tried to be very respectful of the NOMA line.  At TT people complain that I am the NOMA cop.

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2007,23:08    Here’s MY theory of ID. 1. It attracts cranks like no other theory. Whether this is a quantum property or not, their hand wave function is orders of magnitude larger than their mass 2. For each and every ID supporter there is an equal and imaginary number of ID theories (unless they have an IQ south of Dave Tard) 3. If ID succeeds the soldiers for christ will set their targets on changing the US Constitution to remove the church state separation ........and if ID doesn't succeed it will......oh never mind. 4. ID promoters will co-opt any science to promote their cause (scientism) 5. ID appears to be inflating …using the shrinking observer model. Interpretation of quantum mechanics -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,00:12    Quote Thought Provoker Posts: 55 Joined: April 2007  (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,05:46 ?   -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Hi K.E. You wrote... Quote Yes but [photons] have momentum and maybe you could explain why they can't escape a black hole. If you are not careful, people might get the impression you understand and are interested in this stuff.   Gravity bends Minkowskian space/time.  Either that, or bends in Minkowskian space/time are what cause gravity. Either way the photon particle/wavefunction gets wrapped up in the fold. ......What again does ID predict in this case? -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,00:33    Quote The lord of all things ID provides the measuring stick called CSI. When has anything been measured in CSI? -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

qetzal Posts: 311 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,00:58    Quote (Thought Provoker @ Sep. 25 2007,22:34) Hi qetzal, If you have heard a better pro-ID presention, I would like to know where. I would even be interested in knowing about any that matched this one. Oh, I agree yours is as good as any and better than most. For what that's worth. ;-)   Quote Ok, let's play the game... "The purpose of our teleological universe is to be internally consistent." This is a falsifiable statement.  It is being tested each and every day.  It the universe should suddenly quit being consistent we will know it.  Then again, maybe we won't. No, "The universe is internally consistent" is a falsifiable statement. The fact that the universe is (so far) internally consistent does not demonstrate that consistency is the universe's purpose. It's the assertion of purpose that I object to, not the statement about consistency.     Quote "The wavefunction is purposeful design." This follows from the first statement and the reference to Anthropic principle that you skipped over.  Your problem may be in the word "design".  I had indicated earlier that design, for all practical purposes, means non-random. No, my problem is with the adjective "purposeful." It implies conscious intention in the design, an intention that you have not justified.     Quote "Whether via anthropic principle or divine whim, life may be necessary to make the teleological universe complete." You did notice the word "may", right?  I provided an example of how it "may" be necessary. Exactly. It may be necessary, or it may not. It's just a statement of possibility. Which is fine, as far as it goes, but that doesn't support anything one way or another.     Quote "If the universe needs something to be consistent, than interconnected quantum effects will make it happen and time order isn’t a restriction." I posted three long comments explaining this one. But you haven't justified that the universe needs something to be consistent. So, again, this is really just a statement of possibility.     Quote "While quantum effects are inherent in both living and non-living material, living material is inherently more flexible." Don't like the word "flexible"?  How about more utilitarian? I don't accept either. You haven't defined what flexible or utilitarian mean in this context, or shown how living material is more flexible/utilitarian, or shown how greater flexibility/utilitarianism relates to quantum effects, or tied that putative relationship to the overall ID hypothesis.     Quote "MikeGene’s front loading is essentially looking for a preponderance of clues that a future need was satisfied by a past feature." Are you demanding citations and references to MikeGene's works? No. I wasn't objecting to that sentence by itself. I quoted it because your next sentence refers to it. (Although I will note, in passing, that most people mean something much more specific by "front loading." If I eat that banana in my office tomorrow, my future hunger will have been satisfied by my past purchase of a banana. Would MikeGene consider that front loading?)     Quote "Retrocausality would be something that interconnected quantum effects would demonstrate." Interconnected via space and time, means interconnected via space and time.  Time is just another dimension that extends in two directions. Right. So if the purpose of the universe is to be consistent, and if the universe needs life to be complete, and if interconnected quantum effects allow for retrocausality, then that's consistent with a weak version of ID that boils down to "life was inevitable." Sure. If we posit those ifs and that version of ID, I agree. It's consistent. So what? To me, it seems like your whole point is to find a way to argue that some version of ID could be true, based on QM. If so, then you've succeeded. I, for one, will happily concede that certain versions of ID could be true, at least hypothetically. But hypothetically, there could also be a teapot in orbit around Mars. If I claim (without empirical evidence) that the universe may require a celestial teapot to be internally consistent, does that make the teapot's existence significantly more likely?

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,01:17    actually, I would disagree, that version of ID is nothing more than Monday-morning quarterbacking.  The fact that all these things may be true still does not mean design.  Just as non-random does not mean design it just means causation.  You may be using design in a completely different way but ID uses it to mean purposeful and deliberate which is not the same as inevitable.  Your proof may mean nothing more than the Universe appears to have designed itself when you look back from this point but there can be no definitive evidence either way.  I'll look up CSI to see what you're implying and maybe you should reevaluate "design" in the context you are using.

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,01:59    Quote I'll look up CSI Here's a helping hand on that. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Occam's Toothbrush Posts: 555 Joined: April 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,03:55    Quote (qetzal @ Sep. 26 2007,01:58) So if the purpose of the universe is to be consistent, and if the universe needs life to be complete, and if interconnected quantum effects allow for retrocausality, then that's consistent with a weak version of ID that boils down to "life was inevitable." It's impressive what ID brings to the table in terms of synthesizing the imaginary evidence.  If you ever want to know what would be true if some new and completely made-up set of observations was taken, just ask an IDiot.  Assuming of course that the answer you're looking for is goddidit. -------------- "Molecular stuff seems to me not to be biology as much as it is a more atomic element of life" --Creo nut Robert Byers ------ "You need your arrogant ass kicked, and I would LOVE to be the guy who does it. Where do you live?" --Anger Management Problem Concern Troll "Kris"

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,07:12    I didn't have time to read the link Wesley provided.  But I suggest Dembski might be a better authoritative source for how ID defines what is meant by "specification" and, therefore, design Here is a link to a Dembski paper on the subject. "Since specifications are those patterns that are supposed to underwrite a design inference, they need, minimally, to entitle us to eliminate chance. Since to do so, it must be the case that X = –log2[ 120^10 · S(T)·P(T|H)] > 1, we therefore define specifications as any patterns T that satisfy this inequality."

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,07:23    Stand back everyone TP's brain has just gone naked singularity!! TP You DID post that without the slightest hint of irony, right? Lets see if you can do a better job at Sancho Panzo to Don Quixote than Salvador Cordova could. This is going to be fun. -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

skeptic Posts: 1163 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,09:42    Thanks Wes, I looked up his paper last night but your perspective will balance that out.  D's primary premise is unproven and maybe unprovable.  The question as to whether information is fundamental or just a construct of the human mind balances his whole house of cards.  I saw no evidence that this premise may be taken as fact.  Without that, CSI seems philosophy and not science.

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,10:15    Hi qetzal, You asked...   Quote If I eat that banana in my office tomorrow, my future hunger will have been satisfied by my past purchase of a banana. Would MikeGene consider that front loading? My version of this is someone grabbing an umbrella when leaving in the morning because it might rain later in the day. I think it is an example of retrocausality.  We have had discussions about this on Telic Thoughts. I don't want to suggest what MikeGene thinks.  Personally, I think it goes straight to the point.  I think it is an example of life engaging in Front Loading.  It is such a trivial example that it is dismissed. That was the general topic of the opening post.  Some things are so common that we take them for granted. How are conscious decisions made? Libet's experiments shows 500ms of electrical brain activity occurring prior to a conscious decision being made.  This has had a profound impact on the study of consciousness.  It has gotten to the point that a significant portion of the community is suggesting that the idea of conscious control is an illusion.  At best, we might sometimes get to veto our body's automatic responses. But I digress. I have suggested to MikeGene that the Front Loaded property of life he is looking for is that life's actions are directly coupled to interconnected quantum effects. DNA evolved into a quantum computer, this makes for a significant link between the evolution of life and the interconnected quantum effects. If it is established that microtubules are also quantum computers, consciousness becomes an artifact of interconnected quantum effects. Whether or not it is microtubules, it is very likely that consciousness is directly interconnected with quantum effects because of observations like GHZ states.

k.e Posts: 1948 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,10:32    Quote ....it is very likely that consciousness is in directing interconnected with quantum effects because of observations like GHZ states. So what you are saying is if you think about GHZ states you will affect the thought *snicker*. And is that wishful thinking? Again how does LSD interact with that? -------------- The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,11:34    Some musing on frontloading. All of the info for the complicated future creatures would be compressed somewhere in the simpler ancestor? This origional life was seen to be "very simple", I believe. The two seem at odds. Does frontloading have prior knowledge of future enviroments and pressures? If not then its looking more and more like NDE... -------------- "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

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,11:56    Hi Richard, Thank you for your comment. You wrote...   Quote This origional life was seen to be "very simple", I believe. Are you familiar with Vernanimalcula guizhouena? I posted a comment on a Telic Thoughts' thread about it (see Yet again…older than expected). Excuse me for this rather long copy, but it is interesting to me... While it is arguable that these are "older than expected" verses just old, the Vernanimalcula guizhouena are a significant find. Here is a link I found… Animals - in the form of microscopic yet complex organisms - may have existed millions of years earlier than previous estimates, according to a new study published in the June 3 [2004] edition of Science Express. … The animal in question is called Vernanimalcula guizhouena, Latin for “small spring animal” - a nod by the discovery team to the “spring” following the so-called “Snowball Earth” time period that ended roughly 600 million years ago when it’s theorized that most of the planet was entombed in ice. Vernanimalcula guizhouena - which was about the size of four human hairs laid side by side - is thought to have survived that period of extreme cold, Bottjer said. “It was a little button-shaped organism that probably scooted along the sea floor,” he said. “It had a little mouth, sort of like a vacuum cleaner. It was tiny, but microbes are even smaller so it probably sucked them up so it could eat them.” Aside from a mouth, Vernanimalcula guizhouena had an anus and paired external pits that the researchers theorized it used to sense environmental conditions, such as light. Here is the Pharyngula link that has some nice pictures. We now know these little critters had a hormonal signaling system. How do we know this? From the link in the opening post…"It is likely that [two types of hormone-secreting nerve cells] existed already in Urbilateria, the last common ancestors of vertebrates, insects and worms" The Vernanimalcula guizhouena descended from the Urbilateria. I don't know about you guys, but this kind of complexity is older than I had expected. 50 million years prior to the Cambrian we have a critter with a pair of "external pits" that were sensitive to light (can you say "eyes"?) a digestive system and a hormonal system. It looks like this little critter could SEE! Do you think I exaggerate? Also from the opening post link… "Both of the cell types studied in Platynereis and fish are multifunctional: they secrete hormones and at the same time have sensory properties. The vasotocin-secreting cells contain a light-sensitive pigment, while RF-amide appears to be secreted in response to certain chemicals." Hormones "…secreted in response to certain chemicals." Could it SMELL and TASTE too? Since even single celled organisms have a sense of TOUCH, I think it is safe to say our little critter probably had that too. Alright, I will admit the Vernanimalcula guizhouena probably had to hand out "I am deaf" cards to any verbalizing organisms running around, but all and all, for it's time the Vernanimalcula guizhouena were intellectual giants. That time was 600 MILLION YEARS AGO! As a champion of a Third Choice I will point out the challenge of this for the other two choices. First of all, what evolutionary pressures would there be to cause such a complex creature to evolve? How much complexity is needed to eat microbes? How complicated do early organisms have to get before it is admitted they just might be more complicated than expected? To the Intelligent Designer advocates. Other than an appeal to "mysterious ways", how did this all come about? How did God the Intelligent Designer implement the plan? Some ID proponents point to the Cambrian Explosion as something significant. To these proponents the complexity shown by the Vernanimalcula guizhouena may be "older than expected" for ID, not "Darwinists". A hypothesis that suggests consciousness at a fundamental level of living organisms would expect organisms with interacting sub-systems earlier than simple evolutionary pressures would dictate. I wonder how many microtubules were in a Vernanimalcula guizhouena.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,12:12    Its a shame for all these early creatures. They're full of front loaded goodness for us and others but are very minimal / crap themselves. THANK YOU FRONTLOADED CRAPPY CREATURES! -------------- "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

Albatrossity2 Posts: 2780 Joined: Mar. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,13:34    Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 26 2007,12:12) THANK YOU FRONTLOADED CRAPPY CREATURES! Hilarious! I wonder if Daniel can give us his interpretation of the data in this article, pointing out the evolutionary relationship of a bacterial protein (FtsZ) and tubulin. Are bacteria conscious?  What are they thinking? Probably something like "I have all of these really cool genes. Why am I living in this pile of stinking crap?" -------------- Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind Has been obligated from the beginning To create an ordered universe As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.                         - Pattiann Rogers

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,13:57    Quote Here is a link to a Dembski paper on the subject. I thought it was an essay. Has it actually been published somewhere? If so, I'd appreciate the citation. -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:01    As for links to Dembskiana, I have some more. Dembski and critics link page. Up until things got crazy with writing and defending my dissertation in 2002, I was pretty active in keeping these pages updated with pretty much any online resource of note concerning Dembski... and criticisms of his ideas. It's a one-stop shop for stuff to that point in time. Dembski dossier at AE -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Wesley R. Elsberry Posts: 4991 Joined: May 2002 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:03    The one thing missing from TP's reply seems to be the answer to my question, Quote When has anything been measured in CSI? -------------- "You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Thought Provoker Posts: 530 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:10    Hi Wesley, You asked... Quote I thought it was an essay. Has it actually been published somewhere? Hey, I'm an engineer, not a scientist.  Whatever it is supposed to be called, it was something I digested and understood to be Dembski's opinion on a topic that is fundimental to ID.  It is also recent (Aug, 2005).

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:14    Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 26 2007,14:03) The one thing missing from TP's reply seems to be the answer to my question,   Quote When has anything been measured in CSI? TP there are several threads that attempt to get a real world example of the EF (and therefore a measure of CSI is required). If you have something to add I'm sure I can find the links and you can add to the discussion's. -------------- 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

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:18    Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 26 2007,14:14) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 26 2007,14:03) The one thing missing from TP's reply seems to be the answer to my question,   Quote When has anything been measured in CSI? TP there are several threads that attempt to get a real world example of the EF (and therefore a measure of CSI is required). If you have something to add I'm sure I can find the links and you can add to the discussion's. Sadly the one at "The Sci Phi Show" (which Sal ran away from) is dead. I think the whole message board went down. -------------- "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

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:27    Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 26 2007,14:18) Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 26 2007,14:14) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 26 2007,14:03) The one thing missing from TP's reply seems to be the answer to my question,     Quote When has anything been measured in CSI? TP there are several threads that attempt to get a real world example of the EF (and therefore a measure of CSI is required). If you have something to add I'm sure I can find the links and you can add to the discussion's. Sadly the one at "The Sci Phi Show" (which Sal ran away from) is dead. I think the whole message board went down. Oh? I keep meaning to go back but somehow never bothered. What always made me laugh was when I went to the website it would take 5-10 seconds to "start up" and then it was fine. Obviously the hard drive was going to sleep and only waking up when there was a visitor. Not many visitors :) I think the active ID loons that are linked to UD are down to a dozen or two now. I guess there are millions of random loons like the bloke I just created the thread for to try and entice in. The guy's a science teacher ffs, and that's what got me (FTK, take note). I mean, my science teachers were great in years gone by and the comparison from them to this bloke - well, he's down there in the FTK zone. It's a shame these sort of people get to call themselves teachers. -------------- 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

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:30    Old man, the big 1k is coming up for you, Celebrate with a special post, a virgin sacrifice (CarslonJok) and by paying homage to me. Mwuahaha. -------------- "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

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,14:53    Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 26 2007,14:30) Old man, the big 1k is coming up for you, Celebrate with a special post, a virgin sacrifice (CarslonJok) and by paying homage to me. How dare you suggest that I do not engage in carnal relations with members of the opposite gender. Why, I will have you know that today is my 15th wedding anniversary and it was just last.......... .......um...........err.........not that long ago....... hmmm......... Oh, never mind.   -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,15:01    I'M SUPRISED SHE LETS THAT MIDGIT RIDE YOU. -------------- "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

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2007,15:10    Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 26 2007,15:01) I'M SUPRISED SHE LETS THAT MIDGIT RIDE YOU. I am on a pretty short lead since she found a picture of me hanging out with one of Lou FCD's friends. -------------- It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

Pages: (9) < 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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