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

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

Pages: (356) < ... 140 141 142 143 144 [145] 146 147 148 149 150 ... >

Febble Posts: 310 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,04:31    Quote (REC @ May 13 2012,17:23) Where's the red-herring tank? marinating in the ad hominen oil?

Amadan Posts: 1337 Joined: Jan. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,05:06    Is the ceiling wired for a loudspeaker? -------------- "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.

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,06:24    Quote (Febble @ May 14 2012,12:31) Quote (REC @ May 13 2012,17:23) Where's the red-herring tank? marinating in the ad hominen oil? Mixed with metaphor of picked cherries, conclusion high jumps and dead bell ends. Sautéed with burning man ambitions, fueled by paper tigers. Well poisoned rhetoric, served in a chalice. Drivel with oil of sad omens. An ancient plot puked through a 56k modem on a malaria infested rock no one wants to go to. -------------- "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

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,09:53    Quote (JLT @ May 12 2012,06:21) Just to document this for the next time StephenB claims that he's the sole arbiter of logic and reason: StephenB   Quote My attitude is simple. Whenever my personal interpretation of the Bible conflicts with my scientific speculations, I go with the Bible every time. However, when my personal interpretation conflicts with something I know to be a slam dunk fact, I re-evaluate my biblical interpretation, knowing that I made a mistake in reading it. How do I know that? I know it because the Bible will never contravene a fact, therefore, if it appears to, I am misreading it. How do I know that the Bible will never contravene a fact? Because the Bible is inerrant. Just had a glance at that thread - the only live one at the moment. From what I gathered, Stephen B. has left a shred of sanity compared to tjguy who takes him to task about Teh Fludd. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,12:28    Barry. It is as "obvious" that living things appear to be designed as it is that the earth appears to be flat, and that the sun and other celestial objects revolve around the earth. However, the evidence points to the facts that: 1) living things were not designed for a purpose; 2) the earth is not flat; 3) the sun and celestial objects do not revolve around the earth. Nice try, and actually, I think this was a creative attempt by you, Barry, but your argument would not persuade any instructor teaching Freshman Composition. Again, and seemingly always with ID, the analogy is not apt. Evolution is cooborated not only by the biological evidence, but by evidence in chemistry, physics, archeology, and other sciences (and now, apparently, the humanities). Triangulation, Barry. "Design" enjoys no such status. No, Barry, it is you who is just like a YEC, except that you have added one more matryoshka doll: you take the eyeballing of "design," wrap it in the evidence for evolution, then doll it up with another matryoshka called begging the question (not to mention the burden of proof). Thank you for getting your paper in on time, but I just gave you an F, and no, classroom participation will not alter it. -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,12:38    P.S. I notice that the split between IDists and YECs, that I predicted so long ago in the comments at Red State Rabble, has begun. What I did not predict was the sudden emergence of an attempt to correlate YECs and those who accept the scientific evidence for evolution, while at the same time allowing those still uninformed about ID (an astonishing large audience, it seems, after all of that hard PR work) to think that intelligent design is merely "God had something to do with evolution." Veeeery interesting. -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,12:53    Quote (Kristine @ May 14 2012,10:38) P.S. I notice that the split between IDists and YECs, that I predicted so long ago in the comments at Red State Rabble, has begun. What I did not predict was the sudden emergence ;) of an attempt to correlate YECs and those who accept the scientific evidence for evolution, while at the same time allowing those still uninformed about ID (an astonishing large audience, it seems, after all of that hard PR work) to think that intelligent design is merely "God had something to do with evolution." Veeeery interesting. I'm surprised as well, Kristine.  I was expecting a series of fundier-than-thou purges, with a "six days, flood and baraminology" loyalty oath.  It will be interesting* to see where this attempt to co-opt theistic evolutionists ends up, especially given Dr Dr D's current employment. * for some definitions of the word "interesting". -------------- 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

REC Posts: 638 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,14:20    SCheesman sticks his neck out on Barry's 9000th post celebration: Quote I wish I could celebrate, but I fear 9000 is a reflection of a vast inflation in the number rate of postings in the last year or two, with a corresponding decline in comments. I owe a good deal of what I know today about ID from UD, both from a scientific and theological perspective, and used to enjoy the long threads and back-and-forth between proponents and opponents. But now, many, if not most posts get nary a comment, and the ones engendering some debate often are lost in the crowd. Since the recent purge of participants who failed to pass what amounted to a purity test, it’s been pretty quiet here. The most lively recent discussion featured a debate between OEC’s and YEC’s. Now I enjoy that sort of thing (like on Sal Cordova’s old “Young Cosmos” blog), but it’s hardly what UD used to be known for. Maybe the new format gets more visitors than it used to, but I’d be interested in seeing the stats, including comments per post, posts per month, unique visitors etc. over the last few years. I miss the old days. I expect a lot of us do. Please, Barry, celebrate this milestone with a Loudspeaker/ Bannination.

Patrick Posts: 666 Joined: July 2011 (Permalink) Posted: May 14 2012,16:13    Quote (REC @ May 14 2012,15:20) SCheesman sticks his neck out on Barry's 9000th post celebration: Quote I wish I could celebrate, but I fear 9000 is a reflection of a vast inflation in the number rate of postings in the last year or two, with a corresponding decline in comments. I owe a good deal of what I know today about ID from UD, both from a scientific and theological perspective, and used to enjoy the long threads and back-and-forth between proponents and opponents. But now, many, if not most posts get nary a comment, and the ones engendering some debate often are lost in the crowd. Since the recent purge of participants who failed to pass what amounted to a purity test, it’s been pretty quiet here. The most lively recent discussion featured a debate between OEC’s and YEC’s. Now I enjoy that sort of thing (like on Sal Cordova’s old “Young Cosmos” blog), but it’s hardly what UD used to be known for. Maybe the new format gets more visitors than it used to, but I’d be interested in seeing the stats, including comments per post, posts per month, unique visitors etc. over the last few years. I miss the old days. I expect a lot of us do. Please, Barry, celebrate this milestone with a Loudspeaker/ Bannination. Does anyone have SCheesman's contact details?  I'm sure he could find some of the "back-and-forth" he's looking for here.  He's probably just waiting for an invitation.

DiEb Posts: 312 Joined: May 2008 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,02:49    Quote (REC @ May 14 2012,20:20) SCheesman sticks his neck out on Barry's 9000th post celebration:   Quote I wish I could celebrate, but I fear 9000 is a reflection of a vast inflation in the number rate of postings in the last year or two, with a corresponding decline in comments. I owe a good deal of what I know today about ID from UD, both from a scientific and theological perspective, and used to enjoy the long threads and back-and-forth between proponents and opponents. But now, many, if not most posts get nary a comment, and the ones engendering some debate often are lost in the crowd. Since the recent purge of participants who failed to pass what amounted to a purity test, it’s been pretty quiet here. The most lively recent discussion featured a debate between OEC’s and YEC’s. Now I enjoy that sort of thing (like on Sal Cordova’s old “Young Cosmos” blog), but it’s hardly what UD used to be known for. Maybe the new format gets more visitors than it used to, but I’d be interested in seeing the stats, including comments per post, posts per month, unique visitors etc. over the last few years. I miss the old days. I expect a lot of us do. Please, Barry, celebrate this milestone with a Loudspeaker/ Bannination. Here are some of the stats in which SCheesman is interested.

Stephen Elliott Posts: 1776 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,04:20    Quote (Kristine @ May 14 2012,12:28) Barry. ... Nice try, and actually, I think this was a creative attempt by you, Barry, but your argument would not persuade any instructor teaching Freshman Composition. Again, and seemingly always with ID, the analogy is not apt. Evolution is cooborated not only by the biological evidence, but by evidence in chemistry, physics, archeology, and other sciences (and now, apparently, the humanities). Triangulation, Barry. "Design" enjoys no such status. No, Barry, it is you who is just like a YEC, except that you have added one more matryoshka doll: you take the eyeballing of "design," wrap it in the evidence for evolution, then doll it up with another matryoshka called begging the question (not to mention the burden of proof). Thank you for getting your paper in on time, but I just gave you an F, and no, classroom participation will not alter it. That was damned funny.

NormOlsen Posts: 104 Joined: Nov. 2011 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,11:42    For a blog purportedly about Intelligent Design, the only OPs that generate a significant number of comments are about religion.  For example, How TEs are like YECs, which has 161 comments to date, with 347 instances of the word "God". Just in case there was any confusion about what really excites IDists. (hint: it's God) Everybody already knows this, but still, reading through those comments and seeing some of the regular UDers with their guard down, in full god-botherish mode is quite revealing.

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,12:02    Quote (REC @ May 14 2012,14:20) SCheesman sticks his neck out on Barry's 9000th post celebration:     Quote I wish I could celebrate, but I fear 9000 is a reflection of a vast inflation in the number rate of postings in the last year or two, with a corresponding decline in comments. I owe a good deal of what I know today about ID from UD, both from a scientific and theological perspective, and used to enjoy the long threads and back-and-forth between proponents and opponents. But now, many, if not most posts get nary a comment, and the ones engendering some debate often are lost in the crowd. Since the recent purge of participants who failed to pass what amounted to a purity test, it’s been pretty quiet here. The most lively recent discussion featured a debate between OEC’s and YEC’s. Now I enjoy that sort of thing (like on Sal Cordova’s old “Young Cosmos” blog), but it’s hardly what UD used to be known for. Maybe the new format gets more visitors than it used to, but I’d be interested in seeing the stats, including comments per post, posts per month, unique visitors etc. over the last few years. I miss the old days. I expect a lot of us do. Please, Barry, celebrate this milestone with a Loudspeaker/ Bannination. The audience is no longer amused and starts to grumble. johnnyb:   Quote So, we’ve lost PCID, ISCID, UD is now a news site, and Telic Thoughts is pumping very slowly. Does this mean ID is dying? No, on the other hand, it is professionalizing. There are starting to be conferences on ID, ID has a journal, and ID is starting to appear more in other journals (though not usually under the title “Intelligent Design”). It would be nice if there were a research spot where ID’ers and their critics could hang out and discuss things like men, but there is not. Slimy Sal (who inspired my current avatar) offers a solution:   Quote Given the success of the discussions at the Young Cosmos website during the summer of 2007, I have the acquired the domain: “CreationEvolutionUniversity” where I hope to host such discussion and exchange of papers. ... There will be a separate discussion forum where thread starters can invite who they wish to publicly dialogue with. I've bolded the bits that made me laugh the loudest. No linky, it's the comments right after SCheesman's. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,13:17

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,13:29    Nice Norwegian Blue, Woodbine! I'm wondering whom johnnyb wants to exclude when he is discussing like a man - mathgrrl (hehe) or Lizzie. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

oldmanintheskydidntdoit Posts: 4999 Joined: July 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,13:45    The content is unavailable, but you can see by the topic titles how YEC Sal is. http://web.archive.org/web....ttp You can read many of his "puppy beater" posts on this page: http://web.archive.org/web....ttp -------------- 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

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,16:00    Quote (Kattarina98 @ May 15 2012,12:02) Slimy Sal (who inspired my current avatar) offers a solution:       Quote Given the success of the discussions at the Young Cosmos website during the summer of 2007, I have the acquired the domain: “CreationEvolutionUniversity” where I hope to host such discussion and exchange of papers. ... There will be a separate discussion forum where thread starters can invite who they wish to publicly dialogue with. I've bolded the bits that made me laugh the loudest. No linky, it's the comments right after SCheesman's. I don't mean to beat a dead (ahem) horse and invoke a producer of ear-worm invective, but - Does this behavior remind anyone of someone who started a new blog whenever the comments crashed and burned? -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,17:16    http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-425156 Quote 14Barry ArringtonMay 15, 2012 at 4:04 pm Commenters, Thank you for your comments. The management at UD has wrestled with the identified issues for over a year now. The problem is, like most decisions we have to make in our lives, there are no clear “good” and “bad” answers to these questions. Instead, you have tradeoffs. On the one hand, we know that the lifeblood of a blog is constant new content. On the other hand, we love the intense, largely civil discussions that go along with some of the more in-depth posts. So the tradeoff is between higher traffic (more posts) and more opportunity for discussion before the in-depth posts move down the page (fewer posts). At UD we try to achieve both goals though a system that is similar to the one KF suggests. You might have noticed that the four posts just under the lead post “stick” longer than the other posts. The reason for this is that the news posts do not go into this area. They are pushed down by any new post that comes along. The posts in the “sticky” area tend to be the more in-depth posts that draw more comments. We are trying to have the best of both worlds, higher traffic attracted by constant new content; and in-depth discussion of the posts in the “sticky” section. I am not worried about the comments-per-post data. As Denyse points out, that ratio was bound to go down when we added a news desk. I am also quite pleased with the quality of the discussions at UD. This is especially the case when I look at other sites around the web (all pro-Darwin), where the discussion is barely above schoolyard taunt level most of the time. All in all, while we continue to look for ways to improve, I am pleased with where we are at UD, and I am especially proud of Denyse’s news desk. She does a fantastic job for us. Barry LOLOCAUST. -------------- "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

The whole truth Posts: 1554 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,17:37    Quote (Kattarina98 @ May 15 2012,10:02) Quote (REC @ May 14 2012,14:20) SCheesman sticks his neck out on Barry's 9000th post celebration:       Quote I wish I could celebrate, but I fear 9000 is a reflection of a vast inflation in the number rate of postings in the last year or two, with a corresponding decline in comments. I owe a good deal of what I know today about ID from UD, both from a scientific and theological perspective, and used to enjoy the long threads and back-and-forth between proponents and opponents. But now, many, if not most posts get nary a comment, and the ones engendering some debate often are lost in the crowd. Since the recent purge of participants who failed to pass what amounted to a purity test, it’s been pretty quiet here. The most lively recent discussion featured a debate between OEC’s and YEC’s. Now I enjoy that sort of thing (like on Sal Cordova’s old “Young Cosmos” blog), but it’s hardly what UD used to be known for. Maybe the new format gets more visitors than it used to, but I’d be interested in seeing the stats, including comments per post, posts per month, unique visitors etc. over the last few years. I miss the old days. I expect a lot of us do. Please, Barry, celebrate this milestone with a Loudspeaker/ Bannination. The audience is no longer amused and starts to grumble. johnnyb:   Quote So, we’ve lost PCID, ISCID, UD is now a news site, and Telic Thoughts is pumping very slowly. Does this mean ID is dying? No, on the other hand, it is professionalizing. There are starting to be conferences on ID, ID has a journal, and ID is starting to appear more in other journals (though not usually under the title “Intelligent Design”). It would be nice if there were a research spot where ID’ers and their critics could hang out and discuss things like men, but there is not. Slimy Sal (who inspired my current avatar) offers a solution:     Quote Given the success of the discussions at the Young Cosmos website during the summer of 2007, I have the acquired the domain: “CreationEvolutionUniversity” where I hope to host such discussion and exchange of papers. ... There will be a separate discussion forum where thread starters can invite who they wish to publicly dialogue with. I've bolded the bits that made me laugh the loudest. No linky, it's the comments right after SCheesman's. This too made me laugh: "exchange of papers" Papers? IDiots don't need no stinking papers. They can (and do) just make shit up as they go along. -------------- 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: May 15 2012,17:41    Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ May 15 2012,11:45) The content is unavailable, but you can see by the topic titles how YEC Sal is. http://web.archive.org/web............ttp You can read many of his "puppy beater" posts on this page: http://web.archive.org/web............ttp I'm only slightly aware of cordova's history, and the more I see of it the more I see what a rancid turd he is. No wonder he's called Slimy Sal. -------------- 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

Timothy McDougald Posts: 1036 Joined: Dec. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,18:14    Quote ... and I am especially proud of Denyse’s news desk. She does a fantastic job for us. -------------- Church burning ebola boy FTK: I Didn't answer your questions because it beats the hell out of me. PaV: I suppose for me to be pried away from what I do to focus long and hard on that particular problem would take, quite honestly, hundreds of thousands of dollars to begin to pique my interest.

The whole truth Posts: 1554 Joined: Jan. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,18:20    Quote (Richardthughes @ May 15 2012,15:16) http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-425156 Quote 14Barry ArringtonMay 15, 2012 at 4:04 pm Commenters, Thank you for your comments. The management at UD has wrestled with the identified issues for over a year now. The problem is, like most decisions we have to make in our lives, there are no clear “good” and “bad” answers to these questions. Instead, you have tradeoffs. On the one hand, we know that the lifeblood of a blog is constant new content. On the other hand, we love the intense, largely civil discussions that go along with some of the more in-depth posts. So the tradeoff is between higher traffic (more posts) and more opportunity for discussion before the in-depth posts move down the page (fewer posts). At UD we try to achieve both goals though a system that is similar to the one KF suggests. You might have noticed that the four posts just under the lead post “stick” longer than the other posts. The reason for this is that the news posts do not go into this area. They are pushed down by any new post that comes along. The posts in the “sticky” area tend to be the more in-depth posts that draw more comments. We are trying to have the best of both worlds, higher traffic attracted by constant new content; and in-depth discussion of the posts in the “sticky” section. I am not worried about the comments-per-post data. As Denyse points out, that ratio was bound to go down when we added a news desk. I am also quite pleased with the quality of the discussions at UD. This is especially the case when I look at other sites around the web (all pro-Darwin), where the discussion is barely above schoolyard taunt level most of the time. All in all, while we continue to look for ways to improve, I am pleased with where we are at UD, and I am especially proud of Denyse’s news desk. She does a fantastic job for us. Barry LOLOCAUST. Yes, definitely a LOLOCAUST, and the usual demonstration of denial and IDiocy. "we know that the lifeblood of a blog is constant new content" What new content? It's really just the same old shit, and could all be distilled down to something like this: Darwin was evil. Anyone who isn't a zealous evangelical intelligent design creationist fundy is evil, and will burn in Hell forever. Evolution doesn't happen, and the ToE is evil. Science is evil, but we thoroughly enjoy the perks it provides. Worship me and my God, or risk my and God's wrath.   We're exceptional, and specially created in God's image. We're God's official spokesmen. We are inerrant. Darwinists/evolutionists/materialists/naturalists/atheists are the spawn of the Devil and are always wrong. Reality sucks. Fantasy rules. The crazier it is the more we like it and believe in it. Everything is rapidly decaying and sinful. Repent now! God-did-it. -------------- 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

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: May 15 2012,19:54    Quote (Kattarina98 @ May 15 2012,11:29) Nice Norwegian Blue, Woodbine! I'm wondering whom johnnyb wants to exclude when he is discussing like a man - mathgrrl (hehe) or Lizzie. Oh. "Let us, like men, discuss things." not "Let us discuss 'things like men'." I see now. -------------- "[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory "Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,02:29    The spin doctor is in.  (links to UD) Quote For instance from 2010/11 we had a clear sock puppet and troll wave that sought to kill UD, and that is reflected in part of the statistics. Some of the die-off is due to the tail end of that wave. What the other commenters perceived to be an interesting debate in 2011 and miss so much they are now thinking of migrating to another site was in fact an attempt to kill UD, and they never noticed the death throes because the debate was so - lively! And what even you admit to be a "die-off" is in fact the healing process. It pays to be trained in Christian apologetics, doesn't it, KF? -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,08:09    Quote (Kattarina98 @ May 16 2012,10:29) The spin doctor is in.  (links to UD)   Quote For instance from 2010/11 we had a clear sock puppet and troll wave that sought to kill UD, and that is reflected in part of the statistics. Some of the die-off is due to the tail end of that wave. What the other commenters perceived to be an interesting debate in 2011 and miss so much they are now thinking of migrating to another site was in fact an attempt to kill UD, and they never noticed the death throes because the debate was so - lively! And what even you admit to be a "die-off" is in fact the healing process. It pays to be trained in Christian apologetics, doesn't it, KF? God must be on a long free lunch if he just waves socks at UD. -------------- "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

NormOlsen Posts: 104 Joined: Nov. 2011 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,09:56    O'Leary offers evidence against human evolution:   Quote The few claims for which we have hard evidence are stuff like cave art (which went downhill over the millennia) and temple complexes (Gobekli Tepe, about 12000 years old, went down over the millennia too), which doesn’t support Darwin’s gradual ascent thesis at all. That, plus the fact that she's way dumber than most writers were a century ago, so take that Darwin!

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,10:55    Quote (NormOlsen @ May 16 2012,09:56) O'Leary offers evidence against human evolution:     Quote The few claims for which we have hard evidence are stuff like cave art (which went downhill over the millennia) and temple complexes (Gobekli Tepe, about 12000 years old, went down over the millennia too), which doesn’t support Darwin’s gradual ascent thesis at all. That, plus the fact that she's way dumber than most writers were a century ago, so take that Darwin! Her whole OP is one huge mountain of manure madness. I was starting to pick some tidbits for your edification but was overwhelmed by the sheer quantity of fail. And she's so proud of it she signed it with O'Leary instead of News. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

Freddie Posts: 371 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,11:34    Quote (NormOlsen @ May 16 2012,09:56) O'Leary offers evidence against human evolution:       Quote The few claims for which we have hard evidence are stuff like cave art (which went downhill over the millennia) and temple complexes (Gobekli Tepe, about 12000 years old, went down over the millennia too), which doesn’t support Darwin’s gradual ascent thesis at all. That, plus the fact that she's way dumber than most writers were a century ago, so take that Darwin! What the fuck does that even mean?  Did she just piss off a few hundred million fellow catholics? -------------- Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy. Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people. Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.

Kattarina98 Posts: 1267 Joined: Sep. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,11:58    Quote (Freddie @ May 16 2012,11:34) What the fuck does that even mean?  Did she just piss off a few hundred million fellow catholics? She might love to piss off Catholics; iirc she belongs to a group of fundie dissenters who want to go back to the roots. -------------- Barry Arrington is a bitch.

sparc Posts: 2088 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: May 16 2012,14:43    Quote (Kattarina98 @ May 16 2012,11:58) Quote (Freddie @ May 16 2012,11:34) What the fuck does that even mean?  Did she just piss off a few hundred million fellow catholics? She might love to piss off Catholics; iirc she belongs to a group of fundie dissenters who want to go back to the roots. Isn't she a former fundy evangelical and converted for whatever reasons? -------------- "[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God." - William Dembski -

Pages: (356) < ... 140 141 142 143 144 [145] 146 147 148 149 150 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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