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... > A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin

Pages: (622) < ... 479 480 481 482 483 [484] 485 486 487 488 489 ... >

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,17:00    Quote (ChemiCat @ June 30 2015,08:42) You are claiming that your "model" code shows the relationship between chemical/electro-chemical/chemical signalling between neurons. Where exactly is this relationship? It would help for you to first explain where exactly is this relationship in this commonly programmed model of chemical-to-electrical-to-chemical signal transduction neurons? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....network -------------- 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: June 30 2015,17:18    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,17:55) Quote (ChemiCat @ June 30 2015,08:42) I won't expect an answer any time soon, what with you having such a huge backlog of unanswered questions in this forum. I'm not obliged to waste my time on those who cannot accept scientific definitions, demand that I meet their religious expectations. As far as your work goes, you've provided no scientific definitions. You've also ignored the contradictions between the definitions of science and your usage. "Learn" is merely one glaring example. "Emergent" is another, and directly relevant to this latest wash of effluent.

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,17:54    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,22:55)   Quote (ChemiCat @ June 30 2015,08:42) I won't expect an answer any time soon, what with you having such a huge backlog of unanswered questions in this forum. I'm not obliged to waste my time on those who cannot accept scientific definitions, demand that I meet their religious expectations. Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks.

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,18:15    Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,17:54) Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks. Your future robot overlords are doing splendidly! This one even shares my mood, in regards to you:   Quote Artificial Intelligence Machine Gets Testy With Its Programmer Human: I really like our discussion on morality and ethics… Machine: And how I’m not in the mood for a philosophical debate. Human: What do you like to talk about? Machine: Nothing. -------------- 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: June 30 2015,18:25    Are you moonlighting as a robot, Gary? You're under-qualified.

Texas Teach Posts: 2084 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,18:46    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,18:15) Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,17:54) Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks. Your future robot overlords are doing splendidly! This one even shares my mood, in regards to you:     Quote Artificial Intelligence Machine Gets Testy With Its Programmer Human: I really like our discussion on morality and ethics… Machine: And how I’m not in the mood for a philosophical debate. Human: What do you like to talk about? Machine: Nothing. Why are you so afraid, Gary?  Just give a page number.  Bwok  bwok bwok bwok bwok... -------------- "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

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,18:54    Quote (NoName @ July 01 2015,00:25) Are you moonlighting as a robot, Gary? You're under-qualified. It's even weirder than that. Gary is moonlighting as a robot with a substantially better grasp of English than he has. And presumably better teeth. Whether the robot is a liar and a fraud like Gary remains to be seen. I think I should email Kathy Martin about Gary's recent behaviour. I doubt Kathy would approve of anyone making unsubstantiated claims.

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,19:14    Yer not the bossa me, now Yer not the bossa me, now Yer not the bossa me, now and yer not so great... Life is unfair. -------------- "[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

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,19:19    Quote (Texas Teach @ June 30 2015,18:46) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,18:15) Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,17:54) Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks. Your future robot overlords are doing splendidly! This one even shares my mood, in regards to you:     Quote Artificial Intelligence Machine Gets Testy With Its Programmer Human: I really like our discussion on morality and ethics… Machine: And how I’m not in the mood for a philosophical debate. Human: What do you like to talk about? Machine: Nothing. Why are you so afraid, Gary?  Just give a page number.  Bwok  bwok bwok bwok bwok... If I did that then this thread would become many pages longer, in part from all the complaining afterward about your not wanting to see pages of information and illustrations for how intelligence and intelligent cause works. Either way, I'm damned. -------------- 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.

Texas Teach Posts: 2084 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,19:36    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,19:19) Quote (Texas Teach @ June 30 2015,18:46) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,18:15)   Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,17:54) Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks. Your future robot overlords are doing splendidly! This one even shares my mood, in regards to you:       Quote Artificial Intelligence Machine Gets Testy With Its Programmer Human: I really like our discussion on morality and ethics… Machine: And how I’m not in the mood for a philosophical debate. Human: What do you like to talk about? Machine: Nothing. Why are you so afraid, Gary?  Just give a page number.  Bwok  bwok bwok bwok bwok... If I did that then this thread would become many pages longer, in part from all the complaining afterward about your not wanting to see pages of information and illustrations for how intelligence and intelligent cause works. Either way, I'm damned. Bwok bwok bwok bwok bwok... -------------- "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

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,19:52    Quote (GaryGaulin @ July 01 2015,01:19) If I did that then this thread would become many pages longer, in part from all the complaining afterward about your not wanting to see pages of information and illustrations for how intelligence and intelligent cause works. Apart from being the worst excuse ever your latest dodge is a clumsy and predictable attempt at redirection. The request isn't for your explanation of intelligence. Nor is it for your explanation of 'intelligent cause'. The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. See the difference? (Probably not considering your chronic inability to grasp the difference between falsifiability and falsification)           Quote Either way, I'm damned. Yes, scientists who fail refuse to substantiate their claims inevitably are.

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,20:15    Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request isn't for your explanation of intelligence. Nor is it for your explanation of 'intelligent cause'. The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. See the difference? Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. -------------- 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: June 30 2015,20:20    Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) Yes, scientists who fail refuse to substantiate their claims inevitably are. And  scumbags like you who throw defamatory insults while talking trash should crawl back under the rock you slithered out from, and take your science-trashing friends with you. -------------- 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.

Cubist Posts: 558 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,20:23    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)     Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is.

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,20:50    Quote (Cubist @ June 30 2015,20:23) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)     Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is. That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. -------------- 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.

Jim_Wynne Posts: 1208 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,21:14    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:50) Quote (Cubist @ June 30 2015,20:23) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)       Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is. That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. So it's turtles all the way down? -------------- Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,21:15    Quote (GaryGaulin @ July 01 2015,02:15) Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. Jesus. Just look at that. Ah well, it was worth it for that gem alone. I hope the Ukrainians are taking notes. Right now Kathy is puking in a bucket from shame.         Quote You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again.         Quote That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. You haven't a clue what you are talking about, do you? You've seen somebody online use the term 'circular logic' pejoratively and decided to throw it out there and hope for the best. It's like watching a monkey use a TV remote to wipe its arse.

Texas Teach Posts: 2084 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,21:19    Quote (Jim_Wynne @ June 30 2015,21:14) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:50) Quote (Cubist @ June 30 2015,20:23)   Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)       Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is. That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. So it's turtles all the way down? Self-similar emergent turtles. -------------- "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

Jim_Wynne Posts: 1208 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,21:45    Quote (Texas Teach @ June 30 2015,21:19) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ June 30 2015,21:14) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:50)   Quote (Cubist @ June 30 2015,20:23)   Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)         Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is. That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. So it's turtles all the way down? Self-similar emergent turtles. When GG sees this he will dutifully Google "turtles all the way down," find a Wikipedia explanation, then offer a link as evidence that he's correct.  That or a YouTube video of "Happy Together." -------------- Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Cubist Posts: 558 Joined: Oct. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,22:06    Me and you… and you and me No matter how we toss the dice, it had to be The only one for me is you, and you for me So happy together…

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,22:07    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,14:55) Quote (ChemiCat @ June 30 2015,08:42) I won't expect an answer any time soon, what with you having such a huge backlog of unanswered questions in this forum. I'm not obliged to waste my time on those who cannot accept scientific definitions, demand that I meet their religious expectations. (shrug) You're not obliged to do anything. And we are not obliged to take your gibberish seriously. You get what you give. -------------- "[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

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 30 2015,22:07    Quote (Texas Teach @ June 30 2015,19:19) Quote (Jim_Wynne @ June 30 2015,21:14) Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:50)   Quote (Cubist @ June 30 2015,20:23)   Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:15)         Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. Wow. The guy who confidently declares that "Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another.", complains about someone else "playing a circular word game". That is well and truly special, that is. That's their circular logic being addressed, and it's certainly not my fault that a logical response to it is at least equally dizzying. So it's turtles all the way down? Self-similar emergent turtles. fracturtles. -------------- "[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

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,00:16    Quote (fnxtr @ June 30 2015,22:07) You get what you give. Yes that's why I spent the free time I had this evening working on the new ID Lab. At least some know what I gave is for. The program is coming out nicer than I thought it would. Whatever I have by Friday will be more than good enough to go, as the last preliminary it may need. Quote (fnxtr @ June 30 2015,22:07) And we are not obliged to take your gibberish seriously. If you do not feel obliged to take the primary scientific issues of the ID controversy seriously then you have yourselves to blame for having scientific opinions that cannot be taken seriously either. Science does not allow vocabularies that require the phrase "intelligent cause" to be an unscientific concept. And I'm not in the mood for religious/philosophical debate over that being the way it is, in reality. -------------- 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.

ChemiCat Posts: 532 Joined: Nov. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,02:28    Quote Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,14:55) Quote (ChemiCat @ June 30 2015,08:42) I won't expect an answer any time soon, what with you having such a huge backlog of unanswered questions in this forum. I'm not obliged to waste my time on those who cannot accept scientific definitions, demand that I meet their religious expectations. "Religious", another word to add to the long, long list of words that Gaulin does not or cannot understand. Gaulin, nowhere in my post is any reference to anything "religious". The only one trying, desperately, to force your religion into science is you.* "Intelligent Design", "intelligent Cause", the Trinity etc, etc, etc, etc. Religion wrapped up in a lab coat! You are desperate wannabe with a persecution complex, grow up. * BTW, I don't have a religion, however you define it.

ChemiCat Posts: 532 Joined: Nov. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,02:31    Quote Machine: Nothing. This sums up perfectly your "not-a-theory" and your attitude to answering questions.

NoName Posts: 2729 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,07:03    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,21:15) Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,19:52) The request isn't for your explanation of intelligence. Nor is it for your explanation of 'intelligent cause'. The request is for you to provide your explanation of 'how one intelligence level causes another'. See the difference? Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. ROFLMAO!! Gary has exceeded himself here.  Well, more so than usual at least. This is actually perfectly consistent with Gary's "theory" and his "explanations" -- he is literally unable to see the circularity and inherent contradictions in his approach. His blindness to these core flaws is compounded by his inability to comprehend the notion of 'multiple realizability'.  That a process can be modeled by X does not mean that the process is, in fact, accomplished by X nor that X is the sole means by which the process can be accomplished. I pointed this out a couple of hundred pages ago -- we can model the flight path of a baseball, or the trajectory needed for an eagle at point a to catch a fish expected to be at point b, using calculus.  This does not mean that the person who views, or predicts, the path of the baseball, nor the eagle who successfully catches the fish, performs calculus or understands its function or usage. Gary would have us believe otherwise. But of course Gary believes that because all the intelligence we know of is made up of molecules then all molecules are intelligent in and of themselves.  And that this is somehow an instance or example of emergence. Totally loony, and a pathetic failure, that's our Gary.

NoName Posts: 2729 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,07:09    Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,20:19) Quote (Texas Teach @ June 30 2015,18:46)   Quote (GaryGaulin @ June 30 2015,18:15)   Quote (Woodbine @ June 30 2015,17:54) Gary, as a real-scientist you are obliged to back up your claims. But you know this because you are an honourable man and would never lie about your scientific achievements. With this in mind can you please post your explanation for 'how one intelligence level causes another'. Or retract your claim. Many thanks. Your future robot overlords are doing splendidly! This one even shares my mood, in regards to you:       Quote Artificial Intelligence Machine Gets Testy With Its Programmer Human: I really like our discussion on morality and ethics… Machine: And how I’m not in the mood for a philosophical debate. Human: What do you like to talk about? Machine: Nothing. Why are you so afraid, Gary?  Just give a page number.  Bwok  bwok bwok bwok bwok... If I did that then this thread would become many pages longer, in part from all the complaining afterward about your not wanting to see pages of information and illustrations for how intelligence and intelligent cause works. Either way, I'm damned. You're damned regardless.  It's self-inflicted and you're the only one who can begin to fix it.  A therapist would help, but you're the one who has to do the work. What's incredibly funny about this whine of yours is not so much the confusion over what is being requested of you. The really funny bit is how you have, up to now, proclaimed that your "theory" literally is the explanation for how one intelligence level causes another, how intelligence works across the 4 levels of your absurdist diagram, and all things pertaining to 'intelligence'.  This thread is hundreds of pages long in no small part because of your constant posting of 'the diagram' and your links to the ever-changing "theory" of which you are so proud. But now you run away from that and insist it would somehow be pointless. Well, you got one thing right, by accident.  It would indeed be pointless.  Not because it would increase the size of this thread, but because we've all 'been there, done that', and have rejected your "theory" due to its obvious lack of merit. Are you starting to get a glimmer of a trace of a foreshadowing of a premonition of an insight that we might be correct? One can only hope.

N.Wells Posts: 1836 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,07:38    I'm still ridiculously amused over the philosophical perfection of Gary's latest tautology:     Quote Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. It's like a hall of mirrors with a Moebius loop at the end. And "self-similar emergent turtles" and "fracturtles" were wonderful!  Thanks to those responsible.     Quote Science does not allow vocabularies that require the phrase "intelligent cause" to be an unscientific concept. Also, that's a lie.  Beaver dams and tool use by chimps and all other aspects of animal intelligence in action (all of which involve intelligence causing stuff) are of course fully included in science.  What's not allowed are making unsupported claims and smuggling in desired conclusions and hidden agendas by playing games with the meanings of words. Quote [From Woodbine] The request isn't for your explanation of intelligence.  Nor is it for your explanation of 'intelligent cause'. Although those are questions from the early pages of this thread that Gary **still** hasn't answered, along with a justifiable operational definition for intelligence, a logically valid regular definition for intelligence, support for his concept of "molecular intelligence", etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc.

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,09:22    Quote (N.Wells @ July 01 2015,15:38) I'm still ridiculously amused over the philosophical perfection of Gary's latest tautology: Quote Intelligent cause is the cause of one intelligence level causing another. Therefore understanding how intelligent cause works explains how one intelligence level causes another. You are just playing a circular word game, that adds up to your talking nonsense again. It's like a hall of mirrors with a Moebius loop at the end. And "Self-similar emergent turtles" and "fracturtles" were perfect!  Thanks to those responsible. Quote Science does not allow vocabularies that require the phrase "intelligent cause" to be an unscientific concept. Also, that's a lie.  Beaver dams and tool use by chimps and all other aspects of animal intelligence in action are of course fully included in science.  What's not allowed are making unsupported claims and smuggling in desired conclusions and hidden agendas by playing games with the meanings of words. You're ridiculously amused? Phhht. Clichés are mildly amusing. Gary is his own pointless meme. A circular hilarity of mixed metaphors  milking a dead horse. But +1 for the Mobius loop at the end. -------------- "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

GaryGaulin Posts: 5385 Joined: Oct. 2012 (Permalink) Posted: July 01 2015,15:39    Quote (N.Wells @ July 01 2015,07:38) Although those are questions from the early pages of this thread that Gary **still** hasn't answered, along with a justifiable operational definition for intelligence, a logically valid regular definition for intelligence, support for his concept of "molecular intelligence", etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc., etc. Or in other words: you do not allow scientific explanations you only allow definitions that support your religious movement (Atheism). -------------- 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.

Pages: (622) < ... 479 480 481 482 483 [484] 485 486 487 488 489 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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