RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (622) < ... 509 510 511 512 513 [514] 515 516 517 518 519 ... >   
  Topic: A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin, As big as the poop that does not look< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 491
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 12 2015,23:07   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 11 2015,19:18)
And after having to nominate Sal for the past decade's most scientifically useful information (for the ID movement)...

     
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 12 2015,19:24)
And Joe G struck again! But it was helpful:  

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......9180147

With heroes like Sal Cordova, Joe Gallien, Casey Luskin and a pseudo-Halloween Whopper, how could Gary not be doing science?

[ETA the Gaulin-Deified Casey per N.Wells below...if only I could find one of Gary's choice Luskin Links]

--------------
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK

"You could always wrap fresh fish in the paper you publish it on, though, and sell that." - Field Man on how to find value in Gary Gaulin's real-science "theory"

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 12 2015,23:19   

Egads, Gary: Luskin misrepresents almost everything, but you cite him; Joe makes horrendous mistakes all the time, but you cite him; Salvador misrepresents and misunderstands more often than not, and you cite him too.  You do yourself no favors by linking to those sorts of sources.  I'd appeal to your sense of embarrassment and your ability to evaluate sources, but you've shown quite clearly how futile such an appeal would be.  

You are going out of your way to give your ideas a name that serves your purposes about as well as if you had named them "New and Improved Phlogiston Science" (particularly if your work didn't even touch on phlogistons).  If that's too obscure a reference, let me be blunter: leaving aside the issue of whether or not your model meaningfully addresses intelligence, it doesn't show ANYTHING originating through design, so why shoot yourself in the foot, wrap an anchor chain around your neck, and pin a "Kick Me" sign to your behind by labelling your stuff "intelligent design" and citing such pitifully atrocious sources in its support?

If you can't find anything better, you'd be better off letting your model stand on its own without external support.

  
NoName



Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2015,12:38   

So, Gary, having lost on the 'muscle control system', would you prefer that we move on and examine your 'sensory addressed memory'?

The problems there are every bit as bad if not worse.

We have mountains of evidence that memory is not directly addressed, for either write or read, by sensory input.
Processing at various levels goes on between the point where a sensory nerve is activated and when a sensation is felt, to say nothing of when a short-term memory is formed.
The 'same' sensation, under different circumstances (where the difference may be nothing more than time), can generate different memories and retrieve different memories.  This is uncontroversial and well-known.

There is also the problem of the well-known difference between short-term and long-term memory.  They don't work the same.

So precisely what do you mean by 'sensory addressed memory'?  Be specific and precise, ideally with very concrete examples.

Or is your whole "theory" based on a vast generalization where 'motor control system' means simply 'has to have a body' and 'sensory addressed memory' means 'has to have input and memory'?
Those are vague generalizations with zero explanatory power, and, as generalizations, are again entirely uncontroversial.  Except, of course, for asserting 'intelligence' in molecules and cells.  lol

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2015,06:52   

?!

kurzweilai.net/forums/topic/basics-of-dna-hydrogen-bond-electromagnetic-code

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

   
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2015,11:56   

From Gary at Sandwalk,
Quote
the first to figure out how to scientifically explain what its premise is describing


That is a jaw-dropper.  It is Grade Double-A Prime Nonsense right there.  If your science consists of trying to explain somebody's premise, then both you and they are doing science incorrectly.

A premise is a proposition that is assumed to be true for the purpose of an argument.  The only premise that you ever identify is "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."  If people had no idea how to explain this, then it pretty clearly could not serve as an acceptable basis for any further argument, so you (IDists) have been assuming your conclusions.  

In science, if the truth or falsity of a proposition is not known then the proposition is an hypothesis, and unbridled speculation based upon it does not constitute a theory.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2015,16:18   

Quote (N.Wells @ Oct. 14 2015,11:56)
If your science consists of trying to explain somebody's premise, then both you and they are doing science incorrectly.

That is a lame excuse for your reading comprehension problem that came from being such a swellhead.

And for more evidence that the theory was right all along:

Brains work via their genes just as much as their neurons
http://medicalxpress.com/news....ns.html

--------------
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: Oct. 14 2015,16:26   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 14 2015,17:18)
Quote (N.Wells @ Oct. 14 2015,11:56)
If your science consists of trying to explain somebody's premise, then both you and they are doing science incorrectly.

That is a lame excuse for your reading comprehension problem that came from being such a swellhead.

And for more evidence that the theory was right all along:

Brains work via their genes just as much as their neurons
http://medicalxpress.com/news.......ns.html

You are demonstrably unqualified to judge.

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 14 2015,16:30   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 14 2015,16:18)
Quote (N.Wells @ Oct. 14 2015,11:56)
If your science consists of trying to explain somebody's premise, then both you and they are doing science incorrectly.

That is a lame excuse for your reading comprehension problem that came from being such a swellhead.

And for more evidence that the theory was right all along:

Brains work via their genes just as much as their neurons
http://medicalxpress.com/news.......ns.html

Nonresponsive.  Did Einstein say, "I have a theory.  It posits that E = m c-squared.  I now call on scientists worldwide to figure out what 'c' is."?

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2015,00:54   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 12 2015,18:24)
And Joe G struck again! But it was helpful:  

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......9180147

Helpful? Wow, gary, you're more desperate and deluded than I had thought, and your support and praise for YEC sal cordova, the discotooters, and YEC joey g removes any doubt as to whether you're a full blown theocratic goon or not.

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

   
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2015,06:59   

Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 15 2015,00:54)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 12 2015,18:24)
And Joe G struck again! But it was helpful:  

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......9180147

Helpful? Wow, gary, you're more desperate and deluded than I had thought, and your support and praise for YEC sal cordova, the discotooters, and YEC joey g removes any doubt as to whether you're a full blown theocratic goon or not.

My work is doing just fine, in the real world. In fact it's now time to get ready to upload the new model to PSC. More news later.....

--------------
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: Oct. 15 2015,07:00   

So, no clarification or detail or concrete and specific examples of 'sensory addressed memory'?
Are you abandoning that ridiculous notion, or granting that it is a broad generalization with no explanatory power as such?
That's the first two elements of your "circuit diagram" obliterated, then.

  
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 15 2015,07:07   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 15 2015,14:59)
   
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 15 2015,00:54)
   
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 12 2015,18:24)
And Joe G struck again! But it was helpful:  

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......9180147

Helpful? Wow, gary, you're more desperate and deluded than I had thought, and your support and praise for YEC sal cordova, the discotooters, and YEC joey g removes any doubt as to whether you're a full blown theocratic goon or not.

My work is doing just fine crap, in the real bizzarro world. In fact it's now time to get ready to upload the new model toy roomba to PSC. More news shit shining
later.....

fixed

--------------
"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: Oct. 15 2015,18:00   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 15 2015,06:59)
Quote (The whole truth @ Oct. 15 2015,00:54)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 12 2015,18:24)
And Joe G struck again! But it was helpful:  

http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2015.......9180147

Helpful? Wow, gary, you're more desperate and deluded than I had thought, and your support and praise for YEC sal cordova, the discotooters, and YEC joey g removes any doubt as to whether you're a full blown theocratic goon or not.

My work is doing just fine, in the real world. In fact it's now time to get ready to upload the new model to PSC. More news later.....

Or in other words: giving credit where due is not a problem for someone who already shamed their critics so badly they now have zero credibility in all "intelligence" related sciences.

At this point in time: my occasionally having to credit others in the ID movement only goes to show how incredibly badly things went for your anti-ID movement side.

I now have to get back to work explaining the model and theory to people who like to code neural and genetic systems. I'll be back..

--------------
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: Oct. 16 2015,04:01   

Quote
At this point in time: my occasionally having to credit others in the ID movement only goes to show how incredibly badly things went for your anti-ID movement side.


Dover.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,06:58   

Quote (ChemiCat @ Oct. 16 2015,04:01)
Quote
At this point in time: my occasionally having to credit others in the ID movement only goes to show how incredibly badly things went for your anti-ID movement side.


Dover.

Since I knew what the outcome would be: it's not an issue for me.

--------------
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: Oct. 16 2015,11:36   

Quote
Since I knew what the outcome would be: it's not an issue for me.


Intelligent design is dead in the water, Gaulin. So why do you insist of trying to breathe life into it, apart from insanity?

BTW, Postcardo is so far ahead in the Crank Stakes that you are not even on the horizon yet.

  
KevinB



Posts: 525
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,11:47   

Quote (ChemiCat @ Oct. 16 2015,11:36)
 
Quote
Since I knew what the outcome would be: it's not an issue for me.


Intelligent design is dead in the water, Gaulin. So why do you insist of trying to breathe life into it, apart from insanity?

BTW, Postcardo is so far ahead in the Crank Stakes that you are not even on the horizon yet.

That metaphore doesn't work on a flat earth.....

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,16:46   

Quote (ChemiCat @ Oct. 16 2015,11:36)
Quote
Since I knew what the outcome would be: it's not an issue for me.


Intelligent design is dead in the water, Gaulin. So why do you insist of trying to breathe life into it, apart from insanity?


If a premise for a theory can easily enough be scientifically explained then panic over it is ridiculous. It's like running away from your shadow. You only look silly.

You must confront your fears by treating the "Theory of Intelligent Design" just like any other scientific theory.

Quote (ChemiCat @ Oct. 16 2015,11:36)
BTW, Postcardo is so far ahead in the Crank Stakes that you are not even on the horizon yet.


I'll let you two battle it out, for the #1 spot.

--------------
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.

   
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,17:00   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 16 2015,23:46)
If a premise for a theory can easily enough be scientifically explained then panic over it is ridiculous

OK, you can panic now then

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,17:21   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 16 2015,16:46)
I'll let you two battle it out, for the #1 spot.

Have you also programmed a random punctuation generator?

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,17:25   

Notice how Gee Gee wastes inordinate amounts of time trying to find explanations for a "theory" that doesn't explain anything at all

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,17:40   

Gary at Sandwalk:
Quote
I seriously do not know of any science field that's outside of the territory that the "Theory of Intelligent Design" has to cover, regardless of who was the first to figure out how to scientifically explain what its premise is describing.

What the heck kind of theory needs heaps of scientific work to explain its premise?

As long as the premise is understood but unverified, it's an hypothesis.  If you don't even understand the premise, it's unjustified speculation and cannot yet be tested.

You, on the other other hand, are simply assuming your conclusions, which isn't even science.

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:17   

Quote (N.Wells @ Oct. 16 2015,17:40)
As long as the premise is understood but unverified, it's an hypothesis.

Testing the hypothesis in my signature line required scientific theory to explain how the said "intelligent cause" works. Duh?

--------------
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: Oct. 16 2015,18:39   

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

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

--------------
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.

   
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:42   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 17 2015,01:39)
Test = "The theory of intelligent design holds that"
Hypothesis = "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause,"
NotHypothesis = "not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

Look at that, Gaulin has math because there's "additional signs"

  
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:44   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 17 2015,01:39)
Test = "The theory of intelligent design holds that"
Hypothesis = "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause,"
NotHypothesis = "not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

Is it really that hard to google "premise", "hypothesis" and "theory" you fucking retard?

  
GaryGaulin



Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:48   

Quote (dazz @ Oct. 16 2015,17:25)
Notice how Gee Gee wastes inordinate amounts of time trying to find explanations for a "theory" that doesn't explain anything at all

Operationally define "intelligent cause" is as much scientific detail as is scientifically possible.

Only the outcome of the whole ID controversy is at stake here. No pressure.

--------------
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: Oct. 16 2015,18:49   

Quote (dazz @ Oct. 16 2015,18:44)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 17 2015,01:39)
Test = "The theory of intelligent design holds that"
Hypothesis = "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause,"
NotHypothesis = "not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

Is it really that hard to google "premise", "hypothesis" and "theory" you fucking retard?

Do you get a thrill out of being an asshole?

--------------
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.

   
dazz



Posts: 247
Joined: Mar. 2015

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:54   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 17 2015,01:49)
Quote (dazz @ Oct. 16 2015,18:44)
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 17 2015,01:39)
Test = "The theory of intelligent design holds that"
Hypothesis = "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause,"
NotHypothesis = "not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

Is it really that hard to google "premise", "hypothesis" and "theory" you fucking retard?

Do you get a thrill out of being an asshole?

You wouldn't be getting your knickers in a bunch like that if you FUCKING GOOGLED THOSE AND REALIZED HOW RETARDED THAT "EQUATION" IS

  
N.Wells



Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 16 2015,18:57   

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Oct. 16 2015,18:39)
Test = "The theory of intelligent design holds that"
Hypothesis = "certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause,"
NotHypothesis = "not an undirected process such as natural selection."

Test + Hypothesis + NotHypothesis = TheoryPremise = "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."

OK, that doesn't make much sense.
"The theory of intelligent design holds that" is the beginning of a description or summary of the supposed theory of intelligent design.

If "certain features ..... by an intelligent cause" is an hypothesis then the whole thing is not a theory.  "The theory holds that" implies that what follows is the theory.

However, "certain features" is so imprecise as to be useless and uninteresting.  Of course some things in the universe are designed.  No one doubts that, but that's not an explanation of anything specific, nor does it have any implications at all, so the whole mess is utterly pointless.

"NotHypothesis" has no meaning, so you are babbling again.  Possibly what you meant is "null hypothesis", except that a null hypothesis is indeed very much an hypothesis, so either way you are being stupid.

However, the way you are using the phrase, you are merely making an unsupported assertion that you never get around to backing up.  Worse, natural selection has been documented to be important in evolutionary change, so you are just asserting rubbish.

Lastly a test plus an hypothesis (with or without whatever a NotHypothesis is) does not equal a premise.  Never has, never will.

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

Pages: (622) < ... 509 510 511 512 513 [514] 515 516 517 518 519 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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