Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread

Posted: June 30 2006,03:47

LOL!!!
George said:

Quote

Welcome to Windows ID. Homo.

Give that man the AtBC gold miniature idiot award

Acceptance speech please George !!!

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

Ved

Posts: 398
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,04:39

Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ June 30 2006,07:00)

Quote (blipey @ June 29 2006,22:56)

Dembski's lauding a new magazine dedicated to the downfall of materialism! I know; it's exciting.

But ID isn't about religion. No sirree Bob. it's just them lying atheist darwinists who say it is.

Ugh, that's so LAME!

Salvo Magazine, ie Salvation with a militant connotation. Fire another round at materialism, boys!

Brought to you by the Crux Project. "Crucifiction? Good. Out of the door, line on the left, one cross each"

Who do they think they are fooling? Oh, right, themselves. Just look at afdave!

Wesley R. Elsberry

Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

Posted: June 30 2006,04:50

Apparently anybody can join the discussions on the weblog set up to discuss Allen MacNeill's "intelligent design" course at Cornell University. But be sure to read the ground rules for discussion. I don't know how the co-moderation thing there might work, but you might consider copying any comment made there to a comment here, too, just to have a backup.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,04:53

Quote

The first issue focuses on the materialist reduction of soul.

Look guys, basically its just 4/4 gospel music with more contemporary sounds and it relates to relationships with real entities.

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

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,04:58

This magazine business got me thinking. I saw some fundy on MSNBC the other day. He was advocating, IIRC, fundies pulling their kids out of public school, because it was rotting their brains. His evidence for this rotting, was that half the kids who grow up fundy leave the church ASAP. Knowing a lot of fundies and ex-fundies, I could have told him why half the kids leave--they aren't dumb and crazy enough to believe that Will and Grace is executive-produced by the devil, among other things. A friend told me just this week that at the age of 16, she left her southern baptist church for the episcopalians, after the SB preacher mentioned that little black kids and little white kids play together 'because they don't know better'. That kind of thing is not going to be reversed by some 50 year-old-fundies like Denyse O'Leary writing magazine articles in which they try to be hip. Remember being a teenager? How did you respond to adults trying to act hip?

Besides, here's a pic of Denyse:

are you really going to tell me she's not a fan of Will & Grace? Or perhaps The L Word?

******************
Legal Disclaimer: this post is for entertainment purposes only. Must be 18 or over to read. Any Similarity to Persons Living or Dead or Canadian Is Purely Coincidental. Steve S Enterprises, LLC, reserves all rights, including the one of jury nullification, which the law firm of Uncommonly Dense assures him means he can have the jury declared null and void after the verdict. Use of Showtime's The L Word trademark does not imply anything. In fact, the people at Steve S Enterprises just finished the second season on DVD. We're amazed that Bette and Tina are still together. Perhaps things would have gone differently, if Helena wasn't such a megabitch.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,05:09

Quote (George @ June 30 2006,09:16)

Quote

There followed 20 years of job hopping at ever higher salaries until in 1993 I landed a senior engineering position at Dell Computer Corporation in laptop R&D. Our laptops became the gold standard in reliability and battery life,

Bugger. So that's why when my new Dell Inspiron laptop starts up it says

Welcome to Windows ID. Homo.

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,05:36

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ June 30 2006,09:50)

Apparently anybody can join the discussions on the weblog set up to discuss Allen MacNeill's "intelligent design" course at Cornell University. But be sure to read the ground rules for discussion. I don't know how the co-moderation thing there might work, but you might consider copying any comment made there to a comment here, too, just to have a backup.

I put this up:

Quote

Ah, the 'explanatory filter'

A few observations, if I may.

Firstly, it is a fallacy of the Holmesian order:

http://www.frankston.com/Public....Fallacy

The false positives have been noted – similar thinking has histrorically led us to think ‘the giants causeways’ was in fact built by giants and that Mars was populated by, erm, canal builders. [the problem with (1-x) type arguments is that man does not and cannot know “1” (everything BUT x)]. It works if you’re omniscient, but then you know what x is already…

Second, it’s never been used. Please don’t offer the include that is ‘the spontaneous generation’ of the bacterial flagella. Because evolution doesn’t require spontaneous generation.

http://www.aaas.org/spp....002.pdf

IDists in their many blogs often tout,” this would be a perfect application for the explanatory filter”, but they never get around to using it.

They do however use this Explanatory filter:

http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/upload/2006/05/ef20.gif

Ask yourselves why:

http://www.pandasthumb.org/archives/2006/02/the_wisdom_of_p.html

Isn’t the poster child for IC and the main target for SC? It seems far more remarkable and unlikely that cute little flagellas. But it doesn’t nudge you along to the conclusion of a loving, Christian god…

but it looks like there's a moderation queue? How novel, for an ID blog.

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

George

Posts: 316
Joined: Feb. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,05:53

Quote (k.e @ June 30 2006,08:47)

LOL!!!
George said:

Quote

Welcome to Windows ID. Homo.

Give that man the AtBC gold miniature idiot award

Acceptance speech please George !!!

Thank you. But with scriptwriters like GobScott*, it makes the job of the producers very easy.

* Gobshite + DaveScott

steve_h

Posts: 544
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,06:32

Quote (bystander @ June 30 2006,06:51)

...
Does this mean that you could find in a jellyfish DNA the information to create a human? If it does then it's testable isn't it?
...
The only other thing I can think of is that the original critter had DNA that created everything and DNA gets thrown out as species develop. That is as the first amphibians left the water they threw out the fin making genes and the fish knowing that amphibians had evolved throw out the genes for making legs.

If you look carefully, you'll find code for detecting when the time is right for the next planned mutation(s) to take place, and machinery for executing those none-random mutations. If you find a front loading fan who is not averse to pathetic levels of detail, he will happily point out exactly where that code is.
One prediction of front loading is that if you keep cloned bacteria isolated from each other but otherwise in identical conditions they will all experience roughly the same mutations in roughly the same order. Naturally, no so-called scientist who is part of the conspiracy would ever dare to do the experiment.
Front loading also explains why certain identical features are found in diverse places in the 'tree of life'. Conventional Darwinism can't explain that so they normally just deny that it happens. The common ancester was a single celled organism which had dna code for producing high intelligence and opposable thumbs, but that code usually only gets executed if you are human. However, if you zap the right 'call' instruction into the dna of a bacterium (or change the call address of an existing one) it will instantly acquire those traits. See, for example, the famous picture of a mouse suddenly spouting a human ear. That set the Darwinists in a real panic and they had to invent a rather implausible alternative explanation.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,06:39

Front-loading is an idiotic idea. What a shame, then, that Intelligent Design is even less scientific.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,07:21

Quote

June 30, 2006
Accident or Design? Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Spider silk and diatom silica structures are just accidents. We can’t design stuff like this ourselves but when we take these two complex things found in nature and combine them then all of a sudden it’s a design! Wheeeeee! Aren’t we smart!

Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 11:54 am

Somebody want to tell me what the point of this post is?

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,07:28

Quote (stevestory @ June 30 2006,12:21)

Quote

June 30, 2006
Accident or Design? Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Spider silk and diatom silica structures are just accidents. We can’t design stuff like this ourselves but when we take these two complex things found in nature and combine them then all of a sudden it’s a design! Wheeeeee! Aren’t we smart!

Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 11:54 am

Somebody want to tell me what the point of this post is?

But it *looks* designed.

much like the sun looks like a wheel.

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

Arden Chatfield

Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,07:37

Quote (stevestory @ June 30 2006,12:21)

Quote

June 30, 2006
Accident or Design? Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Spider silk and diatom silica structures are just accidents. We can’t design stuff like this ourselves but when we take these two complex things found in nature and combine them then all of a sudden it’s a design! Wheeeeee! Aren’t we smart!

Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 11:54 am

Somebody want to tell me what the point of this post is?

"There are designed things in nature. Therefore Intelligent Design is correct. Homo.-dt"

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

deadman_932

Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,08:46

What I want to know is why you DarWEENIANS are disparaging Denyse O'Leary--she's HAWT.

I'd like a bite of that tart, plz.

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

dhogaza

Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,09:01

Quote

Spider silk and diatom silica structures are just accidents. We can’t design stuff like this ourselves but when we take these two complex things found in nature and combine them then all of a sudden it’s a design! Wheeeeee! Aren’t we smart!

In other news, wood frame houses prove trees were designed ...

2ndclass

Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,09:04

Quote (stevestory @ June 30 2006,12:21)

Quote

June 30, 2006
Accident or Design? Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Spider silk and diatom silica structures are just accidents. We can’t design stuff like this ourselves but when we take these two complex things found in nature and combine them then all of a sudden it’s a design! Wheeeeee! Aren’t we smart!

Novel nanocomposites from spider silk–silica fusion (chimeric) proteins

Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 11:54 am

Somebody want to tell me what the point of this post is?

The point is that my designed cotton/wool blend suit is proof that cotton and wool are synthetic materials.

Actually, the real point is that Dave has completely lost it.

--------------
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

GCT

Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,11:03

Quote (2ndclass @ June 30 2006,14:04)

Actually, the real point is that Dave has completely lost it.

It's hard to lose what you never had.

wheatdogg

Posts: 8
Joined: June 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,11:35

I checked out Salvo's TOC for the first issue. Looks like really original stuff: "Counter Intelligence: The 5 Myths Crafted by Hollywood," "Interrogate: Seven Things You Cannot Do as Moral Relativist," "Brain Wash: The Leftwing dominance of academia" ... blah blah blah.

Reading Salvo issue #2 should not be much different from reading #1. This mag cannot exist in print for long. The content cannot be that much different from one issue to another.

Wisely, they have decided apparently not to offer a web version of the mag. The TOC is just a teaser, so the unwary will actually pay $$ for a copy. Somebody, somewhere with deep pockets (and little media savvy) must be bankrolling this enterprise.

blipey

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,11:52

Quote

sorry for multi-comments… but one last thought, can’t wait to see Salvo #2! The teasers are nice intro. Crux is great. Nice to see an intellectual alternative unafraid to tackle the issues head on.

Comment by Michaels7 — June 30, 2006 @ 11:42 am

.Click the coming soon link.

I find that stupendously--if accidentaly--funny. Nice to see the fundies supporting the alternative lifestyles of skull-sex afficianados.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank

Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,13:40

Quote (stevestory @ June 30 2006,09:58)

Knowing a lot of fundies and ex-fundies, I could have told him why half the kids leave--they aren't dumb and crazy enough to believe that Will and Grace is executive-produced by the devil, among other things.

Don't be too sure about that:

http://kutv.com/topstories/local_story_174090621.html

Excerpt:

"Republican congressional hopeful John Jacob believes the devil is impeding his efforts to unseat five-term Representative Chris Cannon."

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,16:26

from :

http://evolutionanddesign.blogsome.com/2006....ment-68

Quote

Indeed, once again I find it necessary to emphasize that this is one of the most obvious and important differences between the huge corpus of published research supporting evolutionary theory and the miniscule collection of speculative hypotheses and computer models that characterize virtually all of the ID literature to date. To state it bluntly: real scientists (like real fire investigators) get their hands dirty, in the field and in the lab, and publish research reports that present in detail the empirical evidence that either validates or falsifies their hypotheses. The world is still waiting for such work to begin to trickle out of the clositered environs of the Discovery Institute. And waiting and waiting and waiting…

Perhaps they’re too busy publishing press releases to do any science?

I like this cat

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

bystander

Posts: 301
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,16:35

Quote (steve_h @ June 30 2006,11:32)

If you look carefully, you'll find code for detecting when the time is right for the next planned mutation(s) to take place, and machinery for executing those none-random mutations. If you find a front loading fan who is not averse to pathetic levels of detail, he will happily point out exactly where that code is.
One prediction of front loading is that if you keep cloned bacteria isolated from each other but otherwise in identical conditions they will all experience roughly the same mutations in roughly the same order. Naturally, no so-called scientist who is part of the conspiracy would ever dare to do the experiment.
Front loading also explains why certain identical features are found in diverse places in the 'tree of life'. Conventional Darwinism can't explain that so they normally just deny that it happens. The common ancester was a single celled organism which had dna code for producing high intelligence and opposable thumbs, but that code usually only gets executed if you are human. However, if you zap the right 'call' instruction into the dna of a bacterium (or change the call address of an existing one) it will instantly acquire those traits. See, for example, the famous picture of a mouse suddenly spouting a human ear. That set the Darwinists in a real panic and they had to invent a rather implausible alternative explanation.

So It's testable? So they should test it. If they truly believe that things are designed there are a lot of things you can test. The things I can think of are:

1. Front loading --- should be findable in the DNA
2. Intervention --- IC I suppose. I think the current examples have enough doubt thrown on them. In fact if ID was sincere they would be trying to falsify these themselves and systematically searching for new versions. I'm sure that SETI would try to falsify any signals they found.
3. A single creation or Multiple creations. This is where God creates each of the kinds separately. I'm sure a study could actually define the original "kinds". Things like vestigial legs on whales has disproven this but I am sure that a sincere IDist could think of experiments to falsify common descent.

There are a few biologists around here. If some sincere Creo came up to a univeristy with a fat cheque and no strings attached would they assist in any experiments?

Also I know that Dave comes here. I wonder if he is brave enough to take the next step and open discussion in UD about real experiments to prove ID (Not strawman experiments that they think disprove evolution).

Michael

deadman_932

Posts: 3094
Joined: May 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,17:40

Salvador Cordova seems engaged in a large-scale propaganda campaign over at MacNeill's Cornell U. Evo./ID class blog site. I'll take a chance and say it takes a month of his preachy attempts at "authority" before he irritates even the ID-ers.

--------------
AtBC Award for Thoroughness in the Face of Creationism

Drew Headley

Posts: 152
Joined: Mar. 2006

Posted: June 30 2006,18:42

Quote (blipey @ June 29 2006,22:56)

Dembski's lauding a new magazine dedicated to the downfall of materialism! I know; it's exciting.

I especially like the the coming soon part. Sorry, I can't link directly to the flash image, but maybe someone can explain exactly how that form of intercourse is either natural or safe. If anything, I think it would be painful...not to mention unfruitful.

Check out the editorial board. It is a who's who of ID and christian metaphysicians. Surprise surpise, our friend Dembski is on it.

Bob O'H

Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,22:38

Dembski's skating on thin ice. He's complaining about someone who (a) appears to be less than honest in a book review on Amazon, and (b) dares to say that someone with a PhD in biology is talking rubbish, when they aren't themselves qualified.

Turn your irony-meters off before looking.

Bob

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

Bob O'H

Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: June 30 2006,23:12

Quote (Richardthughes @ June 30 2006,10:36)

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ June 30 2006,09:50)

Apparently anybody can join the discussions on the weblog set up to discuss Allen MacNeill's "intelligent design" course at Cornell University. But be sure to read the ground rules for discussion. I don't know how the co-moderation thing there might work, but you might consider copying any comment made there to a comment here, too, just to have a backup.

I put this up:

...

but it looks like there's a moderation queue? How novel, for an ID blog.

Allen MacNeill's on our side. I think the moderation is because the site is primarily intended to support his course, so he wants some control so that doesn't get too heated, especially with outsiders getting involved.

Or perhaps he's just worried in case PZ and Lenny turn up.

Bob

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank

Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

Posted: July 01 2006,02:35

Not much chance of that.

Anyway, I have no gripe with PZ when he sticks to science.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

GCT

Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

Posted: July 01 2006,02:47

Quote (wheatdogg @ June 30 2006,16:35)

Wisely, they have decided apparently not to offer a web version of the mag. The TOC is just a teaser, so the unwary will actually pay $$ for a copy. Somebody, somewhere with deep pockets (and little media savvy) must be bankrolling this enterprise.

Paging Mr. Ahmanson. Mr. Ahmanson please pick up the courtesy phone. We need more dominionist money, stat.

2ndclass

Posts: 182
Joined: June 2006

Posted: July 01 2006,03:19

Quote (Richardthughes @ June 30 2006,21:26)

from :

http://evolutionanddesign.blogsome.com/2006....ment-68

Quote

Indeed, once again I find it necessary to emphasize that this is one of the most obvious and important differences between the huge corpus of published research supporting evolutionary theory and the miniscule collection of speculative hypotheses and computer models that characterize virtually all of the ID literature to date. To state it bluntly: real scientists (like real fire investigators) get their hands dirty, in the field and in the lab, and publish research reports that present in detail the empirical evidence that either validates or falsifies their hypotheses. The world is still waiting for such work to begin to trickle out of the clositered environs of the Discovery Institute. And waiting and waiting and waiting…

Perhaps they’re too busy publishing press releases to do any science?

I like this cat

When I read this, I thought, "This guy went too far. He'll get censored by MacNeill." Then I went to the site and saw that it is MacNeill.

This is one of the professors that Salvador trots out to show that ID is taught in college. Unfortunately for Salvador, it looks like this professor will teach the truth.

--------------
"I wasn't aware that classical physics had established a position on whether intelligent agents exercising free were constrained by 2LOT into increasing entropy." -DaveScot

Jim_Wynne

Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006