Printable Version of Topic

-Antievolution.org Discussion Board
+--Forum: After the Bar Closes...
+---Topic: Dave Scot: Lifetime Achievement Award started by Arden Chatfield


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 24 2007,13:11

The following Dave Scot quote from yesterday got me thinking about just how hilarious our friend David Springer can be:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

What’s out of line is that 60% of academic scientists self-identify as non-religious. They like to think they are irreligious because they’re smarter than everyone else. The truth is that they’re more dysfunctional than everyone else and have to live in a sheltered little world where they all think alike, act alike, and pat each other on the back constantly about how very smart they are.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This got me thinking of how many fantastic little bon mots Dave has so carelessly tossed off over the years. While it's invaluable that so many of  these have been immortalized in the ATBC UD thread, I feel like Dave is such a phenomenon that he might deserve a venue where he be appreciated just for his own unique tardhood, not as just a cog in the UD machine.

So I envision this as a venue for some of Dave's most deathless comments, so that all of us, including Dave, can rest assured they can be savored well into the future. I don't envision this as a depository of him merely saying dumb but ultimately boring things about science -- I envision this as a place where his most jaw-droppingly STOOPID quotes can live, or also the quotes where Dave lets his freak flag fly and reveals what a cranky, egomaniacal, insecure, misanthropic, uneducated, gullible wannabe tyrant he is deep down.

The problem, tho: there's too much material to work with. In order to see how feasible this is, I went to page one of the ATBC UD thread. It was a gruelingly slow process, but I did get up to page 13. I figure the best nuggets I culled out of those pages could get the ball rolling.

So now, without any further ado, I give you:

The Best of David Springer!


 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Then there’s a really good point about scientists not being the ones to define what is and isn’t science. It should be philosophers of science doing the defining. That caught me off guard too. Dembski has a PhD in the philosophy of science, interestingly enough. So WTF are scientists doing telling him what is and isn’t science? That’s like foxes telling farmers how to build chicken coops, isn’t it?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It has come to my attention that some of our best informed ID supporters don’t believe politics are important to winning and that science education is the key. Now I dearly love science but without politics providing us a level playing field our arguments from math and science are doomed to being censored.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I think you’re conflating macro-evolution with Darwinian evolution. The evidence in support of descent with modification from a universal common ancestor over the course of billions of years is compelling. Logically arguable but practically undeniable. If you argue against that you get laughed at and I’ll be hard pressed to suppress a chuckle myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I don’t like to be so blunt but if the ID movement doesn’t get its head & tail wired together and accept as settled science that evolution happened, that only the mechanism of random mutation as the sole source of variation is in dispute, then its doomed to the dustbin of history. A million scientists aren’t entirely wrong. They got a lot of the story right. Their only error is foisting a notion that evolution is an unguided, unplanned process. That’s purely a dogmatic concoction driven by an atheistic worldview and in denial of some very compelling evidence to the contrary - namely the patterns in the machinery of life which defy explanation by any plausible unintelligent self-assembly mechanism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I believe in a chain of command and unquestioning loyalty to it. One follows the orders of those higher in the chain and gives orders to those lower in it. Mission objectives are given, rules of engagement are defined, then mission leaders take the initiative to get the job done. Bill offered me the job of blog czar and I accepted. I then received my marching orders and got on with it. Czar is hardly suggestive of democracy or gentle persuasion. If he wanted a czar that’s what he got. If not then I’m the wrong person for this position.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This mindset of salvaging pet theories with ad hoc kludges to explain failed predictions is what propped Darwin up for so long. I see it’s not just biology that is plagued by this. Us engineers are a different breed I guess. Lives can be lost when we’re wrong so we can’t afford to let our egos get in the way of acknowledging failures.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where there’s just plain no denying that people are being attacked instead of ideas is when the idea is ID and the attackers are “scientists”. Not only is the idea of ID not being judged apart from those holding it, the primary argument against it seems to be pointing out that the majority of its proponents are evangelical Christians, like that in and of itself makes ID unscientific. What rubbish! That is not the scientific way. Any scientist worth his salt who attacks ID based on the personal religious beliefs of a majority of those who hold it should be ashamed of themselves. And the ones cheering about courts censoring it on establishment clause grounds are downright despicable. These are no scientists but rather people with an anti-religion agenda who won’t let facts get in the way of their agenda.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
After discovering some of things that **** likes to do in his spare time I can see why he needs to convince himself there’s no God.
I think that’s the case for a lot of atheists, although I don’t suspect they all have quite such a long list of things they’d rather not have to explain to St. Peter at the Pearly Gates with their angelic mother listening.
I’m not sure if I’m going to have to explain my actions in this life when I get to the other side but it’s usually better to be safe than sorry.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



and, the classic:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It’s simply counter-productive to our goals and reinforces the idea that ID is religion because nothing but religion argues against descent with modification from a common ancestor.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Please feel free to toss in your personal favorites.
Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Oct. 24 2007,13:18

My personal favorite is in my sig.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 24 2007,13:23

Let's give the whole quote, for posterity:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
A big mistake in NDT inspired ideology is that the earth’s changing environment gradually molded life to fit it. That’s bass ackwards. Life molded the environment, paved the way so to speak, for the next predetermined phase of phylogenesis. That’s why the process took billions of years. It isn’t quick or easy laying down foundations that span an entire planetary surface. The atmosphere needed to be oxygenated. The time of great upheavals and catastrophy in a young solar system had to be waited out. Fossil fuel reserves had to be laid down to power an upcoming industrial species. My contention is that industry didn’t arise because a power source was available for it but rather a power source was made available so that industry could arise. The way was prepared in advance. It was planned that way.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 24 2007,13:32

Took me a while to track down this manifesto of DT's spiritual beliefs:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That’s a really good reason for not closing the door on theistic belief. This however raises a further problem in which particular flavor of theism is the right one. Who am I to decide that a billion Buddhists or Hindus might not be the ones who have it right? In my personal life however I’m inclined to take up Pascal’s Wager. If atheists are right and you aren’t an atheist nothing much is lost. If theists are right and you’re an atheist there might be hell to pay. The smart money picks a theistic belief that’s suitable to his personal tastes and at least goes through the motions just in case. I chose non-denominational Protestantism. It makes a great working basis for civil and productive society, the overhead is minimal (ask to be saved and you are saved), I was saved as a child so there’s nothing more that needs doing (once saved always saved), it’s a common religion where I live so its easy to fit in, and so there’s really no downside unless some other religion is right but I don’t have enough evidence to make that determination. Pascal’s Wager to the letter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 24 2007,13:40

This whole thread:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/religio....of-mine >
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 24 2007,13:44

One of my all time < favorites >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It just ocurred to me that according to Ernst Mayr I must be a different species from Inuits. We’re reproductively isolated by geography and there isn’t a snowball’s chance in south central Texas I’d be attracted to an Inuit woman anyhow even though we’re probably still physically compatible on a hypothetical basis sort of like brown bears and polar bears.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


[edit] Be sure to include linkies.
Posted by: Altabin on Oct. 24 2007,13:45

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 24 2007,20:32)
Took me a while to track down this manifesto of DT's spiritual beliefs:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That’s a really good reason for not closing the door on theistic belief. This however raises a further problem in which particular flavor of theism is the right one. Who am I to decide that a billion Buddhists or Hindus might not be the ones who have it right? In my personal life however I’m inclined to take up Pascal’s Wager. If atheists are right and you aren’t an atheist nothing much is lost. If theists are right and you’re an atheist there might be hell to pay. The smart money picks a theistic belief that’s suitable to his personal tastes and at least goes through the motions just in case. I chose non-denominational Protestantism. It makes a great working basis for civil and productive society, the overhead is minimal (ask to be saved and you are saved), I was saved as a child so there’s nothing more that needs doing (once saved always saved), it’s a common religion where I live so its easy to fit in, and so there’s really no downside unless some other religion is right but I don’t have enough evidence to make that determination. Pascal’s Wager to the letter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't "non-denominational Protestantism" all but identical with fundagelical?
Posted by: carlsonjok on Oct. 24 2007,13:46

Please don't forget this one:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

This is all about Judge Jones. If it were about the merits of the case we know we’d win. It’s about politics. Look at the Cobb county case. A sticker that did no more than mention a plain fact, that evolution is theory not a fact, was ruled a violation of the establishment clause. Incredible! A local school board saying evolution is a theory is, in some twisted logic that just makes me shudder, a law regarding an establishment of religion. Har har hardy har har. Right. In a pig’s ass (pardon my french). Clinton appointed Judge Clarence Cooper made a ridiculous ruling that was faithful to the left wing overlords that he serves.

Judge John E. Jones on the other hand is a good old boy brought up through the conservative ranks. He was state attorney for D.A.R.E, an Assistant Scout Master with extensively involved with local and national Boy Scouts of America, political buddy of Governor Tom Ridge (who in turn is deep in George W. Bush’s circle of power), and finally was appointed by GW hisself. Senator Rick Santorum is a Pennsylvanian in the same circles (author of the “Santorum Language” that encourages schools to teach the controversy) and last but far from least, George W. Bush hisself drove a stake in the ground saying teach the controversy. Unless Judge Jones wants to cut his career off at the knees he isn’t going to rule against the wishes of his political allies. Of course the ACLU will appeal. This won’t be over until it gets to the Supreme Court. But now we own that too.

Politically biased decisions from ostensibly apolitical courts are a double edged sword that cuts both ways. The liberals had their turn at bat. This is our time now. We won back congress in 1996. We won back the White House in 2000. We won back the courts in 2005. Now we can start undoing all the damage that was done by the flower children. The courts have been the last bastion of liberal power for 5 years. It was just a matter of time. The adults are firmly back in charge. The few wilted flower children that refused to grow up will have to satisfy themselves by following the likes of Cindy Sheehan around ineffectually whining about this, that, and the other thing. They’ve been marginalized.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 24 2007,13:49

And of course this:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I will remind everyone again - please frame your arguments around science. If the ID movement doesn't get the issue framed around science it's going down and I do not like losing. The plain conclusion of scientific evidence supports descent with modification from a common ancestor. You are certainly welcome to have other opinions based on faith in something other than science but I'd ask that you go to a religious website with them if you must talk about it.

You certainly don't have to agree here with descent with modification from a common ancestor but I'm going to start clamping down on anyone positively arguing against it. It's simply counter-productive to our goals and reinforces the idea that ID is religion because nothing but religion argues against descent with modification from a common ancestor. What we are fighting is the idea that the modification was unguided. ID can fight that without ever leaving the battleground of plain scientific conclusions. If we try to argue against anything else we're are (sic) going to lose. Plain and simple. No buts about it. There's only one gaping vulnerability in the commonly accepted evolutionary narrative we can exploit successfully and that's the bit about it being unplanned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


(No link, because this was disappeared by the Big Head.)
Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 24 2007,13:53

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/religio....of-mine >

Dave will always be the Praying Marines vs the ACLU in my heart.  It will always bring a smile to my face to recall when the computer genius with an IQ of 150 fell for an Urban Myth and stood up on his soap box and shared it with his closest friends (UDers)  and enemies (Hey - that's us!)  

His denial of error was good, and his attempt to rationalize was even better.  Dave - No matter what happens, we'll always share that special ACLU vs. The Praying Marines moment!

Yes, Janie and Corporal Kate were special, but as Dave would no doubt agree, this one is even more specialer.

Tied with Janie and Corporal Kate, was Richard's TREMENDOUS, AWARD WINNING NEVER TO BE TOPPED EVAR POST # 1,000, where Richard did DaveScot better than DaveScot does DaveScot.  

He was so good I thought he was going to ban us all from ATBC!

I think Richard's Channelling DaveScot Posts belong here.

edited:  The link to Praying Marines added in edit from Richard's earlier post.
Posted by: someotherguy on Oct. 24 2007,13:55

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 24 2007,13:49)
And of course this:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I will remind everyone again - please frame your arguments around science. If the ID movement doesn't get the issue framed around science it's going down and I do not like losing. The plain conclusion of scientific evidence supports descent with modification from a common ancestor. You are certainly welcome to have other opinions based on faith in something other than science but I'd ask that you go to a religious website with them if you must talk about it.

You certainly don't have to agree here with descent with modification from a common ancestor but I'm going to start clamping down on anyone positively arguing against it. It's simply counter-productive to our goals and reinforces the idea that ID is religion because nothing but religion argues against descent with modification from a common ancestor. What we are fighting is the idea that the modification was unguided. ID can fight that without ever leaving the battleground of plain scientific conclusions. If we try to argue against anything else we're are (sic) going to lose. Plain and simple. No buts about it. There's only one gaping vulnerability in the commonly accepted evolutionary narrative we can exploit successfully and that's the bit about it being unplanned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


(No link, because this was disappeared by the Big Head.)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's funny to imagine him saying this now to the current crop of UD denizens.
Posted by: slpage on Oct. 24 2007,13:57

Busily looks for Tard's claims about being built like a middle-weight boxer or a lineabacker....
Posted by: guthrie on Oct. 24 2007,13:58

So what kind of trophy does he get?
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 24 2007,14:02

Not to be overlooked in the praying marine post is DaveTard's theory of what prompts religious belief:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
...The lightning hit a power line near the house, travelled into the garage and to the vehicle through the cord on a trouble light, and knocked the crap out of both of us as we were in contact with the vehicle. It might have made him a bit more religious all of a sudden as he had both hands on bare metal whereas I was just touching a painted surface with one hand.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've always wondered: Where was his other hand?
Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 24 2007,14:19

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 24 2007,14:02)
Not to be overlooked in the praying marine post is DaveTard's theory of what prompts religious belief:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
...The lightning hit a power line near the house, travelled into the garage and to the vehicle through the cord on a trouble light, and knocked the crap out of both of us as we were in contact with the vehicle. It might have made him a bit more religious all of a sudden as he had both hands on bare metal whereas I was just touching a painted surface with one hand.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've always wondered: Where was his other hand?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


re:: Dave's Other Hand -

I was going to link to Half Moon's excellent graphics, but the Discovery Banner Has Vanished!  It's another Friggin Miracle™!
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 24 2007,14:24

< Another one for the pile >, this one featuring "Legal Scholar Dave".
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
No long extinct species whose only evidence of ever existing is imprints left in rocks can be discussed in a genetic context because all the DNA of these creatures, if they even had DNA in them, has been destroyed. There’s no way to test whether or not dinosaurs even utilized DNA. In effect stipulation 1 says only experimental science can be discussed and that pretty much only leaves room for that which can tested on living tissue. This not to mention the limitations placed on physics teachers who won’t be able to mention anything from theoretical physics. In the meantime, it isn’t hard to say ID is testable in principle by demonstrating in a laboratory that a flagellum can evolve without intelligent input. This could SO backfire in the anti-religion zealots faces…
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 24 2007,14:35

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 24 2007,14:24)
< Another one for the pile >, this one featuring "Legal Scholar Dave".
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
No long extinct species whose only evidence of ever existing is imprints left in rocks can be discussed in a genetic context because all the DNA of these creatures, if they even had DNA in them, has been destroyed. There’s no way to test whether or not dinosaurs even utilized DNA. In effect stipulation 1 says only experimental science can be discussed and that pretty much only leaves room for that which can tested on living tissue. This not to mention the limitations placed on physics teachers who won’t be able to mention anything from theoretical physics. In the meantime, it isn’t hard to say ID is testable in principle by demonstrating in a laboratory that a flagellum can evolve without intelligent input. This could SO backfire in the anti-religion zealots faces…
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Your link should go in The Best Of Billy Dembski's file - I forgot about this, but thanks to your link, we now remember that Wisconsin is Evolutions Waterloo!

Dembski's post summary: "Dover certainly wasn’t ID’s Waterloo. Wisconsin may well be evolution’s Waterloo. "

I don't want to have to go and dig up the pathetic level of detail necessary to determine how many Waterloo's  this makes for evolution, but I am sure some starving grad student somewhere will be willing to do the research.
Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Oct. 24 2007,14:45

Re Carlsonjok's citation of Dave's pre-Dover praise of Judge Jones, here is DT's < post-Dover description > of the good judge.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Putz does have a better sound to it. No argument there. Absent a more complete single word descriptor I guess it’ll have to do. Dickweed would be more hip. Beavis and Butthead really popularized it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I can see that this game is going to be very addictive. Damn you, J-Dog!
Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Oct. 24 2007,14:53

Diet discussion < here. >

I love how DT gets all sciency with his physician (single experiment, no controls = proof positive. All Science So Far!), appears to believe that hyperproteinemia is a good thing, and endorses a dietary product that has "some enzymes" which he apparently believes will survive digestion in the stomach and get to the right place to "accelerate fat burning".

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I asked my wife yesterday to make enough space around the universal gym so I could start weightlifting and she did. There was several years of worth of stuff piled up around it. I need to go stock up on my favorite body-building supplement Myoplex Deluxe. I might have a week's worth left from my last workout jag. It ain't cheap but it gets muscle building/repair protein circulating in your bloodstream like all get out. If you don't lift to the point of wanting to lay down and cry because it hurts so much you aren't doing it right. The pain is from torn muscle tissue which then repairs itself and adds even more muscle in a bid to prevent further injury in the future. The Myoplex protein boost was unintentionally confirmed by my doctor. I had a physical in 2000, was working out at the time, and drinking Myoplex after each workout. When my blood test came back the doctor said everything was normal except for elevated blood protein. I asked "What causes that?" and he said "Well, that's just it. Except for certain drugs which you don't take I don't know what causes it." I then explained the workouts and body building drinks but he was dubious and asked me to stop for a few days and retake the blood test. I did and this time blood protein was normal. So it really does work. It also has some enzymes in it that supposedly accelerates fat burning while promoting muscle growth. Interestingly, as I was reading the list of ingredients right now from the link above it includes a brown rice extract (brown rice has been my staple food since starting the diet). It says that the carbs in brown rice are metabolized slowly over 2-3 hours and help to curb hunger moreso than other types of carbs. So unbeknownst to me there was something besides the green tea that's been working as an apetite suppressant. I guess it's true you learn something new every day!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 24 2007,15:00

Dave Scot, simple country < lawyer >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There’s plenty of people who think that teaching evolution absent any criticism or alternative beliefs is the state disfavoring certain religions. I was pretty sure the constitution guarantees equal treatment under the law. Where’s the justice for all those folks?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave Scot, simple country < botanist >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It shouldn’t take a botanist to understand how that works but still Ed just didn’t get it. Evolution is all important to the Texas grapefruit industry says he. I didn’t bother pointing out that grapefruit were purposely hybridized in the Barbados a hundred years before Darwin was born. It wouldn’t have made any difference.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Altabin on Oct. 24 2007,15:02

Please, let us never forget the < mushrooms: >

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Gene Induction in Fungi - Lamarckian?

As some of you may recall I wrote that I was experimenting with laboratory propagation of volvariella volvacea (Chinese Straw Mushrooms). Recently, among several other lines of R&D, I was experimenting with hydrogels as a nutrient media. So far I’ve been using them as an agar replacement with mixed results. ....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Oct. 24 2007,15:02

And who can forget < this classic comment, > posted just after the shootings at Virginia Tech last spring.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I wonder what kind of religious beliefs the shooter held? I tried to find out and didn't come up with much other than he had the words "ISMAIL AX" written on his arm and he signed his mass murder manifesto with it. The blogosphere is going nuts trying to figure out what it means.

I'm willing to bet long odds he wasn't a member of any mainstream Christian church, that's for sure. Islam wouldn't be surprising as mass murder of anonymous strangers including women and children in innocent public settings to make a political point seems to be de rigueur for them. There's also some speculation it's tied to an Asian gang.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: blipey on Oct. 24 2007,15:35

Quote (slpage @ Oct. 24 2007,13:57)
Busily looks for Tard's claims about being built like a middle-weight boxer or a lineabacker....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask and ye shall receive:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’m an extreme
mesomorph. We’re the ones who can pile on or take off bulk with little
effort - our bodies are like putty we can sculpt quickly and easily. You
recognize us by our V shape. My hips are 13 inches wide and my shoulders
are 21. Even when I let myself go to a new record high of 240 recently my
chest and shoulders were still much wider than my waist and hips. I dropped
40 in three months no sweat. I’m considering how far down to go. 160 was
my Marine Corps weight and my aging joints will appreciate that but I like
how I look more between 180 and 200. Either way it’s another 3 months of
focused but not very intense effort. I need to add 10 pounds of lean muscle
mass (which just means eating lots of protein and working out with as much
heavy weight as I can tolerate 20 minutes a day) for the higher weight and
actually lose muscle mass for the lower weight. I hate the thought of
sacrificing any lean muscle mass as it’s a lot easier to lose than to regain
and the older you are the harder it gets.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From < here. >
< Also nice. >
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 24 2007,19:48

DaveTard is the < gift that keeps on giving >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And yes, biology IS something that can be picked up in spare time depending on how much time we're talking about and how fast the person can learn. I have certified IQ somewhere north of 150. If you're much under that you really can't even comprehend how fast people at my level can think. For instance I got a 4.0 in marine biology in college by devoting ONE DAY to studying the material. I've read every issue of SciAm cover to cover for two decades in my spare time. But am I a biologist? Nope. I made my bones designing PC hardware and software where my talent at logic could be exercised to the fullest. Now that I'm financially independent and free to pursue any area of interest I want, and the 2004 election is over, I'm interested in this evolution brouhaha as it encompasses a number of my favorite subjects including politics. I spent a hundred hours or so in the past few weeks boning up on things missed in 250 issues of SciAm related to evolution. It's mostly a review though, not a learning experience. For instance I knew that DNA codons in both nuclear and mitochondrial forms didn't always code for the same amino acid out of 20 possibilities but I'd forgotten it until I visited the NIH repository where the standard coding table and exceptions are kept.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 24 2007,20:01

From < here >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Davescot

If you can give me a clear and precisely worded example of an `intelligent’ agency causing a violation of the second law, please do.

Me writing this sentence. -ds
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: bfish on Oct. 24 2007,21:02

Here's my favorite. Unfortunately, I have to quote my quote of it, as you'll see in a bit.

Here's what I attributed to DT:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
15
Unless I’m mistaken mtDNA is a circular molecule (like bacterial DNA) while nuclear DNA is a double helix. It seems the most likely explanation would be that a cell with a nucleus containing double helix DNA incorporated a separate cell with circular DNA. Symbiotic relationships abound. This is just one more example.

Comment by DaveScot — February 7, 2006 @ 2:59 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




< And here is what the link says now: >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


15

DaveScot

02/07/2006

2:59 pm

Unless I’m mistaken mtDNA is a circular molecule (like bacterial DNA) while nuclear DNA is open ended. It seems the most likely explanation would be that a cell with a nucleus containing open ended DNA incorporated a separate cell with circular DNA. Symbiotic relationships abound. This is just one more example.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I guess it's an open-ended discussion.
Posted by: steve_h on Oct. 25 2007,07:42

< DaveScot >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’m guilty of taking it for granted that people in a discussion such as this know that the energy in photons is measured by degrees Kelvin. And of course degrees Kelvin is a measure of temperature and temperature is synonymous with heat. Next time you decide to be argumentative I suggest you do a better job of it. -ds
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



DS tried to cover his many errors in subequent exchanges by displaying his knowledge of black body radiation and explaining how we measure the temperature of individual photons etc. Discussion around here started just before this post by ss on page < 39 > and continued for a while after.
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 25 2007,09:22

< St. Dave of Assisi: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You people are obviously not naturalists. I suggest you pipe down and listen. I’ve raised many different species of birds and mammals as pets. Let me assure you in no uncertain terms they most assuredly can learn quite a few things, they have different personalities from one to another individual, they most definitely know pain and pleasure, work and play, and if you look into their eyes you’ll see part of yourself in them - if you’ve got the gift. Maybe God doesn’t give the gift to everyone.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or maybe God tends to forget birthdays, just like me. Spoken like an agnostic. Also, don't forget the reissue (dance single) of that big hit, < "Gravity Parties Hardest" >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Curiously, in some ways gravity is also the strongest force in the universe. It always adds, never subtracts, and can build up until it overwhelms all other forces.
-Physicist John G. Cramer

< http://www.npl.washington.edu/av/altvw89.html >

HAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

That's from a real physicist not an anonymous pretender. Too bad. So sad.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Laughed so hard I cried, I admit.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That's all you get from Super Dave today kiddies. I'm going to go back over to UD (pagerank 6/10 on google, by the way :-p ) where even my most playful utterings are taken seriously and propagated far & wide. It must be very frustrating for y'all knowing that, eh? LOL
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


When I read that one, I briefly considered that he was capable of serious irony directed at himself, with a playful wink to we "Darwinists," while the UDudes took it seriously. Yes, I briefly gave him that credit. :p
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 25 2007,10:23

The morning's harvest:

Dave may not know about philosophy, but he knows what he doesn't like:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Let me know when you have some way of measuring mind apart from brain and you can argue with me about it. In the meantime mind/brain duality strikes me as wool gathering so you aren’t going to persuade me of anything no matter how hard you try.

--DaveScot
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave stands up for the persecuted and respects his elders (and even works in the phrases 'Sternberged' and 'Darwinian priesthood' while he's at it):

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As far as Davison goes sometimes you have to take the bad with the good. He’s a brilliant experimental biologist with 50 years experience at it. He was Sternberged 20 years ago by the Darwinian priesthood for heresy and has good reason to be hateful about it. What they’ve done and continue to do to him is despicable. You get back what you give out. If nothing else show some respect for your elders and cut them some slack.

Comment by DaveScot — February 13, 2006 @ 10:31 am
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



But sometimes you need tough love: [to Davison]

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

No one hijacked any of my threads. I deleted your comment because it was lewd. You’ve been warned over and over that I won’t tolerate lewdness here yet you persist. That’s too bad. I’ve no choice at this point but to exclude you from further participation here. -ds

February 19, 2006 @ 9:26 am
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave is just years ahead a them pointy-headed scientists:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Good grief, Myers. This is a prime example why biologists aren’t qualified to recognize design. What you think you’re just discovering is something I recognized decades ago. The flagellum for example isn’t the sum of its proteins. While each individual protein is complex in its own right, the assembly instructions are the real specified complexity. Design engineers recognize that immediately and it’s taken you what, 20 years to begin catching on?

Myers gets a clue. Will wonders never cease?
Filed under: Intelligent Design — DaveScot @ 5:17 am
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave doesn't like scientists at all, he doesn't like people in general much better, but he's cool with animals:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What exactly is the appearance of a soul and what makes you think a chimp is lacking in that department? Not that I disagree I just want to know how you arrive at these conclusions. As far as I’m concerned there are a lot of humans that have no soul. None whatsoever. Zilch. As cruel and heartless as any animal. Worse, because the human ostensibly has the capacity to know right from wrong. What other animals besides humans get any joy out of causing pain to other creatures? As far as animals resembling people in the soul category elephants might have us beat which I blogged about here. -ds

February 21, 2006 @ 5:31 pm

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Speaking in the < third person >, Dave explains why sending xmas letters to Michael Dell means he must be right about ID:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He's written on Dembski's site that he was on the patent committee at Dell, a select group of a dozen top engineers, and reviewed something like 1000 patent abstracts submitted by employees for worthiness.  I bet he was a real sweetheart to deal with.  He seems to have made a career out of being a jerk but in all fairness he's been on the right side of every fight and how many of us have managed to get rich before we got gray hair working as engineers or scientists?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Yeah, Dave hates him some scientists:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Scientists are a tiny part of the population. They have failed miserably to convince a significant number of people that the NeoDarwinian story is true. The only thing left propping it up is that it enjoys legally enforced exclusivity in public schools. Judicial fiat is the only thing maintaining its exclusivity. If you think it’s so robust why not let it be taught? Surely no one will believe anything else. What are you so afraid of? -ds
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Dave > hasn't even heard the *word* irony:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It could take thousands and millions of years.  Yes.  It could also take forever plus one day.  It could also happen in the first generation.  The point is that NeoDarwinian theory makes no prediction about how many generations it should take.  A theory that makes no verifiable or falsifiable predictions about macroevolutionary events isn't much of a theory.  It's a just-so story about unpredictable, unrepeatable, unwitnessed events in the distant past.  Why can't you accept that?

This is too easy.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ID has nothing to do with religion, and obviously not right wing politics, < either >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Failing?

Dover is one small battle in one tiny corner of the country. <yawn> Wake me up when SCOTUS makes a ruling.

Meanwhile:

Conservative executive office - check
Conservative majority in house of representatives - check
Conservative majority in senate - check
Conservative majority in supreme court - replacement of one 86 year-old liberal justice and... checkaroony!

I can happily live with failures like that.  Can you?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave gets all philosophical and < shit >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Did any of you ever stop to think that the ID/NeoDarwin clash might involve science, religion, and politics all at the same time?

Good grief.  The world isn't black and white.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave resorts to WERE YOU THERE with some alliteration on the side:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
How many generations should it take, Russell?

How do you know it's more generations than we can possibly observe?

I know you can't answer those questions in a way that doesn't make you look stupid so I'll understand if you dodge them again.

The Five D's of Darwinism:

Dodge, duck, dip, dive, and dodge!

LOL

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave gambles that no one will call his < bluff >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

So I guess you don't want to bet on your so-called knowledge that I haven't taken any biology classes beyond high school.  That's the first smart thing I've seen from you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave levels with us for a second, then goes back to babbling:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Whether ID is good science or not makes no difference.  Nothing in the constitution says you can't teach bad science.  A theory that supposes certain patterns in nature cannot be adequately explained without intelligent agency of some sort is not religion.  Religions have scriptures, places of worship, clerics, moral codes, and a whole host of things that ID doesn't have.  It isn't religion.  That's a canard.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 25 2007,11:40



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You wouldn’t be wondering if you’d had a number of other men’s wives yelling at you in the height of passion “I want to have your baby!”. It’s a little disconcerting at first but you get used to it. It’s a dirty job but someone has to do it. Some guys prefer to make the world’s children smarter by becoming teachers and some guys prefer to make them smarter through better genetics. It’s all good.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by: steve_h on Oct. 25 2007,17:10

< DaveScot at UDOJ >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I hate to disappoint the church burnin' ebola boys but I won't be commenting on UD in the future. I just told the smarmy Canadian cross dresser to go fuck itself in an email. It would have banned me in any case as it's nowhere near as cool as Bill Dembski. The stick up its disgusting ass could make a redwood feel inadequate. I'm going to go ahead and forgive Bill for this monumental brainfart as he's going through some long term bad shit on the homefront with a sick child. I felt bad about bailing out on him at a time like this but he forced my hand. No big deal. I had a few extra hours today to finish rebuilding the carbs on my jetboat (it's back together and running great) and throw a ball in the water for my puppy. He's napping at my feet on the houseboat at the moment. I think we'll go out for a swim and then take the jetboat for a longer validation run.

P.S. if my dog was as ugly as the Canadian cross dresser I'd shave his ass and teach him to walk backwards.

HAHAHA - I kill me sometimes!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 25 2007,17:19

Quote (bfish @ Oct. 24 2007,21:02)
Here's my favorite. Unfortunately, I have to quote my quote of it, as you'll see in a bit.

Here's what I attributed to DT:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Unless I’m mistaken mtDNA is a circular molecule (like bacterial DNA) while nuclear DNA is a double helix. It seems the most likely explanation would be that a cell with a nucleus containing double helix DNA incorporated a separate cell with circular DNA. Symbiotic relationships abound. This is just one more example.

Comment by DaveScot — February 7, 2006 @ 2:59 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< And here is what the link says now: >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Unless I’m mistaken mtDNA is a circular molecule (like bacterial DNA) while nuclear DNA is open ended. It seems the most likely explanation would be that a cell with a nucleus containing open ended DNA incorporated a separate cell with circular DNA. Symbiotic relationships abound. This is just one more example.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I guess it's an open-ended discussion.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Here's what's really beautiful about that whole episode:

Dave made the original comment on February 7, 2006.  I < linked to it > on April 20, 2007, when the idiotic reference to the double helix was still there.  That means that Dave's bloated ego was so wounded by his mistake that he went back and rewrote history more than 14 months after the fact, hoping that nobody would notice. Luckily for us, bfish noticed.

DaveScot is a perfect tard storm:  Massive ego, anemic intellect, and an acute sensitivity to criticism.  What more could a tard-watcher ask for?  

We salute you, DaveTard!
Posted by: Lou FCD on Oct. 25 2007,20:50

Carlsonjok got my favorite, but Steve_h got my favorite from UDoJ.

Classics all, though.

Here's another from the same < thread > at UDoJ:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Rich,

Thanks. I’m pretty sure Wesley nailed it with the adultery comment. You know what they say “If they can’t take a joke, fuck ‘em!”.

My goal has always been to entertain. I’d rather put a smile on your face than a thought in your head. And in your case the latter might be nigh on impossible anyhow and I’m nothing if not a realist. I even told all the other blog authors at UD my strategy was going to be a page from Howard Stern’s success story - whether from love or hate people will keep coming back to hear the next outrageous thing you’re going to say.

On starting my own blog, I dunno. Sounds like work and that’s something I try to avoid. Besides, what better place than right here could a Howard Stern fan find himself?

Howard says it best:

Click me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 25 2007,21:30

A < nice > < juxtaposition >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Serving four years in the United States Marine Corps opened up my eyes to the truth that racial features are no measure of a man. Heart, courage, honor, and brotherhood formed by common values and goals are what counts and I’m happy to report that people of all races, ethnic categories, and religious belief can display these virtues in great abundance working side by side. Focus on what unites us not what divides us.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Josh is right about me banning him. He was close to the first! Tribune7 can't be him unless he got a new IP address. I caught Josh "The Cunt" Bozeman in several guises by his IP address. Josh was guilty of way too much bible thumping. I can only give so much leeway to a book written 2000 years ago by lice ridden beduins, after all. Especially after 9/11. Everyone knows those Arab beduins are a bunch of liars that like buggering camels and young boys but won't admit it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: steve_h on Oct. 25 2007,21:59

One of my favorites from "< “IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security” >
Dr Dr :

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Information Forensics (IF) — another branch of ID:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DaveScot:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
James Wynne asks what this has to do with ID.


< this is what >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


At the time of writing, Dembski had already disappeared James Wynne's (*) comment asking "what has this got to do with ID".

DS searches for Forensic Information & Dembski. All of the early results are to uncommondescent, arn, and other usual suspects. None to sites involved in Forensic Science. Take away the "Dembski" and the situation reverses.

James Wynne was banned by Dembski after one more comment. I shouldn't mention that here because it's a DaveScot thread.
Posted by: Bob O'H on Oct. 26 2007,02:51

Ah, memories, memories.  < DaveScot the Agnostic >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


gaspass

Can a non-religious person come to believe there is a designer without becoming religious?

Sure. I did. I was a positive atheist for decades until I read Michael Denton’s book “Evolution: A Theory in Crisis” 15 years ago. At that point I became agnostic. I was too busy in my career to really look into ID until a couple of years ago but all my life I’ve spent most of my spare time reading science and hard science fiction so I was pretty well informed on a wide range of science and engineering topics before concentrating on evolution and ID. I’ve been retired for almost 7 years and have oodles of time now for learning about things that will probably never bring home any bacon. I’m still an agnostic in rational thinking but I more or less formulated Pascal’s Wager on my own and bet that way before I was out of grammar school.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

(emphases in bold added)
DaveScot, the only man to take the wrong side of Pascal's wager.

The "I learned half of my engineering from SF" is added bonus Tard.
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,04:07

Quote (Bob O'H @ Oct. 26 2007,02:51)
The "I learned half of my engineering from SF" is added bonus Tard.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's hard SF, you chance worshipper. -dt
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 26 2007,04:13

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 25 2007,11:40)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You wouldn’t be wondering if you’d had a number of other men’s wives yelling at you in the height of passion “I want to have your baby!”. It’s a little disconcerting at first but you get used to it. It’s a dirty job but someone has to do it. Some guys prefer to make the world’s children smarter by becoming teachers and some guys prefer to make them smarter through better genetics. It’s all good.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I thought that was a Sin? Un-wed acts of horror (well, it is DS!)

No heaven for DS then!
Posted by: steve_h on Oct. 26 2007,07:36

< Michael Shermer Admits Science Is Religion To Him >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
They’re a crackpot when they’re Michael Shermer, The Skeptic, happily exposing his science-is-spiritual beliefs in a science journal. He’s supposed to be a skeptic adhering to the scientific method to expose this stuff as metaphysical wool gathering and here I find him blithering about his own personal metaphysical beliefs in a hard science journal. Non sequitur. Shermer is worse than a garden variety mystic. He’s a hypocrite. -ds

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Zachriel


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ds: “ in a hard science journal“

Ho hum. Scientific American is not a “hard science journal”. It is a conventional magazine providing a roundup of science news for a scientifically educated readership.

I’m not sure it was worth fishing this out of the spam bin but I thought it might a good way to point out that the picking of semantic nits is about the best you got. Get lost. And stop taking up space in the spam bucket. I’d rather see the thouands of ads for online casinos, low interest loans, and viagra than more of your tripe. Thanks in advance for your courtesy. -ds
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Jim_Wynne on Oct. 26 2007,13:37

Just yesterday, in the < first comment > under one of his own posts:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The global warming debate is SO not over. Al Gore just wishes it was over. The fact of the matter is the crapass bandwagon science underpinning global warming hysteria is sinking faster and farther than a lead weight dropped in the Marianis Trench.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,15:25

No DaveTard retrospective would be complete without < this gem >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot said:
H fckng sshls. plgz t Dvsn NW bfr gt pssd ff nd strt fckng wth . dn’t wnt t mk m md. Trst m n ths. r scrt scks bg tm.

Comment #21312 on April 2, 2005 9:30 PM
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,15:27



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
(DaveScot @ May 2 2005 3:51 PM)
My comments were arbitrarily deleted and disemvoweled at Panda’s Thumb. Trying to escape that treatment I resorted to using randomly selected names. I was then banned for using multiple names. Professor Emeritus of Biology John Davison,University of Vermont, has suffered the same treatment at Panda’s Thumb except they still allow him to post comments on “The Bathroom Wall” like he’s not qualified to comment elsewhere. Professor Davison has been a practicing doctor in biology for nearly 50 years. Their treatment of him is outrageous. They call him every derogatory name you can think of and accuse him of senility. I correspond with him a lot. He’s got more wits about him now at 76 years of age than any of those cretins ever had at any time in their miserable lives.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,15:35

From < here >:
Quote (keiths @ July 05 2006,07:19)
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but DaveTard is as bad at lying as he is at biology and logic.  Look at how his Scientific American "credential" morphs over time:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’ve read every issue of SciAm cover to cover for two decades in my spare time...

Posted by DaveScot on January 6, 2005 03:25 PM
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’ve also been a subscriber and dedicated reader of Scientific American for almost 40 years.

Comment by DaveScot — May 2, 2005 @ 3:51 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I found it a bit disturbing that a double PhD from UC and Yale with a perfect SAT score would be called a blithering idiot by the editor of an otherwise respectable magazine that I’ve subscribed to for 30 years.

Comment by DaveScot — June 3, 2005 @ 3:40 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I am an extreme polymath. Auto-didact. Going on 50 years of voracious consumption of any and all scientific literature processed and correlated by an IQ well into the genius range. I had all the hard science in the World Book encyclopedia memorized by the third grade and that was just the beginning. I’ve read, I reckon, 400 issues of Scientific American cover-to-cover and understand most of it...

Comment by DaveScot — June 15, 2005 @ 3:15 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Astronomy rules, dude. For the past 400 months when I get my Scientific American in the mail if there’s an article on astronomy or cosmology in it I turn straight to it before anything else. After reading that I usually go from front to back reading everything else...

June 15, 2005 @ 6:11 pm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps Santa should give Steve a subscription to Scientific American for Christmas - a magazine I’ve been reading cover to cover every month for 30 years - so he wouldn’t have missed The Alternative Genome and then he’d know that introns aren’t junk DNA...

March 6, 2006
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
So basically all the scientific discovery of the last 40 years important enough to make it into the pages of Scientific American I read about at the time it was discovered...

June 20, 2006
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: ck1 on Oct. 26 2007,19:41

DS:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The smart money picks a theistic belief that’s suitable to his personal tastes and at least goes through the motions just in case. I chose non-denominational Protestantism. It makes a great working basis for civil and productive society, the overhead is minimal (ask to be saved and you are saved), I was saved as a child so there’s nothing more that needs doing (once saved always saved),
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Boy, did my parents pick the wrong version of Christianity.

And yes, RTH's 1000th post was one of the funniest things on this site ever.  Wish I had a link.
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,21:33

I hadn't noticed < this one > before.  Dave, the self-proclaimed computer genius, reveals that he doesn't even know the meaning of the terms 'microcode' and 'operand':


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
To strike a nerve you’re going to have to do better than getting a self-modifying program to cobble together an EQU instruction out of microcode through trial and error, reward and punishment. That’s laughable from the perspective of programmers who were using so-called evolutionary algorithms decades before it got a shiny new name applied to it. Moreover we teased solutions out of it that far exceed in complexity and practicality that of a simple microprocessor operand.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 26 2007,21:47

Quote (ck1 @ Oct. 26 2007,19:41)
And yes, RTH's 1000th post was one of the funniest things on this site ever.  Wish I had a link.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask, and < it shall be given you >.
Posted by: Venus Mousetrap on Oct. 26 2007,22:31

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 26 2007,21:47)
Quote (ck1 @ Oct. 26 2007,19:41)
And yes, RTH's 1000th post was one of the funniest things on this site ever.  Wish I had a link.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask, and < it shall be given you >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I hope you're happy. I'm crying now, literally. XD
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 26 2007,22:33

Quote (Venus Mousetrap @ Oct. 26 2007,22:31)
Quote (keiths @ Oct. 26 2007,21:47)
 
Quote (ck1 @ Oct. 26 2007,19:41)
And yes, RTH's 1000th post was one of the funniest things on this site ever.  Wish I had a link.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask, and < it shall be given you >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I hope you're happy. I'm crying now, literally. XD
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ITS NOT THAT BAD, HOMO. IF YOUR A HAWT CHIC YOU CAN LEAF A COMMENT.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 27 2007,02:25

A couple more:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-and-id >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That’s what they tell you in school but if you ever get a chance to work with a gifted programmer you’ll find out the rule has its exceptions. The exceptions are what are known in the business as “star programmers”. They’re about as rare are pro ball players and usually end up earning about as much. They’re 10+ times more productive than average programmers. Familiar names that come to mind are John Carmack, Steve Wozniak, and Tim Berners-Lee… I’ve clocked myself writing over 300 lines of assembly or C code per hour that often executes flawlessly on the first pass (including a clean compilation on the first pass). I can code almost without syntactical or logical error as fast as I can type and I can type pretty damn fast. I’ve written literally millions of lines of code that has gone into billions upon billions of dollars worth of computer systems. Virtually none of it was done according to the structured/team programming rules you were taught. At the top of my game I was making about $1000 per hour and my mistakes, (which I didn’t make and had a long track record of not making) had the potential of each costing millions of dollars PER DAY in stalled computer manufacturing lines all over the world.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Swoon! If I were a gold-digger I'd totally get banged up by you, Dave.

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....t-84937 >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
20

DaveScot

01/11/2007

1:43 am
Speaking of Rosarita Beach and Jesus… there isn’t anything that gets you praying better than waking up naked on Rosarita Beach Sunday morning with a mouthful of sand, an empty bottle of tequila, and no idea which hotel is yours. The first thing you pray for is a fig leaf before you go looking for your car.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



At least the crabs didn't get him...
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 29 2007,10:32

(Needed to bump this thread back above the fold.)

Not only is DaveTard all edumacated and stuff, he's not afraid to take a brave moral stand:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot
07/10/2006
4:56 am

Speaking of Scientific American the peanut gallery at ATBC is raising some questions about why I've variously mentioned reading it for 20, 30, and 40 years.

Here is clarification.

The earliest I recall regularly reading SciAm was in the 7th grade. The school library subscribed to it and I spent a lot of my time at school in the library. That would make it at least 36 years ago that I started reading it every month. I've no doubt rounded that up to 40 years or down to 30 years just because I like round numbers and it doesn't really matter that much. From age 18 to 23 I might not have read it every month as I wasn't in a library much except when required for college assignments and bought it off the newstands. Shortly after I married (at age 24) I began subscribing to it. That was over 20 years ago and I've no doubt mentioned that I've been a subscriber for 20 or 25 years.
I missed a few months of it last year in protest over John Rennie's crusade against ID. For the first time in decades I let my subscription lapse and promised to never subscribe to it again. So I told my wife it would make a nice Valentine gift and now she subscribes to it for me so I can have my cake and eat it too. After all, I didn't promise to stop reading it, I only promised to stop subscribing to it.
So there.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 30 2007,13:56

Thanks to one < Dave S > for reminding us of < this gem > from the "the Darwinists are herding us all into concentration camps!" school of ID:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

20 April 2006

The New Downtrodden
DaveScot


When they came for the creation scientists,
I remained silent;
I was not a creation scientist.

When they locked up the abortion protesters,
I remained silent;
I was not an abortion protester.

When they came for the intelligent design theorists,
I did not speak out;
I was not an intelligent design theorist.

When they came for the strongly religious,
I did not speak out;
I was not strongly religious.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Fittingly, the VERY FIRST comment sports a boldfaced DaveTard banning.

When they came for the dumbshits,
I went along quietly;
I was a dumbshit.

Posted by: Mister DNA on Oct. 30 2007,17:16

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 30 2007,13:56)
Thanks to one < Dave S > for reminding us of < this gem > from the "the Darwinists are herding us all into concentration camps!" school of ID:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

20 April 2006

The New Downtrodden
DaveScot


When they came for the creation scientists,
I remained silent;
I was not a creation scientist.

When they locked up the abortion protesters,
I remained silent;
I was not an abortion protester.

When they came for the intelligent design theorists,
I did not speak out;
I was not an intelligent design theorist.

When they came for the strongly religious,
I did not speak out;
I was not strongly religious.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Fittingly, the VERY FIRST comment sports a boldfaced DaveTard banning.

When they came for the dumbshits,
I went along quietly;
I was a dumbshit.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DT really needs to follow that one up with his own version of < Footprints >.

He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I banned him.

Posted by: snoeman on Oct. 30 2007,22:23

Quote (Mister DNA @ Oct. 30 2007,17:16)
 
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 30 2007,13:56)
Thanks to one < Dave S > for reminding us of < this gem > from the "the Darwinists are herding us all into concentration camps!" school of ID:

       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

20 April 2006

The New Downtrodden
DaveScot


When they came for the creation scientists,
I remained silent;
I was not a creation scientist.

When they locked up the abortion protesters,
I remained silent;
I was not an abortion protester.

When they came for the intelligent design theorists,
I did not speak out;
I was not an intelligent design theorist.

When they came for the strongly religious,
I did not speak out;
I was not strongly religious.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Fittingly, the VERY FIRST comment sports a boldfaced DaveTard banning.

When they came for the dumbshits,
I went along quietly;
I was a dumbshit.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DT really needs to follow that one up with his own version of < Footprints >.

He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I banned him.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Too bad 'Post of the Week' is already taken.
Posted by: stevestory on Oct. 30 2007,22:30

Yeah too bad. Steve_h really deserved it, though.
Posted by: Bob O'H on Oct. 31 2007,01:35

Mister DNA - Remove that post, and repost it next Monday.  Win 'Post of The Week' and 'Dembski of the Week' in one go!

Bob
Posted by: Mister DNA on Oct. 31 2007,02:04

Quote (Bob O'H @ Oct. 31 2007,01:35)
Mister DNA - Remove that post, and repost it next Monday.  Win 'Post of The Week' and 'Dembski of the Week' in one go!

Bob
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Better yet, if I remove it, repost it and add the following:

   
Quote (snoeman @ Oct. 30 2007,22:23)
Post of the Week
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


and:
 
Quote (Bob O'H @ Oct. 31 2007,01:35)
Mister DNA - 'Post of The Week' and 'Dembski of the Week' in one go!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Will you throw in "Cordova of the Week"?

If I repost it to richarddawkins.net, iidb, CARM and FStDT, will I get AFDave of the Week?

If I claim I'm being denied Post of the Week because you're all a bunch of mean ol' Darwinists, will I get FtK of the Week?

Seriously, to even be eligible for post of the week (which I agree - steve_h deserved it), I would have had to have done it more like this:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I told him, Their was only one set of footprince because you're outta here, homo. - DS
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: nuytsia on Oct. 31 2007,03:40

Quote (Mister DNA @ Oct. 30 2007,18:04)

Seriously, to even be eligible for post of the week (which I agree - steve_h deserved it), I would have had to have done it more like this:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I told him, Their was only one set of footprince because you're outta here, homo. - DS
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pure gold!  :D
Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 31 2007,07:56

Quote (nuytsia @ Oct. 31 2007,03:40)
Quote (Mister DNA @ Oct. 30 2007,18:04)

Seriously, to even be eligible for post of the week (which I agree - steve_h deserved it), I would have had to have done it more like this:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I told him, Their was only one set of footprince because you're outta here, homo. - DS
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pure gold!  :D
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Spelling of "their" instead of "there" and "footprince" instead of "foot prints" certainly gives your post an aura of ds authenticity.  Ah!  I love the smell of tard in the morning...
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Oct. 31 2007,11:45

Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 31 2007,07:56)
Quote (nuytsia @ Oct. 31 2007,03:40)
Quote (Mister DNA @ Oct. 30 2007,18:04)

Seriously, to even be eligible for post of the week (which I agree - steve_h deserved it), I would have had to have done it more like this:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I told him, Their was only one set of footprince because you're outta here, homo. - DS
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pure gold!  :D
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Spelling of "their" instead of "there" and "footprince" instead of "foot prints" certainly gives your post an aura of ds authenticity.  Ah!  I love the smell of tard in the morning...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In fairness to the mesomorphic old autodidact, DT's spelling is actually pretty good (considerably better than RTH's!), but I agree that fake DT posts somehow 'read better' when you mix up 'there', 'their' and 'they're'. Adds a certain aesthetic zing.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 31 2007,17:31

Quote (snoeman @ Oct. 30 2007,22:23)
Quote (Mister DNA @ Oct. 30 2007,17:16)
   
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 30 2007,13:56)
Thanks to one < Dave S > for reminding us of < this gem > from the "the Darwinists are herding us all into concentration camps!" school of ID:

         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

20 April 2006

The New Downtrodden
DaveScot


When they came for the creation scientists,
I remained silent;
I was not a creation scientist.

When they locked up the abortion protesters,
I remained silent;
I was not an abortion protester.

When they came for the intelligent design theorists,
I did not speak out;
I was not an intelligent design theorist.

When they came for the strongly religious,
I did not speak out;
I was not strongly religious.

When they came for me,
there was no one left to speak out.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Fittingly, the VERY FIRST comment sports a boldfaced DaveTard banning.

When they came for the dumbshits,
I went along quietly;
I was a dumbshit.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DT really needs to follow that one up with his own version of < Footprints >.

He asked, "Why Lord, in my most troubling times, were there only one set of footprints?"

So I banned him.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Too bad 'Post of the Week' is already taken.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"Dreamy" Man coulter must have been influenced:

< http://www.anncoulter.com/ >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I could almost imagine a poem:

First they came for Rush Limbaugh, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Rush Limbaugh;

And then they came for Ann Coulter, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't Ann Coulter;

And then they came for David Horowitz, and I didn't speak up because I wasn't David Horowitz;

And then ... they came for me ... And by that time there was no one left to speak up.


Liberals claim to be terrified that the Religious Right is going to take over the culture in a country where more than a million babies are exterminated every year, kindergarteners can be expelled from school for mentioning God, and Islamic fascists are welcomed on college campuses while speakers opposed to Islamic fascism are met with angry protests.

If liberals want to face real fascism, try showing up on a college campus and denouncing fascism.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Tard knows no boundries.
Posted by: keiths on Nov. 04 2007,19:27

From < here >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’m running out of naming options for these increasingly sick people. I started out a month ago with Church Burners. Then I had to add Ebola Boys. Church Burning Ebola Boys. Now what - Church Burning Baby Butchering Ebola Boys? That’s too long. Too unwieldy. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Nov. 04 2007,19:30

And < here >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Actually it makes me feel like doing some pain experiments on PZ Myers. I don’t believe he feels pain. All the blood and screaming from my fists pounding his face to a pulp would be nothing more significant than an automobile engine leaking oil and bearings making noise from lack of lubrication. Of course I could be wrong. -ds
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Robert O'Brien on Nov. 04 2007,19:42

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 25 2007,11:40)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You wouldn’t be wondering if you’d had a number of other men’s wives yelling at you in the height of passion “I want to have your baby!”. It’s a little disconcerting at first but you get used to it. It’s a dirty job but someone has to do it. Some guys prefer to make the world’s children smarter by becoming teachers and some guys prefer to make them smarter through better genetics. It’s all good.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You guys are being unfair to DaveScot by posting that pic of DaveScot, Sr., his father.
Posted by: stevestory on Nov. 04 2007,20:01

i think it's actually a picture of Jabba the Scot.
Posted by: Dr.GH on Nov. 04 2007,20:16

Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 04 2007,18:01)
i think it's actually a picture of Jabba the Scot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, DaveTard is healthy compared to Ed Brayton.
Posted by: stevestory on Nov. 04 2007,20:39

Why ya'll hatin' on Ed?
Posted by: Mr_Christopher on Nov. 05 2007,09:33

I was playing my DaveTard's greatest hits this morning and I thought some of you might remember this
< gem >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
8 January 2006
Reminder To Stay On Message
DaveScot
This applies to everyone writing articles as well as writing comments. Professor Dembski excepted of course.

The topic and purpose of this weblog is to instruct and promote the intelligent design work of Bill Dembski in particular and the ID movement in general. We are trying to convince that world that ID is based on math, science, and logic. While the implications tend to attract religious devotees in large number ID is not about religion...I realize that it’s hard to divorce our innermost faith from our writing and will try to tolerate a generous amount of spillage but the bottom line is if you’re warned to ease up, ease up or the axe will fall. Professor Dembski advised me to be ruthless in policing this blog.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Talk about jeebus and you'll get the axe!  Funny because that is ALL they talk about nowadays.  I'm glad they finally quit pretending ID has nothing to do with jeebus.

And since when were creobots are attracted to "math, science, and logic"?  Seriously, is there a parallel universe or something where religious tards are attracted to science and reason?  No one ever bothered to tell me this.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Nov. 09 2007,21:57

Gotta bounce Dave back to the front page:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot
05/07/2007
11:44 am

Another common factor is that United States is the focal point of both controversies. Funny how a nation of knuckle dragging bible worshippers is also the most technologically and economically advanced nation in the world. The mother of all non sequiturs is that progress in science and engineering is hampered by religious belief. The proof of the pudding is in the tasting and the proof in this case is that a nation founded on the principle of inalienble God-given rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness is the best thing going. Judeo-Christian belief, whether true or not with regard to divine inspiration, is unquestionably a successful formula for the attainment of high living standards in a free society. I don’t know who said it but Never argue with success and if ain’t broke don’t fix it are apt here.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: BWE on Nov. 10 2007,01:06

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 24 2007,13:44)
One of my all time < favorites >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It just ocurred to me that according to Ernst Mayr I must be a different species from Inuits. We’re reproductively isolated by geography and there isn’t a snowball’s chance in south central Texas I’d be attracted to an Inuit woman anyhow even though we’re probably still physically compatible on a hypothetical basis sort of like brown bears and polar bears.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


[edit] Be sure to include linkies.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I used to know an eskimo chick. She was a hairdresser in Bellingham. She wasn't bad at all. Looking. Bad looking.
Posted by: Annyday on Nov. 10 2007,07:18

I doubt anyone cares, but DaveScot's claims about his IQ were so stupid they actually gave me nightmares. At the time I wrote some groggy junk on that topic, which anyone masochistic enough can read below.

[Quote="DaveScot"]I’m an autodidact with a certified IQ north of 150 (MGCT and SAT tests).[/quote]

[QUOTE="Moi"]The SAT is not an IQ test. The SAT is 'aptitude' test, with many things you have to be taught in it, as opposed to factors of general intelligence. The SAT can be correlated roughly with IQ, but not very well. Anyone with an IQ over 150 should know this.

The second one is that MGCT isn't even a test I am aware of or can find. The closest I could come on google for "MGCT" was "Minnesota Council for the Gift and Talented", which might administer an IQ test, maybe. It is still not the acronym for a test, however. There is an MCAT test, which is another aptitude (not IQ) test. However, it is a test for students attempting to get into medical school. It's both improbable that Dave took it (and aced it) given that he's not a doctor, and even more improbable he'd mistake it for an IQ test somehow.[/QUOTE]

MGCT is also a test for some bizarre disease I'd never heard of, and someone with a one-in-a-thousand IQ should be too smart to make these retarded comments, even barring his UD involvement counting against him. Well, okay. Maybe someone with a one-in-a-thousand IQ who was permanently blind drunk could act like DaveScot.

I wrote a bunch of other junk about his use of "autodidact" being blindingly stupid, his bizarre obsession with New Scientist, and the low odds of his being a half-competent computer engineer, but it's a little trite in retrospect. Actually, very trite in retrospect. I blame sleeplessness.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Nov. 10 2007,08:30

Quote (Annyday @ Nov. 10 2007,08:18)
I wrote a bunch of other junk about his use of "autodidact" being blindingly stupid, his bizarre obsession with New Scientist, and the low odds of his being a half-competent computer engineer, but it's a little trite in retrospect. Actually, very trite in retrospect. I blame sleeplessness.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Annyday, Welcome to the Therapeutic Wellness Environment at AtBC. Here we specialize in assisting others in their recovery from Post Tardmatic Stress Disorder. On these peaceful, spacious grounds and with the guidance of our compassionate and accepting staff you will learn to heal your tardma and release your pain. The nurses' station is to your left; this is your room.

You'll note the absence of furniture save a bare mattress on the polished linoleum floor. Please remove your clothing, seal all items into this bag and place into the incinerator. Shortly, an aid will shave your head and all body hair.

You'll note that all flat surfaces are HD screens displaying Uncommon Descent. 20 hours each day you will read UD, starting with posts by William Dembski and DaveScot, followed by the works of Denyse O'Leary, Gil Dodgen and the archived works of Sal Cordova. You can expect to experience nausea that culminates in continuous projectile vomiting (please use the appropriate receptacles).

Ultimately, these disturbances will be replaced by a sense of despair, boredom, and eventually wandering attention. Upon looking up from your screen you will be surprised to discover that weeks have passed. You will be overcome by an irresistible desire to sleep. You will awaken many hours later at home in bed, clothed, coiffed, and feeling strangely refreshed. Your interest in Uncommon Descent will be permanently attenuated, and you will be able to reflect on your experiences there without emotional upset.

Good luck!
Posted by: Louis on Nov. 10 2007,08:58

{APPLAUSE}

Post of the decade!

Bill, you're on fire today.

Metaphorically I hope.

Louis
Posted by: Annyday on Nov. 10 2007,12:48

One Flew Over The Tard's Nest.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Nov. 14 2007,00:17

Mustn't forget this old classic where Dave advocates mob justice to improve ID's prospects:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I hope someone keeps track of the 11 parents and their children. Everyone in Dover knows damn well that no children were forced to listen to the 60 second announcement regarding evolution and intelligent design. So what you have is 11 parents whose religious hostility extended to such a trivial matter they were willing to make the tiny school district pay a million dollars.

I grew up in a small town and when a few people pull crap like that that hurts everyone there will be payback. I won't be at all surprised if the children of these parents are so badly ostracized and abused by other students that they're forced to find another school and the parents will be snubbed and insulted and their cars keyed and their coworkers and supervisors making their lives miserable that they'll all end up moving away.

I hope that's all tracked so that the next group of parents that gets their panties in a bunch and volunteers to the be the designated shitheads know what it's going to cost them.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Nov. 29 2007,12:51

< Dave > stands up for the non-peer reviewed science journal where he learned everything he knows:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
While SciAm is not peer reviewed, per se, a cover story is an accomplishment that few astronomers in the world manage to get and one that no one else in ISU’s astronomy department can brag about. Since SciAm is an old and well respected popular science journal that can be seen prominently on every magazine rack in the western world this represents a tremendous positive advertisement for both Gonzalez personally and for the ISU astronomy department in general.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



C'mon Dave. Don't keep making your wife pay for your subscription.  :angry:
Posted by: steve_h on Nov. 29 2007,17:59

Oh Noooooooh!!!

(Yawn)

Sorry - what were you saying?

Flippin' eck!  Is that the time?

Fee ee ling sle.. must stay awa... Snort, Hey wow! great! I'm buzzin'

edit: (Jumps into a corner)

Wonder what the tards are up to. Oh bugger!


edit: Just realised, I could have been channelling Black Adder III above.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Nov. 30 2007,09:34

Dave gets < all philosophical 'n shit: >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The sun has been shining on the earth for billions of years. Yet things like books, cars, highways, and computers didn’t form from the energy of the sun alone. Not until intelligent agency entered the scene did those things come to be. Anything physically possible can happen in an open system if intelligent agency is involved otherwise things like the above are just too improbable to have any reasonable chance of forming by nature alone.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 07 2007,15:15

Dave gets all invidious 'n shit:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
4 May 2006

Time Magazine and Judge John Jones
DaveScot

The magazine who made these men “Man of the Year”

1938 - Adolf Hitler
1939 - Joseph Stalin
1942 - Joseph Stalin
1957 - Nikita Krushchev
1979 - Ayatullah Khomeini

now brings you Judge John Jones as a 2006 Honorable (pun intended) Mention.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Annyday on Dec. 07 2007,15:34

I love it when that happens. Almost any institution that goes back more than 30-40 years has, somewhere in its history, done some things that are either extremely backwards or extremely shortsighted in hindsight.

Is Dave aware that Hitler was considered a conservative good-old-boy prior to WW2 when that award was given, and that Stalin was considered a vanguard of the free world against Nazism during WW2 by people on both sides of the political spectrum, or that "person of the year" is supposed to be for total impact? If he is, he has a funny way of showing it.

... but you know he'd be talking about how prestigious Time was instead, if one of the IDers had gotten into it somehow.
Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Dec. 07 2007,15:45

DaveTard has ventured out of the friendly confines of UD to < comment > on Peter Iron's review of Dembski's and Wells' latest dreck on Amazon.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 07 2007,15:52

Quote (Annyday @ Dec. 07 2007,15:34)
I love it when that happens. Almost any institution that goes back more than 30-40 years has, somewhere in its history, done some things that are either extremely backwards or extremely shortsighted in hindsight.

Is Dave aware that Hitler was considered a conservative good-old-boy prior to WW2 when that award was given, and that Stalin was considered a vanguard of the free world against Nazism during WW2 by people on both sides of the political spectrum, or that "person of the year" is supposed to be for total impact? If he is, he has a funny way of showing it.

... but you know he'd be talking about how prestigious Time was instead, if one of the IDers had gotten into it somehow.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Actually, Time magazine has made it clear since Day One that 'Man of the Year' did NOT imply approval, but simply that the person had a huge impact on history that year. It's never been a popularity contest.

Now, if Dave wasn't a dishonest tard, he would also acknowledge that Jones ALSO shares that honor with Eisenhower, Gandhi, Lindbergh, Truman, Churchill, his beloved Ronald Reagan, etc. But Dave IS a dishonest tard, so there you go.

This also makes Dembski's comment to DT about him 'keeping this in perspective' especially stoopid.
Posted by: someotherguy on Dec. 07 2007,15:53

Quote (Annyday @ Dec. 07 2007,15:34)
I love it when that happens. Almost any institution that goes back more than 30-40 years has, somewhere in its history, done some things that are either extremely backwards or extremely shortsighted in hindsight.

Is Dave aware that Hitler was considered a conservative good-old-boy prior to WW2 when that award was given, and that Stalin was considered a vanguard of the free world against Nazism during WW2 by people on both sides of the political spectrum, or that "person of the year" is supposed to be for total impact? If he is, he has a funny way of showing it.

... but you know he'd be talking about how prestigious Time was instead, if one of the IDers had gotten into it somehow.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Time's person of the year award isn't an accolade for being a hero or doing something for the public good.  It's a recognition that Person X has--for better or for worse--had a large impact on the world that year.

ETA:  Drat!  Beat to the punch--and by that bastard Arden, no less!
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 07 2007,16:02

Quote (someotherguy @ Dec. 07 2007,15:53)
ETA:  Drat!  Beat to the punch--and by that bastard Arden, no less!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


HAH-hah!


Posted by: someotherguy on Dec. 07 2007,16:56

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Dec. 07 2007,16:02)
Quote (someotherguy @ Dec. 07 2007,15:53)
ETA:  Drat!  Beat to the punch--and by that bastard Arden, no less!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


HAH-hah!


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Go ahead, laugh now. . .while you still can.   :angry:
Posted by: VMartin on Dec. 08 2007,13:35

According John DaveScot purged Uncommon descent from opponents entirely.

< http://www.iscid.org/ubbcgi....#001068 >
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 21 2007,10:59

It's best that these things get cross-posted to the special DT thread:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Sure. The genetic code of modern whales existed in a repressed form in the cell line leading to whales. An environmental trigger in the distant past caused a chromosome reorganization to occur which in turn led to a saltation. This is in complete accord with the indisputable testimony of the fossil record which of course is a record of abrupt emergence of radically new phenotypes followed by long periods of stability in the new phenotype and in the vast majority of cases extinction of the new phenotype after an average of 10 million years with all but a small fraction of these leaving no successor species.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This is promising. Usually Dave tries to vaguely hook his 'science' rants up to sth. he's read in Scientific American. I like this new 'pull nonsense out of my ass and assert it confidently' direction he's taking.

Also, is it just me, or is he ripping off Javison here? Does Dave love it so?
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 21 2007,11:04

Thanks to Bob O'H for spotting this one today:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

DaveScot

12/20/2007

4:17 am

Mike Gene is a shrinking violet. He carefully hides his identity so his notions about ID can’t be used to blemish his reputation (whatever that reputation might be). While I admire his thinking on the subject to some extent I don’t have any respect for the man (or possibly woman) himself. His rejection of ID as science is par for the course - my guess is he’s covering his ass in case his boss or peers find out what he’s been doing in his secret life. No doubt he appeals to many Western Europeans. Western Europe has lost its backbone and has become a continent full of shrinking violets. I’m guessing the United States will have to rescue it yet again in the not too distant future when the Muslim horde successfully takes it over.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Nice to see Dave has his masculine wingnutty swagger back. Maybe UD will take pity on him and let him start banning people again?
Posted by: J-Dog on Dec. 21 2007,11:33

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Dec. 21 2007,11:04)
Thanks to Bob O'H for spotting this one today:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

DaveScot

12/20/2007

4:17 am

Mike Gene is a shrinking violet. He carefully hides his identity so his notions about ID can’t be used to blemish his reputation (whatever that reputation might be). While I admire his thinking on the subject to some extent I don’t have any respect for the man (or possibly woman) himself. His rejection of ID as science is par for the course - my guess is he’s covering his ass in case his boss or peers find out what he’s been doing in his secret life. No doubt he appeals to many Western Europeans. Western Europe has lost its backbone and has become a continent full of shrinking violets. I’m guessing the United States will have to rescue it yet again in the not too distant future when the Muslim horde successfully takes it over.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Nice to see Dave has his masculine wingnutty swagger back. Maybe UD will take pity on him and let him start banning people again?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dave might be tring to get the old swagger back, but
I suspect that there are some deep-seated problems that "Dave" is trying to work through.

If one is careful in reading between the lines, it could very well be that "DaveScot Springer " might turn out to be a "DiedreScot Springer".

I have bolded the parts that considered together, could have big implications on Dave/Diedre's future.

Consider:

* His double-usage of the phrase "shrinking violet".

* His use of the word "blemish".  The Old Dave wouldn't care about his skin - he just wanted Cheesy Poofs, and make that the Extra-Large Size.

*  He "admires his thinking".  Is this really Dave?  Admiring anything except himself?  No, I don't think so.

* He brings up the man/women ambivalence.  Posts about it.  He clearly wants us to tell him he looks pretty, and no, that dress does not make him look fat.

*He posts about a "secret life".  Not that it's wrong Dave.  Us Liberal Atheistic Darwinists will be very supportive, and Kristine wants to borrow that red dresss you have in your closet.

Keeping in mind RB's admonition that none of us are professional shrinks, I think Dave/ Diedre's post speaks for itself.

Could this be what happened to "Denyse"?  It could explain so much...
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Dec. 21 2007,11:42



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

*He posts about a "secret life".  Not that it's wrong Dave.  Us Liberal Atheistic Darwinists will be very supportive, and Kristine Richard wants to borrow that red dress you have in your closet.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Fixed it for you.  :angry:
Posted by: JohnW on Dec. 21 2007,12:44

Quote (J-Dog @ Dec. 21 2007,09:33)
*He posts about a "secret life".  Not that it's wrong Dave.  Us Liberal Atheistic Darwinists will be very supportive, and Kristine wants to borrow that red dresss you have in your closet.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Any red dress belonging to Dave is going to fit several Kristines simultaneously.
Posted by: J-Dog on Dec. 21 2007,12:54

Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 21 2007,12:44)
Quote (J-Dog @ Dec. 21 2007,09:33)
*He posts about a "secret life".  Not that it's wrong Dave.  Us Liberal Atheistic Darwinists will be very supportive, and Kristine wants to borrow that red dresss you have in your closet.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Any red dress belonging to Dave is going to fit several Kristines simultaneously.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Good point!
Posted by: Bob O'H on Dec. 21 2007,12:54

But by implication only one Richard.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Mar. 24 2008,17:40

Dave < struts his stuff as only he can: >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This doesn’t bode well for Myers’ upcoming tenure review. If enough of his peers start viewing him as a liability to science and the University of Minnesota then they’ll give him the bum’s rush just as quick as they did Guilliermo Gonzalez. And PZ Myers’, unlike Guilliermo Gonzalez, has no impeccable publication record to fall back on in protest so it won’t be difficult or unseeming for the tenure committee to give him a thumbs down.

This is very, very bad for us. If PZ Myers didn’t exist we’d have to invent him. Myers does more to give Darwinists a bad name than any man alive. If he’s denied tenure we might be forced to put together a “Save the Myers” foundation to solicit donations to keep his blog alive.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



PZ has been tenured for 5 years.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My power is more immense than you can possibly imagine, since I just leapt into my time machine and retroactively gave myself tenure five years ago. My critics better worry. I don't use my powers for anything as crude as killing their grandfather before he had children...instead, I'll go back and sleep with their mother 9 months before they were born.
That'll send chills down their spines.
Posted by: PZ Myers | March 24, 2008 5:55 PM
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ERRRRRRRNNNNNT. Thanks for playing, Dave, and please accept our home game.
Posted by: godsilove on Mar. 24 2008,18:42

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Mar. 24 2008,17:40)
Dave < struts his stuff as only he can: >

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This doesn’t bode well for Myers’ upcoming tenure review. If enough of his peers start viewing him as a liability to science and the University of Minnesota then they’ll give him the bum’s rush just as quick as they did Guilliermo Gonzalez. And PZ Myers’, unlike Guilliermo Gonzalez, has no impeccable publication record to fall back on in protest so it won’t be difficult or unseeming for the tenure committee to give him a thumbs down.

This is very, very bad for us. If PZ Myers didn’t exist we’d have to invent him. Myers does more to give Darwinists a bad name than any man alive. If he’s denied tenure we might be forced to put together a “Save the Myers” foundation to solicit donations to keep his blog alive.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



PZ has been tenured for 5 years.

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My power is more immense than you can possibly imagine, since I just leapt into my time machine and retroactively gave myself tenure five years ago. My critics better worry. I don't use my powers for anything as crude as killing their grandfather before he had children...instead, I'll go back and sleep with their mother 9 months before they were born.
That'll send chills down their spines.
Posted by: PZ Myers | March 24, 2008 5:55 PM
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ERRRRRRRNNNNNT. Thanks for playing, Dave, and please accept our home game.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's hilarious.  Not the first time he's been made to look foolish.
Posted by: J-Dog on Mar. 25 2008,18:09

Quote (godsilove @ Mar. 24 2008,18:42)
ERRRRRRRNNNNNT. Thanks for playing, Dave, and please accept our home game.[/quote]
That's hilarious.  Not the first time he's been made to look foolish.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Plus, that red dress, DOES make him look fat...

or is it the Cheesy Poofs?
Posted by: k.e.. on Mar. 28 2008,10:45

I'M HUMBLED THAT SOMEONE AS SMART AND FAMOUS AS YOU WOULD DEIGN TO NOTICE ME AT ALL MUCH LESS TAKE THE TIME TO PERSONALIZE A BLOG ENTRY FOR ME. DOESN'T THAT SORT OF TAKE AWAY FROM YOUR WORK SAVING MILLIONS OF LIVES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE?

ROFLMAO

Posted by: davescot | February 2, 2007 03:59 PM
Posted by: didymos on Mar. 29 2008,06:00

Holy Frak!  DaveScot actually said something kind of funny.  In reference to this video:

< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8Aq00yJSxo >

he < wrote >:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

I wonder if she kisses the pope’s ring with that mouth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I don't know how to feel about this.
Posted by: didymos on Mar. 29 2008,06:01

Intentionally funny, that is...
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 10 2008,13:34

[cross-posted from the UD thread]

DaveTard on PZ:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-292251 >

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
2

DaveScot

07/10/2008

12:52 pm
Myers is playing Russian roulette. He just keeps pushing the envelope in seeing how many people he can possibly offend in the worst way. It’s just a matter of time before someone with a terminal disease, a month left to live, decides he hasn’t got anything to lose by taking out Myers along with him.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: J-Dog on July 10 2008,14:31

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 10 2008,13:34)
[cross-posted from the UD thread]

DaveTard on PZ:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-292251 >

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
2

DaveScot

07/10/2008

12:52 pm
Myers is playing Russian roulette. He just keeps pushing the envelope in seeing how many people he can possibly offend in the worst way. It’s just a matter of time before someone with a terminal disease, a month left to live, decides he hasn’t got anything to lose by taking out Myers along with him.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DaveScot Springer:

He's a Tard On The Edge... and he's not afraid to use it.

Looks like it's time to get out the Magic Design Phone and call Homeland Security again, right Dr. Dr.?
Posted by: Amadan on July 10 2008,15:15



Despite the CheesyPoofs, judging Dave's Greatest Hits continued.
Posted by: rhmc on July 11 2008,18:04

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 10 2008,14:34)
[cross-posted from the UD thread]

DaveTard on PZ:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-292251 >

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
2

DaveScot

07/10/2008

12:52 pm
Myers is playing Russian roulette. He just keeps pushing the envelope in seeing how many people he can possibly offend in the worst way. It’s just a matter of time before someone with a terminal disease, a month left to live, decides he hasn’t got anything to lose by taking out Myers along with him.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


damn.
i do so love a christian attitude.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Nov. 04 2008,23:29

Well, I guess it is time to memorialize another demonstration of Davescot's great powers of prognostication.

Ladies and Germs, I present to you, straight from Pharyngula, Davescot on Sarah Palin and the presidential election:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Henry J on Nov. 05 2008,10:41

Well, the part about Palin causing some people to care about who won - that could be true: there could well be people out there that voted for Obama because of her, but who wouldn't have otherwise. ;)

Henry
Posted by: J-Dog on Nov. 05 2008,10:45

Quote (carlsonjok @ Nov. 04 2008,23:29)
Well, I guess it is time to memorialize another demonstration of Davescot's great powers of prognostication.

Ladies and Germs, I present to you, straight from Pharyngula, Davescot on Sarah Palin and the presidential election:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You can always count on DaveScot, and I am looking forward to his 2012 political prediction.  I'm betting his houseboat though, that there will be a Texas Dover case that he can predict for us first.  Right Dave?
Posted by: American Saddlebred on Nov. 05 2008,10:49

Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 05 2008,10:41)
Well, the part about Palin causing some people to care about who won - that could be true: there could well be people out there that voted for Obama because of her, but who wouldn't have otherwise. ;)

Henry
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I would've potentially voted for a better McCain ticket.  I was actually a "swing voter" this year IMO, but they totally lost me the second Bible Spice opened her mouth.
Posted by: blipey on Nov. 05 2008,11:16

OMG!  Put out an APB.  DaveTard seems to be having a bit of trouble.  With all the layoffs at Dell, maybe Michael's asking for some of his money back.

Dave's answering service is off line and his phone (a land line, I think) seems to have undergone a significant downgrade.

I'm sure it's nothing, but if anyone's in the Austin area you might check in on him.  Make sure his dogs didn't tie him up or something.

edited to fix inexcusable apostrophe catastrophe
Posted by: jeffox on Nov. 05 2008,12:50

Maybe Davetard woke up from a very bad dream where cute, funny, harmless, and beneficial clowns/eskimo women were tormenting and chasing him around his houseboat.  :)  :p

Maybe, like TARDavison, he's gonna move out of the country because Obama won the election.   :)   ;)

Maybe Davetard actually learned how to use his autodingdong.  Whatever that is.   :)   :)

Maybe not.  But, then again, I've never been good at predicting the movements of the tarded ones; I just like to read about it later.   :)   :)   :p
Posted by: paragwinn on Jan. 02 2009,01:03

Is anyone keeping tabs on the running verbal gun battle between DaveScot and John A Davison over at ISCID's Brainstorms forum ("brainstorms"...hehehe) or the one between JAD and Raving Atheists (it's mostly JAD baiting someone to ban him)?
Posted by: stevestory on Jan. 02 2009,01:12

Quote (paragwinn @ Jan. 02 2009,02:03)
Is anyone keeping tabs on the running verbal gun battle between DaveScot and John A Davison over at ISCID's Brainstorms forum ("brainstorms"...hehehe) or the one between JAD and Raving Atheists (it's mostly JAD baiting someone to ban him)?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I tried to tell JAD something last week. The site said "brainstorms is no longer accepting new registrations" or something to that effect.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Jan. 02 2009,08:38

When a site gets tens to hundreds of spammer user registrations a day, one can either (1) put in a fair bit of effort to hack an effective anti-spammer system into place or (2) close down registrations.

Of course, if one is no longer interested in even the pretense of holding a discussion, closing down registrations will make sense, too.
Posted by: Marion Delgado on Jan. 05 2009,18:29

The IQ thing I posted on somewhere, maybe this forum, God knows. The 2nd one is, I believe, a Military General Competency Test and JAD knows how the bacula you correlate that with a Wechsler or Stanford Binet test score.

It's quite possible he made at least some money at Dell, I have never thought any higher of "the market" than that, anyway.

And Dell in particular are not known for "good." What they're known for is "cheap." And customizable for the American boys who grew up after the Japanese and German imports ended the era of the shade-tree mechanics and just want something to tinker with.
Posted by: stevestory on Jan. 05 2009,19:00

Quote (blipey @ Nov. 05 2008,12:16)
edited to fix inexcusable apostrophe catastrophe
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


apostrophe misuse is annoying, but the only inexcusable one is using the god awful ` on the left side of a quote. The asymmetry is ugly and it doesn't kern properly.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Jan. 20 2009,09:58

On this day, I think we need to reconfirm this:


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by: J-Dog on Jan. 20 2009,10:59

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Jan. 20 2009,09:58)
On this day, I think we need to reconfirm this:


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You have to give him credit for consistency at least....

He hasn't been right yet!

I'm hoping for a nice DaveScot prediction for Texas Science Standards too.
Posted by: Kristine on Jan. 20 2009,11:04

As I said in another thread, they eventually, and unconsciously, supply their own refutations:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That’s the difference between illusion and reality - illusions go away, < reality doesn't >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sure does, Dave, sure does! :)
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on Jan. 20 2009,11:06

Even tho he hasn't taken the oath yet, it's past 12 noon DC time, Obama legally is now president.

Holy shit. This hasn't sunk in yet.
Posted by: Lou FCD on Jan. 20 2009,19:26

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Jan. 20 2009,10:58)
On this day, I think we need to reconfirm this:


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Don't worry Davey. We wrote it down and put it somewhere that it won't be erased.


...ever.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Jan. 20 2009,19:39

Quote (Lou FCD @ Jan. 20 2009,19:26)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Jan. 20 2009,10:58)
On this day, I think we need to reconfirm this:


     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Posted by: DaveScot | September 4, 2008 5:49 PM

You finally got one right, PZ. This IS how you will lose.

Even totally united behind Gore in 2000 and Kerry in 2004 you couldn't beat a dumbass draft dodging reborn alcoholic George "Shrub" Bush and his snake-oil sidekick Dick Cheney of all people. That's pretty pathetic. This round you've got an even worse candidate that half of your own party thinks stole the nomination by cheating and dirty politics. Your party is shattered up the middle and you have the worst candidate in all the decades I've been paying attention. I knew Jack Kennedy and your nominee, PZ, is no Jack Kennedy.

Now the culture war is still on, the players are all the same on both sides, except this time we have an honest-to-God centrist war hero, even if he is an elitist beltway insider, and a little unheard of cutie, obviously a political savant, who in 30 minutes won the hearts and minds of every heretofore apathetic God fearing blue collar flyover family all across the nation and made them start caring about who wins this election not to mention is stealing a lot of the Hillary voters who wanted nothing more than a woman in the Whitehouse. If McCain wins then Palin, sooner or later, is going to become the first woman president of the United States as by the time she's up for election to the top spot there won't be any question of lack of experience. You are basically looking at teh American Margaret Thatcher. Get used to her. She's going to be in your face for the next 16 years. It's all over except for the tears and anger from your side that you were fucked yet again. Write that down.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Don't worry Davey. We wrote it down and put it somewhere that it won't be erased.


...ever.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you know PZ well enough, you should have him do a blog post about that comment.  That would really chap Dave's ass. Heck, I'd even visit Pharyngula for that.
Posted by: Henry J on Jan. 20 2009,20:46



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Don't worry Davey. We wrote it down and put it somewhere that it won't be erased.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


How considerate it is of others to do that for him!

Henry
Posted by: Lou FCD on Jan. 20 2009,21:57

Quote (carlsonjok @ Jan. 20 2009,20:39)
If you know PZ well enough, you should have him do a blog post about that comment.  That would really chap Dave's ass. Heck, I'd even visit Pharyngula for that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, I don't know that Dr. PZ knows me from Adam (Ant), but I've sent it along anyway.
Posted by: J-Dog on Jan. 30 2009,07:47

Out Little Davey Strikes Again!  
I found this on Josh Rosenau's blog and include it for your tard-reading pleasure and edification:

The anatomy of nonsense

Category: Planet Earth • Policy and Politics
Posted on: January 29, 2009 10:34 PM, by Josh Rosenau

DaveScot, the semiliterate sycophant who used to administer Bill Dembski's ID blog, is in a tizzy. In addition to being an evolution denier, DS is a climate change denier and a promoter of medical woo, you see, and he thinks there's evidence that "[James] Hansen’s former boss at NASA declares himself an AGW skeptic." He is sure that:

   The video below is U.S. Senator James Inhofe describing the letter he received from former NASA supervisor and senior atmospheric scientist Dr. John S. Theon

< Davey Loses Again >
Posted by: Leftfield on Feb. 17 2009,14:00



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
17

DaveScot

02/17/2009

2:26 pm
KRiS is yet another sock puppet from the Panda’s Thumb forum. Same one I ejected a couple months ago when his subtle mockery of Denyse became too obvious.

Just so y’all know.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



. . . so remember, Dave only approves of mockery of Denyse that is subtle!

ETA: From the current Walter ReMine thread.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Feb. 17 2009,14:15

< http://en.wikipedia.org/w....+search >
Posted by: carlsonjok on Feb. 17 2009,15:51

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2009,14:15)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/w....+search >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Richtard is back!  To paraphrase John Kennedy: Ich bin braun und übel riechend.
Posted by: J-Dog on Feb. 17 2009,15:51

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2009,14:15)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/w....+search >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thanks homo!

So... How's things?

Are you working on a Tardelogue???

Huh?  Please?  It's my birthday pretty soon!  It's Kristine's birfday even sooner...!!!
Posted by: dvunkannon on Feb. 18 2009,10:31

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2009,15:15)
< http://en.wikipedia.org/w....+search >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Some classic Scooter there...

< Scooter Falls On His Turd For Dembski >

The evidence from Missouri...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Copying the blog posts here so everyone can see
I hope someone keeps track of the 11 parents and their children. Everyone in Dover knows damn well that no children were forced to listen to the 60 second announcement regarding evolution and intelligent design. So what you have is 11 parents whose religious hostility extended to such a trivial matter they were willing to make the tiny school district pay a million dollars.
I won't be at all surprised if the children of these parents are so badly ostracized and abused by other students that they're forced to find another school and the parents will be snubbed and insulted and their cars keyed and their coworkers and supervisors making their lives miserable that they'll all end up moving away.
I hope that's all tracked so that the next group of parents that gets their panties in a bunch and volunteers to the be the designated shitheads know what it's going to cost them." [34] (already referenced in the article). JoshuaZ 02:52, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Scooter thinks quoting his own words is libelous of himself!!1!


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The interpretation of what I wrote is libelous.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Then backpedals furiously...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The last edit was better but it still implied I intended to publish the names to encourage others to cause harm. My only intent there was so that the names could be googled to see if anything untoward had indeed happened which I presume would have received some press. I corrected it to better state what my intent was. I also pointed out that I never actually published any names. It was empty rhetoric. Lastly, I updated to reflect the fact that I had put back as a moderator on uncommon descent after a hiatus of 6 weeks.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What is this "empty rhetoric" you speak of? Ain't you a Marine? This isn't empty rhetoric, just a garden variety FAILED SCOOTER PREDICTION.

The bannination hammer falls on the cheezy poofed fingers of Scooter...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Per this I recommend that we block an IP Dave is using on sight and revert his edits until he withdraws his legal threats per WP:LEGAL. JoshuaZ 04:46, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Scooter decides a guerilla campaign is the only way to continue "helping" his fearless leader.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Not to engage in ad hominems or well poisoning but the anon who brought the matter up is DaveScot. In fact, the matter was sourced to the primary comments until he got Larry to take them down and then attempted to remove the statement saying the sources didn't have it. He also initially tried to "clarify" what he meant with those comments so his attempt to say on the BLP board that maybe the comments weren't his is insulting to our intelligence. The bottom line is that no matter how unhappy Dave is with his comments and no matter how many times he makes libel accusations the comment is reliably sourced. JoshuaZ 01:06, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



...and proceeds to talk about himself in the third person...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot's comment did not appear on Dembski's blog and there's not a shred of evidence that Dembski either knew about it or agreed with it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



... to no avail. Scooter's nose is rubbed in his own tard.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot is a two-bit player on the ID scene and not nearly as important as he'd like to be or think he is. The argument would have to go something like "its relevant because the article is about Dembski and what happens at his blog is a major part of it" It might seem more reasonable to include it if we had a separate article on Uncommon Descent. On the other hand, we clearly don't have enough material to have a separate article on Uncommon Descent, so any such material would be reasonable to have here. I haven't made up my mind on this matter at all. (Given that the content is sourced and such I'm also tempted to keep it in simply in reaction to DaveScot's behavior since he first made libel claims then got Larry to take down the original posts and then tried to blank and vandalize this article, then made some more libel noises, and now is trying to claim that maybe the posts aren't his even though he had earlier tried to argue that he had meant something different. Indeed, Dave seems to be going out of his way to take the info out and if anything just to establish that Wikipedia won't back down from threats and manipulation we should consider keeping it if we think the sourcing is good. JoshuaZ 18:18, 30 November 2006 (UTC)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Instant replay


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot is a two-bit player on the ID scene and not nearly as important as he'd like to be or think he is.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Slow motion


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
D a v e S c o t   i s   a   t w o - b i t   p l a y e r   o n   t h e   I D   s c e n e
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That's gotta leave a mark. A cheezy poof shaped mark, but a mark, nonetheless. Perhaps we should blame JoshuaZ for Scooter's reckless abandon with the bannination stick and loudspeaker in the ceiling since the day he was banninated from Wikipedia. Or maybe we should just blame Scooter hisself. We report, you decide.
Posted by: J-Dog on Feb. 18 2009,10:51

Excellent fisking,  - especially catching the Big Tough Marine flouncing away...
and
That looked GREAT in slow motion!

BTW - I vote that we blame Davey hisself...
Posted by: Zachriel on Feb. 18 2009,10:51

Quote (dvunkannon @ Feb. 18 2009,10:31)
...and proceeds to talk about himself in the third person...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DaveScot's comment did not appear on Dembski's blog and there's not a shred of evidence that Dembski either knew about it or agreed with it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Zachriel finds that rather droll. {sniff}
Posted by: Zachriel on Feb. 18 2009,11:11



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Upright BiPed >: As if pointing out that the explanation doesn’t fit the evidence is a weakness of some kind (see Copernicus, Einstein, Mendel, Wegener, Denton, Behe)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Einstein and Denton!?
Mendel and Behe?!

...

The Wright Brothers and Bozo the Clown.
end


Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a
Ikonboard © 2001 Jarvis Entertainment Group, Inc.