RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (666) < ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... >   
  Topic: The Bathroom Wall, A PT tradition< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,07:55   

As for me this just lumps the pandas thumb as another blog controlled by some total jerk with a scissor.Funny,  I thought, it was different, you know, communitarian. I Didn't know it was just another pissing ground for PZ. Since conditions for equal, free conversation are unavailable here, I quit.  Good bye.

Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,07:58   

Buh bye, fluff fluff

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
BWE



Posts: 1902
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,08:12   

Y'know,

I just read all his posts and I am not sure exactly how they started out OT? His moniker is a little confrontational, true but why the deletions?
Quote
As I was saying in the message before missy PZ wiped it out, for democratic reasons I guess (in the Bush sense of the word):
Poppers ghost reflects the kind of dicotoomous thinking that PZ harvests. Basically that if your´re not bent on insulting religion, you can´t be a scientist or an atheist. Black or white. Oh and did Poppers ghost call me an illiterate moron? What a surprise! These guys are great for the evolution cause. They insult, they like moving in flocks (PZ herdsman), you know, not an inch better than a christian fanatic neocon, but of inverted polarity.


That seems like a reasonable, if testy comment. And, considering the topic, I would say On-T.

What am I missing?

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,09:19   

you SUCK like no other

AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,09:19   

thanks PZ, for continuing with the message wipe outs. I told you I knew your kind perfectly well. Too bad foul playing pigheads like you want to stand as representatives of science. All the better for ID and creationism.

Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,09:51   

Quote (BWE @ June 22 2006,13:12)
Y'know,

I just read all his posts and I am not sure exactly how they started out OT? His moniker is a little confrontational, true but why the deletions?
 
Quote
As I was saying in the message before missy PZ wiped it out, for democratic reasons I guess (in the Bush sense of the word):
Poppers ghost reflects the kind of dicotoomous thinking that PZ harvests. Basically that if your´re not bent on insulting religion, you can´t be a scientist or an atheist. Black or white. Oh and did Poppers ghost call me an illiterate moron? What a surprise! These guys are great for the evolution cause. They insult, they like moving in flocks (PZ herdsman), you know, not an inch better than a christian fanatic neocon, but of inverted polarity.


That seems like a reasonable, if testy comment. And, considering the topic, I would say On-T.

What am I missing?

I think they're responding to a certain looniness between the lines on antiPZ's posts.

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

  
AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,10:09   

cephalopods don't deserve a monster like you piggybacking on their coolness

Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,10:12   

Quote (Guest @ June 22 2006,15:09)
cephalopods don't deserve a monster like you piggybacking on their coolness

Case in point.

Think it's DaveScot going deep undercover?

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

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,10:27   

It's very DaveTardy.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,13:16   

It is impossible to respond  and have conversation if PZ insists in wiping out perfectly good messages. It is simply stupid to repeat myself on what he has deleted. You guys can keep your shoulder-rubbing club.  Good bye folks, this blog is simply useless.

AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,13:50   

IF I am allowed a voice, however brief and unread
Those mesaages are in response to PZ wiping out perfectly good ones, like the one about the gandhi quotes. See, PZ wipes out the quotes where you can tell most clearly  I`m a scientist and atheist, and leaves only those he thinks will allow you to  convince yoursels  to say "yeaaah, he must be one of those darn religious"  so you children won't have any nightmares, or any doubts stirring  your pure souls.This naturally pisses me off so PZ gets some well deserved reactions as well.
If some of my retorts seem nonsensical, it is because lame ole PZ is dipping the scissor all the time. And no, I have not found any of my quotes in the bathroom wall.
Im sure this will be erased soon enough, to keep appeareances. Good bye, kiddies, live in the bliss of Pz paradise

pzmyers



Posts: 35
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,13:55   

Quote (Guest @ June 22 2006,18:50)
And no, I have not found any of my quotes in the bathroom wall.
If he's the anti-PZ, I must be a freakin' genius.

Edited by pzmyers on June 22 2006,18:56

   
pzmyers



Posts: 35
Joined: Sep. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,14:04   

Quote
That seems like a reasonable, if testy comment. And, considering the topic, I would say On-T.

What am I missing?

"AntiPZ" is not on-topic at all; the thread is about the recent election of someone with biology training to high rank in the Episcopalian church. He lurched into the thread in full-on obnoxious confrontation mode, and he is basically being evicted on sight every time he tries to re-engage.

He doesn't seem to be getting the message, though. At this point he might as well consider himself banned for being too stupid to post.

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,14:04   

Well that depends, PZ.  What was your SAT score?

:)

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5455
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,14:07   

For those not paying attention, See this thread to explain the SAT quip.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

   
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,14:07   

naw, we didn't need someone with a negative IQ to tell us you were already a genius, there PZ.

;)

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
AntiPZ

Unregistered



(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,14:59   

Before you use your allmighty powers to cut off the thread, acknowledge to yourself  that you wiped the one below for absolutely  no good reason. It is on topic, and certainly deserves to be on this thread (but of course, anyone wishing to merely insult me is just perfectly on-topic and can remain)

"Taking whatever wrong people have said is a miserable endeavour. Lets take the GOOD things people have said.  I think Gandhi nails it pretty nicely there on the subject of morality. I also like what he says of being prepared to assume the costs of non violence. I find cool what he did about the muslim boy in the movie. The lesson once again is a trivialization of cult differences. All of that is good stuff.  
If we were to make a list of cool things gandhi or the dalai lama have said, I have no doubt that it will greatly exceed the  list of  the uncool. Furthermore, I bet that regarding human relations, we will find far more good thoughts, and far more enlightening, than what  most scientists have ever said. This is not to demean science, only to ackowledge the differences of inmediate concerns of the  jobs. Science  mostly works several domain-leaps  away from the complex realities of human  interactions, whereas some religious men have thought profoundly about them and even dealt with them directly, in admirable ways.
A student once approached Einstein and told him he wanted to do good for humanity, and asked him whether physics was the way. Einstein's answer was: whatever physisicists have done, is nothing, in comparison to the works of Jesus and Buddha"

normdoering



Posts: 287
Joined: July 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,15:03   

Quote (Guest @ June 22 2006,18:50)
I`m a scientist and atheist, ...

I don't believe you.

Which branch of science? As far as I know unless all you've got is a B.S. degree then you have to have degrees in some specific branch of science. Which general branch is it? Computer science, physics, geology, biochemistry...? What kind of research do you do?

Also, explain why you are an atheist.

  
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,16:23   

Hi, I´m antipz but I have changed name not to honor PZ anymore haha
Why should you believe anything I say? Anyway, if you're trying to fit me into something, youre going to have to deal with the fact that I am a paleobiologist, doing my postdoc on the developmental evolution of tetrapod limbs.
I am an atheist because I dont give a cent for the idea that actually, you know, there is some kind of conscious being blablabla However I do not hold that others must share my opinion. That is each person's decision and responsibility. I decide to be an atheist. YOU can be anything you want.  
I hate Dawkin's science, among good evolutionary biologists everyone knows his selfish gene stuff is the purest crap. And of course I do not share his vulgar, easy  attack on religon. For example, he says, "the more I know about evolution, the more I move from agnosticism to atheism" That is so stupid, it only makes sense if you still have hopes, and how on earth does growing knowledge on the mechanisms of evolution increasingly refutes God? What does that have to do with god at all? Its amazingly silly.
The point is: god has nothing to do with evolution. And I'm interested in evolution, not god. I hate it when people like stupid EO Wilson say the best thing evolution has done is refute god. Lets talk about evolution, for Bateson's sake

Convinced yet?

Science is about describing mechanisms. Sure, if you want, crystals, the orbits of planets, the atom and organisms reflect the intelligence of god, to me people are welcome to think that as long as they know that in the realm of science, these things are discussed in terms of observations and mechanism, such that anyone can engage in this discussion, regardless of whether he accepts the idea an intelligenece may or may not be reflected there.
I believe this is perfectly understood by many intelligent religious people, and even in entire religions, like hinduism and buddhism. Remember the muslim "trust Allah, but dont forget to tie your camel" hahaha

Like if the study of nature can tell us something about the existence or not of god. And no, it never will prove or disprove it.

I hope you realize that PZ does something very silly when he simply attacks all religion declaring a war to the death where we cannot coexist. Hey, people turn to fanatic religion (or some other stupid ideology) not because they're "simply stupid" but for human, real world circumstances. Buy to guys like PZ (and his real master silly Dawkins), these historical and material realities are "the details". Their attitude is simplistic, stuck- up and useless. Preaching to the choir, stuck up creeps that rub each other shoulders and believe almost everyone but them is stupid so they are free to insult. You can see right through these chauvinistic fools .

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,16:44   

ahh, i see you found the BW, where you said your posts didn't exist.

I'm not terribly interested in your rants, but one thing caught my eye:

Quote
stupid EO Wilson say the best thing evolution has done is refute god.


that's an interesting tidbit.  with all the things Wilson has said, I don't recall that one specifically.  Can you recall where you mined that quote from?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,17:02   

See, fools like this are only interested in evolution, insofar it deals with God. Paleontology, development, no, not that interesting. God and religion bashing, Oh goody goody yes!!!
Its in the introduction Wilson wrote to the reedition of the atrociously abridged books of darwin. Go ahead and use it as stupidly as you can.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,17:10   

that's not good enough.  If you could track down the exact abridged version you mean, that would be a bit more helpful.  I spent a half hour searching, and can't find any abridged versions of Origins, for example, that have introductions by EO Wilson.  Several versions with introductions by other biologists, but not Ed.

bottom line, I doubt he really said what you seem to think he said.  It's possible, but I'd like to see it for myself.  I bet he said something more along the lines of evolutionary theory being a good example of where god is not needed to explain what we observe.

...and stop your idiotic ranting for a little while.  maybe when you turn off that part of your brain that feels the need to rant, something actually useful will come out of your keyboard.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,17:51   

http://www.amazon.com/gp....=283155

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,17:59   

Quote
Hi, I´m antipz... youre...dont...Dawkin's...Its amazingly silly...Lets...


Is English your first language?

   
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,18:20   

Of course god is not NEEDED to explain organisms or anything else we see.  Thats not a very impressive thought to me. You may add or take god, it won't do much of a difference to a properly scientific understanding of what we see. I don't need a pile of evolution data to know that, nor will anyone who understands the true spirit of science.
As poet Nicanor Parra humorously put it in his "Ultimatum":
Either god is in everything, or he is in nothing.

  
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,18:25   

So what? probably that's why I dont like moving in herds as much as you frivolous gringos

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,18:51   

Is this the introduction you apparently find so offensive:

http://www.harvard-magazine.com/on-line/110518.html

I could not find where Wilson said that "the best thing evolution has done is refute god."

maybe you can find it.

I did find this passage relevant, however:

Quote
So, will science and religion find common ground, or at least agree to divide the fundamentals into mutually exclusive domains? A great many well-meaning scholars believe that such rapprochement is both possible and desirable. A few disagree, and I am one of them. I think Darwin would have held to the same position. The battle line is, as it has ever been, in biology. The inexorable growth of this science continues to widen, not to close, the tectonic gap between science and faith-based religion.

Rapprochement may be neither possible nor desirable. There is something deep in religious belief that divides people and amplifies societal conflict. In the early part of this century, the toxic mix of religion and tribalism has become so dangerous as to justify taking seriously the alternative view, that humanism based on science is the effective antidote, the light and the way at last placed before us.

In any case, the dilemma to be solved is truly profound. On the one side the input of religion on human history has been beneficent in many ways. It has generated much of which is best in culture, including the ideals of altruism and public service. From the beginning of history it has inspired the arts. Creation myths were in a sense the beginning of science itself. Fabricating them was the best the early scribes could do to explain the universe and human existence.

Yet the high risk is the ease with which alliances between religions and tribalism are made. Then comes bigotry and the dehumanization of infidels. Our gods, the true believer asserts, stand against your false idols, our spiritual purity against your corruption, our divinely sanctioned knowledge against your errancy. In past ages the posture provided an advantage. It united each tribe during life-and-death struggles with other tribes. It buoyed the devotees with a sense of superiority. It sacralized tribal laws and mores, and encouraged altruistic behaviors. Through sacred rites it lent solemnity to the passages of life. And it comforted the anxious and afflicted. For all this and more it gave people an identity and purpose, and vouchsafed tribal fitness — yet, unfortunately, at the expense of less united or otherwise less fortunate tribes.

Religions continue both to render their special services and to exact their heavy costs. Can scientific humanism do as well or better, at a lower cost? Surely that ranks as one of the great unanswered questions of philosophy. It is the noble yet troubling legacy that Charles Darwin left us.



like dawkins, he sees the problems arising from religious fundametnalism, but unlike him, I think Ed doesn't want to completely abandon the good things that religion has provided throughout history:

Quote
...the input of religion on human history has been beneficent in many ways. It has generated much of which is best in culture, including the ideals of altruism and public service.


does that sound to you like someone who thinks that the best thing science has done is to refute god?

again, stop your ranting and see the real issues involved here.

see what happens when pure religious fervor is the norm:  take Al qaeda, for example.  would they even exist at all if it wasn't for the very negative aspects of religion Ed himself describes above?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,19:06   

Quote (Antipasto @ June 22 2006,23:20)
Of course god is not NEEDED to explain organisms or anything else we see.  Thats not a very impressive thought to me. You may add or take god, it won't do much of a difference to a properly scientific understanding of what we see. I don't need a pile of evolution data to know that, nor will anyone who understands the true spirit of science.
As poet Nicanor Parra humorously put it in his "Ultimatum":
Either god is in everything, or he is in nothing.

hmm, if god is not needed to explain something, and god is in everything or he is in nothing....

you've given us only one choice.

he's in nothing.

I don't see a problem with that for people of faith, who don't try to prove god exists by looking for him in the gaps of existence, but the very thing that PZ and Dawkins, and Wilson, and myself, and 99.9% of all scientists see is that there is a large proportion of those who call themselves 'xian' or 'muslim' who apparently have no faith, and feel they must find god revealed in nature, or accept that he IS nothing.  With such a strawman for a worldview, it's no surprise to see apologists like Dembski invent a ass-backwards idea like NFL, or Behe create the idea of "irreducible complexity".

Yes, these folks in not accepting the tenants of their professed faith, do damage not only to science and education, but to the larger religions they claim to belong to as well.

At some point, one does have to ask the question:

are these IDiots going to be reigned in by those of the religions they claim?  or not?

many have, based on an apparent unwillingness of those who say they do have faith to correct those who apparently don't (specifically the afore mentioned IDiots and creationists), come to the logical conclusion that perhaps the overaching failure is with religion itself.

I for one, don't blame them.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Antipasto



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,19:39   

haha check out these gems from Wilson!!

http://www.salon.com/books/int/2006/03/21/wilson/

"there's a possibility that a god or gods -- I don't think it would resemble anything of the Judeo-Christian variety -- or a super-intelligent force came along and started the universe with a big bang and moved on to the next universe. I can't discount that"

Oh what a great eclectic chap. Am I the only atheist barfing?

"Well, that's a question I'm happy to leave to the astrophysicist -- where the laws of the universe came from and what is the meaning of the origin of existence"

Sure, there is a fair chance that quarks have "made by god" stamped right on them, we biologists just happende to be saved by the bell we didint find it in organism, aaaah that's a relief. Lets pass the ball to the physicists, they are suppa cool and trustworthy

"There's no evidence whatsoever that we're being overseen or directed in our evolution and actions by a supernatural force."

Nah, really? Could that be because its supposed to be a "super-natural" force, Eddie? What kind of evidence were you expecting? aw fuggedaboutit

Brilliant epistemology that of Wilson, its just "all about the evidence" huh? What a great empiricist. The only detail is "what" kind of evidence hahaha

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 22 2006,19:44   

Is Antipasto by any chance related to Thordaddy?

The style seems awfully familiar...

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."

- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

  
  19967 replies since Jan. 17 2006,08:38 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (666) < ... 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 21 22 23 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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