RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (654) < ... 648 649 650 651 652 [653] 654 >   
  Topic: The Bathroom Wall, A PT tradition< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
khan



Posts: 1526
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 15 2016,17:59   

Quote (Henry J @ July 13 2016,22:16)
That's being discussed on the Panda's Thumb thread "Ark Park on opening day".

http://pandasthumb.org/archive....-355659

That was interesting.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
rossum



Posts: 227
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2016,03:43   

Page bug bump?

--------------
The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

  
Lethean



Posts: 116
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 03 2016,17:12   

Pigs are flying over a snowball fight in hell where cats and dogs co-habitating. Ok, not really, but this pretty entertaining.

Byers squares off and in his own Byer-esque manner defends Darwin against the seemingly obsessed crank-like Sutton, champion of Patrick Matthew.

   
Quote
Mike Sutton.
I am a hosyile creationist. Yet I have read Darwin and he went out of his way to be fair about who got the credit for what he thought was a great idea to change mankinds thinking on origins.
He stressed recognizing Wallace in a very gentlemanly way.
Je likewise recognized this Patrick who possibly could not og even got his claims noticed.
In fact dArwin didn't deny him..
One would have to go a long way, and bit further, to suggest darwin was lying about his independent discovery.
further also is the argument made in his books. its fully based on observations and then reasonings from it.
There is no hint or need for Patrick's stuff..
Darwin correctly calcuated he would get the credit despite some priority claim on some points by patrick.
I guess fair and square.


It goes on from there into another chain of comments.

Behold the Bemusement.

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
JonF



Posts: 632
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2016,12:19   

Hi, Dennis.

  
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2016,15:00   

Bye Dennis.

   
Henry J



Posts: 4593
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 04 2016,19:45   

"Bye Dennis"? Not even if the price was negative!

  
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 23 2016,10:46   

Two very talented friends are funding their new Graphic Novel on kickstarter. If you like feminist science conspiracy mystery adventure stuff, this is for you.

Edited by stevestory on Aug. 23 2016,14:06

   
Lethean



Posts: 116
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 06 2016,12:22   

Over on TalkRational, Hawkins starts a thread where he claims to be "researching" the possibility that "the ancients" (by which he means Seth the son of Adam) had advanced knowledge of the natural world including its size and oblateness.

No, really.

Having gone way off the reservation into woo-meister number-wanking territory he makes this rather odd assertion.

 
Quote
Dave Hawkins
 
Quote
Brother Daniel
 
Quote
Pingu
 
Quote
Dave Hawkins

In fact, evidence has been increasing in recent decades that mankind had at least as much knowledge of the natural world as did Eratosthenes even as far back as 4500 years ago.

No it hasn't.

Something I've noticed about Dave:  When talking about amounts of evidence, he loves to make claims about the evidence "increasing".

It doesn't matter to him if the evidence is less than 0.01% of the amount needed to begin to take the idea seriously.  As long as that tiny amount of evidence represents an INCREASE over whatever it was previously, then he imagines that the amount of evidence has some sort of momentum, and will thus continue to increase to the point where it eventually becomes overwhelming.

Apparently, he's not concerned with the overall weight of evidence; he's concerned with the rate of change of the overall weight of evidence.

(Never mind that he can't support even his claims about that rate of change.  That's another issue.)


The reason I said that in this instance was because I've referred to the Wiki article on Eratosthenes several times over the years and I don't remember EVER reading that he got anywhere close to 1% of the true circumference value.  I think that was a "fringe view" 10 years ago.  Now it's in the Wiki article and hasn't been removed by Wesley Elsberry's goons.


Wesley, if this is a paid position I'd like an application if you don't mind.

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
Lethean



Posts: 116
Joined: Jan. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 06 2016,12:25   

Forgot the linky.

linky

--------------
"So I'm a pretty unusual guy and it's not stupidity that has gotten me where I am. It's brilliance."

"My brain is one of the very few independent thinking brains that you've ever met. And that's a thing of wonder to you and since you don't understand it you criticize it."


~Dave Hawkins~

  
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 06 2016,12:26   

Quote (Lethean @ Sep. 06 2016,13:22)
Over on TalkRational, Hawkins starts a thread where he claims to be "researching" the possibility that "the ancients" (by which he means Seth the son of Adam) had advanced knowledge of the natural world including its size and oblateness.

No, really.

Having gone way off the reservation into woo-meister number-wanking territory he makes this rather odd assertion.

 
Quote
Dave Hawkins
 
Quote
Brother Daniel
 
Quote
Pingu
 
Quote
Dave Hawkins

In fact, evidence has been increasing in recent decades that mankind had at least as much knowledge of the natural world as did Eratosthenes even as far back as 4500 years ago.

No it hasn't.

Something I've noticed about Dave:  When talking about amounts of evidence, he loves to make claims about the evidence "increasing".

It doesn't matter to him if the evidence is less than 0.01% of the amount needed to begin to take the idea seriously.  As long as that tiny amount of evidence represents an INCREASE over whatever it was previously, then he imagines that the amount of evidence has some sort of momentum, and will thus continue to increase to the point where it eventually becomes overwhelming.

Apparently, he's not concerned with the overall weight of evidence; he's concerned with the rate of change of the overall weight of evidence.

(Never mind that he can't support even his claims about that rate of change.  That's another issue.)


The reason I said that in this instance was because I've referred to the Wiki article on Eratosthenes several times over the years and I don't remember EVER reading that he got anywhere close to 1% of the true circumference value.  I think that was a "fringe view" 10 years ago.  Now it's in the Wiki article and hasn't been removed by Wesley Elsberry's goons.


Wesley, if this is a paid position I'd like an application if you don't mind.



{drops soda} "Noooooooooo! Wes don't give away my job!!!!!!1111"

   
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 06 2016,12:29   

if we still haven't made those CBEB biker jackets, "Wesley Elsberry's Goons" would make a fine appellation.

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4820
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 06 2016,12:57   

Quote (Lethean @ Sep. 06 2016,12:22)
Over on TalkRational, Hawkins starts a thread where he claims to be "researching" the possibility that "the ancients" (by which he means Seth the son of Adam) had advanced knowledge of the natural world including its size and oblateness.

No, really.

Having gone way off the reservation into woo-meister number-wanking territory he makes this rather odd assertion.

 
Quote
Dave Hawkins
 
Quote
Brother Daniel
 
Quote
Pingu
 
Quote
Dave Hawkins

In fact, evidence has been increasing in recent decades that mankind had at least as much knowledge of the natural world as did Eratosthenes even as far back as 4500 years ago.

No it hasn't.

Something I've noticed about Dave:  When talking about amounts of evidence, he loves to make claims about the evidence "increasing".

It doesn't matter to him if the evidence is less than 0.01% of the amount needed to begin to take the idea seriously.  As long as that tiny amount of evidence represents an INCREASE over whatever it was previously, then he imagines that the amount of evidence has some sort of momentum, and will thus continue to increase to the point where it eventually becomes overwhelming.

Apparently, he's not concerned with the overall weight of evidence; he's concerned with the rate of change of the overall weight of evidence.

(Never mind that he can't support even his claims about that rate of change.  That's another issue.)


The reason I said that in this instance was because I've referred to the Wiki article on Eratosthenes several times over the years and I don't remember EVER reading that he got anywhere close to 1% of the true circumference value.  I think that was a "fringe view" 10 years ago.  Now it's in the Wiki article and hasn't been removed by Wesley Elsberry's goons.


Wesley, if this is a paid position I'd like an application if you don't mind.

I wish I were in a position to pay people to do useful stuff, though I think I would refer to y'all in somewhat more positive terms than "goons".

About Hawkins... just because Wikipedia hadn't until recently explicitly noted that certain old estimates of the earth's size weren't too shabby doesn't mean that the appreciation of it is recent. And he apparently still is upset over the little contretemps we had over the possibility of new alleles being produced via recombination, which played out in part in the editing of the Wikipedia article.

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

    
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 17 2016,14:59   

A Marching Band From Waco, Tx

   
Henry J



Posts: 4593
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2016,22:24   

Testing...

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2492
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 25 2016,23:14   

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 06 2016,10:26)
{drops soda} "Noooooooooo! Wes don't give away my job!!!!!!1111"


Get your own Pepsi.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2139
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 26 2016,03:53   

Quote (stevestory @ Sep. 17 2016,14:59)
A Marching Band From Waco, Tx

Now here's a blast from the past:
Quote
In fall 2015, Baylor hired Philadelphia law firm Pepper Hamilton to review its past treatment of sexual assault claims.


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

   
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 21 2016,22:17   

Plane Not A Planet
The First Ever Flat Earth Website …. Helping to end 500 years of One Massive Lie.

https://aplanetruth.info/....th.info

   
Henry J



Posts: 4593
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 21 2016,22:57   

Website? Something that depends on satellite communication, which depends on things that circle the Earth? Something there doesn't sound quite right.

  
Henry J



Posts: 4593
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Nov. 13 2016,12:57   

Testing...

  
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 08 2017,02:44   

Nice comment at PT:

Quote
Mike Elzinga -> Robert Byers • 11 hours ago
You are missing the central point of the criticism of ID/creationism; ID/creationism is pseudoscience.

The important trend to notice is that there is a fifty year history of ID/creationists getting the science dead wrong and just making up crap to fit with sectarian beliefs. None of their "science" has anything to do with the universe around us.

ID/creationists get the basic concepts in physics, chemistry, biology, and geology dead wrong. ID/creationists get routine basic calculations dead wrong. ID/creationists don't pay attention to units when plugging variables into equations. ID/creationists apply meaningless calculations to the probabilities for molecular and biological assemblies. ID/creationist "astrophysicists" can't do basic orbital mechanics calculations. ID/creationist engineers don't know the basics of scaling up the sizes of structures that even Galileo wrote about. ID/creationist "hydraulic engineers" can't do the basic physics of a worldwide flood and recognize the ludicrous nature of their claims. They are all incompetent.

ID/creationist self-proclaimed "experts" insert themselves into the published work of working scientists and report the findings incorrectly. These self-proclaimed "experts" don't understand the details of the papers they are quote-mining. They don't understand the language, the concepts, the calculations, or the conclusions.

ID/creationists weren't there during the crucial phases of the research; they have no knowledge of or feeling for the reality behind the reporting in the published papers of working scientists. They are "arm chair experts" who have never been in the game of real research; they are merely distorting the papers of working scientists to their gullible audiences in order to preserve their beliefs in a particularly narrow sectarian dogma.

ID/creationism is, and always has been, fakery and pretentious bluster in support of prior sectarian beliefs. It has nothing to do with the physical reality of the universe; it is pseudoscience trying to make a sectarian dogma look superior to all other religious beliefs.

Any "religion" that requires that kind of phony support is not worth having.
linky

   
fnxtr



Posts: 2492
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 08 2017,12:19   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 08 2017,00:44)
Nice comment at PT:

 
Quote
Mike Elzinga -> Robert Byers • 11 hours ago
You are missing the central point of the criticism of ID/creationism; ID/creationism is pseudoscience.

The important trend to notice is that there is a fifty year history of ID/creationists getting the science dead wrong and just making up crap to fit with sectarian beliefs. None of their "science" has anything to do with the universe around us.

ID/creationists get the basic concepts in physics, chemistry, biology, and geology dead wrong. ID/creationists get routine basic calculations dead wrong. ID/creationists don't pay attention to units when plugging variables into equations. ID/creationists apply meaningless calculations to the probabilities for molecular and biological assemblies. ID/creationist "astrophysicists" can't do basic orbital mechanics calculations. ID/creationist engineers don't know the basics of scaling up the sizes of structures that even Galileo wrote about. ID/creationist "hydraulic engineers" can't do the basic physics of a worldwide flood and recognize the ludicrous nature of their claims. They are all incompetent.

ID/creationist self-proclaimed "experts" insert themselves into the published work of working scientists and report the findings incorrectly. These self-proclaimed "experts" don't understand the details of the papers they are quote-mining. They don't understand the language, the concepts, the calculations, or the conclusions.

ID/creationists weren't there during the crucial phases of the research; they have no knowledge of or feeling for the reality behind the reporting in the published papers of working scientists. They are "arm chair experts" who have never been in the game of real research; they are merely distorting the papers of working scientists to their gullible audiences in order to preserve their beliefs in a particularly narrow sectarian dogma.

ID/creationism is, and always has been, fakery and pretentious bluster in support of prior sectarian beliefs. It has nothing to do with the physical reality of the universe; it is pseudoscience trying to make a sectarian dogma look superior to all other religious beliefs.

Any "religion" that requires that kind of phony support is not worth having.
linky



--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
stevestory



Posts: 10149
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2017,19:27   


   
Woodbine



Posts: 1173
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2017,20:16   

I've long fantasized about swallowing a trilobite fossil on my death bed just to fuck with anyone who digs me up in the future.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4820
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 08 2017,21:46   

Take a bunch of antacids when you do that.

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

    
Texas Teach



Posts: 1437
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2017,22:16   

East Texas:  where they don't just believe in Bigfoot; they want him dead.

From the local college paper

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
cyberredarmies



Posts: 1
Joined: Feb. 2017

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2017,23:56   

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....05oKROA

https://storify.com/deltoid....-parano

https://www.greatamericaneclipse.com/....pse.com

http://www.eclipse2017.org/2017....pup.htm

The modern man sees the importance of an eclipse merely in the fact that it happens. BUT WHAT DOES THE ECLIPSE MEAN? This is something science can never can answer, for it can answer only HOW but never WHY.

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1025
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2017,01:00   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 10 2017,22:16)
East Texas:  where they don't just believe in Bigfoot; they want him dead.

From the local college paper

So...don't wear a Bigfoot costume in Texas, I guess.

Might be best to just skip Halloween there, since the list of things to shoot is probably not short.

Glen Davidson

--------------
http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p

Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

   
k.e..



Posts: 3787
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2017,09:49   

Quote (cyberredarmies @ Feb. 11 2017,07:56)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....05oKROA

https://storify.com/deltoid....-parano

https://www.greatamericaneclipse.com/....pse....pse.com

http://www.eclipse2017.org/2017.......pup.htm

The modern man sees the importance of an eclipse merely in the fact that it happens. BUT WHAT DOES THE ECLIPSE MEAN? This is something science can never can answer, for it can answer only HOW but never WHY.

WHY not? Are you not (rhetorically) asking WHO made them? WHAT, no special pleading, begging the question? Surely not!

We know what eclipses are. We also know how, why, when and where they came into existance.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
k.e..



Posts: 3787
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2017,09:52   

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 11 2017,09:00)
Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 10 2017,22:16)
East Texas:  where they don't just believe in Bigfoot; they want him dead.

From the local college paper

So...don't wear a Bigfoot costume in Texas, I guess.

Might be best to just skip Halloween there, since the list of things to shoot is probably not short.

Glen Davidson

It might be better to find an empty asylum, all the inmates seem to have escaped.

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Learned Hand



Posts: 214
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Feb. 11 2017,11:23   

http://www.unlockgenesis.com/....sis.com

That's where I am today. Contain your jealousy. CONTAIN IT!

  
  19591 replies since Jan. 17 2006,08:38 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (654) < ... 648 649 650 651 652 [653] 654 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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