RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (356) < ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4, Fostering a Greater Understanding of IDC< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
noncarborundum



Posts: 320
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 26 2011,23:56   

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 26 2011,12:29)
Damn - just when you've made one armchair diagnosis, another one with a better fit comes along.  Try Fanatic Narcissist to see if it fits.
       
Quote
Fanatic narcissist - including paranoid features. An individual whose self-esteem was severely arrested during childhood, who usually displays major paranoid tendencies, and who holds on to an illusion of omnipotence. These people are fighting delusions of insignificance and lost value, and trying to re-establish their self-esteem through grandiose fantasies and self-reinforcement. When unable to gain recognition or support from others, they take on the role of a heroic or worshipped person with a grandiose mission.

Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!

The only part of that I have a problem with is the bit about "delusions of insignificance".  On the contrary, the insignificance is quite real.

--------------
"The . . . um . . . okay, I was genetically selected for blue eyes.  I know there are brown eyes, because I've observed them, but I can't do it.  Okay?  So . . . um . . . coz that's real genetic selection, not the nonsense Giberson and the others are talking about." - DO'L

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,04:02   

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 26 2011,21:14)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 26 2011,15:08)
 
Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 26 2011,18:29)
Damn - just when you've made one armchair diagnosis, another one with a better fit comes along.  Try Fanatic Narcissist to see if it fits.
         
Quote
Fanatic narcissist - including paranoid features. An individual whose self-esteem was severely arrested during childhood, who usually displays major paranoid tendencies, and who holds on to an illusion of omnipotence. These people are fighting delusions of insignificance and lost value, and trying to re-establish their self-esteem through grandiose fantasies and self-reinforcement. When unable to gain recognition or support from others, they take on the role of a heroic or worshipped person with a grandiose mission.

Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!

So I should be worried thatif that describes methis guy I know?

Louis

Only if it describes you him sober.

Crap Oh good.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Schroedinger's Dog



Posts: 1692
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,04:44   

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 26 2011,21:08)
Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 26 2011,18:29)
Damn - just when you've made one armchair diagnosis, another one with a better fit comes along.  Try Fanatic Narcissist to see if it fits.
       
Quote
Fanatic narcissist - including paranoid features. An individual whose self-esteem was severely arrested during childhood, who usually displays major paranoid tendencies, and who holds on to an illusion of omnipotence. These people are fighting delusions of insignificance and lost value, and trying to re-establish their self-esteem through grandiose fantasies and self-reinforcement. When unable to gain recognition or support from others, they take on the role of a heroic or worshipped person with a grandiose mission.

Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!

So I should be worried thatif that describes methis guy I know?

Louis

That's going to be me, right? I know that's going to be me! But don't you dare, I have the omnipotent power to stop you right there! Do remember I have thousands of fans literally worshipping me, and I know my cause is just!


(Holy crap! That was supposed to be tongue-in-cheek, but now I'm starting to worry a bit. May have to consult...)

--------------
"Hail is made out of water? Are you really that stupid?" Joe G

"I have a better suggestion, Kris. How about a game of hide and go fuck yourself instead." Louis

"The reason people use a crucifix against vampires is that vampires are allergic to bullshit" Richard Pryor

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2086
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,06:42   

Another ID Theorist has a bad day:                
Quote
4.1.2.1 gpuccio October 26, 2011 at 10:43 pm
GinoB:

I think I will not answer you any more. There is no hope, when the attitude is to serach only senseless fight.

Please review your epistemology, and think about the difference between a logic deduction and an empirical inference.

And, if you want, look for the many occasions where I have detailed, supported and motivated all those assertions here.

Again, have a good time (sincerely  ).
               
Quote
4.1.2.1.1 GinoB October 26, 2011 at 11:44 pm
gpuccio

No one’s looking for a fight. I’m just pointing out the big problems with your arguments, ones that you obviously have no answers for.

Let’s assume for a second that that your made up, subjective ‘dFSCI’ metric has some validity. You still have the issue that at best your claim “only intelligently designed things can have large amounts of dFSCI” is a hypothesis, not any sort of established truth. To honestly test the hypothesis, you’re going to have to measure both known designed and known not-designed things. You can’t look at a whole class of unknown-origin objects (i.e biological life) and then conclude that they’re all designed based on the very thing you’re trying to test. It’s called “affirming the consequence”, and it’s horribly bad reasoning.

There’s a reason the scientific community doesn’t take such fatally flawed arguments seriously. Hint – it’s not because of an evil conspiracy to EXPEL you.

Not that that fazes gpuccio, of course.  He replies with the old 'But we SEE designed things with dFSCI in them' argument (we should number these things for brevity) and kairosflatus joins in later with four zillion words ending with "But then, 200 years ago or so, Wilberforce was a spokesman for a controversial and tiny minority."  

So it's definitely not a victory for reason, but I think the constant clear explanations of his mistakes is at least starting to wear poochie down a little.

Maybe we should start isolating one UDer at a time and tag-teaming them with clear, easy to understand replies to every cliched argument they throw out until they finally either learn something or at least go away.

--------------
...after reviewing the arguments, I’m inclined to believe that the critics of ENCODE’s bold claim were mostly right, and that the proportion of our genome which is functional is probably between 10 and 20%.  --Vincent Torley, uncommondescent.com 1/1/2016

  
Patrick



Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,07:04   

gpuccio is a liar:
Quote
I have often given an explicit definition of dFSCI, and a personal threshold for biololgical dFSCI (150 bits).

In four threads on Mark Frank's blog, starting here, gpuccio not only fails to provide an explicit definition or calculation of any CSI variant, but changes his definition whenever it looks like it is starting to be clear enough to calculate it.

Quite disappointing.  He's far more polite, generally, than the other regulars at UD but just as dishonest as the worst of them.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,07:06   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 27 2011,06:42)
Another ID Theorist has a bad day:                  
Quote
4.1.2.1 gpuccio October 26, 2011 at 10:43 pm
GinoB:

I think I will not answer you any more. There is no hope, when the attitude is to serach only senseless fight.

Please review your epistemology, and think about the difference between a logic deduction and an empirical inference.

And, if you want, look for the many occasions where I have detailed, supported and motivated all those assertions here.

Again, have a good time (sincerely  ).
                 
Quote
4.1.2.1.1 GinoB October 26, 2011 at 11:44 pm
gpuccio

No one’s looking for a fight. I’m just pointing out the big problems with your arguments, ones that you obviously have no answers for.

Let’s assume for a second that that your made up, subjective ‘dFSCI’ metric has some validity. You still have the issue that at best your claim “only intelligently designed things can have large amounts of dFSCI” is a hypothesis, not any sort of established truth. To honestly test the hypothesis, you’re going to have to measure both known designed and known not-designed things. You can’t look at a whole class of unknown-origin objects (i.e biological life) and then conclude that they’re all designed based on the very thing you’re trying to test. It’s called “affirming the consequence”, and it’s horribly bad reasoning.

There’s a reason the scientific community doesn’t take such fatally flawed arguments seriously. Hint – it’s not because of an evil conspiracy to EXPEL you.

Not that that fazes gpuccio, of course.  He replies with the old 'But we SEE designed things with dFSCI in them' argument (we should number these things for brevity) and kairosflatus joins in later with four zillion words ending with "But then, 200 years ago or so, Wilberforce was a spokesman for a controversial and tiny minority."  

So it's definitely not a victory for reason, but I think the constant clear explanations of his mistakes is at least starting to wear poochie down a little.

Maybe we should start isolating one UDer at a time and tag-teaming them with clear, easy to understand replies to every cliched argument they throw out until they finally either learn something or at least go away.

Instead, isolate them on at a time and demand definitions, explanations, and calculated examples... until it gets through their tiny hindbrains that they cannot do the things they claim to.

--------------
Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims.

http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

   
paragwinn



Posts: 521
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,07:38   

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 27 2011,05:06)
Instead, isolate them on at a time and demand definitions, explanations, and calculated examples... until it gets through their tiny hindbrains that they cannot do the things they claim to.

Might want to wear rain gear and galoshes in case this happens:



eta:fix quoteblock fail

--------------
All women build up a resistance [to male condescension]. Apparently, ID did not predict that. -Kristine 4-19-11
F/Ns to F/Ns to F/Ns etc. The whole thing is F/N ridiculous -Seversky on KF footnote fetish 8-20-11
Sigh. Really Bill? - Barry Arrington

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,07:39   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,08:04)
gpuccio is a liar:
Quote
I have often given an explicit definition of dFSCI, and a personal threshold for biololgical dFSCI (150 bits).

In four threads on Mark Frank's blog, starting here, gpuccio not only fails to provide an explicit definition or calculation of any CSI variant, but changes his definition whenever it looks like it is starting to be clear enough to calculate it.

Quite disappointing.  He's far more polite, generally, than the other regulars at UD but just as dishonest as the worst of them.

meh what do you expect.

all creationists are liars or delusional.  or both.  and then there are those who may be delusional liars but have some inkling of awareness around that fact and use their dishonest projections to lead other deluded liars around by the nose.  and this results in websites like UD and all the other manifestations of deep latent fundie idiocy.  

it is fun to point it out though.  and i am glad to see poochie on the rack, for fuck's sake you do that to gordon e mullings of montserrat and the little muppet tries to kill you with tardiloquies and reams and reams of utter horse shit

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
k.e..



Posts: 3897
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,08:10   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 26 2011,19:26)
Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,20:45)
Final comment on that thread:
       
Quote
I will not reward that behaviour, so I will now shut down comments, and add responses in brief overnight to what requires a reasonable comment for record, as editorial notes.

GEM of TKI

I'm quietly playing IDiot bingo here by myself.  What's the proper armchair psychologist term for Gordon's fear and loathing of open discussion combined with his assumption that he has the authority to reward and punish other participants?  Is "being an ignorant, dishonest, cowardly ass" too technical a term?

Too technical for Gordon E Mullings AKA Gem of TIKI aka Kairos  Focus

He would read that as "knowledgeable, decent and a class act"

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

  
Patrick



Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,08:33   

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 27 2011,08:39)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,08:04)
gpuccio is a liar:
 
Quote
I have often given an explicit definition of dFSCI, and a personal threshold for biololgical dFSCI (150 bits).

In four threads on Mark Frank's blog, starting here, gpuccio not only fails to provide an explicit definition or calculation of any CSI variant, but changes his definition whenever it looks like it is starting to be clear enough to calculate it.

Quite disappointing.  He's far more polite, generally, than the other regulars at UD but just as dishonest as the worst of them.

meh what do you expect.

I expect people who make claims to be able to define their terms and provide evidence in support of those claims.  I expect people to be intelligent enough to recognize when others point out legitimate problems with those definitions and that evidence.  I expect people to be intellectually honest enough to admit when they have clearly failed to sufficiently define their terms and support their claims with objective, empirical evidence.  I expect people to have the integrity not to reassert claims that have already been refuted.

Oh, wait, that was a rhetorical question, right?

  
k.e..



Posts: 3897
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,08:36   

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 27 2011,15:38)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 27 2011,05:06)
Instead, isolate them on at a time and demand definitions, explanations, and calculated examples... until it gets through their tiny hindbrains that they cannot do the things they claim to.

Might want to wear rain gear and galoshes in case this happens:



eta:fix quoteblock fail

....From the sublime to the ridiculous


What's the difference between a human and a Dalek Creationist?

Creationists never change their minds.

--------------
"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: 3897
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,08:38   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,16:33)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 27 2011,08:39)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,08:04)
gpuccio is a liar:
 
Quote
I have often given an explicit definition of dFSCI, and a personal threshold for biololgical dFSCI (150 bits).

In four threads on Mark Frank's blog, starting here, gpuccio not only fails to provide an explicit definition or calculation of any CSI variant, but changes his definition whenever it looks like it is starting to be clear enough to calculate it.

Quite disappointing.  He's far more polite, generally, than the other regulars at UD but just as dishonest as the worst of them.

meh what do you expect.

I expect people who make claims to be able to define their terms and provide evidence in support of those claims.  I expect people to be intelligent enough to recognize when others point out legitimate problems with those definitions and that evidence.  I expect people to be intellectually honest enough to admit when they have clearly failed to sufficiently define their terms and support their claims with objective, empirical evidence.  I expect people to have the integrity not to reassert claims that have already been refuted.

Oh, wait, that was a rhetorical question, right?

Ergo 'people' don't lie for Jesus only creobots.

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

  
Patrick



Posts: 610
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,10:06   

gpuccio
Quote
There is no chemical reason why the sequence of the three nucleotides TCT maps to serene.

DrBot
Quote
If there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine then how do you make TCT map to Threonine?

ScottAndrews2
Quote
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

Attention to detail isn't any more important than internal consistency inside the big tent.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,15:03   

DiCkRigit is a Dick:
 
Quote
Okay, this is the exact question you posed to me in 5.1.4.3.13 “Could you give some examples of ligand binding in computers”.

My answer to your question is “No I can’t”.

Of course, I would expect to either, and I know enough about information transfer to know that it doesn’t matter anyway. There are no transistors in my fountain pen, there are no magnetic lines of iron oxide when I speak. The comparison being made is not concerned with the system used to transfer information; it’s being made to the dynamics of the transfer itself. Hence, your assumption is flawed.

Now I’ve answered your question, you are bound by your word to answer mine.


fali

Well, woo hoo. The "Information Transfer" king is in town.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1040
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,17:43   

Is Elizabeth Liddle leaving UD for good?:
 
Quote
No, it isn’t, because of drift effects.

Scott, it’s been nice talking to you, but I think it’s time I left you guys to yourselves :) ]

If you want to get in touch, I’m here:

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....w....p....wp

and you, and everyone else, are very welcome to drop by. The idea behind the site is that it is a place where people with very different views can debate with as little rancour as possible. At least, that’s the idea :)

Hope to see you around.

Lizzie

Link
Edit: Well, yes.

--------------
We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.”
-PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 27 2011,22:30   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 27 2011,15:03)
DiCkRigit is a Dick:
   
Quote
Okay, this is the exact question you posed to me in 5.1.4.3.13 “Could you give some examples of ligand binding in computers”.

My answer to your question is “No I can’t”.

Of course, I would expect to either, and I know enough about information transfer to know that it doesn’t matter anyway. There are no transistors in my fountain pen, there are no magnetic lines of iron oxide when I speak. The comparison being made is not concerned with the system used to transfer information; it’s being made to the dynamics of the transfer itself. Hence, your assumption is flawed.

Now I’ve answered your question, you are bound by your word to answer mine.


fali

Well, woo hoo. The "Information Transfer" king is in town.

Uptight Biped needs to FlexX his mental muscles a bit.

Blowhard Dumbass IDiot.

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
damitall



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,02:26   

Quote
Maybe we should start isolating one UDer at a time and tag-teaming them with clear, easy to understand replies to every cliched argument they throw out until they finally either learn something or at least go away.


But they've been positively INUNDATED with clear and easily-understood replies for YEARS.

Some of them have occasionally gone quiet for a wee while, but they're back when they judge that the fisking has been forgotten.

Must seem like groundhog day to some of 'em - or it would if it wasn't for that pesky lack of awareness.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,03:31   

Gordo, somehow, has the time to also post on his own blog.

Here you can read about how teh gay can be prayed away.

What a POS.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,05:28   

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 28 2011,09:31)
Gordo, somehow, has the time to also post on his own blog.

Here you can read about how teh gay can be prayed away.

What a POS.

I prayed the gay away and he came back with some of his friends, a keg, a pińata, and a variety of recreational drugs. Bloody good night. I'm praying he returns tonight, good lad that gay. This time I'm hoping he comes back with that nice lesbian couple that came last time. They were a hoot.

Mind you, this other gay lad I know is very dull and quite annoying. It's almost like they're people and varied and stuff. But that's just crazy talk!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,05:29   

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,16:06)
gpuccio
Quote
There is no chemical reason why the sequence of the three nucleotides TCT maps to serene.

DrBot
Quote
If there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine then how do you make TCT map to Threonine?

ScottAndrews2
Quote
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

Attention to detail isn't any more important than internal consistency inside the big tent.

I'm also seeing that knowledge of, for example, chemistry, is not high on their list of priorities.

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,06:19   

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 28 2011,06:28)
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 28 2011,09:31)
Gordo, somehow, has the time to also post on his own blog.

Here you can read about how teh gay can be prayed away.

What a POS.

I prayed the gay away and he came back with some of his friends, a keg, a pińata, and a variety of recreational drugs. Bloody good night. I'm praying he returns tonight, good lad that gay. This time I'm hoping he comes back with that nice lesbian couple that came last time. They were a hoot.

Mind you, this other gay lad I know is very dull and quite annoying. It's almost like they're people and varied and stuff. But that's just crazy talk!

Louis

the best time i ever had with a log splitter was at a gay logger convention!  buddy you shoulda seen the size of those wedges

i wish gordon had been there, he would have came in handy

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2086
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,06:49   

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 28 2011,05:29)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,16:06)
gpuccio
   
Quote
There is no chemical reason why the sequence of the three nucleotides TCT maps to serene.

DrBot
   
Quote
If there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine then how do you make TCT map to Threonine?

ScottAndrews2
   
Quote
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

Attention to detail isn't any more important than internal consistency inside the big tent.

I'm also seeing that knowledge of, for example, chemistry, is not high on their list of priorities.

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis

gpuccio claimed to be a doctor a while back.  

Kind of scares you.

--------------
...after reviewing the arguments, I’m inclined to believe that the critics of ENCODE’s bold claim were mostly right, and that the proportion of our genome which is functional is probably between 10 and 20%.  --Vincent Torley, uncommondescent.com 1/1/2016

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,07:04   

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 28 2011,12:49)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 28 2011,05:29)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 27 2011,16:06)
gpuccio
   
Quote
There is no chemical reason why the sequence of the three nucleotides TCT maps to serene.

DrBot
   
Quote
If there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine then how do you make TCT map to Threonine?

ScottAndrews2
   
Quote
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

Attention to detail isn't any more important than internal consistency inside the big tent.

I'm also seeing that knowledge of, for example, chemistry, is not high on their list of priorities.

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis

gpuccio claimed to be a doctor a while back.  

Kind of scares you.

Didn't I tell you I am six foot four inches tall and a chiselled male model playboy billionaire.

After all, aren't we all gods on the internet?

Oh yes, I also have a massive cock. I can link you to some pictures if you like. They might be different colours and what not, but they are all mine. Honest.

Louis

P.S. Ahhh the internet. Where an ignoramus like gpuccio can pretend to be anything he wants to be. After all Joe is a muslim Iraqi war veteran or something, right? I'm just surprised he's not an astronaut fighter pilot with a house boat and lots of guns who lives in Hollywood and regularly bones {insert famous woman here}.

--------------
Bye.

  
damitall



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,07:25   

This from "ScottAndrews2" at UD

Quote
Let me rephrase this as an evolutionary prediction.

Evolutionary theory predicts that living things should possess features or behaviors that are necessary for their survival or reproduction, or were at some point necessary for the survival or reproduction of their ancestors.

Is that an accurate prediction of evolutionary theory?


Which
Is
Pure
Tard.

No wonder Liz upped and left. It's SO FUCKING DISPIRITING to argue with those who will not understand the thing they're arguing against.

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,08:06   

vjtorley:
Quote
And on your second option, God would have to be continually intervening to stop the Canaanites from killing children, over a period of hundreds of years. That sounds messy – and if He did that, presumably He’d be obliged to stop every other act of murder occurring on the planet, too. And that’s not all. To be fair and consistent, God would have to stop everyone from hurting anyone else. That makes God a cosmic nanny.


And then:

Quote
Kairosfocus and Scott Andrews2 are spot on in their comments. The possibility of evil is the price of libertarian freedom.


Yet KF holds that "bodyplans" cannot be evolved, they must be designed.

So their god intervenes to tweak DNA trillions of times, all the time, but won't stop a child being killed?

Some fucked up world they live in.

T.A.R.D

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Woodbine



Posts: 1204
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,08:24   

Klinghoffer
Quote
....intelligent design assumes a universe more than 13 billion years old and a history of life going back more than 3 billion.



And when did this little wedge of real-politik shoulder its way into the big tent?

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,08:43   

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 28 2011,08:24)
Klinghoffer
 
Quote
....intelligent design assumes a universe more than 13 billion years old and a history of life going back more than 3 billion.



And when did this little wedge of real-politik shoulder its way into the big tent?

And for our friends south of the Rio Grande:



--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,08:44   

I'll, er, someone should ask KF if he agrees with that.

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,14:54   

DeNews, pushing Crocker's baloney:

Quote
Research fraud you shouldn’t pay for: You have to sign up at AITSE to get this newsletter


Reporting on an article in the Economist, so why exactly would we need Caroline Crocker to read the Economist for us?

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 28 2011,15:45   

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 28 2011,08:24)
Klinghoffer
 
Quote
....intelligent design assumes a universe more than 13 billion years old and a history of life going back more than 3 billion.



And when did this little wedge of real-politik shoulder its way into the big tent?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs....m2.html

Behe cross examination

Quote
Q In fact, intelligent design takes no position on the age of the earth or when biological life began.

A That's correct.



--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
  10669 replies since Aug. 31 2011,21:06 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (356) < ... 25 26 27 28 29 [30] 31 32 33 34 35 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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