Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::Uncommonly Dense Thread 3

Posted: Feb. 18 2010,21:35

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 18 2010,20:23)

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

All I know is this:

1. He’s right about the demographics. Religious people do have more kids. To the point where some think it a big problem.

2. Most of the people I have ever met who have lots of kids have never heard of Darwinism, or have and don’t believe it.

3. Most of the people I have ever met who are passionate about Darwinism have few kids.

4. This means that Darwinism would not likely survive under natural circumstances, hence it must be compulsorily propagated through school systems. Hence all the school board court cases.

That there is some whacky thinking.

They made a movie about where this leads.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Dr.GH

Posts: 2333
Joined: May 2002

Posted: Feb. 18 2010,21:42

Where is the thread where Joy eats out her ass about "weaponized Ebola?"

I want video!

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

REC

Posts: 638
Joined: Sep. 2006

Posted: Feb. 18 2010,22:09

Quote

The civil law which forbids discrimination is based on the objective moral principle that all human beings, regardless of race, creed, or national origin, have “inherent dignity” and, on that account, deserve to be treated fairly.

Link

Funny how these god-given, objective and universal principles have only kicked in in the last 40 years, in some places (with great resistance)....

sparc

Posts: 2088
Joined: April 2007

Posted: Feb. 18 2010,22:18

What the hell is long time JAD follower VMartin doing over at UD?

Quote

On the other hand I am still perplexed by the convergence of marxists and great anti-darwinian scholars like Richard Goldschmidt. Marxists insisted on special biological laws that couldnot be reduced to darwinian mechanics. They strongly criticised “morganism-mendelism” during Stalin. I am afraid – despite the horrors they commited – criminal Lysenkoists were more far-seeing in this point than Dawkins.

Anti-reductionism fits well with ID and “morganism-mendelism” will be denied at UD at the latest when somebody brings up the human mind.

Quote

Goldschmidt dismissed corpuscular notion of genes and insisted on action of chromosomes as wholes. New species can arise by chromosomal rearrangements. Something John Davison proposed as well.

This notion is also ID compatible especially if one takes into account that ID suggests that there is no such thing as sequences without function which ultimately makes commonly applied definitions of genes with rather distinct boarders senseless.
William Dembski the Trofim Lysenko of information theory?

--------------
"[...] the type of information we find in living systems is beyond the creative means of purely material processes [...] Who or what is such an ultimate source of information? [...] from a theistic perspective, such an information source would presumably have to be God."

- William Dembski -

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Feb. 18 2010,23:29

Quote (REC @ Feb. 18 2010,22:09)

Quote

The civil law which forbids discrimination is based on the objective moral principle that all human beings, regardless of race, creed, or national origin, have “inherent dignity” and, on that account, deserve to be treated fairly.

Link

Funny how these god-given, objective and universal principles have only kicked in in the last 40 years, in some places (with great resistance)....

and the gays are still waiting..

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

fnxtr

Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,01:29

Quote (midwifetoad @ Feb. 18 2010,19:35)

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 18 2010,20:23)

Uncommonly Denyse:

Quote

All I know is this:

1. He’s right about the demographics. Religious people do have more kids. To the point where some think it a big problem.

2. Most of the people I have ever met who have lots of kids have never heard of Darwinism, or have and don’t believe it.

3. Most of the people I have ever met who are passionate about Darwinism have few kids.

4. This means that Darwinism would not likely survive under natural circumstances, hence it must be compulsorily propagated through school systems. Hence all the school board court cases.

That there is some whacky thinking.

They made a movie about where this leads.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0387808/

... and I thought it was going to be a link to "The Handmaid's Tale".

(God what a boring book).

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night." Joe G

didymos

Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,02:16

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 18 2010,21:29)

Quote (REC @ Feb. 18 2010,22:09)

Quote

The civil law which forbids discrimination is based on the objective moral principle that all human beings, regardless of race, creed, or national origin, have “inherent dignity” and, on that account, deserve to be treated fairly.

Link

Funny how these god-given, objective and universal principles have only kicked in in the last 40 years, in some places (with great resistance)....

and the gays are still waiting..

Don't worry, man. It'll happen for you guys someday....

...HOMO.

--------------
I wouldn't be bothered reading about the selfish gene because it has never been identified. -- Denyse O'Leary, professional moron
Again "how much". I don't think that's a good way to be quantitative.-- gpuccio

oldmanintheskydidntdoit

Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,03:06

StephenB

Quote

If God is sovereign and due worship, and if man is, therefore, morally obliged to worship God as creator, then obviously an atheist cannot be a moral person.

Hey, StephenB, frilly Gil's dad was immoral IIRC. Anybody fancy pointing out that unfortunate fact? Gil himself says his brother is immoral as well only recently:

GilDogden:

Quote

My brother (who is a physicist, software engineer, and atheist) once commented to me: “If it can’t be predicted with certainty which decisions we will make, we have the functional equivalent of free will.”

Case closed. All else is meaningless sophistry.

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

midwifetoad

Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,07:59

Quote

William Dembski the Trofim Lysenko of information theory?

Epigenetics and Lysenko?

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/sciencenow/3411/02-ask.html

About 2/3 down the page..

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

Albatrossity2

Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,08:05

Quote (sparc @ Feb. 18 2010,22:18)

What the hell is long time JAD follower VMartin doing over at UD?

This phenomenon is known as tardattraction, and was first recognized and named by sewage treatment engineers.

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
- Pattiann Rogers

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,09:24

Quote (didymos @ Feb. 19 2010,02:16)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 18 2010,21:29)

Quote (REC @ Feb. 18 2010,22:09)

Quote

The civil law which forbids discrimination is based on the objective moral principle that all human beings, regardless of race, creed, or national origin, have “inherent dignity” and, on that account, deserve to be treated fairly.

Link

Funny how these god-given, objective and universal principles have only kicked in in the last 40 years, in some places (with great resistance)....

and the gays are still waiting..

Don't worry, man. It'll happen for you guys someday....

...HOMO.

I dunno, Diddy, I enjoy our love more because it is ......forbidden

Now put your leather vest on, cupcake.

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

carlsonjok

Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,09:36

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 19 2010,09:24)

Quote (didymos @ Feb. 19 2010,02:16)

I dunno, Diddy, I enjoy our love more because it is ......forbidden

Now put your leather vest on, cupcake.

Today's PSA in the form of a cautionary tale:

--------------
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!)

dvunkannon

Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,09:51

Nakashima seems to be exploring Sidewiki on comment pages where his comments have been held for a while. Please join him!

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

KenGee

Posts: 53
Joined: Oct. 2008

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:02

These guys are nut's maybe someone should ask them if they think Dahmer is in hevan. After all he was born again in prison and was batised. Doesn't that wash away or those nasty preborn again chooties?

That's clearly a better system then our secular one.

--------------
"Proteins are not produced by a chemical reaction, they are manufactured by machinery that is programmed through a base-four digital code. " Frilly Gilly on LIfe

KenGee

Posts: 53
Joined: Oct. 2008

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:06

These guys are nut's maybe someone should ask them if they think Dahmer is in heaven. After all he was born again in prison and was baptised. Doesn't that wash away all those nasty preborn again chooties?

That's clearly a better system then our secular one.

--------------
"Proteins are not produced by a chemical reaction, they are manufactured by machinery that is programmed through a base-four digital code. " Frilly Gilly on LIfe

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:20

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 17 2010,13:43)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2010,18:32)

Quote (dheddle @ Feb. 17 2010,13:30)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2010,13:19)

Quote (dheddle @ Feb. 17 2010,11:44)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2010,11:18)

Everyone knows I don't do books.

What am I getting wrong?

P1. God is timeless
P2. God could have authored any Heddle

C1. God knows what heddle will do before god creates him
C2. Heddle's "free will" is an illusion.

Hey if I log on to UD, I know that Dembski will toss me out. That doesn't mean he doesn't have free will. Just no free lunch. Or no lunch of any sort at universities run by former special prosecutors who are not on the Clintons' Christmas Card list.

You conflate confidence and knowledge, where knowledge is the intersection of fact and belief. I'm not sure any of what you wrote addresses what I wrote, I may just not 'get it' [happens a lot] but I need a bit more help, because the analogy doesn't seem to work on any level.

Sorry, I didn't realize you were serious. But I'll pass, thanks, preferring not to get into a discussion of the Calvinistic view of free will on the UD thread.

No worries. I was destined not to know.

I was destined to know. I do know. I ain't telling.

So there.

Louis

I was destined to be destined for what I do not know.

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:26

Quote (Louis @ Feb. 17 2010,16:55)

Quote (REC @ Feb. 17 2010,21:48)

[SNIP]

...Dahmer grew up in a fundamentalist household* and maybe, just maybe, was mentally ill.

[SNIP]

Bolding mine.

Wait! You mean raping, torturing, killing, and eating young men and boys, and occasionally also shagging the corpses is a sign of potential mental illness?

Has anyone told Arden? He's gonna want to know that he needs to get himself checked out.

Louis

He only does it with consenting corpses. Dead men have no tails.

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:51

Quote (dheddle @ Feb. 18 2010,09:33)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 18 2010,09:27)

Quote (dheddle @ Feb. 18 2010,09:21)

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 18 2010,08:59)

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Feb. 18 2010,08:41)

Quote (MichaelJ @ Feb. 18 2010,05:47)

To me "free will" is a meaningless concept. I think that free will as proposed by the UDiots can not be defined without God.

I have not read philosophy (translation: bullshit) on free will, but most of the intarweb arguments are looking at the matter from the wrong perspective. It is irrelevant to me whether I have a choice in how I be me, but it matters a great deal that my choosing is not determined by what is outside. Otherwise the word freedom has no meaning.

I'm confused. Heddle believes he has free will - the one god chose for him?

OK, Since you keep asking about my view, it is briefly sketched here.

It is based on the concept of moral inability, as opposed to coercion.

I always give the same example—not perfect but I think it works to illustrate the principle. A mother of sound mind sits at the kitchen table holding her baby. Though possessed with a free will, she is morally incapable of making the choice to place her baby in the microwave and turning it on. Her free will is not violated—yet she does not have the liberty to make that choice—because her morality will not permit her. Likewise, in this model preferred by Calvinists, though we have a libertine free will, we lack, in our fallen state, the moral ability to choose God, so we never will.

EDIT: typo

And God lacked the moral ability to author those who only choose not to put babys in microwaves, effectively putting the baby in the microwave?

Yes.

Quote

God from all eternity, did, by the most wise and holy counsel of His own will, freely, and unchangeably ordain whatsoever comes to pass; yet so, as thereby neither is God the author of sin, nor is violence offered to the will of the creatures; nor is the liberty or contingency of second causes taken away, but rather established (WCF III.I)

Poor Judas. His actions were ordained--and yet he chose and must, barring some unrecorded conversion, pay. Thems the rules.

Strange rules, the only way to win is not to play the game.

Bob O'H

Posts: 2564
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,10:51

What a useless blog post. Reprise some comments on a previous post, and end with "nah nah, you're wrong".

And file under Intelligent Design.

--------------
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)

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,11:08

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 19 2010,03:06)

StephenB

Quote

If God is sovereign and due worship, and if man is, therefore, morally obliged to worship God as creator, then obviously an atheist cannot be a moral person.

Hey, StephenB, frilly Gil's dad was immoral IIRC. Anybody fancy pointing out that unfortunate fact? Gil himself says his brother is immoral as well only recently:

GilDogden:

Quote

My brother (who is a physicist, software engineer, and atheist) once commented to me: “If it can’t be predicted with certainty which decisions we will make, we have the functional equivalent of free will.”

Case closed. All else is meaningless sophistry.

I like how he uses two conditional statements to arrive at a certainty.

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,11:19

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 19 2010,10:51)

What a useless blog post. Reprise some comments on a previous post, and end with "nah nah, you're wrong".

And file under Intelligent Design.

Arrogant Barington explains it all:

"Both you and mikev6 know the objective transcendent morality for the simple reason that it cannot not be known. God has placed it in your heart. You deny it, but denying a truth does not make it any less true."

Would affirming a truth make it more true or do we have to have a heart attack due the the known/unknown Truth god has placed in our hearts?

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,11:22

Quote (tsig @ Feb. 19 2010,11:19)

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 19 2010,10:51)

What a useless blog post. Reprise some comments on a previous post, and end with "nah nah, you're wrong".

And file under Intelligent Design.

"Both you and mikev6 know the objective transcendent morality for the simple reason that it cannot not be known. God has placed it in your heart. You deny it, but denying a truth does not make it any less true."

Arrogant Barington explains it all.

Would affirming a truth make it more true or do we have to have a heart attack due the the known/unknown Truth god has placed in our hearts?

As evidenced by the fact that people have always agreed on morality and it hasn't changed through time one bit. Not even for slave owning Christians.

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

Posts: 339
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,11:25

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 19 2010,11:22)

Quote (tsig @ Feb. 19 2010,11:19)

Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 19 2010,10:51)

What a useless blog post. Reprise some comments on a previous post, and end with "nah nah, you're wrong".

And file under Intelligent Design.

"Both you and mikev6 know the objective transcendent morality for the simple reason that it cannot not be known. God has placed it in your heart. You deny it, but denying a truth does not make it any less true."

Arrogant Barington explains it all.

Would affirming a truth make it more true or do we have to have a heart attack due the the known/unknown Truth god has placed in our hearts?

As evidenced by the fact that people have always agreed on morality and it hasn't changed through time one bit. Not even for slave owning Christians.

There's a lot of people who wouldn't object to slavery as long as they got to be the masters.

J-Dog

Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,11:29

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 19 2010,11:22)

Arrogant Barington explains it all.

Quote

Would affirming a truth make it more true or do we have to have a heart attack due the the known/unknown Truth god has placed in our hearts?

As evidenced by the fact that people have always agreed on morality and it hasn't changed through time one bit. Not even for slave owning Christians.

You bring up a good point, and raise another question:

Do I hate IDers and laugh at UDers because they are so stupid, or because they are so damn certain they are right and everybody that doesn't think like them is wrong?

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

Alan Fox

Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,12:28

Quote

Do I hate IDers and laugh at UDers because they are so stupid, or because they are so damn certain they are right and everybody that doesn't think like them is wrong?

Yes, it's the certainty plus the ability to read the minds of and put words into the mouths of critics that does it for me.

Edit: capitalisation

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,12:39

Quote (Alan Fox @ Feb. 19 2010,12:28)

Quote

Do I hate IDers and laugh at UDers because they are so stupid, or because they are so damn certain they are right and everybody that doesn't think like them is wrong?

Yes, it's the certainty plus the ability to read the minds of and put words into the mouths of critics that does it for me.

Edit: capitalisation

And then ensure they can't correct what you said.

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

Alan Fox

Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,12:43

Quote

And then ensure they can't correct what you said.

Whereas here I can point out "don't you mean you can't correct what they said"?

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,12:47

Quote (Alan Fox @ Feb. 19 2010,12:43)

Quote

And then ensure they can't correct what you said.

Whereas here I can point out "don't you mean you can't correct what they said"? :)

Yeah, I had my doubts typing it, but Lesson 13 of 'Write: Canadian Style' is "Instincts: Go with them"

I need moar coffee!!

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

fnxtr

Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

Posted: Feb. 19 2010,17:24

Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 19 2010,10:47)

Quote (Alan Fox @ Feb. 19 2010,12:43)

Quote

And then ensure they can't correct what you said.

Whereas here I can point out "don't you mean you can't correct what they said"? :)

Yeah, I had my doubts typing it, but Lesson 13 of 'Write: Canadian Style' is "Instincts: Go with them"

I need moar coffee!!

It's actually, "Go with them, eh?"

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night." Joe G

didymos

Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008