RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (527) < ... 282 283 284 285 286 [287] 288 289 290 291 292 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 5, Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,08:53   

Quote (stevestory @ July 21 2017,05:11)
Quote
16
ETJuly 20, 2017 at 7:28 am
rvB8- What is the state of evolutionary research? No one knows how any flagella evolved via natural selection or drift. The same goes for any and all multi-protein machines.

So what, exactly, does evolutionism have? I ask because if your position actually had something then ID would be a non-starter. Yet ID is stronger than ever thanks to the consilience of clues and evidence.


Quote
21
rvb8July 20, 2017 at 9:30 pm
ET @16,

there is a vast ammount of literature, and original experimentation on the origins of the flagella, blood clottng and the immune system, all you have to do is click.

What there isn’t is any ID lab, scientist, research avenues, articles, or any other solid evidence pointing to Design, other than the Bible.

That’s fine. If your faith says God achieved these systems, good. Unfortunately, many of us believe this to be poppycock.




linky

"Mr. Rothschild, would you like your books back? They're heavy."

--------------
"[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

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,12:49   

Quote (stevestory @ July 21 2017,07:11)
 
Quote
16
ETJuly 20, 2017 at 7:28 am
rvB8- What is the state of evolutionary research? No one knows how any flagella evolved via natural selection or drift. The same goes for any and all multi-protein machines.

So what, exactly, does evolutionism have? I ask because if your position actually had something then ID would be a non-starter. Yet ID is stronger than ever thanks to the consilience of clues and evidence.


   
Quote
21
rvb8July 20, 2017 at 9:30 pm
ET @16,

there is a vast ammount of literature, and original experimentation on the origins of the flagella, blood clottng and the immune system, all you have to do is click.

What there isn’t is any ID lab, scientist, research avenues, articles, or any other solid evidence pointing to Design, other than the Bible.

That’s fine. If your faith says God achieved these systems, good. Unfortunately, many of us believe this to be poppycock.




linky

Kinda obvious that JoeTard Gallien is back as another sock in that thread, posting as ET.  Not that his usual shtick is that hard to spot.   :D

--------------
"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.

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,13:42   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ July 21 2017,12:49)
Quote (stevestory @ July 21 2017,07:11)
   
Quote
16
ETJuly 20, 2017 at 7:28 am
rvB8- What is the state of evolutionary research? No one knows how any flagella evolved via natural selection or drift. The same goes for any and all multi-protein machines.

So what, exactly, does evolutionism have? I ask because if your position actually had something then ID would be a non-starter. Yet ID is stronger than ever thanks to the consilience of clues and evidence.


   
Quote
21
rvb8July 20, 2017 at 9:30 pm
ET @16,

there is a vast ammount of literature, and original experimentation on the origins of the flagella, blood clottng and the immune system, all you have to do is click.

What there isn’t is any ID lab, scientist, research avenues, articles, or any other solid evidence pointing to Design, other than the Bible.

That’s fine. If your faith says God achieved these systems, good. Unfortunately, many of us believe this to be poppycock.




linky

Kinda obvious that JoeTard Gallien is back as another sock in that thread, posting as ET.  Not that his usual shtick is that hard to spot.   :D

If ET is Joe then he is back on his meds.

By the way, what has happened to KF? Maybe he has finally moved himself and his family into the bunker to survive the downfall of civilization.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2333
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,14:36   

Quote (fnxtr @ July 21 2017,06:53)
"Mr. Rothschild, would you like your books back? They're heavy."

Excellent!

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

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

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,17:49   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ July 21 2017,14:42)
By the way, what has happened to KF? Maybe he has finally moved himself and his family into the bunker to survive the downfall of civilization.

I've seen KF a little, but Barry's been totally absent for it seems like weeks.

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,21:18   

the spamming continueth.


   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 21 2017,21:21   

Quote
5
rvb8July 20, 2017 at 9:20 pm
TWSYF @2,

and others. Ann Coulter regularly makes the top ten of the NYT bestseller list therefore…?

Therefore what exactly? ID books make the top 20-25,000 at Amazon therefore…?

I won’t go into the obvious questions about publishing original ideas and new areas of investigation,in peer reviewed respected journals, (and I don’t mean AIG Science Mags, or the Journal of Creation Research, Heh:), let me just sum up all of these books.

1) “There are areas in evolution where evidence is not absolute and an area of doubt remains.” Write a book, with no peer review; or the, ‘Book of the Gaps’ approach:)

2) “It looks really complex, evolution can’t explain the complexity, therefore design.”

3) Irreducible Complexity. (Whatever the hell that is; I believe it says blood clotting, and flagella are too complex to evolve; try reading the litterature. It’s too scientific for me, I suggest you use Dionisio, TWSYF, and others to make it approachable for the likes of me; cheers:)

4) Specified Complexity. (Whateverthe hell that is; no one seems to be able to measure or explain this.)

5.) There is dissent from Darwin in the science community. Ah-Huh. Don’t mention project Steve.

6.) ID is a scientific movement not a poltical, ideological, religious one. Ah-Huh. Don’t mention the ‘Wedge Strategy’.

7.) We run rings around rvb8, here at UD, bring on the Nobel Laurettes. Heh:)

8.) Our ideas can suffer scientific scrutiny. We don’t fear bringing our new EQUATIONS to the attention of the wider scientific community. (Dionisio, I’m looking at you; Heh:)

Have I missed anything?

Good luck with the NYT’s bestseller list, and Amazon rankings to further the ‘academic rigour’, that is ID.
linky

   
Ptaylor



Posts: 1180
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2017,03:22   

Quote (stevestory @ July 22 2017,10:49)
       
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ July 21 2017,14:42)
By the way, what has happened to KF? Maybe he has finally moved himself and his family into the bunker to survive the downfall of civilization.

I've seen KF a little, but Barry's been totally absent for it seems like weeks.

Speaking of Barry, I notice that this:

         

doesn't appear on UD pages anymore; only the 'Copyright © Uncommon Descent, Inc.' portion remains. Like its original appearance, I have no idea how recently it changed, or whether anything at all can be read into the fact that Barry is no longer credited as President.

Edited by Ptaylor on July 22 2017,20:23

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2017,08:17   

maybe he finally realized he bought at the peak and wants to cut his losses?

   
k.e..



Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2017,11:17   

Quote (Ptaylor @ July 22 2017,11:22)
Quote (stevestory @ July 22 2017,10:49)
       
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ July 21 2017,14:42)
By the way, what has happened to KF? Maybe he has finally moved himself and his family into the bunker to survive the downfall of civilization.

I've seen KF a little, but Barry's been totally absent for it seems like weeks.

Speaking of Barry, I notice that this:

         

doesn't appear on UD pages anymore; only the 'Copyright © Uncommon Descent, Inc.' portion remains. Like its original appearance, I have no idea how recently it changed, or whether anything at all can be read into the fact that Barry is no longer credited as President.

Tidying up before the  big Ambulance chase   suit against the Columbine Police Academy.?

--------------
"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: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 22 2017,11:19   

Quote (stevestory @ July 22 2017,05:21)
Quote
5
rvb8July 20, 2017 at 9:20 pm
TWSYF @2,

and others. Ann Coulter regularly makes the top ten of the NYT bestseller list therefore…?

Therefore what exactly? ID books make the top 20-25,000 at Amazon therefore…?

I won’t go into the obvious questions about publishing original ideas and new areas of investigation,in peer reviewed respected journals, (and I don’t mean AIG Science Mags, or the Journal of Creation Research, Heh:), let me just sum up all of these books.

1) “There are areas in evolution where evidence is not absolute and an area of doubt remains.” Write a book, with no peer review; or the, ‘Book of the Gaps’ approach:)

2) “It looks really complex, evolution can’t explain the complexity, therefore design.”

3) Irreducible Complexity. (Whatever the hell that is; I believe it says blood clotting, and flagella are too complex to evolve; try reading the litterature. It’s too scientific for me, I suggest you use Dionisio, TWSYF, and others to make it approachable for the likes of me; cheers:)

4) Specified Complexity. (Whateverthe hell that is; no one seems to be able to measure or explain this.)

5.) There is dissent from Darwin in the science community. Ah-Huh. Don’t mention project Steve.

6.) ID is a scientific movement not a poltical, ideological, religious one. Ah-Huh. Don’t mention the ‘Wedge Strategy’.

7.) We run rings around rvb8, here at UD, bring on the Nobel Laurettes. Heh:)

8.) Our ideas can suffer scientific scrutiny. We don’t fear bringing our new EQUATIONS to the attention of the wider scientific community. (Dionisio, I’m looking at you; Heh:)

Have I missed anything?

Good luck with the NYT’s bestseller list, and Amazon rankings to further the ‘academic rigour’, that is ID.
linky

Forgot bananas hands and Mt Rushmore

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2017,18:16   

Quote
4
News July 23, 2017 at 5:28 am
rvb8 at 3: Homework assignment

Look up this string of words

je suis Charlie

and ponder its meaning in the light of what really happened later.

Naturalism, the religion of Europe and of Berkeley, is one that few people will take risks for. That’s understandable and inevitable. They are just animals, in their own eyes. What can be expected?

Berkeley is beginning to understand its naturalist master and will not defend it against another.


 
Quote
5
Daniel King July 23, 2017 at 10:35 am
News at 4: Homework assignment

Learn how to write coherent prose.


 
Quote
9
News July 23, 2017 at 12:25 pm
Daniel King at 5: Unsupported and unproductive snark gets people banned around here. Say something or get lost.

Check out Trolls Wanted, if that happens.
How DARE you make fun of denyse's shitty, shitty writing!

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2017,12:30   

Quote
37
MatSpiritJuly 24, 2017 at 11:14 am
News @ 9: je suis Daniel King.

“Unsupported and unproductive snark”?

King’s comment # 5 is 100% supported by your failed attempt at coherent thinking in comment # 4.

You claim to be a journalist, then you use a quotation expressing solidarity with the innocent journalists who were murdered in cold blood by religious believers in the name of their religion. Then you complain that secular people won’t do the same for their beliefs!

If you can’t learn to think coherently, then please find a profession more suitable to your talents. Surely there are some ditches that need to be dug in Canada.


MatSpirit kicks it up a notch!

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2017,12:32   

UD is the greatest thing EVAR.

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3504
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2017,18:31   

Quote (stevestory @ July 24 2017,10:30)
Quote
37
MatSpiritJuly 24, 2017 at 11:14 am
News @ 9: je suis Daniel King.

“Unsupported and unproductive snark”?

King’s comment # 5 is 100% supported by your failed attempt at coherent thinking in comment # 4.

You claim to be a journalist, then you use a quotation expressing solidarity with the innocent journalists who were murdered in cold blood by religious believers in the name of their religion. Then you complain that secular people won’t do the same for their beliefs!

If you can’t learn to think coherently, then please find a profession more suitable to your talents. Surely there are some ditches that need to be dug in Canada.


MatSpirit kicks it up a notch!

Or maybe there's a theatre troupe who needs a Jerry Lewis look-alike.

--------------
"[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

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2017,19:16   

Quote
38
Allen ShepherdJuly 24, 2017 at 11:33 am
I love reading this site and enjoy the back and forth. But the snark of this conversations seems to serve no useful end. In a sense you are speaking past each other just taking jabs. I think you can do better.

I beleive God had a reason for the Amalikite destruction, as he said “Their cup of iniquity was full”. What might that mean? There were groups that practiced child sacrifice and other more ghoulish acts, etc. It is not completely clear, but apparently God had his reasons. I beleive the other destructive events could be explained in a similar fashion.

There are assumptions here, but not unreasonable one. I don’t think so much snark is necessary though.
Quote

40
PindiJuly 24, 2017 at 3:53 pm
ET @34, my point is that if the only threat preventing this tidal wave of anti Darwin academics from speaking is losing their jobs, then they are not the kind of people that one could describe as having the courage of their convictions. Think of all the people in history who have spoken and published in risk of losing their life or liberty. Your heroes are silent in case they lose their jobs!
Quote

41
PindiJuly 24, 2017 at 3:56 pm
Allen Shepherd, seriously, you are ok with saying God apparently had his reasons for wanting babies to be killed? You don’t think he could have come up with a better solution for dealing with some bad men than killing their babies? Isn’t he meant to be omnipotent?

And following on from my comment above, how do you know he doesn’t “have his reasons” for wanting babies to be aborted?


Code Sample
https://uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/evolution-news-and-views-on-dawkins-dumped-from-berkeley-did-it-serve-him-right/#comment-636408

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2017,19:18   

Quote
185
OrigenesJuly 24, 2017 at 4:26 pm
wd400 has argued that gaps are expected. For instance here (2014):
Quote

… you wouldn’t expect to see intermediates if there were a set paths from A -> B -> … -> X, because intermediates will be replaced by more favoured variants. The branching nature of evolutionary process creates gaps in extant species/proteins/genes.

If huge gaps, like the one between non vertebrates and the first vertebrates (WRT proteins SATB1 and SATB2), are to be expected, why is there no such gap between the whale shark and humans?
Wd400 wants it both ways. If there are (huge) gaps, then this is expected and when there are no gaps then this is evidence for blind watchmaker evolution.


Quote
187
wd400July 24, 2017 at 4:49 pm
Quote
If huge gaps, like the one between non vertebrates and the first vertebrates (WRT proteins SATB1 and SATB2), are to be expected, why is there no such gap between the whale shark and humans?

I’m not sure you’ve been reading this thread? These genes arose in the ancestors of vertebrates.
pwned

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,11:09   

Quote
13
rvb8July 27, 2017 at 12:49 am
ET @11,

correct, no one has proved ID needs the supernatural, mainly because ID is not recognised as anything that needs proving.

Creationism is accepted, as it is the religious answer to nature. Evolution is accepted, as it is the naturalist answer to nature.

ID is recognised nowhere, except here, and one or two other sites.

Having failed in the ‘Wedge’ strategy to meet any of its goals to become a, ‘player’ in the academic world, it resorts to the courts, (where it repeatedly failed), and leguslatures (where its victories-two- are embarassments to those states, and non-binding.?

The heavy hitters, such as they were, are gone, and you remain.

I do miss BA77; and where is Kairosfocus BTW?
linky

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,14:52   

Quote
Historically, progressivism tends to end in mass murder

Dense, of course.

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,15:33   

ID the Future!

1: It is well known that God likes round numbers, assuming you accept seven, twelve and forty as among the round numbers.  And maybe three.

2: Jesus was born in approximately four BC.  (Being born four years before he was born was not actually his first miracle.  It was more of a calendar maker's fuck up.)

3: Therefore, we should have gone Ape Shit for Baby Jesus on December 25, 1996, but didn't.

4: Our next opportunity to go Biblicly Ape Shit will be on the two thousandth anniversary of Jesus's death.

5: Jesus was about thirty three when he died.

6: Therefore, (2033-4) = 2028 looks like it will be a Jubilee year for Christians of the Whacked persuasion.

7: Unless the fact that there was no year zero (see 2 above) changes things.

8: Considering 7 above, the year 2025 is pretty close and there will be another total eclipse of the sun crossing America ( God's Country) that year.

9: Therefore, prepare to Party Hearty for the late Jesus in 2025.

Submitted to Progress in Information, Complexity and Design after reading one too many threads on UD.  I have heard informally that it will be published in their next issue.

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,15:55   

PCID's been offline for years. Last issue was 'published' a month before the Dover decision.

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,17:48   

They've been waiting for my research.

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 2927
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,18:05   

Quote (CeilingCat @ July 27 2017,17:48)
They've been waiting for my research.

Maybe you should submit it to BioComplexity. It is having a banner year.

  
steve_h



Posts: 544
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,18:22   

Quote (PTaylor @ July 22 2017,10:22)
Speaking of Barry, I notice that this:

         

doesn't appear on UD pages anymore; only the 'Copyright © Uncommon Descent, Inc.' portion remains. Like its original appearance, I have no idea how recently it changed, or whether anything at all can be read into the fact that Barry is no longer credited as President.


Does this mean that they have changed from some sort of non-profit organisation (*) to a strictly for-profit(**) organisation?

(*) Non-Profit (AIUI) = all money donated by the rubes is spent strictly on the persuance of an ID educational agenda - after paying for some basics such as Web Hosting, Web Design, Legal fees, Dept Collection Fees, Board Advisory Fees,  Technical Advice ( Legal, Mathematical, Theological, Newsy, etc.), and payments to lecturers of various types (ID lecurerers, ID Law lecturers,  ID News Experts people who can write thier own name) etc, and other costs.

(**) For-Profit (AIUI) = all money donated by the rubes goes straight to the owner's bank account - after paying for some basics such as Web Hosting, Web Design,  Technical Advice ( Mathematical, Theological, Newsy, etc.), and payments to lecturers of various types (ID lecurerers, ID News Experts people who can write thier own name) etc, and other costs.

Disclaimer: I am not a company law expert.

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1180
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,21:21   

The env/dawkins thread is getting bizarre. ET (who is not Joe G) is getting fixated on Stonehenge (which is one of Joe G's fixations):
   
Quote
LoL!@ Pindi- I know all about Stonehenge. I also know that there isn’t any evidence that humans designed and built it. All they have are inferences based on the fact that humans lived in the area. However I know there is a huge difference between living in the area and designing and building the monument.

How do we even know the people of 4,000+ years ago had the capability to design and build such a thing?

I don't presume to speak for others here, but to me the mere existence of Stonehenge is evidence that people built it. Just as I was wondering if the conversation there could get any dimmer, along came Upright Biped, responding to an earlier comment from Pindi:
   
Quote
Ahh, so you want to argue that the only reason you don’t reckon that Stonehenge is the natural product of wind and erosion is because evidence suggests that humans were around at the time to build it. I’m sure you join in the high emotions of those first methodical researchers at the site. It must have been quite exciting at the time to survey and date the area, and finally put to rest that pressing question if Stonehenge was a natural effect of wind and erosion.

Alternatively, we can reason that you know fully well — even from your own observations of the natural world — that wind and erosion were never a candidate explanation for Stonehenge. If this is the case, then your attack on ID (demanding the identity of the designer) can be put into perspective. You badger ID proponents for evidence that is a) outside of ID arguments, and b) you don’t require elsewhere to infer design. And c), you do this instead of engaging the evidence that ID actually presents.

No inconsistencies there. 😐

I think my IQ just dropped a point after reading those two comments.
UD link

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

  
JohnW



Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,22:58   

Quote (Ptaylor @ July 27 2017,19:21)
The env/dawkins thread is getting bizarre. ET (who is not Joe G) is getting fixated on Stonehenge (which is one of Joe G's fixations):
   
Quote
LoL!@ Pindi- I know all about Stonehenge. I also know that there isn’t any evidence that humans designed and built it. All they have are inferences based on the fact that humans lived in the area. However I know there is a huge difference between living in the area and designing and building the monument.

How do we even know the people of 4,000+ years ago had the capability to design and build such a thing?

Indeed.  Joe lives in an area, and he's never done shit.

--------------
Math is just a language of reality. Its a waste of time to know it. - Robert Byers

There isn't any probability that the letter d is in the word "mathematics"...  The correct answer would be "not even 0" - JoeG

  
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1100
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 27 2017,23:24   

I have no idea whether or not Stonehenge was made by intelligence or not.  How could I?  Is it anywhere near to the complexity of a fishing reel?  Well, maybe some, but not the Ambassador 6500 C3 CT MAG 09 00.  I know that was designed, and of course RNA synthetase was.

But Stonehenge?  It's just too simple to tell.  And it lacks vestigial organs, and complex pathways like the descent of the testes (from about the position they are in fish--surely only a designer would know that and design it to be made there as it is in fishes).  It isn't made overly complicated, like rigid bird wings made out of bones that were articulated in their terrestrial dinosaurian ancestors.  Only these sorts of things are obviously designed, not simple, straightforward shapes and positions of stones in Stonehenge.

When are these idiots going to start using their superior skills in detecting design?  Life and Ambassador 6500 fishing reels are obviously designed, not Stonehenge.  It's laughable that anyone could know that Stonehenge was designed when it's such a simple structure.  A/mats think that they can determine design in Stonehenge, but why are righteous IDiots being suckered in by wanton materialistic evil beliefs that simple things can be determined to have been designed?

Glen Davidson

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

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

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 28 2017,13:13   

Quote (Ptaylor @ July 22 2017,03:22)
 
Speaking of Barry, I notice that this:

         

doesn't appear on UD pages anymore; only the 'Copyright © Uncommon Descent, Inc.' portion remains. Like its original appearance, I have no idea how recently it changed, or whether anything at all can be read into the fact that Barry is no longer credited as President.

According to the Wayback Machine, it was there March 9, 2017 and gone on June 2, 2017.

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

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2017,21:34   

Quote (Zachriel @ July 28 2017,13:13)
 
Quote (Ptaylor @ July 22 2017,03:22)
 
Speaking of Barry, I notice that this:

         

doesn't appear on UD pages anymore; only the 'Copyright © Uncommon Descent, Inc.' portion remains. Like its original appearance, I have no idea how recently it changed, or whether anything at all can be read into the fact that Barry is no longer credited as President.

According to the Wayback Machine, it was there March 9, 2017 and gone on June 2, 2017.

Barry seems to have given up his private practice and joined a local law firm too.  No idea if that has anything to do with this.

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2363
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 29 2017,22:24   

ET/notJoeG: "Just because someone can imagine it doesn’t make it conceivable."
Inconceivable!

Link

  
  15792 replies since Dec. 29 2013,11:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (527) < ... 282 283 284 285 286 [287] 288 289 290 291 292 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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