Printable Version of Topic

-Antievolution.org Discussion Board
+--Forum: After the Bar Closes...
+---Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 4 started by carlsonjok


Posted by: carlsonjok on Aug. 31 2011,21:06

Since Bob O'H named the previous thread after his house pet feline overlord, I figure I can get away with naming the next after Foster, a dearly loved and missed dog.  He was a better person than most people who legitimately are classified as homo sapien, especially a fair number of those retrograde knotheads over at UD.



Too maudlin?
Posted by: carlsonjok on Aug. 31 2011,21:08

Shroedinger's Dog:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Ras + Louis = Catfight!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Enjoy < the video >.
Posted by: Louis on Aug. 31 2011,21:26

Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 01 2011,03:08)
Shroedinger's Dog:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Ras + Louis = Catfight!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Enjoy < the video >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thank you. I shall now make a joke about what you do to horses, as is customary.

Tradition must be preserved.

Louis
Posted by: sparc on Aug. 31 2011,23:02

From UDT III:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Patrick >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 31 2011,11:01)
If KF is engaged in politicking and appears in public places, his image is fair game.

Besides, doesn't he approve of outing when it's someone else?

Why yes, he does!

It's the asymmetry that justifies his hypocrisy, you see.

That being said, I do agree with Louis* that compiling dossiers on the UD denizens borders on creepy stalker behavior.  Gentlemen don't read each other's mail, and all that.

* Is that a bannable offense here?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


After having been banned at UD upon Kairosfocus request for linking to one of his own web pages that displayed his real name I think is fair to use the later. Especially, since he used at least one other name (dictionary). In addition, he still signs his comments as GEM.

ETA: BTW, his old < The Kairos Focus > pages he links to from his new blog under the title < The Fullness Focus reference site > still displays the following

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This web page was created by Gordon Mullings; all rights reserved
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

. Thus, using his real name canot be classified as outing, IMO.

Although I think KF is either hysterical or just playing the upset I think his relatives should not get involved in these issues. OTH, if he mentions his wife in his posts it is fair to cite this fact in comments.
Posted by: Seversky on Aug. 31 2011,23:20

Quote (carlsonjok @ Aug. 31 2011,21:06)
Since Bob O'H named the previous thread after his house pet feline overlord, I figure I can get away with naming the next after Foster, a dearly loved and missed dog.  He was a better person than most people who legitimately are classified as homo sapien, especially a fair number of those retrograde knotheads over at UD.



Too maudlin?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not in the slightest.  Foster looks to be a fine fellow, a canine superior in every way to the asinine at UD.

This is another thing I hold against the UD version of Christianity:  a heaven which does not admit loyal companions like your Foster or my Sam can do without me as well.  Not that there is much chance of me getting there even if it does exist.


Posted by: MichaelJ on Sep. 01 2011,00:36

Don't you just love that brand new thread smell.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 01 2011,05:12

ftk mode on:  
Quote (Louis @ Aug. 31 2011,21:26)
   
Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 01 2011,03:08)
Shroedinger's Dog:
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Ras + Louis = Catfight!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Enjoy < the video >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thank you. I shall now make a joke about what you do to horses, as is customary.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Won't anybody think of the gerbils?
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 01 2011,05:50

Quote (Louis @ Aug. 31 2011,15:46)
Ahhhh /b/. Yes Patrick, I'm well aware of /b/

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'm sure you either stumbled upon it accidentally or clicked a link sent by a malicious prankster and, in either case, quickly closed that browser window.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 01 2011,07:33

Quote (MichaelJ @ Sep. 01 2011,01:36)
Don't you just love that brand new thread smell.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


um yes sorry about that my tummy is still hurting a bit from the last thread
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 01 2011,07:34

Louis said, through twisted knickers



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
expressing mild disagreement/having a discussion =/= getting knickers in a knot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



oh come now you know that is EXACTLY LITERALLY PRECISELY THE SAME THING YOU EVEN SPELL IT THE SAME WAY
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 01 2011,08:19

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 01 2011,15:33)
Quote (MichaelJ @ Sep. 01 2011,01:36)
Don't you just love that brand new thread smell.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


um yes sorry about that my tummy is still hurting a bit from the last thread
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


HAH.

YOU KNOW THE FIRST FEW PINTS OUT OF THE KEG ARE A BIT WATERY.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 01 2011,11:28

Quote (CeilingCat @ Sep. 01 2011,04:12)
Won't anybody think of the gerbils?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Why, are they attacking somebody?
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 01 2011,13:04

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 01 2011,11:50)
Quote (Louis @ Aug. 31 2011,15:46)
Ahhhh /b/. Yes Patrick, I'm well aware of /b/

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'm sure you either stumbled upon it accidentally or clicked a link sent by a malicious prankster and, in either case, quickly closed that browser window.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nope. I went there on purpose as part of an educational tour of the internet. All very proper and above board. Very educational too.

Very. Educational.

Louis
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 01 2011,15:19

Darwin still failing at UD:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Next: 2006: Dissent from Darwin is becoming more open among professionals

All posts in this series:

2006: Dissent from Darwin is becoming more open among professionals

2007: Darwinist efforts to stifle the ID community are failing

2008: Lots of people doubt Darwin that you didn’t think would, and are not afraid to say so

2009: The modern (neo-Darwinian) synthesis is – safely – admitted to be fading

2010: Layer on layer of intricacy outstrips Darwinian just-so stories
< http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....e-years >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://chem.tufts.edu/Answers....se.html >
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 01 2011,19:02

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 01 2011,21:19)
Darwin still failing at UD:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Next: 2006: Dissent from Darwin is becoming more open among professionals

All posts in this series:

2006: Dissent from Darwin is becoming more open among professionals

2007: Darwinist efforts to stifle the ID community are failing

2008: Lots of people doubt Darwin that you didn’t think would, and are not afraid to say so

2009: The modern (neo-Darwinian) synthesis is – safely – admitted to be fading

2010: Layer on layer of intricacy outstrips Darwinian just-so stories
< http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....e-years >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://chem.tufts.edu/Answers....se.html >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


2007:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The top intelligent design book honors for 2007 goes to Michael Behe’s Edge of Evolution [bla bla bla]

The “edge” of evolution, a line that defines the border between random and non-random mutation, lies very far from where Darwin pointed. Behe argues convincingly that most of the mutations that have defined the history of life on earth have been non-random.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Most Darwinist response is ill-informed attacks and cries of “Darwindunit!” when it was plentifully obvious that Darwin didn’t do it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 01 2011,23:49

< Thylacine sighting > at UD.  

I remember that some bigtime ID evolution critic displayed two pictures of a thylacine, one reversed and desaturated, to illustrate some creationist falsehood a few years ago.  Anybody remember who that was?  Was that Cornelius Hunter?
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 02 2011,02:31

Quote (CeilingCat @ Sep. 01 2011,23:49)
< Thylacine sighting > at UD.  

I remember that some bigtime ID evolution critic displayed two pictures of a thylacine, one reversed and desaturated, to illustrate some creationist falsehood a few years ago.  Anybody remember who that was?  Was that Cornelius Hunter?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, indeed.  < See Wesley's brilliant take on it. > It's still up-to-date because Corny didn't change a bit since then.

ETA:

Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 02 2011,06:03

Thanks.  That restores my faith in ID/Creationism.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 02 2011,06:35

Gordo equates atheists with paedophiles:

< >

It goes on but....
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 02 2011,06:43

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 02 2011,12:35)
Gordo equates atheists with paedophiles:

< >

It goes on but....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


He truly is a deeply lovely human being.

Hmmmm. Wait. Lovely is the same as odious right?

Louis
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 02 2011,06:49

At least he doesn't poison the atmosphere.

Is there a link for that, or at least a thread title?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 02 2011,07:02

The funny thing is that Christian churches protect pedophiles and actually keep them on the payroll, without denying them access to their prey.

The occasional voice of protest echos in the cathedral.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,07:05

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 02 2011,12:35)
Gordo equates atheists with paedophiles:

< >

It goes on but....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/the-universe-is-too-big-too-old-and-too-cruel-three-silly-objections-to-cosmological-fine-

tuning-part-one/comment-page-1/#comment-398071]Again[/URL].
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 02 2011,07:22

I'm feeling much better now:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now, since I have you on the line, let me ask you to consider a wild scenario regarding all those babies Yahweh had the Israelites kill: what if you came to know with metaphysical certainty that the consciousness inhabited by each one of those poor little babies was actually something akin to a Hitler or Stalin in a former incarnation on a different planet? How would that color your view about their being killed in such a manner by the Israelites during their incarnation on this planet?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Edit to add:

I'm somewhat interested in how one can be guilty simple by thinking bad thoughts in utero. Not to mention the inheritance of guilt from past lives.

Freaking amazing what that site tolerates and doesn't tolerate.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 02 2011,07:35

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 02 2011,06:49)
At least he doesn't poison the atmosphere.

Is there a link for that, or at least a thread title?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Click on the image itself.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 02 2011,07:48

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 02 2011,13:22)
I'm feeling much better now:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now, since I have you on the line, let me ask you to consider a wild scenario regarding all those babies Yahweh had the Israelites kill: what if you came to know with metaphysical certainty that the consciousness inhabited by each one of those poor little babies was actually something akin to a Hitler or Stalin in a former incarnation on a different planet? How would that color your view about their being killed in such a manner by the Israelites during their incarnation on this planet?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Edit to add:

I'm somewhat interested in how one can be guilty simple by thinking bad thoughts in utero. Not to mention the inheritance of guilt from past lives.

Freaking amazing what that site tolerates and doesn't tolerate.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah but we tolerate Teh Gayz which makes us atheists as bad as paedophiles sooper secret agenda paedophile apologists paedophiles on a daily basis.

HTH, HAND.

Louis
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,08:22

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 02 2011,13:22)
I'm somewhat interested in how one can be guilty simple by thinking bad thoughts in utero. Not to mention the inheritance of guilt from past lives.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't the inheritance of guilt a central belief of Christianity?
We are all fallen sinners and such?
And punishment of the children for the sins of their fathers.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,09:30



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Here’s morality in a nutshell: What hurts or harms sentient organisms is bad. Deliberately or carelessly doing needless bad things is evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You’re irrationally borrowing your moral concepts from religion, Dmullenix. As an atheist, your starting point is:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Now, kindly explain where morality fits into that unavoidable component of the atheistic worldview.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't get it. The universe might show nothing but blind, pitiless indifference, but humans are clearly not indifferent. Humans have empathy, they care for their children, they're able to reflect about their actions and how these might affect others. That's a pretty good basis for developing morality, IMO.

I also observe that the universe is pretty dark, cold, and mostly empty, and I still have lights, a heating system, and furniture.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 02 2011,09:39



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Humans have empathy
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It's a trait that varies in strength, just like any other trait.

It's fun, although probably not instructive, to speculate on whether the mix of empathetic and non-empathetic individuals helps a population survive.

Formal morality and law is obviously a way of coping with non-empathetic people.

In some sense, that's what defines original sin. Lack of empathy.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 02 2011,09:53

markf < ftw >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
One way of looking at this. If ID can only measure its progress through objections to “Darwinism” then how is progress in ID different from progress in any other creationist movement such as AIG?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not even UD can spin ID's "achievements" over the past five years any better than that.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 02 2011,09:57

Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,09:30)

I also observe that the universe is pretty dark, cold, and mostly empty, and I still have lights, a heating system, and furniture.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


At least for now you do.  But just wait for the new austerity measures that are just around the corner.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 02 2011,10:08

My heat went out a few years ago. I live in Florida, but it still gets below freezing several times a year.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,10:21

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 02 2011,15:57)
 
Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,09:30)

I also observe that the universe is pretty dark, cold, and mostly empty, and I still have lights, a heating system, and furniture.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


At least for now you do.  But just wait for the new austerity measures that are just around the corner.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'll fight for my couch to the death!
OTOH, I'm using energy saving bulbs* since approximately 1995, so they don't get me there ;)

* Since yesterday, 60-watt bulbs are banned in all countries of the European union (100-watt and 75-watt bulbs were already banned).
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 02 2011,10:52

Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,16:21)
[SNIP]

OTOH, I'm using energy saving bulbs*

[SNIP]

* Since yesterday, 60-watt bulbs are banned in all countries of the European union (100-watt and 75-watt bulbs were already banned).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!

Energy saving bulbs are wicked and evil and do not represent proper/Jesus'/American/British/Whatever bulbs that have been around forever since Adam made them in the Garden of Eden and these new bulbs give you cancer and are due to that fake global warming stuff which is a communist, atheist, gay, leftie, black, tree hugger plot made to take money from rich, white people (who are the best at everything ever and deserve to be by divine/biological/both right) and you can't tell me that's not true because old bulbs give better light and it's not entirely subjective at all oh no it's not.

And they lower house prices and encourage dirty dirty immigrants who are now white, but speak funny, which makes us confused because we can't call them pakis.

[/Daily Mail and/or my mother]

Louis

ETA: How did I do?
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,11:04

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2011,16:52)
 
Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,16:21)
[SNIP]

OTOH, I'm using energy saving bulbs*

[SNIP]

* Since yesterday, 60-watt bulbs are banned in all countries of the European union (100-watt and 75-watt bulbs were already banned).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!

Energy saving bulbs are wicked and evil and do not represent proper/Jesus'/American/British/Whatever bulbs that have been around forever since Adam made them in the Garden of Eden and these new bulbs give you cancer and are due to that fake global warming stuff which is a communist, atheist, gay, leftie, black, tree hugger plot made to take money from rich, white people (who are the best at everything ever and deserve to be by divine/biological/both right) and you can't tell me that's not true because old bulbs give better light and it's not entirely subjective at all oh no it's not.

And they lower house prices and encourage dirty dirty immigrants who are now white, but speak funny, which makes us confused because we can't call them pakis.

[/Daily Mail and/or my mother]

Louis

ETA: How did I do?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pretty good, but you forgot that it's a conspiracy by Osram and Philipps to monopolise the market*, that energy saving bulbs are actually WORSE for the environment, and that they lead to depression.

ETA: * which nicely fits in with the communist etc. plot to take money from the rich.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 02 2011,11:08

Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,11:04)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2011,16:52)
 
Quote (JLT @ Sep. 02 2011,16:21)
[SNIP]

OTOH, I'm using energy saving bulbs*

[SNIP]

* Since yesterday, 60-watt bulbs are banned in all countries of the European union (100-watt and 75-watt bulbs were already banned).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ZOMG SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!

Energy saving bulbs are wicked and evil and do not represent proper/Jesus'/American/British/Whatever bulbs that have been around forever since Adam made them in the Garden of Eden and these new bulbs give you cancer and are due to that fake global warming stuff which is a communist, atheist, gay, leftie, black, tree hugger plot made to take money from rich, white people (who are the best at everything ever and deserve to be by divine/biological/both right) and you can't tell me that's not true because old bulbs give better light and it's not entirely subjective at all oh no it's not.

And they lower house prices and encourage dirty dirty immigrants who are now white, but speak funny, which makes us confused because we can't call them pakis.

[/Daily Mail and/or my mother]

Louis

ETA: How did I do?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pretty good, but you forgot that it's a conspiracy by Osram and Philipps to monopolise the market, that energy saving bulbs are actually WORSE for the environment, and that they lead to depression.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Don't forget the mercury... won't someone think of the egrets?
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 02 2011,11:12

{Facepalm}

The mercury, conspiracy and worse for the environment? How could forget those?

I'm getting old. BAH!!

Louis
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 02 2011,11:32

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 02 2011,17:12)
{Facepalm}

The mercury, conspiracy and worse for the environment? How could forget those?

I'm getting old. BAH!!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There's *always* a conspiracy, and if they THEY claim otherwise, it's a cover-up. If you claim otherwise, you're either a naive dupe or in THEIR pockets. No evidence for a conspiracy only shows how deep-reaching THEIR influence is. And if the conspiracy theory only works if governments and scientists all over the world are together in it, that only means that you should buy 10 000 light bulbs, a diesel generator, a plywood shack somewhere in the woods, and a gun if you live in the US (I actually read that in a comment...) or that you should buy 10 000 light bulbs, leave all your lights on at all times (that'll show Them!)*, and get really angry in the pub, if you live in Germany. In the UK, you'll probably become Lord Monckton.

* I read that one, too.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 02 2011,19:26

markf < continues pwning UD >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
However, your point is interesting. It seems you are suggesting that the ID argument is:

“known non-design alternatives for life are wrong therefore life was designed”

I think this is a good summary of the ID argument but do you really support it? I have spent hours hearing from people on the ID side protesting that this is not the case. They claim there is positive evidence for design as well as evidence against “Darwinism”.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Barry "Free Speech For Me But Not For Thee" Arrington helpfully points Mark to < ID's positive claims >, including:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1.  Living things display IC and FSCI.

2.  Material forces have never been shown to produce IC and FSCI.

3.  Intelligent agents routinely produce IC and FSCI.

4.  Therefore, based on the evidence that we have in front of us, the best explanation for the presence of IC and FSCI in living things is that they are the result of acts of an intelligent agent.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So, Barry, how about some examples of how to calculate this FSCI thing you're on about?  You could start with < these four scenarios >.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 02 2011,22:16

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 02 2011,06:35)
Gordo equates atheists with paedophiles:

< >

It goes on but....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


According to Gordon E. Mullings it was not clear if the actress in < the porn KairosFocus admittted to have watched was even 18 >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This lovely, fresh-faced smiling young miss (I gather she was precisely 18 at the time of this picture)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Of course it is not his fault:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

Thus, we are being lured into a world of graphical, aural and verbal stimulation, designed to pull us into an addiction to not only watching but participating in anything-goes action, and to eventually join the fun by (a) taking and posting public pictures of your "equipment" or adventures, or even (b) advertising in pop-ups on the same sites.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 03 2011,07:18

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 02 2011,17:53)
markf < ftw >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
One way of looking at this. If ID can only measure its progress through objections to “Darwinism” then how is progress in ID different from progress in any other creationist movement such as AIG?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not even UD can spin ID's "achievements" over the past five years any better than that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


umm don't spoil the party dude.

In the name of the lord let them be our most obedient servants.



aAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHA

GAFAW

<snikker>
Posted by: Seversky on Sep. 03 2011,11:35

DeNews < quotes > Mark Steyn getting all nostalgic about the movie Apollo 13.  She tries to smear current thinking in cosmology by linking it to the fiction of the upcoming Apollo 18.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now, some fear NASA will end up in tune with crackpot cosmologies. You know, “We are living in a giant hologram, or a giant trailer filled with poop, or whatever Stephen Hawking says we are living in” because he is The Smartest Man in the WorldTM, and these days genius beats exploration as a source of knowledge.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Obviously, it's much better to rely on a book filled with stories of talking snakes or sticks that turn into snakes or voices speaking out of burning bushes or the parting of seas or people turned into pillars of salt for just looking the wrong way.  Let's keep things real here, people.
Posted by: fnxtr on Sep. 03 2011,12:59

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 03 2011,13:23

Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 03 2011,13:56

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 03 2011,13:23)
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Also make sure you spell "Toyota" correctly and I don't suggest "whitehouse.com"
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 03 2011,14:22

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 03 2011,13:56)

Also make sure you spell "Toyota" correctly and I don't suggest "whitehouse.com"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Whitehouse.com is down now, but Wiki says this: "In 2004 Dan Parisi decided to sell the domain, mainly because of his son who would be in kindergarten the next year. At this point he was making US$1 million annually from the site alone."

Who was it who said, "I'm not in politics for my health?"
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 03 2011,16:13

Densey O'Bleary's < Philosophy of Science: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Intelligent design will prevail when engineers rule.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Cuz an engineer would never tell you that we live in a giant trailer full of < poop >.
Posted by: Seversky on Sep. 03 2011,18:14

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 03 2011,16:13)
Densey O'Bleary's < Philosophy of Science: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Intelligent design will prevail when engineers rule.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Cuz an engineer would never tell you that we live in a giant trailer full of < poop >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Tacoma Narrows Bridge

Titanic

Hindenberg

Hyatt Regency Walkway (Kansas City)

Ford Pinto

London Millenium Footbridge

Space Shuttle Challenger

Chernobyl

Tay Bridge (Scotland)

De Havilland Comet

Deepwater Horizon

... etc

Yep, engineers are so much less error-prone than all the other disciplines and professions..
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 03 2011,19:20

If doctors bury their mistakes, lawyers appeal theirs, and scientists build on theirs, what do engineers do?


PS: Are statisticians reasonably certain of  their mistakes?
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 03 2011,19:54

Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 03 2011,19:14)
Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 03 2011,16:13)
Densey O'Bleary's < Philosophy of Science: >      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Intelligent design will prevail when engineers rule.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Cuz an engineer would never tell you that we live in a giant trailer full of < poop >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Tacoma Narrows Bridge

Titanic

Hindenberg

Hyatt Regency Walkway (Kansas City)

Ford Pinto

London Millenium Footbridge

Space Shuttle Challenger

Chernobyl

Tay Bridge (Scotland)

De Havilland Comet

Deepwater Horizon

... etc

Yep, engineers are so much less error-prone than all the other disciplines and professions..
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You left out Bhopal.  Won't someone think of the chemical engineers?
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 03 2011,20:54

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 03 2011,17:54)
Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 03 2011,19:14)
Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 03 2011,16:13)
Densey O'Bleary's < Philosophy of Science: >      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Intelligent design will prevail when engineers rule.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Cuz an engineer would never tell you that we live in a giant trailer full of < poop >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Tacoma Narrows Bridge

Titanic

Hindenberg

Hyatt Regency Walkway (Kansas City)

Ford Pinto

London Millenium Footbridge

Space Shuttle Challenger

Chernobyl

Tay Bridge (Scotland)

De Havilland Comet

Deepwater Horizon

... etc

Yep, engineers are so much less error-prone than all the other disciplines and professions..
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You left out Bhopal.  Won't someone think of the chemical engineers?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's right, take all the limelight away from the railroad and custodial engineers!
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 03 2011,21:02

Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 03 2011,19:20)
If doctors bury their mistakes, lawyers appeal theirs, and scientists build on theirs, what do engineers do?


PS: Are statisticians reasonably certain of  their mistakes?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Engineers blame the accountants.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 03 2011,21:18

ID will prevail when D O'L transforms into a woman.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 03 2011,22:09

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 03 2011,19:18)
ID will prevail when D O'L transforms into a woman.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As portrayed in the upcoming cinematic feature "Tranmawformers: Back-Side of the Dog" using CSI effects, engineered by GilDo, legally protected by Barry 'Jackpot' Arrington.

(To be double-featured with "Expelled II: Intelligence IOU" )
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 03 2011,23:43



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If doctors bury their mistakes, lawyers appeal theirs, and scientists build on theirs, what do engineers do?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hit the reboot button?

Henry
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 04 2011,00:31



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< I am a software/aerodynamics/mechanical/artificial-intelligence/information-processing/integrating-all-of-these-engineering-disciplines engineer >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

says the one time piano player who owns < three college degrees in foreign language, literature, and music > who otherwise < spent a consiiderable time of his life hanging around without any further formal education >.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 04 2011,00:55



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Genetics paper retracted: “Some other mechanism” is responsible for genetic mutations >
September 3, 2011
Posted by News under Evolution, Genetics, Intelligent Design, Natural selection, News
No Comments


In “Genetics Paper Retracted: Due to statistical errors, a Science paper claiming that mutation is responsible for genetic variation is retracted” (The Scientist September 2, 2011), Jessica P. Johnson < reports >,



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
A May 2010 Science paper showing that the most genetically fit cow-pea weevils have fewer deleterious genetic mutations in their genomes than their less fit counterparts was retracted yesterday (September 1) by the authors because of flaws in their statistical analysis.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The results apparently supported the hypothesis that individuals with the fewest bad mutations will produce the most fit offspring.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The revised data analysis, which shows little effect on fitness due to mutation, suggests that some other mechanism may instead be responsible for maintaining genetic variation in weevil populations.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wonder what?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Must have been the designer at work.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 04 2011,00:57

BTW, it is good to know that due to their moral superiority decent behaviour like retracting errornous papers is so common among < ID scientists >.
Posted by: Seversky on Sep. 04 2011,02:05

DeNews as always speaks out for < academic freedom >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The zone of protected professorial speech is shrinking.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



They might want to check into what’s happening to students too. They should see Expelled as well.

Today’s universities are a living antithesis of everything North American nations were founded for.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Ah, yes.  There was that notorious case of the professor at some Southern Baptist seminary who wrote something that was felt to be at odds with orthodox opinion at the institution.  He was invited to 'clarify' his position or look for another job.  

DeNews really gave them a hard time over that.

Or was that someone else?
Posted by: BWE on Sep. 04 2011,02:21

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 03 2011,19:18)
ID will prevail when D O'L transforms into a woman.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


don't you mean finishes the transformation? Or am I confusing D with someone else?
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 04 2011,06:42

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 03 2011,22:18)
ID will prevail when D O'L transforms into a woman.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


trans being operative

disgusting stick up it's disgusting ass, that would make a redwood shave it's face and walk backwards because its ass is inadequate
Posted by: Seversky on Sep. 04 2011,08:32

DeNews and the rabbis < continue their sinful ways: >

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Rabbi pleads with Darwinian atheists: Turn back from legal pedophilia. But they can’t.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



1.  DeNews sees no difference between journalism and propaganda and thereby ignores the commandment against bearing false witness.

2.  Various celebrity clergy are quick to smear atheism for implying amorality and hence permitting pedophilia.  They ignore the evidence that religious belief does not provide an insurmountable barrier to pedophilia which brings to mind a saying about glass houses and stone-throwing.

3.  Even worse is that, while the Lord took care to prohibit things like taking His name in vain, making graven images or coveting the neighbor's ox, He apparently overlooked the small matter of abusing children - or maybe He didn't consider it such a big deal.

4.  They all sidestep the is/ought problem and the Euthyphro Dilemma.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 04 2011,08:54

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 03 2011,13:56)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 03 2011,13:23)
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
 
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Also make sure you spell "Toyota" correctly and I don't suggest "whitehouse.com"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Serious question:  what misspelling of Toyota should I be using in my "research"?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 04 2011,09:04

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 03 2011,13:23)
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


To me, Gordo is more like another Leroy.

LEEEEEEEEEROOOYYYYYYY  JENKINS!
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 04 2011,09:16

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 04 2011,15:04)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 03 2011,13:23)
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
 
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


To me, Gordo is more like another Leroy.

LEEEEEEEEEROOOYYYYYYY  JENKINS!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 04 2011,09:20

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 04 2011,14:54)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 03 2011,13:56)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 03 2011,13:23)
 
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 03 2011,18:59)
 
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 02 2011,20:16)
         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is now a rising flood of free -- much of it amateur [or pseudo-amateur] -- Internet pornography, just a simple Google search away. All you have to do is make a simple mistake in a search and the links to the most graphic, "hard core" porn sites will start to come up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, sure. I don't know how many times I've tried to Google "Basic Astrophysics" and ended up at "Back Door Babes". Happens all the time. Even when my "safe search" filter is on, right Gorgo?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Happens to me too when I search "back door babe", that was that adorable moment in the movie Babe, when Babe the piglet tries to get into the farmer's house through the backdoor.

I don't regret the searches, though. It seems Gordo* has something against sex. How surprising...







*I am really reluctant about that nick. For me Gordo has always been Leroy Gordon Cooper, a hero of mine, even if he went crazy pants in his later years.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Also make sure you spell "Toyota" correctly and I don't suggest "whitehouse.com"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Serious question:  what misspelling of Toyota should I be using in my "research"?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I was wondering about that too. I'm not sure I want to know the answer, but I will confess to being curious.

Louis
Posted by: sledgehammer on Sep. 04 2011,09:58

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 03 2011,22:31)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< I am a software/aerodynamics/mechanical/artificial-intelligence/information-processing/integrating-all-of-these-engineering-disciplines engineer >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

says the one time piano player who owns < three college degrees in foreign language, literature, and music > who otherwise < spent a consiiderable time of his life hanging around without any further formal education >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And let's not forget:
" I once took a class to learn how to run LS-DYNA, a simulator engine developed by some other really smart folks.
Now I are a both an engineer and a scientist!".

Shows how little you need to know to be a simulator jock:

1)  take a guess, based on what has worked previously.
2)  run the sim,
3)  tweak a parameter or two,
4)  re-run the sim.
5)  continue trial and error until it works.

Hmm,  where have I seen this mindless procedure work before?
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 04 2011,11:24

Hmm... Joe seems to still think that our 'debate' was about evolution.  Him and medplex are upset because I never did define evolution.

Of course, I stated that I agreed with all of Joe's definitions of evolution EXCEPT the strawman one that is the only one he actually argues against.  When called on that definition and asked to find a single reference that used it, he ran away.

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....om-fish >
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 04 2011,13:48

Quote (sledgehammer @ Sep. 04 2011,09:58)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 03 2011,22:31)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< I am a software/aerodynamics/mechanical/artificial-intelligence/information-processing/integrating-all-of-these-engineering-disciplines engineer >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

says the one time piano player who owns < three college degrees in foreign language, literature, and music > who otherwise < spent a consiiderable time of his life hanging around without any further formal education >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And let's not forget:
" I once took a class to learn how to run LS-DYNA, a simulator engine developed by some other really smart folks.
Now I are a both an engineer and a scientist!".

Shows how little you need to know to be a simulator jock:

1)  take a guess, based on what has worked previously.
2)  run the sim,
3)  tweak a parameter or two,
4)  re-run the sim.
5)  continue trial and error until it works.

Hmm,  where have I seen this mindless procedure work before?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD News?
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 04 2011,18:11

< Gordo >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Is it any surprise that what we used to call lumpen proletariat elements would soak in the atmosphere of amorality and resort to nihilistic, opportunistic looting; without being able to quote Nietzsche. Why should they, it was all written into their school books and the teacher’s scripts for classes, it was trumpeted all over TV, it was in the papers and it was on the net.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Er, right-o. Nailed that on the head.
Posted by: N.Wells on Sep. 04 2011,18:19

Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 04 2011,08:32)
3.  Even worse is that, while the Lord took care to prohibit things like taking His name in vain, making graven images or coveting the neighbor's ox, He apparently overlooked the small matter of abusing children - or maybe He didn't consider it such a big deal.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not at all - Jesus specifically commanded "Suffer the little children", and the Vatican is merely trying its utmost to ensure that they do.
(/snark)
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 04 2011,19:34

Just started watching a documentary called Mystical Brain.  In the first few minutes it quotes O'Leary's Spatula Brain coauthor Mario Beauregard:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
We lived in the country.  I had lots of time to think.  Already when I was young, I had an inner certainty that the essence of human beings, the soul if you will, was a phenomenon linked to the brain, but was not the brain.  One could not be reduced to the other.  As a child, I thought, "When I grow up, I'll become a scientist, and I'll demonstrate that."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's a nice summary of the ID attitude toward science: "I already know the Truth.  I can't be wrong. Science's job is to confirm what I know, and by God, I'll twist and mangle it until it does."
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 04 2011,20:47

Apropos of nothing specific:

Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 04 2011,22:13

Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 05 2011,06:25

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 05 2011,04:13)
Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... which is presumably why IDiots have developed their own ToE?

(I'm such a heel for saying that. An utter tarser)
Posted by: Wolfhound on Sep. 05 2011,06:41

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 04 2011,10:16)
All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What?  You are suggesting I'm dull boy/girl just because I have a level 85 hunter, level 85 paladin, level 85 druid, level 85 priest, level 85 death knight, and a level 64 rogue?   :angry:

Oh, wait, it's all of those other reasons.

Carry on, then.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 05 2011,09:29



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That antibiotic resistance likely jumped from the soil bacteria to disease-causing bacteria.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You mean, it was due to jumping genes, not Darwinian evolution?

Remember when failure to believe that Darwinian evolution is the cause of antibiotic resistence was supposed to endanger the nation’s health? Quaint.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I just headdesked so hard, I feel slightly concussed.

ETA:< Link >
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 05 2011,10:11

Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 05 2011,12:41)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 04 2011,10:16)
All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What?  You are suggesting I'm dull boy/girl just because I have a level 85 hunter, level 85 paladin, level 85 druid, level 85 priest, level 85 death knight, and a level 64 rogue?   :angry:

Oh, wait, it's all of those other reasons.

Carry on, then.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I would never suggest that. Although you do seem to have a bad case of Altoholism. Which server are you on? Do you raid? What spec is your druid?*

Louis

*Not that I know about these things. Never played the game in my life. Honest.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 05 2011,11:01

Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 05 2011,07:41)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 04 2011,10:16)
All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What?  You are suggesting I'm dull boy/girl just because I have a level 85 hunter, level 85 paladin, level 85 druid, level 85 priest, level 85 death knight, and a level 64 rogue?   :angry:

Oh, wait, it's all of those other reasons.

Carry on, then.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Depends.  Shadow or Holy priest?
Posted by: Wolfhound on Sep. 05 2011,13:39

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 05 2011,11:11)
Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 05 2011,12:41)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 04 2011,10:16)
All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What?  You are suggesting I'm dull boy/girl just because I have a level 85 hunter, level 85 paladin, level 85 druid, level 85 priest, level 85 death knight, and a level 64 rogue?   :angry:

Oh, wait, it's all of those other reasons.

Carry on, then.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I would never suggest that. Although you do seem to have a bad case of Altoholism. Which server are you on? Do you raid? What spec is your druid?*

Louis

*Not that I know about these things. Never played the game in my life. Honest.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Druid is a Boomchicken because I'm too chickenshit to try healing, although I AM dual specced for it.

I play on the US Bloodhoof server, as does Deadman.  Both Alliance.  I don't get to raid any more because of this absolute shit satellite ISP I have here in the sticks of Washington State.  650 latency is a GOOD day for me.  Normally it's 800-2k so the lag is too much for even random instances, much less raiding.  I used to OWN Icecrown Citadel, back before I moved.  Waaaah!

I'll tell you our toons' names if you care to look us up.  Deadman raids pretty regularly and is a bit of a gear whore, even if he denies it.  He's even a Defender of A Shattered World, the bastard!   :angry:
Posted by: Wolfhound on Sep. 05 2011,13:44

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 05 2011,12:01)
Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 05 2011,07:41)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 04 2011,10:16)
All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...All WoW and no play makes Jack a dull boy...

;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What?  You are suggesting I'm dull boy/girl just because I have a level 85 hunter, level 85 paladin, level 85 druid, level 85 priest, level 85 death knight, and a level 64 rogue?   :angry:

Oh, wait, it's all of those other reasons.

Carry on, then.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Depends.  Shadow or Holy priest?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Shadow is primary.  Holy is secondary.  :)
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 05 2011,13:52

Crazy kids...


I played Minesweeper, once.
Posted by: Alan Fox on Sep. 05 2011,14:00

Who on Earth is < this nutcase >? Anyone curious enough to follow the link to his blog? Is this the messiah we've been waiting for?

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Each and every living cell on Earth is inhabited by live beings, both mono-cells and cells that cluster to live in poly-cell life forms.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Next!
Posted by: Bob O'H on Sep. 05 2011,14:51

Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 05 2011,06:25)
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 05 2011,04:13)
Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... which is presumably why IDiots have developed their own ToE?

(I'm such a heel for saying that. An utter tarser)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I meta tarsier once.
Posted by: Alan Fox on Sep. 05 2011,15:01

Quote (Bob O'H @ Sep. 05 2011,09:51)
Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 05 2011,06:25)
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 05 2011,04:13)
Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... which is presumably why IDiots have developed their own ToE?

(I'm such a heel for saying that. An utter tarser)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I meta tarsier once.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You didn't mistake it for flying phalanges by any chance?
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 05 2011,15:02



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You may find this version fraught with insights, with answers to yet unanswered questions and with directions for thought, study and work IF, if like the boy in The Emperor's New Clothes, you call what you see; if you regard the in-cell contents a life-bearing micro-space-ship at a homeostatic state.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



not enough crank fontage to convince me of teh truthiness.  for someone bringing galactic level tard, the poor dumb sombitch sure needs some lessons in presentation
Posted by: sledgehammer on Sep. 05 2011,15:17

Quote (Bob O'H @ Sep. 05 2011,12:51)
 
Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 05 2011,06:25)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 05 2011,04:13)
Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... which is presumably why IDiots have developed their own ToE?

(I'm such a heel for saying that. An utter tarser)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I meta tarsier once.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Groan.... Talus you won't do that again, or I'll have to put my foot down.  You're just tap-dancing around the issue.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 05 2011,15:30

These pun cascades just stain my sole...
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 05 2011,15:35

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 05 2011,13:30)
These pun cascades just stain my sole...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


They are my Achille's Heel.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 05 2011,16:41

Quote (sledgehammer @ Sep. 05 2011,16:17)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Sep. 05 2011,12:51)
 
Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 05 2011,06:25)
   
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 05 2011,04:13)
Most people have two souls.

One on each foot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... which is presumably why IDiots have developed their own ToE?

(I'm such a heel for saying that. An utter tarser)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I meta tarsier once.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Groan.... Talus you won't do that again, or I'll have to put my foot down.  You're just tap-dancing around the issue.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Aglet it drop, if I was you.
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 05 2011,22:56

< Gilbert Dodgen >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At age 90 as of 2011, my father is one of the few living scientists who developed the atomic bomb during WWII. He named me after the great physical chemist Gilbert Newton Lewis, under whom my dad earned his Ph.D. in his early 20s while working on the Manhattan Project.

When I was a child in the 1950s rumors spread that the communist Chinese were developing an atomic bomb. I asked my dad, “Why don’t we just keep it a secret from them?” My dad replied, and I’ll never forget it, “Gilbert, the secret is in nature, and it’s there to be found by anyone who looks hard enough.”

Of course, my dad was talking about the nature of the nucleus of the atom, physical chemistry, and the potential for a sustained nuclear chain reaction.

I would like to offer the following observation, inspired by my father’s comment: Design is to be found in nature, by anyone who looks hard enough.

The irony is that figuring out nuclear fission requires quite a bit of searching for “secrets,” while design in nature is there to be found with almost no searching at all. Design screams from every corner of creation. Not finding design in nature is what takes a lot of effort.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Poor Frill's head is going to explode if he tiptoes any closer to the inevitable question.  Dissonance much, Gil?
Posted by: didymos on Sep. 06 2011,00:33

I don't know why, but the lack of self-awareness over there still stupefies me.  < DeNews >:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In fairness, Matzke doesn’t really know much about carnivorous plants, whereas Loennig is clearly an expert.

Matzke has a tendency to rely on pseudo-experts, which can play him false.

His best bet right now, to event he score, would be to bring in a real expert on his side.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Her stupidity is truly awe-inspiring.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 06 2011,03:40

Quote (didymos @ Sep. 06 2011,00:33)
I don't know why, but the lack of self-awareness over there still stupefies me.  < DeNews >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In fairness, Matzke doesn’t really know much about carnivorous plants, whereas Loennig is clearly an expert.

Matzke has a tendency to rely on pseudo-experts, which can play him false.

His best bet right now, to event he score, would be to bring in a real expert on his side.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Her stupidity is truly awe-inspiring.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ah, Lönnig again. As usual he cites Behe and other creationists in his article "Carnivorous Plants" that somehow made it into Nature's Encyclopaedia of Life Sciences. Interestingly, he cites Robert Nachtwey's "Der Irrweg des Darwinismus" published 1959. According to a review it contained already everything that Intelligent Design claims today and those arguments were outdated back then:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
We could dispose of this book and its
subject-the misdirection of Darwinism
-in a few sentences. On the basis of its
intrinsic merit it rates only a little space.
But the very fact that such a work could
be published a century after Darwin's
The Origin of Species is interesting in
itself and, to anyone concerned with the
resistance that scientific knowledge often
encounters, this fact is important enough
to merit some study.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ETA < link >
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 06 2011,06:15



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If you are referring to the God of the Bible, then He owes us nothing other than punishment for our crimes against Him. If this makes no sense to you, then you plainly fail to understand simple Biblical theology.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< LOL >.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 06 2011,06:37

As if Gil Dodgen never ever mentioned the achievements of his father before:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
3
Robert Byers
< September 6, 2011 at 3:12 ame >

Didn’t know one of the writers here comes from such a achieving family in the great stories of the use of physics. Too bad its killing people but in reality the atomic bombs had to be used to save people from being killed other ways. The good guys too.
Its cool to have creationism(s) these days with rightfully confident people.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




Will Gildo tell Robert that his father is an atheist not dismissing evolution theory?
BTW: Since when is ID creationism?
Or do I miss irony and Mr. Byers pisses off Gildo?
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Sep. 06 2011,06:46

Quote (didymos @ Sep. 06 2011,00:33)
I don't know why, but the lack of self-awareness over there still stupefies me.  < DeNews >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In fairness, Matzke doesn’t really know much about carnivorous plants, whereas Loennig is clearly an expert.

Matzke has a tendency to rely on pseudo-experts, which can play him false.

His best bet right now, to event he score, would be to bring in a real expert on his side.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Her stupidity is truly awe-inspiring.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


expert  - n., connotation: Someone who authoritatively tells you what you want to hear.

As long as IDC advocates and cheerleaders go with that, they'll keep giving us those Dover moments in court.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 06 2011,12:24

And here I though an expert was somebody what used to be a pert...
Posted by: Woodbine on Sep. 06 2011,12:26

Well I learned something today. For as long as I can remember I had been pronouncing Gil with a soft G but now I discover it's short for Gilbert.

Gilbert Dodgen.

Someone really ought to tell him the Universe is taking the piss out of him. The only other Gil I am aware of is Gil Gerard (Buck Rogers). And so without further excuse here's a picture of the lovely Wilma Deering.

(snatched from wilmadeering.com believe it or not)


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 06 2011,12:49

Doesn't this post break some kind of rule at UD?

< there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement >
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 06 2011,13:58

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 06 2011,18:24)
And here I though an expert was somebody what used to be a pert...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ex-pert. (Noun):  female breasts that have succumbed to the forces of gravity and age.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 06 2011,14:03

I don't know if this has been posted, but the new Koonin book is available free for download At Amazon. If you non't have a Kindle, you can download a free reader.

The News at UD is rather stupidly touting it as an ID friendly book.

Details here:

< http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....freebie >
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 06 2011,14:04

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 06 2011,19:58)
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 06 2011,18:24)
And here I though an expert was somebody what used to be a pert...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ex-pert. (Noun):  female breasts that have succumbed to the forces of gravity and age.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There's an excellent section of "I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue"* in which new definitions are given to old words. For example:

Countryside: To kill Piers Morgan.

Coquette: Small penis.

And so on and so forth.

Louis

* The Radio 4 show that gave us Mornington Crescent.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 06 2011,14:34

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 06 2011,14:04)
 
Quote (BillB @ Sep. 06 2011,19:58)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 06 2011,18:24)
And here I though an expert was somebody what used to be a pert...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ex-pert. (Noun):  female breasts that have succumbed to the forces of gravity and age.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There's an excellent section of "I'm Sorry I Haven't A Clue"* in which new definitions are given to old words. For example:

Countryside: To kill Piers Morgan.

Coquette: Small penis.

And so on and so forth.

Louis

* The Radio 4 show that gave us Mornington Crescent.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


rec·ti·tude  (r?kt?-t??d, -ty??d) n. the honorable, upright demeanor assumed by your proctologist as he prepares to examine you.

ETA:  those length-marked vowels looked just fine in preview.
Posted by: Raevmo on Sep. 06 2011,17:48

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 06 2011,14:03)
I don't know if this has been posted, but the new Koonin book is available free for download At Amazon. If you non't have a Kindle, you can download a free reader.

The News at UD is rather stupidly touting it as an ID friendly book.

Details here:

< http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....freebie >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That is putting is mildly. Quote from Koonin's book:

"Of course, ID is malicious nonsense"

Bwahaha
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 06 2011,17:57

The universe implodes as DeNudes opines on IQ, snatching an illustration from the < Wikipedia > article on IQ, uncredited.

That article also states:

"The American Psychological Association's report 'Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns' states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%."

And

"The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6. The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods were controlled for. While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function, IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations."

And

"The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about quarter of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes."

There are many caveats; academic performance, job performance and income are all complexly and multiply determined. IQ has a relationship with each of them, stronger in some instances than in others.

From this DeNudes concludes:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
within a normal range - there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


*Facepalm*
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 06 2011,20:20

But will Gil conclude from this that there is not a strong correlation between daddy's career achievements and the achievements of his web potato child?
Posted by: MichaelJ on Sep. 06 2011,21:23

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 07 2011,08:57)
The universe implodes as DeNudes opines on IQ, snatching an illustration from the < Wikipedia > article on IQ, uncredited.

That article also states:

"The American Psychological Association's report 'Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns' states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%."

And

"The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6. The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods were controlled for. While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function, IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations."

And

"The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about quarter of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes."

There are many caveats; academic performance, job performance and income are all complexly and multiply determined. IQ has a relationship with each of them, stronger in some instances than in others.

From this DeNudes concludes:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
within a normal range - there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


*Facepalm*
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't the data skewed because a lot of the high IQ people were not interested in "achieving". I've met a lot of very smart people who were contented with a job that gave them enough resources to follow their own passions.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 06 2011,22:27

Quote (MichaelJ @ Sep. 06 2011,21:23)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 07 2011,08:57)
The universe implodes as DeNudes opines on IQ, snatching an illustration from the < Wikipedia > article on IQ, uncredited.

That article also states:

"The American Psychological Association's report 'Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns' states that wherever it has been studied, children with high scores on tests of intelligence tend to learn more of what is taught in school than their lower-scoring peers. The correlation between IQ scores and grades is about .50. This means that the explained variance is 25%."

And

"The validity of IQ as a predictor of job performance is above zero for all work studied to date, but varies with the type of job and across different studies, ranging from 0.2 to 0.6. The correlations were higher when the unreliability of measurement methods were controlled for. While IQ is more strongly correlated with reasoning and less so with motor function, IQ-test scores predict performance ratings in all occupations."

And

"The American Psychological Association's 1995 report Intelligence: Knowns and Unknowns stated that IQ scores accounted for (explained variance) about quarter of the social status variance and one-sixth of the income variance. Statistical controls for parental SES eliminate about a quarter of this predictive power. Psychometric intelligence appears as only one of a great many factors that influence social outcomes."

There are many caveats; academic performance, job performance and income are all complexly and multiply determined. IQ has a relationship with each of them, stronger in some instances than in others.

From this DeNudes concludes:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
within a normal range - there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


*Facepalm*
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't the data skewed because a lot of the high IQ people were not interested in "achieving". I've met a lot of very smart people who were contented with a job that gave them enough resources to follow their own passions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't a job that gives

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
them enough resources to follow their own passions
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

already quite some achievement?
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 06 2011,23:33

all you white people want to do is work work work.  i'll lay here under this pawpaw tree and mind the fishing line tied to my toe whilst i take sips from pap's peartenin' juice
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 07 2011,00:16

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 06 2011,12:24)
And here I though an expert was somebody what used to be a pert...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"X" = the mathematical symbol for the unknown.

"Spurt" = a drip under pressure.

So an expert is an unknown drip under pressure.

UD is full of experts.
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 07 2011,03:24

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 06 2011,20:27)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Isn't the data skewed because a lot of the high IQ people were not interested in "achieving". I've met a lot of very smart people who were contented with a job that gave them enough resources to follow their own passions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't a job that gives  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
them enough resources to follow their own passions
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

already quite some achievement?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




I recall vaguely a "zen*" story about a student asking a teacher about what a "miracle" was, the reply;

Sleep when you are tired, eat when you are hungry.



*I doubt it is associated with any actual Zen Buddhist teaching. More likely Nichiren Buddhism, since they are not (as) opposed to gratifying physical desires like fatigue and hunger rationalized under the teaching of "Expedient Means."


Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 07 2011,06:47

Quote (Raevmo @ Sep. 06 2011,17:48)
   
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 06 2011,14:03)
I don't know if this has been posted, but the new Koonin book is available free for download At Amazon. If you non't have a Kindle, you can download a free reader.

The News at UD is rather stupidly touting it as an ID friendly book.

Details here:

< http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....freebie >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That is putting is mildly. Quote from Koonin's book:

"Of course, ID is malicious nonsense"

Bwahaha
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Reality is settling in:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Cannuckian Yankee 4.1 Incidentally, News, I’m now on the 2nd Chapter and it appears that it’s not exactly a “Darwin-free book.” Koonin appears to have more of a problem with the “Hardness” and dogmatism of the modern synthesis; thus the Preface: “Toward a Postmodern Synthesis of Evolutionary Biology.” He praises Darwin and those who further praise Darwin; even mentioning Dobzhansky’s famous “Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of evolution,” not once, but twice for emphasis.

One thing I can tell you about the book – it’s very well written and easy to follow. He’s not so much interested in the fine details as he is in the “big picture.” He states at the beginning that he first intended it to be a popular Tome like that of Hawking, but later revised it to be a bit more “scientific” but not technical.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


They do get a little encouragement.  Koonin apparently thinks that abiogenesis is a 1 in 10^thousand or so  event.

Thanks for the publicity, Denyse!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 07 2011,07:28

Koonin lists a number of abiogenesis scenarios and pronounces one of them as being a long shot.

The ID friendliness is diluted by the fact that his main point is we don't know how it happened.

But he does fall back to the multiverse as a way of overcoming odds.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 07 2011,07:48



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
One thing I can tell you about the book – it’s very well written and easy to follow. He’s not so much interested in the fine details as he is in the “big picture.” He states at the beginning that he first intended it to be a popular Tome like that of Hawking, but later revised it to be a bit more “scientific” but not technical.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This seems right to me. It's extremely well written, and unless there are boneheaded errors, it's going to be a classic on the order of The Selfish Gene.

It seems to hit every point that ever comes up in evolution debates, and except for OOL, it nails them down tight.

There's a -- perhaps unnecessary -- section on postmodernism, which quietly takes it down. Concluding that most big subjects in science, including physics, are incomplete and provisional, with overlapping "narratives," each of which reliably describes some phenomena, but which fail to be the grand unifying theory. There's an implied "so what."
Posted by: Fross on Sep. 07 2011,09:34

Quote (Raevmo @ Sep. 06 2011,17:48)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 06 2011,14:03)
I don't know if this has been posted, but the new Koonin book is available free for download At Amazon. If you non't have a Kindle, you can download a free reader.

The News at UD is rather stupidly touting it as an ID friendly book.

Details here:

< http://freethoughtblogs.com/pharyng....freebie >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That is putting is mildly. Quote from Koonin's book:

"Of course, ID is malicious nonsense"

Bwahaha
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Did  de News really just get excited over a new book on evolution because it knocks over her cartoon understanding of "Darwinism"?  

Too bad she doesn't read beyond the cover slips.   It seems most of her anti-Darwin rage was based on her understanding of the Selfish Gene book cover.  (according to her, that's the gene that makes us act selfishly and therefore evolve)
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 07 2011,09:45



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Did  de News really just get excited over a new book on evolution because it knocks over her cartoon understanding of "Darwinism"?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I have to say that after following the "debate" for several decades (starting with Gould's essays), there is little in the Koonin book that I've never heard of.

But it's a relentless pounding of creationism and ID, even though it never mentions them in the body of the book.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 07 2011,10:08

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 06 2011,17:57)
There are many caveats; academic performance, job performance and income are all complexly and multiply determined. IQ has a relationship with each of them, stronger in some instances than in others.

From this DeNudes concludes:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
within a normal range - there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


*Facepalm*
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DeNews' proof that IQ does not correlate to achievement:  Look at all the blogs I have achieved!
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 07 2011,15:49

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 07 2011,04:27)
Isn't a job that gives      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
them enough resources to follow their own passions
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

already quite some achievement?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As often before, I return to Kliban, the master:


Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 07 2011,15:57

I like Kilban, new to me! Found this, seems relevant to ID.


Posted by: fnxtr on Sep. 07 2011,16:21

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Sep. 07 2011,13:57)
I like Kilban, new to me! Found this, seems relevant to ID.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I was just thinking ID is like that scene in Sleeper where Allen and Keaton are asked to check the cell structure of the clone. Hilarity (or at least a mild chuckle) ensues.
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 07 2011,17:15

This one reminds me of everyone's favourite "journalist":


Posted by: Tom Ames on Sep. 08 2011,02:57

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 07 2011,08:08)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 06 2011,17:57)
There are many caveats; academic performance, job performance and income are all complexly and multiply determined. IQ has a relationship with each of them, stronger in some instances than in others.

From this DeNudes concludes:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
within a normal range - there is no systematic relationship between IQ and achievement.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


*Facepalm*
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DeNews' proof that IQ does not correlate to achievement:  Look at all the blogs I have achieved!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


She also could have cited the example of one-time PCID contributor Christopher Langan. (Hi Genie!)
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 08 2011,03:50

< Thomas Cudworth criticises > Venema/BioLogos:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dennis Venema, the “heavy hitter” of Biologos when it comes to evolutionary theory — hands up, professors of evolutionary biology at Chicago, Harvard, Stanford, Columbia, Yale, Oxford, Cambridge, etc., if you have heard of Dennis Venema — has recently issued some remarks about ID in an interview.
[a lot of whining]
The moneybags who fund Biologos would be wiser to start a whole new theology/science project, one run by people who are much more cognizant of the very latest developments in biological science and the very latest developments in post-graduate-level theology. And, above all, one run by people who honor the basic academic principle that one should make sure one understands a theoretical position before one criticizes it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Requirement to criticise ID: Being a professor of evolutionary biology at a top notch university who understands the "theoretical position" of ID, i.e. pretends that there is one.

Requirement to criticise evolutionary theory: Being able to type. Or, if that's too difficult, copy & paste.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 08 2011,11:49

< CY >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I attended a Christian College (now University) that had a tendency to seek out professors who had some secular academic credentials. They ended up in one instance courting Tony Campolo in Sociology from the UofP. No friend of Darwin, though. So there is a way. Of course, I don’t really know if there aren’t any open Darwinists there, but perhaps some secret Darwinists.

I wouldn’t be surprised if practically every Christian college has it’s secret Darwinist, just as practically every secular college has it’s open Christian.

What’s really alarming though is the open Darwinist in a decidedly Evangelical college. This is the sort of practice that eventually causes a college to abandon it’s Christian roots.
Then the foundation is lost and it becomes another secular college like all the others that have gone before: Princeton (Presbyterian), Yale (Congregationalist), Dartmouth (Puritan), to name a few. Well funded colleges to be sure, but not exactly Christian anymore. Some discernment is in order.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You can't make stuff like that up.

"Secular academic credentials" in a prof, outrageous!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 08 2011,12:21



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I wouldn’t be surprised if practically every Christian college has it’s secret Darwinist, just as practically every secular college has it’s open Christian.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Its a mystery.
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 08 2011,13:22

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 08 2011,10:21)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I wouldn’t be surprised if practically every Christian college has it’s secret Darwinist, just as practically every secular college has it’s open Christian.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Its a mystery.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I can't wait to see Expelled II: Bigger, Longer and Uncut.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 08 2011,14:46

News!



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Jumping genes” a mechanism of evolution?
September 8, 2011 Posted by News under Evolution, Genetics, News
No Comments

Definitely an idea worth pursuing, but what they must now demonstrate is permanent, functional improvements resulting from this process.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Clue for the clueless:  Look up Barbara McClintock.  It was pursued long ago, with fabulous results.  This is news to DeNews.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 09 2011,18:32

< Lewontin >!
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 09 2011,22:24



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
why-the-mathematical-beauty-we-find-in-the-cosmos
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Beauty is in the reaction of the one observing it, it isn't intrinsic to the object being observed.

Or am I being picky?

Henry
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 10 2011,01:43



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
3.1
GilDodgen
< September 9, 2011 at 9:53 pm >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Is musical ability heritable? I’ve read that it does tend to run in families.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



The mixing and matching of existing genetic information (which obviously occurs) is not what Darwinism attempts to explain. It attempts to explain the origin of completely novel, never-before-seen information.

As far as musical ability is concerned, I believe I got some of that, but it definitely doesn’t run in the family. It appears to have appeared out of nowhere in my family lineage.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The obvious question Gildo doesn't dare to ask? Why did he obviously not inherrit the intellectual capacity that run in the family? It appears to have vanished into nowhere.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 10 2011,04:22

< Nick Matzke sounds just a tiny bit exasperated. >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Even under an ID hypothesis, plant carnivory ought to have some function, right? It’s not exactly revolutionary to suggest that the function of *carnivory*, i.e. *eating things*, is probably to *get nutrients*. Gimme a freakin’ break here!

The only reason you guys are objecting to these basic points is that you just hate Darwin and somehow have got it in your head that the association between carnivorous plants and low-nutrient situations is some kind of evolutionary/Darwinist conspiracy. But that just ain’t so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you follow the discussion, that's exactly what's going on. In essence, they're arguing that there's no benefit for the plant in being carnivorous.  But no one asks why, if that were true, a supposedly intelligent designer would've made them carnivorous. Probably because god the designer works in mysterious ways.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 10 2011,08:37

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 09 2011,19:32)
[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/why-the-mathematical-beauty-we-find-in-the-cosmos-is-an-objective-fact-which-points-to-a-d

esigner/comment-page-1/#comment-398797]Lewontin[/URL]!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If he weren't so sanctimonious, condescending, and willfully ignorant, one could almost feel some sympathy for kairosfocus.  He's so blinded by Leweontin's statement that "Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door." that he is actually incapable of understanding that the following sentences explain exactly why this is the case:  "The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that miracles may happen."

When you understand the scientific method, kairosfocus, you will be able to understand Lewontin.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 10 2011,09:36



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When you understand the scientific method, kairosfocus, you will be able to understand Lewontin.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That's about as likely as KF ever coming to grip with the concept that quote mining is a form of lying.

ETA:

I wonder if Lewontin has been added to the quote mine project, and I wonder how UD would fare in an update of the quote mine sweepstakes.

< http://blog.darwincentral.org/2006....of-dawn >
Posted by: J-Dog on Sep. 10 2011,10:16



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Probably because god the designer works in mysterious ways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Yes, Gordon E Mullings of Montserrat is thankful that He made the world safe for the cowardly leeches that inhabit UD! :)
Posted by: Badger3k on Sep. 10 2011,10:47

Quote (JLT @ Sep. 10 2011,04:22)
< Nick Matzke sounds just a tiny bit exasperated. >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Even under an ID hypothesis, plant carnivory ought to have some function, right? It’s not exactly revolutionary to suggest that the function of *carnivory*, i.e. *eating things*, is probably to *get nutrients*. Gimme a freakin’ break here!

The only reason you guys are objecting to these basic points is that you just hate Darwin and somehow have got it in your head that the association between carnivorous plants and low-nutrient situations is some kind of evolutionary/Darwinist conspiracy. But that just ain’t so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you follow the discussion, that's exactly what's going on. In essence, they're arguing that there's no benefit for the plant in being carnivorous.  But no one asks why, if that were true, a supposedly intelligent designer would've made them carnivorous. Probably because god the designer works in mysterious ways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If The Fall could make those nice plant-eating T-rexes turn into carnivorous beasts, then surely the plants had to join them.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 10 2011,11:05

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 10 2011,09:36)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When you understand the scientific method, kairosfocus, you will be able to understand Lewontin.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That's about as likely as KF ever coming to grip with the concept that quote mining is a form of lying.

ETA:

I wonder if Lewontin has been added to the quote mine project, and I wonder how UD would fare in an update of the quote mine sweepstakes.

< http://blog.darwincentral.org/2006.......of-dawn >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't suppose anybody has those quotes as a CSV/XML document or similar?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 10 2011,11:39

I have the whole thing in an Access database, including the program I used to crawl the internet and gather the statistics.

But the quotes are in a table that could be exported.

Edit:

What I actually have is snippets from the quote mine project. Just enough of the original quote to make a reliable Google search.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 10 2011,12:30

Great! Will PM you.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 10 2011,22:40

Hey < Denyse >, did you ever wonder why < pandasthumb.org > has been named after the < pandas's thumb >?
Somebody may suggest some reading to her that even on her computer is only one click away: < Michel Laurin, Marc Girondot and Armand de Ricqlès (2000): Early tetrapod evolution >.

ETA: links corrected
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 10 2011,23:26

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 11 2011,04:40)
Hey < Denyse >, did you ever wonder why < pandasthumb.org > has been named after the < pandas's thumb >?
Somebody may suggest some reading to her that even on her computer is only one click away: < Michel Laurin, Marc Girondot and Armand de Ricqlès (2000): Early tetrapod evolution >.

ETA: links corrected
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DO'L:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The five-fingered limb is much easier to subtract from than add to. That’s the fundamental problem with Darwinian evolution. There is an original law, probably based on design.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Or maybe there's common descent.
Posted by: JLT on Sep. 10 2011,23:55

Oh, goody, I was waiting for this.
< Gods iPod >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ID proponents SHOULD be “truthers”, because both have come to their conclusions from following the evidence, not popular, or an expert’s, opinion.

Please stop the perforative use of the term “conspiracy theorist”. Every Law Enforcement Officer is a conspiracy theorist, and they arrest people for conspiracy often.

Some truthers might be a bit insane, but the one’s leading the movement are mostly scientists. www.ae911truth.org
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Come on, UD, only one truther? There must be more!

BTW, isn't it great that he tries to make the truthers seem reasonable by claiming that they're all scientists?
Paragwinn:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Actually, ae911truth.org is led by architects and engineers, not scientists.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I LOL'ed.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 11 2011,10:44

< DrBot responds to Joseph > and shows UD what reality looks like:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to the current theory of evolution ALL genetic changes are accidents/ mistakes/ errors.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I’m not aware of anything in evolutionary theory that says that the goal of reproduction is an exact copy. What is required for evolution to happen is actually reproduction with variance, so genetic changes serve a purpose – i.e. they are not accidents, mistakes or errors in the sense that they are unintended – but they are all random with respect to fitness.

There is an important difference between randomly generated, but necessary, variety and just unwanted errors.

Evolution depends on variety so by definition variety in its self is not an error, or to put it another way – you don’t understand evolutionary theory.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's gonna leave a mark.

(Emphasis mine.)
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 11 2011,11:45

Joseph responds by channeling a 6 year old:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
So to put it another way you don’t understand evolutionary theory and you do not understand ID.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 11 2011,12:00

Perhaps Joe can point to a specific example of a genomic change that was not the result of a stochastic process.

An example not from genetic engineering by humans.

I'm particularly interested in how a designer knows in advance the results of a large change.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Sep. 11 2011,13:11

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 11 2011,12:00)
Perhaps Joe can point to a specific example of a genomic change that was not the result of a stochastic process.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


He already did.







On his blog.







You are just too stupid to understand.







Assface.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 11 2011,14:16

Well, UD has managed to establish one truth. I they malign and libel a major player, they will get more than two posts in response.

Watch out when they figure this out.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 11 2011,14:21

< Speaking of gaming, >, StephenB's "Jump To Conclusions" armor is pierced by Elizabeth's "Perform Real Investigative Work" battle-axe in UDville:

StephenB

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
So you agree, in principle, that one can legitimately draw an inference to design by ruling out natural causes?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Elizabeth

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
No, I think you can legitimately infer design by testing design hypotheses.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 11 2011,14:56

bornagain77 has identified a tool in the Darwinist Conspiracy To Supress Evidence Regarding The Cambrian Explosion: < Fossil Collectors! >
ba77  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
David, perhaps it was a case of ‘cognitive dissonance’ on [Charles Doolittle] Walcott’s part, but none-the-less, despite the level to which Walcott suppressed that which was so surprising to him that it caused him to collect 60,000 specimens, it is certainly a clear example of a inherent materialistic bias for which we have all paid a severe price in the setting back science for several decades
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


David W. Gibson  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Not at all. Walcott was a collector. He squirreled away FAR more specimens than that; he collected fossils of any and all kinds from everywhere he went. He was not ‘cognitively dissonent’, any more than any other collector. He did not “suppress” anything, he simply collected it. Collectors do that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Evidently, museum drawers are the Vanishing Cabinets of Conspiratorial Magic.

bracketted name clarification mine.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 11 2011,15:23

Stupid man should have shredded the evidence. Conspirators never learn.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 11 2011,21:59

If < Joseph > would only explore the sites he links to he would know that < nature EDUCATION's > < Scitable > does not support his views at all.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 11 2011,23:24

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 11 2011,21:59)
If < Joseph > would only explore the sites he links to he would know that < nature EDUCATION's > < Scitable > does not support his views at all.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


But that's true of everything posted on UD unless it comes from a creationist website.

What you have to understand is the the authors hide their ID sympathies in Bible Code.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 12 2011,07:33

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 11 2011,23:24)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 11 2011,21:59)
If < Joseph > would only explore the sites he links to he would know that < nature EDUCATION's > < Scitable > does not support his views at all.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


But that's true of everything posted on UD unless it comes from a creationist website.

What you have to understand is the the authors hide their ID sympathies in Bible Code.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


No.  Those websites DO support Joe's views on ID.

They just don't realize it yet.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 12 2011,08:03

< >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,10:56

Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 12 2011,11:13

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,10:56)
Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's everywhere now.  The same cookies that maintain your login also tracks your posting habits.

I've been researching mattresses and every website with ads now has mattress ads.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,12:39

Get rich quick:

Over at UD there's a $1000 prize (judges not named) for "anyone who is able to demonstrate that the design of a living thing by an intelligent agent necessarily requires a supernatural act."

No prize is being offered for anyone who can calculate the CSI of any living organism.

No prize is being offered for anyone who can cite an instance of design being implemented, other than by humans. No prize for what. No prize for when, No prize for how.

No prize is being offered for explaining where or how a finite (non-supernatural) designer stores the 10^500 bits of information regarding fitness landscapes and coding sequences that would be required to design without using some form of GA. (Assuming, of course, that fitness landscapes really are as rugged as claimed by ID advocates.)

< Linky >
Posted by: Alan Fox on Sep. 12 2011,12:39

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 12 2011,06:13)
   
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,10:56)
Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's everywhere now.  The same cookies that maintain your login also tracks your posting habits.

I've been researching mattresses and every website with ads now has mattress ads.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That doesn't explain why I keep getting an ad for a muslim bride, though, does it, as I've never researched this topic? Though the concept does have a certain novelty appeal!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,13:04



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That doesn't explain why I keep getting an ad for a muslim bride
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That would be the mind reading component, still in Beta.
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 12 2011,13:13

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 12 2011,09:13)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,10:56)
Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's everywhere now.  The same cookies that maintain your login also tracks your posting habits.

I've been researching mattresses and every website with ads now has mattress ads.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gordon Gobshite must be seeing some interesting ads, after all those mis-spelled (ahem) searches.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 12 2011,13:36

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 12 2011,10:13)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,10:56)
Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's everywhere now.  The same cookies that maintain your login also tracks your posting habits.

I've been researching mattresses and every website with ads now has mattress ads.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


For that kind of problem, the appropriate strategy is to sleep on it.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 12 2011,13:41

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 12 2011,11:36)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 12 2011,10:13)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,10:56)
Recent research reveals that if I type a brand name into a post anywhere on the net, an ad for than brand will show up on UD the next time I visit, or soon thereafter.

Sony, iPod, Nikon, testing...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's everywhere now.  The same cookies that maintain your login also tracks your posting habits.

I've been researching mattresses and every website with ads now has mattress ads.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


For that kind of problem, the appropriate strategy is to sleep on it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And then spring into action!
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 12 2011,13:50

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,12:39)
Get rich quick:

Over at UD there's a $1000 prize (judges not named) for "anyone who is able to demonstrate that the design of a living thing by an intelligent agent necessarily requires a supernatural act."

No prize is being offered for anyone who can calculate the CSI of any living organism.

No prize is being offered for anyone who can cite an instance of design being implemented, other than by humans. No prize for what. No prize for when, No prize for how.

No prize is being offered for explaining where or how a finite (non-supernatural) designer stores the 10^500 bits of information regarding fitness landscapes and coding sequences that would be required to design without using some form of GA. (Assuming, of course, that fitness landscapes really are as rugged as claimed by ID advocates.)

< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,14:06

I'm interested in how gil and ba77 will approach this, since they assume the designer is god. They obviously have no problem with infinite resources.

I once argued with gpuccio that design is impossible without evolution, because no finite resource can predict protein folding in less time than folding itself.

He asserted there had to be some structure to folding that would provide a shortcut.

In the absence of evidence I doubt there will be a look up table for functional sequences that is smaller than the number of particles in the universe

That, of course, ignores the minor matter of regulation, and the ecological problems encountered and requiring adaptation.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Sep. 12 2011,14:22

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,14:06)
I'm interested in how gil and ba77 will approach this, since they assume the designer is god. They obviously have no problem with infinite resources.
.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'd be more interested in StephenB's attempt. Isn't the main part of his schtick that methodological naturalism, by limiting itself to natural explanations, is attempting to discriminate against ID?  By his reasoning, supernatural causation is *REQUIRED* in design theory.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,14:26

Quote (carlsonjok @ Sep. 12 2011,14:22)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,14:06)
I'm interested in how gil and ba77 will approach this, since they assume the designer is god. They obviously have no problem with infinite resources.
.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'd be more interested in StephenB's attempt. Isn't the main part of his schtick that methodological naturalism, by limiting itself to natural explanations, is attempting to discriminate against ID?  By his reasoning, supernatural causation is *REQUIRED* in design theory.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The big tent does not cover any foolishly consistent hobgoblins.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,15:02

DrBot opines:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As a general comment though, this looks like a challenge to ID more than it is to evolutionary scientists. I doubt any evo biologists would have an issue with the idea of an intelligent agent being able to design a living thing. Perhaps a more pertinent and direct challenge would be to show that supernatural intervention is not required to create life – when no material intelligent agent already exists – otherwise it is just inviting infinite regress (is a supernatural event required to produce the non supernatural intelligence that designed the life or do we invoke another material designer as the designer of the designer)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This requires a bit of head spinning. What kind of non-supernatural entity designs the first life?

If none is required, how is this different from naturalism? If it is required, the contest is won.

ETA:

The loudspeaker in the ceiling just deleted most of DrBot's post, specifically the part I quoted above.

< Linky >

ETA moar:

DrBot's entire post, before being censored by Barry:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Barry, thanks for the reply, I think some things still need clarification. For a start, I asked about non material minds and in reply you said:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Therefore, I am going to make a bold assumption for the sake of argument. Let us assume for the sake of argument that intelligent agents do NOT have free will, i.e., that the tertium quid does not exist. Let us assume instead, for the sake of argument, that the cause of all activity of all intelligent agents can be reduced to physical causes.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You responded with a statement about free will where you assume that it cannot exist in systems which operate according to the laws of physics. I don't have a problem with the idea that a material mind has free will, or conversely I can see that a non-material mind could equally lack free will. Free will in this context is not related to the issue of how 'mind' is defined.

Would the simplest thing be to state, as a premise for the competition, that a mind, intentionality and consciousness can all be produced by matter?

As a general comment though, this looks like a challenge to ID more than it is to evolutionary scientists. I doubt any evo biologists would have an issue with the idea of an intelligent agent being able to design a living thing. Perhaps a more pertinent and direct challenge would be to show that supernatural intervention is not required to create life - when no material intelligent agent already exists - otherwise it is just inviting infinite regress (is a supernatural event required to produce the non supernatural intelligence that designed the life or do we invoke another material designer as the designer of the designer)

This is the root question isn't it - how was life created, not how or in what way does it evolve once it exists.

I won't take up the challenge because I don't think that a supernatural act is required to produce life, most scientists I know would probably agree, but I look forward to seeing some of the ID supporters taking it up, and thanks for issuing the challenge (I mean that sincerely)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: carlsonjok on Sep. 12 2011,15:28

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,15:02)
DrBot opines:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As a general comment though, this looks like a challenge to ID more than it is to evolutionary scientists. I doubt any evo biologists would have an issue with the idea of an intelligent agent being able to design a living thing. Perhaps a more pertinent and direct challenge would be to show that supernatural intervention is not required to create life – when no material intelligent agent already exists – otherwise it is just inviting infinite regress (is a supernatural event required to produce the non supernatural intelligence that designed the life or do we invoke another material designer as the designer of the designer)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This requires a bit of head spinning. What kind of non-supernatural entity designs the first life?

If none is required, how is this different from naturalism? If it is required, the contest is won.

ETA:

The loudspeaker in the ceiling just deleted most of DrBot's post, specifically the part I quoted above.

< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hardly surprising.  Barry seems to construct elaborate rhetorical traps in his mind and can't seem to handle it when his presumed opponent deviates from the script Barry so helpfully wrote for him/her.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,15:46

It does seem natural that Barry would be a bit twitchy about the question of whether consciousness exists. that would seem to hit too close to home.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,17:31

No surprisingly, KF declares victory.

In doing so he explains why the lawyer Barry deleted DrBot's post.

The deleted post pointed out the infinite regress of designers, which cannot be resolved without invoking a supernatural first designer.

Either that or conceding that a designer is not necessary.

So not only is Barry Arrington a dishonest scum for deleting an embarrassing post, but he lied about his reason.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 12 2011,19:51

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 12 2011,13:39)
Get rich quick:

Over at UD there's a $1000 prize (judges not named) for "anyone who is able to demonstrate that the design of a living thing by an intelligent agent necessarily requires a supernatural act."

No prize is being offered for anyone who can calculate the CSI of any living organism.

No prize is being offered for anyone who can cite an instance of design being implemented, other than by humans. No prize for what. No prize for when, No prize for how.

No prize is being offered for explaining where or how a finite (non-supernatural) designer stores the 10^500 bits of information regarding fitness landscapes and coding sequences that would be required to design without using some form of GA. (Assuming, of course, that fitness landscapes really are as rugged as claimed by ID advocates.)

< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is "< Cosmological ID >" (e.g. arguments vis fine tuning, cosmological origins, and the necessity of an uncreated creator, etc.) still considered ID at UD?

If so, I'd be interested in Barry's description of a "natural" designer capable of, say, intelligently fine tuning cosmological constants to attain a desired universe.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 12 2011,20:11

KF gave the game away. Barry considers humans to be non supernatural designers capable of designing life from scratch. KF just now said that Venter's work is "proof of concept."

Someone should require him to make that explicit, because lots of UDers doubt that.

If so, the solution to origin of life is solved, in concept. And  the supernaturalists at UD can eat Barry's dirt.

Of course this involves an infinite regress, but if you mention that, Barry will delete your post.

Someone should sue UD for the prize money and force them to declare under oath that the designer isn't god.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 13 2011,08:39

KF would never poison the well:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Spell this: S-A-U-L A-L-I-N-S-K-Y distortion and demonisation of design thought .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 13 2011,08:43



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
See those references to scriptures and to issues on interpretation thereof?

See the persistent unresponsiveness to correction?

Utterly revealing.

GEM of TKI
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




Good to know that KF will be jumping all over any future poster on UD that dares to mention religion or atheism.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 13 2011,11:43

As if < Jonathan M's post > isn't ludicrous enough < Granville Sewell who published a more or less identical paper at least three times > thinks he has to add the < following >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Jonathan,

Good post. I like the comments “to have written 800 papers is regarded as something to boast about rather than being shameful” and “with far fewer papers being published, reviewers, grant committees and promotion committees might be able to read the papers, not just count them.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 13 2011,12:05

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 13 2011,11:43)
As if < Jonathan M's post > isn't ludicrous enough < Granville Sewell who published a more or less identical paper at least three times > thinks he has to add the < following >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Jonathan,

Good post. I like the comments “to have written 800 papers is regarded as something to boast about rather than being shameful” and “with far fewer papers being published, reviewers, grant committees and promotion committees might be able to read the papers, not just count them.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
led to a situation where any paper, however bad, can now be printed in a journal that claims to be peer-reviewed.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He is referring to bio-complexity, isn't he?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 13 2011,14:00

Stupid UD News Headline, issue 138,476:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Philosophers deride neuroscience attempts to attack free will
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Of course, no derision to be seen.  Only D'Oh!-leary thinks that way.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 13 2011,14:32

DeNews asks a question:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Memo to CNN: After the Ardi and Ida pfffft’s, what religion do we join, so we can not believe in your latest babe, Sediba?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Nothing wrong with Ardi as a fossil, only certain IDiots who don't realize how many design events are required for homonins - they just engage in denial.  Ida is an example of a sparse record, of course there is going to be different ideas on where it is in the tree of life.  

All D'Oh-leary can do is:

Paper 1 says X about evolution, paper 2 says Y, so paper X is WRONG, therefore evolution is wrong, therefore DEZIGN!!!!11!

What you should do is get your science news from journal articles.  Of course if you tried...

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Wanda: [after Otto breaks in on Wanda and Archie in Archie's flat and hangs him out the window] I was dealing with something delicate, Otto. I'm setting up a guy who's incredibly important to us, who's going to tell me where the loot is and if they're going to come and arrest you. And you come loping in like Rambo without a jockstrap and you dangle him out a fifth-floor window. Now, was that smart? Was it shrewd? Was it good tactics? Or was it stupid?

Otto West: Don't call me stupid.

Wanda: Oh, right! To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people! I've known sheep that could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs. But you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it. Now let me correct you on a couple of things, OK? Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Remember Densy's blunder in saying that a circular phylogenetic tree diagram was not a tree?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 13 2011,14:59

DeNews certainly can't be accused of a "Interested in the Truth"-er:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Ties with anti-Semitic Troother show that the Darwin lobby is failing
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.  She could go further and point out that the guy is really big on conspiracies, not just 9-11.
Posted by: Robin on Sep. 13 2011,15:13

D'oh-neese is an evolved species of ichneumon - she paralyzes her victims with inane claims and plants embroys of asinine ideas that will consume the victim's mind.

Really. Just stop reading her before you become nothing but a barely conscious shell as her vile spawn eats your mind from the inside out.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 13 2011,15:44



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He has some rather strong associations in the conspiracy world with people who blame Israel for 9/11.

Just looking briefly at the truther sewer, he might have disassociated himself from that. Or not. It's difficult to tell who's in and who's out. What a mess.

I have a personal reason for thinking the Trade Center theorists are full of shit. They talk about the fire not being hot enough.

I live a few blocks from a church that burned a few years ago. It had a frame made of steel I-beams which bent like cooked spaghetti in the fire. There was no additional fuel. It was just a routine fire.


Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 13 2011,16:08

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,13:44)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He has some rather strong associations in the conspiracy world with people who blame Israel for 9/11.

Just looking briefly at the truther sewer, he might have disassociated himself from that. Or not. It's difficult to tell who's in and who's out. What a mess.

I have a personal reason for thinking the Trade Center theorists are full of shit. They talk about the fire not being hot enough.

I live a few blocks from a church that burned a few years ago. It had a frame made of steel I-beams which bent like cooked spaghetti in the fire. There was no additional fuel. It was just a routine fire.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, obviously the CIA/Illuminati/Elders of Zion/Manchester United FC planted incendiary explosives around the beams when the place was built, so they could burn it down years later to discredit the conspiracy theories they knew would arise after they burned down the WTC.  

It's the only logical explanation.
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 13 2011,16:36

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,15:44)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He has some rather strong associations in the conspiracy world with people who blame Israel for 9/11.

Just looking briefly at the truther sewer, he might have disassociated himself from that. Or not. It's difficult to tell who's in and who's out. What a mess.

I have a personal reason for thinking the Trade Center theorists are full of shit. They talk about the fire not being hot enough.

I live a few blocks from a church that burned a few years ago. It had a frame made of steel I-beams which bent like cooked spaghetti in the fire. There was no additional fuel. It was just a routine fire.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, please don't tell me that anyone besides Rosie O'Donnell is repeating that crap! And geez, doesn't Denyse know that skeptic/atheist/"Darwinist" Michael Shermer has been one of the most outspoken voices against 9-11 conspiracies? (Of course not.)

This stuff depresses me as much as creationism does. Oh, speaking of which do you know that the Great Depression was planned?  ;)  (From a local cable access show in the 1990s. Blarg! )
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 13 2011,16:38

I swore I'd never go back there, but like a moth ...

DrREC wrote:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Copying Mussorgsky’s Gates of Kiev, and throwing in an unplayed (Ventner’s addition doesn’t code, or do anything) stanza doesn’t make me a composter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



No, but participating in the comment thread at UD sure does!
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 13 2011,17:05

< Lewontin >!
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 13 2011,17:10

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,15:44)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He has some rather strong associations in the conspiracy world with people who blame Israel for 9/11.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Unless the JFK assassination and Paul Wellstone plane crash are also widely averred to be Jewish conspiracies, I think not.  Fetzer is a "OUR government did it" sort of fellow.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 13 2011,17:27



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Lifton seems to be upset that I have endorsed a book, STRANGER THAN FICTION, which traces the history of Zionism from the late 1800s to the present day and advances evidence, not only of the history of terrorism practiced by those who wanted to create the State of Israel, but of Israeli involvement in the events of 9/11. I had independently concluded Israel was involved in 9/11 before I discovered this book. I must admit that I had no clear concept of Zionism until relatively recently, when I began inviting experts on the subject onto my radio program, "The Real Deal", including Stephen Lendman (13 March 2010), Barry Chamish (30 March 2010), and Elias Davidsson (10 July 2010).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.p....c=16026 >

This stuff is depressingly easy to find.


ETA:

< http://www.globalresearch.ca/article....4A.html >
Posted by: Ptaylor on Sep. 13 2011,19:52

I happen to work with a bunch of journalists. On the whole they are quite picky about getting things right. Such as avoiding < typos in headlines >.

Apparently it is not a universal trait.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 13 2011,21:43

Quote (Ptaylor @ Sep. 13 2011,19:52)
I happen to work with a bunch of journalists. On the whole they are quite picky about getting things right. Such as avoiding < typos in headlines >.

Apparently it is not a universal trait.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


But if DeNews were really picky about getting things right, she'd never post anything, and then where would we be?
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 13 2011,21:46



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But if DeNews were really picky about getting things right, she'd never post anything, and then where would we be?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Hanging out in train station pubs with Louis, obviously.

Been there, done that.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 13 2011,22:24



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I swore I'd never go back there, but like a moth ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A moth attracted to the sweater?
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 13 2011,22:47

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 13 2011,20:43)
But if DeNews were really picky about getting things right, she'd never post anything, and then where would we be?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In a lab doing science?
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 14 2011,01:54

< Gildo calls out the "Darwinists": >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The claim has been made that ID proponents are just “creationists in cheap tuxedos.”
[snip]

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Therefore, I’ll make the claim that Darwinists are atheists in expensive tuxedos.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



bolding mine
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,02:21

Didn't someone at UD just bet a thousand dollars that ID didn't require god?
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 14 2011,06:52

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,20:05)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 13 2011,11:43)
As if < Jonathan M's post > isn't ludicrous enough < Granville Sewell who published a more or less identical paper at least three times > thinks he has to add the < following >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Jonathan,

Good post. I like the comments “to have written 800 papers is regarded as something to boast about rather than being shameful” and “with far fewer papers being published, reviewers, grant committees and promotion committees might be able to read the papers, not just count them.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
led to a situation where any paper, however bad, can now be printed in a journal that claims to be peer-reviewed.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He is referring to bio-complexity, isn't he?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yep objectivism bolted to a post modernist fact free truthiness.

Or if you like thruth free factlessness.

Where no test that survives the scientific principle survives creationist/ID mendaciousness.
Posted by: Woodbine on Sep. 14 2011,07:06

Dembski has calved more 'journals' than papers, near enough.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 14 2011,07:21

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 14 2011,09:54)
< Gildo calls out the "Darwinists": >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The claim has been made that ID proponents are just “creationists in cheap tuxedos.”
[snip]

What’s good for the goose is good for the gander. Therefore, I’ll make the claim that Darwinists are atheists in expensive tuxedos.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



bolding mine
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So Gildo's complaint is we have higher priced tailors?

They can only afford to shop at The Good Samaritans?

Creationists are driven by out of date fashions?


Is poor dress sense correlated to low IQ and earnings capacity?


Oh well charity begins at home, so that unibrow creationist whatever his name is could hold an auction so Gildo can get a decent jacket.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 14 2011,07:25

Quote (Woodbine @ Sep. 14 2011,15:06)
Dembski has calved more 'journals' than papers, near enough.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Don't know about that

...... but he has certainly spawned more acronyms than TV crime writers
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 14 2011,10:23

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,17:27)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Lifton seems to be upset that I have endorsed a book, STRANGER THAN FICTION, which traces the history of Zionism from the late 1800s to the present day and advances evidence, not only of the history of terrorism practiced by those who wanted to create the State of Israel, but of Israeli involvement in the events of 9/11. I had independently concluded Israel was involved in 9/11 before I discovered this book. I must admit that I had no clear concept of Zionism until relatively recently, when I began inviting experts on the subject onto my radio program, "The Real Deal", including Stephen Lendman (13 March 2010), Barry Chamish (30 March 2010), and Elias Davidsson (10 July 2010).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.p....c=16026 >

This stuff is depressingly easy to find.


ETA:

< http://www.globalresearch.ca/article....4A.html >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That is definitive!  Ah well, it should get some mention in the wikipedia article on him, at least.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,10:31

I'm afraid it dominates the Wiki article on Fetzer. It defines his Wiki image.

In fact there's nothing else on the wiki page except an appeal for cleanup.

I know lots of people who criticize Israel, but none that think Israel had anything to do with 9/11. Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 14 2011,11:23



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I would call wrong on that one. Israel support doesn't piss off Arabs. It pisses off Muslims. There is quite a few Arabs that happen to be Jews as well.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,11:27

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 14 2011,11:23)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I would call wrong on that one. Israel support doesn't piss off Arabs. It pisses off Muslims. There is quite a few Arabs that happen to be Jews as well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting. I stand corrected.

Would many Jewish Arabs be living in the countries that seem to be supporting militant Muslims? Could you speculate on the percentage or the raw numbers?
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 14 2011,11:37

I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste
ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 14 2011,12:04

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 14 2011,10:31)
I'm afraid it dominates the Wiki article on Fetzer. It defines his Wiki image.

In fact there's nothing else on the wiki page except an appeal for cleanup.

I know lots of people who criticize Israel, but none that think Israel had anything to do with 9/11. Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A text search of the wikipedia Fetzer article:

Israel 0 mentions
Jew 0 mentions
semitic 0 mentions

That is what I was going by, plus a brief google search and reading some of the radio transcripts, but as we have seen my goggle-fu is weak..

The heading of the wikipedia article notes that it is extensively autobiographical, so it is no doubt problematic in more than one way.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 14 2011,12:05

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 14 2011,11:27)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 14 2011,11:23)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I would call wrong on that one. Israel support doesn't piss off Arabs. It pisses off Muslims. There is quite a few Arabs that happen to be Jews as well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting. I stand corrected.

Would many Jewish Arabs be living in the countries that seem to be supporting militant Muslims? Could you speculate on the percentage or the raw numbers?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Actually, there are many Arabic Christians in the region.
Posted by: Alan Fox on Sep. 14 2011,12:06

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,06:37)
I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste



ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hope you're not planning any cyber stalking!

Search for "Post Darwinist" and check her profile where she lists a contact email.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,12:11

I spend as little intellectual effort on politics as possible, so my opinions are not worth much.

My understanding is that the Arabs view Israel the way Americans might view a Texas or California that seceded and  affiliated with Cuba or Venezuela.

If Muslims in Pakistan hate Israel it is probably in sympathy with the Arab nations.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 14 2011,16:32

Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 14 2011,12:06)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,06:37)
I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste




ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hope you're not planning any cyber stalking!

Search for "Post Darwinist" and check her profile where she lists a contact email.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask a question, get a typical non-answer.  Thanks, Useless.
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 14 2011,16:53

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 13 2011,21:44)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Of course, no evidence the guy is antisemitic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He has some rather strong associations in the conspiracy world with people who blame Israel for 9/11.

Just looking briefly at the truther sewer, he might have disassociated himself from that. Or not. It's difficult to tell who's in and who's out. What a mess.

I have a personal reason for thinking the Trade Center theorists are full of shit. They talk about the fire not being hot enough.

I live a few blocks from a church that burned a few years ago. It had a frame made of steel I-beams which bent like cooked spaghetti in the fire. There was no additional fuel. It was just a routine fire.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmmm. Where exactly were you when this fire took place?

Were there any reports of hemorrhagic fevers in the locality?
Posted by: Glen Davidson on Sep. 14 2011,16:57

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,16:32)
Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 14 2011,12:06)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,06:37)
I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.

     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste






ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hope you're not planning any cyber stalking!

Search for "Post Darwinist" and check her profile where she lists a contact email.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask a question, get a typical non-answer.  Thanks, Useless.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


denyseoleary@gmail.com

It was at her blog site.  I can only assume that it's current, but you'll have to find out.  I have no intention to try to contact her.

Glen Davidson
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,17:02



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Hmmm. Where exactly were you when this fire took place?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Home in bed with the covers over my head. Nobody saw me and you can't prove it. Besides, it was Christmas eve. Maybe Santa did it.

Seriously, the old building was kind of tacky in a 1960s sort of way. The new building is much nicer. Not that that means anything. It is kind of curious that they had no smoke detector.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 14 2011,17:21

Quote (Glen Davidson @ Sep. 14 2011,16:57)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,16:32)
 
Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 14 2011,12:06)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,06:37)
I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.

     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste







ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hope you're not planning any cyber stalking!

Search for "Post Darwinist" and check her profile where she lists a contact email.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask a question, get a typical non-answer.  Thanks, Useless.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


denyseoleary@gmail.com

It was at her blog site.  I can only assume that it's current, but you'll have to find out.  I have no intention to try to contact her.

Glen Davidson
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry.  That might have been misconstrued.

I did e-mail O'Leary.  I got, from her, a typical non-answer.  She is... indeed... useless.

I apologize to those I might have offended here.
Posted by: J-Dog on Sep. 14 2011,18:21



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It is kind of curious that they had no smoke detector.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Curious?  Or planned that way by the Darwinists and/or Cabal of CBEB's????

What's curious is that the dog did nothing in the night...
Posted by: Alan Fox on Sep. 14 2011,18:47

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,12:21)
 
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Sep. 14 2011,16:57)
 
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,16:32)
   
Quote (Alan Fox @ Sep. 14 2011,12:06)
     
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 14 2011,06:37)
I don't often go to UD.  Raw idiocy is just too much these days.  But I had a question that only UD could answer (no I didn't find an answer).

But this on the home page struck me as... curious.

         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Do intelligent desgn theorists need the supernatural – just to leave room for a little mystery in life?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

http://www.uncommondescent.com/origin-of-life/do-intelligent-deign-theorists-need-the-supernatural-just-to-leave-room-for-a-little-myste










ry-in-life/

Perhaps intelligence should use a little more intelligent design.

Does anyone have contact information for O'Leary?  Surprisingly, there is no way to contact anyone via the UD website.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hope you're not planning any cyber stalking!

Search for "Post Darwinist" and check her profile where she lists a contact email.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ask a question, get a typical non-answer.  Thanks, Useless.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


denyseoleary@gmail.com

It was at her blog site.  I can only assume that it's current, but you'll have to find out.  I have no intention to try to contact her.

Glen Davidson
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry.  That might have been misconstrued.

I did e-mail O'Leary.  I got, from her, a typical non-answer.  She is... indeed... useless.

I apologize to those I might have offended here.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's not good enough. As I was seriously not offended at all, I demand a notpology!!!
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 14 2011,20:08

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 14 2011,18:05)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 14 2011,11:27)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 14 2011,11:23)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Except for the obvious fact that our support for Israel pisses off the Arabs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I would call wrong on that one. Israel support doesn't piss off Arabs. It pisses off Muslims. There is quite a few Arabs that happen to be Jews as well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting. I stand corrected.

Would many Jewish Arabs be living in the countries that seem to be supporting militant Muslims? Could you speculate on the percentage or the raw numbers?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Actually, there are many Arabic Christians in the region.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Which, in the end, would come down to the governments being pissed off, not the ethnicity as a whole. There are also arab atheists (not very outspoken, though, because of the "apostasy punishable by death" thing and all).

Now, we could also argue that all of them are semitic, so basically it's just another of those religious wars we've heard about before...
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,20:19

I never understood the Semitic part. It seems to be anti-Jewish.

And as far as I can tell it all boils down to the fact that Jews have been successful.

At a time when Christians and Muslims could not charge interest, Jews lent money at interest. Pretty much bankrupted Europe due to the tendency of monarchs to borrow money to finance wars.

European Jews also went into arts and sciences and encouraged academic learning.

So all the people whose religion hobbled them were just envious.

I believe they still design many if not most modern computer chips. They did until recently.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 14 2011,20:30

Well, when you are forbiden to take part in a shitload of business ventures, you get very good at mastering what you are allowed to do. That's what they did in Europe, and now continue to do. Can't blame them. The reasons they were forbiden? They killed Jebus! (I am not familiar with other reasons why).

As for Semitic, it's all related to language, culture and ethnicity. Basically, all the people originated around the Jordanian/Israely/Arab Peninsula are semitic.

< Linky >

Admitedly, there's been some watering-down of the original ethnicity. My girlfriend, for exemple, is jewish. She's blond with blue eyes...
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 14 2011,20:37



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Well, when you are forbiden to take part in a shitload of business ventures, you get very good at mastering what you are allowed to do
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Europeans have always looked down their noses at businessmen and shopkeepers. (My source for this otherwise unreferenced factoid is BBC costume dramas.)

Islam still seems to be in the dark ages regarding science, music and art. Sad, because it wasn't always so.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 14 2011,20:45

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,02:37)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Well, when you are forbiden to take part in a shitload of business ventures, you get very good at mastering what you are allowed to do
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Europeans have always looked down their noses at businessmen and shopkeepers. (My source for this otherwise unreferenced factoid is BBC costume dramas.)

Islam still seems to be in the dark ages regarding science, music and art. Sad, because it wasn't always so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Islam has, so far, the best banking system because they don't allow interests on loans and such.


Wait, did I just say something positive about religion? Get Louis!!!

ETA: Islam was top notch in science, medicin and maths until some dumbfucker in the XIth century decided this all was haram. I'll try to fish out his name...
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 14 2011,23:28

< Lewontin >!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,01:47

To get around loan interest, Islamic banks have various financial devices that have the same effect.
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 15 2011,02:18

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,07:47)
To get around loan interest, Islamic banks have various financial devices that have the same effect.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I guess it is a bit like Christianity and the whole 'thou shalt not kill' thing. There are various theological devices that make it permissible. After all, why let a commandment from God get in the way of a good old religious war.
Posted by: Quack on Sep. 15 2011,03:04

A workable monetary system without interest is possible, but will world casino have it?

I read the < book >many years ago.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 15 2011,03:32

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 15 2011,02:45)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,02:37)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Well, when you are forbiden to take part in a shitload of business ventures, you get very good at mastering what you are allowed to do
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Europeans have always looked down their noses at businessmen and shopkeepers. (My source for this otherwise unreferenced factoid is BBC costume dramas.)

Islam still seems to be in the dark ages regarding science, music and art. Sad, because it wasn't always so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Islam has, so far, the best banking system because they don't allow interests on loans and such.


Wait, did I just say something positive about religion? Get Louis!!!

ETA: Islam was top notch in science, medicin and maths until some dumbfucker in the XIth century decided this all was haram. I'll try to fish out his name...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In all seriousness there are plenty of positive things to say about religion, and plenty of negative things to say about non-religion.

So?

It still doesn't mean there's a magic man in the sky who watches you masturbate, or whatever incoherent, evidence lacking proposition someone wishes to believe in.

I've got nothing against religion, let it flourish as a personal enterprise. As Thomas Jefferson said:

"But it does me no injury for my neighbor to say there are twenty gods or no God. It neither picks my pocket nor breaks my leg."

The minute someone wants to break my leg or pick my pocket on behalf of their deity, ideology, or whatever, you bet your backside on a barbeque I'm going to ask a few awkward questions. The "goddiness" of it is irrelevant. Having the NHS support homeopathy (however small this support is, it's non-zero) is just as important in principle as removing the (pseudo) compulsory act of Christian worship in UK schools, or reducing the stranglehold that various religious groups have on schools, or combating Nadine Fucking Dorries (spit)*.

Not on any specific issue you understand, just combating Nadine Fucking Dorries (spit). She is the living avatar of what should be combated in so many ways it's simpler just to combat everything and take the hit if it ever occurs that she alights on the right side of an issue simply by chance.

Louis

*That is her full title. Google is your friend, I refuse to link to her blog.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 15 2011,03:55

I had never heard of Nadine Fucking Dorries (spit). I just made a few researches, then had to go sit down in a quiet place for a little while. Also, I think I vomited in my mouth a bit.

And Louis, this was not a statement of your hate of religion, it was just the name that poped up first when I wrote that :)
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 15 2011,04:18

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 15 2011,09:55)
I had never heard of Nadine Fucking Dorries (spit). I just made a few researches, then had to go sit down in a quiet place for a little while. Also, I think I vomited in my mouth a bit.

And Louis, this was not a statement of your hate of religion, it was just the name that poped up first when I wrote that :)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh I know THAT! I was just a) being mildly comedic and b) using it as an excuse to mention Nadine Fucking Dorries (spit).

You allowed me a (leaden and entirely shoe-horned) segue into my rampant distaste for the person in question and her views. Fundafuckwits: we have them in the UK too.

Louis
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 15 2011,06:33

< Lewontin >!

Wherein KairosFlatus implicitly acknowledges that he has been quotemining Lewontin, and tries to justify doing so.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 15 2011,07:59

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 15 2011,07:33)
< Lewontin >!

Wherein KairosFlatus implicitly acknowledges that he has been quotemining Lewontin, and tries to justify doing so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


what a cunt
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 15 2011,10:30

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 14 2011,18:37)
Islam still seems to be in the dark ages regarding science, music and art. Sad, because it wasn't always so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't think that there are any particular problems with music and Islam. Most popular music is quite national/ethnic anyways. I am rather fond of the classical oud, but there is some good modern stuff as well.

Our colleague Taner Edis has a book out (2007) "An Illusion of Harmony: Science and Religion in Islam," that addressed the problem of fundamentalism and science. I only started reading it last night. So far, I like it.


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,10:46



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I don't think that there are any particular problems with music and Islam.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.islam-qa.com/en....000 >
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 15 2011,10:55

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,08:46)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I don't think that there are any particular problems with music and Islam.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.islam-qa.com/en....0........000 >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....Qawwali >

How many Christian sects disapprove of singing and dancing?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,11:06



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
How many Christian sects disapprove of singing and dancing?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I haven't mentioned Christianity, but I'm aware than the rather mainstream Methodists disapproved. I'm at a loss to recall any recent prohibitions by Christian nations.
I'm also quite aware that Islam is separate from Christianity in many of these issues by a hundred years or less.

In my own rather simple mind I speculate that much Islamic  militancy is a reaction to the rapid evolution of behavior among Muslims. Fundamentalists tend to surface in politics when social change is rapid.

What else is new?
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 15 2011,11:22

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,09:06)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
How many Christian sects disapprove of singing and dancing?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I haven't mentioned Christianity, but I'm aware than the rather mainstream Methodists disapproved. I'm at a loss to recall any recent prohibitions by Christian nations.
I'm also quite aware that Islam is separate from Christianity in many of these issues by a hundred years or less.

In my own rather simple mind I speculate that much Islamic  militancy is a reaction to the rapid evolution of behavior among Muslims. Fundamentalists tend to surface in politics when social change is rapid.

What else is new?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Indeed.  My point was simply that it's wrong to assume "Islam" disapproves of music based on one source.  As with other religions, people can find scriptural justification for whatever God-given moral code they were planning to believe in anyway.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,12:35

The problem I see, if I am correct, is that Islamic militancy is motivated by factors within the Islamic community and cannot be addressed or ameliorated by outsiders.

I suppose that evil, immoral westerners are providing satanic temptations, but that is unlikely to go away. We may broadcast satellite TV, but we do not install receivers in Muslim homes.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 15 2011,12:40

If one is trained in the argumentation of law, does that training carry over into philosophy or scientific investigation?

< BarryA: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If a materialist believes that blind unguided natural forces can account for the “design” of living things, how could he ever argue that, in principle, it would require a miracle for an intelligent agent to replicate that “design.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Now, what did he just do in that statement?



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But facts and logic rarely stop our materialist opponents. Faced with an unanswerable argument, they usually resort to obfuscation tactics such as “I just can’t understand what the words you are using mean."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Chewbacca Defense!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,12:43

Moving on to a more useful topic, Jonathan M disputes that ERV insertions support common descent.

< Linky >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Some ID proponents have argued that, in spite of this striking appearance, the structure of the germ-cell production system makes it extremely unlikely that the inserts were accomplished by viruses, and thus these hitherto-thought-to-be ERV sequences are not, in fact, viral in origin at all. This is an interesting argument. It does seem somewhat unlikely that retroviral elements would be able to insert themselves literally hundreds of thousands of times into the germ cells without causing fatalistic damage to the host organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The second point worthy of note is that it shouldn’t surprise us that ERV elements can be found occupying the same genetic loci across multiple taxa. This is indicative of the specificity of the target site preference.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 15 2011,12:44

if a man shits into a grocery bag and leaves it under the couch and no one is home does it stink?

parsing the words of that queef for meaning is a bit like pleasuring yourself with a vegetable peeler
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,14:09

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 15 2011,07:59)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 15 2011,07:33)
< Lewontin >!

Wherein KairosFlatus implicitly acknowledges that he has been quotemining Lewontin, and tries to justify doing so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


what a cunt
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Someone seems to have caused a constitutional crisis in the homeland at the very moment KF was gearing up for a massive outburst of pure logic.

He was last seen entering a phone booth.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Sep. 15 2011,16:05

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Sep. 15 2011,12:44)
parsing the words of that queef for meaning is a bit like pleasuring yourself with a vegetable peeler
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sounds like a job for Galapagos Finch!


Posted by: BillB on Sep. 15 2011,16:19

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,20:09)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Sep. 15 2011,07:59)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 15 2011,07:33)
< Lewontin >!

Wherein KairosFlatus implicitly acknowledges that he has been quotemining Lewontin, and tries to justify doing so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


what a cunt
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Someone seems to have caused a constitutional crisis in the homeland at the very moment KF was gearing up for a massive outburst of pure logic.

He was last seen entering a phone booth.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From what I remember of the few phone booths I entered in the past they seemed to be mostly used as an advertising space for 'escort services'.

Presumably KF felt a sudden urge for spiritual relief at the hands of a youthful nun.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,17:43

< Linky >
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 15 2011,18:41

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,08:46)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I don't think that there are any particular problems with music and Islam.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.islam-qa.com/en....0........000 >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That site was the Islamic equivalent of saying that Pat Roberson speaks for all Christians.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 15 2011,19:06

Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 15 2011,18:41)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,08:46)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I don't think that there are any particular problems with music and Islam.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.islam-qa.com/en....0........000 >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That site was the Islamic equivalent of saying that Pat Roberson speaks for all Christians.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Perhaps if Pat had henchmen with weapons.

Perhaps more like the KKK enforcing segregation. Not perfect analogy, but my intention is to convey that militants use force, and also to suggest it will pass in time.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 15 2011,20:49

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,12:43)
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It does seem somewhat unlikely that retroviral elements would be able to insert themselves literally hundreds of thousands of times into the germ cells without causing fatalistic damage to the host organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Fatalistic damage?  Is that when your sperm cells decide there's absolutely nothing they can do to increase their chances of finding a nice egg to hook up with?
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 15 2011,21:46



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Some ID proponents have argued that, in spite of this striking appearance, the structure of the germ-cell production system makes it extremely unlikely that the inserts were accomplished by viruses, and thus these hitherto-thought-to-be ERV sequences are not, in fact, viral in origin at all. This is an interesting argument. It does seem somewhat unlikely that retroviral elements would be able to insert themselves literally hundreds of thousands of times into the germ cells without causing fatalistic damage to the host organism.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wonder if anybody thought to ask if anybody was actually saying that there were more than one or two of these viral inserts in any one germ cell?

Henry
Posted by: Badger3k on Sep. 15 2011,22:07

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 15 2011,20:49)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 15 2011,12:43)
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It does seem somewhat unlikely that retroviral elements would be able to insert themselves literally hundreds of thousands of times into the germ cells without causing fatalistic damage to the host organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Fatalistic damage?  Is that when your sperm cells decide there's absolutely nothing they can do to increase their chances of finding a nice egg to hook up with?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that's when the sperm hits circle-circle-R2-triangle-X and rips the heart out of Scorpion (or whoever he is fighting).  If done correctly, it can even occur with "Flawless Victory"!  Bonus!
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 16 2011,10:03

Is it over?


Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 16 2011,10:08

Dead. It's been doing that off and on for a week. This is just extended. Maybe they're rebooting.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 16 2011,10:24

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 16 2011,10:08)
Dead. It's been doing that off and on for a week. This is just extended. Maybe they're rebooting.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think reality has had enough toss from the UD crew.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 16 2011,10:39

I'm sure Gil can sort it out, Unless he was running a simulation.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 16 2011,12:29

I wonder what they will do now?

I'd bet on moving to a new blog, but can you imagine the cat fight over who's in control?  

Joe would just moderate everyone all the time... oh wait, they're used to that, but I bet they don't want Joe in control.

Karios would require that every post be 8000 words... feel free to repeat portions as needed.

Can you imagine all the coffee ads on O'Leary's?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 16 2011,13:09

They're mucking about with software.
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 16 2011,14:19

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 16 2011,11:09)
They're mucking about with software.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's back.  They haven't been mucking about with learning anything.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 16 2011,22:12

Barry Arrington receives a lethal dose of 'obfuscation', causing him to release the monster within:

< Eric Holloway >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Neither yourself nor KairoFocus have demonstrated that my arguments miss the point or are unsound. I plan to write out the arguments again as a UD article, and you can respond more in depth there if you wish. Otherwise, I’m afraid I’ll have to call BS on your challenge.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< And here >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If Mr. Arrington claims such usage of the term “supernatural” is not common parlance, then I’m really at a loss as to what he means by “supernatural.” Perhaps Mr. Arrington can give some examples of what he would consider “supernatural?”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Barry >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Stop it Eric.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Does anyone else feel the cold shadow of the Banhammer? Isnt the 'Loudspeaker-in-the-Ceiling' supposed to appear first?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,04:47

I think they've behaved rather well considering the pounding they're taking. Judging from the absence of BA77, I think the regulars don't like the argument that ID doesn't require supernatural intervention.

Their new software mysteriously poofs random posts into random threads.

Mathematically random or pseudo-random? Only the Designer knows.
Posted by: didymos on Sep. 17 2011,05:39

OK, Gordon has officially become an < Internet Tough Guy >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Group think, intimidatory thought police in action, < again > in the halls of the academy; for the thought “crime” of daring to question the “consensus” in a student presentation.

Yes, a student presentation.

Notice, how having a student reduced to tears and shaking seemingly did not trigger any sense that they were going beyond any reasonable behaviour; a classic sign of thought police in self-righteous action, hoping to trigger fear and/or guilt as an emotional response on the part of one who has failed to toe the partyline, similar to the U Colorado case recently handled by Barry A.

I hope there were witnesses willing to speak.

We need to make some financial bloody-nose examples of a few intellectual bullies like this, to stop this sadistic –and I < MEAN > that term (“who di cap fit. let ‘im wear it . . . “, cf. senses 2 & 3) — grown up version of the school yard bully.

Bullies like that only respect superior force.

(And believe you me if you were to attack and intimidate one of my students in front of me like this — especially a young lady, and ignored warnings to back off, I would step in decisively. Bully-boy. And if you persist, you will get what you are asking for, jackbooted SS bully-boy. As in, student harassment with power/status abuse and obvious sexual intimidation overtones. Kiss your career goodbye. Bully Verbal rapist!)

See why dismissive rhetoric that pretends there is not a serious problem in science or science education, as can be seen above, have no impact on me?

I know too many cases in point of abusive behaviour, and I can tell the foul demonic stench of SS bully-boyism a mile off, upwind.

Ganging up on a GIRL to intimidate her for presenting a student presentation!

And, keeping at it till she is reduced to tears and shaking!

Frankly, you should be taken to the schoolyard wood-shed and thoroughly whupped, with a good old fashioned tamarind switch . . . one soaked in saltwater first.

Maybe, it has not got through your thick comfortable skulls that if you keep on doing that sort of thing, you are going to pick on the wrong girl one of these days and her bro or boyfriend or husband or dad or uncle or cousin is going to come for you and give you a very literal bloody nose.

Regardless of consequences.

Those are the matches you are playing with, academic bully-boys.

Lesson no 1 of half-decent broughtupcy: don’t pick on girls, or on someone who cannot hit back.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Bonus points for the paternalistic misogyny and another co-option of rape for rhetorical purposes.  Also:

< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....CBZtpEk >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,06:24

I started out as an English major (big mistake).

On the first day of one class the professor (department chairman) started a discussion. I gave an opinion. He lit into me with a string of insults, not entirely unlike KF's diatribes.

The rest of the class was bug-eyed. For the rest of the term, classes consisted of the professor vainly trying to start discussions and the class mostly looking at their watches and waiting for the end of the period.

I suppose it's possible for this to happen in a Biology class, but I chalk it up to some people being clueless assholes.
Posted by: didymos on Sep. 17 2011,06:38

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 17 2011,04:24)
I suppose it's possible for this to happen in a Biology class, but I chalk it up to some people being clueless assholes.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, sorry. Here's the UD piece that give the background for this diatribe:

< How one student paid for questioning Darwinism >

Said student is only identified by a first name, and her tale is related by the not-Expelled Caroline Crocker, apparently in her new book about her persecution at neo-Darwinist hands.  And Crocker has a new "institute":

< http://www.americaninstitutetechnologyscienceeducation.com/....ion....ion.com >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,09:28

One flew over Denyse's nest"

< http://news.discovery.com/human....16.html >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,09:46



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrREC September 16, 2011 at 4:22 pm
“Why DrREC, so all you have to do to prove your point is say that Protein a evolved from protein b??? Why that is just special DrREC! Perhaps you could sooth my doubts and actually physically demonstrate the origination of a new protein from a old protein and establish your theory/religion as at least scientifically plausible???”

I’m sorry, I find this rant awfully incoherent, and I don’t understand why my previous references are insufficient to answer your query.

The first two demonstrate the generation of novel, functional proteins by mutation and recombination of previously non-coding regions. The last demonstrates the directed evolution of novel activities (taking activity/protein a and evolving it into activity/protein b, where b doesn’t exist in nature, by ‘Darwinian’ processes-mutation and recombination acted on by selection.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Reply
8.1
Joseph September 17, 2011 at 7:39 am
DrREC,

All you are doing is engaging in question-begging- Just how was it determined that gene duplication and recombination are ‘Darwinian’ processes?

Do you realize that ID is not anti-evolution? Or do you really think your ignorance refutes ID?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 17 2011,16:25

Is uncommon descent down?  I can't bring it up.  It just loods and loads and then shows a blank screen.  If I try to follow a link from this blog, my iPad grunts and then resets.  

Is it just trying to protect me?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,16:57

Your computer is looking after your welfare. It's up.
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 17 2011,18:38

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 17 2011,07:46)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrREC September 16, 2011 at 4:22 pm
“Why DrREC, so all you have to do to prove your point is say that Protein a evolved from protein b??? Why that is just special DrREC! Perhaps you could sooth my doubts and actually physically demonstrate the origination of a new protein from a old protein and establish your theory/religion as at least scientifically plausible???”

I’m sorry, I find this rant awfully incoherent, and I don’t understand why my previous references are insufficient to answer your query.

The first two demonstrate the generation of novel, functional proteins by mutation and recombination of previously non-coding regions. The last demonstrates the directed evolution of novel activities (taking activity/protein a and evolving it into activity/protein b, where b doesn’t exist in nature, by ‘Darwinian’ processes-mutation and recombination acted on by selection.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Reply
8.1
Joseph September 17, 2011 at 7:39 am
DrREC,

All you are doing is engaging in question-begging- Just how was it determined that gene duplication and recombination are ‘Darwinian’ processes?

Do you realize that ID is not anti-evolution? Or do you really think your ignorance refutes ID?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The Bornatron 77 comes dangerously close to punctuational meltdown as that thread progresses. It might be time to upgrade to the 88 model, with PunctProtectTM technology.

The 77 starts out okay -- incoherent as always, but punctuationally benign:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
First no neo-Darwinists seems be able to show me ANY beneficial mutations, in humans (or anything else for that matter), that will withstand scrutiny, (Lactase persistence, and Himilaya high altitude/low oxygen tolerance mutations, in humans, both fail scrutiny for functional information generation, much less can the mutations be claimed as purely random mutations and not, in fact, be claimed as ‘calculated’ mutations), Yet the evidence for detrimental mutations in humans is simply overwhelming:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then the triple comma makes its first appearance:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But, of personal note, when considering the multiple overlapping layers of coding in the genome,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The triple comma metastasizes and starts showing up in the middle of clauses:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Their work,,, shows that the genetic code — used by organisms as diverse as reef coral, termites, and humans — is nearly optimal for encoding signals of any length in parallel to sequences that code for proteins.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then we see a triple comma trying to mate with a single comma:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But alas, as Dr. Hunter says, ,,, Religion drives science and it matters!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The problem spreads to other punctuation marks:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why DrREC, so all you have to do to prove your point is say that Protein a evolved from protein b??? Why that is just special DrREC! Perhaps you could sooth my doubts and actually physically demonstrate the origination of a new protein from a old protein and establish your theory/religion as at least scientifically plausible???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrREC, despite what you may think of my ‘hypocritical’ standard for science, the standard for empirical science is brutally unchanging in its threshold of satisfaction and requires nothing less than a actual empirical DEMONSTRATION for what you are claiming, and in such resolute firmness empirical science is the very antithesis of hypocrisy!!!.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Smoke pours out of the Bornatron 77 as it emits quadruple exclamation points and commas:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Well by golly Elizabeth, if bacteria have nothing to do with human evolution then I guess the entire Random Mutation and Natural Selection process itself has absolutely nothing to with Human Evolution either!!!! Too bad I know your playbook Elizabeth,,,, i.e. neo-Darwinian tactic #5, when faced with clear evidence that severely contradicts neo-Darwinism, deny that the clear evidence has anything whatsoever to do with evolution.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Somebody better break the glass case and grab the fire extinguisher.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 17 2011,18:55



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Natural Selection process itself has absolutely nothing to with Human Evolution either!!!! Too bad I know your playbook Elizabeth,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
as the observer approached the constant of the speed of light.,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
see what the almighty power of neo-Darwinian evolution has DEMONSTRATED for this fool to behold:

And the drum-roll please,,,,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You can almost see the bile pouring out of every orifice.

He does seem to have a problem with punctuational entropy and meltdown.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 17 2011,19:13

I understand that Crocker got the story from Michelle Bachmann who said that the mother of the student came up to her, crying, and told Bachmann that her daughter gave a presentation on "intelligent design" and now she's suffering from mental retardation and couldn't get into medical school.

Sad, really.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 17 2011,22:30

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 17 2011,18:55)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Natural Selection process itself has absolutely nothing to with Human Evolution either!!!! Too bad I know your playbook Elizabeth,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
as the observer approached the constant of the speed of light.,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
see what the almighty power of neo-Darwinian evolution has DEMONSTRATED for this fool to behold:

And the drum-roll please,,,,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You can almost see the bile pouring out of every orifice.

He does seem to have a problem with punctuational entropy and meltdown.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe bornagan77 will eventually reach punctuational equilibrium,,,
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 18 2011,00:01

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 17 2011,17:13)
I understand that Crocker got the story from Michelle Bachmann who said that the mother of the student came up to her, crying, and told Bachmann that her daughter gave a presentation on "intelligent design" and now she's suffering from mental retardation and couldn't get into medical school.

Sad, really.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I posted a comment at that post asking if the story could be substantiated, but that seems to have disappeared. I re-posted the question.

I dont understand how she couldnt get into medical school.
According to Dr. Egnor, those institutions dont teach TOE because they find it irrelevant, and most doctors super-secretly believe in ID.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 18 2011,01:32

More from the < Venema post >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

12 Prof. FX Gumby < September 16, 2011 at 7:24 pm
>
DrREC, you might as well give up the argument. This fool will be satisfied with nothing less than one of his precious youtube videos of a beneficial protein-coding mutation arising in real time, complete with sound effects and laser light shows. On the other hand, he is perfectly willing to accept the slightest hand wave in the direction of divine intervention design.

I think the operative phrase is “selective hyperskepticism”?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
14 DrREC < September 16, 2011 at 9:47 pm >

Prof. FX Gumby,

I wouldn’t be too harsh. I think bornagain77 summarizes the ID position well - no one here seems to ever correct him. His posts are revealing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

emphasis mine
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 18 2011,07:59

There seems to be no purifying selection capable of removing pseudocommas.
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 18 2011,08:38

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 18 2011,04:30)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 17 2011,18:55)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Natural Selection process itself has absolutely nothing to with Human Evolution either!!!! Too bad I know your playbook Elizabeth,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
as the observer approached the constant of the speed of light.,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
see what the almighty power of neo-Darwinian evolution has DEMONSTRATED for this fool to behold:

And the drum-roll please,,,,,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You can almost see the bile pouring out of every orifice.

He does seem to have a problem with punctuational entropy and meltdown.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe bornagan77 will eventually reach punctuational equilibrium,,,
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


... or vanish up his own colon
Posted by: Texas Teach on Sep. 18 2011,08:50

If junk punctuation turns out to have function, does that prove ID?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 18 2011,09:20

Quote (Texas Teach @ Sep. 18 2011,08:50)
If junk punctuation turns out to have function, does that prove ID?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well UD makes extensive use of semi colons.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 18 2011,10:08

Post translation modification



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
This post is my personal attempt to reconcile recent statements made by   quell a TARDfight between Barry Arrington and Eric Holloway, regarding whether or not a supernatural Designer is required in order to produce a living thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 18 2011,22:12

Quote (Texas Teach @ Sep. 18 2011,16:50)
If junk punctuation turns out to have function, does that prove ID?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nup ......it only proves ID Eat's root's shoot's and leave's
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 19 2011,05:53

Has Steve Fuller become a YEC?  Watch his new < animation > (thankfully sans fart noises) and judge for yourselves.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,07:48

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 19 2011,05:53)
Has Steve Fuller become a YEC?  Watch his new < animation > (thankfully sans fart noises) and judge for yourselves.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'm sure it was a short walk.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,08:54

I seem to have been banned from Corny Hunter's blog. Is that possible?
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Sep. 19 2011,09:04

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,08:54)
I seem to have been banned from Corny Hunter's blog. Is that possible?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Haven't seen anyone banned yet.  His funky board SW security bot does still delete the odd post on its own, normally if you include a url link it doesn't like.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,09:30

Hitting the post button just reloads the page. I'm logged in and have posted within the last couple of days.

I've tried logging out and closing and reopening the page.
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Sep. 19 2011,09:37

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,09:30)
Hitting the post button just reloads the page. I'm logged in and have posted within the last couple of days.

I've tried logging out and closing and reopening the page.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That now happens if you have a problem in your post like an open tag.  Old SW used to highlight the error, new SW just bounces the post back.  Confused the heck out of me too until I figured out what the new SW was doing.

Try posting a simple test message with no tags, see what happens.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,09:45

Oh.

Seems it doesn't like blockquotes. Correct or not.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 19 2011,11:15

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 19 2011,05:53)
Has Steve Fuller become a YEC?  Watch his new < animation > (thankfully sans fart noises) and judge for yourselves.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think just plain old muddled-thinking IDiot will do for an explanation.  It is true that evolution of all life would not work if the earth is young.  Kind of refutes the argument that Dawkins thinking is just "magic" though, because magic should not be able to be constrained to only work for a few billion years.  You know, kind of like creationism is not so limited.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,11:15



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Blast from the past: Christian biology profs tell [Disgraced] Congressman:”materialistic science has greatly increased the American people’s quality of life”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I've never met Mark Souder, but he's a distant cousin of mine. At least I believe I share more gene sequences with him than with my Chimpanzee cousins.

But it's always good to have a relative, however distant, who can still preach Christian virtues while displaying none.

I give up on the link
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 19 2011,12:54

Fans of Elizabeth rejoice:

< http://tinyurl.com/66ucxqb....66ucxqb >
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 19 2011,14:50

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,12:54)
Fans of Elizabeth rejoice:

< http://tinyurl.com/66ucxqb....66ucxqb >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What a bunch of dunces (except Elizabeth).
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Sep. 19 2011,15:06

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,12:54)
Fans of Elizabeth rejoice:

< http://tinyurl.com/66ucxqb....66ucxqb >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow.

Four posts in and batshit77 is already screaming that Lizzie is a liar.

Joetard Gallien is doing his usual asinine IDiot dance claiming there is no evidence for abiogenesis, even though Lizzie has linked him to dozens of papers and offered to hand walk him through a few.

Chris Doyle accuses Lizzie of 'literature bluffing', demonstrates that he doesn't understand the first thing about how the scientific method works.

I have no idea how Lizzie keeps herself from beating the shit out of the lot of 'em with a tire iron.
Posted by: Amadan on Sep. 19 2011,15:25

Contratulations to Wes for < making the Big Time >

WND and FSTDT!
Posted by: socle on Sep. 19 2011,16:59

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Sep. 19 2011,15:06)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,12:54)
Fans of Elizabeth rejoice:

< http://tinyurl.com/66ucxqb....66ucxqb >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow.

Four posts in and batshit77 is already screaming that Lizzie is a liar.

Joetard Gallien is doing his usual asinine IDiot dance claiming there is no evidence for abiogenesis, even though Lizzie has linked him to dozens of papers and offered to hand walk him through a few.

Chris Doyle accuses Lizzie of 'literature bluffing', demonstrates that he doesn't understand the first thing about how the scientific method works.

I have no idea how Lizzie keeps herself from beating the shit out of the lot of 'em with a tire iron.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's amazing that Chris Doyle even still posts, given his cowardly douchebaggery over at Lizzie's blog.  Unfuckingbelievable.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 19 2011,17:24

UD has really become a clown-car filled cluster fuck.  There's more sense made at the Mad Hatter's tea party than at UD.

Data don't count and you can draw an infinite number of lines through a point only that doesn't matter because it's all just a wild guess.

Venus on a clamshell, UD has become a singularity of stupid.
Posted by: MichaelJ on Sep. 19 2011,17:51

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 20 2011,08:24)
UD has really become a clown-car filled cluster fuck.  There's more sense made at the Mad Hatter's tea party than at UD.

Data don't count and you can draw an infinite number of lines through a point only that doesn't matter because it's all just a wild guess.

Venus on a clamshell, UD has become a singularity of stupid.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A few years ago I used to wonder why the more intelligent UDers didn't do more to censor the insane inmates. I think that the answer now is obvious...
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 19 2011,19:45

< Nick Matzke asks >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
How could JonathanM have missed this huge and obvious biological fact, if he is claiming to give a well-researched account of the system?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's one o' them reetoerickle questions, right?
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Sep. 19 2011,20:41

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 19 2011,19:45)
< Nick Matzke asks >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
How could JonathanM have missed this huge and obvious biological fact, if he is claiming to give a well-researched account of the system?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's one o' them reetoerickle questions, right?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Scott Andrews takes a shot at Nick's answer, scores an own goal



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ScottAndrews September 19, 2011 at 6:57 pm

Nick,

You would have everyone’s full attention if you could refute Jonathan’s conclusion by describing how natural selection accounts for such developments. You could demolish his argument by providing yours. Instead, your objection calls attention to your inability to do so.

The trouble isn’t that your explanation isn’t good. It’s that you don’t have one at all. It’s like telling a child that babies from from storks. It only holds up as long as you avoid giving details. Eventually you have to admit that you don’t know where storks get babies and no one has ever seen a stork deliver a baby, and then you cave in like an extra on Law and Order.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Sure thing Scottie - like all those details you and the rest of the IDiots at UD have provided on the mechanisms of Intelligent Design.  Like when the design was done, and where, and by what physical processes, and by whom.

What a bunch of spineless hypocrites.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 19 2011,20:47

It's a sad commentary that Jonathan M is actually one of the more "intelligent" contributors to UD.

By design?

< Animals Smarter than Jonathan M >
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 19 2011,21:18

Quote (socle @ Sep. 19 2011,14:59)
It's amazing that Chris Doyle even still posts, given his cowardly douchebaggery over at Lizzie's blog.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Chris 'Brave Sir Robin' Doyle: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
A strong indication that you are lying to yourself is when you can’t substantiate your claims (citation bluffing is not a substitute for substantiation) or can’t engage with arguments (plenty of threads have come to an end here on Uncommon Descent because you [Elizabeth Liddle] disappeared instead of providing evidence for your position or even a detailed, cogent counter-argument).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Elizabeth Liddle: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And, actually, Chris, this is pretty rich from you – I was delighted that you came over to my own site, where things move a bit more slowly, but not only did you “disappear” from the discussions you were having there, but, as far as I can tell, you deleted all your posts AS WELL as all the counter-arguments that had been made to you!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



second-person pronoun disambiguation mine
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 19 2011,21:37

< StephenB: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth, I think the gentlemen are simply asking you to make the connection between the study (studies) that you cite and the substance of your claims.
[snip]
If you do not take us through the process, then it seems fair to suggest that you cannot take us through the process. . . . I promise you that William Dembski, Paul Marks, and Michael Behe can take you through this process from an ID perspective with their eyes closed and one-half of their brain tied behind their backs. The clarity of their arguments and the transparent relationship between those arguments and the evidence are all there to be evaluated. Indeed, I could, standing on their shoulders, do it myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


   He could if he wanted to, but he's not but that doesn't mean he can't, so don't say that he can't just because he won't because he could if he wanted to, but he's not ....

emboldened assholisms mine
Posted by: socle on Sep. 19 2011,21:40

hory shet, I didn't even see the part where Chris Doyle accused Lizzie of "disappearing"!  lol.

It's ironic that the topic of at least one of the threads CD deleted concerned how atheists supposedly have no rationale to act morally.  Then when he got his ass handed to him, he bailed out and destroyed the evidence.  I guess that's moral in his world.  
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 19 2011,21:50

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 19 2011,15:24)
Venus on a clamshell, UD has become a singularity of stupid.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


<Al Pacino> Every time I get out, they keep on bringing me back in. </Al Pacino>
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 19 2011,22:14

turell weighs in:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Bacteria undoubedly developed these processes through the epigenetic codes, not Darwin’s random chance mutations and then natural selection. Epigenetics does not look at all passive as Darwinism presents, and suggests strongly that those codes were there from the beginning of life, that is, by intelligent design. See James Shapiro’s new book, a revelation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I am not sure what an epigenetic code in bacteria would be - does he think patterns of acylation and methylation of histones apply?  Is there something to this, or is epigentics being used by an IDiot as a magic word to banish "Darwinism?"
Posted by: dochocson on Sep. 19 2011,23:21

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 19 2011,20:14)
turell weighs in:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Bacteria undoubedly developed these processes through the epigenetic codes, not Darwin’s random chance mutations and then natural selection. Epigenetics does not look at all passive as Darwinism presents, and suggests strongly that those codes were there from the beginning of life, that is, by intelligent design. See James Shapiro’s new book, a revelation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I am not sure what an epigenetic code in bacteria would be - does he think patterns of acylation and methylation of histones apply?  Is there something to this, or is epigentics being used by an IDiot as a magic word to banish "Darwinism?"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I always figured that epigenetics came from the "Darwin didn't know about it, so it must refute Darwinism" chapter of the UD playbook. I doubt any of them really have any idea what epigenetics is.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,00:06

Gil modestly proclaims:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As you know, I was once Dawkins and Matzke, only significantly more obnoxious and prideful, if such a thing can even be imagined.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 20 2011,00:42

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 19 2011,22:06)
Gil modestly proclaims:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As you know, I was once Dawkins and Matzke, only significantly more obnoxious and prideful, if such a thing can even be imagined.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah,

But not as intelligent, accomplished, or well educated.

"more obnoxious and prideful" requires no imagination at all.


Posted by: Louis on Sep. 20 2011,05:19

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 20 2011,03:50)
Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 19 2011,15:24)
Venus on a clamshell, UD has become a singularity of stupid.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


<Al Pacino> Every time I get out, they keep on bringing me back in. </Al Pacino>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Seconded. The place is a car crash + tar pit + TV tropes. You look at it, it hurts, but you can't look away easily. The pain is a good kind...

...I shared too much there didn't I?

Louis
Posted by: carlsonjok on Sep. 20 2011,06:41

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 20 2011,00:06)
Gil modestly proclaims:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As you know, I was once Dawkins and Matzke, only significantly more obnoxious and prideful, if such a thing can even be imagined.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, thank goodness he got over that.


Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Sep. 20 2011,07:04

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 20 2011,00:06)
Gil modestly proclaims:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As you know, I was once Dawkins and Matzke, only significantly more obnoxious and prideful, if such a thing can even be imagined.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's amazing that while Gil Dodgen or Jonathan Wells claim these sorts of things, there's absolutely no public record of what they did while they were on the other side of the fence. It seems to me that if you claim advocacy for something, it's rather pathetic if you left no trace whatsoever of that advocacy. And highly convenient, of course.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 20 2011,07:24

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 20 2011,06:06)
Gil modestly proclaims:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As you know, I was once Dawkins and Matzke, only significantly more obnoxious and prideful, if such a thing can even be imagined.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I know it's asking barely functional, blinkered morons to be able to climb an intellectual kerb nearly a micron high, but even an utter dribbler like Gil should be capable of realising that his experience of atheism (if it is indeed even true) =/= anyone else's.

Am I asking for too much?

Louis
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,07:26

I hadn't noticed that they've done anything on their current side.

Other than type.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,07:32



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
his experience of atheism
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I guess what he's saying is that he has always been an an arrogant, self-centered, thoughtless twit, incapable of self awareness of of considering the impression he makes on others.

So he switched teams, but nothing else changed.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 20 2011,07:32

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 20 2011,13:26)
I hadn't noticed that they've done anything on their current side.

Other than type.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Type? You over-estimate them, sir!

Their posts are proof of evolution. They apply face to keyboard and roll, and posts appear by random accident and are then selected in the environment of the internet to be worth pointing and laughing at. Coherence is merely a bonus, emergent property, rarely observed.

Louis
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 20 2011,07:32

DrBot < rubs StephenB's nose > in Lizzie's argument:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now where, StephenB, do they conclude that “abiogenesis is plausible”? They don’t, what they show is that the data supports their hypothesis, as stated in the paper, and that it fits into their own broader theory about abiogenesis.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Like DrBot, I am astounded at how difficult it is for StephenB and the rest of the IDiots to follow Lizzie's very clear explanation.  It's almost enough to make me want to study psychology.  The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 20 2011,07:39

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?

Louis

P.S. Actually this is a semi serious question I have posed myself. Just what am I accomplishing by engaging in T.A.R.D. destruction and Moron Baiting on them thar Interwebs? Sure there have been positive outcomes (insert all the usual justifications here), but have I adequately taken care of the negatives. After all I have been exposed to Richard Hughes, and no one wants that.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 20 2011,08:10

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,08:39)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, no one ever intimated that I needed to be less subtle before.  :D
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 20 2011,08:15

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
DrBot [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-



impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400218]rubs StephenB's nose[/URL] in Lizzie's argument:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now where, StephenB, do they conclude that “abiogenesis is plausible”? They don’t, what they show is that the data supports their hypothesis, as stated in the paper, and that it fits into their own broader theory about abiogenesis.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Like DrBot, I am astounded at how difficult it is for StephenB and the rest of the IDiots to follow Lizzie's very clear explanation.  It's almost enough to make me want to study psychology.  The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< From here: >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dr Liddle's current research interest is translational mental health, in particular ADHD and schizophrenia, as well as neuroimaging. Her work mainly focuses on trying to correct aberrant learning
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It is all one big psychology project ;)
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 20 2011,08:24

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,07:39)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?

Louis

P.S. Actually this is a semi serious question I have posed myself. Just what am I accomplishing by engaging in T.A.R.D. destruction and Moron Baiting on them thar Interwebs? Sure there have been positive outcomes (insert all the usual justifications here), but have I adequately taken care of the negatives. After all I have been exposed to Richard Hughes, and no one wants that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Because the if no one answers their crap and shows them just how embarrassing it will be if they spew their crap publicly, then they will go forth and declare publicly that they won.

And Faux news will support them and blab their 'victory over Darwinism' for all to see and no amount of Bill Nye will be able to put that genie back in the bottle.

Creationism (and anti-vax and AGW) are all Pandora's Boxes.  

Maybe YOU don't have to do it, but someone does.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,08:52



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
then they will go forth and declare publicly that they won.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Let's be fair. Although creationism and ID have been shot down every time they have been in court, they have !!!111!!! on the basis of breach of contract.

Or should that be !!!!111!!!!,,,,,,
Posted by: George on Sep. 20 2011,09:01

Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 19 2011,15:25)
Contratulations to Wes for < making the Big Time >

WND and FSTDT!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dang, Wes.  Have you been working out?
Posted by: Lou FCD on Sep. 20 2011,09:03

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 20 2011,09:15)
It is all one big psychology project ;)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Shhh. Talk like that will bias the experiment.

Let the good doctor work, damnit!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,09:18



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It is all one big psychology project ;)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



My background is special education. I feel right at home.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 20 2011,09:57

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,14:10)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,08:39)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, no one ever intimated that I needed to be less subtle before.  :D
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You, sir, win one internet!

Louis
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 20 2011,14:00

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,10:57)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,14:10)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,08:39)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, no one ever intimated that I needed to be less subtle before.  :D
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You, sir, win one internet!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 20 2011,15:38

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,07:32)
DrBot [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400218]rubs StephenB's nose[/URL] in Lizzie's argument:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now where, StephenB, do they conclude that “abiogenesis is plausible”? They don’t, what they show is that the data supports their hypothesis, as stated in the paper, and that it fits into their own broader theory about abiogenesis.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Like DrBot, I am astounded at how difficult it is for StephenB and the rest of the IDiots to follow Lizzie's very clear explanation.  It's almost enough to make me want to study psychology.  The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There is an explanation for this observation.  It's not that the UDders don't understand the arguments and data being presented, however, it's precisely that they DO understand.

They aren't so much stupid, joseph and JoeG and FL and Dense excluded, as they are dishonest.  Yes, I'm talking about you ba77, you creep.

Notice how they'll bumble along until someone like Liz actually provides a link to a relevant resource or make a tight argument (down, Louis) and suddenly the tone changes.  Suddenly there is a barrage of creationist links and non sequiturs.  Suddenly you're back to the "can't add information" argument or the "not enough time" argument or the "improbable" argument.

Liz scored several direct hits on that thread and the creeps know it which is why they tried to bury the thread in irrelevant bullshit.  

I made the mistake of honestly engaging with these cons years ago and got banninated by DaveScot his own self after my very first post which was very polite by my standards.   As I recall, I pointed out that steam, water and ice are actually three states of the same matter, H2O, and was banned for excessive sarcasm.  Alas, I wish that had been the case!
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 20 2011,16:50

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,14:00)
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,10:57)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,14:10)
 
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 20 2011,08:39)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,13:32)
[SNIP]

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or is that merely reinforcing your own biases?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, no one ever intimated that I needed to be less subtle before.  :D
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You, sir, win one internet!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Quote reference fail.

"My God!  It's full of porn."
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,16:53

Porn stars.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 20 2011,17:18

Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 20 2011,17:50)
Quote reference fail.

"My God!  It's full of porn."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is there an emoticon for hanging one's head in shame?
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 20 2011,18:20

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,08:32)
DrBot < rubs StephenB's nose > in Lizzie's argument:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now where, StephenB, do they conclude that “abiogenesis is plausible”? They don’t, what they show is that the data supports their hypothesis, as stated in the paper, and that it fits into their own broader theory about abiogenesis.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Like DrBot, I am astounded at how difficult it is for StephenB and the rest of the IDiots to follow Lizzie's very clear explanation.  It's almost enough to make me want to study psychology.  The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


StephenB. What a tool.

I'll have an exasparilla, please.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 20 2011,19:11

I have a generic solution to the link problem.

Just click on the link. When you get to the page, find the <br> in the URL and delete it and press Enter.

I suppose everyone else knows this, but I didn't.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 20 2011,23:25



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If junk punctuation turns out to have function, does that prove ID?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nah, it just shows that they're in a comma.

Besides, isn't punctuation a virtue?
Posted by: Tom Ames on Sep. 20 2011,23:58

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,07:32)
The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


We should not overestimate the intelligence of that crew's leadership, simply on the basis of their earned degrees and publications.

I've read a lot of what Dembski's written, and I have yet to be convinced that he's of more than average intelligence. He's got the bluster down, and he can push symbols around, after a fashion. But anyone who's seriously considered his "scholarship" can see that he has profound difficulty engaging with counter-arguments. He's a bullshitter who's learned how to sound smart to his primary audience, which consists of fundamentalist rubes.

Does anyone remember 'mturner' from ARN? He was really good at constructing sentences that sounded to the ignorant like they were full of profound truth. But he simply could not comprehend any challenges to his script--he was just not intellectually capable of listening to and considering anything that didn't fit into his story. Dembski's a lot like that. And I think that describes someone of less than impressive intelligence.

(Paul Nelson seems like he may be kind of smart. However, he's intellectually--and, in fact, generally--lazy. And Wells is just flat out dense.)

[Edit to remove evidence of own substandard intelligence wrt blockquotes.]


Posted by: George on Sep. 21 2011,01:22

ID is < totally not religious >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
hate speech against conservative, traditional Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, is never targeted by the authorities.

What does this have to do with Darwinism and ID? If you can’t figure it out, there is no point in trying to explain it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 21 2011,06:21

Quote (George @ Sep. 20 2011,23:22)
ID is < totally not religious >:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
hate speech against conservative, traditional Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, is never targeted by the authorities.

What does this have to do with Darwinism and ID? If you can’t figure it out, there is no point in trying to explain it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thank goodness for small favors.

sarcastical bolding mine
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 21 2011,06:33

From the < Attack-on-Religious-Civil-Liberties Dept: >
Blue Savannah:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Unbelievable! You can have orgies, but heaven forbid you study the Bible!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


paragwinn:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Orgies would fall under fraternal organizing, so if you were meeting on a regular basis, you would still need a permit.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Collin:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
either way, unconstitutional
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Cannot make this up.
I could find myself supporting a religious believer's right to conduct orgies in their home without government interference, especially considering GilDo's OP title: Two or More Replaced with More Than Three
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 21 2011,06:39

Quote (George @ Sep. 21 2011,01:22)
ID is < totally not religious >:

     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
hate speech against conservative, traditional Christians, both Catholic and Protestant, is never targeted by the authorities.

What does this have to do with Darwinism and ID? If you can’t figure it out, there is no point in trying to explain it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth,

I meant to say persuasive enough to me. I assert this based on my Christian faith. I simply do not believe that abiogenesis will ever be proven to have been the case.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Linky >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 21 2011,07:40

Poor Nick is not used to encountering sarcasm on UD



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
NickMatzke_UDSeptember 20, 2011 at 7:22 pm


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nick, you are missing the point. It’s only the irreducible part that can’t be reduced.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Someone please say what “the irreducible part” is for chemotaxis. JonathanM’s opening post doesn’t even try, and neither has anyone else. Yet the assertion has been made.

Chemotaxis just ain’t as hard as you guys think. Anything microscopic is already moving passively through Brownian motion, and anything that biases Brownian movement in the appropriate direction can cause chemotaxis. It’s been awhile since I reviewed this topic, but one thing I can remember is that things like nonliving vesicles can exhibit chemotaxis under pretty simple conditions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://tinyurl.com/3o6bvtj....3o6bvtj >
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 21 2011,08:06

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 20 2011,23:38)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 20 2011,07:32)
DrBot [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-



impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400218]rubs StephenB's nose[/URL] in Lizzie's argument:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now where, StephenB, do they conclude that “abiogenesis is plausible”? They don’t, what they show is that the data supports their hypothesis, as stated in the paper, and that it fits into their own broader theory about abiogenesis.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Like DrBot, I am astounded at how difficult it is for StephenB and the rest of the IDiots to follow Lizzie's very clear explanation.  It's almost enough to make me want to study psychology.  The problem isn't low intelligence, although that does contribute in some cases, or lack of education, ditto, but a deeply ingrained inability to recognize facts that contradict their views.  Frustrating, but fascinating.

It does make me more cognizant of when I might be reinforcing my own biases, though, so clearly my tard addiction is good for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There is an explanation for this observation.  It's not that the UDders don't understand the arguments and data being presented, however, it's precisely that they DO understand.

They aren't so much stupid, joseph and JoeG and FL and Dense excluded, as they are dishonest.  Yes, I'm talking about you ba77, you creep.

Notice how they'll bumble along until someone like Liz actually provides a link to a relevant resource or make a tight argument (down, Louis) and suddenly the tone changes.  Suddenly there is a barrage of creationist links and non sequiturs.  Suddenly you're back to the "can't add information" argument or the "not enough time" argument or the "improbable" argument.

Liz scored several direct hits on that thread and the creeps know it which is why they tried to bury the thread in irrelevant bullshit.  

I made the mistake of honestly engaging with these cons years ago and got banninated by DaveScot his own self after my very first post which was very polite by my standards.   As I recall, I pointed out that steam, water and ice are actually three states of the same matter, H2O, and was banned for excessive sarcasm.  Alas, I wish that had been the case!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


YEAH SORRY ABOUT THAT, HOMO!

I MEAN'T YOUR WIT WAS TOO DRY FOR THE AVERAGE ID-IST WHOSE IQ AS YOU KNOW IS ABOUT HALF MY 150 BASED ON A NON SAT BUT POPULAR TEST AT AN INUIT DATING SITE.

IF YOU HAD HAVE POINTED OUT THAT THE 3 PHASES...UM OR IS THAT PHASORS? OF GI CAMP GENERATOR WERE IN FACT 3 STATES OF THE SAME VOLTAGE THEN  HOW COULD I ACCUSE YOU OF SARCASM?

YOU SEE AS OSCAR WILDE ONCE SAID "SARCASM IS THE LOWEST FORM OF WIT BUT THE HIGHEST FORM OF INTELLIGENCE"

...SO HOW COULD I BE WRONG?

HOWEVER AGE HAS MELLOWED ME SO I NOT-POLOGISE BUT WOULD STILL BAN YOU FOR


I-R-O-N-Y!

© d.t.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 21 2011,10:46

Actually I wrote in a subsequent post using the pseudonym Dembski's Poodle that evolution was implausible because the framastat couldn't mork the frim fram.

That led Marks and Dembski to write their famous paper, Non-linear Framastatic Frim Frams in a Biological Morkverse.  (published in a comment thread on Amazon.com)
Posted by: JohnW on Sep. 21 2011,13:19

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 21 2011,08:46)
Actually I wrote in a subsequent post using the pseudonym Dembski's Poodle that evolution was implausible because the framastat couldn't mork the frim fram.

That led Marks and Dembski to write their famous paper, Non-linear Framastatic Frim Frams in a Biological Morkverse.  (published in a comment thread on Amazon.com)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Most of Dembski's target audience are hearing exactly that.  And they're convinced by it.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 21 2011,14:54


Posted by: keiths on Sep. 21 2011,15:37

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 21 2011,12:54)

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Reminds me of < this >.
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 21 2011,15:54



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That led Marks and Dembski to write their famous paper, Non-linear Framastatic Frim Frams in a Biological Morkverse.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Shazbot!!!!!!
Posted by: khan on Sep. 21 2011,19:01

Orgies would fall under fraternal organizing, so if you were meeting on a regular basis, you would still need a permit.

But what about the right of the people to peaceably assemble?
Posted by: Learned Hand on Sep. 21 2011,22:56

Quote (khan @ Sep. 21 2011,19:01)
Orgies would fall under fraternal organizing, so if you were meeting on a regular basis, you would still need a permit.

But what about the right of the people to peaceably assemble?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You mean assemble their pieces?
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 22 2011,07:18

I have to say that if your orgy is {ahem} "fraternal", you're doing it wrong. Expand that gene pool people!

Louis
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 22 2011,07:20

Gil Dodgen is < lost and confused >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My company has been very generous in providing me with all kinds of training....
. . .
In my experience attending these training courses I am struck by the fact that I am almost always among the very few who are American-born scientists and engineers.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alternative explanation:  The other engineers learned it the first time.

DrREC is probably correct, though:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps you are one of the few American-born scientists and engineers willing to work at the wages your company provides.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 22 2011,08:15

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 22 2011,15:20)
Gil Dodgen is < lost and confused >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My company has been very generous in providing me with all kinds of training....
. . .
In my experience attending these training courses I am struck by the fact that I am almost always among the very few who are American-born scientists and engineers.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alternative explanation:  The other engineers learned it the first time.

DrREC is probably correct, though:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps you are one of the few American-born scientists and engineers willing to work at the wages your company provides.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


HEADLINE NEWS

"ID TARD RACE TO TEH BOTTOM"

'MERIKA DITCHES CREATED BY BIG FLOOD.

id SOFTWARE ENGINEER  WHO CAN'T LOSE VIRGINITY TAKES JOB IN A 3RD WORLD SLUM.

WAKES UP AND REALIZES HE'S STILL IN KANSAS.

BUZZ ADRENALIN WAS JUST CGI ON CRACK AND THE NO FREE LUNCH ALGORITHM WAS A NIGERIAN INTERNET SCAM.

Gildo only has himself to blame.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 22 2011,08:24

Quote (Doc Bill @ Sep. 21 2011,18:46)
Actually I wrote in a subsequent post using the pseudonym Dembski's Poodle that evolution was implausible because the framastat couldn't mork the frim fram.

That led Marks and Dembski to write their famous paper, Non-linear Framastatic Frim Frams in a Biological Morkverse.  (published in a comment thread on Amazon.com)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Fine.

It's a pity the acronym wasn't BANFFFFFFFFFF
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 22 2011,12:34

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 22 2011,05:20)
Gil Dodgen is < lost and confused >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My company has been very generous in providing me with all kinds of training....
. . .
In my experience attending these training courses I am struck by the fact that I am almost always among the very few who are American-born scientists and engineers.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alternative explanation:  The other engineers learned it the first time.

DrREC is probably correct, though:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps you are one of the few American-born scientists and engineers willing to work at the wages your company provides.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
These three- to five-day courses are universally incredibly intensive, and it is assumed that the attendee has a thorough background in mathematics (integral and differential calculus, and differential equations), a complete understanding of basic physics (e.g., F=ma...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Gil, < elsewhere >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But here’s something very interesting about such a simple mathematical equation as F = MA. Force (e.g., lbf, or pound force) = Mass times Acceleration. Acceleration could be something like feet per second per second (ft. / sec.^2). Solving for Mass with simple algebra we get:

lbf / (ft. / sec.^2) or (lbf times sec.^2) / ft.

Thus, we calculate mass density by dividing mass by volume (in this case ft.^3), and we get:

lbf sec.^2 / ft.^4

How interesting! The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space.

And all of this ultimately comes from 1 apple plus 1 apple equals 2 apples.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I hope the furriners helped Gil with the physics part.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 22 2011,13:40

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 22 2011,12:34)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 22 2011,05:20)
Gil Dodgen is < lost and confused >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My company has been very generous in providing me with all kinds of training....
. . .
In my experience attending these training courses I am struck by the fact that I am almost always among the very few who are American-born scientists and engineers.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alternative explanation:  The other engineers learned it the first time.

DrREC is probably correct, though:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps you are one of the few American-born scientists and engineers willing to work at the wages your company provides.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
These three- to five-day courses are universally incredibly intensive, and it is assumed that the attendee has a thorough background in mathematics (integral and differential calculus, and differential equations), a complete understanding of basic physics (e.g., F=ma...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Gil, < elsewhere >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But here’s something very interesting about such a simple mathematical equation as F = MA. Force (e.g., lbf, or pound force) = Mass times Acceleration. Acceleration could be something like feet per second per second (ft. / sec.^2). Solving for Mass with simple algebra we get:

lbf / (ft. / sec.^2) or (lbf times sec.^2) / ft.

Thus, we calculate mass density by dividing mass by volume (in this case ft.^3), and we get:

lbf sec.^2 / ft.^4

How interesting! The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space.

And all of this ultimately comes from 1 apple plus 1 apple equals 2 apples.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I hope the furriners helped Gil with the physics part.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So?  I can prove that 1+1=0.

It still doesn't make it correct.

edit:

Oh, I get it now.  He left out the density component.  nevermind.

The correct formula would be F=Dva.

kgm/s^2 = kg/l * l * m/s^2

dumbass

edit: proof of dumbassery and pathetic knowledge of algebra
Posted by: MichaelJ on Sep. 22 2011,20:05

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 22 2011,22:20)
Gil Dodgen is < lost and confused >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My company has been very generous in providing me with all kinds of training....
. . .
In my experience attending these training courses I am struck by the fact that I am almost always among the very few who are American-born scientists and engineers.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alternative explanation:  The other engineers learned it the first time.

DrREC is probably correct, though:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Perhaps you are one of the few American-born scientists and engineers willing to work at the wages your company provides.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Or typically due to being native speakers they would have been promoted out of operational work. I saw this a lot when I was managing a group of programmers in the late 90s. If you were a native speaker and a reasonable coder it was relatively easy to get promoted to team-leader or you simply left and became a consultant.

Same in Engineering. After 10 years you would expect to be a manager, consultant or academic
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 22 2011,20:38

Quote (keiths @ Sep. 21 2011,15:37)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 21 2011,12:54)

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Reminds me of < this >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD reminds me of < this >.
Posted by: J-Dog on Sep. 22 2011,20:49

Quote (Kristine @ Sep. 22 2011,20:38)
 
Quote (keiths @ Sep. 21 2011,15:37)
   
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 21 2011,12:54)

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Reminds me of < this >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD reminds me of < this >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



UD reminds me of this:



Life and Science - They're doing them wrong
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 23 2011,06:16

Elizabeth Liddle destroys the "ID is too science" argument in < one magnificent post >.
Posted by: rossum on Sep. 23 2011,06:42

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,06:16)
Elizabeth Liddle destroys the "ID is too science" argument in [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]one magnificent post[/URL].
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hopefully working link to her excellent post: < here >.

The link is < http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613 >

rossum
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 23 2011,07:13

Quote (rossum @ Sep. 23 2011,07:42)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,06:16)
Elizabeth Liddle destroys the "ID is too science" argument in [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-


impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]one magnificent post[/URL].
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hopefully working link to her excellent post: [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]here[/URL].

The link is [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613[/URL]

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thanks, I got bitten by the line break bug.
Posted by: Wolfhound on Sep. 23 2011,07:45

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,08:13)
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 23 2011,07:42)
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,06:16)
Elizabeth Liddle destroys the "ID is too science" argument in [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-



impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]one magnificent post[/URL].
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hopefully working link to her excellent post: [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-


impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]here[/URL].

The link is [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-


impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613[/URL]

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thanks, I got bitten by the line break bug.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Looks like they purged it.  I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya!
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 23 2011,08:07

Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 23 2011,08:45)
Looks like they purged it.  I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nope, Rossum got bitten by it too.  Here's the link, tested for your safety and convenience:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613 >
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 23 2011,08:09

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,09:07)
Quote (Wolfhound @ Sep. 23 2011,08:45)
Looks like they purged it.  I'm shocked, shocked I tells ya!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nope, Rossum got bitten by it too.  Here's the link, tested for your safety and convenience:

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613[/URL]
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Okay, that's really weird.  I carefully removed the line break, and the board helpfully put it back in.  bit.ly refuses to shorten it.  Google to the rescue:  http://goo.gl/rr5PF
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 23 2011,08:29

If you don't preview your comment the link will usually not be broken. Of course that comes with it's own set of problems.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 23 2011,08:39

It's true, the line break is inserted by the board software.

therew are two ork-arounds.

You can, if your browser allows it, click on the link and wait for the not found message, then edit the <br> out of the URK and press Enter.

Or the person making the link can use tinyurl.com to make one that works.

Not all links require this. Just the really long ones. there are special characters that trigger it also.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 23 2011,08:41

...works for only a few seconds after scroll down.

I was thinking for a minute divine intervention (:0)

....but I realized that the ID program must be running the No Free Goat Algorithm ™

ID  is just tanding around singing 'pass teh loot' dressed in little aprons with satanic symbols these days.
Posted by: Acipenser on Sep. 23 2011,09:17

Yesterday everytime I tried to read that thread it would load for a few seconds then kick over to the 'The Internets can't show you that page' screen....don't know if it's my machine or their software.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 23 2011,09:38

Quote (Acipenser @ Sep. 23 2011,09:17)
Yesterday everytime I tried to read that thread it would load for a few seconds then kick over to the 'The Internets can't show you that page' screen....don't know if it's my machine or their software.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I still does that if the URL is defective.

That's a problem with the way this forum handles long URLs.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 23 2011,10:58



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

25.1.1
Eugene SSeptember 22, 2011 at 8:32 am

Elizabeth,

Yes, science is based on belief. First of all, by engaging yourself into science you believe that the outcome of your activity may be sensical and useful. Otherwise, being a scientist would be a bizarre thing.

More importantly, each theory rests upon axioms. True, a richer theory may question the initial axioms but only by introducing more axioms. A classic example is Lobachevsky and Eucledian geometries.

Your interpretation of Einstein overturning Newton I find strange. Einstein extended the Newtonian model, so the Newtonian mechanics became a special case of the more generic model. No overturning occured.

Circular argumentation is a logical flaw that people may have irrespective of their religious beliefs. I just wanted to say that abiogenesis makes no sense to me in all respects, scientific included.

How can something that does not exist yet start all of a sudden assembling itself? Give us at least one real life example of self-organisation. I also said that if such a thing had been possible in the past, chances are it would have been possible today unless we give a credible explanation of why it is the other way around.

Without these things, it is not a science but alchemy or attempts to breed a homunculus.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



these fuckfaces est tres postmodern que thee

ETA  this particular fuckface writes like he stabbed his right prefrontal cortex with a shitty catheter, and he spells like Louis.  what is it with these furriner tards these days?  shit is spreading!
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 23 2011,11:16

Quote (Acipenser @ Sep. 23 2011,09:17)
Yesterday everytime I tried to read that thread it would load for a few seconds then kick over to the 'The Internets can't show you that page' screen....don't know if it's my machine or their software.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's not your machine, since I've seen it too.  I wonder if it's IP-address related.  It happens to me in both Firefox and IE, but not if I use an IP anonymizer.
Posted by: Zachriel on Sep. 23 2011,13:06

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 23 2011,11:16)
Quote (Acipenser @ Sep. 23 2011,09:17)
Yesterday everytime I tried to read that thread it would load for a few seconds then kick over to the 'The Internets can't show you that page' screen....don't know if it's my machine or their software.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's not your machine, since I've seen it too.  I wonder if it's IP-address related.  It happens to me in both Firefox and IE, but not if I use an IP anonymizer.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Works in Chrome.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 23 2011,13:10

Depends on what you mean by works in chrome.

The link, as massaged by this forum's software doesn't work, because there's a <br> inserted into the URL.

Depending on the length of the URL.

It's been a problem as long as I've posted here. It's why a couple of posters routinely use tinyurl.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 23 2011,20:44

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 23 2011,13:10)
Depends on what you mean by works in chrome.

The link, as massaged by this forum's software doesn't work, because there's a <br> inserted into the URL.

Depending on the length of the URL.

It's been a problem as long as I've posted here. It's why a couple of posters routinely use tinyurl.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think the "works in Chrome" is in regards to the problem Acipenser and I were discussing, viz. "Yesterday everytime I tried to read that thread it would load for a few seconds then kick over to the 'The Internets can't show you that page' screen".

The links, they don't work for nobody unless you edit them.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 23 2011,23:47



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The links, they don't work for nobody unless you edit them.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I use Chrome. It allows me to see the problem link on the page that doesn't load, and fix it on the fly.

I wonder how many times it has to be repeated that the problem is here.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 24 2011,01:41

< From Gildo's latest he-once-was-lost testimonial: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But I’m a freethinker, a legitimate scientist.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe he and Joe G can team up and design their own computer simulation of evolution. Gildo can engineer the software and Joe can beat the shit out of the hardware.

If Gildo is a legitimate scientist, then I'm an eminent historian as a result of living through over 4 decades of American and World history.

He's been putting out quite a few of these lately. What gives?

eta: misspelling correction
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 24 2011,02:26

He once made a big deal that his threads got the most responses. Now he has been forsaken.

It probably hurts.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 24 2011,05:26

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 24 2011,02:41)
< From Gildo's latest he-once-was-lost testimonial: >        

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But I’m a freethinker, a legitimate scientist.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe he and Joe G can team up and design their own computer simulation of evolution. Gildo can engineer the software and Joe can beat the shit out of the hardware.

If Gildo is a legitimate scientist, then I'm an eminent historian as a result of living through over 4 decades of American and World history.

He's been putting out quite a few of these lately. What gives?

eta: misspelling correction
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


His modesty is touching. He was like Dawkins, but...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I could have put him to shame with the power and passion of my argumentation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Whatever happened to that prowess?
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 24 2011,08:32

Jonathan M has been infected with the < Lewontin meme >.  kairosfocus needs to learn to keep it in his pants.

Reading Jonathan M's posts actually saddens me.  Unlike some of the UD regulars, he doesn't come across as intellectually deficient.  He's young and could have a promising career, but he seems determined to follow a path that, at best, leads to becoming a bitter, irrelevant, failed academic teaching at a backwater bible school.  At worst he could end up on that park bench next to Joe G, muttering at pigeons.

It's bad enough that these bastards are trying to destroy science education.  The corruption of individual minds is simply repugnant.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 24 2011,10:58

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 23 2011,23:47)
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The links, they don't work for nobody unless you edit them.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I use Chrome. It allows me to see the problem link on the page that doesn't load, and fix it on the fly.

I wonder how many times it has to be repeated that the problem is here.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


There are two separate issues here that you are confusing.

I fully understand that this forum mangles links.  When I follow one of these mangled links, I see UD's 404 page, which looks like this:

< >

I also know how to fix this problem, by editing the URL at the top of the 404 page, or by pasting it into notepad and editing it there, or by following a shortened link helpfully posted by a fellow AtBC participant, such as the goo.gl link that Patrick posted yesterday.  When I try any of these things, the result depends on whether I'm in Firefox or IE on the one hand, or Chrome on the other.  In Firefox, I see the target UD thread perfectly well for a period of time of up to 60 seconds:

< >

Then, for no apparent reason, the page is suddenly replaced by this:

< >

(The same thing happens in IE, except that IE's "loss of connection" page looks a little different.)

It's this sudden loss of connection, not the URL mangling that we all know about, that Acipenser and I are encountering.  Zachriel is entirely correct that it doesn't happen in Chrome.  This problem is not here, it's at UD.  I suspect there's something in the HTML for that particular page that confuses IE and Firefox but that Chrome has no problem with.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 24 2011,14:08

My guess as a minor league web programmer is that IE and FireFox "fix" the URL sufficiently to get to the main page, but fail when moving down to the specific post.

It could be the UD software doing this, but why would it be different on different browsers, unless it is the browser doing it?

Unless I misread you, it only happens when the URL is defective, so regardless of the symptom, the cause is a defective URL.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 24 2011,14:30

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 24 2011,15:08)
My guess as a minor league web programmer is that IE and FireFox "fix" the URL sufficiently to get to the main page, but fail when moving down to the specific post.

It could be the UD software doing this, but why would it be different on different browsers, unless it is the browser doing it?

Unless I misread you, it only happens when the URL is defective, so regardless of the symptom, the cause is a defective URL.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


More datapoints (vis OS X browsers). Once the URL is repaired:

Chrome cranks away for some time, displays the comment, cranks away longer, then stops with the page incompletely loaded (some comments omitted). No error page.

Safari also cranks away and displays an incomplete page, but not quite as much of it as Chrome.

Firefox also cranks away, displays the comment, then immediately gives the "connection reset" message.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 24 2011,14:39

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 24 2011,14:08)
My guess as a minor league web programmer is that IE and FireFox "fix" the URL sufficiently to get to the main page, but fail when moving down to the specific post.

It could be the UD software doing this, but why would it be different on different browsers, unless it is the browser doing it?

Unless I misread you, it only happens when the URL is defective, so regardless of the symptom, the cause is a defective URL.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've only seen it happen on that specific page, and it still happens even if I edit the URL to remove the comment tag from the end.  In fact, it even happens when I go to UD's front page and follow the link from there.  Really.  It's not AtBC's URL mangling that's at fault here.

I've followed dozens of badly formatted links from AtBC to UD.  I know how to repair these links so that they work.  I've never seen this particular symptom before.

I notice that when I try to load that page, regardless of browser, it spends quite a long line displaying the spinning in-progress indicator on the title tab and claims to be waiting to read something from googlesyndication.com.  The difference between browsers seems to come down to what happens when the wait times out.  Firefox and IE treat it as a "reset connection" error, while Chrome just to gives up trying, leaving the page displayed but not completely loaded (even Chrome doesn't display the entire page, as judged by what shows up when you "view page source").
Posted by: Cubist on Sep. 24 2011,14:41

Another datapoint, for Safari under Mac OS X: Clicking the link directly, I get the "can't find it" message. By going to the UD homepage, clicking on 'evolution' in their tag-cloud, and clicking on the link from that set of results, I get the actual page.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 24 2011,15:31

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 24 2011,15:39)
I've followed dozens of badly formatted links from AtBC to UD.  I know how to repair these links so that they work.  I've never seen this particular symptom before.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've followed hundreds of well-formatted links to pages at UD that loaded properly.

Using Chrome, I encounter mountains of slippery horseshit, most emitted by a small collection of perseverative gasbags. The bald, unrepentant fuckwittery is very clear.

Using Safari the picture is similar, with subtle differences. Both load the horseshit more quickly than I can cart it away, although Safari leavens the outgassing with a hint of nutty finish I find hard to resist.

FireFox discloses better balance than either Chrome or Safari and, at least on paper, probably yields the best fidelity. But Firefox never quite rises above the plodding cephalofecal stupidity of UD to capture the shimmering shit-for-brains mist that engulfs UD at its best.

So I keep looking.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Sep. 24 2011,15:54

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 24 2011,15:31)
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 24 2011,15:39)
I've followed dozens of badly formatted links from AtBC to UD.  I know how to repair these links so that they work.  I've never seen this particular symptom before.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've followed hundreds of well-formatted links to pages at UD that loaded properly.

Using Chrome, I encounter mountains of slippery horseshit, most emitted by a small collection of perseverative gasbags. The bald, unrepentant fuckwittery is very clear.

Using Safari the picture is similar, with subtle differences. Both load the horseshit more quickly than I can cart it away, although Safari leavens the outgassing with a hint of nutty finish I find hard to resist.

FireFox discloses better balance than either Chrome or Safari and, at least on paper, probably yields the best fidelity. But Firefox never quite rises above the plodding cephalofecal stupidity of UD to capture the shimmering shit-for-brains mist that engulfs UD at its best.

So I keep looking.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You're trying to use a browser to fix the idiocy at UD?!?!?

That's kind of like taking twice as much cholesterol medicine to counter the bacon you eat for breakfast everyday.
Posted by: Zachriel on Sep. 24 2011,16:02

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 24 2011,10:58)
Zachriel is entirely correct that it doesn't happen in Chrome.  This problem is not here, it's at UD.  I suspect there's something in the HTML for that particular page that confuses IE and Firefox but that Chrome has no problem with.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting bug. We mentioned that it worked in Chrome because Elizabeth Liddle's responses are well worth the read.

< tinyurl.com/3pftzmb >
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 24 2011,18:08

Quote (Zachriel @ Sep. 24 2011,17:02)
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 24 2011,10:58)
Zachriel is entirely correct that it doesn't happen in Chrome.  This problem is not here, it's at UD.  I suspect there's something in the HTML for that particular page that confuses IE and Firefox but that Chrome has no problem with.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting bug. We mentioned that it worked in Chrome because Elizabeth Liddle's responses are well worth the read.

< tinyurl.com/3pftzmb >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Absolutely.  While the geek in me appreciates the speculation as to the nature of the technical problems, I hope we can find some time to address important topics in physics as well, such as how hard Chris Doyle would have to sneeze to extract his head from his ass.
Posted by: MichaelJ on Sep. 24 2011,20:24

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 24 2011,16:41)
< From Gildo's latest he-once-was-lost testimonial: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But I’m a freethinker, a legitimate scientist.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe he and Joe G can team up and design their own computer simulation of evolution. Gildo can engineer the software and Joe can beat the shit out of the hardware.

If Gildo is a legitimate scientist, then I'm an eminent historian as a result of living through over 4 decades of American and World history.

He's been putting out quite a few of these lately. What gives?

eta: misspelling correction
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Has Gildo even done any pretend science? All he does is preach how he once was lost and now is found
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 24 2011,20:32

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 24 2011,16:08)
I hope we can find some time to address important topics in physics as well, such as how hard Chris Doyle would have to sneeze to extract his head from his ass.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That is, indeed, a dark matter to contemplate.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 24 2011,21:19

Quote (Zachriel @ Sep. 24 2011,16:02)

Interesting bug. We mentioned that it worked in Chrome because Elizabeth Liddle's responses are well worth the read.

< tinyurl.com/3pftzmb >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Absolutely.  I wouldn't have cared half so much about the bug if it hadn't been preventing me from reading her responses.

I honestly don't know how she does it.  I would long since have hurled my laptop, or possibly myself, through the nearest window.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Sep. 24 2011,22:50

If we could create a Nobel Prize category for "dealing with fucktards" then Liddle would win hands down.

I mean, I would have been spastic long ago.  I can only guess that she is collecting data for a treatise on sociopathic behavior.

I give up.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 25 2011,00:10

I wonder how < Kairosfocus > can quote this from < Wikipedia > without getting red  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
To lie is to state something with disregard to the truth with the intention that people will accept the statement as truth . . . . even a true statement can be used to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being overall untruthful rather than the truthfulness of any individual statement that is considered the lie . . . . One can state part of the truth out of context, knowing that without complete information, it gives a false impression. Likewise, one can actually state accurate facts, yet deceive with them . . . . One lies by omission when omitting an important fact, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. Lying by omission includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. Also known as a continuing misrepresentation . . . . A misleading statement is one where there is no outright lie, but still retains the purpose of getting someone to believe in an untruth . . .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ET replace broken link by tinyURL
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 25 2011,08:49

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 25 2011,08:10)
I wonder how < Kairosfocus > can quote this from < Wikipedia > without getting red  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
To lie is to state something with disregard to the truth with the intention that people will accept the statement as truth . . . . even a true statement can be used to deceive. In this situation, it is the intent of being overall untruthful rather than the truthfulness of any individual statement that is considered the lie . . . . One can state part of the truth out of context, knowing that without complete information, it gives a false impression. Likewise, one can actually state accurate facts, yet deceive with them . . . . One lies by omission when omitting an important fact, deliberately leaving another person with a misconception. Lying by omission includes failures to correct pre-existing misconceptions. Also known as a continuing misrepresentation . . . . A misleading statement is one where there is no outright lie, but still retains the purpose of getting someone to believe in an untruth . . .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ET replace broken link by tinyURL
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


EASY, HOMO!

HE'S A RED FACED LIAR.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 25 2011,20:54

StephenB goes < back to the Fifties: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where I live, state law (thanks to the government bureacracy called the Center for Disease Control) requires that the municipal water supply be flouridated. Interestingly, there is plenty of science indicating that flouride (at 1 part per million–the “recommended theraputic dose”) is exceedingly toxic, potential harmful on many levels, and serves no useful purpose.

In the 1950?s a few dentists claimed that it helps prevent tooth decay, Nevertheless, everyone in our city is forced to take this drug every day, and they have nothing to say about it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


John Birch would be proud.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Sep. 25 2011,21:33

Quote (CeilingCat @ Sep. 25 2011,20:54)
StephenB goes < back to the Fifties: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where I live, state law (thanks to the government bureacracy called the Center for Disease Control) requires that the municipal water supply be flouridated. Interestingly, there is plenty of science indicating that flouride (at 1 part per million–the “recommended theraputic dose”) is exceedingly toxic, potential harmful on many levels, and serves no useful purpose.

In the 1950?s a few dentists claimed that it helps prevent tooth decay, Nevertheless, everyone in our city is forced to take this drug every day, and they have nothing to say about it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


John Birch would be proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Robert Welch, Jr. would be proud, for sure. What John Birch would have thought is not so easily determined; Welch merely borrowed Birch's name, much as Dembski tried to borrow the Polyani name back in 1999.

ETA: Somewhere in the boxes of stuff around here, I've got a dinner program autographed by Welch. No, I didn't go to the dinner, but I did acquire the program with some other papers.


Posted by: Ptaylor on Sep. 25 2011,22:19

< NickMatzke_UD >, to Gil:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Looks to me like you’ve kept the same high-certainty, low-level-of-relevant-scholarship attitude, you just switched sides while doing so. Actually coming to grips with the scientific literature on some specific biological topic would be worth a thousand defiant testimonials.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

(My bolding)
Gil responds with a, well, < defiant testimonial >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nick,

I examined the evidence and logic, and determined that you and those of your persuasion are promoting a thesis that cannot be defended on scientific, rational, mathematical or evidential grounds, and have therefore resorted to intimidation and vilification as the only recourse in an attempt to defend an indefensible, dying philosophy, disguised and promoted as “science.”

The fact that I am a legitimate scientist who followed the evidence where it led, and a former militant, obnoxious atheist like you, is what really pisses you off.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 25 2011,23:51

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
(GilDo:) The fact that I am a legitimate scientist who followed the evidence where it led, and a former militant, obnoxious atheist like you, is what really pisses you off.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, he's certainly right that obnoxiousness is involved.
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 26 2011,01:55

someone had better tell KF:
< a few million monkeys randomly recreate shakespeare >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Today (2011-09-23) at 2:30 PST the monkeys successfully randomly recreated A Lover’s Complaint. This is the first time a work of Shakespeare has actually been randomly reproduced.  Furthermore, this is the largest work ever randomly reproduced. It is one small step for a monkey, one giant leap for virtual primates everywhere.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 26 2011,06:20

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,01:55)
someone had better tell KF:
< a few million monkeys randomly recreate shakespeare >
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Today (2011-09-23) at 2:30 PST the monkeys successfully randomly recreated A Lover’s Complaint. This is the first time a work of Shakespeare has actually been randomly reproduced.  Furthermore, this is the largest work ever randomly reproduced. It is one small step for a monkey, one giant leap for virtual primates everywhere.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That reminds me of one of Bob Newhart's classic routines from his early 60's comedy albums:

Suppose they actually tried to duplicate Shakespeare with monkeys - someone would have to inspect the output, looking for something valid.  

One inspector speaks to another: "Hey Bob, this looks like it might be something.  'To be or not to be.  That is the ...  gzortensplat'"
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 26 2011,07:02

But does it latch? That is the question.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 26 2011,09:06

WHETHER 'TIS NOBLER IN THE MIND TO SUFFER, HOMOS!
THE SLINGS AND ARROWS OF OUTRAGEOUS CREATIONISTS,
OR TO TAKE ARMS AGAINST A SEA OF ROUBLES, (generated by Christ Co.)
AND BY OPPOSING END THEM? TO DIE: TO SLEEP; (of boredom)
NO MORE; AND BY A SLEEP TO SAY WE END ( but not in their case…. yawn)
THE HEART-ACHE AND THE THOUSAND NATURAL SHOCKS  (of their plain bone headedness)
THAT FLESH IS HEIR TO, 'TIS A CONSUMMATION  (but not in KF’s case)
DEVOUTLY TO BE WISH'D. TO DIE, TO SLEEP; (or because they  lie down with dogs)
TO SLEEP: PERCHANCE TO DREAM: AY, THERE'S THE RUB; (Denko on Denyse)
FOR IN THAT SLEEP OF DEATH WHAT DREAMS MAY COME (of angels for Bill)
WHEN WE HAVE SHUFFLED OFF THIS MORTAL COIL, (what?....before or after Dover?)
MUST GIVE US PAUSE: THERE'S THE RESPECT (those clowns need love too)
THAT MAKES CALAMITY OF SO LONG LIFE; (of ID? ..stillborn folks and buried under the roses)
FOR WHO WOULD BEAR THE WHIPS AND SCORNS OF TIME, (they can, all day long)
THE OPPRESSOR'S WRONG, THE PROUD MAN'S CONTUMELY, (oily KFs anyone?)
THE PANGS OF DESPISED LOVE, THE LAW'S DELAY, (Behe and Dover..again)
THE INSOLENCE OF OFFICE AND THE SPURNS  (fart gags and man of the year  Time Mag…..oh wait)
THAT PATIENT MERIT OF THE UNWORTHY TAKES, (kaching)
WHEN HE HIMSELF MIGHT HIS QUIETUS MAKE  (yes god ,where art thou…homo)
WITH A BARE BODKIN? WHO WOULD FARDELS BEAR, (Casey fuck brows who else)
TO GRUNT AND SWEAT UNDER A WEARY LIFE, (At Baylors broom cupboard?)
BUT THAT THE DREAD OF SOMETHING AFTER DEATH, (ummmm…..death?)
THE UNDISCOVER'D COUNTRY FROM WHOSE BOURN  (Ah yes Jerusalem the rough beast's destination)
NO TRAVELLER RETURNS, PUZZLES THE WILL (and  testament)
AND MAKES US RATHER BEAR THOSE   lulz  WE HAVE
THAN FLY TO OTHERS THAT WE KNOW NOT OF? (global warming deniers?)
THUS CONSCIENCE DOES MAKE COWARDS OF US ALL; (snikker ....nup only fact deniers)
and thus the native hue of evolution
is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of id,
and blogs of great piss and comment
with this regard their rusted on contributors  blow smoke ,
and lose the name of action. – please don’t give up!
the fair eve! nymph, in thy kansas
be all my sins remember'd.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 26 2011,11:13

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,01:55)
someone had better tell KF:
< a few million monkeys randomly recreate shakespeare >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Today (2011-09-23) at 2:30 PST the monkeys successfully randomly recreated A Lover’s Complaint. This is the first time a work of Shakespeare has actually been randomly reproduced.  Furthermore, this is the largest work ever randomly reproduced. It is one small step for a monkey, one giant leap for virtual primates everywhere.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If Shakespeare didn't latch all these words into English literature in the first place you wouldn't realize the monkeys typing them.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 26 2011,11:27

Quote (k.e.. @ Sep. 26 2011,15:06)
WHETHER 'TIS NOBLER IN THE MIND TO SUFFER, HOMOS!
THE SLINGS AND ARROWS OF OUTRAGEOUS CREATIONISTS,
OR TO TAKE ARMS AGAINST A SEA OF ROUBLES, (generated by Christ Co.)
AND BY OPPOSING END THEM? TO DIE: TO SLEEP; (of boredom)
NO MORE; AND BY A SLEEP TO SAY WE END ( but not in their case…. yawn)
THE HEART-ACHE AND THE THOUSAND NATURAL SHOCKS  (of their plain bone headedness)
THAT FLESH IS HEIR TO, 'TIS A CONSUMMATION  (but not in KF’s case)
DEVOUTLY TO BE WISH'D. TO DIE, TO SLEEP; (or because they  lie down with dogs)
TO SLEEP: PERCHANCE TO DREAM: AY, THERE'S THE RUB; (Denko on Denyse)
FOR IN THAT SLEEP OF DEATH WHAT DREAMS MAY COME (of angels for Bill)
WHEN WE HAVE SHUFFLED OFF THIS MORTAL COIL, (what?....before or after Dover?)
MUST GIVE US PAUSE: THERE'S THE RESPECT (those clowns need love too)
THAT MAKES CALAMITY OF SO LONG LIFE; (of ID? ..stillborn folks and buried under the roses)
FOR WHO WOULD BEAR THE WHIPS AND SCORNS OF TIME, (they can, all day long)
THE OPPRESSOR'S WRONG, THE PROUD MAN'S CONTUMELY, (oily KFs anyone?)
THE PANGS OF DESPISED LOVE, THE LAW'S DELAY, (Behe and Dover..again)
THE INSOLENCE OF OFFICE AND THE SPURNS  (fart gags and man of the year  Time Mag…..oh wait)
THAT PATIENT MERIT OF THE UNWORTHY TAKES, (kaching)
WHEN HE HIMSELF MIGHT HIS QUIETUS MAKE  (yes god ,where art thou…homo)
WITH A BARE BODKIN? WHO WOULD FARDELS BEAR, (Casey fuck brows who else)
TO GRUNT AND SWEAT UNDER A WEARY LIFE, (At Baylors broom cupboard?)
BUT THAT THE DREAD OF SOMETHING AFTER DEATH, (ummmm…..death?)
THE UNDISCOVER'D COUNTRY FROM WHOSE BOURN  (Ah yes Jerusalem the rough beast's destination)
NO TRAVELLER RETURNS, PUZZLES THE WILL (and  testament)
AND MAKES US RATHER BEAR THOSE   lulz  WE HAVE
THAN FLY TO OTHERS THAT WE KNOW NOT OF? (global warming deniers?)
THUS CONSCIENCE DOES MAKE COWARDS OF US ALL; (snikker ....nup only fact deniers)
and thus the native hue of evolution
is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of id,
and blogs of great piss and comment
with this regard their rusted on contributors  blow smoke ,
and lose the name of action. – please don’t give up!
the fair eve! nymph, in thy kansas
be all my sins remember'd.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
Posted by: rossum on Sep. 26 2011,11:50

Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 26 2011,12:17

Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Tardy on, Garth.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 26 2011,17:58

Designer identified by DeNews!  They are transposons, but she does not have the wit to recognize she has shot herself in the foot.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Not only is genome alteration for placental pregnancy a “huge cut-and-paste operation,” study finds, but …
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



From the article:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
They found more than 1500 genes that were expressed in the uterus solely in the placental mammals. Intriguingly, note the researchers, the expression of these genes in the uterus is coordinated by transposons -- essentially selfish pieces of genetic material that replicate within the host genome and used to be called junk DNA.

"Transposons grow like parasites that have invaded the body, multiplying and taking up space in the genome," said Vincent J. Lynch, research scientist in EEB and lead author of the paper.

But they also activate or repress genes related to pregnancy, he said.

"These transposons are not genes that underwent small changes over long periods of time and eventually grew into their new role during pregnancy," Lynch said. "They are more like prefabricated regulatory units that install themselves into a host genome, which then recycles them to carry out entirely new functions like facilitating maternal-fetal communication" Lynch said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Keep posting them functional DNA articles regardless of whether anything is known about their origin, DeNews!
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 26 2011,18:09

DeNews continues to post about what others are saying about relativity:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Yet more reactions to the “faster than light” neutrinos: Must be “subtle error”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



C'mon, post your deep theorizing, self-appointed cosmology expert (from reading one popular book about string theory by Woit).
Posted by: noncarborundum on Sep. 26 2011,19:19

Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
Posted by: Hermagoras on Sep. 26 2011,21:42

Huzzah! Popping in out of my busy life to note that Frilly Gil, in the opening moves of a musically inflected < C.3 >, does injury to English, as follows:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Although for many years I was a classical concert pianist, I was raised by a wonderful father . . .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ponder the significance of that although for a moment.  

< Da Tard >
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 26 2011,22:47

Quote (Hermagoras @ Sep. 26 2011,19:42)
Huzzah! Popping in out of my busy life to note that Frilly Gil, in the opening moves of a musically inflected < C.3 >, does injury to English, as follows:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Although for many years I was a classical concert pianist, I was raised by a wonderful father . . .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Ponder the significance of that although for a moment.  

< Da Tard >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe he's trying to distinguish himself from < Mozart > and < Beethoven >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
musicologist Maynard Solomon maintains that Leopold enjoyed basking in the reflected glory of his “miraculous” child’s talents, and exploited the boy for material gain while constantly claiming poverty to all who would listen.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Beethoven's father cruelly made young Ludwig practice for hours at a time.  His dream was to have his son make the family rich.  After long nights of drinking, Beethoven's father would sometimes drag his son out of bed to practice the piano or play for guests.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Being mistaken for a person of renown can be quite a terrible burden. :p

eta: emoticon powers, activate!
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 26 2011,23:35

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 26 2011,10:17)
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Tardy on, Garth.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Would that be better said,

"60 millionths of a second preemie on, Garth"

Well, OK. It wouldn't. But, it would be more current until the next uncharged particle burst. Or, as I suggested, the whole universe is mostly 60 millionths of a second slow. I am slower than that by several orders of magnitude, but I don't think people notice.

Does any one remember "tackions?"
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 26 2011,23:38

Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
 
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 27 2011,01:30

Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,05:38)
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
   
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmm, well I think the one I posted tomorrow was better, but I decided to delete it last week.
Posted by: Dr.GH on Sep. 27 2011,01:40

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,23:30)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,05:38)
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
 
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
   
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmm, well I think the one I posted tomorrow was better, but I decided to delete it last week.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry, I wasn't there. But I won't be there later, or earlier either.

I actually had a thought that these neutrinos could be using some of string theory's spare dimensions. But I still favor my idea that the universe is really running a 60 millionth of a second late and these particles have just avoided the crowded station.
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 27 2011,03:04

Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,07:40)
Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,23:30)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,05:38)
 
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
 
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
     
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmm, well I think the one I posted tomorrow was better, but I decided to delete it last week.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry, I wasn't there. But I won't be there later, or earlier either.

I actually had a thought that these neutrinos could be using some of string theory's spare dimensions. But I still favor my idea that the universe is really running a 60 millionth of a second late and these particles have just avoided the crowded station.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


We are living in a simulation - photons are buffered, neutrinos are not.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 27 2011,03:49

Quote (BillB @ Sep. 27 2011,09:04)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,07:40)
Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,23:30)
 
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,05:38)
 
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
   
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
     
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmm, well I think the one I posted tomorrow was better, but I decided to delete it last week.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry, I wasn't there. But I won't be there later, or earlier either.

I actually had a thought that these neutrinos could be using some of string theory's spare dimensions. But I still favor my idea that the universe is really running a 60 millionth of a second late and these particles have just avoided the crowded station.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


We are living in a simulation - photons are buffered, neutrinos are not.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


World of Earthcraft? We lagged compared to the neutrinos?

Hmmmm. I demand a reroll!

Louis
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 27 2011,05:19

Quote (Louis @ Sep. 27 2011,09:49)
Quote (BillB @ Sep. 27 2011,09:04)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,07:40)
 
Quote (BillB @ Sep. 26 2011,23:30)
 
Quote (Dr.GH @ Sep. 27 2011,05:38)
   
Quote (noncarborundum @ Sep. 26 2011,17:19)
   
Quote (rossum @ Sep. 26 2011,11:50)
       
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If it got here via neutrino, maybe it's the PONW.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is definitely the POSW (Post Of Some Week).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmm, well I think the one I posted tomorrow was better, but I decided to delete it last week.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sorry, I wasn't there. But I won't be there later, or earlier either.

I actually had a thought that these neutrinos could be using some of string theory's spare dimensions. But I still favor my idea that the universe is really running a 60 millionth of a second late and these particles have just avoided the crowded station.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


We are living in a simulation - photons are buffered, neutrinos are not.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


World of Earthcraft? We lagged compared to the neutrinos?

Hmmmm. I demand a reroll!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Mmmhh. Can we get a Ping on those neutrinos?
Posted by: fusilier on Sep. 27 2011,07:39

Quote (k.e.. @ Sep. 26 2011,10:06)
WHETHER 'TIS NOBLER IN THE MIND TO SUFFER, HOMOS!
THE SLINGS AND ARROWS OF OUTRAGEOUS CREATIONISTS,
OR TO TAKE ARMS AGAINST A SEA OF ROUBLES, (generated by Christ Co.)
AND BY OPPOSING END THEM? TO DIE: TO SLEEP; (of boredom)
NO MORE; AND BY A SLEEP TO SAY WE END ( but not in their case…. yawn)
THE HEART-ACHE AND THE THOUSAND NATURAL SHOCKS  (of their plain bone headedness)
THAT FLESH IS HEIR TO, 'TIS A CONSUMMATION  (but not in KF’s case)
DEVOUTLY TO BE WISH'D. TO DIE, TO SLEEP; (or because they  lie down with dogs)
TO SLEEP: PERCHANCE TO DREAM: AY, THERE'S THE RUB; (Denko on Denyse)
FOR IN THAT SLEEP OF DEATH WHAT DREAMS MAY COME (of angels for Bill)
WHEN WE HAVE SHUFFLED OFF THIS MORTAL COIL, (what?....before or after Dover?)
MUST GIVE US PAUSE: THERE'S THE RESPECT (those clowns need love too)
THAT MAKES CALAMITY OF SO LONG LIFE; (of ID? ..stillborn folks and buried under the roses)
FOR WHO WOULD BEAR THE WHIPS AND SCORNS OF TIME, (they can, all day long)
THE OPPRESSOR'S WRONG, THE PROUD MAN'S CONTUMELY, (oily KFs anyone?)
THE PANGS OF DESPISED LOVE, THE LAW'S DELAY, (Behe and Dover..again)
THE INSOLENCE OF OFFICE AND THE SPURNS  (fart gags and man of the year  Time Mag…..oh wait)
THAT PATIENT MERIT OF THE UNWORTHY TAKES, (kaching)
WHEN HE HIMSELF MIGHT HIS QUIETUS MAKE  (yes god ,where art thou…homo)
WITH A BARE BODKIN? WHO WOULD FARDELS BEAR, (Casey fuck brows who else)
TO GRUNT AND SWEAT UNDER A WEARY LIFE, (At Baylors broom cupboard?)
BUT THAT THE DREAD OF SOMETHING AFTER DEATH, (ummmm…..death?)
THE UNDISCOVER'D COUNTRY FROM WHOSE BOURN  (Ah yes Jerusalem the rough beast's destination)
NO TRAVELLER RETURNS, PUZZLES THE WILL (and  testament)
AND MAKES US RATHER BEAR THOSE   lulz  WE HAVE
THAN FLY TO OTHERS THAT WE KNOW NOT OF? (global warming deniers?)
THUS CONSCIENCE DOES MAKE COWARDS OF US ALL; (snikker ....nup only fact deniers)
and thus the native hue of evolution
is sicklied o'er with the pale cast of id,
and blogs of great piss and comment
with this regard their rusted on contributors  blow smoke ,
and lose the name of action. – please don’t give up!
the fair eve! nymph, in thy kansas
be all my sins remember'd.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW,

I second the motion.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 27 2011,08:38

Pride goeth before a fail.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ThoughtSpark:

Isn’t it about time you said something new in there posts of yours, Gil? I’m partial to intelligent design, but it does you no favours repeating the same old “I used to be an atheist, you know!”, time after time. One would almost be lead to think you are proud of your atheist history.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-400893 >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 27 2011,12:58

The DU page loading bug is back, but only on some pages.

Now it affects Chrome as well as IE and FireFox.

The Science and Freethinking thread is unusable as well as stupid.
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 27 2011,18:47

As DeNews condescends to notify UDers of Jason Rosenhouse's < upcoming book >[link to Jason's blog], woodford ponders < this >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why does News have to sneer at everything? It really lowers the tone of this website and takes away from what’s being said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Why, indeed.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 27 2011,19:12

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 27 2011,19:47)
As DeNews condescends to notify UDers of Jason Rosenhouse's < upcoming book >[link to Jason's blog], woodford ponders < this >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why does News have to sneer at everything? It really lowers the tone of this website and takes away from what’s being said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Why, indeed.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


While Mrs. O'Leary treated me very nicely in my guise as MathGrrl, I simply cannot accept that she has the writing skill necessary to lower the tone of UD.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 27 2011,19:52

as stupid as whatever the fuck tranmaw is may in fact be, those haploid drunks are on a whole 'notha level
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 27 2011,21:55

Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 27 2011,12:58)
The DU page loading bug is back, but only on some pages.

Now it affects Chrome as well as IE and FireFox.

The Science and Freethinking thread is unusable as well as stupid.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Firefox explains the bug thusly:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The connection was reset
     
The connection to the server was reset while the page was loading.
       
The site could be temporarily unavailable or too busy. Try again in a few moments.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It graciously leaves out explanation B: "Firefox is protecting you from Tard Overload"
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 28 2011,00:48

Now it's later in the day, I'm connected to a better internet connection and it loads perfectly.  I'm betting UD's server is choking during periods of high Tard input and dropping the connection.

F/N Don't worry, there doesn't appear to be anything particularly worth reading on that thread, but if I spot something I'll upload it here.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Sep. 28 2011,07:12

It's been a while since we had a "it's another record month at UD for views" post...

I wonder why.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 28 2011,08:29

< gpuccio is back > and talking about information again:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I am discussing the probability of generating the complex functional information present in basci protein domains by darwinain evolution. That is clear, simple and explicit.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's almost as though he's completely forgotten about the < multiple threads on Mark Frank's blog > where he claimed to be able to calculate CSI but ended up repeatedly changing his definition and finally stopped participating altogether.

He must have spent the last year fixing those problems with his definition and calculations.  Surely no Intelligent Design Creationist at UD would be so intellectually dishonest as to continue to use demonstrably nonsensical concepts.
Posted by: BillB on Sep. 28 2011,08:56

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 28 2011,14:29)
< gpuccio is back > and talking about information again:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I am discussing the probability of generating the complex functional information present in basci protein domains by darwinain evolution. That is clear, simple and explicit.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's almost as though he's completely forgotten about the < multiple threads on Mark Frank's blog > where he claimed to be able to calculate CSI but ended up repeatedly changing his definition and finally stopped participating altogether.

He must have spent the last year fixing those problems with his definition and calculations.  Surely no Intelligent Design Creationist at UD would be so intellectually dishonest as to continue to use demonstrably nonsensical concepts.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And is now < running away: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrBot:

I am afraid your “arguments” have fallen below any acceptable level. A pity, I thought you were quite reasonable, in the beginning.

Well, I will leave you to explain, if you want, how the laws of electromagnetism completely explain the existence of Windows 7. Good luck, and have a good time.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Zachriel on Sep. 28 2011,09:55



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrRec: Functional information DOES increase in nature (de novo genes, novel activities).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: Sure. The problem is: how does it increase? Design certainly can increase functional information, for example by designing and implementing a de novo gene. Can the darwinian algorithm do the same? The simple answer is: no, if the new information is complex and not deconstructable into simple naturally selectable steps.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If ...



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: Directed evolution, if I understand what you mean, is a form of design.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Directed evolution can address the issue of selectable steps.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: The fundamental limitation is that only one subset of functions is “naturally selectable”: those that confer a reproductive advantage. Now, whatever Petrushka may go on saying, that subset is a very tiny subset of all possible functions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This seems to be the crux of gpuccio's position. In fact, as anyone with passing familiarity with biology can see, there are many ways to be reproductively competitive, from sunflowers to sunfish.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Sep. 28 2011,10:17



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Now, whatever Petrushka may go on saying, that subset is a very tiny subset of all possible functions. Therefore, natural selection is obviously much less powerful than intelligent selection. Intelligent selection can select any defined function, while natural selection can select only a reproductive advantage. It’s as simple as that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I forget where it is that he dismisses neutral and nearly neutral variation.

But he completely misses Petrushka's point, which is that  directed evolution is a targeted search and natural selection is not. Natural selection operates in many dimensions.

Anyway, I want to cry.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 28 2011,16:13

DeNews being an IDiot:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Peer review is, in the end, a victim of self-inflicted injury. And Karl Giberson is the last man alive, according to his own testimony, who really, truly believes in it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Somebody obviously has a severe cognitive deficit, to say that about a person who writes:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In our new book, "The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age," historian Randall Stephens and I look at the widespread and disturbing inability of American evangelicals to distinguish between real knowledge claims, rooted in serious research and endorsed by credible knowledge communities, and pseudo-claims made by unqualified groups and leaders that offer "faith-friendly" alternatives. Across the board we find evangelical Christians attracted to indefensible views in many areas: American history (the Founding Fathers intended America to be a Christian nation), sexual orientation (you can "pray away the gay"), climate change (not happening), evolution (never happened), cosmology (Big Bang is a big joke) and even biblical studies (the bible tells us what is about to happen in the Middle East).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And how does science as a whole create a real knowledge base?  The peer-reviewed literature.  All scientists know this, and believe it, because it works.  By the way, UD hits on four of these pseudo-claims, if you count the Bible Code debacle of Dembski for an example of the latter.
Posted by: dheddle on Sep. 28 2011,17:57

Off topic. Tenure track faculty positions available, at least one in Mathematical Biology.

< Read about 'em here. >

(I have moved from the physics department to chair, temporarily, the Mathematics department.)

Equivalent statements:

1) We are an EoE.

2) Preference without prejudice will be given to anyone who can calculate the specified complexity of any living organism.
Posted by: J-Dog on Sep. 28 2011,18:06

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 28 2011,17:57)
Off topic. Tenure track faculty positions available, at least one in Mathematical Biology.

< Read about 'em here. >

(I have moved from the physics department to chair, temporarily, the Mathematics department.)

Equivalent statements:

1) We are an EoE.

2) Preference without prejudice will be given to anyone who can calculate the specified complexity of any living organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


heddle:  

re: @#2.  You have quite the little mean streak there Dr. Heddle... I like it! :)

Congratulations on the move.  I hope it all adds up for you.

ps:  You got out of Physics just in time !  Everything they know is wrong, right?
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 28 2011,18:15

Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 28 2011,15:57)
Off topic. Tenure track faculty positions available, at least one in Mathematical Biology.

< Read about 'em here. >

(I have moved from the physics department to chair, temporarily, the Mathematics department.)

Equivalent statements:

1) We are an EoE.

2) Preference without prejudice will be given to anyone who can calculate the specified complexity of any living organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Who was it at UD who said that they would perform the task stated in #2 if given thousands or tens of thousands of dollars? This could be the incentive they're looking for!
Posted by: Ptaylor on Sep. 29 2011,00:34

Gil appears to be pricked by comments on his predictability:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My purpose is to provide encouragement to fellow victims of materialistic philosophy — which is ubiquitous and pervasive in public education and all the popular media — and to demonstrate that legitimate science points in the direction of design and therefore purpose and meaning in life.

I promise to never again reference my abandonment of militant atheism, since that seems to be out of bounds. I’ll just address the science.
<more of the usual Gil-speak - "transparently illogical", "mathematically absurd", etc>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
So there goes argument E from the < Dodgenator3000 >. It'll be interesting to see if he can keep his word.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 29 2011,04:44

Quote (Zachriel @ Sep. 28 2011,17:55)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
DrRec: Functional information DOES increase in nature (de novo genes, novel activities).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: Sure. The problem is: how does it increase? Design certainly can increase functional information, for example by designing and implementing a de novo gene. Can the darwinian algorithm do the same? The simple answer is: no, if the new information is complex and not deconstructable into simple naturally selectable steps.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If ...

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: Directed evolution, if I understand what you mean, is a form of design.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Directed evolution can address the issue of selectable steps.

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< Gpuccio >: The fundamental limitation is that only one subset of functions is “naturally selectable”: those that confer a reproductive advantage. Now, whatever Petrushka may go on saying, that subset is a very tiny subset of all possible functions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This seems to be the crux of gpuccio's position. In fact, as anyone with passing familiarity with biology can see, there are many ways to be reproductively competitive, from sunflowers to sunfish.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


INDEED, HOMO!

HOW DO YOU GET FROM SUNFLOWERS TO SUNFISH? (with or out fingers)

......EASY STRIKE OUT FLOWERS AN' PUT FISION.
Posted by: k.e.. on Sep. 29 2011,04:56

Quote (Ptaylor @ Sep. 29 2011,08:34)
Gil appears to be pricked by comments on his predictability:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My purpose is to provide encouragement to fellow victims of materialistic philosophy — which is ubiquitous and pervasive in public education and all the popular media — and to demonstrate that legitimate science points in the direction of design and therefore purpose and meaning in life.

I promise to never again reference my abandonment of militant atheism, since that seems to be out of bounds. I’ll just address the science.
<more of the usual Gil-speak - "transparently illogical", "mathematically absurd", etc>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
So there goes argument E from the < Dodgenator3000 >. It'll be interesting to see if he can keep his word.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is Gil one of the original 12 or 10 or maybe 7 lost  tribes spawned by Abraham?

IF YOU PRICK US, DO WE NOT BLEED? HOMOS.

If so, he needs to get up close and personal with his Rabbi.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 29 2011,06:18

Quote (Ptaylor @ Sep. 29 2011,01:34)
Gil appears to be pricked by comments on his predictability:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My purpose is to provide encouragement to fellow victims of materialistic philosophy — which is ubiquitous and pervasive in public education and all the popular media....
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil should expect a call from the Department of Redundancy Department.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Sep. 29 2011,06:20

Blue_Savannah < states her values: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It always amuses me the way actors, comedians, cartoonists, etc pride themselves on their alleged intelligence by mocking those who dissent against an unsupported theory. When I want to learn about scientific theories and evidence for/against them I look to UNcommon Descent, not pop culture.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That's after giving the correct URL for a Doonesbury cartoon after DeNews posted what turned out to be a link to Gmail.  Doonesbury - Gmail - when you've mastered ID think, there's no difference.
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on Sep. 29 2011,07:50

Quote (CeilingCat @ Sep. 29 2011,12:20)
Blue_Savannah [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/this-doonesbury-cartoon-tells-you-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-design-vs-darwinism-contr

oversies/comment-page-1/#comment-401117]states her values:[/URL]  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It always amuses me the way actors, comedians, cartoonists, etc pride themselves on their alleged intelligence by mocking those who dissent against an unsupported theory. When I want to learn about scientific theories and evidence for/against them I look to UNcommon Descent, not pop culture.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



That's after giving the correct URL for a Doonesbury cartoon after DeNews posted what turned out to be a link to Gmail.  Doonesbury - Gmail - when you've mastered ID think, there's no difference.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


One word: Oh Boy!*









*Intended
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 29 2011,13:53

Poor, expelled Gonzalez:

< http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastr....e-zones >

I expect extensive discussion at UD any time now.
Posted by: damitall on Sep. 29 2011,15:20

Do we take note of the KF "Lewontin" quote-mine count any more, or just accept its inexorable upward trajectory?

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....-401119 >
Posted by: Ptaylor on Sep. 29 2011,15:47

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 29 2011,11:15)
   
Quote (dheddle @ Sep. 28 2011,15:57)

...

2) Preference without prejudice will be given to anyone who can calculate the specified complexity of any living organism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Who was it at UD who said that they would perform the task stated in #2 if given thousands or tens of thousands of dollars? This could be the incentive they're looking for!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would of course be Pa-"go away little girl"-V, as originally pointed out by oldman < here >.

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What she wants from us is the “chance hypothesis” for these programs. If she is willing to pay me large sums of money, I might consider showing her how its done. However, considering the time, effort and thought required, I am not willing to give it to her for free.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Current link >.
Posted by: keiths on Sep. 29 2011,16:01

< Progress of a sort > -- Denyse is no longer looking for a single "selfish gene":


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The whole of human history can be explained by the competition of the never-identified “selfish genes.” As every Sunday features editor knows.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, where are they, Darwinists?

I wonder if Denyse saw the Iron Curtain before it fell.  And really, who makes curtains out of iron?  Stupid communists.
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 29 2011,16:06

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Sep. 28 2011,16:13)
DeNews being an IDiot:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Peer review is, in the end, a victim of self-inflicted injury. And Karl Giberson is the last man alive, according to his own testimony, who really, truly believes in it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Somebody obviously has a severe cognitive deficit, to say that about a person who writes:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In our new book, "The Anointed: Evangelical Truth in a Secular Age," historian Randall Stephens and I look at the widespread and disturbing inability of American evangelicals to distinguish between real knowledge claims, rooted in serious research and endorsed by credible knowledge communities, and pseudo-claims made by unqualified groups and leaders that offer "faith-friendly" alternatives. Across the board we find evangelical Christians attracted to indefensible views in many areas: American history (the Founding Fathers intended America to be a Christian nation), sexual orientation (you can "pray away the gay"), climate change (not happening), evolution (never happened), cosmology (Big Bang is a big joke) and even biblical studies (the bible tells us what is about to happen in the Middle East).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And how does science as a whole create a real knowledge base?  The peer-reviewed literature.  All scientists know this, and believe it, because it works.  By the way, UD hits on four of these pseudo-claims, if you count the Bible Code debacle of Dembski for an example of the latter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


All creationism is is an attempt to control, and thus "predict," the future, and thus scare people into doing what creationists want, and living the way that they think we should live. Peer review is decentralized, nonauthoritarian, so naturally it gets dissed.

Creationism adapts not so much to new scientific knowledge as to their own new ideas of how the worldly are "corrupt." I remember a time when conservatives insisted that Jesus kept his hair short (Rev. Cecil Maxey) and paid his taxes. Sshh! Don't tell the T-publicans!
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 29 2011,21:43

Quote (damitall @ Sep. 29 2011,16:20)
Do we take note of the KF "Lewontin" quote-mine count any more, or just accept its inexorable upward trajectory?

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/this-doonesbury-cartoon-tells-you-all-you-need-to-know-about-the-design-vs-darwinism-contr

oversies/comment-page-1/#comment-401119]http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....-401119[/URL]
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Lewontin >!
Posted by: Quack on Sep. 30 2011,00:46

I took the liberty of making a working Tinyurl of < damitall's link >

ETA: Tested!
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 30 2011,01:06

< Saul Alinsky >!
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 30 2011,06:19

Quote (paragwinn @ Sep. 30 2011,02:06)
< Saul Alinsky >!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


With a Lewontin! on the side.
Posted by: sparc on Sep. 30 2011,06:20

Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Sep. 30 2011,06:34

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 30 2011,07:20)
Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Much more fun is a sexually motivated change in spirituality.
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 30 2011,07:19

dmullenix < speaks truth at UD >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As far as I can tell, ID’s sole self-appoint task is to make futile attacks on on their straw-man misunderstandings of evolutionary theory and, on this blog at least, on science generally.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


(The whole post is worth reading.)

I sense a ban and comment elimination pending.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Sep. 30 2011,07:31

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 30 2011,07:20)
Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


whatever it is he is trying to do it with, i am sure that it's a disappointment for everyone but gordon mullings.  nothing could kill a big throbber quicker than listening to that glory hole troll open his goober smoocher and start flapping those face curtains about a big pile of jackshit
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 30 2011,07:43

:p  < Hee hee here >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
4 ThoughtSpark
September 24, 2011 at 5:16 am

Isn’t it about time you said something new in there posts of yours, Gil? I’m partial to intelligent design, but it does you no favours repeating the same old “I used to be an atheist, you know!”, time after time. One would almost be lead to think you are proud of your atheist history.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ouch! That must have stung!

Don't be backslider, Gil! (Yeah, as if.)
Posted by: Patrick on Sep. 30 2011,08:42

Despite the always stiff competition at UD, I believe the Cluelessly Projecting Hypocrite of the Week award should go to < Eugene S >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I think to say: “we don’t know” or even “we can’t know” is more honest than to lie with smoke in mirrors instead of evidence.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, Eugene, that would indeed be more honest.  I look forward to you applying that standard to Upright BiPed, gpuccio, Dembski, kairosfocus, and, of course, your good self.
Posted by: Louis on Sep. 30 2011,08:58

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 30 2011,12:34)
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 30 2011,07:20)
Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Much more fun is a sexually motivated change in spirituality.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ahhhh the Tortured Monk routine, I remember it well.

Louis
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Sep. 30 2011,09:52

Major league philosophy coming up from vjtorley:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Hi junkdnaforlife,

“Plainly, you cannot invoke the laws of physics to explain the laws of physics.”

I loved that line. That says it all. Thanks.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Physicists are puzzled as to why derivations suddenly become invalid.
Posted by: REC on Sep. 30 2011,10:04

Quote (sparc @ Sep. 30 2011,06:20)
Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The "research" group that published that paper is from Pat Robertson U, with this on their webpage:

"tend to be student-oriented, focusing on engaging students through the subject matter and its application to their professional identity and ways in which God may be at work in their lives. I also try to call students to be good stewards of the many resources they have been given, to teach them to be advocates for those who are marginalized, and to see what they do in the context of God's redemptive plan.

I have published two integration textbooks, such as Family Therapies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal and Modern Psychopathologies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal. I have also previously published several books on homosexuality and sexual identity: Homosexuality and the Christian: A Guide for Pastors, Parents and Friends, Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate, Sexual Identity: A Guide to Living in the Time Between the Times, Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, and Sexual Identity Synthesis: Attributions, Meaning-Making and the Search for Congruence."

< http://www.regent.edu/acad....use.htm >
Posted by: Quack on Sep. 30 2011,10:45

Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 30 2011,08:42)
Despite the always stiff competition at UD, I believe the Cluelessly Projecting Hypocrite of the Week award should go to < Eugene S >:
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I think to say: “we don’t know” or even “we can’t know” is more honest than to lie with smoke in mirrors instead of evidence.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, Eugene, that would indeed be more honest.  I look forward to you applying that standard to Upright BiPed, gpuccio, Dembski, kairosfocus, and, of course, your good self.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Might this case of "I-don't-know-honesty" be appropriate here:

From a transcript made at the DDD3 conference in 2002 (Source ARN):
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Question from the audience: I’d be interested in hearing you tell us a little bit about what your theory of intelligent design is, as opposed to what evolution isn’t.

Behe replies: Well, that’s a great question, and I know folks on the other side who are sceptical of intelligent design often get frustrated, but I try to be as conservative as I can and I don’t go out beyond what the data can support because I think overreaching is the bane of theories of design. You say that flagellum looks designed so everything is designed, or that everything that looks complex was designed, or something like that.

I think the short answer to your question is, for all of those things, I don’t know.

There not enough data. For the elephant, we have primelephus, the ancestral elephant of the Asian and African elephant, and mammoth. Well, could that happened by random mutation and natural selection? My instinctive answer is sure - it sure looks like it. It doesn’t look like any big deal.

The more careful answer, the actual answer, is I don’t know - cause I don’t know what’s involved in making one versus the other. I don’t know what molecular changes are necessary to make the small anatomical differences in those different species.

Suppose one believed that those things could have happened by natural selection, but maybe the origination of mammals needed some extra information - how would that have happened - how would the designer have done that? Would it have been, say, information embedded into nature at the big bang, or whenever nature started, or might it have been manipulations along the way, or some sort of input along the way?

The short answer is “I don’t know.”

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 30 2011,12:36

Quote (REC @ Sep. 30 2011,10:04)
 
Quote (sparc @ Sep. 30 2011,06:20)
Will Gordon E. Mullings finally turn gay?
Kairosfocus:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
< BREAKING: Major longitudinal (across-time) study showing spiritually motivated changes in sexual orientation >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The "research" group that published that paper is from Pat Robertson U, with this on their webpage:

"tend to be student-oriented, focusing on engaging students through the subject matter and its application to their professional identity and ways in which God may be at work in their lives. I also try to call students to be good stewards of the many resources they have been given, to teach them to be advocates for those who are marginalized, and to see what they do in the context of God's redemptive plan.

I have published two integration textbooks, such as Family Therapies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal and Modern Psychopathologies: A Comprehensive Christian Appraisal. I have also previously published several books on homosexuality and sexual identity: Homosexuality and the Christian: A Guide for Pastors, Parents and Friends, Homosexuality: The Use of Scientific Research in the Church's Moral Debate, Sexual Identity: A Guide to Living in the Time Between the Times, Ex-Gays? A Longitudinal Study of Religiously Mediated Change in Sexual Orientation, and Sexual Identity Synthesis: Attributions, Meaning-Making and the Search for Congruence."

< http://www.regent.edu/acad.......use.htm >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Be careful of what you wish for >. You may get peer reviewed!
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In my view, this means of description confuses success with change. Over half did describe some version of success but that is not the same as over half describing sexual orientation change. I will be interested to see how this is reported in the press anti-evo churchlady finger-waving crowd. [fix'd that ferya!] :)

The changes reported here are significant and no doubt welcomed by the people involved. However, they are not the types of changes which I suspect the various mental health groups mean by “sexual orientation change.” Whatever happened to the participants in this study, they do not appear to have gone from gay to straight — in the sense that people who have always been straight are straight. They have gone from gay to less gay and a bit more straight. I do not mean to suggest that this is not important information; it is. But I am wondering if anyone at APA would dispute the within category changes reported here. I am going to ask and will report what I learn.

Jones and Yarhouse seem to be aware that the results can be understood as a change in identity and not orientation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


But I'm not holding my breath for any sudden upswing in reading comprehensibility at UDead.
Posted by: olegt on Sep. 30 2011,13:53

< Stephen B >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
For an ID proponent to follow the “helpful” advice of a Darwinist is similar to a Republican following the helpful advice of a Democrat. Partisans do not make suggestions in order to provide aid to their adversary but rather to gain an advantage, evade the issue, blunt the point of an argument, or shut down discussion.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Boy, are these guys insecure!
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 30 2011,16:59

Quote (olegt @ Sep. 30 2011,13:53)
< Stephen B >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
For an ID proponent to follow the “helpful” advice of a Darwinist is similar to a Republican following the helpful advice of a Democrat. Partisans do not make suggestions in order to provide aid to their adversary but rather to gain an advantage, evade the issue, blunt the point of an argument, or shut down discussion.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Boy, are these guys insecure!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Boy, are these guys predictable.
Posted by: Seversky on Sep. 30 2011,20:42

DeNews < finds > more evidence for design:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Strange new features spotted on Mercury

From Rachel Kaufman, National Geographic News (September 29, 2011):
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

The planet Mercury is dotted with holes that appear to be unlike any other landform yet seen in the solar system, new pictures show.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It looks a bit like like a golfball!

God does not play dice with the Universe He uses it as a golf course!

Intelligent Design!
Posted by: Henry J on Sep. 30 2011,21:23



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Boy, are these guys insecure!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Would that be from living in a tent (however big) rather than a house?

Henry
Posted by: paragwinn on Sep. 30 2011,22:15

Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 30 2011,19:23)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Boy, are these guys insecure!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Would that be from living in a tent (however big) rather than a house?

Henry
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And with the camels on the outside pissing in.
Posted by: Kristine on Sep. 30 2011,23:09

Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 30 2011,20:42)
DeNews < finds > more evidence for design:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Strange new features spotted on Mercury

From Rachel Kaufman, National Geographic News (September 29, 2011):
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

The planet Mercury is dotted with holes that appear to be unlike any other landform yet seen in the solar system, new pictures show.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It looks a bit like like a golfball!

God does not play dice with the Universe He uses it as a golf course!

Intelligent Design!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you connect the dots, you have the Mercurial Mount Rushmore. The four figures look like melted robots (this privileged planet being so close to the sun and all). It could not have arisen by chants...er, chance. Hahahaha, they've got us now!
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 01 2011,08:08

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,07:09)
Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 30 2011,20:42)
DeNews < finds > more evidence for design:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Strange new features spotted on Mercury

From Rachel Kaufman, National Geographic News (September 29, 2011):
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

The planet Mercury is dotted with holes that appear to be unlike any other landform yet seen in the solar system, new pictures show.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It looks a bit like like a golfball!

God does not play dice with the Universe He uses it as a golf course!

Intelligent Design!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you connect the dots, you have the Mercurial Mount Rushmore. The four figures look like melted robots (this privileged planet being so close to the sun and all). It could not have arisen by chants...er, chance. Hahahaha, they've got us now!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What Mercury more Holy than Earth?

.....where is this all going to end?

The FLOOD on Mars?

A plague of locusts on Nepture?

Burning bushes on the way to Betelgeuse?

A parting of the Red spot on Jupiter?

Water into wine in Uranus?

Creationists ........you have to love every bone in their heads.
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 01 2011,08:57

REGENT UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS PROVE THAT WE ARE ALL BI! :D Because really, that's a more accurate assessment that KrapFocus's.

These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.

ETA - added an sssssss (cue Teh Serpent)


Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 01 2011,09:08

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,09:57)
These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


With these guys, same activity.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 01 2011,09:50

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,08:57)
REGENT UNIVERSITY RESEARCHERS PROVE THAT WE ARE ALL BI! :D Because really, that's a more accurate assessment that KrapFocus's.

These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.

ETA - added an sssssss (cue Teh Serpent)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


But they do masturbate all day long and while they are not doing it literally they continue wanking by spaming the web.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 01 2011,09:51

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,17:08)
Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,09:57)
These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


With these guys, same activity.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oil supplied by KF.
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 01 2011,10:35

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,08:57)
These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What makes you think that (would) make them happy? It just makes them feel guilty.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 01 2011,10:40

Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 01 2011,10:51)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,17:08)
   
Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,09:57)
These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


With these guys, same activity.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oil supplied by KF.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then it's oil stroked strawmen, burning.
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 01 2011,11:07

< DeNews: >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Come on, Darwinists, you’re going to have to come up with something better than this. As the cop said when he caught the fellow stuck in a narrow window of a house where nobody knew him
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Wellerism > Fail?
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 01 2011,15:36

Petrushka has been landing some < heavy body blows > recently at UD:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Unlike ID, sciences that posit mechanisms require research to validate conjectures about the mechanisms. that could take decades or even centuries.

If your mechanism is the assertion that some unspecified entity having unspecified capabilities did some unspecified things at unspecified time and places, then you are worry free.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



markf, DrRec, and DrBot have also been pointing out the vacuity at the core of intelligent design creationism.  I wonder how long they'll be allowed to discuss the emperor's nudity.  The regulars aren't even bothering to mount a defense -- they don't seem to see the lack of empirical evidence, a testable theory, or predictions that suggest new research to be problems.
Posted by: sledgehammer on Oct. 01 2011,17:08

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 01 2011,13:36)
Petrushka has been landing some < heavy body blows > recently at UD:
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Unlike ID, sciences that posit mechanisms require research to validate conjectures about the mechanisms. that could take decades or even centuries.

If your mechanism is the assertion that some unspecified entity having unspecified capabilities did some unspecified things at unspecified time and places, then you are worry free.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



markf, DrRec, and DrBot have also been pointing out the vacuity at the core of intelligent design creationism.  I wonder how long they'll be allowed to discuss the emperor's nudity.  The regulars aren't even bothering to mount a defense -- they don't seem to see the lack of empirical evidence, a testable theory, or predictions that suggest new research to be problems.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's because, in their minds,  they believe all those questions have been answered:

Who:  The Almighty, of course, (but it could also have been Space Aliens, wink, wink, nudge, nudge.)

What:  Created and/or modified genomes.

When:  At OOL, the Cambrian, and Humans, In a few days, a week, or a few billion years.  Details.  It's all the same to the Almighty Space Aliens inside the Big Tent.

How:  It doesn't matter.  "Poof" works just fine.  We're talking about the Almighty, after all.

Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways.
Posted by: Henry J on Oct. 01 2011,17:27

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,09:40)
Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 01 2011,10:51)
   
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,17:08)
   
Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 01 2011,09:57)
These people should masturbate instead of grasping at straws. They would be a lot happier. There, I said it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


With these guys, same activity.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oil supplied by KF.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then it's oil stroked strawmen, burning.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Curses, oiled again!
Posted by: Henry J on Oct. 01 2011,17:54



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then why not just say that the "Almighty" did it in whatever the way it was done, even if that is consistent with evolution as described by science, and be done with it? After all, if they say that some method or other was impossible, they're directly implying that the "Almighty" couldn't have done it using that method, which contradicts what I thought was their base assumption. Or am I missing something here?

Henry
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 01 2011,19:02

Post title exposes misunderstanding by DeNews:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where Are the Neutral Genomes with these Mutations?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What the hell is a neutral genome?  Mutations are neutral, ie
one genome has the same fitness as another.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 01 2011,19:07

DeNews:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But absence of evidence IS evidence of absence.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Only if there is reason to expect the evidence to be there because of permanence.  For example: fossils.  Bones are permanent and enduring, so we expect them to be found.  Eyes, not so much.

So, absence of evidence of bones of rabbits in the Precambrian is indeed evidence that they are absent and that evolution occurred.  Congratulations, DeNews, for this convenient reminder that YEC is BS.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 01 2011,20:29

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 01 2011,17:02)
Post title exposes misunderstanding by DeNews:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where Are the Neutral Genomes with these Mutations?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What the hell is a neutral genome?  Mutations are neutral, ie
one genome has the same fitness as another.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DeNews gets off the hook for this one. PaV is the one spouting off about 'neutral genomes' (which, in response to my query, he denies using that term) or what he 'clarifies' as 'neutral versions of the genome.' Are there such entities?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 01 2011,21:13

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 01 2011,20:29)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 01 2011,17:02)
Post title exposes misunderstanding by DeNews:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where Are the Neutral Genomes with these Mutations?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What the hell is a neutral genome?  Mutations are neutral, ie
one genome has the same fitness as another.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DeNews gets off the hook for this one. PaV is the one spouting off about 'neutral genomes' (which, in response to my query, he denies using that term) or what he 'clarifies' as 'neutral versions of the genome.' Are there such entities?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Denews is not off the hook because she credulously thinks PaV knows what he is talking about.  A google scholar search for "neutral genome" gives 6 hits with the words in consecutive order, yet none of these where it is a noun.  Then comes the hits for "neutral, genome"...
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 01 2011,21:25

Stung by the groans elicited by endless repetition of his "I was once an evil atheist" conversion story, Gil resorts to yet another repetition of his "I program LS-Dyna, perhaps the world's most powerful software ever created for the purpose" tic.  

Like < here >,

and < here >,

and < here >,

and < here >,

and < here >,

and < here >,

and < here >...

He must have been one hell of a repetitive atheist.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 01 2011,21:39

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 02 2011,05:25)
Stung by the groans elicited by endless repetition of his "I was once an evil atheist" conversion story, Gil resorts to yet another repetition of his "I program LS-Dyna, perhaps the world's most powerful software ever created for the purpose" tic.  
<snip>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh .....so he's playing God?....Wait 'till the Grand Wizard hisself finds out.

I hope he still isn't running it on a VAX.
Posted by: sledgehammer on Oct. 01 2011,22:38

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 01 2011,15:54)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then why not just say that the "Almighty" did it in whatever the way it was done, even if that is consistent with evolution as described by science, and be done with it? After all, if they say that some method or other was impossible, they're directly implying that the "Almighty" couldn't have done it using that method, which contradicts what I thought was their base assumption. Or am I missing something here?

Henry
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 Because that would mean that humans are just another animal, a filthy, stinkin' ape no less, with no Greater Purpose, and that would also mean that the Fall never happened, and therefore we didn't need to be Saved, and so The Scriptures might not be the Revealed Truth.
  Once you start down that slippery slope,  it can only end in one place:  the possibility that the atheists were right all along in that when we die, that's it, which can't possibly be the Truth because He is Risen.
 So all that other sciency stuff must be wrong.  Simple as that.  QED.  End of story.
Besides, everyone knows that Darwinism leads the innocent to Atheism and materialism, which is far, far worse than Islam, Naziism, and Communism combined, and so must be stopped at all costs.
Posted by: Henry J on Oct. 01 2011,22:47



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He must have been one hell of a repetitive atheist.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In other words, it was on a daily basis?

Henry
Posted by: Henry J on Oct. 01 2011,22:50

Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 01 2011,21:38)
Besides, everyone knows that Darwinism leads the innocent to Atheism and materialism, which is far, far worse than Islam, Naziism, and Communism combined, and so must be stopped at all costs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


At least it didn't lead to dancing.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 02 2011,09:02

kairosfocus, typist:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Functionally specific, complex information and associated information [FSCO/I]  — especially, digitally coded FSCI [dFSCI] — are seen as two of the strongest signs of design as cause.

For instance, when you see this post, you do not wonder or debate the odds of different letters being strung by chance [e.g. e in English is typically about 1/8 of the text], you intuitively immediately know that this is best explained as the work of an intelligent, purposeful agent acting towards a goal and based on his knowledge of the language, codes and topic in question. And, analytically, we can substantiate that intuition.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



When I see "FSCI [dFSCI]" I think of a monkey trying to type Shakespeare.  And I would be right.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 02 2011,09:07

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 01 2011,20:29)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 01 2011,17:02)
Post title exposes misunderstanding by DeNews:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where Are the Neutral Genomes with these Mutations?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What the hell is a neutral genome?  Mutations are neutral, ie
one genome has the same fitness as another.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DeNews gets off the hook for this one. PaV is the one spouting off about 'neutral genomes' (which, in response to my query, he denies using that term) or what he 'clarifies' as 'neutral versions of the genome.' Are there such entities?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


paragwin, I now see what you meant, that PaV is the author and not DeNews.  It would be interesting to know who writes the titles.  Don't see how I missed that - of course the author never shows on the blurb.

Thinking on it, surely DeNews would have asked what a neutral genome was if she had seen that title.  ;)
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 02 2011,10:21

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 02 2011,10:02)
kairosfocus, typist:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Functionally specific, complex information and associated information [FSCO/I]  — especially, digitally coded FSCI [dFSCI] — are seen as two of the strongest signs of design as cause.

For instance, when you see this post, you do not wonder or debate the odds of different letters being strung by chance [e.g. e in English is typically about 1/8 of the text], you intuitively immediately know that this is best explained as the work of an intelligent, purposeful agent acting towards a goal and based on his knowledge of the language, codes and topic in question. And, analytically, we can substantiate that intuition.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



When I see "FSCI [dFSCI]" I think of a monkey trying to type Shakespeare.  And I would be right.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I see those terms as an excellent metric for identifying the most dishonest of the intelligent design creationists.  Despite the fact that no one has ever calculated, or even clearly defined, CSI or any of its variants and despite the further fact that this has been repeatedly and unambiguously demonstrated to them, the IDCists continue to make claims based on this nonsense.

The only solution I can see is to chain a few of these idiots to a whiteboard in an abandoned warehouse, superglue a marker into their only free hand, fire up a webcam to stream the event, and not free them until they either provide an example calculation of CSI or write "CSI is incoherent gibberish."

But that would be wrong time-consuming.
Posted by: Seversky on Oct. 02 2011,11:54

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,21:25)
Stung by the groans elicited by endless repetition of his "I was once an evil atheist" conversion story, Gil resorts to yet another repetition of his "I program LS-Dyna, perhaps the world's most powerful software ever created for the purpose" tic.  
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You know, you'd think that, being such a software whiz, he'd just program some sort of bot that would post alternating "I was once an evil atheist"/"I am the Liberace of LS-DYNA" screeds with minor variations to save himself the trouble of doing it manually.

Come to think of it how do we know he hasn't?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 02 2011,15:44

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 02 2011,07:07)
Thinking on it, surely DeNews would have asked what a neutral genome was if she had seen that title.  ;)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


She probably assumes it is something lacking selfish genes.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 02 2011,15:47

Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 02 2011,09:54)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 01 2011,21:25)
Stung by the groans elicited by endless repetition of his "I was once an evil atheist" conversion story, Gil resorts to yet another repetition of his "I program LS-Dyna, perhaps the world's most powerful software ever created for the purpose" tic.  
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You know, you'd think that, being such a software whiz, he'd just program some sort of bot that would post alternating "I was once an evil atheist"/"I am the Liberace of LS-DYNA" screeds with minor variations to save himself the trouble of doing it manually.

Come to think of it how do we know he hasn't?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Because the CSI calculated for each of his posts has not exceeded the Universal Lower Bound and each successive post adds no new information.
Posted by: Amadan on Oct. 02 2011,16:44

Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 02 2011,04:38)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 01 2011,15:54)
         

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then why not just say that the "Almighty" did it in whatever the way it was done, even if that is consistent with evolution as described by science, and be done with it? After all, if they say that some method or other was impossible, they're directly implying that the "Almighty" couldn't have done it using that method, which contradicts what I thought was their base assumption. Or am I missing something here?

Henry
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 Because that would mean that humans are just another animal, a filthy, stinkin' ape no less, with no Greater Purpose, and that would also mean that the Fall never happened, and therefore we didn't need to be Saved, and so The Scriptures might not be the Revealed Truth.
  Once you start down that slippery slope,  it can only end in one place:  the possibility that the atheists were right all along in that when we die, that's it, which can't possibly be the Truth because He is Risen.
 So all that other sciency stuff must be wrong.  Simple as that.  QED.  End of story.
Besides, everyone knows that Darwinism leads the innocent to Atheism and materialism, which is far, far worse than Islam, Naziism, and Communism combined, and so must be stopped at all costs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


More importantly, it would mean that Teh Eevul Darwinists are right about something. There is also the not inconsiderable problem that those fellows in frocks in Rome take that line, and some of the constituency would be very unhappy about agreeing with Them.

Having invested so heavily in YECs as a core component of movement conservatism, why let a bit of intellectual honesty spoil the party?
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 02 2011,19:39

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 02 2011,16:21)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 02 2011,10:02)
kairosfocus, typist:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Functionally specific, complex information and associated information [FSCO/I]  — especially, digitally coded FSCI [dFSCI] — are seen as two of the strongest signs of design as cause.

For instance, when you see this post, you do not wonder or debate the odds of different letters being strung by chance [e.g. e in English is typically about 1/8 of the text], you intuitively immediately know that this is best explained as the work of an intelligent, purposeful agent acting towards a goal and based on his knowledge of the language, codes and topic in question. And, analytically, we can substantiate that intuition.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



When I see "FSCI [dFSCI]" I think of a monkey trying to type Shakespeare.  And I would be right.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I see those terms as an excellent metric for identifying the most dishonest of the intelligent design creationists.  Despite the fact that no one has ever calculated, or even clearly defined, CSI or any of its variants and despite the further fact that this has been repeatedly and unambiguously demonstrated to them, the IDCists continue to make claims based on this nonsense.

The only solution I can see is to chain a few of these idiots to a whiteboard in an abandoned warehouse, superglue a marker into their only free hand, fire up a webcam to stream the event, and not free them until they either provide an example calculation of CSI or write "CSI is incoherent gibberish."

But that would be wrong time-consuming.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Can we poke them with sharpened sticks and/or electric cattle prods?

Because, erm, if so, I, ahem, "know some guys" if you get my drift. Thursday good for you?

Louis
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 03 2011,02:45

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 02 2011,17:39)
Can we poke them with sharpened sticks and/or electric cattle prods?

Because, erm, if so, I, ahem, "know some guys" if you get my drift. Thursday good for you?

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I am reminded of when in the 1990s I was indirectly approached for advice on how to cause great pain to a victim without causing serious physical damage. The request was through a professional colleague, supposedly from a foreign police force, and the justification was that they were already using "terrible and potentially lethal" methods already. SO, why not help out with non-lethal methods? Why, I would be a "humanitarian" by providing these pigs with less lethal torture methods. OH! And, I would be well paid.

Stinking assholes. I wish there was a Hell just for them.

Yeah, I know "some guys." Too well to joke about it.

< >

This is a carcass removed from a mass gave by village dogs in Afghanistan. With the destruction of the village, the dogs were starving and began raiding the nearby mass grave. The burial trench was loaded with explosives, killing many of the dogs. But at least a few were able to drag bodies to safety (for the dogs). For more information, see < Physicains For Human Rights." >

(PS: I deleted "fucking" as an adjective. There is no reason to demean sex with an association torture and murder. The use of rape as torture is much worse than "fucking." Again,  I recommend seeing < Physicians for Human Rights). >


Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 03 2011,02:57

Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 02 2011,16:44)
 
Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 02 2011,04:38)
   
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 01 2011,15:54)
             

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Details? We don' need no steenkin details. It's not ID's job to match your pathetic demand for details. Your details stink anyways.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Then why not just say that the "Almighty" did it in whatever the way it was done, even if that is consistent with evolution as described by science, and be done with it? After all, if they say that some method or other was impossible, they're directly implying that the "Almighty" couldn't have done it using that method, which contradicts what I thought was their base assumption. Or am I missing something here?

Henry
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 Because that would mean that humans are just another animal, a filthy, stinkin' ape no less, with no Greater Purpose, and that would also mean that the Fall never happened, and therefore we didn't need to be Saved, and so The Scriptures might not be the Revealed Truth.
  Once you start down that slippery slope,  it can only end in one place:  the possibility that the atheists were right all along in that when we die, that's it, which can't possibly be the Truth because He is Risen.
 So all that other sciency stuff must be wrong.  Simple as that.  QED.  End of story.
Besides, everyone knows that Darwinism leads the innocent to Atheism and materialism, which is far, far worse than Islam, Naziism, and Communism combined, and so must be stopped at all costs.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


More importantly, it would mean that Teh Eevul Darwinists are right about something. There is also the not inconsiderable problem that those fellows in frocks in Rome take that line, and some of the constituency would be very unhappy about agreeing with Them.

Having invested so heavily in YECs as a core component of movement conservatism, why let a bit of intellectual honesty spoil the party?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I remember having this conversation with AmeriChristian (who I miss talking to) at Red State Rabble (which I simply miss). AmeriChristian, a theistic evolutionist, was telling me that someone close to him who was a creationist let it slip that "if evolution is true" then "we have committed a big sin against them" [apes] and probably the majority of the natural world as well.

Yeah. His (or maybe her?) creationist relative was that honest.
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 03 2011,04:47

Quote (Dr.GH @ Oct. 03 2011,08:45)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 02 2011,17:39)
Can we poke them with sharpened sticks and/or electric cattle prods?

Because, erm, if so, I, ahem, "know some guys" if you get my drift. Thursday good for you?

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I am reminded of when in the 1990s I was indirectly approached for advice on how to cause great pain to a victim without causing serious physical damage. The request was through a professional colleague, supposedly from a foreign police force, and the justification was that they were already using "terrible and potentially lethal" methods already. SO, why not help out with non-lethal methods? Why, I would be a "humanitarian" by providing these pigs with less lethal torture methods. OH! And, I would be well paid.

Stinking assholes. I wish there was a Hell just for them.

Yeah, I know "some guys." Too well to joke about it.

< >

This is a carcass removed from a mass gave by village dogs in Afghanistan. With the destruction of the village, the dogs were starving and began raiding the nearby mass grave. The burial trench was loaded with explosives, killing many of the dogs. But at least a few were able to drag bodies to safety (for the dogs). For more information, see < Physicains For Human Rights." >

(PS: I deleted "fucking" as an adjective. There is no reason to demean sex with an association torture and murder. The use of rape as torture is much worse than "fucking." Again,  I recommend seeing < Physicians for Human Rights). >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


1) You make excellent points.

2) We're talking about creationists, not human beings.

3) I was not serious about torturing them or point 2) above. I hope that was MORE than obvious. Perhaps not! ;-)

Louis
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 03 2011,08:56

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 03 2011,02:47)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Oct. 03 2011,08:45)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 02 2011,17:39)
Can we poke them with sharpened sticks and/or electric cattle prods?

Because, erm, if so, I, ahem, "know some guys" if you get my drift. Thursday good for you?

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I am reminded of when in the 1990s I was indirectly approached for advice on how to cause great pain to a victim without causing serious physical damage. The request was through a professional colleague, supposedly from a foreign police force, and the justification was that they were already using "terrible and potentially lethal" methods already. SO, why not help out with non-lethal methods? Why, I would be a "humanitarian" by providing these pigs with less lethal torture methods. OH! And, I would be well paid.

Stinking assholes. I wish there was a Hell just for them.

Yeah, I know "some guys." Too well to joke about it.

< >

This is a carcass removed from a mass gave by village dogs in Afghanistan. With the destruction of the village, the dogs were starving and began raiding the nearby mass grave. The burial trench was loaded with explosives, killing many of the dogs. But at least a few were able to drag bodies to safety (for the dogs). For more information, see < Physicains For Human Rights." >

(PS: I deleted "fucking" as an adjective. There is no reason to demean sex with an association torture and murder. The use of rape as torture is much worse than "fucking." Again,  I recommend seeing < Physicians for Human Rights). >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


1) You make excellent points.

2) We're talking about creationists, not human beings.

3) I was not serious about torturing them or point 2) above. I hope that was MORE than obvious. Perhaps not! ;-)

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


and here I was all set to go off on a Doug and Dinsdale tangent...
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 03 2011,09:22

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 03 2011,05:47)
3) I was not serious about torturing them or point 2) above. I hope that was MORE than obvious. Perhaps not! ;-)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Indeed, no torture intended.  What would a better metaphor be?  Perhaps putting their arguments in . . . a vise?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 03 2011,09:27

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 03 2011,09:22)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 03 2011,05:47)
3) I was not serious about torturing them or point 2) above. I hope that was MORE than obvious. Perhaps not! ;-)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Indeed, no torture intended.  What would a better metaphor be?  Perhaps putting their arguments in . . . a vise?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Put their wedge in a vice at Waterloo.

Is that anything like a WC?
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 03 2011,10:18

Quote (fnxtr @ Oct. 03 2011,14:56)
[SNIP]

and here I was all set to go off on a Doug and Dinsdale tangent...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh I am very happy to use.....sarcasm.

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 03 2011,10:19

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 03 2011,15:22)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 03 2011,05:47)
3) I was not serious about torturing them or point 2) above. I hope that was MORE than obvious. Perhaps not! ;-)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Indeed, no torture intended.  What would a better metaphor be?  Perhaps putting their arguments in . . . a vise?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A vice....

....now why does that seem familiar? ;-)

Louis
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 03 2011,11:42

DeNews!


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Here’s neuroscientist Russ Poldrack (U Texas Austin) on neuroscience as neurotrash (in media)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So, let us get this straight:  Neuroscientist criticizes media for being gullible nincompoops.  What was your profession again, DeNews?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 03 2011,13:06

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 03 2011,09:42)
DeNews!
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Here’s neuroscientist Russ Poldrack (U Texas Austin) on neuroscience as neurotrash (in media)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So, let us get this straight:  Neuroscientist criticizes media for being gullible nincompoops.  What was your profession again, DeNews?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Propaganda Minister  Political Pundit  Science Writer  Cultural Observer  Genome Neutralizer  Editorialist
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 03 2011,14:35

OK, hate me, but the new UD software is an improvement.

Now if they could improve the softheads.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 03 2011,15:23

I'm not a scientist, I'm a Science Journal Author!

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Evo-devo is NOT the big answer to evolution, says a science journal author
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Crackpot (Joseph Esfandiar Hannon Bozorgmehr) gets essay published, DeNews stupidly touts it.

As Elizabeth Liddle points out in comment 3:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Also, it’s got nothing to do with evo-devo. Not sure where you got that idea. Have you read it?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This brings to mind one of my favorite movie scenes:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Wanda: [after Otto breaks in on Wanda and Archie in Archie's flat and hangs him out the window] I was dealing with something delicate, Otto. I'm setting up a guy who's incredibly important to us, who's going to tell me where the loot is and if they're going to come and arrest you. And you come loping in like Rambo without a jockstrap and you dangle him out a fifth-floor window. Now, was that smart? Was it shrewd? Was it good tactics? Or was it stupid?

Otto West: Don't call me stupid.

Wanda: Oh, right! To call you stupid would be an insult to stupid people! I've known sheep that could outwit you. I've worn dresses with higher IQs. But you think you're an intellectual, don't you, ape?

Otto West: Apes don't read philosophy.

Wanda: Yes they do, Otto. They just don't understand it. Now let me correct you on a couple of things, OK? Aristotle was not Belgian. The central message of Buddhism is not "Every man for himself." And the London Underground is not a political movement. Those are all mistakes, Otto. I looked them up.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ETA:  Title changed! (same title, see below)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Gene duplication not usually a source of biochemical innovation?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



ETA:  That was a second stupid post about a second stupid paper by a second-rate crackpot.  Even DrREC got confused.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 03 2011,15:40



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Gene duplication not usually a source of biochemical innovation?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Two wrongs make a write?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 03 2011,17:15

Keeping for posterity, from the "Gene duplication not usually a source of biochemical innovation?" post.

Neil Rickert


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Let me see if I understand this.

James Shapiro refutes Darwinism, with his novel approach to evolution based on natural genetic engineering. And gene duplication is part of the evidence Shapiro uses to support his ideas of natural engineering.

Bozorgmehr says that gene duplication doesn’t do anything useful, and that refutes Darwinism.

It seems that if gene duplication is important, then Darwinism is refuted, whereas if it isn’t important, then Darwinism is refuted. Maybe you can have your cake and eat it too.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 03 2011,20:31

Joseph, master of the I-know-you-are-but-what-am-I school of debate, responding to DrREC:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   Does Spenter even consider gene duplication in his book?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, he does.
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   Why do you think they are non-mechanistic or designed?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Why do you think they are stochastic?
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   You take the evidence for evolution, accept it, and say “that isn’t Darwinian” and “ID isn’t against evolution.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That is a funny thing you do, DrREC. You obviously have no clue as to what ID claims yet you feel compelled to rail against it.
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   By which I think you mean Darwinian=natural, unguided.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Actually evolutionary biologists say that- natural selection is blind/ mindless and the mutations are undirected.
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   This makes you a theistic evolutionist.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nope. But that makes you a butthead.
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   You accept the mechanisms, but see a guiding hand behind them, I guess.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Design is a mechanism. A targeted search is a design mechanism. No need for any hand, just a well written genetic algorithm.
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   That said, there isn’t any evidence that requires invoking a designer in evolution, geology, meteorology or the casino.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Strange then that scientists have presented plenty of evidence for ID in fields such as biology, geology, physics, chemistry and cosmology.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
Posted by: sledgehammer on Oct. 03 2011,23:06

I appears that Joe's rather un-civil response was taken down.  If so, good for them.
 Then Batty77 chimes in accusing DrRec and Lizzie of "first responder damage control".  Jealousy, obviously because that's Batty's usual role, and he proceeds with his own damage control Lit bluff by citing, get this, Bozog himself (along with CreationSafaris, Axe, EvoNewsandSpews, IDpodcast,  Abel, and Royal Truman).
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 04 2011,03:56

It says quite a lot (and nothing good) about UD that they take BozoJoe Bozorgmehr seriously.

If you read some of his earlier stuff at TalkRational (as "Atheistoclast"), not only is he ignorant of biology, but, under the "look at me, I'm a bit of a clown" facade, he has some pretty unpleasant characteristics.

On second thought, he'd be right at home at UD
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 04 2011,07:50

is this the same stain as Atheistoclast at PT.  if so, LOL.  that guy keeps falling for the old hit me in the hand with the shovel trick.  wherefore art this ponce
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,07:59

Quote (damitall @ Oct. 04 2011,03:56)
It says quite a lot (and nothing good) about UD that they take BozoJoe Bozorgmehr seriously.

If you read some of his earlier stuff at TalkRational (as "Atheistoclast"), not only is he ignorant of biology, but, under the "look at me, I'm a bit of a clown" facade, he has some pretty unpleasant characteristics.

On second thought, he'd be right at home at UD
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And here he is:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-401745 >

Edit:

and here:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/culture....-401734 >

and here:

< http://www.uncommondescent.com/culture....-401737 >

taking on Nick Matzke
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,08:12

Joe bozo on the holocaust:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why is the Holocaust regarded as being sacrosanct?
If it is regarded as an historical fact, then it must surely be permitted to question it and to subject it to further empirical investigation.

If, on the other hand, it is a modern myth that is simply accepted as being true then it needn't be questioned, revised or altered in any way.

Isn't it time that the Western media allowed a free, open and informed debate about the Holocaust and the extent to which it happened and why?

In some respects, the accepted version is already known to be a lie: 6 million Jews were not gassed to death and cremated in ovens. We know that this was Soviet propaganda to portray Auschwitz as a death camp when it was really a labour camp with extensive rail links to supply the German army. The numbers of those who died at this camp has been revised from 4 million to less than a 1 million and there is every sign that it will be lowered still and that disease and exhaustion claimed the lives of the majority.

But why stop there? Surely, the best way to refute any Holocaust denial would be to provide a definitive list of all the victims of this atrocity and to mention where they were killed and the method used. "The most documented event in human history" seems to fail this crucial test.

Failing that, the Holocaust appears to be more a saga than an event.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 04 2011,08:24

DeNews quotes another climate scientist interpreter of interpretations, Paul Greenberg.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
… CERN’s researchers have found that nearly half of the global warming observed of late isn’t traceable to man’s activities after all but to sunspots, specifically the fluctuations in solar cosmic rays that promote cloud formation …
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Afraid I am going to need a cite, because the average of cosmic rays have been constant over the past 60 years, so how can fluctuations explain warming?
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 04 2011,10:33

Is UD down alot for you guys also?
Posted by: dheddle on Oct. 04 2011,10:36

What happened to Richard Hughes? Is he still active?
Posted by: dheddle on Oct. 04 2011,10:36

Oh there you are! I feared the worst.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 04 2011,10:48

Quote (dheddle @ Oct. 04 2011,10:36)
Oh there you are! I feared the worst.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alright Dave - just a bit busy, and underwhelmed by current ID shenanigans.

Hope you're well - congrats on your rise to academic power. Be sure to Expel! those who disagree.
Posted by: dheddle on Oct. 04 2011,10:55

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 04 2011,10:48)
 
Quote (dheddle @ Oct. 04 2011,10:36)
Oh there you are! I feared the worst.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Alright Dave - just a bit busy, and underwhelmed by current ID shenanigans.

Hope you're well - congrats on your rise to academic power. Be sure to Expel! those who disagree.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I didn't even know they changed their site (when did that happen?) As for my rise to power, it is temporary (2 years). I don't like admin crap. I want to be back in the trenches.

No golden, glorious, gleaming pristine goddess--
No sir!
For no Diana do I play faun.
I can tell you that right now.
I snarl, I hiss: How can ignorance be compared to bliss?
I spark, I fizz for the lady who knows what time it is.
I cheer, I rave, for the virtue I'm too late to save,
The sadder-but-wiser girl for me.

Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 04 2011,12:20

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,06:12)
Joe bozo on the holocaust:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link, please?
Posted by: dhogaza on Oct. 04 2011,12:31



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
… CERN’s researchers have found that nearly half of the global warming observed of late isn’t traceable to man’s activities after all but to sunspots, specifically the fluctuations in solar cosmic rays that promote cloud formation …
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It's news to me that the "G" in "GCR" stands for "Solar".

The rest of the quote is equally accurate.

Real Climate has a couple of posts up on it that outline exactly what the CERN people have shown.  Nothing to do with global warming at all, at this point, but some possible insight into the process of cloud formation may fall out after much future experimental work.  If such future work does show a role for GCRs in cloud formation, then of course skeptics are still faced with the fact that GCRs have varied little over the last several decades.  Nor is there evidence that cloud cover has, either ...
Posted by: carlsonjok on Oct. 04 2011,13:19

Quote (Dr.GH @ Oct. 04 2011,12:20)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,06:12)
Joe bozo on the holocaust:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link, please?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,15:06

This just in:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
An exchange at UD on dFSCI — digitally coded, functionally specific complex information — as an empirically and analytically reliable sign of design as cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by kairosfocus

comments closed.

Which one is Simplicio?
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 04 2011,15:39

Quote (carlsonjok @ Oct. 04 2011,11:19)
Quote (Dr.GH @ Oct. 04 2011,12:20)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,06:12)
Joe bozo on the holocaust:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link, please?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Thanks
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 04 2011,15:44

Eric Anderson, biology genius:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth: “In fact the giraffe’s neck is an excellent example of incremental adaptation being a more likely explanation than intelligent design . . .”

Are you seriously arguing that the giraffe’s neck supports a gradualistic evolutionary scenario and counts as evidence against design because it is designed poorly? If so, you need to do two things: (i) read up on what is involved in the engineering of the giraffe’s neck, (ii) think through what would be involved in changing it, before making assertions based on simplistic notions of what you think the design should be.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



1) wonders of Eric knows what an Okapi is.

2) what would be involved in changing it -  I thought these things were Designed from scratch?  I would design the recurrent laryngeal nerve so that it would not loop under the aorta, about 20 ft extra length in a giraffe neck.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Gray622.png

It is like adding an outlet in the garage by extending an existing circuit that goes from breaker box to basement. Afterthought rather than foresight.  IDiots would make ad hoc arguments like: the breaker box couldn't hold more breakers.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,15:46

Moar JoeBozo:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Nuremberg trials were showtrials with forced confessions. If you want to condemn what is happening in Iran with leading reformists, then you have to condemn Nuremberg as well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
55 million died in WW2. If 6 million of that 55 million were Jews, why does that make it a "Holocaust"?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,15:52

I wonder if DeNews knows what she has snuggled up to?



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I bring up the Holocaust for the following reasons:

1) It remains the moral justification for the continuing existence of Israel, the world's only racist state.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I thought UD was opposed to anti-Semitism.

Or have we always been at war with Oceania?
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 04 2011,16:20

We 'Holotards' have yet to show how the Nazis, operating freely, could kill so many Jews.
Posted by: Amadan on Oct. 04 2011,16:51

Ye Gawdz, Bozo Joe snuggles up to the UDiots?

Will the hybrid fleas constitute a new species?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 04 2011,18:21

vjtorley talks Free Will-y



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There is one thing that Professor Coyne gets absolutely right, however: genuine free will is incompatible with determinism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Genuine free will, vs what exactly?  Phony free will?

I define free will as the ability to choose a course of action, and not have the choice be made by someone else.  Whether my brain itself had no choice but to wind up in that decision is fruitless to argue, and certainly no reason to think there must be a ghost in the machine.

He has convinced himself by his argument, but then again, he is pretty gullible so that is no great achievement.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,18:23

The new species will have hybrid rigor.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 04 2011,18:40

Hard to believe, but UD has now embraced someone more despicable that kariosfocus.

Kinda puts the truther episode in perspective.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 04 2011,23:46

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,15:06)
This just in:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
An exchange at UD on dFSCI — digitally coded, functionally specific complex information — as an empirically and analytically reliable sign of design as cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by kairosfocus

comments closed.

Which one is Simplicio?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link please?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 05 2011,01:24

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 04 2011,21:46)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,15:06)
This just in:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
An exchange at UD on dFSCI — digitally coded, functionally specific complex information — as an empirically and analytically reliable sign of design as cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by kairosfocus

comments closed.

Which one is Simplicio?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link please?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< As you wish > . . . but you have been warned: Tardbergs ahead.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 05 2011,03:29

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 05 2011,01:24)
 
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 04 2011,21:46)
   
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,15:06)
This just in:

     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
An exchange at UD on dFSCI — digitally coded, functionally specific complex information — as an empirically and analytically reliable sign of design as cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by kairosfocus

comments closed.

Which one is Simplicio?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Link please?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< As you wish > . . . but you have been warned: Tardbergs ahead.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It must be nice, lazing in the carribean sun, sipping whatever the hell obnoxious tards sip and thinking up new acronyms.  What the hell is FSCO/I supposed to mean?  

On second thought, please don't tell me.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 05 2011,03:48

And does anybody know where PaV is getting all the good drugs?  From the post above:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Hybridization happens at the chromosomal level; not the genetic, and not the amino acid level.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And here I thought the genes had to more or less match up or there would be big trouble.  Silly me.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 05 2011,14:38

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 04 2011,15:06)
This just in:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
An exchange at UD on dFSCI — digitally coded, functionally specific complex information — as an empirically and analytically reliable sign of design as cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Posted by kairosfocus

comments closed.

Which one is Simplicio?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


How ironic - a post made up of comments from a thread allows no comments.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 05 2011,15:06

Robert Sheldon gets Nobel Prize criterion exactly backward:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But the Nobel prize in Physics is awarded by the Swedes. It is supposed to be for lifetime achievement, ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He misunderstood a Clownhall columnist (who is actually not too bad when talking about physics), who says:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If we examine the Nobel citations, we see that novel discoveries, building a better instrument, and sometimes bold theories that transform the field are the major reasons for awarding the Nobel. Since the Nobel is not supposed to be awarded to dead people, sometimes a worthy recipient is cited for "lifetime achievement" just before he dies.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: olegt on Oct. 05 2011,15:59

The < Clownhall column > is written by Sheldon hisself. It is a misunderstanding, but on a deeper level.

The column is pretty silly. It includes this assessment of the Nobelists' work:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Have supernovae been observed before? Oh sure, all the way back to the Chinese astronomers in 1054. Some would even say that the Christmas star was a supernova. How about 50, is that a special number? Not really, the era of robotic telescopic observations permit thousands of such objects to be observed simultaneously from both ground and space-based telescopes 24/7. So if it wasn't the observation that was so special, was it the technique? Nope, they used other peoples instruments and data sets. So if it isn't the observation and the technique, is it lifetime achievement? Absolutely not, these are rather youngish astronomers.

[snip]

We've eliminated novel observations, novel techniques, lifetime achievements, which leaves only bold theories that change the paradigm. What theory did these 50 supernovae prove?

[snip]

So when three rather youngish astronomers say, "Look at that, these supernova are dimmer than we expected, could this be evidence of dark energy? Could this be proof that maybe the Big Bang wasn't necessarily the beginning?" You can just imagine the electric jolt that went through the materialist community.

For the first time since Einstein's greatest blunder and since Penzias' and Wilson's discovery, there was data for Democritus and materialism. Now let's be clear, the "dark energy" cabal isn't yet ready to dismiss the Big Bang, but they are well on track for finding solutions to Einstein's equations that make it less and less necessary. First we demonstrate anti-gravity, next we start finding proof of "inflation" and "baby universes" and the "multiverse" is just around the corner.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, where to begin? The observations of Perlmutter, Brian, and Riess do nothing to disprove the Big Bang. The expansion of the Universe is well established and is not going anywhere. These astronomers showed that the Universe is expanding with a positive acceleration. That's the big deal.

Why is it a big deal? Because Einstein's general relativity in its simplest form (no cosmological constant) predicts that the acceleration ought to be slowing down because of gravitational attraction pulling the Universe together. A positive acceleration indicates that something is pushing the Universe apart. What exactly is causing the acceleration is not known, but the very fact of it is quite astonishing is deserving of the Nobel prize.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 05 2011,16:37

Heh, < DrBot >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
PaV:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   [Bozorgmehr] was—as is usual at Darwinist blogs—denigrated, call names, and told he didn’t know anything.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Go away little girl

;)

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 05 2011,17:14

Quote (olegt @ Oct. 05 2011,15:59)
The < Clownhall column > is written by Sheldon hisself. It is a misunderstanding, but on a deeper level.

The column is pretty silly. It includes this assessment of the Nobelists' work:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Have supernovae been observed before? Oh sure, all the way back to the Chinese astronomers in 1054. Some would even say that the Christmas star was a supernova. How about 50, is that a special number? Not really, the era of robotic telescopic observations permit thousands of such objects to be observed simultaneously from both ground and space-based telescopes 24/7. So if it wasn't the observation that was so special, was it the technique? Nope, they used other peoples instruments and data sets. So if it isn't the observation and the technique, is it lifetime achievement? Absolutely not, these are rather youngish astronomers.

[snip]

We've eliminated novel observations, novel techniques, lifetime achievements, which leaves only bold theories that change the paradigm. What theory did these 50 supernovae prove?

[snip]

So when three rather youngish astronomers say, "Look at that, these supernova are dimmer than we expected, could this be evidence of dark energy? Could this be proof that maybe the Big Bang wasn't necessarily the beginning?" You can just imagine the electric jolt that went through the materialist community.

For the first time since Einstein's greatest blunder and since Penzias' and Wilson's discovery, there was data for Democritus and materialism. Now let's be clear, the "dark energy" cabal isn't yet ready to dismiss the Big Bang, but they are well on track for finding solutions to Einstein's equations that make it less and less necessary. First we demonstrate anti-gravity, next we start finding proof of "inflation" and "baby universes" and the "multiverse" is just around the corner.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, where to begin? The observations of Perlmutter, Brian, and Riess do nothing to disprove the Big Bang. The expansion of the Universe is well established and is not going anywhere. These astronomers showed that the Universe is expanding with a positive acceleration. That's the big deal.

Why is it a big deal? Because Einstein's general relativity in its simplest form (no cosmological constant) predicts that the acceleration ought to be slowing down because of gravitational attraction pulling the Universe together. A positive acceleration indicates that something is pushing the Universe apart. What exactly is causing the acceleration is not known, but the very fact of it is quite astonishing is deserving of the Nobel prize.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ah, thanks for the info.  No doubt he is confused (saying one thing in one post and the opposite in the other, in addition to confusion about this work invalidating Big Bang cosmology).

He listed a bunch of "Perhap"s.  Did he consider, that maybe physicists have weighed these and found them unconvincing counterarguments?
Posted by: olegt on Oct. 05 2011,18:45

Sheldon follows up with an < equally silly post > on the Nobel prize in chemistry for the discovery of quasicrystals. It's complete po-mo gibberish with a pinch of Aristotle and Thomas.

To give you an idea, here is a sample. He is pushing the idea that quasicrystals are specified and complex, or something.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Because such a system would have no repeating pattern, yet still have an overall pattern. It would have long-range order without short-range order. And if we allow those kinds of objects into our world, then humans would not be reducible to interactions of atoms, but would have long-range order that perhaps made them respond to thoughts and emotions and objects on the other side of the universe. That was what Aristotle and Aquinas were promoting. Remember the 4 elements? The reason rocks sink in water is that they are "seeking their own kind" and the reason fire rises in air is it too is "seeking its kind" meaning the sun and the aurora. It was this sort of "spooky-action-at-distance" that assigned purpose and intent and function to inanimate things like rocks and rire that was precisely what the atomist theory was meant to eliminate. Read Lucretius on the need to reduce everything to atoms to remove any affect of the gods on earthly phenomena. Not only did everything have to reduce to atoms, but all the interactions had to reduce to collisions between atoms. It doesn't get any more local than that. We have doodles of Descartes' trying to show that the planets move, not because they were set in motion like Aristotle, but because little whirlpools of atoms filling the heavens were colliding with them and pushing them along.

Of course gravity didn't fit that model. It really was spooky-action-at-a-distance, but Newton pled the fifth, "hypotheses non fingo" he said and refused to elaborate. And then Faraday started spouting off about electric and magnetic fields, but fortunately theoretical physicists tamed all these spooky things by claiming they are mediated by particles. Sorry, I got carried away with the physics again.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



These two paragraphs alone are riddled with physics errors (italicized).

* Crystals exhibit more long-range order than quasicrystals, not less. The former have both orientational order (crystalline directions) and positional order (periodicity). Quasicrystals have orientational order (note the < faces >) but lack periodicity.

* Newtonian gravity included action at a distance. The current version, Einstein's general theory of relativity, does not. It is a local theory. Objects follow the local geodesic in spacetime. Spacetime curls in response to energy and matter at the same point.

* Classical electrodynamics is another local theory. Charged particles feel the local values of the fields and affect the field locally. No spooky action at a distance. Both classical and quantum electrodynamics are local.

He rambles on, conflating long-range order with long-range interactions. In physics, they are not one and the same thing. You can have long-range order in a system with short-range interactions (molecular crystals) and no long-range order in a system with long-range forces (plasma).

And then Sheldon totally loses it:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But what exactly does it mean that interactions are non-local? It means that quantum mechanics is closer to reality than Democritus' atoms. It means that people are not merely made up of atoms, but atoms carefully arranged by some external force. It means that experiments are not isolated from the universe, but always under the influence of things far away. It means that integer dimensions do not capture reality, but we live in fractional spaces, in fractal geometries that have information at all scales from the galaxy down to the subatomic nucleus. It means that no man is an island, no man stands alone. If ever there was a rebuttal of materialism, if ever there were a way to convince a Darwinist that he can never recover the reductionist purposeless of Darwin, it would be this Nobel prize.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This guy is mental.
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 05 2011,19:04

Quote (olegt @ Oct. 05 2011,16:45)
This guy is mental.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< http://www.youtube.com/watch?v....pjF5vXc >
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 05 2011,19:40

Quote (olegt @ Oct. 05 2011,16:45)
And then Sheldon totally loses it:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But what exactly does it mean that interactions are non-local? It means that quantum mechanics is closer to reality than Democritus' atoms. It means that people are not merely made up of atoms, but atoms carefully arranged by some external force. It means that experiments are not isolated from the universe, but always under the influence of things far away. It means that integer dimensions do not capture reality, but we live in fractional spaces, in fractal geometries that have information at all scales from the galaxy down to the subatomic nucleus. It means that no man is an island, no man stands alone. If ever there was a rebuttal of materialism, if ever there were a way to convince a Darwinist that he can never recover the reductionist purposeless of Darwin, it would be this Nobel prize.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This guy is mental.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's all in having the correct meta-mental-physics, man! If you dont got the right God-given meta-holi-physiks, you cant do nuthin' right (or godly). So sayeth Aristotle/Plato/Merlin/Gandalf/Gargamel/Rincewind.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 05 2011,20:42

Here's a dose of < male condescension via Eric Anderson: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth, since you apparently have very little understanding/experience with computer programs and the problem of circularity, let’s step back a bit.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Elizabeth in response:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
As for my experience, in fact you are incorrect. I have substantial experience with computer programs, and, indeed, with evolutionary algorithms.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And I'm sure UD has provided her with lots of experience with circularity.

But it doesn't stop there.
< Elizabeth: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In an evolutionary algorithm, the solution is not programmed in from the beginning. The problem is programmed, but not the solution. The whole point of using such algorithms is to find novel solutions.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Eric in response:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth. Let’s come back to Avida in a moment when we’re sure we have some basic common understanding. So let’s start with a very simple and early algorithm:

Do you acknowledge that Dawkins’ “Methinks” program had the solution programmed in from the beginning?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Go away, little boy.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 06 2011,01:12

< De'News > is trying to hawk a pair of German Christian philosophy books as 'ID friendly'.

If you follow the first book link you will reach its Amazon.de page. Hey! Let's have a peek inside shall we....?

Why it's Dr.Dr.Dembski!



Mind you, though. He must be green with envy; check out this cat!



That's Dr.Dr.Dr.Dr. Schirrmacher to you, peasants!
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 06 2011,02:27

And they lead off (thanks to the miracle of alphabetization) with Dr. John Ankerberg, patron saint of hairdressers and platinum blondes.

Not to mention Prof. Dr. Dr. William Lane Craig.

This is not the intellectual A team!

Here's Craig's contribution:

Pantheists in Spite of Themselves?
God, Infinity, and three contemporary Theologians
Craig, W.L. 74

Here's Ankerberg's contribution:

Does Scientific Evidence Today Show that God Created the Heavens and the Earth?  And what does the Bible say about when He created?
Ankerberg, J. 276

Science all the way!

Edited to add:

World Finance Report  (or, What is Wrong with the Global Economy – and what to do about it)
Guptara, P. 338

Christian Perspectives in Economics  An International Conference of Christian Professors
June 21-25, 2000, Georgia Institute of Technology
Atlanta, Georgia, USA
Hanssmann, F. 353

Yep, hard science.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 06 2011,02:40

Looking more closely at Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. h.c. Thomas Paul Schirrmacher:

According to Google translate:

Prof. Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. h.c. Paul Thomas Schirrmacher  studied theology and the STH Basel. He received his doctorate at the respective universities
Kampten, NL (Drs theol.), Ph. D. (Dr. phil.) Kulturalanthropologie in
Pacific Western University. Los Angeles, Th D. (Dr. theol.) Ethics in Whitefield
Theological Seminary, Lakeland, 1997 d.d. (Dr. h.c.) Cranmer Theological House in Shreveport. He is editor of several journals, publishers,
Author and Rector, owner of several departments.

All of his degrees appear to be in religion and some of the "universities" look a little dodgey.  I'm unaware of any world class university in Shrevport, La for instance.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 06 2011,03:55

A quick Google for Pacific Western University coughed up this....



...and a subsequent paste into Google maps offered this somewhat underwhelming sight....



'A' marks the spot. Not much there.
Posted by: DiEb on Oct. 06 2011,06:15

The spelling errors in Prof. Dr? Schirrmacher aren't very promising: it should be Schirrmacher studierte Theologie an der STH Basel. Er promovierte jeweils an den Univeritäten Kampen, NL...
  • STH Basel is the Staatsunabhängige Theologische Hochschule Basel, i.e., the state-independent theological university at Basel, Switzerland.
  • there are/were two protestant/evangelical universities in Kampen (not Kampten!): The Theologische Universiteit Kampen (Oudestraat) and the Theologische Universiteit Kampen (Broederweg). The first is recognized by the Protestantse Kerk in Nederland, the biggest protestant church in the Netherlands with 1,900,000 members, the latter recognized by the Gereformeerde Kerken vrijgemaakt ("liberated reformed church") with its 124,000 members. We have to guess which institute gave  Dr? Schirrmacher his first doctor...

Posted by: DiEb on Oct. 06 2011,06:17

That's odd: in the preview, I could see  my superscript 4 after the Dr, now it's a quotation mark - equally fitting, I'm afraid...
Posted by: DiEb on Oct. 06 2011,06:32

And the oddest thing: his legitimate doctorate from the university of Bonn isn't mentioned at all...
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 06 2011,06:39

What does the "h.c." mean, as in "Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. h.c. Thomas Paul Schirrmacher"?
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 06 2011,06:58

Quote (DiEb @ Oct. 06 2011,06:17)
That's odd: in the preview, I could see  my superscript 4 after the Dr, now it's a quotation mark - equally fitting, I'm afraid...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's a question mark on my computer.  Looks designed to me.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Oct. 06 2011,07:23

Wikipedia on Whitefield Theological Seminary:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Whitefield Theological Seminary is an unaccredited conservative Reformed seminary located in Lakeland, Florida with no permanent faculty and degrees offered entirely through distance-learning. It derives its name from 18th century revivalist George Whitefield. The current president is Kenneth Gary Talbot.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I grew up in Lakeland and had never heard of it. Looking at the website, it came to be sometime after I left the area.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 06 2011,11:05

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 06 2011,06:39)
What does the "h.c." mean, as in "Dr. Dr. Dr. Dr. h.c. Thomas Paul Schirrmacher"?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dr. h.c. = honoris cause = honorary doctorate
Dr. h.c. mult. = honoris causa multiplex = if you got more than one
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 06 2011,12:04

Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
Posted by: BillB on Oct. 06 2011,12:21

Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,18:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


lets create one right here, ATBCU and rename POTW as P(hd)OTW. Now we can all compete to see who can rack up the most 'Honorary doctorates in humorous or ironic posts' per year.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 06 2011,13:29

I third that emotion!
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 06 2011,13:54

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 06 2011,11:05)
Dr. h.c. mult. = honoris causa multiplex = if you got more than one
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So, if you're reeeeeaaaaallly popular, academically speaking, they honor you by tossing up your education profile during the previews at a big movie theater? Wow!
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 06 2011,16:31

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 06 2011,03:55)
A quick Google for Pacific Western University coughed up this....



...and a subsequent paste into Google maps offered this somewhat underwhelming sight....



'A' marks the spot. Not much there.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Looks like where chicken Joseph lives.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 06 2011,16:37

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 06 2011,16:31)
Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 06 2011,03:55)
A quick Google for

'A' marks the spot. Not much there.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Looks like where chicken Joseph lives.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Which chicken Joseph?
Posted by: rossum on Oct. 06 2011,17:58

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 06 2011,16:31)
Looks like where chicken Joseph lives.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I thought he lived in the car park next door.

rossum
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 06 2011,21:28

Quote (BillB @ Oct. 06 2011,12:21)
Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,18:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


lets create one right here, ATBCU and rename POTW as P(hd)OTW. Now we can all compete to see who can rack up the most 'Honorary doctorates in humorous or ironic posts' per year.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wasn't there something like the University of Ediacara? Seems as if it never honoured anybody, though.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 06 2011,22:24

Even more surprising than the number of PhDs is the number of positions Schirrmacher holds:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Positions

President („Rektor“) and Chair for Ethics and Chair for Comparative Religions: Martin Bucer European Theological Seminary and Research Institutes („Martin Bucer Seminar“)
Theologigical Seminary with study centers in Bonn, Berlin, Bielefeld, Chemnitz, Hamburg, Pforzheim, Zürich (Switzerland), Linz, Innsbruck (Austria), Prague, Zlin (Czech Republic), Istanbul (Turkey), Sâo Paulo (Brazil), and research institutes/think tanks: Institut for Islamic Studies, Institut for Religious Freedom, Institute for Political Education, Institute for Counseling, Institute for World Views and Apologetics, Institute for Life- and Family Science.

Website: www.bucer.eu/international.html, www.bucer.eu and www.bucer.eu/ts.html

– – –

Since 2010: Professor of the Sociology of Religion: Faculty of Sociology and Psychology, State University of the West in Timisoara (Romania)
The West University of Timi?oara (Romanian Universitatea de Vest din Timi?oara) is a university located in Timi?oara, Romania, former Temesar. Established in 1962 in its present form, it is organized in 11 Faculties with alltogether 15.000 students. Timi?oara has several other universities. The 1989 revolution started within the Reformed Church in Timi?oara.

Website: en.wikipedia.org, www.uvt.ro, www.uvt.ro/en/ and www.socio.uvt.ro

– – –

2006–2009 Professor of the Sociology of Religion and Cultural Anthropology: State University of Oradea (Romania)
Founded in 1780, long known as „University of Großwardein“, since 1990 „Technical University of Oradea“, 35.000 students in 18 faculties and 151 programmes.

Website: www.uoradea.ro and en.wikipedia.org

– – –

Professor of Systematic Theology (with Ethics and Apologetics): Whitefield Theological Seminary
Presbyterian Seminary and College, named after the revival preacher of the ‚Second Awakening’ George Whitefield. President Prof. Dr Dr Kenneth Talbot’s motto: „If there is any hope for reformation in America and elsewhere, the Church of Jesus Christ must once again produce pastors who boldly proclaim the whole counsel of God with the anointing of His Spirit.“

Website: www.whitefield.edu

– – –

Distinguished Professor of Global Ethics and International Development: William Carey University, India
An Indian State acknowledged university recently established by law of the State of Meghalaya in its capital Shillong and in Bangalore, which is specialised in the ecological development of poor regions. President ist Prof. Dr Ken Gnanakan.

Website: www.wcu.co.in, www.acts.co.in and en.wikipedia.org

– – –

Director: International Institute for Religious Freedom of the World Evangelical Alliance
Registered in Guernsey Islands with offices in Bonn, Cape Town (South Africa) and Colombo (Sri Lanka). Co-Director is Dr Christof Sauer (Cape Town), in Colombi Godfrey Yogarajah is in charge. Honorary president of the academic council is Prof. Dr Dr Dr John Warwick Montgomery (Strassbourg).

Website: www.iirf.eu

– – –

Speaker for Human Rights: World Evangelical Alliance
The WEA speaks for appr. 600 Mio. Evangelicals. As speaker regular statements on human rights issues, especially to the press, represenation at sessions of UN or OSCE, EU, and dialogue and meetings with political leaders, Muslim leaders and Christian leaders, eg the Ecumenical Patriarch, the World Council of Churches or the Vatican.

Website: www.worldevangelical.org

– – –

Chairman: Theological Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance
“The TC consists of an international group of theologians spread regionally and denominationally. Currently the personnel are Dr. Thomas Schirrmacher, Chair; Dr James Nkansah (Africa), Vice-chair; Dr Jae Sung Kim (Korea); Dr Claus Schwambach (Brazil); Rev David Roldan (Argentina); Dr Carver Yu (Hong Kong); other names will shortly be joining the commission. As of Jan 2006, a system of extended membership was introduced allowing representatives of national Theological Commissions, seminaries and individual theologians and interested people to be members of the TC. In addition Task Forces, Study Groups and other forms of activity are set up as required to work on specific long term or ad hoc projects.” New executive director is Rosalee Velloso Ewell from Brazil.

– – –

Member: Religious Liberty Commission of the World Evangelical Alliance
The RLC of the WEA consists of 13 experts from all continents and monitors the religious liberty situation in more than 100 nations, defends persecuted believers, informs the global media and church, and gives all possible assistance to those who are suffering. The Commission also makes fact finding trips and meets with governments and ambassadors speaking up for the suffering brothers and sisters. At the United Nations the Commission reports about the situation and arranges pecial hearings with Christians from countries under pressure. Director: Godfrey Yogarajah, Sri Lanka, President: John Langlois, Guernsey Islands. The fight for religious freedom was a major reason for founding the WEA in 1846.

Website: www.worldevangelicals.org/commissions/rlc/ and www.worldevangelicals.org/resources/

– – –

Secretary („Geschäftsführer“): Religious Liberty Commission of the German and Austrian Evangelical Alliance
(„Arbeitskreis für Religionsfreiheit der Deutschen und Österreichischen Evangelischen Allianz“) Seven members voted in by the general board of the alliances, President is Dr Paul C. Murdoch, Tübingen.

Website: www.ead.de and www.bucer.de

– – –

Visiting Fellow of Systematic Theology (Ethics): Giessen School of Theology (Freie Theologische Hochschule)
State accredited theological bachelor and master programmes. In 1983 I started teaching missiology and world religions, later I switched to ‚Foundational Theology’ (Theology of Revelation), for some time dean of ST department, since 2008 teaching ethics, since 2011 sociology of religion.

Website: www.fthgiessen.de/ueber-uns, www.fthgiessen.de and www.fthgiessen.de/Kollegium

– – –

Vice-Chair: Theological Commission of ‚Hope for Europe’ (together with European Evangelical Alliance and Lausanne Movement Europe) [Chair: 2002–2010]
Network of theologians throughout Western, Eastern and Southern Europe, assists the board of HfE as well as the many other networks of HfE (eg network of teachers, artists, helath care personal). Chair: Prof. Dr Thomas K. Johnsone, executive coordinator (please contact): Michael Borowski: hfe-theology@bucer.de

Website: www.hfe.org

– – –

Scientific Director: Institute for Life- and Family Science
Run on behalf of the „Treffen Christlicher Lebensrechts-Gruppen (TCLG)“ (Platform of Christian Pro Life Organsiations).
Founded in 2004, the institute is the academic branch of the German prolife movement, also working within all of Europe, publishing books, expertises and statistics. The two branches of the institute mentioned in the name are „family“ (my main job) and „life“, a branch run by my deputy Dr Susanne Lux.

Website: www.bucer.eu/ilfw.html

– – –

President: Pro Mundis
Member organisation of the „Bundesverband Lebensrecht“, the federal council of prolife organisations. vice-president is Dr Susanne Lux.

Website: www.bucer.eu/ilfw.html and www.bv-lebensrecht.de

– – –

Member of the board: International Society of Human Rights (ISHR)
The „Internationale Gesellschaft für Menschenrecht (IGFM)“ is a international human rights organisation founded in 1972 in Frankfurt (am Main) with headquarters in 30 countries in virtually all continents. The German section has 3.000 members. The ISHR is registered with the United Nations and the European Council.

Website: www.ishr.org/index.php?id=867 and www.igfm.de

– – –

Chair of Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Missiologie e. V. (Association of German Speaking Evangelical Missiologists)
Professional assocation of protestant mission scientists, lecturers in mission and missionaries doing research. A branch of the German Evangelical Alliance in association of the Austrian and Swiss Evangelical Alliance. Edits 5 book series of the „edition afem“ and the German bulletin „Evangelikale Missiologie“ („Evangelical Missiology“).

Website: www.missiologie-afem.de

– – –

President of the Board: Giving Hands („Gebende Hände“)
„Gebende Hände  – Gesellschaft zur Hilfe für notleidende Menschen in aller Welt“ is an international active charity helping in more than 40 countries on 4 continents. We emphasise helpt to help yourself.

Website: www.giving-hands.de and www.gebendehaende.de

– – –

Member of the board of trustees: August-Hermann-Francke-Schule Giessen
State accredited Christian school on all levels co-founded by my father Bernd Schirrmacher, who was its president for more than two decades.

Website: www.ahfsgi.de and www.ahfsgi.de/content/view/15/28/

– – –

Member of the Academic Council: German Institute for Youth and Society
The „Deutsche Institut für Jugend und Gesellschaft“ is a private research institute by the Reichelsheim Fellowship connected with YMCA and the diaconical branch of the Protestant Church of Germany. On the base of the Jewish-Christian worldview it researches matters of youth, family, sexuality, education and ecology.

Website: en.wikipedia.org, www.dijg.de and www.dijg.de/wissenschaftlicher-beirat.html

– – –

Member of the Academic Council: Institute for Ethics and Values
The „Institut für Ethik und Werte“ of the FTH in Giessen researches and evaluates all major ethical challenges of the present society.

Website: www.ethikinstitut.de

– – –

Owner: Culture and Science Publ. (Verlag für Kultur und Wissenschaft)
Publishes two books per month, 300 titles alltogether, in the area of linguistics, foreign languages, culture, ethics, world religions, theology and the science and history of mission.

Website: www.vkwonline.de

– – –

Appointed member: German Society for Mission Studies
German Society for Mission Studies, a scientific member organisation, academic journal: Zeitschrift: Interkulturelle Theologie – Zeitschrift für Missionswissenschaft.

Website: www.dgmw.org

– – –

Member: Carter of the Sociology of Religion within the German Society for Sociology
(„Sektion Religionssoziologie in der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Soziologie“)
Academic assocation of teaching and researching sociologist within Germany’s only Society for Sociologists.

Website: www.soziologie.de and www.vs-verlag.de

– – –

Editor: Evangelical Review of Theology
Since volume 33 (2010). Published by Paternoster Press for the Theological Commission of the World Evangelical Commission, this scholarly journal reflects the internationality of the evangelical movement.

Website: www.worldevangelicals.org

– – –

Editor: Evangelikale Missiologie (Evangelical Missiology)
Professional journal of the Association of German Speaking Evangelical Missiologists („Arbeitskreises für evangelikale Missiologie e. V.), a professional association of protestant mission scientists, lecturers in mission and missionaries doing research (see above).

Website: www.missiologie-afem.de/em.html

– – –

Editor of Yearly German Booklet: International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church (Germany, Austria, Switzerland)
(„Weltweiter Gebetssonntag für verfolgte Christen“), yearly on the second Sunday in November.

Website: www.ead.de and www.idop.org

– – –

Co-Editor: Martyrs – Yearbook for the Persecution of Christians Today („Märtyrer – Jahrbuch für Christenverfolgung heute“)
Yearly Idea-Documentation edited by Max Klingberg, Ron Kubsch and myself on behalf of the International Society for Human Rights, the German, Austrian and Swiss Evangelical Alliance, and Giving Hands.

Website: www.bucer.eu and doku.idea.de

– – –

Editor: Yearbook of Martin Bucer Seminary („Jahrbuch des Martin Bucer Seminars“)
Academic contributions by faculty of Martin Bucer European Theological Seminary and Research Institutes and by professors of other universities with a special topic each year. Topics were eg „Caring for the Dying“ („Tabuthema Tod!?“), „Truth and Love: In Memory of Francis Schaeffer“ („Wahrheit und Liebe“), HIV and AIDS as Challange for Christians“ („HIV und AIDS als christliche Herausforderung“), New Insights into Old Texts: Discussing Exgesis of the Old Testament“ („Neue Einsichten in alte Texte“).

Website: www.vkwonline.de
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



It will surprise you that the school founded by his father, the August-Hermann-Francke-Schule in Giessen, for which Schirrmacher is a member of the board of trustees tried to introduce creationism into the curriculum back in 2006.

ETA < link >
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 06 2011,23:45

I at first found it odd that the "Pacific Western University" mentioned above had a student review for the Art Institute of California- Los Angeles. I actually taught for the Art Institute of California at their Orange County campus. (They were money grubbing assholes- don't let your children go there). But, I recalled that the AIC bought "Pacific Western University" as a way to short-cut the paperwork of establishing a college in California.

In the 1970s, I had faculty job at the "University of California Irvine Medical Center," (UCIMC). This was made by the University of California buying the basically defunct "California College of Medicine" and the Orange County Public Hospital. They merged the three, and viola an instant medical college. My first year as faculty was officially in the "CCM," and then at the UCIMC. It was only years later was there a UCI Medical College. "UC Irvine Medical Center" (UCIMC) was a transitional form (nomen sensu lato).
Posted by: fusilier on Oct. 07 2011,07:29

Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,13:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nobody remembers Bye Bayou U.?
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 07 2011,08:05

Is that near Wassamatta U?
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 07 2011,08:33

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 07 2011,08:05)
Is that near Wassamatta U?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's the one.

It's on Nomanisan Island.
Posted by: noncarborundum on Oct. 07 2011,08:40

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 06 2011,21:28)
Quote (BillB @ Oct. 06 2011,12:21)
 
Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,18:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


lets create one right here, ATBCU and rename POTW as P(hd)OTW. Now we can all compete to see who can rack up the most 'Honorary doctorates in humorous or ironic posts' per year.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wasn't there something like the University of Ediacara? Seems as if it never honoured anybody, though.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hey, I used to know a girl who went to Ediacara.  I think her name was Flora . . . no, wait, that wasn't it.  Something like that, though.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 07 2011,08:47

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 06 2011,21:28)
Quote (BillB @ Oct. 06 2011,12:21)
Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,18:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


lets create one right here, ATBCU and rename POTW as P(hd)OTW. Now we can all compete to see who can rack up the most 'Honorary doctorates in humorous or ironic posts' per year.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wasn't there something like the University of Ediacara? Seems as if it never honoured anybody, though.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I was the building manager for Alco Hall at U of E.
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 07 2011,08:57

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 06 2011,01:12)
< De'News > is trying to hawk a pair of German Christian philosophy books as 'ID friendly'.

If you follow the first book link you will reach its Amazon.de page. Hey! Let's have a peek inside shall we....?

Why it's Dr.Dr.Dembski!



Mind you, though. He must be green with envy; check out this cat!



That's Dr.Dr.Dr.Dr. Schirrmacher to you, peasants!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


May God forgive me, "crapology" is what comes to my mind. I swear I am innocent, my brain did it all by itself. I can't help if it is much smarter than me, you are the one who gave it to me.
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Oct. 07 2011,09:05

Quote (fusilier @ Oct. 07 2011,07:29)
 
Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 06 2011,13:04)
Let me get this straight.*

I could create an unaccredited "university,"  Doc Bill U, and award myself an PhD Hon, or several and be a PhD Hon Mult.

Srsly?  I could do that?  Cool!  And I don't even need to recruit a football team.  I had no idea.



*that's what she said.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Nobody remembers Bye Bayou U.?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hey, I have a degree from there! - Doctor of Creationist Engineering, Feynmanian Astrodynamics

Sadly, BBU seems to be defunct.  The following pages are from the Wayback Machine web archives

< ByBayou University >

< degree programs >

< distinguished graduates >

BY BAYOU UNIVERSITY
Your Diploma Mill on the Web

   No inconvenient residency requirements
   No annoying advisor sessions
   No lengthy registration process
   No prerequisites
   No time consuming undergraduate work
   No religious oaths
   No classes
   No papers to write
   No stressful exams
   No counting credits
   No pants - if it's important to you
Posted by: KCdgw on Oct. 07 2011,10:25

We could always contact the Philosophy Department of the University of Woolamaloo:


Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 07 2011,17:50

Is there any way to extract Febble from UD? Does anyone have her ear?

Reason I ask is that looking at the front page it's become obvious that UD is increasingly spamming their site with absolutely anything they can in order to appear relevant; the "illusion of affairs" to steal a phrase from Conrad.

Most of these 'articles' attract zero comments, the only ones that seem to do so are the ones in which Febble engages the Tard. If she would only let them be we could watch UD sink further into obscurity.

We've seen what happens when the inmates have no one to condescend to; they start eating their own. Febble (and socks) are interfering with nature's course in not letting UD consume itself and die.

I know it's tempting. And as much as i've enjoyed this monument to tard over the years I'd really like to watch UD wither and die.

Just me?
Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 07 2011,21:36

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 07 2011,17:50)
Is there any way to extract Febble from UD? Does anyone have her ear?

Reason I ask is that looking at the front page it's become obvious that UD is increasingly spamming their site with absolutely anything they can in order to appear relevant; the "illusion of affairs" to steal a phrase from Conrad.

Most of these 'articles' attract zero comments, the only ones that seem to do so are the ones in which Febble engages the Tard. If she would only let them be we could watch UD sink further into obscurity.

We've seen what happens when the inmates have no one to condescend to; they start eating their own. Febble (and socks) are interfering with nature's course in not letting UD consume itself and die.

I know it's tempting. And as much as i've enjoyed this monument to tard over the years I'd really like to watch UD wither and die.

Just me?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD IS dead.  The body is just still twitching.

I think it pretty much died when Dr. Dr. Dembski pulled out of Dover and welshed on paying off his losing bet, and just coincidentally turned over the asylum to the inmates.

Good riddence to bad rubbish.

ps:  Hows that "Overwhelming Evidence" website doing for you there Dr. Dr. D?
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 08 2011,04:01

Quote (KCdgw @ Oct. 07 2011,10:25)
We could always contact the Philosophy Department of the University of Woolamaloo:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Isn't that vjtorley's alma mater?  

I believe he was in charge of the sheep dip.
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 08 2011,04:46

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 07 2011,17:50)
Is there any way to extract Febble from UD? Does anyone have her ear?

Reason I ask is that looking at the front page it's become obvious that UD is increasingly spamming their site with absolutely anything they can in order to appear relevant; the "illusion of affairs" to steal a phrase from Conrad.

Most of these 'articles' attract zero comments, the only ones that seem to do so are the ones in which Febble engages the Tard. If she would only let them be we could watch UD sink further into obscurity.

We've seen what happens when the inmates have no one to condescend to; they start eating their own. Febble (and socks) are interfering with nature's course in not letting UD consume itself and die.

I know it's tempting. And as much as i've enjoyed this monument to tard over the years I'd really like to watch UD wither and die.

Just me?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Trouble is, Febble has a) a sense of humour; and b) the courage of her convictions, which have not been lightly arrived at.

I think she also enjoys puncturing pretension and inflated egos, both of which abound at UD

However, given another forum where she could express and discuss all those things WITHOUT being constantly accused of lying and intellectual dishonesty (such accusations being blatantly false) and from which kairos-fucking-focus and Chicken Joe were absent, she may well shake the dust of UD from her feet.

Her own blog -"The Skeptical Zone" - has housed some interesting discussions (a bit rarefied for me, but then I'm a lout). A few denizens of UD have been seen there, like William Murray, but I don't think any of the sillier ones have contributed- apart from Chris Doyle, who for some unrevealed reason managed to delete a thread he had started, and all its comments.

Which was kinda weird

But we all know that UDers are shit-scared of commenting anywhere that they're not protected from derision or effective argument by biased moderation and rent-a-mob sycophants
Posted by: Alan Fox on Oct. 08 2011,08:15

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 07 2011,12:50)
Is there any way to extract Febble from UD? Does anyone have her ear?

Reason I ask is that looking at the front page it's become obvious that UD is increasingly spamming their site with absolutely anything they can in order to appear relevant; the "illusion of affairs" to steal a phrase from Conrad.

Most of these 'articles' attract zero comments, the only ones that seem to do so are the ones in which Febble engages the Tard. If she would only let them be we could watch UD sink further into obscurity.

We've seen what happens when the inmates have no one to condescend to; they start eating their own. Febble (and socks) are interfering with nature's course in not letting UD consume itself and die.

I know it's tempting. And as much as i've enjoyed this monument to tard over the years I'd really like to watch UD wither and die.

Just me?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As Damitall suggests, you could visit < her blog > and present your argument. I am sure "Intelligent Design" is brain dead and UD is only lending life-support till the family finally agree to turn the machine off. I have changed my mind on boycotting websites now, having seen the way they can wither away when there are insufficient contributions to maintain interest and the site then implodes.I doubt whether Lizzie commenting or withholding comments will make much difference.
Posted by: Amadan on Oct. 08 2011,09:04

I knew I'd heard of < Pacific Western University > somewhere!
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 08 2011,09:53



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eugene S October 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Elizabeth,

This is simply not nice, to me. Adam and Eve were real people, like your or my parents, not scientific or religious concepts. Would that be okay for you to be addressed as mitochondrial Liz? I don’t think so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 08 2011,09:59

Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 08 2011,09:04)
I knew I'd heard of < Pacific Western University > somewhere!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I forget, was this one of the Irish Government IDiots who recently gave bad advice on some science issue?
Posted by: noncarborundum on Oct. 08 2011,10:13

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 08 2011,09:53)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eugene S October 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Elizabeth,

This is simply not nice, to me. Adam and Eve were real people, like your or my parents, not scientific or religious concepts. Would that be okay for you to be addressed as mitochondrial Liz? I don’t think so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, Adam and Eve were Two Absolutely Real Denizens of the garden.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 08 2011,11:58



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I'd really like to watch UD wither and die.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Speaking for myself, I have no formal training in biology, but I have a hobbyist interest (and a political interest in what's taught in schools).

I find the endless argument educational, and I have no doubt that the political fight would continue without UD.

UD is a constant source of raw material for the next Dover.
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 08 2011,12:20

Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 08 2011,07:04)
I knew I'd heard of < Pacific Western University > somewhere!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"Con Power" indeed.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 08 2011,13:19

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 08 2011,10:53)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eugene S October 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Elizabeth,

This is simply not nice, to me. Adam and Eve were real people, like your or my parents, not scientific or religious concepts. Would that be okay for you to be addressed as mitochondrial Liz? I don’t think so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that Lizzie may have been too nice in response, actually apologizing to Eugene.

I'd like to see his evidence for an historical Adam and Eve.
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 08 2011,14:10

Quote (noncarborundum @ Oct. 08 2011,10:13)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 08 2011,09:53)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eugene S October 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Elizabeth,

This is simply not nice, to me. Adam and Eve were real people, like your or my parents, not scientific or religious concepts. Would that be okay for you to be addressed as mitochondrial Liz? I don’t think so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, Adam and Eve were Two Absolutely Real Denizens of the garden.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If there's one thing these twats lead the world at, it's taking offence.

Permanent spluttering indignation is their ground-state.
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 08 2011,15:09

There was the "Pacific College of Graduate Studies, Australia" that sold Carl Baugh a doctorate. There was a "Columbia Pacific University." And, Pacific Western University (Hawaii), and, Pacific Western University (California). The latter is now called "California Miramar University." They are all unaccredited, and have sold degrees to various creationists.

(I must have been wrong about the Art Institute- they (I suppose) bought some other failing "institute" or "university").


Posted by: Louis on Oct. 08 2011,15:11

Quote (noncarborundum @ Oct. 08 2011,16:13)
Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 08 2011,09:53)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eugene S October 8, 2011 at 8:43 am
Elizabeth,

This is simply not nice, to me. Adam and Eve were real people, like your or my parents, not scientific or religious concepts. Would that be okay for you to be addressed as mitochondrial Liz? I don’t think so.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yes, Adam and Eve were Two Absolutely Real Denizens of the garden.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW!

Good work, you win one internet and a copy of the < Trollolol song >.

Enjoy!

Louis
Posted by: noncarborundum on Oct. 08 2011,16:49

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 08 2011,15:11)
 you win . . . a copy of the < Trollolol song >.

Enjoy!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I hereby resign in favor of the first runner-up.

If you can call that a favor.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 09 2011,07:08

< Utterly shameless.... >
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 09 2011,08:26



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What if the mind is the TV station and the brain is the set?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



New book idea: "The Spiritual TV Station"
Posted by: Amadan on Oct. 09 2011,12:11

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 09 2011,14:26)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What if the mind is the TV station and the brain is the set?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



New book idea: "The Spiritual TV Station"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Some people are clearly only receiving the test card.


Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 09 2011,23:46

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 09 2011,07:08)
< Utterly shameless.... >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Denyse explained:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
One interesting thing that Beauregard mentions within The Spiritual Brain is that perhaps the mind itself is healthy – but trapped within a malfunctioning brain. It’s interesting because I hadn’t considered that possibility, but more on that later.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Nothing wrong with her mind, it's her brain that's malfunctioning.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 10 2011,02:30

They've stopped pretending now.

"Science is dominated by celebrity poseurs, social engineers, and hucksters."

< Tard >

EDIT: Thanks Quack!
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 10 2011,03:39

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 10 2011,02:30)
They've stopped pretending now.

"Science is dominated by celebrity poseurs, social engineers, and hucksters."

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/few-opponents-will-debate-atheist-neuroscientist-raymond-tallis-who-is-tired-of-neurotrash






/]Tard[/URL]
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I get only      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The page you are looking for is not here
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


However, choosing the search option with "Tard", I got loads of it! How appropriate, assuming the headlines represent a cross-section of ID...

ETA: < working link > - if you really want it.

ETA1: May < this > be what has upset them?
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 10 2011,06:15

Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 09 2011,20:11)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 09 2011,14:26)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What if the mind is the TV station and the brain is the set?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



New book idea: "The Spiritual TV Station"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Some people are clearly only receiving the test card.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 10 2011,06:50

< Classic BatShit 77: >

"Nick Matzke, not to step in between you and Jonathan’s discussion, but ..."

Followed by 2,636 words in three separate messages, none of which have anything at all to do with junk DNA, which is what Jonathan M and Nick were attempting to discuss.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 10 2011,08:55

I think it's cute how BatShit77 seals his argument with a Bible verse.

Game, set and match!
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 10 2011,11:59

Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 10 2011,14:55)
I think it's cute how BatShit77 seals his argument with a Bible verse.

Game, set and match!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Science: All so far?

Louis
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 10 2011,14:42

I wonder how many people actually READ BatShit77's posts and follow all the links. I kicked the habit after the first couple I encountered- took no willpower at all.

I recommend this sanity-preserving strategy. (I suspect a good few of his fellow tard-generators have discovered it already)
Posted by: JohnW on Oct. 10 2011,14:58

Quote (damitall @ Oct. 10 2011,12:42)
I wonder how many people actually READ BatShit77's posts and follow all the links. I kicked the habit after the first couple I encountered- took no willpower at all.

I recommend this sanity-preserving strategy. (I suspect a good few of his fellow tard-generators have discovered it already)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As far as I can tell, batshit has a library of twenty or thirty blocks of tard with associated links, from which he selects a random half-dozen for each post.  After a couple of days, you've seen 'em all.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 10 2011,17:08

< Where is the problem, indeed. >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
paragwinnOctober 9, 2011 at 9:32 pm

So then, from where does the mind receive it’s content that is supposedly broadcast to the brain? Is there any evidence that the brain broadcasts back to the mind?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
gpuccioOctober 10, 2011 at 4:36 am

paragwinn:

Evidence?

Each sensation is evidence that the brain “broadcasts” tp the mind. And each action is evidence that the mind “broadcasts” to the brain.

I suppose we have known that for millennia. Where is the problem?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And if it looks designed, it  must be designed. Why must people make science so unnecessarily difficult?

bolding mine, according to the broadcast i'm receiving.
Posted by: BWE on Oct. 10 2011,18:08

Quote (damitall @ Oct. 10 2011,12:42)
I wonder how many people actually READ BatShit77's posts and follow all the links. I kicked the habit after the first couple I encountered- took no willpower at all.

I recommend this sanity-preserving strategy. (I suspect a good few of his fellow tard-generators have discovered it already)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I read about 3 of them once and without even realizing it until now, it turns out that I have simply scrolled past every one since. It wasn't a conscious decision to ignore him, an internal or subconscious process created an if-then sequence which caused me to simply not parse his text any more.

Kinda weird. There are a few like that actually.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 11 2011,06:33

Quote (BWE @ Oct. 10 2011,18:08)
 
Quote (damitall @ Oct. 10 2011,12:42)
I wonder how many people actually READ BatShit77's posts and follow all the links. I kicked the habit after the first couple I encountered- took no willpower at all.

I recommend this sanity-preserving strategy. (I suspect a good few of his fellow tard-generators have discovered it already)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I read about 3 of them once and without even realizing it until now, it turns out that I have simply scrolled past every one since. It wasn't a conscious decision to ignore him, an internal or subconscious process created an if-then sequence which caused me to simply not parse his text any more.

Kinda weird. There are a few like that actually.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


KairosFocus for one.
Posted by: BWE on Oct. 11 2011,07:43

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 11 2011,04:33)
Quote (BWE @ Oct. 10 2011,18:08)
 
Quote (damitall @ Oct. 10 2011,12:42)
I wonder how many people actually READ BatShit77's posts and follow all the links. I kicked the habit after the first couple I encountered- took no willpower at all.

I recommend this sanity-preserving strategy. (I suspect a good few of his fellow tard-generators have discovered it already)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I read about 3 of them once and without even realizing it until now, it turns out that I have simply scrolled past every one since. It wasn't a conscious decision to ignore him, an internal or subconscious process created an if-then sequence which caused me to simply not parse his text any more.

Kinda weird. There are a few like that actually.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


KairosFocus for one.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


lol. Yeah. I forget the name of the one who dropped out a couple years ago because darwinists were ruining his life by attacking him on forums. He used to say that ID was necessary because it is the only explanation for why religiously inspired prophecy was so accurate/ Or something like that. I simply couldn't make any sense of his words. Actually Denise is also one I don't usually read anymore unless someone quotes her with an interesting snippet I go read the source.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 11 2011,11:32

for fucks sake will one of you please tell me which one of you was jerry?
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 11 2011,11:32

bbigej demonstrates psychological compatibility with the IDCists at UD by < projecting onto Nick Matzke >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’m seeing a lot of personal attacks and attempts at character assassination on ID proponents. Can you please cite any papers in support of your claims, especially pertaining to the claim that the Darwinian mechanism can produce copious amounts of complex, specified information? Thanks.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Translation:  "Pointing out exactly when and where we demonstrate our profound and willful ignorance of every aspect of biology is so rude.  Please focus instead on this concept that we've never rigorously defined for a metric we've never actually measured."
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 11 2011,13:26

Right above that there's Joseph lecturing Nick:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nice equivocation, Nick. It’s as if you really believe your ignoirance is some sort of refutation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 11 2011,13:32

This seems to be Nicks name calling post:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
bornagain77 — dude! Where do you get this stuff?? We discussed this paper in my seminar at Berkeley, it has NOTHING to do with tree incongruence statistics at all!

I know exactly what the paper is about — do you, or are you just posting massive amounts of random spam? Why should I even talk to you if you are not a serious discussant and just a link spammer?

Unless you go look up this paper, read it, and give a decent explanation of what it is about, and tell me why you posted it, I’m going to go back to ignoring your posts completely. Hint: it involves the difference between exponential distributions and normal distributions.

Cheers!
Nick
PS: Other random quotes, some of them ancient and outdated, about congruence don’t mean squat unless they are statistical statements. Statistics of tree congruence:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwini....-402791 >
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 11 2011,15:38

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 11 2011,09:32)
bbigej demonstrates psychological compatibility with the IDCists at UD by < projecting onto Nick Matzke >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’m seeing a lot of personal attacks and attempts at character assassination on ID proponents. Can you please cite any papers in support of your claims, especially pertaining to the claim that the Darwinian mechanism can produce copious amounts of complex, specified information? Thanks.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< ba77 frothily agrees with bbigej: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nick, It might interest you to know that I find you to be one of the most religious, intellectually dishonest, atheistic neo-Darwinists I’ve ever met!!! And I’ve met my fair share!!! In fact it is such shamelessly intellectually dishonesty on the part of religious atheists such as yourself ... [snip] ... I certainly fear for the fate of your soul for trying to lead people away from the truth of God with such shameless, and persistent, deception!!!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Waitwhat?!?!?!

shameless and peristent bolding mine
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 11 2011,17:24

< Preserving > (because you never know), NickMatzke_UD's latest response to BSI77 on the latest Junk DNA thread:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That’s not the research article, it’s the news article summary.

And either way, it has NOTHING to do with incongruence between phylogenetic trees! Do you even know what incongruence means? They used phylogenetic trees to do the study, for godssakes!

Bolding random parts of a news article about a research paper you don’t understand is not an argument. These kinds of shenanigans are why I mostly just ignore your posts, and why the scientific community will definitely, and rightly, never take the kind of stuff you put out seriously.

Here’s what the article was actually about — using phylogenetic trees to test whether the most common mechanism of speciation was:

1. A matter of gradually building up many small changes — which might be expected if natural selection of a long series of mutations was the major cause of lineage-splitting.

2. A matter of single, rare events — which might be expected if dispersal to new regions was the major cause of lineage splitting, e.g. when a species on rare occasions gets over a mountain range, out to a remote island, etc.

#1 predicts that the lengths of the branches between nodes on the phylogenetic tree will have a normal (bell curve) distribution, since if you add up the waiting times of a large number of exponentially-distributed events, you get a normal distribution.

#2 predicts that the lengths of the branches between nodes on the phylogenetic tree will have an exponential distribution.

They found statistically more support for #2. Since a lot of biologists have had the opinion that geographic separation is the most common cause of speciation, this tends to support their position.

There are various criticisms one can make of the study, since e.g. estimating branch lengths is nontrivial, but that’s neither here nor there.

In short…what am I, as a scientist, supposed to think about the shenangians you are pulling here? I know you’re not doing it dishonestly, you’re doing it out of the confidence that you’re correct, and your eagerness to show it — but that’s almost worse! Imagine what it looks like to a scientist who is already predisposed to dislike religion. Here’s a guy who calls himself “bornagain77?, who goes around telling people that a major scientific theory is a total fraud, yet he can’t even get the first thing correct about a recent scientific paper, and his doubling-down on the mistake indicates he doesn’t even care enough to double-check his claim once he is criticized about it.

I’m just amused, because I’ve seen such shenanigans so many times from creationists, but a lot of scientists get pretty darn ticked off at the abuse of their work and their field by people who have high confidence, but no idea what they are talking about. This, not atheism, is what makes so many scientists so strongly opposed to creationism/ID. That and the fact that other creationists/IDists don’t correct such mistakes, which are being made all the time.

And, if the goal is to convert people to evangelical Christianity, imagine how your behavior looks from the scientists’ perspective. Apparently, becoming born again involves throwing away your brain, naively misinterpreting the hard and careful work of scientists, and loudly proclaiming to the world that the scientists are wrong, when you don’t even know what you are talking about. That’s about the last thing that will ever appeal to a scientist, or to anyone who values science.

Creationists are one of the biggest impediments to successful apologetics that exists in the modern world.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As with criticism of Elizabeth Liddle I think Nick is also imparting a false sense of respectability to UDers' arguments. However, after this I get the feeling he won't be bothering to hang out over there much longer.

And while I am at it, who is IDiot ScottAndrews? He seems to be in the race with StephenB, Uppy and others to be the most arrogant in their ignorance.
Posted by: Lou FCD on Oct. 11 2011,18:49

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 11 2011,18:24)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Apparently, becoming born again involves throwing away your brain, naively misinterpreting the hard and careful work of scientists, and loudly proclaiming to the world that the scientists are wrong, when you don’t even know what you are talking about.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This part bears repeating every time a creationist opens the mouth.
Posted by: sledgehammer on Oct. 11 2011,20:03

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 11 2011,09:32)
for fucks sake will one of you please tell me which one of you was jerry?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Jerry, you magnificent bastard!  PM 'Ras.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 12 2011,05:40

Reasons to be cheerful. Mullings has just laid a giant two-page post at UD with the catchy title...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ID Foundations, 8: Switcheroo — the error of asserting without adequate observational evidence that the design of life (from OOL on) is achievable by small, chance- driven, success- reinforced increments of complexity leading to the iconic tree of life.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The best part of course is that nobody at all is going to bother reading all that dreck. Lewontin spotters are in for a treat, though.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 12 2011,06:09

< Lewontin >!
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 12 2011,07:45

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 12 2011,05:40)
Reasons to be cheerful. Mullings has just laid a giant two-page post at UD with the catchy title...
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ID Foundations, 8: Switcheroo — the error of asserting without adequate observational evidence that the design of life (from OOL on) is achievable by small, chance- driven, success- reinforced increments of complexity leading to the iconic tree of life.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The best part of course is that nobody at all is going to bother reading all that dreck. Lewontin spotters are in for a treat, though.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I suspect he knows that long URL's play havoc with the AtBC board software ... clever bastard.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 12 2011,11:13

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 12 2011,05:40)
Reasons to be cheerful. Mullings has just laid a giant two-page post at UD with the catchy title...
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
ID Foundations, 8: Switcheroo — the error of asserting without adequate observational evidence that the design of life (from OOL on) is achievable by small, chance- driven, success- reinforced increments of complexity leading to the iconic tree of life.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The best part of course is that nobody at all is going to bother reading all that dreck. Lewontin spotters are in for a treat, though.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Does anyone remember parts 1-7?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 12 2011,14:29

DeNews on drug design:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Which is why progress will depend mainly on outsmarting the proteins with new strategies.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



In essence, outsmarting the Designer, ie God.  Sure you want to go there?
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 12 2011,15:44

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 12 2011,14:29)
DeNews on drug design:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Which is why progress will depend mainly on outsmarting the proteins with new strategies.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



In essence, outsmarting the Designer, ie God.  Sure you want to go there?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh it's ok.

They're FALLEN proteins

Mired in sin
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 12 2011,16:29

Quote (damitall @ Oct. 12 2011,13:44)
 
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 12 2011,14:29)
DeNews on drug design:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Which is why progress will depend mainly on outsmarting the proteins with new strategies.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



In essence, outsmarting the Designer, ie God.  Sure you want to go there?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh it's ok.

They're FALLEN proteins

Mired in sin
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It so happens that < this paper > addresses the GATA factor Serpent (Srp) protein in Drosophilia.

Now if the Serpent protein is in Drosophilia, and Drosophilia are flies, and flies have been associated with the presence of demons, and demons are ruled by Satan . . . Quick! Someone call together a Theology Conference, stat!!

eta: < SIN, a novel Drosophila protein that associates with the RNA binding protein sex-lethal >. The Final Apock-o-lypso is NIGH!!!
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 12 2011,16:47

Sig worthy - BSI77 to DrREC:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You guys need to roll up you sleeves and do the actual experimental work
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


(Long link problem happening, it is comment 10.1.1 on the ID Foundations, 8: Switcheroo and on and on thread.)
DrREC's reply:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Projection much?

What experimental work have you ever done?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 12 2011,17:11



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I suspect he knows that long URL's play havoc with the AtBC board software ... clever bastard
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Freddie - And his long posts:
1.) Play havoc with the AtBC bored.

2.) Are undoubtadly over-compensation for other things in his life, that may just not be..."quite so long?"*


* Somebody ask Arden, or Louis's Mum
Posted by: JohnW on Oct. 12 2011,17:26

Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 12 2011,15:11)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I suspect he knows that long URL's play havoc with the AtBC board software ... clever bastard
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Freddie - And his long posts:
1.) Play havoc with the AtBC bored.

2.) Are undoubtadly over-compensation for other things in his life, that may just not be..."quite so long?"*


* Somebody ask Arden, or Louis's Mum
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I doubt that's the reason.  You're assuming a level of engagement with reality which Gordon's never exhibited before.

Anyway, "Switcheroo — the error of asserting without adequate observational evidence that the design of life (from OOL on) is achievable by small, chance- driven, success- reinforced increments of complexity leading to the iconic tree of life" is pretty concise by Gord standards.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 12 2011,19:24

Not too bad for an IDiot, but the increments in complexity assume there is a direction to evolution.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 12 2011,23:12

UD recently < spotted intelligent design theory in Germany on the radar > and appreciated < the new seemingly ID-friendly book edited by Christopher Heilig > who, under his pseudonym Christophersaint, had some less friendly encouter with Dr. Dr. Dembski back in 2007:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
18 ChristopherSaint < December 19, 2007 at 6:44 pm >

@are-freedom:
Well, to be honest with you – I don’t think, the american IDists have done a good job in arguing that ID is a “scientific theory”. I know only one German ID-advocate, who thinks, ID is a scientific theory (Lönnig). We had an ID-Conference a weak ago or so. It was broad consent, that ID isn’t a scientific theory (that doesn’t mean, that it is junk!). I’m afraid that there are few UD-readers who have read Sober or Ratzsch carefully. You shouldn’t be confused, because there is an ID-advocate who doesn’t think ID is a scientific theory (beyond UD there are MANY)… :-S
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
19 William Dembski < December 19, 2007 at 7:01 pm
>

ChristopherSaint: Give us more credit, please. My dad got his PhD in biology at the the University of Erlangen and my parents live in Germany. My uncle was a professor of ergnomics at the Technische Hochschule in at the time West Berlin. I know the scene in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. And I have read Ratzsch and Sober carefully — Ratzsch spent a week in a six-week seminar that I conducted at Calvin College in 2000 to discuss his then forthcoming book. Although I like much about Mike Gene’s book, he is an amateur at the philosophy of science. Thus I find those who like Mike try to argue that ID is valuable but not science as engaged in misconceived philosophy of science. I’ll probably write a paper on this sometime — when I get time off from my scientific research with Bob Marks’s Evolutionary Informatics Lab (www.evoinfo.org). Forgive me for slipping this in, but where is the outcry from your colleagues about the suppression of this work?

Finally, I have and will continue to allow posts about global warming on this forum because the same forces to obfuscate science at work in the global warming debate are at work with the ID debate. I must say, I really grow tired of Europeans finding fault with this blog. I have yet to see anything cutting-edge supporting ID coming out of Europe (prove me wrong). Those like Cees Dekker, who might have contributed, have jumped ship. In any case, I’m fluent in German, so if you have any sites to which you would like to direct me, be my guest.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 13 2011,02:22

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 12 2011,21:12)
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
19 William Dembski < December 19, 2007 at 7:01 pm
>

ChristopherSaint: Give us more credit, please. My dad got his PhD in biology at the the University of Erlangen and my parents live in Germany. My uncle was a professor of ergnomics at the Technische Hochschule in at the time West Berlin. I know the scene in Germany and elsewhere in Europe. And I have read Ratzsch and Sober carefully — Ratzsch spent a week in a six-week seminar that I conducted at Calvin College in 2000 to discuss his then forthcoming book. Although I like much about Mike Gene’s book, he is an amateur at the philosophy of science. Thus I find those who like Mike try to argue that ID is valuable but not science as engaged in misconceived philosophy of science. I’ll probably write a paper on this sometime — when I get time off from my scientific research with Bob Marks’s Evolutionary Informatics Lab (www.evoinfo.org). Forgive me for slipping this in, but where is the outcry from your colleagues about the suppression of this work?

Finally, I have and will continue to allow posts about global warming on this forum because the same forces to obfuscate science at work in the global warming debate are at work with the ID debate. I must say, I really grow tired of Europeans finding fault with this blog. I have yet to see anything cutting-edge supporting ID coming out of Europe (prove me wrong). Those like Cees Dekker, who might have contributed, have jumped ship. In any case, I’m fluent in German, so if you have any sites to which you would like to direct me, be my guest.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Where have i not heard similar statements before ten times over? I hadnt realized how many Dembski-drones inhabit the UD hive. GilDo's credentialed pedigree, O'Leary's 'CanadaWatch' and 'SuppressionAlerts', Joe G's 'research' and so on. I think they all were separated at birth, by design.

mein boldenkampf (hat, coat, exit)
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Oct. 13 2011,07:02

At least Dembski didn't claim to have < read Popper carefully >.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 13 2011,07:48

GilDo:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In this post [link not carried over]we discover: According to Darwinian theory, new species emerge when mutations produce individuals who can outperform the stock they came from…
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Gil, is it too much to ask for a reference to a leading biology textbook for this?  Apparently, yes it is and always will be.

Comments on the Darwinian logic point out Gil's number 2 is appropriately numbered:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Given #1: A certain feature of a living system exists. (Let’s try a trivial example, like Mozart’s ability to write symphonies.)
Given #2: Since this feature exists, it must have a survival advantage.
Given #3: Since it is known (scientifically) that Darwinian mechanisms can explain everything about the history of life, there must have been a gradual pathway such that random mutations and natural selection could turn a microbe into Mozart. How could this not be obvious?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 13 2011,08:32

Please tell me there's already a UD drinking game.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 13 2011,08:48

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Oct. 13 2011,15:02)
At least Dembski didn't claim to have < read Popper carefully >.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Um yeah ...well... that's because Dembski thought Popper only wrote fart jokes.

He has Aural Dsylexia. So Commom Stupid Idiots becomes CSI
Posted by: Gunthernacus on Oct. 13 2011,09:09

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 13 2011,08:48)
GilDo:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In this post [link not carried over]we discover: According to Darwinian theory, new species emerge when mutations produce individuals who can outperform the stock they came from…
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Gil, is it too much to ask for a reference to a leading biology textbook for this?  Apparently, yes it is and always will be.

Comments on the Darwinian logic point out Gil's number 2 is appropriately numbered:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Given #1: A certain feature of a living system exists. (Let’s try a trivial example, like Mozart’s ability to write symphonies.)
Given #2: Since this feature exists, it must have a survival advantage.
Given #3: Since it is known (scientifically) that Darwinian mechanisms can explain everything about the history of life, there must have been a gradual pathway such that random mutations and natural selection could turn a microbe into Mozart. How could this not be obvious?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It would be a trivial example if we all could write symphonies, Gil.  If we all could write them, then we would expect a connection to some sort of survival advantage.  Let's turn it around, though, Gil.  Can you write symphonies like Mozart?  No?  Not intelligent then, Gil?  Or maybe the Designer loves Mozart more than He loves you?  It's okay, Gil, He did give you checkers - but maybe that was a hint.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 13 2011,09:14

Quote (sledgehammer @ Oct. 12 2011,04:03)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 11 2011,09:32)
for fucks sake will one of you please tell me which one of you was jerry?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Jerry, you magnificent bastard!  PM 'Ras.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


OK HOMO'S LISTEN UP.

JERRY WAS AN ID WEBOT WITH A MITT ROMNEY MASTER GOTO OBJECT ORIENTED PROGRAM (MRMGOOP)

THE EXCECPTION HANDLER ALLOWED AN AMBIGIOUS OUTCOME.

DEMBSKI BELIEVED MRMGOOP WOULD BE A TOUR DE FORCE.

WE ALL KNOW MR Mr M'GooP ONLY SOLD STICKEY FURNITURE POLISH.

FINE IF YOU LIKE YOUR FURNITURE STICKEY.

© dt
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 13 2011,11:49

Joseph [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/id-foundations-8-switcheroo-the-error-of-asserting-without-adequate-observational-evidence

-that-the-design-of-life-from-ool-on-is-achievable-by-small-chance-driven-success-reinforc

ed-incre/comment-page-1/#comment-403013]tells a whopper[/URL]:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth,

GAs are MY fiel and they do have tarhets/ goals. The antenna GA is one such GA with a target/ goal.

AVIDA OTOH is bogus for all the reasons provided.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Followed shortly by:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Yes I have programmed and used GAs to find solutions to encryption issues.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Since encryption keys are the canonical example of fitness landscapes for which evolutionary algorithms are useless, I'm calling bullshit.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 13 2011,11:52

Shortened, hopefully usable URL:  http://bit.ly/r2oPQ0
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 13 2011,12:20

I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 13 2011,12:30

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 13 2011,12:20)
I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Philosopher, theologian and mathematician
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well at least he isn't calling himself a "scientist" anymore. :p
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It therewith hopes to play some small measure in transforming the culture consistent with a broad Christian humanism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"Christian humanism"? Can Spinoza be far behind?

Wow, it will be fun to watch this.

ETA - Or maybe not. He's already repeating that old saw, "Congress shall make no law..." versus the Canadian Bill of Rights (usually it's the UN Charter) explicitly spelling out rights. *Yawn.*

Next it will be the threadbare (because rubbed too much like a lucky penny) "The U.S. is a Republic, not a democracy," and other freshman Young Republican canards.


Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 13 2011,12:58

Christian humanism in the modern sense is an oxymoron.  Christian is based on adherence to a supreme being (God).  Humanism is based on human morals, ethics, and humans as supreme.

Christian humanism in the classic sense is literary criticism (something Dembski would be pretty good at).

< What is Christian Humanism >
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 13 2011,13:54

kellyhomes < pokes kairosfocus with a sharp stick >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And I know somebody that even when they were presented with such video evidence they simply refused to believe what they were seeing and constructed an elaborate explanation as to why the video was not showing what it was plainly showing. The person viewing the video never latched on to it’s true meaning.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I see what you did there.  A bit subtle for Gordon, isn't it?
Posted by: BillB on Oct. 13 2011,14:15

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 13 2011,19:54)
kellyhomes [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/id-foundations-8-switcheroo-the-error-of-asserting-without-adequate-observational-evidence


-that-the-design-of-life-from-ool-on-is-achievable-by-small-chance-driven-success-reinforc


ed-incre/comment-page-1/#comment-403112]pokes kairosfocus with a sharp stick[/URL]:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And I know somebody that even when they were presented with such video evidence they simply refused to believe what they were seeing and constructed an elaborate explanation as to why the video was not showing what it was plainly showing. The person viewing the video never latched on to it’s true meaning.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I see what you did there.  A bit subtle for Gordon, isn't it?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DrBot is less < subtle >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You do not have a right to redefine words as you please.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Neither do you yet you are happy to do it when it suits you.

Latching, psuedo-latching, semi-latching, quasi-latching …
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 13 2011,14:21

Quote (BillB @ Oct. 13 2011,15:15)
DrBot is less < subtle >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You do not have a right to redefine words as you please.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Neither do you yet you are happy to do it when it suits you.

Latching, psuedo-latching, semi-latching, quasi-latching …
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Speaking of DrBot, he, along with Petrushka, Elizabeth Liddle, markf, the new sock kellyhomes, and a few others have been rhetorically pounding the UD regulars into the ground on numerous threads over the past few days.  Is Clivebaby asleep at the ban hammer?  If it weren't Joseph, kairosfocus, and bornagain77 getting beaten up, I'd almost feel bad for them.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 13 2011,14:31



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When I read this, the first thing that popped into my mind was, “two more opposite things could not be said as one thing.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Agnostic Christian? Christian atheist?

I don't know...I can go along with folks who think one can be a Christian without a belief in God or gods. I mean heck...such a perspective is in no more wacky (and imho far less wacky) than believing the bible is the literal Word of God or that everything in it literally occurred as written.

On a more serious note though, there are a few problems with the concept, not least of which is the fact that a "Christian" is someone who, at the very least, is a follower of the "Christ" or Messiah and who believes in the redemption of man through such following. Well, even if such a person stripped everything attributed to Paul out of the bible and doctrine, he or she would still be left with Jesus (via the other writers) noting that the redemption is about getting back to God. I'm not sure how one ignores that and still claims to be a Christian.
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 13 2011,14:38

< Lewontin >!
(and not from KairosFlatus this time)
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 13 2011,14:51

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 13 2011,13:54)
kellyhomes [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/id-foundations-8-switcheroo-the-error-of-asserting-without-adequate-observational-evidence

-that-the-design-of-life-from-ool-on-is-achievable-by-small-chance-driven-success-reinforc

ed-incre/comment-page-1/#comment-403112]pokes kairosfocus with a sharp stick[/URL]:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And I know somebody that even when they were presented with such video evidence they simply refused to believe what they were seeing and constructed an elaborate explanation as to why the video was not showing what it was plainly showing. The person viewing the video never latched on to it’s true meaning.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I see what you did there.  A bit subtle for Gordon, isn't it?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I've never had to remove two <br> from a link before, way to go Gordon!
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 13 2011,15:06

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 13 2011,12:20)
I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dr Dr  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is this the part where he demands $20K to tell us the answer and then runs away as fast as possible?
Posted by: didymos on Oct. 13 2011,15:20

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 13 2011,13:06)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 13 2011,12:20)
I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dr Dr  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is this the part where he demands $20K to tell us the answer and then runs away as fast as possible?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, that Dembski.  Such an original thinker.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Oct. 13 2011,15:23

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 13 2011,15:06)

Dr Dr    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is this the part where he demands $20K to tell us the answer and then runs away as fast as possible?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I wager four quatloos!


Posted by: Acipenser on Oct. 13 2011,15:28

Is anyone else having problems with loading pages from UD?

As threads get larger I get the 'Internet won't let you look at that' error message.  Initial threads, or those with few replies load fine.  If no one else is experiencing problems then it might be related to my blistering 26.4 kbps dialup connection.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 13 2011,15:39

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 13 2011,14:38)
< Lewontin >!
(and not from KairosFlatus this time)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From a comment or two on that thread:

Acipenser said:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
quotemining Lewontin certainly won’t help you make your case. Talk about irony!

A intellectually honest po it would be prudent to provide the entire quote to fix the point in the context the author intended.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Ba77 asks:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Acipencer, is the quote really unfair?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What else could the explanation be for omitting the next two sentences every time?  Accident, running out of electrons.  If you think it makes no difference, then it should not hurt your argument to include it as requested.
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 13 2011,16:40

Quote (didymos @ Oct. 13 2011,15:20)
Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 13 2011,13:06)
 
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 13 2011,12:20)
I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:        

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dr Dr    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is this the part where he demands $20K to tell us the answer and then runs away as fast as possible?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow, that Dembski.  Such an original thinker.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Money is a social contract. Technologies (like abaci and computers) count it.

Hoo boy, settle in, everybody, while the malapropisms are also counted...

ETA - wrong vowel


Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 13 2011,17:08

< Radical Decentralization Pt III >

[VENT]
Dembski: "The minority is indignant because the unwashed masses (of which I’m a card-carrying member) are seen – through their greed, inattention, or waste – to be significantly contributing to the problem."

Ah, excuse me Dr. Dr., but you are not one of the great unwashed, you are the pampered son of a college professor.  You spent nearly twenty years of your life "studying" in some of the worlds most elite and expensive universities.  Since leaving the Ivory Tower, you've been cosseted by a series of right-wing benefactors.  The one time you tried to actually earn your living, you wound up teaching in a Bible camp.

You are a card carrying member of the elite, Billy Boy.  You are not quite a member of the one percent, but you were born into the top five or ten percent and remain there.  Your hands are not calloused, they're soft as a courtier's because that's essentially what you are.  You make your living saying what the monied boys want to hear.

And now, after a decade spent making a complete fool of yourself pretending to be a scientist, you, a conservative Christian, are starting a new column in the "Washington Times".  That's the newspaper founded by and paid for (to the tune of 1.7 billion dollars so far) by the Reverand Sun Myung Moon, a man who claims to actually BE Jesus Christ.  I'm sure you've rationalized that.

You're off to a grand start.  You've left the field you're at least somewhat, nominally, kinda, if you'd paid attention and actually understood what you were "studying", trained in and you're giving us the benefit of your piercing intellect on politics, sociology and economics.  

You've diagnosed our nation's problems as being caused by nameless minorities who bypass the will of the people and use the power of government to impose their desires on the nation without ever mentioning the massive campaign bribes that have corrupted both parties, the billions of dollars spent on lobbyists, the foundations and societies dedicated to greasing the skids for those in power or the wealthy minority who pay for it all.  Possibly because they don't want to hear anything about that and they also pay you.

And now you show some of the classical symptoms of a man about to hook a motor up to a generator and plug the generator into the motor:

"The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned."

We will and we're expecting you to do your usual job of indignant self-immolation.
[/VENT]
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 13 2011,17:45

< ID science at it's best: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so basically the medical establishment has been a giant flop. And think of all the trillions of tax dollars they’ve been given! Yet people think so highly of science and medicine!…why??…for wearing white coats and looking important? This whole health care debacle could be eliminated immediately if people started addressing their diseases with organic foods, (such as vegetable juice) as Hippocrates suggested long ago. diseases do not form because of a lack of drugs, bun instead because of a nutritional imbalance that chokes off healthy cell function.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If those damned scientists would just get off our backs, we'd live forever!
Posted by: Tom Ames on Oct. 13 2011,18:23

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,15:08)
< Radical Decentralization Pt III >

"The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is he talking about Bitcoin? It would be just like him to get in on that pyramid scheme.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 13 2011,18:33

Upright BiPed takes a page from kairosfocus' book and < waits a few weeks before lying about supporting his claims >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The mechanics of information transfer by semiosis has been explained to you.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I seem to remember Upright BiPed being completely incapable of producing operational definitions for several of his terms and running away from the discussion when this was repeatedly pointed out to him.

Doesn't their holy book say something about dishonesty?  As I remember, it was agin' it.
Posted by: J-Dog on Oct. 13 2011,18:59



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
(Permalink) Posted: Oct. 13 2011,17:08    

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Radical Decentralization Pt III

[VENT]
Dembski: "The minority is indignant because the unwashed masses (of which I’m a card-carrying member) are seen – through their greed, inattention, or waste – to be significantly contributing to the problem."

Ah, excuse me Dr. Dr., but you are not one of the great unwashed, you are the pampered son of a college professor.  You spent nearly twenty years of your life "studying" in some of the worlds most elite and expensive universities.  Since leaving the Ivory Tower, you've been cosseted by a series of right-wing benefactors.  The one time you tried to actually earn your living, you wound up teaching in a Bible camp.

You are a card carrying member of the elite, Billy Boy.  You are not quite a member of the one percent, but you were born into the top five or ten percent and remain there.  Your hands are not calloused, they're soft as a courtier's because that's essentially what you are.  You make your living saying what the monied boys want to hear.

And now, after a decade spent making a complete fool of yourself pretending to be a scientist, you, a conservative Christian, are starting a new column in the "Washington Times".  That's the newspaper founded by and paid for (to the tune of 1.7 billion dollars so far) by the Reverand Sun Myung Moon, a man who claims to actually BE Jesus Christ.  I'm sure you've rationalized that.

You're off to a grand start.  You've left the field you're at least somewhat, nominally, kinda, if you'd paid attention and actually understood what you were "studying", trained in and you're giving us the benefit of your piercing intellect on politics, sociology and economics.  

You've diagnosed our nation's problems as being caused by nameless minorities who bypass the will of the people and use the power of government to impose their desires on the nation without ever mentioning the massive campaign bribes that have corrupted both parties, the billions of dollars spent on lobbyists, the foundations and societies dedicated to greasing the skids for those in power or the wealthy minority who pay for it all.  Possibly because they don't want to hear anything about that and they also pay you.

And now you show some of the classical symptoms of a man about to hook a motor up to a generator and plug the generator into the motor:

"The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned."

We will and we're expecting you to do your usual job of indignant self-immolation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



POTW!!!!!!!1111
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 13 2011,19:16

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,23:45)
< ID science at it's best: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so basically the medical establishment has been a giant flop. And think of all the trillions of tax dollars they’ve been given! Yet people think so highly of science and medicine!…why??…for wearing white coats and looking important? This whole health care debacle could be eliminated immediately if people started addressing their diseases with organic foods, (such as vegetable juice) as Hippocrates suggested long ago. diseases do not form because of a lack of drugs, bun instead because of a nutritional imbalance that chokes off healthy cell function.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If those damned scientists would just get off our backs, we'd live forever!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I actually read that and wept. The problems with the pharma industry run deep, but these morons do not have the first clue as to why and what they are.

Louis
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 13 2011,19:25

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 13 2011,19:16)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,23:45)
< ID science at it's best: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so basically the medical establishment has been a giant flop. And think of all the trillions of tax dollars they’ve been given! Yet people think so highly of science and medicine!…why??…for wearing white coats and looking important? This whole health care debacle could be eliminated immediately if people started addressing their diseases with organic foods, (such as vegetable juice) as Hippocrates suggested long ago. diseases do not form because of a lack of drugs, bun instead because of a nutritional imbalance that chokes off healthy cell function.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If those damned scientists would just get off our backs, we'd live forever!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I actually read that and wept. The problems with the pharma industry run deep, but these morons do not have the first clue as to why and what they are.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


No indeed, they want to throw the bathwater, the bathtub, and their own right hands out with the baby.

That they come so close to redesigning reality (which they claim was designed by a benevolent deity) as to actually tread into an area of blasphemy that this atheist fears to treat (i.e., utter hatred of and struggle against That Which Is simply because it is) naturally escapes them. They don't have a quarrel with science per se, but reality itself.

I'm not going there!
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 13 2011,20:10

< BarryA >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Elizabeth Liddle is correct. Science does not, indeed cannot, take account of miracles. The entire scientific project is premised upon previously observed regularities continuing to occur.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Precisely the point of something Lewontin once wrote. IIRC, he made similar remarks in a review of Sagan's last book.

Has that ever been mentioned at UD?

ETA: I can't be bothered to actually UD read threads before snarking at them.
Posted by: didymos on Oct. 13 2011,21:50

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 13 2011,14:40)
Money is a social contract. Technologies (like abaci and computers) count it.

Hoo boy, settle in, everybody, while the malapropisms are also counted...

ETA - wrong vowel
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, there's that too, but what I was denigrating was him acting like the idea of a decentralised, digital currency were somehow novel, and in that smug self-congratulatory way.

Edit: omitted verb
Posted by: didymos on Oct. 13 2011,21:58

Quote (Tom Ames @ Oct. 13 2011,16:23)
Is he talking about Bitcoin? It would be just like him to get in on that pyramid scheme.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My take: He either thinks he's come up with something new, or he's perfectly aware of Bitcoin and is just going to pretend that he's come up with something new.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 13 2011,21:58

Quote (Tom Ames @ Oct. 14 2011,00:23)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,15:08)
< Radical Decentralization Pt III >

"The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is he talking about Bitcoin? It would be just like him to get in on that pyramid scheme.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh please be so!
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 14 2011,01:20

Quote (Tom Ames @ Oct. 13 2011,16:23)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,15:08)
< Radical Decentralization Pt III >

"The first thing I will focus on is money. Money is a social technology, but its current technological sophistication is still in the dark ages, despite the fact that computers rather than abacuses now count it. I’m going to propose a radically decentralized, information-based form of money that owes nothing to the state. Stay tuned."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is he talking about Bitcoin? It would be just like him to get in on that pyramid scheme.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Didnt Spain try that already with their pieces-of-eight? :p
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 14 2011,04:04

Since it seems we right now are on an excursion into political and sociological territory, I'll chip in with an observation made on radio here the other day:

The reason the Scandinavian countries were so successful coping with the economic crisis of the early 1990's was the way it was handled by the state.

But in the USA that would be equated with socialism, which is an ugly word over there.
...

I better keep silent on Dembski.
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 14 2011,04:14

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,17:08)
< Radical Decentralization Pt III >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I had to take a peek. Scary.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 14 2011,06:43

< Unpleasant Blowhard >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Big Bang Theory was adopted because the physical entailments involved in the theory were supported by the evidence. ID asks for no more, or no less. Therefore, there is no legitimate reason to deny that request.

ID claims that the information that organized matter into living things was the product of an agent. The existence of that information has very observable, physical entailments. Those physical entailments (which are truly profound in their dynamics) are an exact match to the same physical entailments which result from information being conveyed by semiotic means (by representations and rules).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UB doesn't quite grasp the notion of "entailment."
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 14 2011,07:25

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2011,07:43)
< Unpleasant Blowhard >:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Big Bang Theory was adopted because the physical entailments involved in the theory were supported by the evidence. ID asks for no more, or no less. Therefore, there is no legitimate reason to deny that request.

ID claims that the information that organized matter into living things was the product of an agent. The existence of that information has very observable, physical entailments. Those physical entailments (which are truly profound in their dynamics) are an exact match to the same physical entailments which result from information being conveyed by semiotic means (by representations and rules).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UB doesn't quite grasp the notion of "entailment."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UB doesn't grasp the notion of words having meaning.
Posted by: rossum on Oct. 14 2011,07:30

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 14 2011,01:20)
Didnt Spain try that already with their pieces-of-eight? :p
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That was Bytecoin.  Bitcoin is pieces-of-one.  :D

rossum
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 14 2011,07:33

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2011,06:43)
< Unpleasant Blowhard >:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Big Bang Theory was adopted because the physical entailments involved in the theory were supported by the evidence. ID asks for no more, or no less. Therefore, there is no legitimate reason to deny that request.

ID claims that the information that organized matter into living things was the product of an agent. The existence of that information has very observable, physical entailments. Those physical entailments (which are truly profound in their dynamics) are an exact match to the same physical entailments which result from information being conveyed by semiotic means (by representations and rules).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UB doesn't quite grasp the notion of "entailment."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Actually, it is we scientists who keep asking for the evidence and yet... it is never forthcoming.

No matter what, they can't get away from 'it looks complex, therefore design'.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 14 2011,08:00

Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 13 2011,20:30)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 13 2011,12:20)
I don't have time to read Dembski's < newest > but according to the summary page he remains the same arrogant Dr. Dr.:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
instead of trying to get the wrong people to do the right thing, make it impossible for the wrong people to keep the right people from doing the right thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Philosopher, theologian and mathematician
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well at least he isn't calling himself a "scientist" anymore. :p
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It therewith hopes to play some small measure in transforming the culture consistent with a broad Christian humanism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"Christian humanism"? Can Spinoza be far behind?

Wow, it will be fun to watch this.

ETA - Or maybe not. He's already repeating that old saw, "Congress shall make no law..." versus the Canadian Bill of Rights (usually it's the UN Charter) explicitly spelling out rights. *Yawn.*

Next it will be the threadbare (because rubbed too much like a lucky penny) "The U.S. is a Republic, not a democracy," and other freshman Young Republican canards.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Spinoza was run out of town by Dembski's wrong/right people.
Posted by: George on Oct. 14 2011,09:01

I made the mistake of direct tard contact and must now report for decontamination.  While there, I saw that the mouth breathers are out in force on the < whale evolution > thread.

Eocene:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Those earlier proto-whales were amphibians, able to live on land as well as sea.”
***

So their early ancestors were some sort of mammal wolf/deer-like creature(whatever – choose your favourite fable) which I assume already had mammal reproductive systems, mammary glands, etc. But then it turned back into an Amphibian which would include the previous vestigial sex froggy/salamandish/toady reproduction systems which I assume includes egg laying, etc, but then morphed back to a mammal of the whale/dolphin variety with fully functional mammalian componants once again ???

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Joseph:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Darwin’s theory cannot predict a tree because it is silent on the origin of life and the origin of life is what determines how many trees there will be.

Also tiktaalik can’t be a transitional because it was found in the wrong strata to be a transitional.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



butifnot:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The entire whale lineage story is flight of fancy.

Also, the ‘chart’ – never fails to amuse!

“Nested hierarchy, Nested hierarchy” “Clade , Clade, clade”

You made a chart, and you placed some animals on it, some of them imaginary – Overwhelming evidence that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I'll now return to the regularly scheduled consumption of tard first filtered by experienced miners.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 14 2011,09:13

Joseph is reduced to < mere sputtering >, even more blatantly than usual:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
No one said every change has to be designed. ID does not exclude darwinian mechanisms and it does not exclude random effects.

Also the hypotheses have nothing to do with blind and undirected chemical processes and again ID is not anti-evolution.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So ID isn't anti-evolution, it doesn't exclude anything, and it doesn't entail anything.  What exactly is your point, then?
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 14 2011,09:14

Quote (George @ Oct. 14 2011,09:01)
I made the mistake of direct tard contact and must now report for decontamination.  While there, I saw that the mouth breathers are out in force on the < whale evolution > thread.

Eocene:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Those earlier proto-whales were amphibians, able to live on land as well as sea.”
***

So their early ancestors were some sort of mammal wolf/deer-like creature(whatever – choose your favourite fable) which I assume already had mammal reproductive systems, mammary glands, etc. But then it turned back into an Amphibian which would include the previous vestigial sex froggy/salamandish/toady reproduction systems which I assume includes egg laying, etc, but then morphed back to a mammal of the whale/dolphin variety with fully functional mammalian componants once again ???

Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Joseph:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Darwin’s theory cannot predict a tree because it is silent on the origin of life and the origin of life is what determines how many trees there will be.

Also tiktaalik can’t be a transitional because it was found in the wrong strata to be a transitional.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



butifnot:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The entire whale lineage story is flight of fancy.

Also, the ‘chart’ – never fails to amuse!

“Nested hierarchy, Nested hierarchy” “Clade , Clade, clade”

You made a chart, and you placed some animals on it, some of them imaginary – Overwhelming evidence that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I'll now return to the regularly scheduled consumption of tard first filtered by experienced miners.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Holy Batshit Cowman

I don't care who you are: That there's some industrial strength dumb.
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 14 2011,09:19

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 14 2011,04:43)
< Unpleasant Blowhard >:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Big Bang Theory was adopted because the physical entailments involved in the theory were supported by the evidence. ID asks for no more, or no less. Therefore, there is no legitimate reason to deny that request.

ID claims that the information that organized matter into living things was the product of an agent. The existence of that information has very observable, physical entailments. Those physical entailments (which are truly profound in their dynamics) are an exact match to the same physical entailments which result from information being conveyed by semiotic means (by representations and rules).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UB doesn't quite grasp the notion of "entailment."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


O ffs. They're still using the "pigs look like piggy banks, therefore design" argument?

Man the bottom of that barrel is sure looking well-scraped.

Has anyone pointed out to Uptight Stu-ped that once again he's comparing to human representations and rules, therefore arguing we made the world?

Bonehead.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 14 2011,09:56

Larry Moran stops by:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

The main point of my article was to demonstrate that Jonathan M doesn’t understand “The Onion Test.” That’s not a big surprise because he is, after all, an IDiot.

Don’t the rest of you IDiots want to defend Jonathan M by showing that his interpretation of the Onion Test was correct? You could score lots of points for the anti-science crowd by doing this, especially since the inventor of “The Onion Test” (Ryan Gregory) will be reading your comments.

Give it your best shot.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.uncommondescent.com/junk-dn....-403368 >
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 14 2011,10:55

Darwinism is toast!


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Such a transition is a fete of genetic rewiring and it is astonishing that it is presumed to have occurred by Darwinian processes in such a short span of time.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Robin on Oct. 14 2011,10:58

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 13 2011,17:45)
< ID science at it's best: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so basically the medical establishment has been a giant flop. And think of all the trillions of tax dollars they’ve been given! Yet people think so highly of science and medicine!…why??…for wearing white coats and looking important? This whole health care debacle could be eliminated immediately if people started addressing their diseases with organic foods, (such as vegetable juice) as Hippocrates suggested long ago. diseases do not form because of a lack of drugs, bun instead because of a nutritional imbalance that chokes off healthy cell function.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If those damned scientists would just get off our backs, we'd live forever!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


AAAAGGGGGHHH!!! Good grief! I hear/read this type of comment from time to time and I wonder just what such people think life was like 50, 100, 200, etc years ago. Not to be melodramatic, but if I'd been born so much as 2 or so years earlier than I was, I'd be dead.

And what's with the silly what-has-science-"cured" strawman? Very little medical attention has to do with curing anything - most medicine has been about finding and using effective treatments for acute and chronic symptoms from ailments, not removing those ailments from the Earth entirely. What a bunch of dumbasses.
Posted by: carlsonjok on Oct. 14 2011,11:09

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 14 2011,10:58)
AAAAGGGGGHHH!!! Good grief! I hear/read this type of comment from time to time and I wonder just what such people think life was like 50, 100, 200, etc years ago.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, Adam lived to be 930 years old, so it must have been pretty good.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 14 2011,11:23

Quote (carlsonjok @ Oct. 14 2011,11:09)
Quote (Robin @ Oct. 14 2011,10:58)
AAAAGGGGGHHH!!! Good grief! I hear/read this type of comment from time to time and I wonder just what such people think life was like 50, 100, 200, etc years ago.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, Adam lived to be 930 years old, so it must have been pretty good.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




ETA: Scratching the >angry<, 'cause that's funny.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 14 2011,14:36



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
but if I'd been born so much as 2 or so years earlier than I was, I'd be dead.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


When Steve Jobs was my age he'd been dead for ten years.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 14 2011,18:32

Caroline Crocker:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Yay, creationist!

< Tard. >
Posted by: Lou FCD on Oct. 14 2011,19:04

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 14 2011,19:32)
Caroline Crocker:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Yay, creationist!

< Tard. >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
8
kellyhomesOctober 14, 2011 at 5:31 pm
Caroline,
Given that “creationism” is simply not science, except perhaps when science is defined to include astrology, why should it not be right to deride “creationism” when it attempts to use the cloak of science for unearned respectability?



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So according to you, any Christian who, for example, does not believe in a literal creation and Noah’s ark is not actually a Christian?

No true Scotsman and all that?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 14 2011,19:34

Caroline Crocker:  (HT to oldmanintheskydidntdoit)
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not even Jesus.  Damn liberal.

< Tard. >
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 15 2011,00:32

Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
5 Ted Davis < October 14, 2011 at 3:04 pm >

Now, as for the larger ID/TE issue, relative to the ASA, I have some things that need to be said, and this is a good place to say them.

I have heard many ID supporters (some who are ASA members and many who are not) say that the ASA is a TE organization that is unfriendly to ID. A few isolated facts might be seen to support that conclusion–a given article or review from our journal or web site, or a particular comment in a session at our annual meeting, or something that was said in a conversation at a meeting. I won’t list any examples of such, but I have no doubt that there are some. (I also have no doubt that others, including some here, have said highly negative things about either the ASA as an organization or about specific members in connection with the ASA. On at least two occasions, highly derogatory language was aimed in my direction here at UD.)

As far as the ASA as an organization is concerned, let me review some facts–all of them easily verified.

(1) Our refereed journal (the oldest science & religion journal in the USA), Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, frequently publishes articles taking a pro-ID stance. I challenge anyone to take a period of several consecutive years (somewhere in the past 20 years), count the number of articles that favor ID (keeping in mind that a large number of articles are entirely unrelated to ID), and compare that number with any other refereed journal of their choice. Unless you pick a journal that is intended specifically to promote ID, I bet we do pretty darn well.

Nevertheless, well known proponents of ID rarely submit papers to our journal, despite the fact that we do publish pro-ID articles.

(2) Most of the papers submitted for our annual meeting — and that process is always open to anyone — end up on the program somewhere. Not a large percentage are rejected (unlike our journal, which is pretty selective, the annual meeting program process is not very selective). Most pro-ID papers are accepted. If the number of such papers on the program in any given year is low, it almost certainly means that only a few such papers were submitted. I have been involved in setting the program several times, and the information in this paragraph accurately describes all of those years.

(3) ASA Council members, who are elected by the whole membership, have included a number of well known ID supporters in the past several years: Walter Bradley, Bob Kaita (who will be VP next April), and Ken Touryan all come to mind. In addition, another current council member is a Southern Baptist theologian (Hal Poe). There has been no effort to exclude pro-ID members from becoming Council members. For an organization that is alleged to be pro-TE, we sure have elected our share of pro-ID presidents. I challenge anyone to find a comparable degree of open-mindedness elsewhere.

(4) ASA Council members must (according to our own by-laws) be Fellows fist. To become a Fellow, a current Fellow must nominate a person; that person must then respond to a request to confirm their interest in being named a Fellow and send in some information (basically a short c.v. and some other information); and, the current Fellows must then affirm that person by voting for them on a ballot they are sent.

Sometimes people whose names are put forth do not respond to the request for information. This happens with at least one person in most years, and I can recall one year in which 3 people did not respond.

I will now share a piece of information that has not been publicly shared before: during my time on Council, I placed in nomination as Fellows multiple people who support ID, yet the two most prominent names did not confirm their interest and their names did not move forward. Everyone here would know those names, but I will have to keep you guessing about their specific identities.

So, what exactly am I saying? Simply this: relative to ID and TE, the ASA is what its members make it. I am (as you all know) not an ID proponent myself (although I am not without interest in ID or without sympathy for aspects of ID), but I always acted to keep the ASA what it has always been: an open forum on issues related to science and Christianity. I cannot submit papers to our journal or to the annual meeting on behalf of others; I cannot respond to requests for information on behalf of others.

Here is my frank advice to anyone within the ASA who believes that we are unfriendly to ID: look in the mirror. Have you submitted a top-notch paper to our journal? have you submitted a decent proposal for a paper at our annual meeting? did you respond to a request to confirm a nomination to be an ASA Fellow? We are who our members make us. What more can I say?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   5.1 William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 8:15 pm
>
   Ted,

   Walter Bradley contacted me in January or February of 2006, asking me to collect a CV and other supporting materials to propose me as fellow of the ASA. He didn’t spell out a strict deadline, so I sent the supporting materials in, as it turned out, two weeks late. Unfortunately, the deadline was strict and my nomination was put in cold storage — at least so I understood from Walter, who indicated that my nomination would be delayed a year. All the materials were in place to confirm my nomination — so Walter gave me to understand. And yet I was never ratified as a fellow, not the following year, not the three additional years that I still remained an ASA member.

   In any case, what finally got to me with the ASA was not the refused fellowship, but the condescension toward ID, the overwhelming (though not exclusive) view of the leadership that ID has no scientific integrity (I believe that Randy Isaac has said as much), and the sense that ID proponents will always be second-class citizens in the ASA.

   –Bill
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Doc Bill got even expelled from a Christian science society. And of course it was not his fault.
< Interim results > from an ongoing ASA survey will not make him any happier.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 15 2011,02:32

It is dawning on me how completely futile it is becoming to engage the ID supporters of UD. It is quite the Bizarro World over there. None of them seem to learn anything except how to repeat each other's talking points. Believe first in ID and THEN you will understand it. Obstinacy is seen to be healthy skepticism and honest steadfastness. They throw their arguments around as if they are defense attorneys; they are not burdened with providing a consistent and reasonable explanation of events but serve only to cast doubt on the prosecution's (if i have mis-characterized any defense attorneys here, I stand corrected). Contention can be healthy and productive but that's not what's occurring at UD. I applaud those who continue to engage UD, and am grateful for the enlightenment they provide.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 15 2011,02:39

< Journalism opportunity: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
(1) Our refereed journal (the oldest science & religion journal in the USA), Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, frequently publishes articles taking a pro-ID stance. I challenge anyone to take a period of several consecutive years (somewhere in the past 20 years), count the number of articles that favor ID (keeping in mind that a large number of articles are entirely unrelated to ID), and compare that number with any other refereed journal of their choice. Unless you pick a journal that is intended specifically to promote ID, I bet we do pretty darn well.

Nevertheless, well known proponents of ID rarely submit papers to our journal, despite the fact that we do publish pro-ID articles.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, Denyse O'Leeeeeeeeeeeary, be a journalist and investigate this, will you, dear?
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 15 2011,04:44

It seems to me a slight but significant correction needs to be made to Caroline Crocker's
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


as in "for Christians nothing trumps Christian faith, not even science."

The reason I bother with Caroline at all is something I heard yesterday. It is well known that Norway has a long tradition of engagement in Arctic exploration and research. A source said that the Arctic ice is becoming alarmingly thin, and that previous estimates of an ice-free arctic basin some 50  - 100 years from now have been too optimistic. It now seems more likely that the time frame is only 10 - 20 years.

Maybe too little emphasis has been put on the effects of positive feedback.

I have long been somewhat skeptic towards the estimates given by climate researchers so I feel a certain satisfaction when my suspicion is confirmed; scientists are not the kind of people to cry 'wolf' at first sight.

It is not encouraging to observe the downplay of science that has become a signature of certain groups within society.

GW is a fact and whatever advances towards a policy of restoring status quo have been and are being made, it is too little too late. We might even have to consider methods for AGC (Artificial Global Cooling).

But why do I worry? I have enjoyed the best times ever on this planet, they wont be back for a very long time, if ever.  

How much easier isn't life if you can ignore facts and science, and just adopt the prevailing opinion and faith of your tribe?
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 15 2011,08:49

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 14 2011,18:55)
Darwinism is toast!


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Such a transition is a fete of genetic rewiring and it is astonishing that it is presumed to have occurred by Darwinian processes in such a short span of time.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So that would be a church fete....?

Damn he was such a hit at street theatre .....so I'm guessing Opera (the animal or the mineral)  ,tights, and the Pirates of Penzance  is out of the question?

Where are these loosers going?

Does he dress up as a girly and hang around in bars?
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 15 2011,08:57

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 15 2011,03:34)
Caroline Crocker:  (HT to oldmanintheskydidntdoit)
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not even Jesus.  Damn liberal.

< Tard. >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah therefore if he was god ..... Satanic Verses would be Fiction.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 15 2011,09:05

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 15 2011,00:32)
Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I will be the first to cheer them on.

GO AITSE !
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 15 2011,09:53

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 15 2011,09:05)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 15 2011,00:32)
Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I will be the first to cheer them on.

GO AITSE !
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As usual he asks for other peoples money.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 15 2011,12:13

Quack:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It seems to me a slight but significant correction needs to be made to Caroline Crocker's
     
Quote
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.

as in "for Christians nothing trumps Christian faith, not even science."

The reason I bother with Caroline at all is something I heard yesterday. It is well known that Norway has a long tradition of engagement in Arctic exploration and research. A source said that the Arctic ice is becoming alarmingly thin, and that previous estimates of an ice-free arctic basin some 50  - 100 years from now have been too optimistic. It now seems more likely that the time frame is only 10 - 20 years.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

That was brought up a couple of weeks ago.  Turns out all the people predicting that are establishment types, so they're wrong.  I think there were also overtones of "them" not being right with Jesus.  

I think Bill Cosby got it right 40 years ago in his "Noah" sketch:  Hey Mr. Polar Bear, "How long can you tread water?"
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 15 2011,14:31

It's probably juvenile and mean spirited of me, but I'm really enjoying reading Larry Moran's posts at UD.  He's giving them all of the respect they have earned.
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 15 2011,16:36

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 15 2011,20:31)
It's probably juvenile and mean spirited of me, but I'm really enjoying reading Larry Moran's posts at UD.  He's giving them all of the respect they have earned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Larry's posting at UD? Oh THIS I have to see....

....wait. That involves actually going to UD. Hmmm I'm getting over a cold and that place is like internet transmittable brain cancer. I'm not sure in my weakened state I should dare. I shall retire to my fainting couch with a mint julep and get the house boy to give me a head massage.

Louis
Posted by: Seversky on Oct. 15 2011,18:22

If Caroline Crocker really believes this



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Therefore, I think I am justified in pointing out that is important to remember that for Christians nothing trumps the Bible, not even science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



and taught it in her science classes then small wonder she was fired.

It also makes one wonder how DeNews can claim that



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Crocker, by contrast, thinks she is following up on an evidence base. That gives her the sovereign right to ignore or dispute nonsense.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



How can she be " following up on an evidence base" if the Bible trumps any contradictory evidence that science might uncover.

Come to think of it, why bother to pursue a scientific career at all if all the answers are in the Bible?
Posted by: tsig on Oct. 15 2011,20:23

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 15 2011,00:32)
Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
5 Ted Davis < October 14, 2011 at 3:04 pm >

Now, as for the larger ID/TE issue, relative to the ASA, I have some things that need to be said, and this is a good place to say them.

I have heard many ID supporters (some who are ASA members and many who are not) say that the ASA is a TE organization that is unfriendly to ID. A few isolated facts might be seen to support that conclusion–a given article or review from our journal or web site, or a particular comment in a session at our annual meeting, or something that was said in a conversation at a meeting. I won’t list any examples of such, but I have no doubt that there are some. (I also have no doubt that others, including some here, have said highly negative things about either the ASA as an organization or about specific members in connection with the ASA. On at least two occasions, highly derogatory language was aimed in my direction here at UD.)

As far as the ASA as an organization is concerned, let me review some facts–all of them easily verified.

(1) Our refereed journal (the oldest science & religion journal in the USA), Perspectives on Science and Christian Faith, frequently publishes articles taking a pro-ID stance. I challenge anyone to take a period of several consecutive years (somewhere in the past 20 years), count the number of articles that favor ID (keeping in mind that a large number of articles are entirely unrelated to ID), and compare that number with any other refereed journal of their choice. Unless you pick a journal that is intended specifically to promote ID, I bet we do pretty darn well.

Nevertheless, well known proponents of ID rarely submit papers to our journal, despite the fact that we do publish pro-ID articles.

(2) Most of the papers submitted for our annual meeting — and that process is always open to anyone — end up on the program somewhere. Not a large percentage are rejected (unlike our journal, which is pretty selective, the annual meeting program process is not very selective). Most pro-ID papers are accepted. If the number of such papers on the program in any given year is low, it almost certainly means that only a few such papers were submitted. I have been involved in setting the program several times, and the information in this paragraph accurately describes all of those years.

(3) ASA Council members, who are elected by the whole membership, have included a number of well known ID supporters in the past several years: Walter Bradley, Bob Kaita (who will be VP next April), and Ken Touryan all come to mind. In addition, another current council member is a Southern Baptist theologian (Hal Poe). There has been no effort to exclude pro-ID members from becoming Council members. For an organization that is alleged to be pro-TE, we sure have elected our share of pro-ID presidents. I challenge anyone to find a comparable degree of open-mindedness elsewhere.

(4) ASA Council members must (according to our own by-laws) be Fellows fist. To become a Fellow, a current Fellow must nominate a person; that person must then respond to a request to confirm their interest in being named a Fellow and send in some information (basically a short c.v. and some other information); and, the current Fellows must then affirm that person by voting for them on a ballot they are sent.

Sometimes people whose names are put forth do not respond to the request for information. This happens with at least one person in most years, and I can recall one year in which 3 people did not respond.

I will now share a piece of information that has not been publicly shared before: during my time on Council, I placed in nomination as Fellows multiple people who support ID, yet the two most prominent names did not confirm their interest and their names did not move forward. Everyone here would know those names, but I will have to keep you guessing about their specific identities.

So, what exactly am I saying? Simply this: relative to ID and TE, the ASA is what its members make it. I am (as you all know) not an ID proponent myself (although I am not without interest in ID or without sympathy for aspects of ID), but I always acted to keep the ASA what it has always been: an open forum on issues related to science and Christianity. I cannot submit papers to our journal or to the annual meeting on behalf of others; I cannot respond to requests for information on behalf of others.

Here is my frank advice to anyone within the ASA who believes that we are unfriendly to ID: look in the mirror. Have you submitted a top-notch paper to our journal? have you submitted a decent proposal for a paper at our annual meeting? did you respond to a request to confirm a nomination to be an ASA Fellow? We are who our members make us. What more can I say?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   5.1 William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 8:15 pm
>
   Ted,

   Walter Bradley contacted me in January or February of 2006, asking me to collect a CV and other supporting materials to propose me as fellow of the ASA. He didn’t spell out a strict deadline, so I sent the supporting materials in, as it turned out, two weeks late. Unfortunately, the deadline was strict and my nomination was put in cold storage — at least so I understood from Walter, who indicated that my nomination would be delayed a year. All the materials were in place to confirm my nomination — so Walter gave me to understand. And yet I was never ratified as a fellow, not the following year, not the three additional years that I still remained an ASA member.

   In any case, what finally got to me with the ASA was not the refused fellowship, but the condescension toward ID, the overwhelming (though not exclusive) view of the leadership that ID has no scientific integrity (I believe that Randy Isaac has said as much), and the sense that ID proponents will always be second-class citizens in the ASA.

   –Bill
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Doc Bill got even expelled from a Christian science society. And of course it was not his fault.
< Interim results > from an ongoing ASA survey will not make him any happier.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Somehow this seems appropriate:

Minever loved the Medici,

Albeit he had never seen one;

He would have sinned incessantly

Could he have been one.



< http://www.poemtree.com/poems....evy.htm >
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 15 2011,21:47

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 15 2011,17:36)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 15 2011,20:31)
It's probably juvenile and mean spirited of me, but I'm really enjoying reading Larry Moran's posts at UD.  He's giving them all of the respect they have earned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Larry's posting at UD? Oh THIS I have to see....

....wait. That involves actually going to UD. Hmmm I'm getting over a cold and that place is like internet transmittable brain cancer. I'm not sure in my weakened state I should dare. I shall retire to my fainting couch with a mint julep and get the house boy to give me a head massage.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So it was Louis on the fainting couch with the house boy....

Sorry, I think I'm playing the wrong game.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 15 2011,23:26

Yeah, you're thinking of the game

"Clueless"
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 15 2011,23:57

In the < Has the American Scientific Affiliation Spurned ID? > thread, Dembski tells about his almost acceptance as a Fellow of the ASA:          

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Walter Bradley contacted me in January or February of 2006, asking me to collect a CV and other supporting materials to propose me as fellow of the ASA. He didn’t spell out a strict deadline, so I sent the supporting materials in, as it turned out, two weeks late. Unfortunately, the deadline was strict and my nomination was put in cold storage — at least so I understood from Walter, who indicated that my nomination would be delayed a year. All the materials were in place to confirm my nomination — so Walter gave me to understand. And yet I was never ratified as a fellow, not the following year, not the three additional years that I still remained an ASA member.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So Dembski blew becoming a Fellow of the ASA in 2006 because of his own TARDiness (sorry).  Then they didn't pick him in 2007, 2008, 2009 or 2010.  I wonder if anything happened in Dr. Dr. Dembski's life around that time that might make a fairly serious religious-scientific organization not want him as a member?

Well, let's see.  If he was asked to become a member in January or February 2006, but missed a deadline for submitting his materials, then the ASA probably considered new candidates sometime in the summer or fall of 2006.  So could Dembski possibly have done anything before the summer or fall of 2007 to change the ASA's mind about wanting to get all collegial with him?  

Well, in the summer of 2007, Dembski and Baylor University Professor Robert Marks started the Evolutionary Informatics Lab at Baylor University, apparently without bothering to tell anybody in the Baylor administration about it.  Baylor authorities found out they were hosting a brand new ID center when Marks posted its web site on a Baylor server.  (If I remember right, Dembski was brought on as the World's Oldest Post-Doc because he was persona-non-grata at Baylor after he blew up in his typical childish way over the Polanyi Center.)

Baylor deleted the web site as soon as they say "Dembski" on it.  After some world class whining on Dembski and Mark's part, they eventually offered to host it again provided it had a disclaimer making it clear that the work did not represent the university's position.  Well, William A. Dembski, BA, MS, MS, MS, PhD, PhD was not going to take an insult like that laying down!  Let's let Dr. Dr. Bill < tell us how he handled that: > (from his public Notpology)      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nonetheless, on this blog I went too far in trying to hold up the Baylor administration’s actions to the light of day. I let it get personal and went over the edge in three things: (1) posting a parody letter attributed to Baylor President Lilley; (2) posting contact information for the Baylor Board of Regents in an effort to apply pressure to the Baylor administration; (3) posting an exchange between Peter Irons and John Lilley largely for the purpose of embarassing both.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


By "posting contact information for the Baylor Board of Regents", Dr. Dr. Dembski means that he published the names, home telephone numbers and personal email addresses of the entire Baylor Board of Regents on that haven of erudition, politeness and restraint, Uncommon Descent.  I leave it to your imaginations what the next few weeks must have been like for the members of the Board.

Any ordinary fuck-up would have contented himself with just writing a parody letter in the name of the President of the university and putting it on line or publishing some of that President's private correspondence,  but Dr. Dr. Dembski is no ordinary person and instead he redefined the whole idea of academic crazy.

And he apparently still hasn't figured out why anybody with enough sanity to wear their underwear on the inside doesn't want to invite him to join their organization.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 16 2011,00:40

Well, at least they had the smarts not to name the organization the

American Scientific Society
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 16 2011,03:34

Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 16 2011,05:26)
Yeah, you're thinking of the game

"Clueless"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The Game.

You just lost it.

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 16 2011,03:36

Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 15 2011,15:05)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 15 2011,00:32)
Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I will be the first to cheer them on.

GO AITSE !
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 16 2011,04:34



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I really am not curious except that's too cryptic for me.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 16 2011,08:20

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 16 2011,05:47)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 15 2011,17:36)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 15 2011,20:31)
It's probably juvenile and mean spirited of me, but I'm really enjoying reading Larry Moran's posts at UD.  He's giving them all of the respect they have earned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Larry's posting at UD? Oh THIS I have to see....

....wait. That involves actually going to UD. Hmmm I'm getting over a cold and that place is like internet transmittable brain cancer. I'm not sure in my weakened state I should dare. I shall retire to my fainting couch with a mint julep and get the house boy to give me a head massage.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So it was Louis on the fainting couch with the house boy....

Sorry, I think I'm playing the wrong game.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


No Louis ..........was the fainting couch house boy.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 16 2011,08:29

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 16 2011,07:57)
In the < Has the American Scientific Affiliation Spurned ID? > thread, Dembski tells about his almost acceptance as a Fellow of the ASA:          

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Walter Bradley contacted me in January or February of 2006, asking me to collect a CV and other supporting materials to propose me as fellow of the ASA. He didn’t spell out a strict deadline, so I sent the supporting materials in, as it turned out, two weeks late. Unfortunately, the deadline was strict and my nomination was put in cold storage — at least so I understood from Walter, who indicated that my nomination would be delayed a year. All the materials were in place to confirm my nomination — so Walter gave me to understand. And yet I was never ratified as a fellow, not the following year, not the three additional years that I still remained an ASA member.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So Dembski blew becoming a Fellow of the ASA in 2006 because of his own TARDiness (sorry).  Then they didn't pick him in 2007, 2008, 2009 or 2010.  I wonder if anything happened in Dr. Dr. Dembski's life around that time that might make a fairly serious religious-scientific organization not want him as a member?

Well, let's see.  If he was asked to become a member in January or February 2006, but missed a deadline for submitting his materials, then the ASA probably considered new candidates sometime in the summer or fall of 2006.  So could Dembski possibly have done anything before the summer or fall of 2007 to change the ASA's mind about wanting to get all collegial with him?  

Well, in the summer of 2007, Dembski and Baylor University Professor Robert Marks started the Evolutionary Informatics Lab at Baylor University, apparently without bothering to tell anybody in the Baylor administration about it.  Baylor authorities found out they were hosting a brand new ID center when Marks posted its web site on a Baylor server.  (If I remember right, Dembski was brought on as the World's Oldest Post-Doc because he was persona-non-grata at Baylor after he blew up in his typical childish way over the Polanyi Center.)

Baylor deleted the web site as soon as they say "Dembski" on it.  After some world class whining on Dembski and Mark's part, they eventually offered to host it again provided it had a disclaimer making it clear that the work did not represent the university's position.  Well, William A. Dembski, BA, MS, MS, MS, PhD, PhD was not going to take an insult like that laying down!  Let's let Dr. Dr. Bill < tell us how he handled that: > (from his public Notpology)        

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Nonetheless, on this blog I went too far in trying to hold up the Baylor administration’s actions to the light of day. I let it get personal and went over the edge in three things: (1) posting a parody letter attributed to Baylor President Lilley; (2) posting contact information for the Baylor Board of Regents in an effort to apply pressure to the Baylor administration; (3) posting an exchange between Peter Irons and John Lilley largely for the purpose of embarassing both.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


By "posting contact information for the Baylor Board of Regents", Dr. Dr. Dembski means that he published the names, home telephone numbers and personal email addresses of the entire Baylor Board of Regents on that haven of erudition, politeness and restraint, Uncommon Descent.  I leave it to your imaginations what the next few weeks must have been like for the members of the Board.

Any ordinary fuck-up would have contented himself with just writing a parody letter in the name of the President of the university and putting it on line or publishing some of that President's private correspondence,  but Dr. Dr. Dembski is no ordinary person and instead he redefined the whole idea of academic crazy.

And he apparently still hasn't figured out why anybody with enough sanity to wear their underwear on the inside doesn't want to invite him to join their organization.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


At least he didn't acuse the Baylor regents of being a victim of redneck xstain gasoline sniffers/wife beaters for being at a drug deal gone wrong.

Bill will have a long list to answer for when he gets to the pearly gates.

Hey Bill or one of you ass sniffers pass the message on.

A CUNT is not part of the female anatomy.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 16 2011,08:40

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,11:36)
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 15 2011,15:05)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 15 2011,00:32)
Being William Dembski means a life of bitterness:      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
1
William Dembski < October 14, 2011 at 12:52 pm >

Thanks for this post, Caroline. Even though my research professorship pays for memberships to professional societies, I decided to let my membership in the ASA lapse last year (after more than 20 years a member) because I simply could no longer get behind the direction in which the organization was going.

Let me urge that you start your own professional society through AITSE to fill that gap that the ASA is leaving — may some deep pockets reading this post provided you with the needed start-up capital!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I will be the first to cheer them on.

GO AITSE !
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It would be nice if anyone anywhere took the Welsh seriously.

But since they can't even beat a bunch of goat fuckers aka the "les bleus" do they even deserve to beat the misnamed Wallabies popularly known as the Bunbury Girls High School 500 cards club.

So while you guys are dreaming of 4th place the mighty All Blacks will be cake walking for the second time in 24 years.....Fingers crossed.
Posted by: Seversky on Oct. 16 2011,08:40

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 16 2011,09:06

Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 16 2011,16:40)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be tripe and black pudding, right?
Posted by: didymos on Oct. 16 2011,09:49

Quote (Quack @ Oct. 16 2011,02:34)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I really am not curious except that's too cryptic for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Words can do neither justice.  They must be experienced. Not that I recommend either of those experiences.  If you really want to know, turn off the safe search and go Googling.  Let it be said, however, that you probably don't want to know.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 16 2011,11:35

Currently, the top three 'articles' at UD are attacks against the ASA. Fuelled, no doubt, by Carol 'crocker' Shit's desire to elevate her AITSE to the position of the 'One True ID-Friendly Science Shoppe'; and ably supported by Dembski's whining.

Nothing much to look at but it's nevertheless fun to watch ID (and all who sail in her) scrabbling around the theological hinterlands, looking for a foothold.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 16 2011,11:45

Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 16 2011,00:26)
Yeah, you're thinking of the game

"Clueless"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is Louis?


Posted by: Louis on Oct. 16 2011,12:22

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 16 2011,17:45)
Quote (Doc Bill @ Oct. 16 2011,00:26)
Yeah, you're thinking of the game

"Clueless"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is Louis?


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If I was that good looking I'd never leave the house.

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 16 2011,12:24

Quote (Quack @ Oct. 16 2011,10:34)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I really am not curious except that's too cryptic for me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You will see a pot below by Didymos.

Under no circumstances obey the instructions within. The reservations he expresses are heavily understated. DO NOT GOOGLE THOSE TERMS!

Especially do not go to the Encylopedia Dramatica's shock page. Just don't. Seriously. It's horrendous.

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 16 2011,12:26

Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 16 2011,15:06)
Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 16 2011,16:40)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be tripe and black pudding, right?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And a special bread poultice of herbs, honey and milk applied to the neck.

Happily, after it has drawn out all of the noxious humours, it can be baked and eaten.

Louis
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 16 2011,13:40

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,12:26)
 
Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 16 2011,15:06)
 
Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 16 2011,16:40)
   
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be tripe and black pudding, right?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And a special bread poultice of herbs, honey and milk applied to the neck.

Happily, after it has drawn out all of the noxious humours, it can be baked and eaten.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I won't be back before page 26.
Posted by: Seversky on Oct. 16 2011,16:01

Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 16 2011,09:06)
Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 16 2011,16:40)
 
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be tripe and black pudding, right?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Mock not.  Tripe and black pudding are triumphs of British hautepaute cuisine and ingenuity.  Not only do they provide a nourishing repast but they can be used to repair punctures in rubber tires and fill small potholes in roads.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 16 2011,18:16

PaV has < updated > a strangely familiar < argument >. Shortened:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In crossing a heath, suppose I pitched my foot against an iPhone...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 16 2011,19:24

Elizabeth Liddle < assaults kairosfocus' worldview >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kairosfocus: it is not “doing you an injustice” to disagree with you.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Obviously it is, Lizzie, else the lying hypocrite would have no reason to clutch his pearls and get the vapors.

It's looking like the aftermath of Sherman's march to the sea over at UD.  Lizzie has taken apart Behe's IC argument and ground the pieces under her heel.  Multiple participants from the reality-based community are asking for positive evidence for ID and pointing out when it isn't forthcoming.  Larry Moran is calling them "IDiots" to their virtual faces.  Every UD regular is being called on their usual nonsense.  The earth is scorched and there's no place for an Intelligent Design Creationist to hide.

The only regret I have is that we won't have UD to kick around anymore.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 16 2011,22:06

They will hide behind Maxwell's daemon, in the form of a silver banhammer.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 16 2011,22:35

Caroline Crocker at < UD >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Quite apart from the scientific problems with this view, some people are questioning whether the faith that is being espoused [by ASA] is still orthodox Christianity. The fruit of the ASA meeting, which included arguing based on ad hominem attacks, advocating a type of Scientism, equivocating about the sanctity of life, and disregarding Biblical standards for sexuality, suggests that it is not. ASA has forgotten its stated identity. ASA has lost its way.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

and on < Twitter >:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Just went to the Southern CA ASA group meeting. Friendly folks. Great to see.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: keiths on Oct. 16 2011,22:49

< GilDo >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I have a Type-A perfectionist personality that has driven me all my life, whether in the pursuit of mathematics, classical piano playing, software engineering, or anything else.

Anything less than perfection is disturbingly unsatisfying to me. This is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing because it has inspired me to do the best I could possibly do in any endeavor I have ever pursued. It is a curse because I know that I cannot ever live up to any standard of perfection, whether self- or externally-imposed.

Christians will understand the implications of this understanding.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil, you mean the things you've been posting at UD are the best you can do?  Christ. No wonder you're bitter.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 17 2011,00:17

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 17 2011,15:49)
Gil, you mean the things you've been posting at UD are the best you can do?  Christ. No wonder you're bitter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That post had a different effect for me. That awful old < Mac Davis song > wormed its way into my mind. And it's still there - aarrgh!
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 17 2011,00:37

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 16 2011,20:49)
< GilDo >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I have a Type-A perfectionist personality that has driven me all my life, whether in the pursuit of mathematics, classical piano playing, software engineering, or anything else.

Anything less than perfection is disturbingly unsatisfying to me. This is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing because it has inspired me to do the best I could possibly do in any endeavor I have ever pursued. It is a curse because I know that I cannot ever live up to any standard of perfection, whether self- or externally-imposed.

Christians will understand the implications of this understanding.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil, you mean the things you've been posting at UD are the best you can do?  Christ. No wonder you're bitter.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Which explains why he hates evolution: it's sloppy... and yet, it works.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 17 2011,00:39

Logic, < PaV style >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kellyhomes @ 21.1.2:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   Let me ask you, what “positive evidence” do you have that Intelligent Design caused a land mammal to become aquatic?
<more>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



But you’ve already asked me that question. I simply turned it around and asked you. You think you have evidence. Well, where is it?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Quack on Oct. 17 2011,03:44

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 16 2011,19:24)
Elizabeth Liddle
< assaults kairosfocus' worldview >
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kairosfocus: it is not “doing you an injustice” to disagree with you.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Obviously it is, Lizzie, else the lying hypocrite would have no reason to clutch his pearls and get the vapors.

It's looking like the aftermath of Sherman's march to the sea over at UD.  Lizzie has taken apart Behe's IC argument and ground the pieces under her heel.  Multiple participants from the reality-based community are asking for positive evidence for ID and pointing out when it isn't forthcoming.  Larry Moran is calling them "IDiots" to their virtual faces.  Every UD regular is being called on their usual nonsense.  The earth is scorched and there's no place for an Intelligent Design Creationist to hide.

The only regret I have is that we won't have UD to kick around anymore.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Fixed link here: < assaults kairosfocus' worldview >  And at the top too...
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 17 2011,08:11

Quote (Quack @ Oct. 16 2011,21:40)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,12:26)
   
Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 16 2011,15:06)
   
Quote (Seversky @ Oct. 16 2011,16:40)
     
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 16 2011,03:36)
That post needs to be celebrated with a Lemon Party. Have a Blue Waffle.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You might want to ease back on that cold medicine. ???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be tripe and black pudding, right?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And a special bread poultice of herbs, honey and milk applied to the neck.

Happily, after it has drawn out all of the noxious humours, it can be baked and eaten.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I won't be back before page 26.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh haha

It seems in reality now that UCD appears more animated than Sleeping Beauty on speed the players have taken to enjoying their real lives.
\
ETA: Over to Grumpy Dopey and Doc
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 17 2011,09:55

StephenB explains why ID is not creationism:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If we accept the findings of physical anthropology and molecular biology, the first “human” species appeared in Africa about 150,000 years ago. According to that scenario, it was the gradual increase in brain size that caused the transition from sub-human species to homo sapiens. As the story goes, the human population was never smaller than 10,000 or some such number. I question this account for several reasons, but I do, nevertheless, think it can be reconciled with Genesis.

According to the Bible, though, there was an original pair of humans. Thus, in order to reconcile Scripture with the scientific evidence presented by experts, we would have to assume that God, in some fashion, planted a spiritual soul into a pre-existing species, which was human in every other way except for the critical powers of intellect and will, and that He was, through that act, and in that sense, creating Adam and Eve.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Oh, er, wait now.

< Can you adam and eve it? >
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 17 2011,10:15

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 15 2011,02:32)
It is dawning on me how completely futile it is becoming to engage the ID supporters of UD. It is quite the Bizarro World over there. None of them seem to learn anything except how to repeat each other's talking points. Believe first in ID and THEN you will understand it. Obstinacy is seen to be healthy skepticism and honest steadfastness. They throw their arguments around as if they are defense attorneys; they are not burdened with providing a consistent and reasonable explanation of events but serve only to cast doubt on the prosecution's (if i have mis-characterized any defense attorneys here, I stand corrected). Contention can be healthy and productive but that's not what's occurring at UD. I applaud those who continue to engage UD, and am grateful for the enlightenment they provide.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I gave up several months ago. The discussions just don't go anywhere except towards name-calling.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 17 2011,10:23

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 17 2011,10:55)
StephenB explains why ID is not creationism:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If we accept the findings of physical anthropology and molecular biology, the first “human” species appeared in Africa about 150,000 years ago. According to that scenario, it was the gradual increase in brain size that caused the transition from sub-human species to homo sapiens. As the story goes, the human population was never smaller than 10,000 or some such number. I question this account for several reasons, but I do, nevertheless, think it can be reconciled with Genesis.

According to the Bible, though, there was an original pair of humans. Thus, in order to reconcile Scripture with the scientific evidence presented by experts, we would have to assume that God, in some fashion, planted a spiritual soul into a pre-existing species, which was human in every other way except for the critical powers of intellect and will, and that He was, through that act, and in that sense, creating Adam and Eve.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Oh, er, wait now.

< Can you adam and eve it? >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ALL SCIENCE SO FAR
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 17 2011,10:25

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 17 2011,11:15)
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 15 2011,02:32)
It is dawning on me how completely futile it is becoming to engage the ID supporters of UD. It is quite the Bizarro World over there. None of them seem to learn anything except how to repeat each other's talking points. Believe first in ID and THEN you will understand it. Obstinacy is seen to be healthy skepticism and honest steadfastness. They throw their arguments around as if they are defense attorneys; they are not burdened with providing a consistent and reasonable explanation of events but serve only to cast doubt on the prosecution's (if i have mis-characterized any defense attorneys here, I stand corrected). Contention can be healthy and productive but that's not what's occurring at UD. I applaud those who continue to engage UD, and am grateful for the enlightenment they provide.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I gave up several months ago. The discussions just don't go anywhere except towards name-calling.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


tards are for kicking.  ID is dead.

< "ID is dead as a mackerel there’s no point in arguing against it scientifically anymore, and all we have left is making fun of diehard IDiots like [these tards] who still try to walk the stinking corpse around, a la Weekend at Bernie’s." >

ETA  UD threads 1.5 and 2 are simply postscripts to lenny flank
Posted by: REC on Oct. 17 2011,10:57

Anyone know who < Brian Cusack > is, and when he pissed in Cornelius Hunter's cornflakes?

"Brian Cusack’s Latest: Anti Parsimonious, Teleological, Petitio Principii, Cum Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc and Misrepresentations"

Hell of a title. And a big screed to go with it-all against the first author of a ok paper.

I'd go start something, but it isn't worth it. Hunter really is in his own little world lately-



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
"Nonetheless, the evolutionists break every rule of parsimony to impose their evolutionary framework. ... These are yet more examples of how evolution is a gratuitous explanation, adding nothing but “multiplied entities” as Occam put it."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



No analysis of how evolution is less parsimonious than whatever alternative Hunter advocates but will never state.

God did it isn't a “multiplied entity" ???
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 17 2011,11:07

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 17 2011,10:25)
Quote (Robin @ Oct. 17 2011,11:15)
 
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 15 2011,02:32)
It is dawning on me how completely futile it is becoming to engage the ID supporters of UD. It is quite the Bizarro World over there. None of them seem to learn anything except how to repeat each other's talking points. Believe first in ID and THEN you will understand it. Obstinacy is seen to be healthy skepticism and honest steadfastness. They throw their arguments around as if they are defense attorneys; they are not burdened with providing a consistent and reasonable explanation of events but serve only to cast doubt on the prosecution's (if i have mis-characterized any defense attorneys here, I stand corrected). Contention can be healthy and productive but that's not what's occurring at UD. I applaud those who continue to engage UD, and am grateful for the enlightenment they provide.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I gave up several months ago. The discussions just don't go anywhere except towards name-calling.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


tards are for kicking.  ID is dead.

< "ID is dead as a mackerel there’s no point in arguing against it scientifically anymore, and all we have left is making fun of diehard IDiots like [these tards] who still try to walk the stinking corpse around, a la Weekend at Bernie’s." >

ETA  UD threads 1.5 and 2 are simply postscripts to lenny flank
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD is dead, too. Boy, was Lenny right!

Any signs of a pulse in "sudden emergence" lately? It seems that the media never latched ;) on to that one.
Posted by: olegt on Oct. 17 2011,15:31

Barry Arrington on miracles:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Mr. Murray writes: “that’s a complete non-sequitur from the definition.” Well, no. A natural law is called a “law” because it is predictable; a miracle does not conform to natural law, i.e., it is not predictable. An object subject to earth’s gravity will accelerate 9.81 meters per second per second every single time according to natural law. It is predictable. Certainly I do not discount the logical possibility of an object floating in mid-air thus achieving an acceleration rate of zero. That’s certainly not an event that I would predict knowing what I do about the earth’s gravity, i.e. it is unpredictable.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Here > is a miracle, Barry!
Posted by: Texas Teach on Oct. 17 2011,16:46

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 17 2011,10:25)
Quote (Robin @ Oct. 17 2011,11:15)
 
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 15 2011,02:32)
It is dawning on me how completely futile it is becoming to engage the ID supporters of UD. It is quite the Bizarro World over there. None of them seem to learn anything except how to repeat each other's talking points. Believe first in ID and THEN you will understand it. Obstinacy is seen to be healthy skepticism and honest steadfastness. They throw their arguments around as if they are defense attorneys; they are not burdened with providing a consistent and reasonable explanation of events but serve only to cast doubt on the prosecution's (if i have mis-characterized any defense attorneys here, I stand corrected). Contention can be healthy and productive but that's not what's occurring at UD. I applaud those who continue to engage UD, and am grateful for the enlightenment they provide.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I gave up several months ago. The discussions just don't go anywhere except towards name-calling.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


tards are for kicking.  ID is dead.

< "ID is dead as a mackerel there’s no point in arguing against it scientifically anymore, and all we have left is making fun of diehard IDiots like [these tards] who still try to walk the stinking corpse around, a la Weekend at Bernie’s." >

ETA  UD threads 1.5 and 2 are simply postscripts to lenny flank
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I prefer to think of these later threads as tributes to the wisdom of Rev Dr Flank.  Blessings be upon him and his pizza boy.

Besides, if we can't laugh at the IDiots, who can we laugh at?
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 17 2011,18:39

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 17 2011,11:23)
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 17 2011,10:55)
StephenB explains why ID is not creationism:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
If we accept the findings of physical anthropology and molecular biology, the first “human” species appeared in Africa about 150,000 years ago. According to that scenario, it was the gradual increase in brain size that caused the transition from sub-human species to homo sapiens. As the story goes, the human population was never smaller than 10,000 or some such number. I question this account for several reasons, but I do, nevertheless, think it can be reconciled with Genesis.

According to the Bible, though, there was an original pair of humans. Thus, in order to reconcile Scripture with the scientific evidence presented by experts, we would have to assume that God, in some fashion, planted a spiritual soul into a pre-existing species, which was human in every other way except for the critical powers of intellect and will, and that He was, through that act, and in that sense, creating Adam and Eve.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Oh, er, wait now.

< Can you adam and eve it? >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


ALL SCIENCE SO FAR
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


He wants to have his snake and eat it too.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 18 2011,07:10

kairosfocus < is an ass >.

I try not to flip the bozo bit on people because they occasionally come up with something unexpected*.  I have come to the conclusion that such an event is vanishingly unlikely in kairosfocus' case.  I think it's safe to only read excerpts from his screeds that hardier tardologists than I post here.

*". . . and then just when you think they're going to start dribbling one of 'em says, 'Incidentally, putting a thirty-foot parabolic reflector on a high place to shoot the rays of the sun at an enemy's ships would be a very interesting demonstration of optical principles.'"
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 18 2011,07:26



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Any signs of a pulse in "sudden emergence" lately?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



gpuccio asserts that protein domains suddenly emerged.

I've asked several time for evidence. Apparently the fossil record has gaps.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 18 2011,07:57

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 18 2011,07:10)
kairosfocus [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/have-we-profoundly-misunderstood-harvard-evolutionary-biologist-richard-lewontin-in-his-ja


n-1997-nyrb-article-billions-and-billions-of-demons/comment-page-1/#comment-404162]is an ass[/URL].

I try not to flip the bozo bit on people because they occasionally come up with something unexpected*.  I have come to the conclusion that such an event is vanishingly unlikely in kairosfocus' case.  I think it's safe to only read excerpts from his screeds that hardier tardologists than I post here.

*". . . and then just when you think they're going to start dribbling one of 'em says, 'Incidentally, putting a thirty-foot parabolic reflector on a high place to shoot the rays of the sun at an enemy's ships would be a very interesting demonstration of optical principles.'"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Error 404: page not found
The page you are looking for is not here
Here are some ways to find what you are looking for
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 18 2011,08:41

When you get the 404 message, find the <br> tag embedded in the URL and edit it out, then press return.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 18 2011,08:56

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 18 2011,09:41)
When you get the 404 message, find the <br> tag embedded in the URL and edit it out, then press return.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I'll make a point of using bit.ly or similar in the future.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 18 2011,09:32

Quote (midwifetoad @ Oct. 18 2011,08:41)
When you get the 404 message, find the <br> tag embedded in the URL and edit it out, then press return.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


D'oh! My bad! I didn't see it in the URL when I looked last time.

Carry on...

ETA: After all that, I read KF's scribblings and just got annoyed. Note to self: KF is an idiot. Do not read is tripe.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 18 2011,11:27

unless you are a tard addict, gordon e mullings has nothing to say.  in fucking spades.  reams and reams and reams of the shit.  it's like this fool has set out to be Captain Question Begger on the good ship Nonsequitor, the only wind in his sails are the occasional puff of smoke from the flaming red herrings or the periodical spaz fit prompted by the mention of Dick Lewontin, upon whom Gordon Mullings apparently has a serious man crush.  Gordon, if Dick Lewontin sent you an email and a dozen new testaments do you think you would run away with him and spread your cheeks Good News?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 18 2011,12:56

Robert Sheldon likes some Lubos Motl:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But physicist blogger, Lubos Motl, questions why a 2-sigma result (1:20 chance of being accidental) of climate warming (a highly contested result, not supported by data contends Roy Spencer) should cause the American Physical Society to claim “incontrovertible proof” when a 6-sigma result  (1:Million chance of being accidental) from a neutrino detector is doubted by all concerned.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Because there are two kinds of error: systematic error, and random error.
IDiot!
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 18 2011,13:00

More Robert Sheldon, climate expert:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There are a great many blogs dedicated to tracking how that miserable field is regressing, so I have felt no need to beat an obviously dead and cooling horse.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot....nd >
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 18 2011,13:03

jerry is bacccckkkk...
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 18 2011,13:49

how.... conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 18 2011,15:33

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 18 2011,13:49)
how.... conveeeeeeeeeeeeeeenient
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Jerry, fess up!  You're driving 'Ras crazy, who is driving us crazy.  :D
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 18 2011,15:41

Hmmm.  'Ras writes this on Oct. 11:
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 11 2011,09:32)
for fucks sake will one of you please tell me which one of you was jerry?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And exactly one week later, jerry pops up at UD again.  Chance and necessity, or design?
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 18 2011,18:14

Heh, a current DeNews headline:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Sophisticated tool production system discovered, from 200,000-400,000 million years ago
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Spotted by < Bilbo I >
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Oct. 18 2011,21:42

Denise has gone ISKCON? I didn't see that coming.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 19 2011,06:15

< DeNews >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When science becomes a frontal assault on reason and evidence: Multiple personality syndrome.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And who is "science" in this case?
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to the author, Debbie Nathan, the memoir was cooked up by three individuals hungry for fame and fortune: Mason, her therapist Cornelia (Connie) Wilbur and journalist Flora Schreiber.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A psychiatric patient, her therapist, and a journalist.

Strangely reminiscent of the motley collection holding forth on all topics "science" at UD. Stands to reason that DeNews takes them as representing science proper.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 19 2011,08:07

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 18 2011,18:14)
Heh, a current DeNews headline:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Sophisticated tool production system discovered, from 200,000-400,000 million years ago
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Spotted by < Bilbo I >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe she meant to put million in parentheses. You know...like she meant to round the range up...

:D
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 19 2011,08:15

Quote (keiths @ Oct. 18 2011,15:41)
Hmmm.  'Ras writes this on Oct. 11:
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 11 2011,09:32)
for fucks sake will one of you please tell me which one of you was jerry?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And exactly one week later, jerry pops up at UD again.  Chance and necessity, or design?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Didn't Jerry already come out of the closet (so to speak) here? I seem to recall a specific person indicating he'd or she'd (why give it away again) have Jerry say something and viola...some 3 minutes later Jerry did in fact say those words.

I'll give a hint...the poster's name has has some wealth associated with it, though others see nix on it.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 19 2011,16:15

I can't tell whether, < in this thread >, Joseph is desperately trying to avoid learning anything that might contradict his religious views or if he's just that stupid.
Posted by: Doc Bill on Oct. 19 2011,16:44

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 19 2011,16:15)
I can't tell whether, < in this thread >, Joseph is desperately trying to avoid learning anything that might contradict his religious views or if he's just that stupid.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You can always tell when Joseph knows the jig is up.  He abruptly changes his style and becomes, dare I say it, irrational.

I know, poor choice of words, but his style changes and he either changes the subject, claims victory or claims that he proved his point "earlier in the discussion" but never points to the entry number because, of course, he's done no such thing.

He's what we used to call in grad school "a little shit."  They never lasted very long.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 19 2011,17:40

BullyA is unknowingly correct:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The Book is not the Ink and Hardware is not the Software
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



But it is in biochemistry, so analogies of DNA to human information are just that - analogies with limited application.  Unfortunately dullards of limited intelligence won't see it.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 19 2011,17:55

They really don't like OOL studies/research, do they? Really gets them going. Sample comments from the Jack Szostak on origin of life < post >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The least offensive way I can describe this is that it is irrational. Szostak is drawing conclusions based on nothing, and people are believing him.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

- ScottAndrews


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Wasted money. Wasted time. Wasted science.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

- UppyBipey
Posted by: Kristine on Oct. 19 2011,20:57

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Oct. 18 2011,21:42)
Denise has gone ISKCON? I didn't see that coming.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


She'll look like Jerry Lewis! </WoodyAllen>  :p
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 19 2011,22:26

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 19 2011,04:15)
[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/when-science-becomes-a-frontal-assault-on-reason-and-evidence-multiple-personality-syndrom



e/comment-page-1/#comment-404305]DeNews[/URL]:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When science becomes a frontal assault on reason and evidence: Multiple personality syndrome.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And who is "science" in this case?
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to the author, Debbie Nathan, the memoir was cooked up by three individuals hungry for fame and fortune: Mason, her therapist Cornelia (Connie) Wilbur and journalist Flora Schreiber.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A psychiatric patient, her therapist, and a journalist.

Strangely reminiscent of the motley collection holding forth on all topics "science" at UD. Stands to reason that DeNews takes them as representing science proper.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I was on the psychiatry faculty of the Medical College of Georgia, the "home" of the multiple personality notion. I was brought in fairly regularly as an outside opinion on multiple personality cases, because I was locally known as a skeptic.

At best, MP (AKA Disassociate Disorder- but this was a gross error)  was an iatrogenic disorder. I was particularly impressed with the association of MP and therapists who used hypnosis, and the association of insecure therapists and using hypnosis.

The big supporters of MP I personally knew in the 1980s were actually professing Christians who actively supported including religion/prayer in therapy. One example was Dr. Jeff Brandsma, who I knew quite well.


Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 20 2011,00:41

Dr.GH:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
MP (AKA Disassociate Disorder- but this was a gross error)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Could you shed some light on that?
Some experiences I have had with someone diagnosed with DD seem to align with symptoms of MP.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 20 2011,06:10

< Software Engineer's Off The Cuff Requirements List For A Simple Cell >

Yeah, Barry, because having no background in biology or chemistry makes you eminently qualified to discuss origin of life theories.  That would be as stupid as Barely Literate Journalist's Off The Cuff Rant About Neuroscience.  Oh, wait....
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 20 2011,06:17

I have been deliberately avoiding the OOL "discussion" at UD. That is a tarpit of T.A.R.D. I have no wish to embroil myself in. My chronic SIWOTI syndrome would drag me in permanently and cause me to correct them.

And that way lies heartburn!

Louis
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 20 2011,07:04

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 20 2011,07:17)
I have been deliberately avoiding the OOL "discussion" at UD. That is a tarpit of T.A.R.D. I have no wish to embroil myself in. My chronic SIWOTI syndrome would drag me in permanently and cause me to correct them.

And that way lies heartburn!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ah, the temptation to leave a trail of Joseph's tard crumbs from here to UD is extreme.

"One more step, Louis.  You know you need to correct just this last misconception."
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 20 2011,07:45

Elizabeth Liddle < asks >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Tell me how you “program” a molecule, without altering the molecule. And if you do alter the molecule, tell me in what sense that not a hardware change.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph < has the answer >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And geez Elizabeth programmers program disks without altering the disk- the prom is still a prom.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So nothing changes on the disk, Joey?  It's not altered at all?

That thread and the related ones are a complete analogy wreck.
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 20 2011,07:59

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 20 2011,13:04)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 20 2011,07:17)
I have been deliberately avoiding the OOL "discussion" at UD. That is a tarpit of T.A.R.D. I have no wish to embroil myself in. My chronic SIWOTI syndrome would drag me in permanently and cause me to correct them.

And that way lies heartburn!

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ah, the temptation to leave a trail of Joseph's tard crumbs from here to UD is extreme.

"One more step, Louis.  You know you need to correct just this last misconception."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"Every time I think I'm out, they pull me back in"

Louis
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 20 2011,08:04

I like < Kelly Holmes >:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kellyhomesOctober 19, 2011 at 3:45 pm

Joseph,
I went to your blog and after reading the post you had linked to I started to look around. It seems you use you blog as a forum to threaten others with violence, abuse them in the most disgusting ways and generally act in quite a different manner to which you comport yourself here.

Why is that Joe? Why?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



The hyperlinked "why" is priceless!
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 20 2011,08:04

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 20 2011,13:45)
Elizabeth Liddle < asks >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Tell me how you “program” a molecule, without altering the molecule. And if you do alter the molecule, tell me in what sense that not a hardware change.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph < has the answer >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And geez Elizabeth programmers program disks without altering the disk- the prom is still a prom.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So nothing changes on the disk, Joey?  It's not altered at all?

That thread and the related ones are a complete analogy wreck.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Veni, legi, singultii.

Louis
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 20 2011,08:16

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 20 2011,08:04)
I like < Kelly Holmes >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kellyhomesOctober 19, 2011 at 3:45 pm

Joseph,
I went to your blog and after reading the post you had linked to I started to look around. It seems you use you blog as a forum to threaten others with violence, abuse them in the most disgusting ways and generally act in quite a different manner to which you comport yourself here.

Why is that Joe? Why?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



The hyperlinked "why" is priceless!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah, that's an epic win.

Joe is so scared he won't even come here to play anymore.  Of course, the others at UD figured out LONG AGO that the only place they have a chance is at UD.

What's really funny is the TARD-on-TARD crime wave that seems to be picking up.
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 20 2011,08:36

I went and read that thread. There is only one response.



< Louis >

P.S. I am genuinely worried that continual interaction (however mild now) with creationists and denialists of various stripes has rendered me incapable of taking them seriously at all. I just can't. I seem to have created a horny carapace of piss taking and comedy, otherwise I might have to contemplate, juuuuust for a second, how venal and stupid these people truly are. Nyan cat is a preferable reality.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 20 2011,09:10

Quote (Dr.GH @ Oct. 20 2011,06:26)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 19 2011,04:15)
[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/when-science-becomes-a-frontal-assault-on-reason-and-evidence-multiple-personality-syndrom




e/comment-page-1/#comment-404305]DeNews[/URL]:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
When science becomes a frontal assault on reason and evidence: Multiple personality syndrome.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And who is "science" in this case?
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to the author, Debbie Nathan, the memoir was cooked up by three individuals hungry for fame and fortune: Mason, her therapist Cornelia (Connie) Wilbur and journalist Flora Schreiber.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A psychiatric patient, her therapist, and a journalist.

Strangely reminiscent of the motley collection holding forth on all topics "science" at UD. Stands to reason that DeNews takes them as representing science proper.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I was on the psychiatry faculty of the Medical College of Georgia, the "home" of the multiple personality notion. I was brought in fairly regularly as an outside opinion on multiple personality cases, because I was locally known as a skeptic.

At best, MP (AKA Disassociate Disorder- but this was a gross error)  was an iatrogenic disorder. I was particularly impressed with the association of MP and therapists who used hypnosis, and the association of insecure therapists and using hypnosis.

The big supporters of MP I personally knew in the 1980s were actually professing Christians who actively supported including religion/prayer in therapy. One example was Dr. Jeff Brandsma, who I knew quite well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


OK HOMO!

I'LL TAKE YOU UP ON THAT ONE.

FOR STARTERS THERE IS ONLY ONE OF ME (....ME,ME,ME)

SECOND: MY LOCAL SHERIFF IS REAL.

THIRD: INUITS AS FAR AS I AM CONCERNED DON'T HAVE PERSONALITIES.

FORTH: MUD BRICK TURNIP PERSONALITIES ALL EMINATE FROM FENCES AND TRUCKS.


FITH: SINGLE MALT SCOTCH DRINKING REQUIRES PERSONALITY AND BILL SHOULD KNOW BETTER.


SIXTH: THAT MORPHODYKE WITH A MOUSTACHE -THE 70'S CALLED THEY'RE MISSING A PORN STAR.(AND A PERSONALITY)

EIGHTH: WHO'S COUNTING?

NINETH: THE UNITED STATES OF TARD IS NOT A TV SHOW IT'S REAL.

TENTH: FREUD AND SLIPS GO TOGETHER LIKE WINE AND POSTMODERNISM. ONE WILL GIVE YOU A HANGOVER AND THE OTHER WILL SCREW YOUR BRAIN.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 20 2011,09:13

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 20 2011,16:04)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 20 2011,13:45)
Elizabeth Liddle < asks >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Tell me how you “program” a molecule, without altering the molecule. And if you do alter the molecule, tell me in what sense that not a hardware change.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph < has the answer >:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And geez Elizabeth programmers program disks without altering the disk- the prom is still a prom.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


So nothing changes on the disk, Joey?  It's not altered at all?

That thread and the related ones are a complete analogy wreck.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Veni, legi, singultii.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


veni, vidi spaghetti
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 20 2011,10:34

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 20 2011,09:04)
I like < Kelly Holmes >:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kellyhomesOctober 19, 2011 at 3:45 pm

Joseph,
I went to your blog and after reading the post you had linked to I started to look around. It seems you use you blog as a forum to threaten others with violence, abuse them in the most disgusting ways and generally act in quite a different manner to which you comport yourself here.

Why is that Joe? Why?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



The hyperlinked "why" is priceless!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joe Gallien is the Jim Lahey of Intelligent Design Creationism
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 20 2011,15:00

DeNews posts:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dawkins speaks: Why he won’t debate William Lane Craig … Craig advocates genocide
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



While I would use the word "excuses" instead of "advocates", DeNews manages to leave it undefended, like the IDiot she is.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 20 2011,15:02



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Turing Test: Chatbots flunk once again at being human
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



TARD test:  UD regulars flunk once again at being distinguishable from a chatbot.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 20 2011,15:12

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 20 2011,08:36)
I went and read that thread. There is only one response.

(great Nyan Cat pic deleted)

< Louis >

P.S. I am genuinely worried that continual interaction (however mild now) with creationists and denialists of various stripes has rendered me incapable of taking them seriously at all. I just can't. I seem to have created a horny carapace of piss taking and comedy, otherwise I might have to contemplate, juuuuust for a second, how venal and stupid these people truly are. Nyan cat is a preferable reality.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Perhaps if I picked up some UD OOL nuggets (using a plastic bag) and dropped them here we could snark without IDiot interference.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 20 2011,15:20

OOL nugget from Eric Anderson:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“A lipid vesicle containing genetic material . . .” Oooo, that’s helpful. My 10-year old could come up with that much detail. What a joke.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Followed by this detailed discussion of lipid structure, synthesis and assembly, and Szostak's research:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Where does the additional nucleotide material come from? How does it get into the vesicle? How does the vesicle prevent interfering materials from entering the vesicle? Does the vesicle “divide” in any kind of controlled manner, or does it just get bigger (Szostak) until eventually it is unstable?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Oh, dear.  This is 10-year old level.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I will quote myself from the first comment above: “This is why it is critical to have an engineering eye look at these things. Too many true believers gloss over the details . . . the proposed pathway or proposed mechanism being offered is simply not workable in the real world or is so general and vague as to be useless for anything other than a just-so story.”
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Because we all know engineers are the experts on lipids!
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 20 2011,16:03

NormO: (about article by software engineer on origin of Life)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Anything you like Barry! But if anyone thinks that being an expert in one field somehow gives them inherent credibility in a completely different field, they are very mistaken. You can’t simply reformulate a problem from a very specific and technical field in terms of your own skill set. You have to do the hard work of understanding the other field. There are no shortcuts.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



kairosfocus literature bluffs in response:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Please see just above. Note, the thermodynamics and systems requisites issues are going to be accessible to a fairly broad range of people from diverse technical fields. Chemists, Physicists, Engineers, and the like not just biochemists.

and...

F/N: Oddly, the very first technical design theory book was by a Chemist, a Polymer specialist and a Geologist, looking at the origin of life from the ground up. Norm, can you tell us what fundamentally is wrong with the thermodynamics and environmental consideration issues here, as a baseline?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Linking Thaxton's outdated garbage.  First of all, most of origin of life research is about organic synthesis, which  none of Thaxton, Bradley or Olsen had a clue.  Thaxton's configurational entropy argument is bogus because it does not account for how free energy changes with concentration, temperature, and solvent, and the fact that self-replication is catalysis, which is kinetics, not thermodynamics.

karosfocus is fond of quoting Orgel, but omits this part (in the same article) that argues against any but a chemical expert being able to sensibly argue (which supports NormO's point):



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It must be recognized that assessment of the feasibility of any particular proposed prebiotic cycle must depend on arguments about chemical plausibility, rather than on a decision about logical possibility.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 20 2011,17:01

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 19 2011,22:41)
Dr.GH:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
MP (AKA Disassociate Disorder- but this was a gross error)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Could you shed some light on that?
Some experiences I have had with someone diagnosed with DD seem to align with symptoms of MP.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A) We have drugs that cause disassociative states. They do not induce MP behaviors.

B) We have drugs that block, or minimize disassocitive states. They do not alter MP behaviors.

C) Ritualized trance states mimic, or induce disassocitive states without inducing MP behaviors (the subject knows who they are, even when they "become" someone, or something else. (WARNING! Self-references ahead: 1984    "Manifestations of Possession in Novel Ecological Contexts," G. S. Hurd, E. M. Pattison. in Ecological Models in Clinical and Community Mental Health, W.A. O'Connor and B. Lubin (ed.s).  John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1985  "Trance and Possession States," E. M. Pattison, Joel Kahan, G. Hurd. In Handbook of Altered States of Consciousness.  B. B. Walman and M. Ullman (ed.s) New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1985 "Superstition,"  G. S. Hurd. In Baker's Encyclopedia of Psychology. David Brenner (ed.) Baker Book House, Grand Rapids,

D) We know that MP behaviors are associated (NPI) with late adolescent adjustment difficulties, and iatrogenically induced.

So, to say that this "MPD" is a disassocitive disorder is a gross error. "Fever" is a symptom, not a diagnosis.

Regarding MP emerging in a clinical setting, one of my first consults (1976) was with a resident treating a young female. The patient convinced the young resident that she had met "Don Juan" of Carlos Castaneda fame while visiting Mexico City, who had given her drugs that "allowed" the patient to experience "past lives," and "free her multiple personalities." The resident (trainee) psychiatrist, not knowing any better, found the story interesting and persuasive. My intervention was to teach the resident a little ethnography and my personal interactions with Castaneda, and to have her stop rewarding her patient for making-up "interesting" stories. With just 4 more sessions (2 weeks), the MP behavior disappeared, and the therapy re-focused on the patient's depression and failing marriage. (The MP was used by the patient to attract the attention of the resident, and avoid her personal, and social problems).


(Shheeech! the problem with starting on this is when to stop)

Trance states are a real phenomena. That was the point of my article with Pattison, and Kahan. In ritualized contexts the roles of the various "persona" are well known by all participants. In "free form" situations, such as in hypnosis used by poorly trained therapists, the interaction will likely spin-out of the control of the therapist. Weakly competent therapists are frightened by lack of 'control' in their patient relationship, which is why they like using hypnosis. The whole "You are listening to my voice, You are only listening to my voice ...." ritual really appeals to weak therapists. And, they are also incompetent in hypnosis. The subject/patient interaction in hypnosis is never just one-way.


Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 21 2011,05:40

Dr.GH,

Thanks for the clarification. Looks like I need to re-investigate certain notions.
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 21 2011,05:53

< Robert Byers, Piling it higher and Deeper: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Excellent videos except they are wrong.
This YEC insists that marine mammals did suddenly “evolve” from land to sea.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
People did not evolve in stages toward our present racial types.
Yet here we are. It was instant and with it a lot of dna change.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Seals really are just bears . Bears and dogs are the same thing
Water dogs have webbed feet.
No big deal but not from evolution. Somthing else.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Oh, Robert, you literally take my breath away (cuz of all the laughing I'm having to do.)

alright, which one of you is Robert Byers?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 21 2011,06:12

< kellyhomes invokes the name of He-Who-Lurks-Unless-You-Invoke-His-Name-At-Which-Point-He-De-Lurks: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Previously Clive has banned people here for things they have said on other sites, unrelated to this one. I guess double standards are only OK if they help your supporters…
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Clive as of October 21, 2011 at 12:52 am: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Only if they were outed as a sock puppet on another site and banned previously.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Google-Fu powers, activate! (This may take awhile)

eta: timestamp for Clive's comment quoted above
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 21 2011,06:58

Hey, Clive, do you remember < this comment of yours from March 22, 2009 12:02AM? >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Reciprocating Bill.

“Given that my participation has been serious and respectful…”

Really?

You said this yourself:

“Without claiming significance anything resembling PZ’s [Myers], I do have a history of critical comments regarding UD, Barry Arrington in particular, Uncommonly Denyse, etc. Not to mention adolescent name calling….I like to think that UD’s new policy, in addition to reflecting new management, is also in response to the the ridiculative selection pressures we’ve exerted here….Let’s watch.”

Bye Bill.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


eta: Reciprocating Bill introduces the bannination < here. >
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 21 2011,08:14

Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 21 2011,09:16

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,08:14)
Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow...Joe continues to amaze me with his powers of inanity. Just when I think he can't possibly come up with something more idiotic, he invents some new area of stupid.

Even for Joe this one is just so obviously erroneous as to make me wonder if Joe isn't really a poe. I mean, how can an entire race of people do evil? It's like insisting all business managers can do evil.

In the immortal words of Hank Hill: "That boy ain't right."
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 21 2011,09:33

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,14:14)
Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Please, please can you fix it for me for one of the sock puppets over there to ask him which races can do and perhaps have done evil.

Call it a Christmas present.

I just want to know if it's:

a) Teh Moooooslims!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos, ya know, they are all terrorists and SO a race)

b) Teh Jooz!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos they control the Librul Meeja and Holleeweird and are also even more SO a race)

c) Teh Blacks!!oneeleveneshift111! (Just 'cos they be dumb or something and are even more of a SO a race than Teh Jooz)

d) Teh Asians!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos....erm, some stereotype about maths probably. Definitely a race)

e) Teh British!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos...erm, come to think of it this one might be true. Definitely a race/Not French)

f) Teh French!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos they have no word for entrepreneur and are a cheese eating, smelly race)

g) Teh Gayz!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos they are a race focussed on Teh Buttsecks and have an Agenda. Except Lezbyuns who are Nice On The Internet but may contain Teh Feminizmz, which is bad)

h) Teh Librulz!!oneeleveneshift111! ('Cos...erm...see Teh Jooz...also may be smarter than Joe. As indeed is bubblegum)

i) Other!!oneeleveneshift111! (the field, inventive bigotry is always appreciated)

j) The 100 metres (That race is a total fucker)

Louis
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 21 2011,09:34

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 21 2011,15:16)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,08:14)
Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow...Joe continues to amaze me with his powers of inanity. Just when I think he can't possibly come up with something more idiotic, he invents some new area of stupid.

Even for Joe this one is just so obviously erroneous as to make me wonder if Joe isn't really a poe. I mean, how can an entire race of people do evil? It's like insisting all business managers can do evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Erm, but they do. ;-)



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In the immortal words of Hank Hill: "That boy ain't right."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



QFT. A lot. Repeatedly and with some emphasis.

Louis
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 21 2011,09:49

How little do you know...

Joe actually defines 'race' as all the people who act the same.  So you see there's a Muslim non-terrorist race and a Muslim terrorist race.

There's a German/Nazi race and a German/non-Nazi race.

It has something to do with the idea of front-loading.  You see, the designer made us all exactly the way we are now.  it's front-loaded genetics.

So, really, behavior is a form of genetic distinction.  Since that is true, nazis can be considered a race all on their own.  

I think the termites were involved.


__

Sadly, I can't even tell if I Poed myself.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 21 2011,10:13

his definition of race is about as good as any fucking body else's.  concepts like "species" and "race" are evidence that essentialist creationist type thinking pervades our cognitive processes even when we consciously manage that structure to eliminate those thought processes.  

but, yeah probly the 26.2 is the most evil
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 21 2011,10:36

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 21 2011,15:49)
[SNIP explanation]

Sadly, I can't even tell if I Poed myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hmmm. You raise an interesting point. I was expecting far too much consistency and rigour from Joe.

Still, I want to see the answer. It's like watching a truly gory intellectual trainwreck with bodies flying and claret, gears and sprockets everywhere. I await my imminent gaping drop of jaw and descent into Munch-like "Scream" madness and horror.

Louis

P.S. The temptation to make this post:

"

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Sadly, I can't even tell if I Pooed myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



FTFY"

was large. Be impressed I resisted. It's Friday and my defences against puerility are low. They weren't high to start with.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 21 2011,10:50

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 21 2011,10:49)
Sadly, I can't even tell if I Poed myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you gaze long into the tard, the hard will gaze back into you.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 21 2011,10:51

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,11:50)
Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 21 2011,10:49)
Sadly, I can't even tell if I Poed myself.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you gaze long into the tard, the hard will gaze back into you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hard, tard, Freud, fuckit it's Friday.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 21 2011,11:15

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 21 2011,09:34)
 
Quote (Robin @ Oct. 21 2011,15:16)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,08:14)
Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow...Joe continues to amaze me with his powers of inanity. Just when I think he can't possibly come up with something more idiotic, he invents some new area of stupid.

Even for Joe this one is just so obviously erroneous as to make me wonder if Joe isn't really a poe. I mean, how can an entire race of people do evil? It's like insisting all business managers can do evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Erm, but they do. ;-)


Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ooo...uhh...hmmm...yeah. Bad example. How 'bout all circus people? No...definitely evil. All artists? Gahh...bring the downfall of Western civilization...Cleaning people? Thieves...all of 'em. Italians? Don't get me started...French? I'll leave that alone? The Swiss? Ogres? Cops? Pixies? 70's porn stars? Bankers? Athletes? (sigh)

Damn...maybe Joe was right. ::shudder::
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 21 2011,11:22

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 21 2011,09:33)
Please, please can you fix it for me for one of the sock puppets over there to ask him which races can do and perhaps have done evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Elizabeth < tried: >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Which ones, Joseph?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



No response from Joey so far though.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 21 2011,11:41

< Good ol' Christian moral standards: >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Anyway, burning children to death sounds a lot worse than cutting them down with a sword. At least with the sword it was quick. And they (Caanan) would have been doing this for several generations, yes? Sorry, but that's one of those cultures I'm not sorry to see go.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Oh yeah...killing people with swords was always quick.

< http://www.classicalfencing.com/article....ody.php >

Granted this article deals with rapier wounds, but the principle is still the same. Most people hit by a sword linger for a bit (usually to bleed out or suffocate) and it is not a painless wait. The exception is when someone is executed, but we aren't talking about that in terms of what the Hebrews did to the Canaanites. That was some brutal stuff - waaaay high squick factor that.
Posted by: Louis on Oct. 21 2011,11:52

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 21 2011,17:22)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 21 2011,09:33)
Please, please can you fix it for me for one of the sock puppets over there to ask him which races can do and perhaps have done evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Elizabeth < tried: >

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Which ones, Joseph?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



No response from Joey so far though.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Blessing? Curse? You decide!

Louis
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 21 2011,12:38

Quote (Robin @ Oct. 21 2011,11:15)
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 21 2011,09:34)
 
Quote (Robin @ Oct. 21 2011,15:16)
   
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 21 2011,08:14)
Elizabeth Liddle < makes a simple point > to Joseph:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
“Races” don’t “do evil” Joseph. People do. People who ascribe evil-doing to a “race” are called “racists”.

The Nazis, for instance.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph then shows his true colors:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Races can do evil, Elizabeth.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is why free speech is important.  I like my bigots out and proud.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wow...Joe continues to amaze me with his powers of inanity. Just when I think he can't possibly come up with something more idiotic, he invents some new area of stupid.

Even for Joe this one is just so obviously erroneous as to make me wonder if Joe isn't really a poe. I mean, how can an entire race of people do evil? It's like insisting all business managers can do evil.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Erm, but they do. ;-)


Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ooo...uhh...hmmm...yeah. Bad example. How 'bout all circus people? No...definitely evil. All artists? Gahh...bring the downfall of Western civilization...Cleaning people? Thieves...all of 'em. Italians? Don't get me started...French? I'll leave that alone? The Swiss? Ogres? Cops? Pixies? 70's porn stars? Bankers? Athletes? (sigh)

Damn...maybe Joe was right. ::shudder::
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Hey now!!!!
Posted by: SoonerintheBluegrass on Oct. 21 2011,22:09



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Oh yeah...killing people with swords was always quick.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Indeed.  Two things-- One, I don't think folks back then had figured out how to even make crude steel yet.  And even if they had, we're definitely not talking about the  super-strong, super-sharp steel that goes into making, e.g., a quality samurai sword.  So we'd be talking probably bronze, which would undoubtedly be nice and dull after just a few uses, even at the pointy end.

Two, they were committing genocide.  Or from their perspective , cleansing the world of an inherently sinful group of miscreants [eyes rolling furiously and contemptuously].  To the victims, of course, it's a distinction without a difference.  In any event, the perpetrators (in their righteous fury/callous indifference-- again, depending on the perspective) would likely not have cared whether the killings were more or less humane.  I doubt much thought would have been given to how much it might have hurt, or how long it would have taken the victims to die.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on Oct. 22 2011,03:01

Reading the comments on just about any capital crime news story today will reveal that the basic urge for spite in dealing out cruel and unusual punishment is alive and well in the general population. And we at least have a culture where people are aware that there are alternatives. The fact that victims in the (not distant enough) past had to experience quite a lot of agony before expiring was probably considered a bonus. Even in executions one can see that reflected, as in drawing-and-quartering, where simply dispatching the condemned was never the point. Anne Boleyn, having been convicted of treason, would ordinarily have been executed by being burned at the stake, but Henry ordered that she be decapitated instead. The reduction of suffering in execution in Anne Boleyn's case was, unfortunately, the exception and not the rule.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 22 2011,08:43

DrBot < tells it like it is >, proving that Clivebaby is asleep at the ban switch:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
KF, ‘the irresponsible rhetoric of turnabout’ – all you have there is a self proclaimed methodology for conducting debates in which you are allowed to criticize, slander, make claims of moral inferiority and issue accusations of lying and deceit, but your opponents aren’t.

I stand by my claim that you are a hypocrite – in fact, I would argue that it is an empirical observation!

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DaveScot would never have let kairosfocus get bitch slapped like that.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 22 2011,10:13

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 22 2011,16:43)
DrBot < tells it like it is >, proving that Clivebaby is asleep at the ban switch:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
KF, ‘the irresponsible rhetoric of turnabout’ – all you have there is a self proclaimed methodology for conducting debates in which you are allowed to criticize, slander, make claims of moral inferiority and issue accusations of lying and deceit, but your opponents aren’t.

I stand by my claim that you are a hypocrite – in fact, I would argue that it is an empirical observation!

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


DaveScot would never have let kairosfocus get bitch slapped like that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


SLOW DOWN, HOMO!

I THINK I LET A FEW THROUGH ON THAT TWAT IIRC.

SERIOUSLY NOBODY TAKES KF AKA GORDON MULLINGS ...ER SERIOUSLY...

NOT EVEN TEH REGULARS


HE'S LIKE A PROTECTED TARD, ZONED OFF FROM THE PUBLIC FOR HIS OWN ....ER PROTECTION...

dang that's twice now

MY REAL BEEF WAS A CERTAIN Dr. dR. OF SPARE RIB BARBEQUING ON SOME YUPPY SLUM DRIVE OUT OF CORPUS CHRISTI PROMOTING A FUCKING CANADIAN BEAVER MOLESTER.

BILL I STILL LOVE YOU, CALL ME SOMETIME.

© d.t.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 22 2011,13:34

< Lewontin! >  Only this time, from Elizabeth Liddle.  She takes kairosfocus through the entire review that he so loves to quote mine, explaining the big words to him and refuting him point by point.

Lizzie seems like someone I'd enjoy having a beer with, but in my opinion she is wasting her time with such a thorough fisking.  kairosfocus is willfully ignorant, dishonest, hypocritical, and incapable of admitting error.  There is nothing to be gained from interacting with him.

That last sentence is actually true of all the intelligent design creationists remaining at UD.  They're not even worth making fun of anymore.  Anyone know of a better tard source?
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 22 2011,14:33

I too wish Elizabeth would leave them alone; but it's not my place to interfere with other people's fun.

As for a better tard source? Well I was going to suggest this little hole of insanity....

< Camping Tards >

Unfortunately the real crazies have flown the nest and after two non-Raptures the place is suffering a kind of heat death. Still if you cast a few searches back to around May 21st you can find some real doozies.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 22 2011,17:25

Re: previous post, some people just can't let go.....

< Dear oh dear.... >



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
BradN, you're ridiculous. and so are your false charity Christian brethren who hypocritically seek only blood.

Again, I do not know why Oct 21 appears to have failed, but my REST and HOPE is still in the Lord.

We are living in very interesting days, the fulfillment of the Bible itself.

The Rapture will occur in only a BLINK of an Eye so God can bring about the Rapture at the very last moment.

I wish I knew why God tarried on Oct 21 but perhaps others are correct that the Rapture will take place tonight, or even tomorrow, Sunday.

But even if nothing happens tonight, or tomorrow, the Lord is still my strength. Everything I learned I still hold to because they are the TRUTH!

Like I said, we are living in very interesting times.

May the Lord's perfect will be done!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Praise Jehovah my SHIELD and my LORD!

Pr 30:5 Every word of God is pure: he is a shield unto them that put their trust in him.

I trust in the WORD OF GOD! The year 2011 is a special year because it is the LAST YEAR!

-7000 years from Noah's Flood!

-1978 years from 33AD. 2x989. Jesus said, I will drink of this cup anew with you. This will occur in the year 2011.

Mt 26:29 But I say unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine, until that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom.

Mr 14:25 Verily I say unto you, I will drink no more of the fruit of the vine, until that day that I drink it new in the kingdom of God.

Lu 22:18 For I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come.

-7x7x7x7 years from 391BC

I'm reading the OT and no WONDER God says, FEAR NOT, repeatedly!

Ex 14:13 And Moses said unto the people, Fear ye not, stand still, and see the salvation of the LORD, which he will shew to you to day: for the Egyptians whom ye have seen to day, ye shall see them again no more for ever.

Isa 51:7 Hearken unto me, ye that know righteousness, the people in whose heart is my law; fear ye not the reproach of men, neither be ye afraid of their revilings.
8 For the moth shall eat them up like a garment, and the worm shall eat them like wool: but my righteousness shall be for ever, and my salvation from generation to generation.


This is talking about RIGHT NOW!

Indeed, the unsaved will be eaten up ! But the righteous will live FOREVER MORE!

I will lean upon my LORD AND SAVIOR! JEHOVAH GOD!

Praise the Lord!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: khan on Oct. 22 2011,17:58

Are they taking into account the shift from the Julian to the Gregorian Calendar?
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 22 2011,20:07

Quote (khan @ Oct. 22 2011,23:58)
Are they taking into account the shift from the Julian to the Gregorian Calendar?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Right about now the only thing they aren't taking into account is their gullibility.
Posted by: Seversky on Oct. 22 2011,22:34

< StephenB > springs to the defense of....God?


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Since no one has said anything nice about God for a while, I will take up his defense:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is it just me or is there something faintly ludicrous about the notion of the eternal, all-knowing, all-powerful Creator of the Entire Universe and Everything In It needing to be defended by anyone - let alone StephenB?
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 22 2011,23:55

You don't even have to read past the title...
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Mud-to-Mozart Atheology (Or, Who are the real skeptics?)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


...to see that the frilled one is using the Dodgenator 3000 argument A1.
< Link >.
As ever, though, it doesn't matter so much which variation he uses, each one of his posts is essentially about Gil.
PS - First couple of comments there make it worth a visit, IMO.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 23 2011,00:09

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 22 2011,23:55)
You don't even have to read past the title...
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Mud-to-Mozart Atheology (Or, Who are the real skeptics?)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


...to see that the frilled one is using the Dodgenator 3000 argument A1.
< Link >.
As ever, though, it doesn't matter so much which variation he uses, each one of his posts is essentially about Gil.
PS - First couple of comments there make it worth a visit, IMO.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD must be seriously slacking off... three posters who don't agree and they are the first three?

It's unheard of...
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 23 2011,02:36

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 22 2011,13:34)
< Lewontin! >  Only this time, from Elizabeth Liddle.  She takes kairosfocus through the entire review that he so loves to quote mine, explaining the big words to him and refuting him point by point.

Lizzie seems like someone I'd enjoy having a beer with, but in my opinion she is wasting her time with such a thorough fisking.  kairosfocus is willfully ignorant, dishonest, hypocritical, and incapable of admitting error.  There is nothing to be gained from interacting with him.

That last sentence is actually true of all the intelligent design creationists remaining at UD.  They're not even worth making fun of anymore.  Anyone know of a better tard source?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My prediction for KF's reply (if he dares)  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
red herring distractions, led away to set up strawman posed in the fever swamps and duly soaked in ad hominems, then set alight. That distracts, poisons, intoxicates, polarsises and clouds the air, which then spreads out from the fever swamps to the culture at large.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

it's actually his default statement after being nailed.

ETA tinyurl
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 23 2011,09:26

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 23 2011,06:09)
UD must be seriously slacking off... three posters who don't agree and they are the first three?

It's unheard of...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's Sunday.

Wait till UD's Praetardian guard collectively stagger back from church and sees what's going on....

"Onlookers...."

...etc.

Batsh^t77, not yet being trusted to enter the house of God, has nevertheless vomited his longest post in living memory.
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 23 2011,09:56

Quote (Louis @ Oct. 21 2011,10:36)
... my defences against puerility are low. ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I guess that defines you - although I suspect you may be some kind of Dr. Jekyll Mr. Hyde type...

ETA: Suppose I am guilty of improper use of ellipsis.
But no harm done, I think.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 23 2011,10:01

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 23 2011,00:09)
Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 22 2011,23:55)
You don't even have to read past the title...
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Mud-to-Mozart Atheology (Or, Who are the real skeptics?)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


...to see that the frilled one is using the Dodgenator 3000 argument A1.
< Link >.
As ever, though, it doesn't matter so much which variation he uses, each one of his posts is essentially about Gil.
PS - First couple of comments there make it worth a visit, IMO.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


UD must be seriously slacking off... three posters who don't agree and they are the first three?

It's unheard of...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Maybe the regulars are in bed early because the weekly Design Manual study is early, before the Designer worship service.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 23 2011,12:38

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 23 2011,03:36)
it's actually his default statement after being nailed.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A visual I did not need.
Posted by: damitall on Oct. 23 2011,15:05

It's wonderful to see how the most prolific pro-ID posters at UD are, jointly and severally,  just about the biggest embarrassments to "ID-is-science!-it-is!-it-is!" it's possible to imagine.
I think they embarrass each other, as well.
Posted by: MichaelJ on Oct. 23 2011,16:32

Quote (damitall @ Oct. 24 2011,06:05)
It's wonderful to see how the most prolific pro-ID posters at UD are, jointly and severally,  just about the biggest embarrassments to "ID-is-science!-it-is!-it-is!" it's possible to imagine.
I think they embarrass each other, as well.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't think that they are aware enough to get embarrassed by each other
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 23 2011,16:41

the absence of obvious self awareness, or a theory of mind, seems to be a prerequisite for riding that short bus
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 23 2011,18:23

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 23 2011,17:41)
the absence of obvious self awareness, or a theory of mind, seems to be a prerequisite for riding that short bus
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting.  That would partly explain the fear they evince at atheists lacking an objective morality.*  They know how the others of their tribe would act without the threat of divine punishment.

* No, I don't agree with their characterization.  I suspect their definitions of "objective" and "subjective" are as incoherent as their concept of "intelligent design".
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 23 2011,21:52

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 24 2011,02:23)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 23 2011,17:41)
the absence of obvious self awareness, or a theory of mind, seems to be a prerequisite for riding that short bus
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Interesting.  That would partly explain the fear they evince at atheists lacking an objective morality.*  They know how the others of their tribe would act without the threat of divine punishment.

* No, I don't agree with their characterization.  I suspect their definitions of "objective" and "subjective" are as incoherent as their concept of "intelligent design".
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Indeed they suffer from hyperrationalism

I found the link below a satisfactory (for me anyway)  explanation of why nonsense becomes fact for the ID hyper-rational

Try this....say ‘part’ backwards.... then read

< http://www2.derby.ac.uk/multifa....acy.htm >

The answer is near the end.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 24 2011,00:03

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 22 2011,23:55)
You don't even have to read past the title...
       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Mud-to-Mozart Atheology (Or, Who are the real skeptics?)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


...to see that the frilled one is using the Dodgenator 3000 argument A1.
< Link >.
As ever, though, it doesn't matter so much which variation he uses, each one of his posts is essentially about Gil.
PS - First couple of comments there make it worth a visit, IMO.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That post contains a bonus "Lewontin" - BA77 quotes him in reply 1.3.  Which is merely the first of SIX replies in a row.  That man has way too much time on his hands.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 24 2011,03:11

BA77 is < talked into submission: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eigenstate, I disagree, but I’m done debating you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Congratulations to Eigenstate!
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 24 2011,04:56

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 24 2011,01:11)
BA77 is < talked into submission: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eigenstate, I disagree, but I’m done debating you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Congratulations to Eigenstate!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that deserves some sort of special award.
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 24 2011,06:49

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 24 2011,12:56)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 24 2011,01:11)
BA77 is < talked into submission: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eigenstate, I disagree, but I’m done debating you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Congratulations to Eigenstate!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that deserves some sort of special award.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


and a prize


Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 24 2011,08:38

Quote (k.e.. @ Oct. 24 2011,06:49)
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 24 2011,12:56)
 
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 24 2011,01:11)
BA77 is < talked into submission: >    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Eigenstate, I disagree, but I’m done debating you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Congratulations to Eigenstate!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that deserves some sort of special award.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


and a prize


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Eigenstate, pick up your prize from Dr. Dr. Dembski.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 24 2011,10:07

The < new sock GinoB > makes me miss MathGrrl:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
William J Murray


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
500-1000+ bits of FSCO/I is the ID metric where the “best explanation” of any phenomena moves from “physics & chance” to ID agency.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That would be the FSCO/I metric that no one has rigorously defined, or given an objective way to measure, or calculated for any real world biological objects, right?

In other words it’s just another way of saying “this looks designed to me” with lots of pseudo-technical jargon added for window dressing.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I am still amazed at how many home truths are being allowed from the reality-based participants at UD.  The intelligent design creationists are being allowed to twist in the wind.  If they hadn't worked so hard to deserve it, I'd almost feel bad for them.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 24 2011,10:24

It gets better.  William J Murray has contracted* kairosfocus' < delusions >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It is rigorously defined, and it can be calculated handily. You can find the definition and reference in the FAQ and Glossary on this site, or by googling “kairosfocus FSCO/I” and finding many exhaustive epxlanations and examples on this site and others.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's interesting that, just as with kairosfocus, William J Murray claims to have examples but never actually gets around to producing them.

* Tongue kissing is unsanitary.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 24 2011,11:01

gordon e mullings probably doesn't even tongue kiss his wife in their dirty little hovel in manjack heights, but i betcha 10 bucks he'd spacedock with a stranger
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 24 2011,13:41

Gordo:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
GB, no a specification here is an independent simple description. Biofunction is known to take up a very limited region of possible AA and D/RNA sequence space. That makes the biosequences functionally very specific, Axe’s estimate for proteins on empirical tests is 1 in 10^70 or thereabouts. Comparable to 1 atom to our galaxy.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< T.A.R.D >
Posted by: keiths on Oct. 24 2011,18:37

Barry < demonstrates > how bad he is at science, logic, and the retelling of plagiarized jokes:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
There are two and only two options with respect to the origin of the universe.

1.  An infinite regress of dependent existence.

2.  The universe was caused by “that beyond which nothing can be reduced,” to use Dr. Roy Clouser’s definition of God.

More familiar terms for these categories are (1) an infinite regress of contingent causes; and (2) one necessary cause.

Science demonstrates that option 1 is false.  The universe had a discrete beginning at the event popularly known as the “big bang.”

Since option 1 is false, it follows that option 2 is true.

All scientific conclusions are provisional.  Therefore, this proof does not work to demonstrate the existence of God as a logical certainty.  It does demonstrate, however, that if the standard model of cosmology is true, it follows from that truth that God exists.

What about Stephen Hawking’s recent proclamation that we can do without God, you might ask.  To which I respond that I can imagine a conversation between God and Dr. Hawking that goes something like this:

Hawking:  “I can demonstrate that the big bang happened without you.

God:  OK; take your best shot.

Hawking:  “Because we have gravity . . .

God:  Wait!

Hawking:  What?

God:   Get your own gravity.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 24 2011,22:27

Just one last rapture update if I may again impose on this august thread.

Here's a link to a 'Special Message' from one of the preachers peddling Harold Camping's numerology.

< MP3 Direct Link - R-Click, Save as >

< http://fridaynightstudy.com/....udy....udy.com >

It's a rambling mess to be sure but if you do listen you'll notice that there isn't the slightest hint that Mr. Brown even considers that they may have erred in their calculations.

I post it not to scoff (well maybe a bit) but as an historical record of the thoughts of someone who actually believed the end of the world was going to happen on October 21st.

As events like this are relatively rare I thought it may be of interest to some.
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 24 2011,23:19

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 23 2011,02:36)
       
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 22 2011,13:34)
< Lewontin! >  Only this time, from Elizabeth Liddle.  She takes kairosfocus through the entire review that he so loves to quote mine, explaining the big words to him and refuting him point by point.

Lizzie seems like someone I'd enjoy having a beer with, but in my opinion she is wasting her time with such a thorough fisking.  kairosfocus is willfully ignorant, dishonest, hypocritical, and incapable of admitting error.  There is nothing to be gained from interacting with him.

That last sentence is actually true of all the intelligent design creationists remaining at UD.  They're not even worth making fun of anymore.  Anyone know of a better tard source?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My prediction for KF's reply (if he dares)            

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
red herring distractions, led away to set up strawman posed in the fever swamps and duly soaked in ad hominems, then set alight. That distracts, poisons, intoxicates, polarsises and clouds the air, which then spreads out from the fever swamps to the culture at large.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

it's actually his default statement after being nailed.

ETA tinyurl
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


As predicted: After >8000 unreadable KairosFocus continues in the comment section:        

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dr Matzke,
You are wrong, and you know or should know you are wrong; this is no mere idiosyncratic, minority, personal view — as Lewontin himself says when he notes “To Sagan, as to all but a few other scientists . . . ”
As the four clippings here document, this is representative of the US NAS, NSTA and of course the NCSE which you were the PR person for.
This is particularly evident from the interventions the NSTA and NAS made — with NCSE hovering in the background of the whole sorry episode [and with the local affiliate fronting . . . ] — in Kansas. I don’t take holding the children of Kansas HOSTAGE lightly.
And that was what was clearly done in that letter, through a threat that has no basis but institutional power of ideological materialism.
A priori materialism is in the driver’s seat of current institutional science, and it does not shun to wield the censor’s pen, or to crack the whip.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dr Matzke:
Nice strawman.
Since it is now quite clear that Lewontin DOES advocate a priori materialism, the attempt is to isolate him in our perceptions. But, this will not wash for those familiar with the way the elites and the politically correct who expelled Gonzalez and others think.Don’t forget the current raft of cases.
[…]
Now, here is the US NAS, the elites of the scientific establishment, in the 2008 version of a long running pamphlet [which is one of the four linked clips I keep pointing to], showing that this has been going on for about 20 – 25 years:
[…]
The NSTA is in like vein, but brings out the materialistic commitments more explicitly and repeatedly; remember, in Kansas, the NAS and NSTA acted jointly, and this shows how they are singing off the same hymn sheet:
[…]
So, we can see the context in which the NAS and NSTA JOINTLY intervened in Kansas to enforce a radical, tendentious redefinition of science, threatening to hold the students of that state hostage if the Board of Education did not comply, with the NCSE hovering in the background and acting though a local front organisation.
All of this goes to underscore how in our time a radical, materialist redefinition of science is being imposed through institutional dominance by a priori materialists, and is presented as though it is the longstanding standard for doing real not fraudulent science. of course, those who object to the radical coup are being tagged as pseudoscientific, i.e. we see here atmosphere poisoning that sets up and knocks over strawmen as pointed out above.
Those who are doing this should take warning from how the public is waking up from the spell imposed by the manipulators of climate science, in the aftermath of the Climategate revelations, and correct themselves before the public has to act in its own interests.[/b]
GEM of TKI
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


       

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dr Liddle:
Pardon, but you are repeating a strawman argument.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
RH7
Strawman and manifestly false assertion.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Editing for emphasis heavily influencspireded by Gordon E. Mullings style.
ETA more irrational emphasis
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 25 2011,03:05

Gordo:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
And as has been conveniently neglected, there IS a sci9entific method for distinguishing nature from art, and there is a valid scientific way to see that something is beyond the explanations of science, e.g if we have good observational evidence and/or testimony that leads us to see that a resurrection from death has occurred, that is beyond scientific forces or explanation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



This is from somebody who refuses to accept the age of the earth because "were you there?"

< http://tinyurl.com/695hsom....695hsom >
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 25 2011,03:38

BornAgain 77 is NOT a Young Earth Creationist, although ...      

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Even though the Grand Canyon does not even closely pertain to the main argument of ID, specifically “where did the stunning, jaw dropping, integrated information of the cell come from since material processes have NEVER been observed generating ANY functional information whatsoever, and only Intelligence has been observed, routinely, generating such information?” (Its not that hard of a question Eugenie!),,, none-the-less, the evidence of a cataclysmic flood in the Grand Canyon is fairly extensive. And even though I don’t hold the young earth model as correct for all the geology of earth, I do find the evidence for a cataclysmic flood in the Grand Canyon to be very persuasive, and more importantly, I find the alternative view, promulgated by most neo-Darwinists, of ‘gradual formation’ of the Grand Canyon, to be completely untenable to the evidence in hand
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

... maybe for SOME of the Earth's geology.

< Link >

P.S. You've been told that variation and natural selection are the source of the information in the cell innumerable times and in innumerable ways, but possibly you were watching videos every single time and missed it.
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 25 2011,04:38

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 25 2011,03:38)
BornAgain 77 is NOT a Young Earth Creationist, although ...        

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Even though the Grand Canyon does not even closely pertain to the main argument of ID, specifically “where did the stunning, jaw dropping, integrated information of the cell come from since material processes have NEVER been observed generating ANY functional information whatsoever, and only Intelligence has been observed, routinely, generating such information?” (Its not that hard of a question Eugenie!),,, none-the-less, the evidence of a cataclysmic flood in the Grand Canyon is fairly extensive. And even though I don’t hold the young earth model as correct for all the geology of earth, I do find the evidence for a cataclysmic flood in the Grand Canyon to be very persuasive, and more importantly, I find the alternative view, promulgated by most neo-Darwinists, of ‘gradual formation’ of the Grand Canyon, to be completely untenable to the evidence in hand
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

... maybe for SOME of the Earth's geology.

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/science-education/national-center-for-science-education-the-darwin-lobby-appeals-to-racism-to-get-its-messag



e-across/comment-page-1/#comment-405638]Link[/URL]

P.S. You've been told that variation and natural selection are the source of the information in the cell innumerable times and in innumerable ways, but possibly you were watching videos every single time and missed it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In the same thread from DrREC ... priceless, if correct:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I believe the individual described by Evolution News and Views: “As spokesman for the view that evolution is best taught with reference to the controversy over intelligent design, the film casts an unidentified black man missing what looks like half his teeth and speaking ungrammatically with an accent so thick he actually gets subtitles.”

Is Dr. Femi S. Otulaja, PhD CUNY, creationist, and an individual who refused to teach evolution to his students. He happened to be the filmaker’s PROFESSOR in college, and a motivation behind the film.
< http://www.flascience.org/wp....?....?p=1393 >

If David Klinghoffer sees an educated foreigner who played a role in this controversy and embraced it as a “unidentified black man missing what looks like half his teeth and speaking ungrammatically” that might speak more to his racism than the film’s.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 25 2011,07:28

that's gotta hurt.  i bet that fucked their little persecution metaphor six way to sunday.  Wait, the toothless yokel IS one of us, expel him!
Posted by: Dr.GH on Oct. 25 2011,09:43

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 25 2011,02:38)
< Link >

P.S. You've been told that variation and natural selection are the source of the information in the cell innumerable times and in innumerable ways, but possibly you were watching videos every single time and missed it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In the same thread from DrREC ... priceless, if correct:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I believe the individual described by Evolution News and Views: “As spokesman for the view that evolution is best taught with reference to the controversy over intelligent design, the film casts an unidentified black man missing what looks like half his teeth and speaking ungrammatically with an accent so thick he actually gets subtitles.”

Is Dr. Femi S. Otulaja, PhD CUNY, creationist, and an individual who refused to teach evolution to his students. He happened to be the filmaker’s PROFESSOR in college, and a motivation behind the film.
< http://www.flascience.org/wp....?....?p=1393 >

If David Klinghoffer sees an educated foreigner who played a role in this controversy and embraced it as a “unidentified black man missing what looks like half his teeth and speaking ungrammatically” that might speak more to his racism than the film’s.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Excellent! Thanks.

I am going to be on a discussion panel after a showing of No Dinos' Thursday, and I'll hopefully get a chance to use that information. As it happened, I was sent a PDF of an article co-authored by Dr. Femi Otulaja.


Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 25 2011,10:37

You have to admit that only Uncommonly Dense would be so jaw-droppingly, barrel-scrapingly dumb as to claim the NCSE are playing the race card...
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Because, given evidence-based developments in evolution studies that don’t confirm Darwin, it’s all they’ve got left, really?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And then in the next fucking sentence go on to play the race card...
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But then Darwin himself was a racist, unlike Wallace.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



:)
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 25 2011,11:53

gpuccio notes that ID is simply a gap:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My general point is simple:

a) RV cannot generate dFSCI

b) RV + NS in principle could, but only if the pathway to the complex information could be deconstructed into steps of low enough functional complexity, each of them naturally selectable (that is, bearing a definite reproductive advantage).

Point b) is not true. Not only it is not true in the general case (which should be the true requirement). It is not true in any known case for any basic protein domain.

It’s as simple as that.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< It's as simple as tard. >
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 25 2011,14:58

DrBot < points out kairosfocus' hypocrisy >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
KF, you are frequently as rude and you owe plenty of people apologies already!

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I finally figured out that all you socks over there are working in concert to trigger a cardiac event or brain aneurysm in Gordon.  You should be roundly chastised, but I can't work up the umbrage in this case.
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 25 2011,16:27

kellyholmes (I heart kellyholmes - which one of you is he/she?) posts a link to this new blog.  One for the bookmarks ...

< Child Burning Deviants >
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 25 2011,16:32

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 25 2011,16:27)
kellyholmes (I heart kellyholmes - which one of you is he/she?) posts a link to this new blog.  One for the bookmarks ...

< Child Burning Deviants >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Forgot to include the original < quote >
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
kellyholmes:

KF,

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
He is simply not talking in terms of reliable predictions, but in terms of material explanations, and indeed say the FSCI criterion, Chi_500 = I*S – 500 bits beyond the solar system threshold, is quite reliable where we can test it.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Really? Where can you test the FSCI criterion?

The funny thing about FSCI is that, as others have noted, you have essentially made it up to support your argument.

Yet in the last month or so you are the only person who has talked about it, really, at all. It’s not exactly setting the ID world on fire so how can it possibly be expected to make headway in the reality based community?

For example, in the last month or so (give or take) FSCI has been mentioned by the following people other then you:

Upright Biped (once)
DrRec (once)
William J Murrary (once)
rhampton7 (three times!)
And you’ve used it around 25 times in that time.

Nobody cares about your fake metrics which can’t actually be applied to anything anyway because you stole the whole idea from some protein paper anyway and point to that when you are asked to calculate it. You don’t need to calculate it because they already have, right?

Pathetic.

Anyway, see for youself who has mentioned FSCI and any other words you like by reading this blog post I stumbled over:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: JohnW on Oct. 25 2011,17:00

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 25 2011,14:27)
kellyholmes (I heart kellyholmes - which one of you is he/she?) posts a link to this new blog.  One for the bookmarks ...

< Child Burning Deviants >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Magnificent stuff.  The IDiotGenerator is, without a doubt, the greatest breakthrough in ID research since the Bible Code.

Here's some random News:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At least one of the problem? That makes it unbelievable is – as anyone who has ever tried organizing a surprise birthday party knows. We default to making sure that the one person we most want to keep it a surprise birthday party knows. We default to making sure that the snob welfares can do before normal people this side of the Earth -a bit further up the pipe at this point. Many of us valued Schaeffer for keeping Yanks out of peer reviewed literature. They never complain about in the plane. In. That.; Case. You.Will. Not. Be.Getting. Back.To.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A bit more coherent than the real thing, but with at least as much content.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 25 2011,18:51

< Lewontin > LARGE!

And Gordon is rocking both the red and the {bold curly bracket} loudspeakers in the ceiling. Must be a woofer-tweeter sort of thing.

ETA: Even Tinyurl can't handle Gordon's logorrhea
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 25 2011,18:53

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 25 2011,19:51)
Lewontin LARGE!

And Gordon is rocking the both the redand the bold curly bracket loudspeakers in the ceiling.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


that motherfucker is rocking about .79 timecubes and climbing
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 25 2011,19:45

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 26 2011,11:51)
< Lewontin > LARGE!

And Gordon is rocking both the red and the {bold curly bracket} loudspeakers in the ceiling. Must be a woofer-tweeter sort of thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So, do I have this right?: KF gets shot down in the comments, and his response is (1) close comments, and (2) {add bold curly bracket comments} to all posts protected from any chance of further responses? If he was of any consequence I'd say that's pretty despicable, but he isn't.

Or do I have that wrong?

Edit: Grammar error; it was irritating me
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 25 2011,19:48

Ha!  stealing the pussy, caught red handed.  that's beautiful.

gordon, may i recommend a bottle of sleeping pills and a pint of mad dog
Posted by: Badger3k on Oct. 25 2011,20:11

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,19:45)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 26 2011,11:51)
[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/follow-up-have-we-profoundly-misunderstood-harvard-evolutionary-biologist-richard-lewontin

-in-his-jan-1997-nyrb-article-“billions-and-billions-ofdemons”-part-2/]Lewontin[/URL] LARGE!

And Gordon is rocking both the red and the {bold curly bracket} loudspeakers in the ceiling. Must be a woofer-tweeter sort of thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



So, do I have this right?: KF gets shot down in the comments, and his response is (1) close comments, and (2) {adds bold curly bracket comments} to all posts protected from any chance of further responses? If he was of any consequence I'd say that's pretty despicable, but he isn't.

Or do I have that wrong?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


"add responses in brief"?????

Gordo????

Does this mean he'll only use 4,000 words?
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 25 2011,22:20

Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 25 2011,17:00)
Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 25 2011,14:27)
kellyholmes (I heart kellyholmes - which one of you is he/she?) posts a link to this new blog.  One for the bookmarks ...

< Child Burning Deviants >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Magnificent stuff.  The IDiotGenerator is, without a doubt, the greatest breakthrough in ID research since the Bible Code.

Here's some random News:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At least one of the problem? That makes it unbelievable is – as anyone who has ever tried organizing a surprise birthday party knows. We default to making sure that the one person we most want to keep it a surprise birthday party knows. We default to making sure that the snob welfares can do before normal people this side of the Earth -a bit further up the pipe at this point. Many of us valued Schaeffer for keeping Yanks out of peer reviewed literature. They never complain about in the plane. In. That.; Case. You.Will. Not. Be.Getting. Back.To.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


A bit more coherent than the real thing, but with at least as much content.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


How did it miss:

Coffee!!
He said it.
Giberson, Giberson, Giberson! (read like Marsha, Marsha, Marsha!)
Old Toff.
Neuroscience: You are not who you think and you don’t think the way you think. Or something.
Dawkins won't debate Craig
Earlier than thought?
Epigenetics
Boobies
Poo-Poo
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 25 2011,22:54

if it missed that boolshite it's only because tranmaw hasn't made a full circuit of the tard lately during the training phase.  i fully expect this to replace UD, since as has been mentioned already it has more content and also teh fucking URLs don't break.  why the shit would anybody actually read anything secreted by that fool gordon mullings when you can just go over and turn a crank and get the identical output?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 26 2011,01:21

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,17:45)
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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------







Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 26 2011,01:32

< William J. Murray, paranormal investigator: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The evidence that consciousness cannot be destroyed by destroying the body (or halted via brain death) exists in vast amounts, dating back over 150 years of scientific research and publication.

It is relatively easy to locate such research via simple google searches.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

i.e., "you do my homework for me".

Ahem, seances don't count as evidence. Just ask Harry Houdini..oh wait, he's DEAD!

bolding mine until my consciousness and my body go their separate ways.
Posted by: George on Oct. 26 2011,02:11

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 25 2011,16:27)
kellyholmes (I heart kellyholmes - which one of you is he/she?) posts a link to this new blog.  One for the bookmarks ...

< Child Burning Deviants >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Pretty fun stuff:

Quote (kairosfocus @ sometime, somewhere)
An examination of the past few years. Nor have things got better since or that of Dawkins et al. Try here as a part of the biblical stories must be recognized that assessment of timelines often presented as though those who differed with him are ignorant, stupid, insane or wicked” slanderous talking point. And, of course, those who dare differ with him. That is poisonous slander, and it is thus self-refuting]. . . ,” that simply underscores how the maximum reasonable Planck time, quantum state resources of the evolutionary materialist ideology hiding in the face of the ribosome, where the scope of events that can ground oughtness in a context where the example came from. Its message is simple and direct. Trial and error/success backed up by any reasonable level of warrant that an opinion piece is one’s personal opinion, but in presenting an ideology, the dominant elites.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



He's got a point you know.
Posted by: BillB on Oct. 26 2011,04:35

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 26 2011,07:21)
Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,17:45)
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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW? - gets my vote.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 26 2011,04:49

Things you would never know if you didn't read UD: Robert Sheldon < tells us: >  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It is a well-hidden fact that Islam is responsible for most of the ills besetting Christendom, including Darwinism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Very well-hidden.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 26 2011,04:55

Oh, all right.  Here's his "reasoning":

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I’ll let you figure out the percentage, but here’s the link. Islam conquered and then lost Spain and left behind a highly educated, philosophical position of God’s absolute power. Let’s call that nominalism. Nominalism emphasized ideology over induction. Contrast with the neo-Platonism of Augustine, and you’ll start to spot the differences. During the Reformation and the Counter-Reformation you had this playing out in philosophy: Augustinian Reformers versus Aristotelian nominalists. Darwin’s exposure to Atheism at the tender age of 16 exposed him to nominalism and the raw power of ideology, which he massaged for 30 years or so to make it palatable to a British Victorian society. It was still ideology but cleverly packaged as induction. Darwin’s real genius lay in marketing, no matter what you may have read otherwise.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is that clear?  Then here's more:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
The impending collapse of Islam is both a breakdown of authoritarian structure and ideology. The modern Muslim looks around and values what he sees (prosperity, smaller families, job mobility) over what he hears (Imam talking about eternal punishment for not having kids, etc). He is choosing induction over nominalism, ID over Darwinism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


In summary,  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It’s not always clear which is ideology and which is induction, and part of Darwin’s genius was selling evolution as induction–which it isn’t. But as Imre Lakatos argues, you can spot the difference between the two in the manner in which they handle exceptions and ad hoc hypotheses. Which comes back to ID being the recognition that not only is Design recognizable, but it is also the opposite of nominalism–it is interactive.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I think that makes it pretty clear.

And all this in a thread on the dreaded Demographic Collapse which turns out to be only having one or two children instead of the traditional seven.

Only on UD.
Posted by: midwifetoad on Oct. 26 2011,08:30

I thought Malthus was responsible for both demographic collapse and Darwinism. :)
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 26 2011,08:42

Chas D < sums up > the only reason I visit UD anymore (other than to read Elizabeth Liddle's stuff):


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Yaeh and MAYBE someday your position will have some research that supports your position!But until then do keep those promissory notes a comin’….

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Ah, my daily dive into Mirrorworld, where ID is an active science and evolution a left-field idea desperately in need of some factual investigation!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Joseph seems stuck in a "La la la, I can't see your evidence or hear your predictions." phase lately.  I do wish he'd add some of his stylish vulgarity to mix things up.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 26 2011,09:22

Quote (BillB @ Oct. 26 2011,04:35)
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 26 2011,07:21)
Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,17:45)
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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW? - gets my vote.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Seconded!
Posted by: Amadan on Oct. 26 2011,09:51

Quote (Richardthughes @ Oct. 26 2011,15:22)
Quote (BillB @ Oct. 26 2011,04:35)
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 26 2011,07:21)
 
Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 25 2011,17:45)
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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



---------------------QUOTE-------------------


POTW? - gets my vote.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Seconded!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Turded!
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 26 2011,11:26

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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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?
Posted by: REC on Oct. 26 2011,12:04

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 25 2011,10:37)
You have to admit that only Uncommonly Dense would be so jaw-droppingly, barrel-scrapingly dumb as to claim the NCSE are playing the race card...
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Because, given evidence-based developments in evolution studies that don’t confirm Darwin, it’s all they’ve got left, really?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And then in the next fucking sentence go on to play the race card...
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
But then Darwin himself was a racist, unlike Wallace.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



:)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted without comment for posterity



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
obert ByersOctober 26, 2011 at 1:25 am
Creationist organizations make these raft trips too and I think it gets under the skin of evolutionist fighters. Its one of those spatial picture things the school folks talk about.

Unlikely they are putting the black down . they just needed a black, as Hollywood always does in FRONT of the camera, and there was no other or other that wasn’t a creationist.
Just common identity selectionism.

Scott and AIG/ICR should have raft races. you can make the best geological interpretation , ride the waves, and persuade the most people and return with them undunked.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< Link >
Posted by: Freddie on Oct. 26 2011,12:16

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 26 2011,11:26)
 
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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well speaking as an armchair psychiatrist in the truest sense of the phrase (and with the appropriate nod and apologies to those that do know what they are talking about here), I used to think < Narcissistic Personality Disorder > but I think based on more recent posts I would have to go with Paranoid Personality Disorder. < Wikipedia > states :


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Paranoid personality disorder is a psychiatric diagnosis characterized by paranoia and a pervasive, long-standing suspiciousness and generalized mistrust of others.

Those with the condition are hypersensitive, are easily slighted, and habitually relate to the world by vigilant scanning of the environment for clues or suggestions to validate their prejudicial ideas or biases. Paranoid individuals are eager observers. They think they are in danger and look for signs and threats of that danger, disregarding any facts. They tend to be guarded and suspicious and have quite constricted emotional lives. Their incapacity for meaningful emotional involvement and the general pattern of isolated withdrawal often lend a quality of schizoid isolation to their life experience.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Of course, it's possible that there are elements of both in there somewhere.
Posted by: Freddie on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 26 2011,13:10

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 26 2011,13:29)
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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Narcissistic personality disorder was definitely the one I was thinking of, but you've nailed it with this one.
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 26 2011,14:17

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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Dang son.  We have a winner.  

Add some psychopathy and you've got them all.
Posted by: Louis on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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

Louis
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 26 2011,15:14

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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Only if it describes you him sober.
Posted by: MichaelJ on Oct. 26 2011,15:40

Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 27 2011,03:29)
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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sounds like Frill to me.
Posted by: REC on Oct. 26 2011,16:19

Pop Quiz (no cheating)

O'Leary or IDiot generator, edited for brevity.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

All kinds of strange stuff has happened since then, including stuff we complain about the Darwin fairy tale of highly creative gene duplication, and it’s too bad if some freak out about the Darwinsludge – the stupid stuff in defense of Darwinism. Which probably does far more harm to their cause than any of us are offended by the constant Darwin worship of the waste basket –
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Are Darwin’s American tribe having a collective nutout or what? Joshua Rosenea went on to quote Virgil’s Aeneid that rumors of the kind I am spreading are “nimble as quicksilver among evils. OK, whatever. Please, lawyer, for all our coffee money for next week: Does Rosenau have a case if we link? Can he force us to break winter camp? This is about some film about dinosaurs in heaven, which nobody can afford to buy and isn’t on line. Dinos aren’t in heaven? We ain’t either. Difference is, we is askin’
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 26 2011,16:35

She's seriously gone, hasn't she?

It is good to see UD become nothing more than a link farm. Anything to drum up interest.

(In spite of Nick Matze and Febble's missionary work  :angry: )
Posted by: BillB on Oct. 26 2011,16:39

< DrBot > replies to KF:

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
   Kindly tell us the term we use to describe a discrete as opposed to continuous state system.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Discrete

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 26 2011,16:47

gpuccio:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Because dFSCI is found empirically only in designed things.

Because biological information has tons of dFSCI.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



They might as well fucking measure information by weight, they've tried (and failed) to do it any other way.

< Duh. >
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 26 2011,17:44

Quote (REC @ Oct. 26 2011,14:19)
Pop Quiz (no cheating)

O'Leary or IDiot generator, edited for brevity.

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

All kinds of strange stuff has happened since then, including stuff we complain about the Darwin fairy tale of highly creative gene duplication, and it’s too bad if some freak out about the Darwinsludge – the stupid stuff in defense of Darwinism. Which probably does far more harm to their cause than any of us are offended by the constant Darwin worship of the waste basket –
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

Are Darwin’s American tribe having a collective nutout or what? Joshua Rosenea went on to quote Virgil’s Aeneid that rumors of the kind I am spreading are “nimble as quicksilver among evils. OK, whatever. Please, lawyer, for all our coffee money for next week: Does Rosenau have a case if we link? Can he force us to break winter camp? This is about some film about dinosaurs in heaven, which nobody can afford to buy and isn’t on line. Dinos aren’t in heaven? We ain’t either. Difference is, we is askin’
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


The IDiot Generator has passed the TARDing Test. All hail our IG overlord.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 26 2011,17:52

Is it Friday?

Some proper A-Class insanity about to erupt. Perhaps.

Dawkins is a liar, and he assoiciates with people like this:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dr. Sam Harris, who says that pushing an innocent man into the path of an oncoming train is OK, if it is necessary in order to save a greater number of human lives
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dr. Sam might say that but so to (IIRC) a majority of people when asked the same question.

vjtorley ends thusly:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Professor Dawkins, I understand that you are a very busy man. Nevertheless, I should warn you that a failure to answer these charges will expose you to charges of apparent lying, character assassination, public hypocrisy, as well as an ethical double-standard on your part. The choice is yours.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Funnily enough that all applies to Dr Dr Dembski, much more so then Dawkins.

And WTF is "apparent lying"? Is that like dFSCI?

< Wow. >

And he even throws one in for "I'd eat a baby if the reason was right" FTK:
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In his article in The Guardian (20 October 2011) condemning William Lane Craig, Professor Dawkins fails to explain exactly why it would be wrong under all circumstances for God (if He existed) to take the life of an innocent human baby, if that baby was compensated with eternal life in the hereafter. In fact, as I will demonstrate below, if we look at the most common arguments against killing the innocent, then it is impossible to construct a knock-down case establishing that this act of God would be wrong under all possible circumstances.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



What a proper POS. Who the fuck could say "if we look at the most common arguments against killing the innocent" and mean it? I thought the whole point of their thang was that they would not need an argument against such a thing, they'd "know" it was wrong from the start. Yet they have to construct arguments as to why killing the innocent is not necessarily wrong simply because their deity did it and so it can't possibly be wrong because it's written down in a book that says it can't be wrong anyway. Wah-ha.

I'm sure it was of much comfort to the mother of an innocent child that it now has eternal life.

In fact, this is how it all begins, right? They start to think "well, unbelievers are in fact better off dead" and so killing you is actually doing you a favor in their minds.

What a mind fuck.

I can only hope they come up with that other logical alternative instead, like the The Heaven's Gate people did. Why not? Get you there all the faster vjtorley you sick piece of shit, if you do it yourself. Works for the innocent right?
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 26 2011,17:55

Joseph and Nick sitting in a tree...


< http://forth998877.appspot.com/Kwic....ph#Nick >
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 26 2011,17:57

Clive is even more senile via the IDiot generator:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
It could be changed or guided or directed; since we don’t see the logical necessity behind it, we have no assurance that it couldn’t have been otherwise, or that these observations haven’t been, or couldn’t have been, different in the character of nature. The supreme irony is that the only things we really do understand, that is, see the reasonableness of why any two things are connected as physical events in the singularity before the Big Bang, then yes, the conditions of nature as we understand nature as we understand nature as we find them now, would’ve been a totally foreign nature, akin to a miracle. it is a logical contradiction for anything in nature to have a point. , Methodological naturalism presupposes that we understand nature as we understand nature as we find them now, would’ve been a totally foreign nature, akin to a miracle. it is a confusion to consider observations as real understandings of the character of nature. So, yes, nature is a logical fallacy. So our “understanding” of nature is based solely and purely on observations, not on any logical necessity, stuck or frozen in their character. It could be changed or guided or directed; since we don’t see the reasonableness of why any two things are connected as physical events in the same way. The simple test is to ask yourself if it is a confusion to consider observations as real understandings of the character of nature. The supreme irony is that the only things we really do understand, that is, see the reasonableness behind, don’t physically exist, like mathematics, morality, and logic.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Or is that a "real" quote.....
Posted by: fnxtr on Oct. 26 2011,19:36

Quote (MichaelJ @ Oct. 26 2011,13:40)
 
Quote (Freddie @ Oct. 27 2011,03:29)
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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Sounds like Frill to me.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< And Joe. And Joe. >
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 26 2011,22:21

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 26 2011,16:47)
gpuccio:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Because dFSCI is found empirically only in designed things.

Because biological information has tons of dFSCI.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



They might as well fucking measure information by weight, they've tried (and failed) to do it any other way.

< Duh. >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Didn't Joseph or Jerry actually suggest to weigh DVDs?
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 26 2011,22:58

< Joseph, the Jacques Tardteau of UD: >

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Cetacean hind limbs are just old, unused FINS
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


It's probably a wasted effort but i'll post a reply to him with a reference to a paper on the < developmental basis for hind-limb loss. >
Posted by: noncarborundum on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
Posted by: Louis on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Only if it describes you him sober.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Crap Oh good.

Louis
Posted by: Schroedinger's Dog on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Bolding mine.  Top that, someone!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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...)
Posted by: CeilingCat on 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-------------------

               

---------------------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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
Posted by: Patrick on 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).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
Posted by: OgreMkV on 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-------------------

                 

---------------------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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
Posted by: paragwinn on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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



eta:fix quoteblock fail
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on 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).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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
Posted by: k.e.. on 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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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

He would read that as "knowledgeable, decent and a class act"
Posted by: Patrick on 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).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


meh what do you expect.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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?
Posted by: k.e.. on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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



eta:fix quoteblock fail
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


....From the sublime to the ridiculous


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

Creationists never change their minds.
Posted by: k.e.. on 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).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


meh what do you expect.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Ergo 'people' don't lie for Jesus only creobots.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 27 2011,10:06

< gpuccio >


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

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< DrBot >


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


< ScottAndrews2 >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Attention to detail isn't any more important than internal consistency inside the big tent.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< fali >

Well, woo hoo. The "Information Transfer" king is in town.
Posted by: Ptaylor on 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

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< Link >
Edit: < Well, yes >.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< fali >

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


Uptight Biped needs to < FlexX > his mental muscles a bit.

Blowhard Dumbass IDiot.
Posted by: damitall on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



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.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on 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.
Posted by: Louis on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I prayed the gay away and he came back with some of his friends, a keg, a piñata, 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
Posted by: Louis on 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.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< DrBot >


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


< ScottAndrews2 >


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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


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

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I prayed the gay away and he came back with some of his friends, a keg, a piñata, 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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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
Posted by: CeilingCat on 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.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< DrBot >
   

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


< ScottAndrews2 >
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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


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

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


gpuccio claimed to be a doctor a while back.  

Kind of scares you.
Posted by: Louis on 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.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< DrBot >
   

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


< ScottAndrews2 >
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Who said that there is no chemical reason why TCT maps to Serine?

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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


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

Gosh, whodathunkit?

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


gpuccio claimed to be a doctor a while back.  

Kind of scares you.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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}.
Posted by: damitall on 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?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



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.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And then:



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



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 >
Posted by: Woodbine on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




And when did this little wedge of real-politik shoulder its way into the big tent?
Posted by: carlsonjok on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




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


And for our friends south of the Rio Grande:


Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 28 2011,08:44

I'll, er, someone should ask KF if he agrees with that.
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on 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
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Reporting on an article in the Economist, so why exactly would we need Caroline Crocker to read the Economist for us?
Posted by: Richardthughes on 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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




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


< 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.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Richardthughes on Oct. 28 2011,15:48

[trying to bump page bug]
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 28 2011,16:15

Nicely done RtH! (Sock puppets please report to Klinghoffer thread!)

Meanwhile, in a post entitled "Some life forms can be scared to death." Van asks...


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so I wonder what the darwinists will claim the selective benefit of this trait is…….hmmmmm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< OK, which one of you is Van? >
Posted by: paragwinn on Oct. 28 2011,16:43

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 28 2011,14:15)
Nicely done RtH! (Sock puppets please report to Klinghoffer thread!)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< There is a crack in everything / That's how the light gets in. > - Leonard Cohen, "Anthem"
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Oct. 28 2011,17:15

Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 28 2011,17:43)
Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 28 2011,14:15)
Nicely done RtH! (Sock puppets please report to Klinghoffer thread!)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< There is a crack in everything / That's how the light gets in. > - Leonard Cohen, "Anthem"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From his beautiful and chilling album, "The Future."
Posted by: OgreMkV on Oct. 28 2011,19:57

Behe fucked up BIG TIME by being allowed on the stand at Kitzmiller.  He screwed the pooch for IDists everywhere.

Heck, half my response to IDists come from Behe's testimony.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 28 2011,21:50

Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 27 2011,08:06)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 27 2011,06:42)
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.

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Elizabeth Liddle's invitation for the UD regulars to join her at < her blog > suggests a related idea.  If every sock replied there (or here) and just left a pointer at UD, it might drag the roaches out into the light to be stomped on encourage the UD regulars to venture out from behind Clivebaby's skirts.  It would be especially interesting if replies at UD were of the form "Oh, we've been discussing that at AtBC.  You should join us there."
Posted by: sparc on Oct. 28 2011,21:57

Surprisingly no "world class ckeckers", "LS-DYNA", "I was a worse than Dawkins militant atheist", "autonomously guided airdrop systems", "artificial-intelligence" "classical piano", but this little gem surely compensates for much

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At a recent men’s church retreat
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

I am hoping for video footage.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 28 2011,22:15

Quote (sparc @ Oct. 29 2011,14:57)
Surprisingly no "world class ckeckers", "LS-DYNA", "I was a worse than Dawkins militant atheist", "autonomously guided airdrop systems", "artificial-intelligence" "classical piano", but this little gem surely compensates for much  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At a recent men’s church retreat
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

I am hoping for video footage.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil almost nails it in his opening paragraph:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why are ID theorists skeptical of “man-caused carbon dioxide emissions leading to the destruction of the planet” theory? The reason is that we follow the evidence, and have a nose that smells out junk science in the name of an ideological (indeed, a religious) agenda.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My embolderation.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 28 2011,22:58

Speak of the self-obsessed fop and he will surely appear. Guess who just blew his nose at Febble's....
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Dear Liz,

Just thought I’d stop by and say hi.

During the years of my youth when I was lost in the dark, depressing depths of atheistic materialism, the piano and classical music were my refuge. From the age of seven my piano teacher was Ruby Bailey, who died tragically in a single-car auto accident. She was like a second mother to me.

Ruby gave me a gift that still blesses me to this day.

You can download some of my piano recordings at:
< http://www.worldchampionshipcheckers.com/....ers....ers.com >
and I would be happy to mail you a set of CDs if you like.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: sparc on Oct. 28 2011,23:34

BTW, if you want pure un-diluted TARD from GilDo you may use the following link: < http://www.uncommondescent.com/author.....ldodgen >

Such lists are available for many but not all (e.g. Dembski, Denyse, Barry Arrington) UD posters.

An interesting case is Patrick whose nome de guerre is <a href="www.uncommondescent.com/author/gumpngreen/" target="_blank">gumpngreen</a>. Google says that gump is the abbrevation of < God's Underground Military Police >. According to < guru.com > he is working for < XRUCIFIX > which describes itself as one

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
of the leading Christian entertainment studios in the industry today. We develop strong, edgy action focused titles for teens and adults. Our vision, like many of our friends are the 3Es: Entertaining, Enlightening and Evangelizing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Seeing their < bizarre pages > I really wonder if US Christian belief has even remotely anything to do with what Christians believe in Europe.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 29 2011,00:15

Well I've just downloaded the < demo > for...

Eternal War: Shadows of Light

...which is advertised on that site. It's only 33mb and from the pics looks nothing more than a Quake/Hexen clone.

I've never played a Christian game before so I'm curious to discover just how much fun a game designed to "...challenge the player spiritually as well as skill-wise without cramming the Bible down their throats." can be.

I'll have a play tomorrow and report my experience/conversion.
Posted by: Henry J on Oct. 29 2011,00:33



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

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

A That's correct.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You know, somehow I've wound up with the impression that the position taken by "intelligent design" depends on who you hear it from (and sometimes also onwho they happen to be talking to at the time).

With evolution, otoh, the same basic principles are acknowledged by experts around the globe, even as the argue (sometimes loudly) about details. But then, if they didn't agree on basic principles, they wouldn't be able to argue about details, as in that case it wouldn't mean anything.

Henry
Posted by: Cubist on Oct. 29 2011,03:58

Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 29 2011,00:33)
   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------

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

A That's correct.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


You know, somehow I've wound up with the impression that the position taken by "intelligent design" depends on who you hear it from (and sometimes also on who they happen to be talking to at the time).
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's probably because the 'position' taken by ID-pushers does depend on who you hear it from and who they happen to be talking to at the time. The real, true, core ideas of ID are God did it and evolution is just wrong; since there are occasional lingering legal restrictions which obstruct ID-pushers from promoting these core ideas (the first one in particular) explicitly and honestly, they must needs cloak it in different verbiage depending on the venue and audience. Since the goals of the ID movement are political and cultural, it's hardly surprising that ID-pushers' tactics make no sense under the presumption that ID is a scientific enterprise...
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 29 2011,08:05

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 29 2011,06:15)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 29 2011,14:57)
Surprisingly no "world class ckeckers", "LS-DYNA", "I was a worse than Dawkins militant atheist", "autonomously guided airdrop systems", "artificial-intelligence" "classical piano", but this little gem surely compensates for much    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
At a recent men’s church retreat
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

I am hoping for video footage.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gil almost nails it in his opening paragraph:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why are ID theorists skeptical of “man-caused carbon dioxide emissions leading to the destruction of the planet” theory? The reason is that we follow the evidence, and have a nose that smells out junk science in the name of an ideological (indeed, a religious) agenda.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My embolderation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


No man in ID is more in need of a BJ.

GIL STOP!

Stop sniffing church farts you are getting higher than a Rasta on  da 'oly 'erb .... mon.

Don't inhale.

Reminds me of that twit Paley's Ghost.
Posted by: Woodbine on Oct. 29 2011,13:01

So, Eternal War: Shadows of Light was a bust. Couldn't get it to run properly; it started slow and juddered to a halt before I made it out of the first room. It's a game designed in 2003, based on the Quake 1 engine and attempting to run on Win7 64. The odds were always against it.

Ah well, nothing lost. The only hint of Christianity I found in the tiny amount of time spent with it was in the controls page where there is a command for 'Prayer'. In game all this elicited was a message saying 'You are already at full strength' so I'm guessing it pumps up your spiritual fortitude when you're feeling a bit nihilistic or Dodgenesque.

Ho hum, I'm therefore still a heathen; back to the regular schedule.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 29 2011,13:39

a famous queauxt by werner von braun comes to mind at that
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 29 2011,13:50

Quote (Woodbine @ Oct. 28 2011,17:15)
Meanwhile, in a post entitled "Some life forms can be scared to death." Van asks...
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
so I wonder what the darwinists will claim the selective benefit of this trait is…….hmmmmm
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


< OK, which one of you is Van? >
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


that post. is. unbelievable.

DeNews

Quote (Tranmaw @ typically)
What it mainly shows is that natural prey animals are usually stupid and unable to assess risks intelligently.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



holy shit.  the irony of this dolt trying to consider such a thing.
Posted by: JohnW on Oct. 29 2011,17:43

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 29 2011,11:50)
Quote (Tranmaw @ typically)
What it mainly shows is that natural prey animals are usually stupid and unable to assess risks intelligently.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



holy shit.  the irony of this dolt trying to consider such a thing.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Stupidity.  Therefore Jesus.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Oct. 30 2011,06:17

Jospeh or IDiotJoseph:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
A targeted search is a post hoc “explanation” with absolly no idea what ID posits. Again what is beneficial for one generation in one specific environment isn’t necessarily going to back away because you cannot demonstrate otherwise. And that was used by the designer(s) or specific process(es) used, is by demonstrating chance and necessity. I can explain that- ya see the compiler doing its thing right up to the 5’ end, the non-coding strand in order to have issues with God wanting to wipe out one or a blind watchmaker papers at your meetings? That is papers that demonstrate the alleged powers of blind, undirected processes. IOW transpsons could very well be a demonstrated feasibility. IOW the information that comes from it is convincing. Yup, perhaps 1/2 way there pertaining to blind, undirected chemical processes.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 30 2011,09:10

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 30 2011,14:17)
Jospeh or IDiotJoseph:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
A targeted search is a post hoc “explanation” with absolly no idea what ID posits. Again what is beneficial for one generation in one specific environment isn’t necessarily going to back away because you cannot demonstrate otherwise. And that was used by the designer(s) or specific process(es) used, is by demonstrating chance and necessity. I can explain that- ya see the compiler doing its thing right up to the 5’ end, the non-coding strand in order to have issues with God wanting to wipe out one or a blind watchmaker papers at your meetings? That is papers that demonstrate the alleged powers of blind, undirected processes. IOW transpsons could very well be a demonstrated feasibility. IOW the information that comes from it is convincing. Yup, perhaps 1/2 way there pertaining to blind, undirected chemical processes.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


hahahaha ID gold from teh turd mines
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 30 2011,09:45

Speaking of Joseph, < Chas D > and < GinoB > are winding him up into a proper lather.  Joseph has even started using terms like "evotard" that he usually reserves for his on cesspit of a blog.  The vacuum that Elizabeth Liddle left is being filled with the best that UD has to offer, apparently.
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Oct. 30 2011,11:08

Batshit77 on experiments to explain bird flocking:

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
,,,nor has Hemelrijk, despite how impressed she may be with her computer model, come anywhere near completely ruling out that the Starlings may actually be communicating ‘telepathically’. In fact there is now direct experimental evidence that ‘non-local’ (beyond space and time) quantum effects play a foundational role in bird navigation, thus, if anything, completely opening up a plausible ‘telepathic’ cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





Ever since UD opened comments to scientifically literate non-ID pushers it's been a  bloodbath for the IDiot regulars.  As someone else noted, I'd almost feel sorry for them if the assclowns didn't deserve it.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 30 2011,13:34

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 30 2011,10:45)
Speaking of Joseph, < Chas D > and < GinoB > are winding him up into a proper lather.  Joseph has even started using terms like "evotard" that he usually reserves for his on cesspit of a blog.  The vacuum that Elizabeth Liddle left is being filled with the best that UD has to offer, apparently.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Quote (JoeG @ channeling another tard)
A transposon has in it sections of DNA that encode two of the enzymes it needs to carry out its job. The cell itself contributes the other necessary enzymes. The motion of these genetic elements about to produce the above mutations has been found to be a complex process and we probably haven’t yet discovered all the complexity. But because no one knows why they occur, many geneticists have assumed they occur only by chance. I find it hard to believe that a process as precise and as well controlled as the transposition of genetic elements happens only by chance. Some scientists tend to call a mechanism random before we learn what it really does. If the source of variation for evolution were point mutations, we could say the variation is random. But if the source of variation is the complex process of transposition, then there is no justification for saying that evolution is based on random events. Dr Lee Spetner “Not By Chance” page 44
---------------------QUOTE-------------------

 

Quote (ChasD @ the dumb place)
Joseph,

What’s all that about? It does not matter whether transposons move by chance or not. And any scientific argument that contains the phrase “I find it hard to believe that…” is worthless.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



haha sig worthy joe

 

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



good luck with that one ChasD, this dip shit "thinks" you are wrong baahahahaha
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 30 2011,13:50



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
What common ancestry lacks is no one knows what makes a whale a whale, a hippo a hippo nor can anyone link the required genetic changes to the required physiological and anatomical changes.

No one even knows if such a transformation is even possible.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Joseph you poor stupid bastard, whales and hippos aren't  fucking pokemon.  creationists think species are ideas in the minds of god.  no wonder they are usually sexually repressed as well
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 30 2011,14:39

Frill



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Why are ID theorists skeptical of “man-caused carbon dioxide emissions leading to the destruction of the planet” theory? The reason is that we follow the evidence, and have a nose that smells out junk science in the name of an ideological (indeed, a religious) agenda.

At a recent men’s church retreat I chatted with our pastor about how it seemed obvious to me that the global-warming thing exhibited all the attributes of a religion.

Mother earth is a goddess. We have sinned against her with technology. If we do not repent and return to primitive living she will call down her wrath and fry us all with vengeance.

Little did I know that Michael Barone, in his essay Collapse of the global-warming cult came to the same conclusion.

The same thing applies to the cult of Darwinism, which is promoted in the name of science. Darwinian theory (in particular, the presumed creative power of random mutations, and attempts to explain away the fact that the fossil evidence consistently contradicts gradualism) exhibits all the attributes of an ersatz religion.

It is the creation story of the religion of materialism.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



LOL
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 30 2011,15:05

it's another permutation of that grand old saw "I, personally, am dumb as fuck.  Therefore, you are wrong."
Posted by: carlsonjok on Oct. 30 2011,15:40

Quote (Erasmus, FCD @ Oct. 30 2011,14:39)
Frill



---------------------QUOTE-------------------

At a recent men’s church retreat I
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



LOL
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Is *that* what they are calling it nowadays?
Posted by: Ptaylor on Oct. 30 2011,15:54

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 31 2011,08:05)
it's another permutation of that grand old saw "I, personally, am dumb as fuck.  Therefore, you are wrong."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From recent comments it's difficult to tell if you are referring to Joseph or Gil. Which one...
...oh, never mind.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Oct. 30 2011,16:19

Quote (Ptaylor @ Oct. 30 2011,16:54)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 31 2011,08:05)
it's another permutation of that grand old saw "I, personally, am dumb as fuck.  Therefore, you are wrong."
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From recent comments it's difficult to tell if you are referring to Joseph or Gil. Which one...
...oh, never mind.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Eureka!  carlson's careful study of species of the Frilled Tard complex has yielded a much more basic systematic inference, a synapomorphy underlying the main frame of the tard organ, which is then differentiated as a function of local selection on historical/socioeconomic fundie tardisms.  the interboobz and the tardularity that is UD have united many divergent lineages of T. ard.   that, ladies and gentlemen and third party pronyms, is the smell of science
Posted by: Tracy P. Hamilton on Oct. 30 2011,18:26

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Oct. 30 2011,11:08)
Batshit77 on experiments to explain bird flocking:

   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
,,,nor has Hemelrijk, despite how impressed she may be with her computer model, come anywhere near completely ruling out that the Starlings may actually be communicating ‘telepathically’. In fact there is now direct experimental evidence that ‘non-local’ (beyond space and time) quantum effects play a foundational role in bird navigation, thus, if anything, completely opening up a plausible ‘telepathic’ cause
---------------------QUOTE-------------------





Ever since UD opened comments to scientifically literate non-ID pushers it's been a  bloodbath for the IDiot regulars.  As someone else noted, I'd almost feel sorry for them if the assclowns didn't deserve it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Send Kreskin over to UD, and he would say "Nothing, drawing a blank."
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 31 2011,03:04

If I may quote BornAgain77, "This is off topic, but..."

I followed a few of the URLs in the < Christian Darwinists getting purged from Calvin College? > thread (the answer, by the way, is "Yes, they are.") and wound up on www.christianpost.com where I spotted a url to < Pornography In the Pew - A Hidden Sin (Part 1) >

As usual in these situations, I asked myself, "What Would Gordon Do?" and of course, I clicked on the link, because that's what Gordon always does.  Solely in the hope of doing a little investigating and maybe catching some hints on the Devil's Ways, of course.  And solely in order to better fight him!

In the article (which, lamentably, contains no illustrations, thus seriously denting my devil-fighting education) I was touched by this sentence:    

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to a ChristiaNet survey, 50 percent of Christian men are addicted to pornography. And it’s not just a “guy-thing;” 20 percent of Christian women are addicted to pornography, and 60 percent of Christian women admitted to significantly struggling with lust.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My heart instantly went out to those poor struggling Christian women, at least the proportion of them that are comely.  (Sorry, Denise, but my passport has expired and my compass is broke and my GPS doesn't work and Canada scares me.  And don't even think of heading south.  I have the plague.)

But Christian women, if you are struggling with lust and are at least half-way comely, please PM me immediately.  I can help.  Let us struggle with lust together.

In Gordon's name, come to me!
Posted by: Quack on Oct. 31 2011,04:43



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In Gordon's name, come to me!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, as someone for whom it never was a struggle, I can at least offer moral support - even for the somewhat less than comely.

ETA:
Posted by: k.e.. on Oct. 31 2011,07:58

Quote (Quack @ Oct. 31 2011,12:43)


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In Gordon's name, come to me!
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well, as someone for whom it never was a struggle, I can at least offer moral support - even for the somewhat less than comely.

ETA:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


HAH, HOMO!

DOWN UNDER WE CALL A BLOKE LIKE YOU A SMOOTH BASTARD!

NEXT YOU'LL BE GETTING THEIR PHONE NUMBERS FOR PURELY 'SCIENTIFIC' REASONS. SUCH AS 'RESEARCH' IN THE PLEISTOCENE SECTION OF THE VARSITY LIBRARY.


OTHER NOTEABLE TRAITS
1.LETTING GIRLS GET ONTO A BUS BEFORE YOU, EVEN THOUGH YOU WERE FIRST IN LINE

2. WHEN A CUTE GIRL GETS YOU INTO A CONVERSATION AND YOUR CELL PHONE RINGS ---SAYING YOUR DENTIST CALLED WHEN YOUR WIFE CALLED TO BRING HOME MILK.

DARWINISTS!


© d.t.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 31 2011,09:30

Is there some kind of back channel between Joseph's blog and < this thread on UD >?


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
OK Joseph, you’ve convinced me you’re a compulsive liar who will say anything to ‘win’ a discussion. You continually lie about your experiences, you lie about what was said, you lie about the evidence others produce.

Your compulsively dishonest behavior is neither healthy nor productive.

I truly feel sorry for you that you’re so messed up mentally and emotionally. Go get some professional help.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


C'mon, Chas D, if we only talked to the honest ID proponents the conversation would stop altogether.
Posted by: Patrick on Oct. 31 2011,09:30

Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
Posted by: Robin on Oct. 31 2011,12:32

Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 31 2011,03:04)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
According to a ChristiaNet survey, 50 percent of Christian men are addicted to pornography. And it’s not just a “guy-thing;” 20 percent of Christian women are addicted to pornography, and 60 percent of Christian women admitted to significantly struggling with lust.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Being Lust, I can tell you that most of those struggles are not very impressive. Heck, they usually give in as soon as the candle is lit and the wine is poured. We almost never get to the gag and handcuffs...
Posted by: CeilingCat on Oct. 31 2011,23:17

Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
Posted by: k.e.. on Nov. 01 2011,06:45

Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
Posted by: Freddie on Nov. 01 2011,07:51

Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 01 2011,06:45)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wisecracks like that will put you in contempt of parliament ...
Posted by: Louis on Nov. 01 2011,08:55

Quote (Freddie @ Nov. 01 2011,13:51)
Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 01 2011,06:45)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wisecracks like that will put you in contempt of parliament ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Flocking hell! That was a stretch. Made me screech it did.

Louis
Posted by: Amadan on Nov. 01 2011,09:44

Oh dear. Another nested punnerarchy.

On UD they prevent this by use of the barnination button.
Posted by: Reciprocating Bill on Nov. 01 2011,09:59

Quote (Louis @ Nov. 01 2011,09:55)
Quote (Freddie @ Nov. 01 2011,13:51)
Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 01 2011,06:45)
 
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
 
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wisecracks like that will put you in contempt of parliament ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Flocking hell! That was a stretch. Made me screech it did.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't know, I think he's got a talon for puns.
Posted by: fnxtr on Nov. 01 2011,10:07

Quote (Amadan @ Nov. 01 2011,07:44)
Oh dear. Another nested punnerarchy.

On UD they prevent this by use of the barnination button.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Damn. I wanted to do a pun on "barn" but couldn't get my brain raptor round it.
Posted by: Louis on Nov. 01 2011,11:30

Quote (Amadan @ Nov. 01 2011,15:44)
Oh dear. Another nested punnerarchy.

On UD they prevent this by use of the barnination button.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Owl be the first to say it: complaining about this is ducking the real issues. Trying to distract us with your flights of fancy when there are important matters to at-hen-d* to. Respect the pecking order of ideas!

Louis

*Sorry.
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Nov. 01 2011,11:47

Gordo compares himself to the J man:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
FYI, my aim here is like Jesus’ when he spoke to those who had been sent by Herod et al: Go tell that Fox . . .
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


LOL. He then get's all worked up into a frothing rage:
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That is, I am marking a line in the sand, for record.

Don’t you dare think that I am going to chalk this down to a PR defeat and let’s hope the poison does not fester longer.

I know better than that, and I know where unanswered blood libel leads.

And, blood libel is exactly what this is, FYI.

[Don't ever forget, as well that this is in the specifically Jewish portion of the Judaeo-Christian Scriptures, so the Blood Libel is also implicitly anti-Semitic. Do you really want to go there?]

The cynical manipulation of moral sensibilities by nihilistic advocates of evolutionary materialism that actually believes that “there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but pitiless indifference” is hereby exposed.

Exposed in blood libel.

Yes, Blood Libel.

I repeat, to drive the point home: BLOOD LIBEL.

This is no little rhetorical game.

You are playing with a nuke tripwire here.

And, BTW, Timbo, in the teeth of corrective information, you just classified yourself as not being serious and informed, for you actually managed to put yourself on the side of promoting the blood libel slander. (Onlookers, note absolutely no sign of serious or fair-minded interaction with the serious issues.)

FYI, Timbo: neither Dr Craig nor any other significant Bible-believing Christian leader in our day supports genocide or the like. Something that Dr Dawkins plainly knows, but cynically disregarded in his resort to tossing out the red meat to stir up a distractive poisonous fight, the better to get away with decades of increasingly irresponsible, poisonous, hostility-/hate- laced rhetoric.

We note your support of moral bankruptcy and for willing promotion of blood libel for future reference.

For God’s sake, please think again before spreading further blood libels about other people.

Good day

GEM of TKI
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



For Gordo to say that somebody has "no sign of serious or fair-minded interaction with the serious issues" is a joke - he never engages with the serious problems in his position.


< Tard. >
EDIT:Working URL.
Posted by: JohnW on Nov. 01 2011,12:28

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 01 2011,09:47)
LOL. He then get's all worked up into a frothing rage:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------




---------------------QUOTE-------------------
...you actually managed to put yourself on the side of promoting the blood libel slander.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Not just blood libel, but blood libel slander.  That's serious, that is.

I picture Gordo with a stack of fresh keyboards by the side of his desk, so he can swap them out when his fingers start sliding around on all the spittle.
Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Nov. 01 2011,12:40

I imagine that he dabs up all that spittle with the pile of infant foreskins that he keeps like a trophy.  

BLOOD LIBEL, SIR!!!!1!!!
Posted by: Occam's Aftershave on Nov. 01 2011,14:34

Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 01 2011,12:28)
   
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 01 2011,09:47)
LOL. He then get's all worked up into a frothing rage:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


   

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
...you actually managed to put yourself on the side of promoting the blood libel slander.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Not just blood libel, but blood libel slander.  That's serious, that is.

I picture Gordo with a stack of fresh keyboards by the side of his desk, so he can swap them out when his fingers start sliding around on all the spittle.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Not just blood libel slander, but playing with nuclear matches, and nuke tripwires!

GEM of TALKY is about 95% of the way around the bend.  I bet he completely wigs out and/or has an aneurysm by year's end.
Posted by: BillB on Nov. 01 2011,15:06

Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 01 2011,17:47)
For Gordo to say that somebody has "no sign of serious or fair-minded interaction with the serious issues" is a joke - he never engages with the serious problems in his position.


< Tard. >
EDIT:Working URL.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Well he has carefully constructed his 'methodology for civilized debate' around the idea of him being allowed to say anything he wants and others only being allowed to agree with him - or at best to really politely disagree once so long as it is never mentioned again.
Posted by: JohnW on Nov. 01 2011,15:54

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Nov. 01 2011,12:34)
GEM of TALKY is about 95% of the way around the bend.  I bet he completely wigs out and/or has an aneurysm by year's end.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Gordo's definitely top of the UD Going Postal Watch List.
Posted by: Richardthughes on Nov. 01 2011,16:11



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You are playing with a nuke tripwire here.


---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Love this.

Okay, so here we've got your basic KV-127B anti-personnel nuke. Its very low yield warhead is designed to kill a small squad and barely irradiate the surrounding 10 clicks. We find the paring of a $0.37 tripwire detonation system with a $1.3MM warhead to make perfect sense - when fighting our war on materialism.
Posted by: Albatrossity2 on Nov. 01 2011,17:10

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Nov. 01 2011,14:34)
I bet he completely wigs out and/or has an aneurysm by year's end.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


And how will we be able to tell?
Posted by: damitall on Nov. 01 2011,17:12



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You are playing with a nuke tripwire here.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I wonder what terrifying fate will befall the careless evolutionist/materialist/atheist who, all unknowing, trips the "nuke".

20 megatons of pompous indignation? A final tsunami of tard?

Does he - can he - realise what an ineffectual little prick he is?

Having said that, he does serve a purpose - single-handed, he must have turned legions of potential converts away from whatever it is he is in favour of.
Posted by: Patrick on Nov. 01 2011,17:14

DrBot is < psychic >:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I assume now you will proceed to deface this post, like you do to the posts of others who disagree with you?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Followed shortly thereafter by this appearing in his comment:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
{Ed: Dr Bot, of course is failing to note that this is a case of blood libel being dealt with. The attempt at immoral equivalency in that context is a sad case of enabling behaviour. And to make an editorial remark, yet again, is not to “deface” a post.}

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Woodbine on Nov. 01 2011,17:56

In a thread in which we throw around the term 'tard' I hesitate to ask, but, is Robert Byers...um...you know, actually slow? Ignoring for a moment the YEC drivel he constantly spews the man is < barely literate >.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In fact biogeography should ot be used as evidence for a theory of biology.
Its not biology research.
Just a line of reasoning which they need to keep up their hunch they are right.
just scoring where critters are does not count for science in biology.
They have no biology science evidence.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



???
Posted by: oldmanintheskydidntdoit on Nov. 01 2011,18:01

I FOUND OUT SOMETHING ABOUT ID!



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In a design model, the inactive gene is prepared while remaining inactive, and only when it is ready, and everything else necessary has been prepared, it is shifted to translation.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



< gpuccio >

WOO-HOO!

gpuccio then links to an example of that actually happening, here is the authors conclusion from that paper:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Here we report the first experimentally verified case of a human-specific protein-coding gene, FLJ33706 (alternative gene symbol C20orf203), that originated de novo since the divergence of human and chimpanzee.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And here is how gpuccio spins it:


---------------------QUOTE-------------------
That is more or less what apparently happens in this case:
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



"More or less" having a different meaning to him I guess.
Posted by: Ptaylor on Nov. 01 2011,20:50

< Fossfur > on DeNews' 'Scientists, our moral and intellectual superiors: Big Dutch researcher made up or manipulated dozens of papers' thread:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I see my reply was ‘disappeared’. Figures.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



And here it iswas:
     

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
2
FossfurNovember 1, 2011 at 7:00 pm

GinoB,
It’s primarily an anti-science Christian apologetics blog; this is par for the course. The stories reported on are for the purposes of sneering, not illumination. There’s no actual interest in discovery, and certainly nothing that could be described as ‘intelligent design news’.

It’s hilarious really. Considering the amount of articles dealing with morality you’ll be hard pressed to find anything at UD on the Catholic church’s systematic cover-up of the rape of children. Not a peep. It’s like it never happened!

But when someone has the temerity to call out William Lane Craig as an apologist for genocide….well. That’s simply beyond the pale! The heathens have gone too far this time!!!

---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Erasmus, FCD on Nov. 01 2011,21:04

Quote (Woodbine @ Nov. 01 2011,18:56)
In a thread in which we throw around the term 'tard' I hesitate to ask, but, is Robert Byers...um...you know, actually slow? Ignoring for a moment the YEC drivel he constantly spews the man is < barely literate >.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In fact biogeography should ot be used as evidence for a theory of biology.
Its not biology research.
Just a line of reasoning which they need to keep up their hunch they are right.
just scoring where critters are does not count for science in biology.
They have no biology science evidence.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



???
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


fucking bot.  fools you every time dude.  it's a good one.
Posted by: CeilingCat on Nov. 01 2011,23:25

Quote (damitall @ Nov. 01 2011,17:12)
 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
You are playing with a nuke tripwire here.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



I wonder what terrifying fate will befall the careless evolutionist/materialist/atheist who, all unknowing, trips the "nuke".

20 megatons of pompous indignation? A final tsunami of tard?

Does he - can he - realise what an ineffectual little prick he is?

Having said that, he does serve a purpose - single-handed, he must have turned legions of potential converts away from whatever it is he is in favour of.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Speaking of Gordo and nukes, I think he's also done a bit of programming:

< http://xkcd.com/970............970 >
Posted by: Fross on Nov. 02 2011,00:09

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 01 2011,09:59)
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 01 2011,09:55)
 
Quote (Freddie @ Nov. 01 2011,13:51)
 
Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 01 2011,06:45)
   
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
   
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wisecracks like that will put you in contempt of parliament ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Flocking hell! That was a stretch. Made me screech it did.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't know, I think he's got a talon for puns.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Who?

 ;>
Posted by: noncarborundum on Nov. 02 2011,00:31

Quote (Fross @ Nov. 02 2011,00:09)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 01 2011,09:59)
   
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 01 2011,09:55)
   
Quote (Freddie @ Nov. 01 2011,13:51)
     
Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 01 2011,06:45)
     
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 01 2011,07:17)
       
Quote (Patrick @ Oct. 31 2011,09:30)
Sorry, that was GinoB, not Chas D.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


This is amazing!  From the same archy thread, BA77 has a link to a video that's actually worth watching!!

< http://www.dogwork.com/owfo8......8....o8 >

An owl, flying directly towards the camera at 1000 frames per second.  I pity any small rodents that ever see a sight like this.

Owls are proof that God hates mice.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Yeah he doesn't give a hoot.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Wisecracks like that will put you in contempt of parliament ...
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Flocking hell! That was a stretch. Made me screech it did.

Louis
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I don't know, I think he's got a talon for puns.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Who?

 ;>
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


If you ask my pinion, it's no beak deal.
Posted by: Freddie on Nov. 02 2011,02:07