RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (27) < ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... >   
  Topic: DI EN&V, Open comments and archive< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1038
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2013,00:04   

Quote (Doc Bill @ July 23 2013,14:00)
That's Rex "My Dick I Will" Tugwell.



(low hanging fruit)

Well, you qualify your comment with "Low hanging fruit", but really, I think the onus is on us to rise above this sort of juvenile play on peoples' names.

Besides that, you beat me to it.

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

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2137
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,10:14   

This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013....81.html

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

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

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:13   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,10:14)
This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013.......81.html

Momentary lapse of unreason.

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

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2137
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:32   

Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2013,09:13)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,10:14)
This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013.......81.html

Momentary lapse of unreason.

Well, I read it over again. It still says that Axe, Gauger, and Meyer are full of shit.

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

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

   
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:36   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,11:32)
Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2013,09:13)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,10:14)
This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013.......81.html

Momentary lapse of unreason.

Well, I read it over again. It still says that Axe, Gauger, and Meyer are full of shit.

I was all like "I am so going to write to UT about this shit..."

Then I read it and was confused.  I read it some more... yep it's saying that Axe is wrong.

What the heck?

I don't know if my world can handle this.

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

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

   
Glen Davidson



Posts: 1045
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:39   

But...what happens to ID if it actually allows dissent, and discussion of its many failings?

Either this keeps up and ID has weeks, at most, to live at the DI, or it ends soon.

Glen Davidson

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

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

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:40   

Quote (OgreMkV @ July 24 2013,11:36)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,11:32)
Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2013,09:13)
 
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,10:14)
This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013.......81.html

Momentary lapse of unreason.

Well, I read it over again. It still says that Axe, Gauger, and Meyer are full of shit.

I was all like "I am so going to write to UT about this shit..."

Then I read it and was confused. I read it some more... yep it's saying that Axe is wrong.

What the heck?

I don't know if my world can handle this.

Quote
Surely some revelation is at hand;
   Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
   The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
   When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
   Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
   A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
   A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
   Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
   Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.

   The darkness drops again but now I know
   That twenty centuries of stony sleep
   Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
   And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
   Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?


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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,11:56   



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

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,17:13   

I'm with Akbar.

(Hey, I should make that into a t-shirt!)

Who's going to lower the boom?  Not Meyer, he knows the least about what he writes.  Axe and Gauger?  Not Gauger, she's too busy doing green screen photo shoots.  Possibly Axe who is both deluded and vindictive.

However, my "ax" of choice is Luskin!  Yea, Attack Gerbil.  Sic, 'em, Gerb!

Heads up for a citation avalanche.

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,17:38   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,11:32)
Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2013,09:13)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 24 2013,10:14)
This rather confused me this morning. Maybe I need more coffee before readng.

http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013.......81.html

Momentary lapse of unreason.

Well, I read it over again. It still says that Axe, Gauger, and Meyer are full of shit.

"I find the Gauger and Axe study uninformative (beyond that which we already knew) because they have no idea what their substitutions actually did to their protein. For example, these mutations could have simply led to an unfolded protein. They reject this idea based on a generalization that "it appears that about 10% or more of the residues in natural proteins need to be changed before the cumulative structural disruption can be expected to cause complete loss of function" (Axe, D. D., 2000, Journal of molecular biology 301: 585-595). - See more at: http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013....f"

How does this idea of loss of structure = loss of function work for intrinsically disordered proteins, which are a significant fraction (half?) of all functional proteins?  Inquiring minds want to know, but also know not to expect anything from EN&V.

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

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

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

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1038
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,21:24   

Poenie seems to be an odd fit for the DI. In this 2003 letter he co-wrote to the Texas State Board of Education he even takes a small swipe at them.
 
Quote
The other of us (Poenie) was listed by the Discovery Institute as one of the Texas scientists on their "40 Texas Scientists Skeptical of Darwin" list (although he did not authorize the DI to include him on this list). Poenie did write a letter to the state board arguing that Darwinian (hyperdarwinian) mechanisms are not the only ones molding the evolutionary history of life and that we should be free to consider alternative non-darwinian mechanisms of change. However, that letter was not intended to oppose basic evolutionary biology or to support poor teaching or coverage of that topic.

The letter goes on to reject an apparent proposal that only one of several biology textbook candidates be approved for the state curriculum. Excerpt:  
Quote
Perhaps the Glencoe book is seen as the only acceptable book by at least one SBOE member because it explicitly lists "Divine Origins" as an alternative to scientific hypotheses about the origin of life (on page 388). However, we both object to the presentation of religious and scientific explanations as mutually exclusive ideas, as if choosing one requires an individual to reject the other. We believe that a science book should focus on scientific explanations, and not present religious beliefs as an alternative to scientific analyses.
...but lest I be accused of out of context quotation you should read the whole letter if you are interested; it is not long.

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

  
Henry J



Posts: 4786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 24 2013,23:35   

Quote
that we should be free to consider alternative non-darwinian mechanisms of change

Uh. At the risk of stating the obvious, people in this country are free to consider "alternative" mechanisms. They just need to keep in mind that if somebody unfamiliar with the subject matter claims that something is supported by evidence when those familiar with the subject know it ain't (or vice versa), that's apt to get pointed out by those people. (i.e. being "free" to say stuff doesn't mean being "free" from criticism of what one says!;)

Henry

  
Ptaylor



Posts: 1038
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 25 2013,01:21   

Quote (Henry J @ July 25 2013,16:35)
Quote
that we should be free to consider alternative non-darwinian mechanisms of change

Uh. At the risk of stating the obvious, people in this country are free to consider "alternative" mechanisms. They just need to keep in mind that if somebody unfamiliar with the subject matter claims that something is supported by evidence when those familiar with the subject know it ain't (or vice versa), that's apt to get pointed out by those people. (i.e. being "free" to say stuff doesn't mean being "free" from criticism of what one says!)

Henry

Agreed. It's why the IDiots' hijacking of the phrase 'academic freedom' is so grating for me. The people trying to frame AF bills know just what they are doing; your average Barb or Mung or Andre think they are a great idea, but show that they wouldn't last a minute in a real academic debate.
And I hope I haven't come across as being critical of the professor; indeed he comes across as one of the good guys in The Argument Regarding Design, which makes the EN&V article all the more puzzling.
/defensive mode

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

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3654
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 25 2013,07:22   

I suspect, though can't know for sure, that when he talks of non-Darwinian, he probably is referring to things like epigenetics, evo-devo, and other evolutionary mechanisms beyond RMNS.

The way that "dissent from darwinism" letter was worded, many scientists could honestly sign it... but from his letter it appears that few actually did.

And I wish I still had my review copy of that Glencoe book.

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

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

   
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4902
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 25 2013,21:37   

There's a response to Poenie.

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

    
Ptaylor



Posts: 1038
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 25 2013,23:18   

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 26 2013,14:37)
There's a response to Poenie.

Yes. David Klinghoffer has helpfully explained how the post and reply process works over there. Here he was over at Amazon a couple of days ago, responding to this from commenter stickler:
Quote
David Klinghoffer: "Unlike our Darwin-defending friends, I genuinely value debate, real debate..."

Really? Then why doesn't Evolution News and Views allow comments on their articles?

Klinghoffer (irony metres off, please):
Quote
Regarding stickler's complaint about comments on Evolution News & Views, we allow and encourage intelligent debate at ENV. In fact tomorrow morning we have scheduled a post by biologist Martin Poenie at the University of Texas at Austin, critical of Doug Axe's work as it figures in Darwin's Doubt. I applaud Dr. Poenie for joining us in discussion on that point. We've publicly invited Jerry Coyne to debate the merits of Darwin's Doubt at ENV -- he refused, preferring to hide behind Matzke, then Prothero. We have hosted Dr. Prothero's co-author Michael Shermer, who is very critical of our work and acquitted himself well in a debate about Alfred Russel Wallace's ideas. And so on.

What we don't allow, stickler, is anonymous sniping or the usual Darwinian spitting, screaming and cursing. That doesn't count as debate in my book. It demeans everyone, including thoughtful defenders of orthodox evolutionary theory.


So that's how debate works over at EN&V. Invite well-enough respected scientists to present an article and whenever someone gullible enough takes up the offer, which will inevitably be critical of ID, get McLatchie or Luskin or Crowther to jump all over it with the usual obfuscatory crap a day or two later, and what do you know - victory!

Edited - removed crappy tinyurl link. Hopefully this Amazon one will work.

Edited by Ptaylor on July 26 2013,20:54

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

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2137
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 26 2013,02:45   

Quote (Ptaylor @ July 25 2013,21:18)
Klinghoffer (irony metres off, please):

Regarding stickler's complaint about comments on Evolution News & Views, we allow and encourage intelligent debate at ENV. In fact tomorrow morning we have scheduled a post by biologist Martin Poenie at the University of Texas at Austin, critical of Doug Axe's work as it figures in Darwin's Doubt. I applaud Dr. Poenie for joining us in discussion on that point.

I saw that, but had not processed it adequately.

Really, it is fucking awesome.

The shit sucking Disco'tute is forced to publish a short comment that explains (very well) that the entire ID effort made by their super-duper "research" is bullshit. Why did they do this?

Merely to cover two critical reviews on Amazon.com by Matzke, and Prothero, the attack gerbil and his minions have been summoned.

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

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

   
sparc



Posts: 1985
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 18 2013,03:18   

Do you remember What George Church, Famed Harvard Geneticist, Says About Darwin's Doubt and Intelligent Design?
According to Church Lab & Harvard Molecular Technology Group Meetings web page this was based on personal communication:
Quote
Mar 13, 2013 Discovery Institute teleconf w/ David Klinghoffer Stephen Meyr [sic!] & Paul Nelson, 1:15-2, Dial-In Information (GMC)
Thus, it is likely that Church's statements are verbatim.
I am wondering though, why the page is openly accesible (I came across it when I was looking for a link between the the Discovery Institute and Aldevron which is acknowledged in Biological Information: New Perspectives for sponsoring the meeting).

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

- William Dembski -

   
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,08:58   

According to Casey "Where's The Wrist?" Luskin, bloggers at this here site scared Springer Verlag shitless. Behold our power!

--------------
If you are not:
Galapagos Finch
please Logout

  
sparc



Posts: 1985
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,13:56   

Quote (olegt @ Aug. 19 2013,08:58)
According to Casey "Where's The Wrist?" Luskin, bloggers at this here site scared Springer Verlag shitless. Behold our power!

Until now it didn't affect book sales which remain 2 for August 2013.

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

- William Dembski -

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:10   

Quote (olegt @ Aug. 19 2013,08:58)
According to Casey "Where's The Wrist?" Luskin, bloggers at this here site scared Springer Verlag shitless. Behold our power!

Perhaps Casey can get together with Gary for a beer.

If it doesn't have any adverse interactions with other medications.

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

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:18   

The DI History Revision department is in full swing.

In an article about the good old centriole they note
Quote
Discovery Institute's Dr. Jonathan Wells hypothesized years ago that centrioles operate like winches, pulling the chromosomes apart with force (here and here)


Where "here and here" is neither here nor there.  What Jon-Boy actually pooted was that the centrioles looked like little turbines and, by hecky, they were little turbines and that Someday it would be discovered (but not by Jon-Boy) that they motorboated stuff in the cell around.

It was turbines using polar force or some such nonsense, not winches.  But I can't fault the Disco Tute too much.  After all it's much easier to make predictions after the fact.  They're just being efficient!

  
sparc



Posts: 1985
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:27   

Strangely enough, as of today Dembski still list Sringer in his CV at designinference.com:  
Quote
BOOKS

in preparation
Biological Information: New Perspectives (co-edited with Robert J. Marks II, John Sanford, Michael Behe, and Bruce Gordon). Under contract with Springer Verlag

He is highly trained in denying realities, though.

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

- William Dembski -

   
olegt



Posts: 1405
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,14:39   

Quote (sparc @ Aug. 19 2013,14:27)
Strangely enough, as of today Dembski still list Sringer in his CV at designinference.com:
Quote
BOOKS

in preparation
Biological Information: New Perspectives (co-edited with Robert J. Marks II, John Sanford, Michael Behe, and Bruce Gordon). Under contract with Springer Verlag

He is highly trained in denying realities, though.

From Bill's CV:
Quote
Current Employment
Senior Fellow, Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (discovery.org/csc), 1996 to present, full-time since summer 2012
Phillip E. Johnson Research Professor in Culture and Science, Southern Evangelical Seminary (ses.edu), part-time since fall 2012

One can't help wondering what it means to be a part-time Senior Fellow at Discovery.

--------------
If you are not:
Galapagos Finch
please Logout

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1199
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,16:01   

Quote (olegt @ Aug. 19 2013,14:39)
Quote (sparc @ Aug. 19 2013,14:27)
Strangely enough, as of today Dembski still list Sringer in his CV at designinference.com:
Quote
BOOKS

in preparation
Biological Information: New Perspectives (co-edited with Robert J. Marks II, John Sanford, Michael Behe, and Bruce Gordon). Under contract with Springer Verlag

He is highly trained in denying realities, though.

From Bill's CV:
 
Quote
Current Employment
Senior Fellow, Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (discovery.org/csc), 1996 to present, full-time since summer 2012
Phillip E. Johnson Research Professor in Culture and Science, Southern Evangelical Seminary (ses.edu), part-time since fall 2012

One can't help wondering what it means to be a part-time Senior Fellow at Discovery.

"Phillip E. Johnson Research Professor..." An endowed chair??



--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1501
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 19 2013,16:36   

Quote (olegt @ Aug. 19 2013,14:39)
Quote (sparc @ Aug. 19 2013,14:27)
Strangely enough, as of today Dembski still list Sringer in his CV at designinference.com:  
Quote
BOOKS

in preparation
Biological Information: New Perspectives (co-edited with Robert J. Marks II, John Sanford, Michael Behe, and Bruce Gordon). Under contract with Springer Verlag

He is highly trained in denying realities, though.

From Bill's CV:
Quote
Current Employment
Senior Fellow, Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (discovery.org/csc), 1996 to present, full-time since summer 2012
Phillip E. Johnson Research Professor in Culture and Science, Southern Evangelical Seminary (ses.edu), part-time since fall 2012

One can't help wondering what it means to be a part-time Senior Fellow at Discovery.

Limited cafeteria privileges?

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

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

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,19:03   

Quote (Texas Teach @ Aug. 19 2013,16:36)
Quote (olegt @ Aug. 19 2013,14:39)
Quote (sparc @ Aug. 19 2013,14:27)
Strangely enough, as of today Dembski still list Sringer in his CV at designinference.com:
Quote
BOOKS

in preparation
Biological Information: New Perspectives (co-edited with Robert J. Marks II, John Sanford, Michael Behe, and Bruce Gordon). Under contract with Springer Verlag

He is highly trained in denying realities, though.

From Bill's CV:
 
Quote
Current Employment
Senior Fellow, Discovery Institutes Center for Science and Culture (discovery.org/csc), 1996 to present, full-time since summer 2012
Phillip E. Johnson Research Professor in Culture and Science, Southern Evangelical Seminary (ses.edu), part-time since fall 2012

One can't help wondering what it means to be a part-time Senior Fellow at Discovery.

Limited cafeteria privileges?

The "ses" is a double-wide trailer diploma mill in bumfuck, NC.

"Unemployed" would be a step up from this place for Dembski.  Part-time at a diploma mill?  

How the mighty Dembski has fallen and one wonders what drives his self-destructive behavior.  Perhaps he's just a consummate asshole and can't get along with anybody.  University of Chicago to Baylor to nothing to two Baptist seminaries to this.

Considering Dembski is the "leading ID theorist" he's certainly on the skids.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10762
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,19:19   

From one of the many "We hate you Nick Matzke" articles up at ENV at the moment:

 
Quote
Matzke was essentially threatening Springer with economic extortion, insinuating that if the company didn't cancel the book contract with the editors of Biological Information: New Perspectives, it might face a boycott. - See more at: URL


No, Casey. He can only threaten them with "economic extortion" if he himself controls the purse strings.

Stick to not being a scientist, you suck as a lawyer.

Edited by Wesley R. Elsberry on Aug. 20 2013,19:38

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

  
Driver



Posts: 649
Joined: June 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,20:47   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 21 2013,01:19)
From one of the many "We hate you Nick Matzke" articles up at ENV at the moment:

Quote
Matzke was essentially threatening Springer with economic extortion, insinuating that if the company didn't cancel the book contract with the editors of Biological Information: New Perspectives, it might face a boycott. - See more at: <a href=""http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/08/on_the_origin_o_3075521.html#sthash.RC9CujbF.dpuf" target="_blank">URL</a>


No, Casey. He can only threaten them with "economic extortion" if he himself controls the purse strings.

Stick to not being a scientist, you suck as a lawyer.

boycott= extortion.

Neo-con wank.

--------------
Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray

[A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

  
sparc



Posts: 1985
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Aug. 20 2013,22:34   

Luskin put up his next piece:
Quote
Censorship Loses: Never Forget the Story of Biological Information: New Perspectives

But he doesn't have anything to offer but his usual claims. E.g.,
Quote
Our goal is to foster a real, and robust scientific debate over neo-Darwinian evolution and intelligent design, and until now, we've felt that goal was best served by staying out of the public debate on this book.
What if not a robust scientific discussion have the Nick's posts at Pandasthumb been, Casey? Don't you have anything better than the following:
Quote
This is a crucial point: How many times have we heard ID critics (like Matzke) say things like "ID shouldn't be taken seriously because it doesn't present research at scientific conferences, or publish scientific papers." But then what happens when ID proponents do exactly what they say we should do: We present research at a scientific conference at a major research university (Cornell) [sic!] and then seek to have it published by a major science publisher (Springer)? Does Matzke applaud us for doing what he demanded? No. ID-critics like Matzke work hard to prevent its publication. This is sheer hypocrisy.
(emphasis mine)

Casey,
1. most if what was presented was not science (or do you beleave any physicist would take Sewell serious? Would any molecular biologist refer to Gitt and Fernandez when it comes to the information content of DNA?)
2. technically the meeting may have taken place on Cornell ground but for God's sake you guys just booked a room there but the university didn't endorse the meeting
3. Springer is indeed a major science publisher. Considering 1. and 2. even you have to come to the conclusion that Springer didn't have a choice. And it surely was not about money but rather their reputation they didn't want to loose.
There's one true thing in you post, though:
Quote
For them, this is not a scientific debate at all. It's an ideological power struggle
This is an ideological struggle, indeed. One started by your side with a plan layed down in the wedge document.

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

- William Dembski -

   
  790 replies since Jan. 20 2011,10:32 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (27) < ... 10 11 12 13 14 [15] 16 17 18 19 20 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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