RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (4) < [1] 2 3 4 >   
  Topic: The Mullings Meander, you'll give up before you find an answer< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 30 2014,02:05   

Creationist Duane Gish was famous for his "Gish Gallup" whereby he out-talked his debate opponents, moving swiftly from point to point, changing subjects and not allowing any insightful discussion.

It appears we have a new variant, over at UD, The Mullings Meander where the author hopes to bore you into TL;DR submission before declaring victory. Case in point:

Our own Reciprocating Bill asks KF


If the physical states exhibited by brains, but absent in rocks, don’t account for human dreams (contemplation, etc.) then you’ve no basis for claiming rocks are devoid of dreams – at least not on the basis of the physical states present in brains and absent in rocks. Given that, on what basis do you claim that rocks don’t dream?

We go around and around before KF offers up his Tardus Opus (warning fast connection required):

Quote
R-B:

Thank you for clearly stating your core contention. This allows us to be able to see the root issues.

I will comment on the pivotal paragraph above on points:

>> A prioris are integral to adductive [--> Abductive] reasoning,>>

1 –> No more so than with reasoning in general, namely the first, self-evident principles of right reason.

2 –> That is, once we accept that something A has a distinct identity, we see a world-partition { A | NOT-A } and so also the principle of identity, non contradiction and excluded middle.

3 –> Also, and this seems to be a root problem you face, that if A is (or is possible, or is impossible) we may freely inquire as to why in at minimum the hope of finding a good and sufficient reason.

4 –> Where, if A is contingent, it credibly traces to a cause; with the critical type of causal factor being the on/off enabling factor such that if absent then A will not actually exist. (Such as, each of heat, fuel, oxidiser and functioning heat-generating chain reaction for a fire.)

5 –> Where also, there are necessary beings and candidate beings that turn out to be impossible. As an example, a square circle has inherent contradictions in core attributes and is impossible. By contrast the truth expressed in 2 + 3 = 5 cannot not exist, on pain of contradiction and confusion. It never began, is so in any possible world and cannot cease.

6 –> All that is necessary for abductive inference to best explanation [and in science it is inference to best CURRENT explanation] to work is that we are willing to acknowledge alternative possibilities as candidates, and are willing to assess them on factual adequacy, coherence and explanatory elegance: simple, neither simplistic nor ad hoc. Where also, the requirement of empirical reliability suffices to lock out unbridled speculations.

7 –> So, it seems your real complaint is that on matters of origins, despite evidence on the significance of FSCO/I as an empirically reliable and analytically plausible sign of design, you are unwilling to entertain such a cause as a design.

>> as they are the basis for judgments regarding which explanation is “best” among the those that remain in logical contention given the facts at hand as one makes that inference to the “best” explanation.>>

8 –> This twists the matter, and is the gateway by which you have injected your own (evidently evolutionary materialism influenced) a prioris, by projecting the accusation of a priorism elsewhere.

9 –> In fact, all that is required for abduction to work . . . and it is the form of induction that underlies scientific methods especially where competing hypotheses are at stake . . . is to be willing to seriously consider alternative possibilities on empirical and logical evidence.

>> Often we can agree on which explanation that is based on shared background knowledge and assumptions,>>

10 –> This is little more than a repetition, which does psychological work, rather than adding to cogency.

11 –> All that is required to clarify what is at stake is to revert to possible worlds thinking (here, an expanded form of modelling based on scenarios).

12 –> Is there a possible world in which, say, a design team creates cell based life forms and seeds a planet? Obviously yes. Given Venter et al, yes again. Given hopes to terraform Mars, yes yet again.

13 –> This is a design scenario.

>>but in disputed (and maybe unresolvable) cases like the significance of cosmological constants,>>

14 –> Translation, by simply objecting, I and my ilk propose to lock out and dismiss serious considerations

>> inference to the best explanation is powerless to decide which explanation is actually “best,”>>

15 –> Translation, I and my ilk refuse to consider the implications of observations that led to Hoyle and others putting fine tuning on the table for serious consideration.

16 –> Also, we refuse to take seriously the significance of FSCO/I as a reliable sign of design. (Cf the chirping crickets currently, here, onlookers.)

>> as it has strictly circumscribed logical force.>>

17 –> Actually, all arguments have strictly circumscribed logical force. Deductive ones go no further than the ambit of axioms.

18 –> As Godel showed, starting with Math, we face irreducible complexities and uncertainties in sufficiently rich axiom systems. If consistent then incomplete. If complete — entailing all true claims — then self contradictory. So, maybe we should give up on Math where there are differences of views? Obviously not.

19 –> As Locke highlighted in the intro to his essay on Human Understanding, in empirically grounded inductive contexts, the ones that allow us to learn new things, there are irreducible uncertainties and provisionalities. (I expand his Scriptural allusions.) Clipping:

Men have reason to be well satisfied with what God hath thought fit for them, since he hath given them (as St. Peter says [NB: i.e. 2 Pet 1:2 - 4]) pana pros zoen kaieusebeian, whatsoever is necessary for the conveniences of life and information of virtue; and has put within the reach of their discovery, the comfortable provision for this life, and the way that leads to a better. How short soever their knowledge may come of an universal or perfect comprehension of whatsoever is, it yet secures their great concernments [Prov 1: 1 - 7], that they have light enough to lead them to the knowledge of their Maker, and the sight of their own duties [cf Rom 1 - 2 & 13, Ac 17, Jn 3:19 - 21, Eph 4:17 - 24, Isaiah 5:18 & 20 - 21, Jer. 2:13, Titus 2:11 - 14 etc, etc]. Men may find matter sufficient to busy their heads, and employ their hands with variety, delight, and satisfaction, if they will not boldly quarrel with their own constitution, and throw away the blessings their hands are filled with, because they are not big enough to grasp everything . . . It will be no excuse to an idle and untoward servant [Matt 24:42 - 51], who would not attend his business by candle light, to plead that he had not broad sunshine. The Candle that is set up in us [Prov 20:27] shines bright enough for all our purposes . . . If we will disbelieve everything, because we cannot certainly know all things, we shall do muchwhat as wisely as he who would not use his legs, but sit still and perish, because he had no wings to fly. [Text references added to document the sources of Locke's allusions and citations.]

>>In those instances I prefer “I don’t know” rather than an abductive leap (which is not to claim that I don’t have my priors). >>

19 –> On fair comment, this is selective hyperskepticism, boiling down to we don’t like some possibilities so we refuse to entertain them.

20 –> Do we seriously think that you object to say teaching abiogenesis or body-plan macroevolutionary explanations as though various scenarios are fact when they cannot pass the vera causa test?

21 –> The answer to this weakly grounded preference, is to insist that we teach origins science in light of strengths, limitations and requisites of abductive-form inductive reasoning in science and the resulting provisionality of results.

22 –> But it is the evolutionary materialism advocates who object to that, demanding to monopolise in ways that look a whole lot like indoctrination.

23 –> But, major body plans, cell based life and the physics of the cosmos all reflect an astonishing degree of FSCO/I. Where we do know a class of causal factors that is empirically reliably and analytically plausibly the only known, capable cause of such.

24 –> Namely, design.

25 –> As Wikipedia, speaking against known ideological interest notes:

More formally design has been defined as follows.

(noun) a specification of an object, manifested by an agent, intended to accomplish goals, in a particular environment, using a set of primitive components, satisfying a set of requirements, subject to constraints;
(verb, transitive) to create a design, in an environment (where the designer operates)[2]

KF

76
kairosfocusJune 27, 2014 at 4:27 am
Continuing:

>> No one in the discussion so speculates – certainly not me.>>

26 –> Not quite. The challenge was raised repeatedly, why not entertain the rock as a locus of dreaming . . . even, as a dismissive reply to perceived “silly” belief in the supernatural. That is a simple fact. To which I responded, let a rock SHOW itself conscious, then we can talk seriously.

27 –> And all of this is really strawmannish off a red herring from the main point I have taken pains to argue, only to see a lot of duck, dodge and side-slip.

28 –> Namely, when we refine rocks and form them into computational substrates — analogue, digital, neural network — they STILL are patently interacting through blind, GIGO-limited cause-effect bonds not through actual insightful, meaning and concept based reasoning. As Leibnitz, Lewis and Reppert have pointed out across 350 years.

29 –> That side slipping has become so consistent that it is telling me that a serious point has been made.

>> But there is a more abstract reason to tarry. In denying any and all relationship between consciousness and embodiment, you’ve built a framework in which rocks may well be conscious.>>

30 –> More precisely, entities formed of dust are observed to be conscious, in a context where neural network architectures are patently still in the cause-effect blind GIGO limited computational regime.

31 –> So, the characteristic materialist lab coat clad fixation on rocks, raw or refined [and on software that is also GIGO-limited and constitutes blind manipulation of digital symbols and/or analogue signals by appropriately arranged rocks], begins to look suspiciously like trying to get North by going West.

>> Human beings, in your framework, are conscious and self-aware not because of the organization of their brains, bodies and nervous systems>>

32 –> Not so fast, you skipped over the analysis of refining and arranging rocks into computational substrates and associated software. This turns what I actually argued into a strawman caricature.

33 –> I positively showed WHY cogs grinding on cogs or gating electrical or electro-chemical signals are acting by blind cause-effect chains, not insightful cognition. Based on having done the homework.

>> (which on your view are neither necessary nor sufficient for consciousness),>>

34 –> This is first, burden of proof shifting. Done, in the teeth of my having taken time to show the limitations of blind computation and why it does not equal contemplation based on rational insight.

35 –> That is, WITHOUT having shown the capability of computational substrates to cause consciousness, you wish to implicitly hold the default. This begs the question in the teeth of inherent limitations shown — shown, not assumed.

36 –> In addition, on the strength of a weak selectively hyperskeptical dismissal already dealt with just now, you wish to pass over the case of the fine tuned physics of the observed cosmos in silence.

37 –> But this is precisely a case that puts the issue of design antecedent to and causative of the material cosmos we inhabit. Which further puts on the table the issue of mind ontologically prior to and causative of, matter.

38 –> So, the argument you have made is little more than an ideological lock-out.

>> but because they possess an additional, non-physical ingredient, one that may even make possible completely disembodied consciousness.>>

39 –> First, the issue of mind ontologically before matter arises from the origin of the cosmos, which exhibits a known, highly reliable sign of design: complex, functionally highly specific fine tuned organisation and associated information.

40 –> Second, I took pains to show why we hold that raw rocks have no dreams, and why refined organised rocks forming computational substrates — INCLUDING neural network arrays — still have no capability to dream arising from the arrangement of material components.

41 –> That we are self-aware and conscious, contemplative, reasoning, designing etc is self evident. That this shows capabilities beyond a cosmos full of blind chance plus mechanical necessity has been repeatedly shown [e.g. try here again], to deny this simply show FSCO/I coming from such blind material factors.

42 –> We re minded, having self-aware, conscious, rational designing capabilities. What is the ontological root of that? In a world that shows itself fine tuned in ways that point to mind being ontologically prior to matter?

>> On what basis do you claim that rocks don’t also have that ingredient?>>

43 –> Asks as thought he answer has not been repeatedly given.

>> Their complete passiveness can’t be the reason: perhaps they lack the physical structures required for interface between that ingredient and the world, yet are dreaming nonetheless.>>

44 –> A case of groundless peculation put up as a counter-argument, with a caricature.

45 –> On the contrary, until rocs pass something like the Glasgow coma test and show that here is something there to be addressed on empirical evidence, the matter is just wild speculation.

46 –> On the contrary, we also have a considerable body pf experience with rocks, which shows that hey have no sign of conscious, self-moved active agency. Just the opposite of ourselves.

47 –> So, we may freely put forth as a best current abductive explanation: rocks are passive objects, not self-moved contemplative ones.

48 –> If you have an alternative that addresses factual adequacy, coherence, and explanatory balance, let us hear it.

>> You’ve no principled reason for denying that.>>

49 –> this is little more than, “I choose to reject an abductive, inference to best explanation scientific argument when it does not suit me.” And, then pretend that such a pattern of inductive reasoning does not exist — never mind that it is the basis of scientific arguments to best current explanation. Selective hyperskepticism.

>> When you erect an argument that empties it’s starting “principle” of principled reasons for its acceptance, you have a problem.>>

50 –> Nope, you have the problems with abductive empirically grounded scientific reasoning. Not me.

>> Appeals to adjunctive empirical supports for your empty principle don’t help. That’s a reason to tarry on the point, even if Bud and Weis remain baffled by the discussion. >>

51 –> Repeating your dismissals of the grounding principles of scientific reasoning do not make your selectively hyperskeptical dismissals any stronger.

KF

77
kairosfocusJune 27, 2014 at 4:50 am
Concluding for now:

>> Regarding the Glasgow, Gpuccio clearly disagrees with you,>>

52 –> GP can speak for himself, and what I find in him is disagreement with the notion of consciousness disapearing in sleep, as opposed to the issue of coma/conscious in the context of medical reference.

53 –> Where, unlike with rocks, there are abundant circumstances where humans and many animals for that matter, exhibit every evidence of active, self-aware self-moved consciousness.

>> as he has assented (to RDF) to the following statement:

RDF:

Apparently you are hypothesizing here that while we are anesthetized, or in a dreamless sleep, or have been “knocked unconscious”, and so on, we actually are still experiencing conscious awareness, but when we regain consciousness, we for some reason forget all that happened while we were unconscious (but still, in your view, having conscious experiences). Is that what you mean?

GP:

Yes.

Persons who are anesthetized cannot respond to the Glasgow or anything like it, which is why we can perform deep surgical interventions without eliciting responses>>

54 –> As it is, this illustrates my point as just made.

55 –> During an operation such as on scoliosis, it is routine for physicians to raise the person to sufficient responsiveness to get him or her to move to a new position. At least, that is what the expert surgeons I dealt with brought to my attention.

56 –> And again, you have distorted GP’s discussion on various kinds of conscious behaviour in a creature known to exhibit full waking consciousness, with the status of a rock which you nor anyone else have not been able to show a single sign of such a state. Where also, we have the ability to administer a Glasgow-like test to our own selves, that is we have self-awareness and memory of past states, so we can be aware that even while asleep we dream, and we have a minimal awareness of comfort while sleeping; indeed there is also evidence that there is an active monitoring of environment as we can be startled out of sleep by a sudden noise or the like, obviously this is protective.

57 –> All this in pursuit of dismissal of abductive inference to best explanation.

>>. Nor do they exhibit self-directed or self-moving behavior of any kind.>>

58 –> Scoliosis patients, under surgery, can credibly be raised sufficiently to respond to verbal commands. During the surgery, tests are done on responses, to see if damage has occurred, so for instance in the case I had to deal with, we know before they sewed up the wound [I think that was at about 6 hours in . . . ], that the surgery was significantly successful. Further to this, there was a discussion later that night in which the responses to questions were in Spanish, which my son is studying in school. Later, when we asked him, he did not recall the conversation, i.e. he was not in full waking consciousness, but was at a certain degree able to hear and respond by emitting FSCO/I, in an acquired second language.

>> The Glasgow indicates that they are unconscious,>>

59 –> Cf just above, the degree of consciousness is variable. Also there are cases of people under surgery in pain, and I believe some may give indications of dreaming.

>> yet Gpuccio maintains that those persons are consciously aware at those very moments (one wonders: of what?).>>

60 –> GP can speak for himself, but it should be clear that he is speaking of the underlying states of a creature known to exhibit full waking consciousness . . . and, to remember dream states etc. Rocks don’t.

>> If he is right, then we have further instances in which the Glasgow, given your framework, gives false negatives –>>

61 –> That is not a false negative in the context of what it measures, degree of closeness to full waking consciousness. Let me clip Wiki:

The Glasgow Coma Scale or GCS is a neurological scale that aims to give a reliable, objective way of recording the conscious state of a person for initial as well as subsequent assessment. A patient is assessed against the criteria of the scale, and the resulting points give a patient score between 3 (indicating deep unconsciousness) and either 14 (original scale) or 15 (the more widely used modified or revised scale) . . . .

The scale is composed of three tests: eye, verbal and motor responses. The three values separately as well as their sum are considered. The lowest possible GCS (the sum) is 3 (deep coma or death), while the highest is 15 (fully awake person).
Eye response (E)

There are four grades starting with the most severe:

No eye opening
Eye opening in response to pain stimulus. (a peripheral pain stimulus, such as squeezing the lunula area of the patient’s fingernail is more effective than a central stimulus such as a trapezius squeeze, due to a grimacing effect).[1]
Eye opening to speech. (Not to be confused with the awakening of a sleeping person; such patients receive a score of 4, not 3.)
Eyes opening spontaneously

Verbal response (V)

There are five grades starting with the most severe:

No verbal response
Incomprehensible sounds. (Moaning but no words.)
Inappropriate words. (Random or exclamatory articulated speech, but no conversational exchange. Speaks words but no sentences.)
Confused. (The patient responds to questions coherently but there is some disorientation and confusion.)
Oriented. (Patient responds coherently and appropriately to questions such as the patient’s name and age, where they are and why, the year, month, etc.)

Motor response (M)

There are six grades:

No motor response
Decerebrate posturing accentuated by pain (extensor response: adduction of arm, internal rotation of shoulder, pronation of forearm and extension at elbow, flexion of wrist and fingers, leg extension, plantarflexion of foot)
Decorticate posturing accentuated by pain (flexor response: internal rotation of shoulder, flexion of forearm and wrist with clenched fist, leg extension, plantarflexion of foot)
Withdrawal from pain (Absence of abnormal posturing; unable to lift hand past chin with supra-orbital pain but does pull away when nailbed is pinched)
Localizes to pain (Purposeful movements towards painful stimuli; e.g., brings hand up beyond chin when supra-orbital pressure applied.)
Obeys commands (The patient does simple things as asked.)

62 –> It is only at the bottom of the scale that death enters, which I take it is reckoned by one and all to be an index that the body is now a passive object subject fully to blind physical and chemical and biological forces of decay.

>> unless you wish to differ with GP about anesthetized persons.>>

63 –> I do not materially differ from GP, especially when we look at the range of degrees of response and conscious behaviour involved.

>> (IOW, it is useless and absurdly misplaced in this discussion. Give it up.) >>

64 –> It would be useless if we had cases where rocks showed significant conscious behaviour, or that humans never showed anything but passivity and no signs of self-aware, intelligent rational conduct.

65 –> But, contrary to your hoped for conclusion, we do and rocks don’t.

KF


65 "points" over 3 posts, question completely dodged, victory declared.

SHAMEFUL, MUST DO BETTER.

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

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 30 2014,06:16   

Hmm, I can't find any FSCO/I in gordo's lengthy sermons but there sure is a lot of FIASCO* in them.

What happened to dFSCI/O? The I and O haven't stayed in the same places, have they? Where did the d go and why was the d never capitalized?


*Fucking IDiotic Avoidance and Slimey Creationist Obnoxiousness

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Woodbine



Posts: 1210
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 30 2014,06:17   

RB must have the high score thus far; 65 bullet-points of hand-waving!

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 30 2014,06:52   

"crickets chirping"

Yeah, gordo is a courageous soldier for 'God', standing firmly on the hill with his plow made into a sword (or whatever), fearlessly taking on all challengers, fighting for truth in the teeth of something or other, setting a fine example for all other brave christian soldiers to follow, ALL in the heavily moderated SANCTUARY of UD that has banned just about anyone who wants to openly and honestly challenge ID, gordo, and the rest of the gang of IDiots there. Yep, gordo is a REAL man. LOL!

Hey gordo, why don't you come here and spew your gibberish, and then see if you hear "crickets chirping"? Come on, Sir Spewsalot, show how brave you are outside of your fortress of cowardly tard.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 30 2014,09:21   

Oops, forgot to fasten seatbelt, jolted out of whack.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2014,11:14   

It continues:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-505981


I love it so!

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

  
JohnW



Posts: 3029
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2014,12:20   

Quote (Richardthughes @ July 02 2014,09:14)
It continues:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-505981


I love it so!

RB's reduced Gordon to Gaulinesque incoherence now:
Quote
That is, rocks, whether raw or refined and organised, are not rising above blind cause-effect chains. That is the context in which we see GIGO at work. Until materialists can show vera causa, they have no right to jump to poof magic emergence or the like.

It's just a matter of time before either Bill gets banned or Gordon has an aneurysm.

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

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2014,12:52   

Its clearly that unknown thing that we can't describe or measure that I'm postulating, not "poof magic emergence"...

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

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 02 2014,22:22   

Quote (JohnW @ July 02 2014,12:20)
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 02 2014,09:14)
It continues:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-505981


I love it so!

RB's reduced Gordon to Gaulinesque incoherence now:
 
Quote
That is, rocks, whether raw or refined and organised, are not rising above blind cause-effect chains. That is the context in which we see GIGO at work. Until materialists can show vera causa, they have no right to jump to poof magic emergence or the like.

It's just a matter of time before either Bill gets banned or Gordon has an aneurysm.

You guys may laugh but wait another 500 years and people all over the world will praise the wisdom and the courage of Kairosfocus, pupils will recite from his writings, scholars will discuss his ideas and believers will flagelate themseves with red herings while in a worldwide broadcasted ceremony Pope Gordon XLVII ignites a strawman soaked in the oil of ad hominem to clean the air from the smell of that stinking fish in the world's main sanctuary on Montserrat.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
KevinB



Posts: 378
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: July 03 2014,06:19   

Quote (sparc @ July 02 2014,22:22)
Quote (JohnW @ July 02 2014,12:20)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 02 2014,09:14)
It continues:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-505981


I love it so!

RB's reduced Gordon to Gaulinesque incoherence now:
   
Quote
That is, rocks, whether raw or refined and organised, are not rising above blind cause-effect chains. That is the context in which we see GIGO at work. Until materialists can show vera causa, they have no right to jump to poof magic emergence or the like.

It's just a matter of time before either Bill gets banned or Gordon has an aneurysm.

You guys may laugh but wait another 500 years and people all over the world will praise the wisdom and the courage of Kairosfocus, pupils will recite from his writings, scholars will discuss his ideas and believers will flagelate themseves with red herings while in a worldwide broadcasted ceremony Pope Gordon XLVII ignites a strawman soaked in the oil of ad hominem to clean the air from the smell of that stinking fish in the world's main sanctuary on Montserrat.

I was going to note that if you have a sufficiently large infinity of multiverses anything could happen.

Then I realised that it's merely a restatement of the Infinite-monkeys-and-Shakespeare proposition, and the light dawned as why UD News will keep banging on about multiverses.

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 03 2014,14:29   

Quote (KevinB @ July 03 2014,06:19)
Quote (sparc @ July 02 2014,22:22)
 
Quote (JohnW @ July 02 2014,12:20)
   
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 02 2014,09:14)
It continues:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-505981


I love it so!

RB's reduced Gordon to Gaulinesque incoherence now:
   
Quote
That is, rocks, whether raw or refined and organised, are not rising above blind cause-effect chains. That is the context in which we see GIGO at work. Until materialists can show vera causa, they have no right to jump to poof magic emergence or the like.

It's just a matter of time before either Bill gets banned or Gordon has an aneurysm.

You guys may laugh but wait another 500 years and people all over the world will praise the wisdom and the courage of Kairosfocus, pupils will recite from his writings, scholars will discuss his ideas and believers will flagelate themseves with red herings while in a worldwide broadcasted ceremony Pope Gordon XLVII ignites a strawman soaked in the oil of ad hominem to clean the air from the smell of that stinking fish in the world's main sanctuary on Montserrat.

I was going to note that if you have a sufficiently large infinity of multiverses anything could happen.

Then I realised that it's merely a restatement of the Infinite-monkeys-and-Shakespeare proposition, and the light dawned as why UD News will keep banging on about multiverses.

Nope. Even if (by some true miracle), the ID proponents were correct... they still wouldn't get the credit.

I used to say that even if Hitler had discovered evolution, it would still be correct. And that's true, but Hitler wouldn't have been given credit. He's too... unconventional.  Much like the denizens of UD.

Can you image having someone like Gordon be correct about something? He'd talk so much that the Earth's oxygen budget would drop several percentage points. Dolphins and bats wouldn't be able to echolocate with all the noise jamming from him.

No, even if ID were correct, the nobel would go to someone like Farris: http://sysbio.oxfordjournals.org/content....3.short

Or Schneider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science....7905403

Not to those idiots on UD.

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

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

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2014,14:13   

More Mullings Meandering:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-506218

He still can't/wont answer Bill's question, though.

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2014,14:40   

And he compares Bill to this:

Quote
1933 the commies set thr Reichstag on fire, in 1918 the Jews stabbed Germany in the back, in 1938 the Czecks were oppressing the Sudeten Germans, in 1939, the Poles attacked German Radio Stations — there were bodies in Polish uniforms to prove it, and last of all in 1941, Stalin was about to attack Germany


Did you learn that one from Expelled! Gordon? You really are a terrible person and a bad advert for whatever you stand for. Thank goodness (and perhaps we now know why) you have no power in real life.

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

  
Woodbine



Posts: 1210
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2014,16:11   

Go easy on Gordon E. Mullings, his mind is elswhere at the moment. Over at his blog he tells us....
Quote
The Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society (JCHS) has produced a wake-up call video.....

The JCHS? Who are they?

Quote
The Jamaica Coalition for a Healthy Society was formed in January 2012 and consists of individuals and organizations that are signatories to the JCHS Charter. At the core is a group of Christian persons who envision a Jamaican society in which Judeo-Christian values nourish and enrich the social, spiritual, physical, emotional and mental health of the society.


Can you guess where this is going?

Quote
....If anal penetration is good and normal, then logically there is no barrier to "same-sex" marriage, same-sex adoption, educating children as to the normalcy of this practice, and ultimately punishing those who express the opinion that marriage ought to be between one man and one woman....


Homos.....homos everywhere!

Poor Gordon.

  
rossum



Posts: 243
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2014,17:55   

Quote (Woodbine @ July 04 2014,16:11)
Homos.....homos everywhere!

Not quite: "Male homos.....male homos everywhere!"  Our Gordo doesn't think about lesbians.

Actually, thinking about it, those last two words were probably redundant.

--------------
The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

  
Texas Teach



Posts: 1634
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 04 2014,18:12   

Quote (rossum @ July 04 2014,17:55)
Quote (Woodbine @ July 04 2014,16:11)
Homos.....homos everywhere!

Not quite: "Male homos.....male homos everywhere!"  Our Gordo doesn't think about lesbians.

That gives Gordo twice as much time to think about gay men.  Not that there's anything wrong with that.

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

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,00:30   

Quote (rossum @ July 04 2014,17:55)
Quote (Woodbine @ July 04 2014,16:11)
Homos.....homos everywhere!
Gordo doesn't think about lesbians.

well, he did. He shared his thoughts here.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
Leftfield



Posts: 107
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,07:29   

R. Bill-
When you tire of rubbing his nose in his failure to answer the rock question, ask him if closely-held, for-profit corporations can have religious beliefs, as VJ Torley states.

--------------
Speaking for myself, I have long been confused . . .-Denyse O'Leary

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,10:21   

When it suits their purpose these very same guys ask for small government and that it should stay out of people's personal lifes.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,17:07   

Onlookers:

In a brilliant and decisive maneuver, KF has closed comments on that thread. Melding the sublime and the ridiculous, he did so after this exchange:

KF:
 
Quote
you seem to be working on the premise, might and manipulation make ‘truth’ and ‘right.’ (As in playing right out of the Alinskyite nihilist tactics primer.)


RB:
 
Quote
It’s unclear what “might” I have in this context. You, however, invoke the loudspeaker in the ceiling to insert remarks into my comments (against stated UD policy, as I recall), have in other threads deleted portions of others’ comments and inserted your own, can ban commenters from your threads at any time you wish, etc. Those are the only forms of “might” available in an internet discussion, and it is all in your hands.


At which moment he thought it a wise to block my further comments. D'oh!

His final comments included the following bit of fiction:

KF:
 
Quote
The first time the expression:
"From your OP, and from your first response to me, we learned that neither rocks nor human beings have the right physical, functional or computational organization for reflective consciousness. In this respect rocks and human beings are similar."

. . . appears in the thread — per search (and thereafter every other time save when I cited you to object) it comes from you R-Bill, in 149, preparing a summary you purport to represent what I have said.

But by substituting the word “human being” for neural network computational substrate, you create a strawman.


My planned (now panned) reply:

---

You’re looking in the wrong place, KF. The OP to which I refer was the OP that kicked off this conversation, here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....cussion

My first comment on that thread:  
Quote
And why are we so confident that rocks have no dreams (beliefs, desires, subjective experiences)?

Because rocks don’t have the right physical organization to sustain/instantiate such states.


Your reply:

 
Quote
RB: And neither do we…


The “we” in your statement obviously refers to human beings generally - unless you are not a human being, but rather a neural network computational substrate, in which case I apologize.

---

Alas, we will never know why rocks can't also have the secret sauce.

Edited by Reciprocating Bill on July 05 2014,18:12

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,20:00   

How pathetic, sad and small is Gordon Mullings?

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

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,21:20   

Do you think Gordon even realizes what he was doing, or is just so ideologically blinkered that he really thinks he answered the question?

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

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 05 2014,22:16   

Some of his remarks were so out to lunch (such as repeatedly asking me for evidence that rocks have consciousness, demanding that I administer the Glasgow to rocks, etc.) that it was clear that he didn't grasp what I was saying, or the implications of his own statements, at all.

Later, however, he seemed determined to stonewall at all costs, running from his own statements (e.g. claiming that I had twisted his words, lied, applied the tactics of Goebbels, etc.) no matter how ridiculous it looked.

I was amused by his largely correct fretting over what a doofus he must have appeared to be to onlookers, although that wasn't my doing.

Edited by Reciprocating Bill on July 05 2014,23:39

--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
didymos



Posts: 1828
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 06 2014,05:08   

To me, the most bizarre thing is how he was relying entirely on evil materialist arguments to "rebut" you.

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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 06 2014,06:40   

But do rocks dream of electric sheeple?

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 07 2014,09:58   

and he's Meandering again:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-506595

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 08 2014,09:57   

HERE'S WINDBAG...!

KF get's asked about self-evident truths by MF

 
Quote
KF

I really cannot understand much of what you write but it would a shame to waste all your thinking about the subject. I invite you to make the case that the law of causality is self-evident with the following conditions:

* It is written in simple non-technical English using complete sentences.

* You don’t need to establish the LOI, LNC or LEM. For the purposes of this discussion I will accept them as true.

* Address the question “Is the law of causality self-evident”. This is not the same as “Is the law of causality true?”.

* Only include what is relevant.

If you can do that I would be interested to engage in a discussion about it.


It goes back and forth, KF does the Mullings' Meander, doesn't address the question, accuses MF of strawmaning, redherringeriszing, etc.

Mark responds:
 
Quote
I am not dodging anything. Do you really think I have time to wade through everything that you write? I have now read the passage you referred to and it makes no difference at all as far as I can see. It is a nice introduction to different kinds of causality. My case is that it is logically possible that some things can exist without having a cause – different types of causality make no difference to this.


BYDAND, NUKE TIPWIRE!

KF begins:

 
Quote
MF: At this point I have little energy to go in endless rhetorical circles...


And then goes on to type 382 words and then adds another 272 in a PS. Thank goodness he wasn't feeling vigorous!

Gripes include but are not limited to: Quantum! Context! and Mark being unwilling to learn.

Mark, Later:


 
Quote
SB, KF, Vivid

As my shingles is getting better I no longer need the distraction of debate. Thank you for your time. I will respond to Paul Diem as I think I can have a constructive discussion with him.

Mark


(Get well Mark)

KF, low on time, Wishes mark good health then gives him another 286 words, a footnote with 186 words, where he assert FSCO/I, that unmeasurable flag for designidness and also give him another Footnote for good measure.

All from here: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 10884
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 08 2014,11:12   

why does this separate thread exist?

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 08 2014,11:17   

Quote (stevestory @ July 08 2014,11:12)
why does this separate thread exist?

I was hoping to highlight the exciting new variant of the "Gish Gallup".

Fell free to roll it into the main UD thread if required.

Edited by Richardthughes on July 08 2014,11:18

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

  
KevinB



Posts: 378
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: July 08 2014,11:23   

Quote (stevestory @ July 08 2014,11:12)
why does this separate thread exist?

So you that can get your KF undiluted.

KF - less toxic than NaF

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: July 08 2014,11:46   

Quote (KevinB @ July 08 2014,11:23)
Quote (stevestory @ July 08 2014,11:12)
why does this separate thread exist?

So you that can get your KF undiluted.

KF - less toxic than NaF

From Wikipedia

Quote
Like other sources of the fluoride ion, F−, KF is poisonous, although lethal doses approach gram levels for humans. It is harmful by inhalation and ingestion. It is highly corrosive, and skin contact may cause severe burns.


Rich, you need to be careful, the stupid will burn you and you may be approaching toxic levels.

I wonder if it accumulates or if the body can expel the compound over time.

Further, it apparently causes some kind of biochemical alteration in the brains of frequent users. As such, they are compelled to get more. This addiction could be a problem for the entire country.

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

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

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 09 2014,08:50   

MF calls him out:

Quote

327
Mark FrankJuly 9, 2014 at 5:10 am
KF #321

I cannot find anywhere in this long comment where you show that is self-evident that there must be an enabling condition for an event which takes place in some possible worlds but not others. Clearly pointing to examples will not prove that it is self-evident.


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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 11 2014,09:06   

Another Mullings' Meander:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-506991

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 14 2014,22:59   

Ruh Roh Raggy:

Quote
P: I have a government transition dealing with, so not a lot of time. Pardon short, sharp:


Oh this will be a small one, then...

Quote
From Alcibiades and co, to Robespierre, the rape of Belgium, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and co, NIHILISM is an issue. So also is the grounding of core rights, starting with life [from conception and implantation to natural death], liberty, innocent repute, liberty to pursue one’s purpose and calling, property and more . . .

It is history and the moans of over 100 million ghosts of victims of evolutionary materialism shaped scientism turned into ruthless state policy (not counting hundreds of millions of victims of abortion on demand . . . ) that put the grounding of morality at the centre of focus.

Sorry, the attempt to ignore the sheer weight of that horrific history is not good enough by a long shot.

In fact, I put it to you that that attempt itself reflects the creeping influence of the radical relativisation and nihilism that Plato put on the table 2350 years ago in The Laws, Bk X. Which have been cited any number of times by way of if we refuse to learn from history we are doomed to repeat it’s worst aspects, and just as repeatedly willfully ignored or distracted from.

This is a deadly serious matter, far too serious for clever rhetorical games.

There is an IS-OUGHT gap, and there is but one level where it can be resolved: a world-foundational IS capable of bearing the awesome weight of a genuine OUGHT. With, after centuries, just one serious candidate on the table . . . the inherently good, creator God, a maximally Great and Necessary being, the root and sustainer of reality.

100 million ghosts are telling us that we had better solidly answer to NIHILISM.

To head off definitionitis:

ni·hil·ism (n-lzm, n-)
n.
1. Philosophy
a. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
b. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4. also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.
5. Psychiatry A delusion, experienced in some mental disorders, that the world or one’s mind, body, or self does not exist.
[Latin nihil, nothing; see ne in Indo-European roots + -ism.]
nihil·ist n.
nihil·istic adj.
nihil·isti·cal·ly adv.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Got to get some rest to prep for the policy war already in progress — the entrenched power classes have already signalled no we will not allow a honeymoon period, early on the morrow. And with implications of the Scottish independence vote on the 18th looming.

Oh, the ever present march of folly!

KF

49
kairosfocusSeptember 14, 2014 at 9:31 pm
PS: Please do not import distractive debates about Popper here, and do not set up strawman targets about knowledge, knowability and degrees of warrant or certainty; the matters linked to nihilism from the OP on are far too soberingly challenging for that.

I suggest to you that first reality is distinct from knowability and that exists across a spectrum of degree of warrant balanced with responsibility; where the long since known real world relevant weak-form sense of knowledge has been:

KNOWLEDGE — warranted, credibly true belief.

In key cases the degree of warrant and the circumstances are such that one would be irresponsible to dismiss or act as though the point of such “weak form” knowledge is false. (I here allude to the opening chapters of Greenleaf on Evidence, a refreshing antidote to ever so many common errors of our time.)

This is termed moral certainty for several good reasons, and it brings out that morality is connected to knowledge. Where also that which is true says of what is that it is and of what is not, that it is not. (Onlookers, kindly cf here (and here on) for discussions on relevant points.)

50
kairosfocusSeptember 14, 2014 at 9:46 pm
F/N: For reference, Greenleaf:

>> Evidence, in legal acceptation, includes all the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is established or disproved . . . None but mathematical truth is susceptible of that high degree of evidence, called demonstration, which excludes all possibility of error [--> Greenleaf wrote almost 100 years before Godel], and which, therefore, may reasonably be required in support of every mathematical deduction.

Matters of fact are proved by moral evidence alone; by which is meant, not only that kind of evidence which is employed on subjects connected with moral conduct, but all the evidence which is not obtained either from intuition, or from demonstration. In the ordinary affairs of life, we do not require demonstrative evidence, because it is not consistent with the nature of the subject, and to insist upon it would be unreasonable and absurd.

The most that can be affirmed of such things, is, that there is no reasonable doubt concerning them.

The true question, therefore, in trials of fact, is not whether it is possible that the testimony may be false, but, whether there is sufficient probability of its truth; that is, whether the facts are shown by competent and satisfactory evidence. Things established by competent and satisfactory evidence are said to be proved.

By competent evidence, is meant that which the very-nature of the thing to be proved requires, as the fit and appropriate proof in the particular case, such as the production of a writing, where its contents are the subject of inquiry. By satisfactory evidence, which is sometimes called sufficient evidence, is intended that amount of proof, which ordinarily satisfies an unprejudiced mind, beyond reasonable doubt.

The circumstances which will amount to this degree of proof can never be previously defined; the only legal test of which they are susceptible, is their sufficiency to satisfy the mind and conscience of a common man; and so to convince him, that he would venture to act upon that conviction, in matters of the highest concern and importance to his own interest. [A Treatise on Evidence, Vol I, 11th edn. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1888) ch 1., sections 1 and 2. Shorter paragraphs added. (NB: Greenleaf was a founder of the modern Harvard Law School and is regarded as a founding father of the modern Anglophone school of thought on evidence, in large part on the strength of this classic work.)] >>


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

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 15 2014,02:45   

Indeed,  aphoristic, apothegmatic, brief, capsule, compact, compendious, crisp, curt, elliptical (or elliptic), epigrammatic, laconic, monosyllabic, pithy, sententious, succinct, summary, telegraphic, concise, thumbnail.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 16 2014,01:46   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Sep. 14 2014,22:59)
Ruh Roh Raggy:

   
Quote
P: I have a government transition dealing with, so not a lot of time. Pardon short, sharp:


Oh this will be a small one, then...

   
Quote
From Alcibiades and co, to Robespierre, the rape of Belgium, Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and co, NIHILISM is an issue. So also is the grounding of core rights, starting with life [from conception and implantation to natural death], liberty, innocent repute, liberty to pursue one’s purpose and calling, property and more . . .

It is history and the moans of over 100 million ghosts of victims of evolutionary materialism shaped scientism turned into ruthless state policy (not counting hundreds of millions of victims of abortion on demand . . . ) that put the grounding of morality at the centre of focus.

Sorry, the attempt to ignore the sheer weight of that horrific history is not good enough by a long shot.

In fact, I put it to you that that attempt itself reflects the creeping influence of the radical relativisation and nihilism that Plato put on the table 2350 years ago in The Laws, Bk X. Which have been cited any number of times by way of if we refuse to learn from history we are doomed to repeat it’s worst aspects, and just as repeatedly willfully ignored or distracted from.

This is a deadly serious matter, far too serious for clever rhetorical games.

There is an IS-OUGHT gap, and there is but one level where it can be resolved: a world-foundational IS capable of bearing the awesome weight of a genuine OUGHT. With, after centuries, just one serious candidate on the table . . . the inherently good, creator God, a maximally Great and Necessary being, the root and sustainer of reality.

100 million ghosts are telling us that we had better solidly answer to NIHILISM.

To head off definitionitis:

ni·hil·ism (n-lzm, n-)
n.
1. Philosophy
a. An extreme form of skepticism that denies all existence.
b. A doctrine holding that all values are baseless and that nothing can be known or communicated.
2. Rejection of all distinctions in moral or religious value and a willingness to repudiate all previous theories of morality or religious belief.
3. The belief that destruction of existing political or social institutions is necessary for future improvement.
4. also Nihilism A diffuse, revolutionary movement of mid 19th-century Russia that scorned authority and tradition and believed in reason, materialism, and radical change in society and government through terrorism and assassination.
5. Psychiatry A delusion, experienced in some mental disorders, that the world or one’s mind, body, or self does not exist.
[Latin nihil, nothing; see ne in Indo-European roots + -ism.]
nihil·ist n.
nihil·istic adj.
nihil·isti·cal·ly adv.

The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2009. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Got to get some rest to prep for the policy war already in progress — the entrenched power classes have already signalled no we will not allow a honeymoon period, early on the morrow. And with implications of the Scottish independence vote on the 18th looming.

Oh, the ever present march of folly!

KF

49
kairosfocusSeptember 14, 2014 at 9:31 pm
PS: Please do not import distractive debates about Popper here, and do not set up strawman targets about knowledge, knowability and degrees of warrant or certainty; the matters linked to nihilism from the OP on are far too soberingly challenging for that.

I suggest to you that first reality is distinct from knowability and that exists across a spectrum of degree of warrant balanced with responsibility; where the long since known real world relevant weak-form sense of knowledge has been:

KNOWLEDGE — warranted, credibly true belief.

In key cases the degree of warrant and the circumstances are such that one would be irresponsible to dismiss or act as though the point of such “weak form” knowledge is false. (I here allude to the opening chapters of Greenleaf on Evidence, a refreshing antidote to ever so many common errors of our time.)

This is termed moral certainty for several good reasons, and it brings out that morality is connected to knowledge. Where also that which is true says of what is that it is and of what is not, that it is not. (Onlookers, kindly cf here (and here on) for discussions on relevant points.)

50
kairosfocusSeptember 14, 2014 at 9:46 pm
F/N: For reference, Greenleaf:

>> Evidence, in legal acceptation, includes all the means by which any alleged matter of fact, the truth of which is submitted to investigation, is established or disproved . . . None but mathematical truth is susceptible of that high degree of evidence, called demonstration, which excludes all possibility of error [--> Greenleaf wrote almost 100 years before Godel], and which, therefore, may reasonably be required in support of every mathematical deduction.

Matters of fact are proved by moral evidence alone; by which is meant, not only that kind of evidence which is employed on subjects connected with moral conduct, but all the evidence which is not obtained either from intuition, or from demonstration. In the ordinary affairs of life, we do not require demonstrative evidence, because it is not consistent with the nature of the subject, and to insist upon it would be unreasonable and absurd.

The most that can be affirmed of such things, is, that there is no reasonable doubt concerning them.

The true question, therefore, in trials of fact, is not whether it is possible that the testimony may be false, but, whether there is sufficient probability of its truth; that is, whether the facts are shown by competent and satisfactory evidence. Things established by competent and satisfactory evidence are said to be proved.

By competent evidence, is meant that which the very-nature of the thing to be proved requires, as the fit and appropriate proof in the particular case, such as the production of a writing, where its contents are the subject of inquiry. By satisfactory evidence, which is sometimes called sufficient evidence, is intended that amount of proof, which ordinarily satisfies an unprejudiced mind, beyond reasonable doubt.

The circumstances which will amount to this degree of proof can never be previously defined; the only legal test of which they are susceptible, is their sufficiency to satisfy the mind and conscience of a common man; and so to convince him, that he would venture to act upon that conviction, in matters of the highest concern and importance to his own interest. [A Treatise on Evidence, Vol I, 11th edn. (Boston: Little, Brown, 1888) ch 1., sections 1 and 2. Shorter paragraphs added. (NB: Greenleaf was a founder of the modern Harvard Law School and is regarded as a founding father of the modern Anglophone school of thought on evidence, in large part on the strength of this classic work.)] >>

PPPPPPPPPPPPPS: According to their manifesto one of the candidates of the winning People's Democratic Movement (PDM) named one of her children Isis.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 16 2014,01:50   

To be fair: This has nothing to do with the current situation in Arabia. Her other children are Osiris, Ocean and Joshua.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
fnxtr



Posts: 2792
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 16 2014,08:29   

He's like the bastard son of GiGo and Mary Baker Eddy.

Loon.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
damitall



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 17 2014,05:10   

A new game:

Spot The Mullings in the anonymous contributions to "editorial" at the Montserrat Reporter

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,02:49   

Speaking of the Montserrat Reporter:

http://www.themontserratreporter.com/time-fo....-200288

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,03:08   

Aw, poor gordo:


BFP
July 16, 2007 at 12:12 pm
BFP To Kairosfocus

Dear Kairosfocus:

Your volume of comments and the length of your comments are upsetting the normal mood of this blog.

When you post four or five new comments all at once we see nothing but you under the “new comments” column.

Readers are complaining, and these are not only the readers who disagree with your position. You are monopolizing the comments on only one issue.

While we appreciate your position on the threat of world islamist fascism, and we post such articles occasionally, your debates are turning this blog into something else.

We have therefore placed you on moderation, and will restrict your comments to two a day of short length. You are more than welcome to invite our readers to your own site –

– BUT THIS IS NOT YOUR WEBSITE.

Yours truly,

Robert

Barbados Free Press

ETA: replaced link with one that works.

Edited by The whole truth on Dec. 18 2014,01:16

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
damitall



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,07:18   

Ah, Barbados!

I thought it a nice place even before I knew they'd given KairosFlatus the bum's rush.

Now I think it even better

  
k.e..



Posts: 4539
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,08:23   

Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 18 2014,11:08)
Aw, poor gordo:


BFP
July 16, 2007 at 12:12 pm
BFP To Kairosfocus

Dear Kairosfocus:

Your volume of comments and the length of your comments are upsetting the normal mood of this blog.

When you post four or five new comments all at once we see nothing but you under the “new comments” column.

Readers are complaining, and these are not only the readers who disagree with your position. You are monopolizing the comments on only one issue.

While we appreciate your position on the threat of world islamist fascism, and we post such articles occasionally, your debates are turning this blog into something else.

We have therefore placed you on moderation, and will restrict your comments to two a day of short length. You are more than welcome to invite our readers to your own site –

– BUT THIS IS NOT YOUR WEBSITE.

Yours truly,

Robert

Barbados Free Press

ETA: replaced link with one that works.

And yet he is welcome at UD. Is UD competing with third world countries for blog posters?

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,08:41   

Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 18 2014,02:49)
Speaking of the Montserrat Reporter:

http://www.themontserratreporter.com/time-fo....-200288

Here's what he has to say in addition on some other site:
Quote
Now that my response to accusations made by abuse of parliamentary privilege in the MLA has been published in the local newspaper of record (and so will be permanently archived by the local public library), I reproduce it here, adjusting for the security needs of a troll-infested Web


ETA:
I wonder if mis-spelling of his oh so secret last name is intentional:
Quote
Gordon Mullins of Montserrat Responds To Claims of Alleged EC$250K Consultancy Paid To Him


Edited by sparc on Dec. 18 2014,08:52

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,09:41   

Quote (sparc @ Dec. 18 2014,08:41)
Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 18 2014,02:49)
Speaking of the Montserrat Reporter:

http://www.themontserratreporter.com/time-fo....-200288

Here's what he has to say in addition on some other site:  
Quote
Now that my response to accusations made by abuse of parliamentary privilege in the MLA has been published in the local newspaper of record (and so will be permanently archived by the local public library), I reproduce it here, adjusting for the security needs of a troll-infested Web


ETA:
I wonder if mis-spelling of his oh so secret last name is intentional:
Quote
Gordon Mullins of Montserrat Responds To Claims of Alleged EC$250K Consultancy Paid To Him

250k ECD is around $92k today.

Montserrat as a GDP per capita of less than $10k:

http://www.indexmundi.com/montser....29.html

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

  
NoName



Posts: 2721
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,10:19   

Really?  My on-line currency converter says 250K Euros is roughly $307K.
But really, any amount of money paid to Gordo is an obscenity.  It is inconceivable that anyone would find value in his output.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,10:27   

Quote (NoName @ Dec. 18 2014,10:19)
Really?  My on-line currency converter says 250K Euros is roughly $307K.
But really, any amount of money paid to Gordo is an obscenity.  It is inconceivable that anyone would find value in his output.

East Caribbean Dollars?

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

  
JohnW



Posts: 3029
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,11:02   

Quote (NoName @ Dec. 18 2014,08:19)
Really?  My on-line currency converter says 250K Euros is roughly $307K.
But really, any amount of money paid to Gordo is an obscenity.  It is inconceivable that anyone would find value in his output.

"Here's $307K.  Now shut up and piss off."

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

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

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,14:32   

Quote (sparc @ Dec. 18 2014,06:41)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 18 2014,02:49)
Speaking of the Montserrat Reporter:

http://www.themontserratreporter.com/time-fo....-200288

Here's what he has to say in addition on some other site:    
Quote
Now that my response to accusations made by abuse of parliamentary privilege in the MLA has been published in the local newspaper of record (and so will be permanently archived by the local public library), I reproduce it here, adjusting for the security needs of a troll-infested Web


ETA:
I wonder if mis-spelling of his oh so secret last name is intentional:
   
Quote
Gordon Mullins of Montserrat Responds To Claims of Alleged EC$250K Consultancy Paid To Him

In the url for the mnialive.com page the g is missing. On the page itself, in the sentence you quoted, there is a g. The g is missing in this sentence on the page: "The following is a paid statement by Gordon E. Mullins....."


On the Montserrat Reporter site gordo posted this:

"Time for a Temple Cleansing
Posted on 05 December 2014.

by Gordon E Mullings, MSc, MBA

The Kairos Initiative,
November 29, 2014"


On his blog he adjusted for "the security needs of a troll-infested Web" and posted this:

">>RESPONSE, FOR RECORD:
Time for a Temple Cleansing

by GEM, MSc, MBA

The Kairos Initiative,
November 29, 2014"


On the mnialive.com page that you linked to, where gordo paid to post his sermon, it says:

"Gordon Mullings of Montserrat Responds To Claims of Alleged EC$250K Consultancy Paid To Him"

And:

"Author: Gordon E. Mullings  Created Date: 17-Dec-2014  Category: Montserrat"

And:

"The following is a paid statement by Gordon E. Mullins....."


On his blog (where he used his initials) and on the mnialive.com page (where he used his full first name, middle initial, and full last name), but not on the Montserrat Reporter page (where he used his full first name, middle initial, and full last name), he said this at the beginning of his sermon:

"Now that my response to accusations made by abuse of parliamentary privilege in the MLA has been published in the local newspaper of record (and so will be permanently archived by the local public library), I reproduce it here, adjusting for the security needs of a troll-infested Web:"


For a guy who whines and accuses so much about "security" and "outing", gordo sure is a blabbermouth when it comes to posting information about himself (and his family) on a variety of websites. gordo is his own, and his family's, worst enemy, in more ways than one.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,14:47   

From

http://kairosfocus.blogspot.ca/2014....nd.html

Quote
(Yes, providing reasonable circumstances apply, single source procurement of goods and services is legitimate. One of these, patently, would be  confidential policy analysis and linked support services.)


Please tell me this impoverished nation is not spending on Fundy consulting...

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,14:52   

http://agc.gov.ms/wp-cont....122.pdf

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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Dec. 18 2014,14:59   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Dec. 18 2014,14:52)
[URL=http://agc.gov.ms/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/SRO.-No.-11-of-2012-Public-Finance-Management-and-Accountability-Procurement-Reg.-20122.pd

f]http://agc.gov.ms/wp-cont....122.pdf[/URL]

http://tinyurl.com/p52ynrj....p52ynrj

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2015,11:22   

After meandering, KF threatens folks and stands up for his hero, Duane Gish: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-553379

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2015,12:18   

And now:

Quote
33
kairosfocusMarch 12, 2015 at 11:12 am
NOTICE: Beyond this point, further trollish misbehaviour by CH is subject to removal. KF


From the child-belting man who suggests candidates for "censor of the year"

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

  
paragwinn



Posts: 539
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2015,19:32   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 12 2015,10:18)
And now:

 
Quote
33
kairosfocusMarch 12, 2015 at 11:12 am
NOTICE: Beyond this point, further trollish misbehaviour by CH is subject to removal. KF


From the child-belting man who suggests candidates for "censor of the year"

Everybody expects KF's Nuclear-triggerish Penultimation!!!

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

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 12 2015,20:15   







--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 21 2015,20:15   

I've been looking at some older UD threads and came across something that is an example of how fucked up (and homophobic) gordo is. In addition to his other maniacal ranting, notice how gordo responds to WilliamRoache.

http://tinyurl.com/3khgxaf....3khgxaf


ETA: The url was too long to work so I changed it to one that does.

Edited by The whole truth on Mar. 21 2015,18:18

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,15:37   

KF only has a moment
Quote
kairosfocusMarch 24, 2015 at 1:54 pm
AS:

I have a budget headache to deal with (metaphorical, with foreshadowings of the literal one . . . ), but I snatch a moment.

Here on is your problem:

a: Evolutionary materialism argues that the cosmos is the product of chance interactions of matter and energy, within the constraint of the laws of nature; from hydrogen to humans by undirected chance and necessity.

b: Therefore, all phenomena in the universe, without residue, are determined by the working of purposeless laws of chance and/or mechanical necessity acting on material objects, under the direct or indirect control of happenstance initial circumstances.

(This is physicalism. This view covers both the forms where (a) the mind and the brain are seen as one and the same thing, and those where (b) somehow mind emerges from and/or “supervenes” on brain, perhaps as a result of sophisticated and complex software looping. The key point, though is as already noted: physical causal closure — the phenomena that play out across time, without residue, are in principle deducible or at least explainable up to various random statistical distributions and/or mechanical laws, from prior physical states. Such physical causal closure, clearly, implicitly discounts or even dismisses the causal effect of concept formation and reasoning then responsibly deciding, in favour of specifically physical interactions in the brain-body control loop; indeed, some mock the idea of — in their view — an “obviously” imaginary “ghost” in the meat-machine. [[There is also some evidence from simulation exercises, that accuracy of even sensory perceptions may lose out to utilitarian but inaccurate ones in an evolutionary competition. "It works" does not warrant the inference to "it is true."] )

c: But human thought, clearly a phenomenon in the universe, must now fit into this meat-machine picture. So, we rapidly arrive at Crick’s claim in his The Astonishing Hypothesis (1994): what we subjectively experience as “thoughts,” “reasoning” and “conclusions” can only be understood materialistically as the unintended by-products of the blind natural forces which cause and control the electro-chemical events going on in neural networks in our brains that (as the Smith Model illustrates) serve as cybernetic controllers for our bodies.

d: These underlying driving forces are viewed as being ultimately physical, but are taken to be partly mediated through a complex pattern of genetic inheritance shaped by forces of selection [["nature"] and psycho-social conditioning [["nurture"], within the framework of human culture [[i.e. socio-cultural conditioning and resulting/associated relativism]. And, remember, the focal issue to such minds — notice, this is a conceptual analysis made and believed by the materialists! — is the physical causal chains in a control loop, not the internalised “mouth-noises” that may somehow sit on them and come along for the ride.

(Save, insofar as such “mouth noises” somehow associate with or become embedded as physically instantiated signals or maybe codes in such a loop. [[How signals, languages and codes originate and function in systems in our observation of such origin -- i.e by design -- tends to be pushed to the back-burner and conveniently forgotten. So does the point that a signal or code takes its significance precisely from being an intelligently focused on, observed or chosen and significant alternative from a range of possibilities that then can guide decisive action.])

e: For instance, Marxists commonly derided opponents for their “bourgeois class conditioning” — but what of the effect of their own class origins? Freudians frequently dismissed qualms about their loosening of moral restraints by alluding to the impact of strict potty training on their “up-tight” critics — but doesn’t this cut both ways? Should we not ask a Behaviourist whether s/he is little more than yet another operantly conditioned rat trapped in the cosmic maze? And — as we saw above — would the writings of a Crick be any more than the firing of neurons in networks in his own brain?

f: For further instance, we may take the favourite whipping-boy of materialists: religion. Notoriously, they often hold that belief in God is not merely cognitive, conceptual error, but delusion. Borderline lunacy, in short. But, if such a patent “delusion” is so utterly widespread, even among the highly educated, then it “must” — by the principles of evolution — somehow be adaptive to survival, whether in nature or in society. And so, this would be a major illustration of the unreliability of our conceptual reasoning ability, on the assumption of evolutionary materialism.

g: Turning the materialist dismissal of theism around, evolutionary materialism itself would be in the same leaky boat. For, the sauce for the goose is notoriously just as good a sauce for the gander, too.

h: That is, on its own premises [[and following Dawkins in A Devil's Chaplain, 2004, p. 46], the cause of the belief system of evolutionary materialism, “must” also be reducible to forces of blind chance and mechanical necessity that are sufficiently adaptive to spread this “meme” in populations of jumped- up apes from the savannahs of East Africa scrambling for survival in a Malthusian world of struggle for existence. Reppert brings the underlying point sharply home, in commenting on the “internalised mouth-noise signals riding on the physical cause-effect chain in a cybernetic loop” view:

>> . . . let us suppose that brain state A, which is token identical to the thought that all men are mortal, and brain state B, which is token identical to the thought that Socrates is a man, together cause the belief that Socrates is mortal. It isn’t enough for rational inference that these events be those beliefs, it is also necessary that the causal transaction be in virtue of the content of those thoughts . . . [[But] if naturalism is true, then the propositional content is irrelevant to the causal transaction that produces the conclusion, and [[so] we do not have a case of rational inference. In rational inference, as Lewis puts it, one thought causes another thought not by being, but by being seen to be, the ground for it. But causal transactions in the brain occur in virtue of the brain’s being in a particular type of state that is relevant to physical causal transactions. [[Emphases added. Also cf. Reppert's summary of Barefoot's argument here.]>>

i: The famous geneticist and evolutionary biologist (as well as Socialist) J. B. S. Haldane made much the same point in a famous 1932 remark:

>> “It seems to me immensely unlikely that mind is a mere by-product of matter. For if my mental processes are determined wholly by the motions of atoms in my brain I have no reason to suppose that my beliefs are true. They may be sound chemically, but that does not make them sound logically. And hence I have no reason for supposing my brain to be composed of atoms. In order to escape from this necessity of sawing away the branch on which I am sitting, so to speak, I am compelled to believe that mind is not wholly conditioned by matter.” [["When I am dead," in Possible Worlds: And Other Essays [1927], Chatto and Windus: London, 1932, reprint, p.209. (Highlight and emphases added.)] >>

. . . DI Fellow, Nancey Pearcey brings this right up to date (HT: ENV) in a current book, Finding Truth:

>> A major way to test a philosophy or worldview is to ask: Is it logically consistent? Internal contradictions are fatal to any worldview because contradictory statements are necessarily false. “This circle is square” is contradictory, so it has to be false. An especially damaging form of contradiction is self-referential absurdity — which means a theory sets up a definition of truth that it itself fails to meet. Therefore it refutes itself . . . .

An example of self-referential absurdity is a theory called evolutionary epistemology, a naturalistic approach that applies evolution to the process of knowing. The theory proposes that the human mind is a product of natural selection. The implication is that the ideas in our minds were selected for their survival value, not for their truth-value.

But what if we apply that theory to itself? Then it, too, was selected for survival, not truth — which discredits its own claim to truth. Evolutionary epistemology commits suicide.

Astonishingly, many prominent thinkers have embraced the theory without detecting the logical contradiction. Philosopher John Gray writes, “If Darwin’s theory of natural selection is true,… the human mind serves evolutionary success, not truth.” What is the contradiction in that statement?

Gray has essentially said, if Darwin’s theory is true, then it “serves evolutionary success, not truth.” In other words, if Darwin’s theory is true, then it is not true.

Self-referential absurdity is akin to the well-known liar’s paradox: “This statement is a lie.” If the statement is true, then (as it says) it is not true, but a lie.

Another example comes from Francis Crick. In The Astonishing Hypothesis, he writes, “Our highly developed brains, after all, were not evolved under the pressure of discovering scientific truths but only to enable us to be clever enough to survive.” But that means Crick’s own theory is not a “scientific truth.” Applied to itself, the theory commits suicide.

Of course, the sheer pressure to survive is likely to produce some correct ideas. A zebra that thinks lions are friendly will not live long. But false ideas may be useful for survival. Evolutionists admit as much: Eric Baum says, “Sometimes you are more likely to survive and propagate if you believe a falsehood than if you believe the truth.” Steven Pinker writes, “Our brains were shaped for fitness, not for truth. Sometimes the truth is adaptive, but sometimes it is not.” The upshot is that survival is no guarantee of truth. If survival is the only standard, we can never know which ideas are true and which are adaptive but false.

To make the dilemma even more puzzling, evolutionists tell us that natural selection has produced all sorts of false concepts in the human mind. Many evolutionary materialists maintain that free will is an illusion, consciousness is an illusion, even our sense of self is an illusion — and that all these false ideas were selected for their survival value.
So how can we know whether the theory of evolution itself is one of those false ideas? The theory undercuts itself.

A few thinkers, to their credit, recognize the problem. Literary critic Leon Wieseltier writes, “If reason is a product of natural selection, then how much confidence can we have in a rational argument for natural selection? … Evolutionary biology cannot invoke the power of reason even as it destroys it.”

On a similar note, philosopher Thomas Nagel asks, “Is the [evolutionary] hypothesis really compatible with the continued confidence in reason as a source of knowledge?” His answer is no: “I have to be able to believe … that I follow the rules of logic because they are correct — not merely because I am biologically programmed to do so.” Hence, “insofar as the evolutionary hypothesis itself depends on reason, it would be self-undermining.”>>

. . . also tellingly highlighting Darwin’s selective skepticism:

>> People are sometimes under the impression that Darwin himself recognized the problem. They typically cite Darwin’s famous “horrid doubt” passage where he questions whether the human mind can be trustworthy if it is a product of evolution: “With me, the horrid doubt always arises whether the convictions of man’s mind, which has been developed from the mind of the lower animals, are of any value or at all trustworthy.”

But, of course, Darwin’s theory itself was a “conviction of man’s mind.” So why should it be “at all trustworthy”?

Surprisingly, however, Darwin never confronted this internal contradiction in this theory. Why not? Because he expressed his “horrid doubt” selectively — only when considering the case for a Creator.

From time to time, Darwin admitted that he still found the idea of God persuasive. He once confessed his “inward conviction … that the Universe is not the result of chance.” It was in the next sentence that he expressed his “horrid doubt.” So the “conviction” he mistrusted was his lingering conviction that the universe is not the result of chance.

In another passage Darwin admitted, “I feel compelled to look to a First Cause having an intelligent mind in some degree analogous to that of man.” Again, however, he immediately veered off into skepticism: “But then arises the doubt — can the mind of man, which has, as I fully believe, been developed from a mind as low as that possessed by the lowest animal, be trusted when it draws such grand conclusions?”

That is, can it be trusted when it draws “grand conclusions” about a First Cause? Perhaps the concept of God is merely an instinct programmed into us by natural selection, Darwin added, like a monkey’s “instinctive fear and hatred of a snake.”

In short, it was on occasions when Darwin’s mind led him to a theistic conclusion that he dismissed the mind as untrustworthy. He failed to recognize that, to be logically consistent, he needed to apply the same skepticism to his own theory . . . .

Applied consistently, Darwinism undercuts not only itself but also the entire scientific enterprise. Kenan Malik, a writer trained in neurobiology, writes, “If our cognitive capacities were simply evolved dispositions, there would be no way of knowing which of these capacities lead to true beliefs and which to false ones.” Thus “to view humans as little more than sophisticated animals …undermines confidence in the scientific method.”

Just so. Science itself is at stake. John Lennox, professor of mathematics at the University of Oxford, writes that according to atheism, “the mind that does science … is the end product of a mindless unguided process. Now, if you knew your computer was the product of a mindless unguided process, you wouldn’t trust it. So, to me atheism undermines the rationality I need to do science.”

Of course, the atheist pursuing his research has no choice but to rely on rationality, just as everyone else does. The point is that he has no philosophical basis for doing so. Only those who affirm a rational Creator have a basis for trusting human rationality.

The reason so few atheists and materialists seem to recognize the problem is that, like Darwin, they apply their skepticism selectively . . . >>

j: Therefore, though materialists will often try to pointedly ignore or angrily brush aside the issue, we may freely argue: if such evolutionary materialism is true, then (i) our consciousness, (ii) the “thoughts” we have, (iii) the conceptualised beliefs we hold, (iv) the reasonings we attempt based on such and (v) the “conclusions” and “choices” (a.k.a. “decisions”) we reach — without residue — must be produced and controlled by blind forces of chance happenstance and mechanical necessity that are irrelevant to “mere” ill-defined abstractions such as: purpose or truth, or even logical validity.

(NB: The conclusions of such “arguments” may still happen to be true, by astonishingly lucky coincidence — but we have no rational grounds for relying on the “reasoning” that has led us to feel that we have “proved” or “warranted” them. It seems that rationality itself has thus been undermined fatally on evolutionary materialistic premises. Including that of Crick et al. Through, self-reference leading to incoherence and utter inability to provide a cogent explanation of our commonplace, first-person experience of reasoning and rational warrant for beliefs, conclusions and chosen paths of action. Reduction to absurdity and explanatory failure in short.)

k: And, if materialists then object: “But, we can always apply scientific tests, through observation, experiment and measurement,” then we must immediately note that — as the fate of Newtonian Dynamics between 1880 and 1930 shows — empirical support is not equivalent to establishing the truth of a scientific theory. For, at any time, one newly discovered countering fact can in principle overturn the hitherto most reliable of theories. (And as well, we must not lose sight of this: in science, one is relying on the legitimacy of the reasoning process to make the case that scientific evidence provides reasonable albeit provisional warrant for one’s beliefs etc. Scientific reasoning is not independent of reasoning.)

l: Worse, in the case of origins science theories, we simply were not there to directly observe the facts of the remote past, so origins sciences are even more strongly controlled by assumptions and inferences than are operational scientific theories. So, we contrast the way that direct observations of falling apples and orbiting planets allow us to test our theories of gravity.

m: Moreover, as Harvard biologist Richard Lewontin reminds us all in his infamous January 29, 1997 New York Review of Books article, “Billions and billions of demons,” it is now notorious that:

>> . . . It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel [[materialistic scientists] to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door. [[And if you have been led to imagine that the immediately following words justify the above, kindly cf. the more complete clip and notes here.]>>

n: Such a priori assumptions of materialism are patently question-begging, mind-closing and fallacious.

o: More important, to demonstrate that empirical tests provide empirical support to the materialists’ theories would require the use of the very process of reasoning and inference which they have discredited.

p: Thus, evolutionary materialism arguably reduces reason itself to the status of illusion. But, as we have seen: immediately, that must include “Materialism.”

q: In the end, it is thus quite hard to escape the conclusion that materialism is based on self-defeating, question-begging logic.

r: So, while materialists — just like the rest of us — in practice routinely rely on the credibility of reasoning and despite all the confidence they may project, they at best struggle to warrant such a tacitly accepted credibility of mind and of concepts and reasoned out conclusions relative to the core claims of their worldview. (And, sadly: too often, they tend to pointedly ignore or rhetorically brush aside the issue.)

Sauce for the goose works for the gander too.

Nimitz the treecat is bleeking with laughter.

KF

191
kairosfocusMarch 24, 2015 at 2:07 pm
Heks, yup. And if you think I would believe in God out of needing an emotional crutch, that does not pass the giggle test. BTW, the day I nigh broke my ankle, I learned the value of a crutch when it is really needed. KF

PS: Cf my recent discussion on matters ontological at UD here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com.....eat-being/....t-being

. . . this, I find pivotal on the issue of necessary being and God as serious candidate such that he is either impossible or actual; and there simply is no good reason to either doubt that God is a serious candidate NB or to think his existence is impossible like how a square circle is impossible. If you doubt that necessary beings exist, try coming up with a world where two-ness does not exist.

192
kairosfocusMarch 24, 2015 at 2:31 pm
F/N: I find the modal ontological context a rich vein for understanding how to think about God and our world. It turns out that given our evident life under moral government, the context leads to a vision of the eternal, ininite-personal inherently good creator-God, a necessary and maximally great being, ground of reality, well worthy of worship. Before you get anywhere near a work on theology much less a religious tradition. This context puts some meat and colour on the skeleton of the God of the philosophers. And, it clearly indicates that ethical theism is on to something really powerful. Oh, how a priori evolutionary materialist scientism and its fellow travellers have robbed us of insight even as they have puffed us up with a sneering dismissal of those who see what we have blinded ourselves to. KF

193
kairosfocusMarch 24, 2015 at 2:34 pm
Ponder, and tremble:

William Blake. 1757–1827

489. The Tiger

TIGER, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Could frame thy fearful symmetry?

In what distant deeps or skies 5
Burnt the fire of thine eyes?
On what wings dare he aspire?
What the hand dare seize the fire?

And what shoulder and what art
Could twist the sinews of thy heart? 10
And when thy heart began to beat,
What dread hand and what dread feet?

What the hammer? what the chain?
In what furnace was thy brain?
What the anvil? What dread grasp 15
Dare its deadly terrors clasp?

When the stars threw down their spears,
And water’d heaven with their tears,
Did He smile His work to see?
Did He who made the lamb make thee? 20

Tiger, tiger, burning bright
In the forests of the night,
What immortal hand or eye
Dare frame thy fearful symmetry?

KF


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

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2792
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,20:49   

I don't. Screw that noise.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,22:19   

Blake is one of my favorite poets, but he seems to have been batshit crazy. Favorite example of that is this:

Quote
AND did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?

And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic Mills?

Bring me my bow of burning gold!
Bring me my arrows of desire!
Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!

I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England's green and pleasant land.


Sounds like British Mormonism.

Put to a great tune, it seems to be the British equivalent of America the Beautiful and Battle Hymn of the Republic mushed together. If you watch BBC costume dramas, you hear it several times a day.

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

  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 395
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,22:44   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 24 2015,21:19)
Blake is one of my favorite poets, but he seems to have been batshit crazy. Favorite example of that is this:

 
Quote
AND did those feet in ancient time
Walk upon England's mountains green?
And was the holy Lamb of God
On England's pleasant pastures seen?

And did the Countenance Divine
Shine forth upon our clouded hills?
And was Jerusalem builded here
Among these dark Satanic Mills?

Bring me my bow of burning gold!
Bring me my arrows of desire!
Bring me my spear! O clouds, unfold!
Bring me my chariot of fire!

I will not cease from mental fight,
Nor shall my sword sleep in my hand,
Till we have built Jerusalem
In England's green and pleasant land.


Sounds like British Mormonism.

Put to a great tune, it seems to be the British equivalent of America the Beautiful and Battle Hymn of the Republic mushed together. If you watch BBC costume dramas, you hear it several times a day.

My favorite rendition (of course):

http://youtu.be/rGEeLtq....LtqtNvU

Bit far in for the start (2:51) with the grand finale begins at 3:46.

--------------
"I, OTOH, am an underachiever...I either pee my pants or faint dead away..." FTK

"You could always wrap fresh fish in the paper you publish it on, though, and sell that." - Field Man on how to find value in Gary Gaulin's real-science "theory"

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,22:45   

A guy wrote a guest article in the Jamaica Gleaner and gordo doesn't like it, so he spewed ten, yes ten responses to it on his blog.

Here's the Gleaner article from July 1, 2013:

Christianity Losing Race Against Science

http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner....e4.html

And here's number 8 of gordo's 10 responses. The rest of his responses can be accessed from this one:

http://kairosfocus.blogspot.com/2013....id.html

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 24 2015,23:34   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 24 2015,15:37)
KF only has a moment

How could he live without Lewontin?

Edited by sparc on Mar. 24 2015,23:34

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
REC



Posts: 638
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Mar. 25 2015,21:52   

One terrifying thing about KF. His greatest threat (worse than Mr. Leathers) is the "like we used to do it back in the day to the Marxists."

Now, what worries me is that Jamaican politics was an incredible sea of bloody violence. Thousands of deaths, including old ladies in a nursing home being burned alive because it was on "marxist" turf. The quotes are because, to an outsider, Caribbean politics  is damn near impenetrable-labour is right at times, etc....

But realize this man is from a region where even today, gays are beat to death with impunity, where "Marxists"  murdered and were murdered, and  go back and reread what he writes (with that mini history lesson that I just learned from a historian at a social gathering in mind).

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news....8844433

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2015,02:52   

gordo slobbered:

"PS: Y/day I had a major reminder of why I do not wish to have anything to deal with the fever swamp, rage and hate fest, defamatory cyberstalker atheism advocates and their more genteel enablers. I wonder if such understand what they say about themselves when they carry on as they do when they think they can get away with it?"

A "major reminder", eh? Chronic liar and drama queen gordo is likely just making shit up, as usual. If I could comment at UD I'd ask him what the alleged "major reminder" was and to show proof.

Hey gordo, you obviously don't understand what you say about yourself when you carry on as you do with your lies, your "defamatory" false accusations, your baseless threats of legal (criminal and civil) action by police and courts, your endless bloviating gibberish, your sniveling cowardice, your massive ego, your support of genocide and other horrible crap in the bible, your hatred of homosexuals and anyone else who doesn't eagerly conform to your 'worldview', your censorship, your flounces, your malignant narcissism, your Mr. Leathers abuse and threats, and your tyrannical theocratic agenda, and you obviously think you can get away with it all without anyone pointing out what a deranged, anal-retentive gasbag you are.


ETA: gordo's "PS" is in comment number 63 here (UD):

http://tinyurl.com/kycmfzm....kycmfzm

Edited by The whole truth on April 18 2015,00:55

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2015,03:09   

Quote (REC @ Mar. 25 2015,19:52)
One terrifying thing about KF. His greatest threat (worse than Mr. Leathers) is the "like we used to do it back in the day to the Marxists."

Now, what worries me is that Jamaican politics was an incredible sea of bloody violence. Thousands of deaths, including old ladies in a nursing home being burned alive because it was on "marxist" turf. The quotes are because, to an outsider, Caribbean politics  is damn near impenetrable-labour is right at times, etc....

But realize this man is from a region where even today, gays are beat to death with impunity, where "Marxists"  murdered and were murdered, and  go back and reread what he writes (with that mini history lesson that I just learned from a historian at a social gathering in mind).

http://www.jamaicaobserver.com/news.......8844433

gordo has said that he has friends who are "former murderers". I wonder if he ever murdered anyone.

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2015,03:40   




From here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/philoso....-415960

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: April 18 2015,07:58   

I guess after your victim is cold and buried, it's all in the past, and you are a former murderer.

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

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 07 2015,14:47   

Crosspost:

KP (KopyPastus) :

[URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/fyi-ftr-sparc-et-al-vs-the-patent-reality-and-relevance-of-wickens-organized-systems-which

-must-be-assembled-element-by-element-according-to-an-external-wiring-diagram-with-a/]http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-with-a[/URL]

Quote
A few days back, sparc objected:

How often have we seen this very thread before? I am not interested in fishing but even I realize that I’ve seen the Abu 6500 C3 reel before (according to Google it appears 42 times on this site). Just opening another thread will not bring the stillborn FSCO/I to life. Didn’t you read what WE had to say about it? And what about Dembski, Meyer, Behe, Marks et al.? Do you think they even consider FSCO/I? FSCO/I just dead and never lived.


Then the Mullings' Meander, where he never actually rebuts the objection, then he closes comments.

BYDAND!

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

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: May 07 2015,14:59   

KF has chimed in in support of levitation and spoon bending.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....-563279

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

  
JohnW



Posts: 3029
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: May 07 2015,15:29   

Quote (midwifetoad @ May 07 2015,12:59)
KF has chimed in in support of levitation and spoon bending.

http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....-563279

Magnificent!  His evidence in support of levitation is...
Quote
I would think that suppressing what was an obvious attempt to do full levitation, coming from the liberating power, was in the end far more significant and convincing.

... a FAILURE to levitate.

Meanwhile, over here, my failure to get any Shebans to obey my commands is convincing evidence that I am the Queen of Sheba.

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

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

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1620
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: May 19 2015,17:45   

Quote
LM, cart before horse [cf 221 just above: http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-565596/....-565596 and onward 163 further above as linked], and in a context that given your rhetoric of contempt and taunting terms as you have repeatedly used here and elsewhere, points to red herrings led away to strawman caricatures soaked in ad hominems to be set alight to cloud, confuse, poison and polarise the atmosphere.

No comment required

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1620
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: May 19 2015,17:50   

I am pretty sure that red herrings soaked in ad hominems is the national dish of Norway.

  
k.e..



Posts: 4539
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: May 21 2015,08:51   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ May 20 2015,01:45)
Quote
LM, cart before horse [cf 221 just above: http://www.uncommondescent.com.....ent-565596/....-56....-565596 and onward 163 further above as linked], and in a context that given your rhetoric of contempt and taunting terms as you have repeatedly used here and elsewhere, points to red herrings led away to strawman caricatures soaked in ad hominems to be set alight to cloud, confuse, poison and polarise the atmosphere.

No comment required

Canehard canard

--------------
"I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit
"ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus
"I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11110
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 09 2015,21:43   

Some light reading:

https://docs.google.com/file....dit

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

  
stevestory



Posts: 10884
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 09 2015,22:04   

Quote (Richardthughes @ June 09 2015,22:43)
Some light reading:

https://docs.google.com/file...........dit

First, let me just say, holy shitballs.

Second:

Quote
This is of course rhetorically very convenient in the promotion of the latest fashionable radical secularist "progressive" agenda item, the notion that homosexual behaviour is a normal pattern, is rooted in immutable genetic characters, and only ignorance, prejudice and bigotry could object to such behaviour and its currently desired institutionalisation via "marriage equality" -- that is the notion that Adam can "marry" Steve or Eve, Mary-Ann. (And some seriously warn, on the power of legal precedent backed by pressure tactics in an era where common sense is at steep discount, that such opens the onward door to Adam "marrying" Steve, Eve and Mary Ann, then if he takes a fancy to it, Fido too.


what is it about zealot whackjobs and 'man-on-dog' action?

   
paragwinn



Posts: 539
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 09 2015,23:09   

Quote (stevestory @ June 09 2015,20:04)
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 09 2015,22:43)
Some light reading:

https://docs.google.com/file...........dit

First, let me just say, holy shitballs.

Second:

 
Quote
This is of course rhetorically very convenient in the promotion of the latest fashionable radical secularist "progressive" agenda item, the notion that homosexual behaviour is a normal pattern, is rooted in immutable genetic characters, and only ignorance, prejudice and bigotry could object to such behaviour and its currently desired institutionalisation via "marriage equality" -- that is the notion that Adam can "marry" Steve or Eve, Mary-Ann. (And some seriously warn, on the power of legal precedent backed by pressure tactics in an era where common sense is at steep discount, that such opens the onward door to Adam "marrying" Steve, Eve and Mary Ann, then if he takes a fancy to it, Fido too.


what is it about zealot whackjobs and 'man-on-dog' action?

Yeah. And notice how it's never about sheep . . .

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

  
Learned Hand



Posts: 214
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: June 09 2015,23:51   

Endless pages that no one will ever read or comprehend. A barely-suppressed obsession with sex. And now he's experimenting with illustrations. KF is becoming the Caribbean Henry Darger.

  
DiEb



Posts: 284
Joined: May 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,01:58   

GEM of TKI

I never would have found out who "KairosFocus" was, if he hadn't used this cryptic formula in each of his comments at UD when I started to edit over there.

But this sounded as (s)he was a lost princess of the Daleks, so naturally, I looked it up - as many before me, I suppose. The truth was so boring...

Virtually all of the other editors at UD who are using pseudonyms are unknown to me - and I'm not interested who they are, only what they comment.

But when you are throwing breadcrumbs all over the place, you have no rights to complain when someone follows the trace...

   
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,02:59   

I am afraid I can't even laugh at what to me looks like a case of warped mind of cosmic dimensions.

--------------
Rocks have no biology.
              Robert Byers.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,08:30   

He Who Must Not Be Named (HWMNBN) sounds a bit like the trailing end of hounymnym.

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

  
Woodbine



Posts: 1210
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,08:44   

Quote (The whole truth @ April 18 2015,09:40)



From here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/philoso....-415960

I really wish God would do all this transforming before the murder starts.

  
rossum



Posts: 243
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,12:22   

Quote (midwifetoad @ June 10 2015,08:30)
He Who Must Not Be Named (HWMNBN) sounds a bit like the trailing end of hounymnym.

s/hounymnym/houyhnhnm

But I suspect that the houyhnhnms are too intelligent to make the comparison work well.

--------------
The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,13:49   

Quote (rossum @ June 10 2015,12:22)
Quote (midwifetoad @ June 10 2015,08:30)
He Who Must Not Be Named (HWMNBN) sounds a bit like the trailing end of hounymnym.

s/hounymnym/houyhnhnm

But I suspect that the houyhnhnms are too intelligent to make the comparison work well.

I was referring to the posterior.

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

  
rossum



Posts: 243
Joined: Dec. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,13:57   

Quote (midwifetoad @ June 10 2015,13:49)
Quote (rossum @ June 10 2015,12:22)
Quote (midwifetoad @ June 10 2015,08:30)
He Who Must Not Be Named (HWMNBN) sounds a bit like the trailing end of hounymnym.

s/hounymnym/houyhnhnm

But I suspect that the houyhnhnms are too intelligent to make the comparison work well.

I was referring to the posterior.

So was I.   :)

--------------
The ultimate truth is that there is no ultimate truth.

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 3992
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 10 2015,14:24   

Your goal, but I get an assist.

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

  
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1620
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2015,20:35   

I am worried about Gordon Mullings. He hasn't posted a comment in a couple days. Or, more worryingly, a FYI/FTR. I am wondering if we should call 911 (or the equivalent on the island). After all, he is being stalked by nefarious characters with evil intent.

Or, should I just sit back and crack another beer?  

Beer wins.

  
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2015,01:24   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 15 2015,20:35)
I am worried about Gordon Mullings. He hasn't posted a comment in a couple days. Or, more worryingly, a FYI/FTR. I am wondering if we should call 911 (or the equivalent on the island). After all, he is being stalked by nefarious characters with evil intent.

Or, should I just sit back and crack another beer?  

Beer wins.

He may have realized what the the "Y" in FYI stands for and that nobody feels addressed by it.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
sparc



Posts: 1999
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2015,01:26   

Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 15 2015,20:35)
Beer wins.

This means at least another constitutional crisis on Montserrat.

--------------
"[...] 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 -

   
KevinB



Posts: 378
Joined: April 2013

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2015,12:21   

Quote (sparc @ June 16 2015,01:26)
 
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 15 2015,20:35)
Beer wins.

This means at least another constitutional crisis on Montserrat.

I always wonder how the residents of Montserrat cope with living under the constant threat of violent eruption and deadly pyroclastic flows.

Having an active volcano on the doorstep won't help matters, either.

  
fnxtr



Posts: 2792
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2015,20:01   

Quote (KevinB @ June 16 2015,10:21)
Quote (sparc @ June 16 2015,01:26)
 
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 15 2015,20:35)
Beer wins.

This means at least another constitutional crisis on Montserrat.

I always wonder how the residents of Montserrat cope with living under the constant threat of violent eruption and deadly pyroclastic flows.

Having an active volcano on the doorstep won't help matters, either.

Not to mention the noxious fuming.

--------------
"But it's disturbing to think someone actually thinks creationism -- having put it's hand on the hot stove every day for the last 400 years -- will get a different result tomorrow." -- midwifetoad

"I am in a rush to catch up with science work." -- Gary Gaulin

  
Henry J



Posts: 5010
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 16 2015,20:14   

But at least they won't lack for fertilizer!

  
The whole truth



Posts: 1554
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 27 2015,03:11   

At UD, YEC gordo says:

"Anything beyond genuine freedom cometh of evil."

Here: http://tinyurl.com/ojaoa6y....ojaoa6y

Yet he is on a theocratic/autocratic/dominionist agenda to restrict and abolish freedoms, such as the freedom for homosexual people to marry each other:

http://kairosfocus.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com

If there is such a thing as "evil", gordo is the personification of it.

gordo lives in Montserrat and is a Jamaican, and he has said that people should not interfere in the governing of countries that they are not a citizen of, yet he regularly brings up the USA Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and things that were said by USA politicians, judges, etc., and he regularly condemns the USA and other governments, and now he even says that the government of the USA should be replaced (i.e overthrown).

Hey gordo, SHUT THE FUCK UP about the USA, you insane piece of shit. Mind your own insignificant business on that insignificant speck of insignificant rock you live on. You live on a British Overseas Territory and the USA wants NOTHING to do with you. I'm sure that most Brits would want nothing to do with you too. You're just one of the worthless mooches sucking on the British taxpayers' tit.  

Hmm, some USA and British government agencies just might be interested in your desire (or plot?) to replace (i.e. overthrow) the USA government, and that you thoroughly believe and constantly spew that: "Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."   (my bold)  

Hey gordo, are you and your murderous friends plotting some 'mafioso style' murders of people who "deserve to die"?  Have you already murdered people who "deserve to die"?


ETA: replaced a non-functioning link

Edited by The whole truth on June 27 2015,01:16

--------------
Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. - Jesus in Matthew 10:34

But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -Jesus in Luke 19:27

   
Acartia_Bogart



Posts: 1620
Joined: Sep. 2014

(Permalink) Posted: June 28 2015,13:17   

Quote (The whole truth @ June 27 2015,03:11)
At UD, YEC gordo says:

"Anything beyond genuine freedom cometh of evil."

Here: http://tinyurl.com/ojaoa6y....ojaoa6y

Yet he is on a theocratic/autocratic/dominionist agenda to restrict and abolish freedoms, such as the freedom for homosexual people to marry each other:

http://kairosfocus.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com

If there is such a thing as "evil", gordo is the personification of it.

gordo lives in Montserrat and is a Jamaican, and he has said that people should not interfere in the governing of countries that they are not a citizen of, yet he regularly brings up the USA Constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and things that were said by USA politicians, judges, etc., and he regularly condemns the USA and other governments, and now he even says that the government of the USA should be replaced (i.e overthrown).

Hey gordo, SHUT THE FUCK UP about the USA, you insane piece of shit. Mind your own insignificant business on that insignificant speck of insignificant rock you live on. You live on a British Overseas Territory and the USA wants NOTHING to do with you. I'm sure that most Brits would want nothing to do with you too. You're just one of the worthless mooches sucking on the British taxpayers' tit.  

Hmm, some USA and British government agencies just might be interested in your desire (or plot?) to replace (i.e. overthrow) the USA government, and that you thoroughly believe and constantly spew that: "Though they know God's righteous decree that those who practice such things deserve to die, they not only do them but give approval to those who practice them."   (my bold)  

Hey gordo, are you and your murderous friends plotting some 'mafioso style' murders of people who "deserve to die"?  Have you already murdered people who "deserve to die"?


ETA: replaced a non-functioning link

For Christ's sake TWT, seek some help.

  
  93 replies since June 30 2014,02:05 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (4) < [1] 2 3 4 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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