Printable Version of Topic

-Antievolution.org Discussion Board
+--Forum: After the Bar Closes...
+---Topic: Dave Tard Memorial Thread started by Mr_Christopher


Posted by: Mr_Christopher on July 18 2006,11:36

Dear Dave Tard, I cannot express my grief over you recently being neutered by that "cool" Bill Dembski.  The long hours you put in to UD, making it ground zero for the scientifically challenged and this is what you get for your efforts?  Replace by Janet Reno's twisted sister?

You banned more people in 6 months than there are signatures on the Disco's Darwin dissenting list.  Heck they should put you in charge of the Disco!

The day you banned me for "being all nice" on UD brought a tear to my eye.  You put the "A" in absured and the "I" in ignorant.  Where would "cool" Bill Dembski be without you.  More disturbingly, where will UD go without you?  Down the toilet as they say in the Marines :-)

One day "cool" Bill Dembski will see the error in his ways, but I fear it will be too late.

Please take pity on us here at the bar and start your own blog.  Many of us need a Dave Tard fix to get through the day.  You can write about anything as long as it includes the notion that intelligent design is science.

Please Tard, don't leave us hanging!  We believe in you.  You don't need "cool" Bill Dembski to bring the "scientific" theory of intelligent design to the masses and you need not have any intelligence or education at all to be an expert in Design Detection and Theory.  Can't you see that?  Heck I have read your posts, you could give Behe a lesson in biology and tutor "cool" Bill Dembski in math with one hand tied behind your back.

Stand up, man, and proclaim yourself an expert on the topic!  Write books, give speeches, make money and most of all, quote anonymous friends and sources on your blog!  You are as much of an expert on intelligent design as "cool" Bill Dembski, don't you see that?  Stand up for yourself and take your rightful place as a leading expert in Intelligent Design, Detection and Theory and leave losers like "cool" Bill Dembski in your intellectual wake.

Seriously, man, don't take this in the pants.  YOU are a Marine, sir.  Would the Marines bow down and crawl away, whimpering about how unfair things are or would they regroup, come up with a better battle plan and win one for God, Country and honor?

Think about it, soldier.  YOU are an expert on intelligent design and YOU do not need Dembski, Larry, the Disco or Janet Reno's twisted sister.  

Amen.

Your pal,
Chris
Posted by: Ichthyic on July 18 2006,15:50

alas, poor Yorick...
Posted by: mcc on July 18 2006,16:51

Frankly, I'm baffled it lasted as long as it did.
Posted by: deadman_932 on July 18 2006,19:25

I weep for the Ann Coulters and Kent Hovinds of the world that no longer have a champion for their cause. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. But surely, Dave the computer expert and autodidactic 180-IQ Scientific American Marine Agnostic that believes god created all animals equally...will stand up to the occasion like the  mushrooms he raises so lovingly.
Posted by: Ichthyic on July 18 2006,19:29

er, you mean stand up so long as it's dark in the room?
Posted by: Caledonian on July 18 2006,19:55

Is there any reason to believe DaveScot's departure is anything other than what the IDists say it is, other than that they're compulsive liars?
Posted by: k.e on July 18 2006,21:55

A truly tear jerking moment...urk..snuffle..suppressed giggle.

We should all stand to attention, heads bowed, hand over heart as the proud pole (that's a flag pole BTW) on DT's 300 day Reich is all but snuffed out by the freaky zany eyed Fundy freak show of Frau DL and all pray....snicker. Another photoshopertunity.

DT you were not a victim of a Darwinist conspiracy but the Evil Empire of satanic verse chanting zombie acolytes of Yahweh...how ironic.
Posted by: Ichthyic on July 18 2006,22:10

not to one up dumbski or nutin, but uh, we banned the 'tard first!

We were smart enough to figure out he wasn't even worth allowing posting privileges, much less moderation.

told ya so, dumbski.

nyah nyah.

:p
Posted by: Renier on July 19 2006,01:13

What the he_ll??? What did I miss? Where, when, why, who???
Posted by: guthrie on July 19 2006,02:07

I wouldnt be too bothered- we're fighting an attitude, rather than an individual, although personal involvement always gives a little frisson.  So there are plenty more out there where Dave came from.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 19 2006,06:14

Wow, in retirement, DT's getting all reflective 'n shit:

(See < here >)

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My goal has always been to entertain. I'd rather put a smile on your face than a thought in your head. And in your case the latter might be nigh on impossible anyhow and I'm nothing if not a realist. I even told all the other blog authors at UD my strategy was going to be a page from Howard Stern's success story - whether from love or hate people will keep coming back to hear the next outrageous thing you're going to say.

On starting my own blog, I dunno. Sounds like work and that's something I try to avoid. Besides, what better place than right here could a Howard Stern fan find himself?

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


Posted by: Richardthughes on July 19 2006,06:44

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,11:14)
Wow, in retirement, DT's getting all reflective 'n shit:

(See < here >)

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My goal has always been to entertain. I'd rather put a smile on your face than a thought in your head. And in your case the latter might be nigh on impossible anyhow and I'm nothing if not a realist. I even told all the other blog authors at UD my strategy was going to be a page from Howard Stern's success story - whether from love or hate people will keep coming back to hear the next outrageous thing you're going to say.

On starting my own blog, I dunno. Sounds like work and that's something I try to avoid. Besides, what better place than right here could a Howard Stern fan find himself?

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


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


Blog for us Dave, your public demands it.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I'm nothing if not a realist
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



Dave, you are being too hard on yourself.
Posted by: GCT on July 19 2006,07:33

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,11:14)
Wow, in retirement, DT's getting all reflective 'n shit:

(See < here >)

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My goal has always been to entertain. I'd rather put a smile on your face than a thought in your head. And in your case the latter might be nigh on impossible anyhow and I'm nothing if not a realist. I even told all the other blog authors at UD my strategy was going to be a page from Howard Stern's success story - whether from love or hate people will keep coming back to hear the next outrageous thing you're going to say.

On starting my own blog, I dunno. Sounds like work and that's something I try to avoid. Besides, what better place than right here could a Howard Stern fan find himself?

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


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


Dont' worry DaveTard, you haven't put any educational thoughts in our heads, even while you were violating SLoT.
Posted by: Glen Davidson on July 19 2006,08:03

I beg to differ, I don't think he's being too hard on himself for admitting that he's nothing.

I love that he told the other "moderators" (how did they "moderate" anything, other than moderating (usually dispatching with) the truth?) that he intended to be the Howard Stern of creationism.  How, then, was he canned for being the sleazeball he's always been?  Yes, we know, it's the fundamentalism of it all (not that ID is religious, understand)--I think that we know now why it is that the Tard isn't YEC, since he really is the sort of person who denies anything that condemns his own scummy life.

So of course I'll miss him.  He was the ongoing evidence that ID isn't the slightest bit moral, not even according to its own pseudo-standards.  O'Leary will put on the kind of moral armor that plays to the rubes, and she seems not to hang onto blatantly false ideas (violation of entropy by minds, gravity is the strongest force) well past the point where no one smarter than Hovind would agree.  

Journalists often make good-sounding arguments, however poorly based their conceptions are.

O'Leary's looks are a legitimate point in politics--and ID is nothing but politics.  If it goes too far one might suspect a lack of good arguments in those pointing and laughing, though.  More importantly, in the area of psychology we have reason to suppose that if she didn't look like a chain-smoking dyke, while apparently having a fundy background, she might be more open to scientific ideas.  She's reacting against the more knowing/better looking/cooler than Dembski (yes, we exist) types.

Lord knows how many things are wrong with DaveTard (why do you suppose that such a vain braggart never shows us a picture of himself?).  Besides his inability to get along with people, he's probably quite ugly, and he seems to evince no impressive intelligence in any area, including in internet activities.  

But he was a perfect representative of Dembski (except that Dembski looks okay in a nerdy sort of way), both in his near-total ignorance of science, and in his incapacity to convince anybody this side of the fundies/loonies.  Denyse, otoh, might actually complement Dembski in some areas, even if she can be expected to embarrass him as well.  Not as much as DaveTard did, I'll wager.


Btw, Caledonian, we have reason to believe that more is going on than UD admits because DaveTard attacks Denyse so savagely and has stated his intention not to post at UD (maybe his wife will add that to her task of procuring SciAm, however).  Also, it took at most a few hours between the Tard's statement that he doesn't want to moderate any more to the point where Denyse was going to be moderating.  That she could be "persuaded" so quickly, and without anyone trying to get the Tard to stay on, suggests that at the least Dembski found the Tard's resignation to be untroubling, perhaps prompted by more than the Tard's slap-down over his anti-fundy commentary.

Could be Dembski taking the opportunity to rid himself of a pest?  Sure, but it's at least that, and neither UD nor Dembski are to be trusted at face value.

Glen D
Posted by: Richardthughes on July 19 2006,08:14

Dembski knows UD hasn't been churchy enough recently - Davetard has shrunk the big tent somewhat - and when you shrink the tent you shrink the cash. Cue Denyse, christian appologist.
Posted by: Wesley R. Elsberry on July 19 2006,08:21

I worked as a staff photographer for my college newspaper.

So far as I can tell, DOL has sold commentary to newspapers and magazines. That doesn't make her a journalist.

From my perspective, i have a stronger claim to the title "journalist" than DOL.
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 19 2006,08:22

Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 19 2006,13:21)
I worked as a staff photographer for my college newspaper.

So far as I can tell, DOL has sold commentary to newspapers and magazines. That doesn't make her a journalist.

From my perspective, i have a stronger claim to the title "journalist" than DOL.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What *are* Denyse's real-world credentials?
Posted by: Diogenes on July 19 2006,08:31

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,13:22)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 19 2006,13:21)
I worked as a staff photographer for my college newspaper.

So far as I can tell, DOL has sold commentary to newspapers and magazines. That doesn't make her a journalist.

From my perspective, i have a stronger claim to the title "journalist" than DOL.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What *are* Denyse's real-world credentials?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


She can quote Luke 2 from memory.
Posted by: stevestory on July 19 2006,08:41

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,12:14)
Wow, in retirement, DT's getting all reflective 'n shit:

(See < here >)

 

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My goal has always been to entertain. I'd rather put a smile on your face than a thought in your head. And in your case the latter might be nigh on impossible anyhow and I'm nothing if not a realist. I even told all the other blog authors at UD my strategy was going to be a page from Howard Stern's success story - whether from love or hate people will keep coming back to hear the next outrageous thing you're going to say.

On starting my own blog, I dunno. Sounds like work and that's something I try to avoid. Besides, what better place than right here could a Howard Stern fan find himself?

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


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


So Dave hasn't yet figured out that JanieBelle doesn't exist.
Posted by: 2ndclass on July 19 2006,08:52

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,13:22)
What *are* Denyse's real-world credentials?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Her credentials in science are that she had a influential science teacher in < high school >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In 1997, an overworked editor asked me to start writing about science issues for the faith community, because no one else in Canada seemed to be doing it. My background was in arts, but my life was very much influenced by my Grade 12 science teacher, Irwin Talesnick, over 30 years earlier. He always encouraged us to be the best we could be, so I decided to just go for it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Posted by: Glen Davidson on July 19 2006,08:53

I took her word for being a journalist.  The most I could find to back that claim up in the short time I was willing to devote to a search was this:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Denyse O’Leary is a Canadian journalist based in Toronto who has written on bioethics and science-related issues for a number of years. She is the author of Faith@Science: Why Science Needs Faith in the Twenty-First Century, which won the Canadian Christian Writing Award in 2002. She is a member of Canadian Science Writers’ Association and an associate member of Canadian Church Press.

< http://www.designorchance.com/author.html >

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



She could count as a journalist, I suppose, by selling articles which at least are partly aimed at providing information, not just commentary.  However, if she is a journalist at all it appears that she is definitely tilted toward religious reporting, not toward anything that is supposed to be objective.

Glen D
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 19 2006,08:58

Perhaps I'm being picayune here, but does she have a degree in anything?
Posted by: stevestory on July 19 2006,09:03

Quote (2ndclass @ July 19 2006,14:52)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,13:22)
What *are* Denyse's real-world credentials?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Her credentials in science are that she had a influential science teacher in < high school >:  

---------------------QUOTE-------------------
In 1997, an overworked editor asked me to start writing about science issues for the faith community, because no one else in Canada seemed to be doing it. My background was in arts, but my life was very much influenced by my Grade 12 science teacher, Irwin Talesnick, over 30 years earlier. He always encouraged us to be the best we could be, so I decided to just go for it.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


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


Hmmm....having a good science teacher in high school....that might not be as impresive as reading lots of SciAm.
Posted by: Diogenes on July 19 2006,09:07

About me section from designorchance.com:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
About Denyse O'Leary
Denyse O’Leary has been a freelance writer since 1971. She specializes in science news of interest to faith communities for such publications as Christianity Today, Faith Today, and the Christian Times. She is the author of several titles including the award-winning Faith@Science: Why Science Needs Faith in the Twenty-First Century, and is the Faith and Science columnist for ChristianWeek. She has written for newspapers, magazines, book publishers, and trade journals, including the Globe & Mail, the Toronto Star, and Canadian Living. O’Leary also manages this Web site (www.designorchance.com), that includes recent news of interest, a chat room, and links to many of the most popular Web sites on the topic.

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


Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 19 2006,09:10

Quote (Diogenes @ July 19 2006,14:07)
About me section from designorchance.com:



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
About Denyse O'Leary
Denyse O’Leary has been a freelance writer since 1971. She specializes in science news of interest to faith communities for such publications as Christianity Today, Faith Today, and the Christian Times. She is the author of several titles including the award-winning Faith@Science: Why Science Needs Faith in the Twenty-First Century, and is the Faith and Science columnist for ChristianWeek. She has written for newspapers, magazines, book publishers, and trade journals, including the Globe & Mail, the Toronto Star, and Canadian Living. O’Leary also manages this Web site (www.designorchance.com), that includes recent news of interest, a chat room, and links to many of the most popular Web sites on the topic.

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


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


So her 'credentials' are that she's a pompous blowhard fundy. Period, full stop.

Gotcha.
Posted by: Diogenes on July 19 2006,09:11

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2006,13:58)
Perhaps I'm being picayune here, but does she have a degree in anything?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


From < http://www.christianweek.org/opinions/insidestory/vol18/07.html >

"Denyse married in 1970 and the following year graduated from Waterloo Lutheran University with an honours degree in English"
Posted by: stevestory on July 19 2006,09:15

Waterloo, eh?
Posted by: Ichthyic on July 19 2006,10:48

lol.  no irony there, nosir.
Posted by: Mr_Christopher on July 19 2006,12:00

Will she be UDs Waterloo?





Sorry, I had to ask that....
Posted by: Bing on July 19 2006,12:15

Quote (Diogenes @ July 19 2006,14:11)
"Denyse married in 1970 and the following year graduated from Waterloo Lutheran University with an honours degree in English"
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Waterloo Lutheran became Wilfred Laurier University in 1973.  It's not the computer science/engineering powerhouse, that's down the street at the University of Waterloo, but it ranked 10th in Canada for undergrad institutions in 2005 according to a Maclean's magazine survey.

Her English degree BA gave her as much science background as Dembski's 2 PhD's.  Which is just about none.
Posted by: Diogenes on July 19 2006,12:54

She did, however, write articles about cats for Hi-Rise magazine, which would seem to indicate a level of biological study that surpasses many of her peers.
Posted by: Rev. BigDumbChimp on July 19 2006,14:37

MonkeyBoy really fell off the haywagon and boy is he pissed.





---------------------QUOTE-------------------
I hate to disappoint the church burnin' ebola boys but I won't be commenting on UD in the future. I just told the smarmy Canadian cross dresser to go fuck itself in an email. It would have banned me in any case as it's nowhere near as cool as Bill Dembski. The stick up its disgusting ass could make a redwood feel inadequate. I'm going to go ahead and forgive Bill for this monumental brainfart as he's going through some long term bad shit on the homefront with a sick child. I felt bad about bailing out on him at a time like this but he forced my hand. No big deal. I had a few extra hours today to finish rebuilding the carbs on my jetboat (it's back together and running great) and throw a ball in the water for my puppy. He's napping at my feet on the houseboat at the moment. I think we'll go out for a swim and then take the jetboat for a longer validation run.

P.S. if my dog was as ugly as the Canadian cross dresser I'd shave his ass and teach him to walk backwards.

HAHAHA - I kill me sometimes!


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

< DaveTard shows his couth >
Posted by: deadman_932 on July 20 2006,08:19



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
She has written for newspapers, magazines, book publishers, and trade journals, including the Globe & Mail, the Toronto Star, and Canadian Living.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



One wonders how many of those were op-ed pieces that anyone can write.
Posted by: KiwiInOz on July 20 2006,20:36

I come not to praise davescot, but to bury him.   :)
Posted by: Arden Chatfield on July 21 2006,08:36

Quote (KiwiInOz @ July 21 2006,01:36)
I come not to praise davescot, but to bury him.   :)
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


I actually kind of miss Dave, but if he's the one disemvowelling random comments right now at UD, I can see he's not going quietly.  :p
Posted by: BWE on Aug. 15 2006,19:21

DaveTard,

I think I met you in Dallas last week. I took a picture. Is this you?


Posted by: Robert O'Brien on Aug. 16 2006,13:27

Quote (deadman_932 @ July 19 2006,00:25)
I weep for the Ann Coulters and Kent Hovinds of the world that no longer have a champion for their cause. Oh, how the mighty have fallen. But surely, Dave the computer expert and autodidactic 180-IQ Scientific American Marine Agnostic that believes god created all animals equally...will stand up to the occasion like the  mushrooms he raises so lovingly.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


Don't forget that DaveScot is the lover of many men's wives, who beg him to impregnate them.
Posted by: "Rev Dr" Lenny Flank on Aug. 16 2006,13:38

Hey Robbie, isn't that a sinful thought . . . . ?
Posted by: Robert O'Brien on Aug. 16 2006,14:22

Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Aug. 16 2006,18:38)
Hey Robbie, isn't that a sinful thought . . . . ?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


For whom? I definitely don't get off on the thought of DaveScot spreading his seed. In fact, I find the prospect f'ing terrifying.
Posted by: "Rev Dr" Lenny Flank on Aug. 16 2006,16:11

Quote (Robert O'Brien @ Aug. 16 2006,19:22)
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ Aug. 16 2006,18:38)
Hey Robbie, isn't that a sinful thought . . . . ?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


For whom? I definitely don't get off on the thought of DaveScot spreading his seed. In fact, I find the prospect f'ing terrifying.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


My goodness, Robbie, you certainly do seem to have an obsession with, uh, "precious bodily fluids".

Anything you want to, uh, tell us . . . . . . ?
Posted by: Robert O'Brien on Aug. 16 2006,16:18



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
My goodness,Robbie, you certainly do seem to have an obsession with, uh, "precious bodily fluids".
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



You must be projecting.



---------------------QUOTE-------------------
Anything you want to, uh, tell us . . . . . . ?
---------------------QUOTE-------------------



No.
Posted by: Paul Flocken on Aug. 16 2006,16:28

Flank, get over yourself.  I thought what O'brien wrote about DT was spot on to the idea in the previous post and good enough to laugh at.  Don't be a knee jerk hater just because you disagree with O'brien's wingnuttery elsewhere.
Posted by: "Rev Dr" Lenny Flank on Aug. 16 2006,16:33

Quote (Paul Flocken @ Aug. 16 2006,21:28)
Flank, get over yourself.  I thought what O'brien wrote about DT was spot on to the idea in the previous post and good enough to laugh at.  Don't be a knee jerk hater just because you disagree with O'brien's wingnuttery elsewhere.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


That's, uh, "Rev Dr" Flank.

I paid eight bucks for my titles, and I want to make sure I get my money's worth.
Posted by: Robert O'Brien on Aug. 16 2006,19:12

Quote (Glen Davidson @ July 19 2006,13:03)
More importantly, in the area of psychology we have reason to suppose that if she didn't look like a chain-smoking dyke, while apparently having a fundy background, she might be more open to scientific ideas.  She's reacting against the more knowing/better looking/cooler than Dembski (yes, we exist) types.
---------------------QUOTE-------------------


What does psychology tell us about an unjustifiably arrogant dick who likes to hit below the belt like you?
Posted by: Ichthyic on Aug. 16 2006,21:36

hmm, define "unjustifiably arrogant", considering what you can learn from the single statement you just commented on, especially taken out of context of the rest of what Glen wrote.

You must be psychic.

does that come with the melding of mathematics and theology?

Your reaction bespeaks of fondness.  Is your defense of Oleary justifiable, I wonder?
end


Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a
Ikonboard © 2001 Jarvis Entertainment Group, Inc.