Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread

Arden Chatfield

Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,13:00

Quote (dhogaza @ June 08 2006,17:55)

Now we have this dude Charliecr posting ...

Quote

When was the last time an evolutionist contributed something to science ?

The display of ignorance over there just gets more and more mind-blowing.

Some of Charliecr's postings there are a little fishy. I think he might be a closet evolutionist who's messing with them.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

jupiter

Posts: 97
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,15:03

Ichthyic:

Quote

I don't necessarily agree that one of the primary underlying factors is the old Straussian idea of the need for religion as a stabilizing influence, but he does raise some interesting points about the politics and history involved in this issue.

Perhaps you're right about Bailey overstating the importance of religion in this specific case. Perhaps Strauss applied his thinking only to the indirect influence of religion. (I doubt it but I haven't read him.) But regardless of Strauss's intentions, the idea of one truth for the elite and another the plebes has become an all-purpose neocon tenet and tactic. Think about how the invasion of Iraq was sold. Or the mania for government secrecy. Or the K-Street Project. Or -- whoops, I'm about to start a rant and I don't want to do that.

Anyway, thanks for the link.

Arden, give it another read -- it's worth it.

steve_h

Posts: 544
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,15:27

Quote

In all the anti propaganda we hear �ID versus Evolution�. As far as I understand it, YECs believe in very fast evolution within limits. IDers believe in evolution, slow or fast within limits of the design criteria. Why do we not change our name to �ID Evolution�, as we are really opposed to Darwinian Evolution, not to change over time per se?

Sneaky. Now they are trying to kill evolution once and for all by associating it with themselves. We're doomed, doomed I tell you.

Spike

Posts: 49
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,16:10

My favorite bits are this:

Quote

F.A. Hayek long ago recognized the phenomenon of "spontaneous order" and described how it arose in markets, families, and other social institutions. Now, ingenious computer models are confirming Hayek's insights. It is increasingly obvious that social systems, from commerce to language, evolve and adapt without the need for top-down planning and organization. Order in markets is generated through processes analogous to Darwinian natural selection in biology. In other words, we can indeed have apparent design without a designer; the world is demonstrably brimming with just such phenomena.

and this

Quote

But as one social welfare program after another succumbed to its unintended consequences, they recognized the limits of governmental intervention.

However, based on jupiter's post, what it seems has replaced the neo-cons' recognition of the limits of governmental intervention is an attitude of, "We recoginze the limits, but don't care, 'cause we know what's best for all of you!"

When did the neo-cons become Liberals?

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,16:18

Jupiter-

I posted a bit about Strauss here quite a while back; here's the link:

http://www.antievolution.org/cgi-bin....;t=1122

there's a couple of perspectives on Strauss' history and beliefs there.

Quote

When did the neo-cons become Liberals?

Spike -

did you ever consider the possibility that the elitism profered as characteristic of liberals was actually a projection of the neocons themselves?

"liberal" wasn't a dirty word until the neocons made it one. don't confuse a neocon with a true conservative. Entirely different animal.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

Richardthughes

Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,16:38

*** Welcome interlopers from Uncommonly Dense ***

Thanks for popping over; we hope the life rafts were comfortable. Although we're atheists who live in a moral vacuum, for some reason we�ve created this little leaflet to help you continue your life of promoting religion and denying science.

Life after ID

�My my, at waterloo napoleon did surrender
Oh yeah, and I have met my destiny in quite a similar way
The history book on the shelf
Is always repeating itself� � ABBA

Life in many ways is circular. As the, er mighty phoenix of ID rose from creationism�s ashes, so you can crumble back there. Before you get all upset, please consider the upside:

� Still no science
� MORE Jesus
� The books are the same � there�s just a little cut and paste
� Probably the same faces
� You can still meet in a church
� You can still give your findings in the church

A plus for you is that you are no longer �bearing false witness� � I know you�ve all been internally conflicted about that. *rolls eyes*

Anyhoo, here�s the mother lode:

http://www.rae.org/revevlnk.html

Please understand, we appreciate your work. The comedic genius that is ID is both hilarious and touching � we think that we�ve come so far and yet there are those who long for the dark ages. And Davescott, you will always have a special place in my heart. If Fox news had you (after O�Reilly would be the perfect slot) I�d pay a subscription to watch. You could do expos�s on 2 year old internet frauds with badly photo-shopped marines and suchlike. TV gold � if you�re reading this Murdoch, TV GOLD.

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

Spike

Posts: 49
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,17:07

Ichthyic,

I recognize that the author is probably a conservative (considering the original source of the article: Reason magazine, a conservative rag that bills itself as libertarian) and the folks he writes about are neo-cons.

I make my own assessment of liberals based on the policies they promote and their methodologies for implementing those policies. I have yet to meet an advocate of (modern) liberalism in government who didn't let it be known that while, perhaps, he was not the one to tell me how best to live my life, the bureaucrats in the agency he was endorsing should do so.

And while I do not disagree that there are many people in government agencies who are experts in their fields and do know more about those subjects than I do, I will not allow even the most benevolent dictatorship over my liberty. If something is true, conservatives and liberals ought to be able to make a better case for it than, �We want to protect you from yourselves.�

(I use �modern� as a qualifier for liberal to distinguish from classical liberals such as Jefferson, Madison, and Adam Smith.)

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,17:10

Quote

If something is true, conservatives and liberals ought to be able to make a better case for it than, �We want to protect you from yourselves.�

I might use the term pragmatic, practical, or efficient, rather than "true", but otherwise I absolutely agree with you. �

truth is not something that is within the purview of a politician, regardless of whether they think so or not.

Heck, I think most politicians would be hard pressed to present a case of "correctness", let alone "truth".

I'm usually more than satisfied if they can simply present a case that balances needs, using actual evidence, which is rare enough these days.

oh, i suppose i should add "non-falsified" evidence too.

Edit:

pet peeve -

I see this quite frequently, both here and on PT, and lots of other places, but:

Quote

I make my own assessment of liberals based on the policies they promote and their methodologies for implementing those policies

"methodology" is the study of method, like "ichthyology" is the study of fish.

the correct term to use here is simply "methods".

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

dhogaza

Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,18:22

Quote

I make my own assessment of liberals based on the policies they promote and their methodologies for implementing those policies. I have yet to meet an advocate of (modern) liberalism in government who didn't let it be known that while, perhaps, he was not the one to tell me how best to live my life, the bureaucrats in the agency he was endorsing should do so.

This can't be allowed to pass unchallenged.

Give us some specific examples, please. How are liberals in government telling you how to live YOUR life.

Again, be specific or (feeling rude) STFU. Of course, since you've actually experienced liberals telling you how you should live your life, you won't be offended by my request. You won't STFU because, of course, your life is full of personal examples of liberal politicians telling you how to live your personal life.

So - lay it out there, dude! I'm 52, and I've never experienced the phenomena you describe, so I'm truly, honestly interested in your examples.

dhogaza

Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,18:32

Quote

I make my own assessment of liberals based on the policies they promote and their methodologies for implementing those policies. I have yet to meet an advocate of (modern) liberalism in government who didn't let it be known that while, perhaps, he was not the one to tell me how best to live my life, the bureaucrats in the agency he was endorsing should do so.

Of course, we all know it is liberals who tell us how to live our lives. Obviously, liberals tell us we must not have sex with someone of the same gender as we are. Liberals tell us we shouldn't enter into legally-binding life-long relationships with someone of our own gender. Liberals tell us we shouldn't consume recreational drugs. Liberals suggest that Christians in our country are #1 and that Christian non-profits should be paid to help the poor while trying their best to convert them to Christianity. Liberals insist that Texas should have the right to send gay men who have sex in their own home to prison for lengthy periods of time.

Yes, liberals are those who want government to control our lives.

Not conservatives.

Fortunately, I don't own an irony meter, so mine's not broken.

But I do own an honesty meter, and, Spike dear, you've busted it to bits.

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,19:12

before this gets going any farther:

I've had my fill of the liberal vs. neocon flame wars.

that said...

play through.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

keiths

Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,19:23

Quote

"methodology" is the study of method, like "ichthyology" is the study of fish. �The correct term to use here is simply "methods".

Sir Fishy,

I don't usually find myself disagreeing with you, but in this case I must. �"Methodology" is legitimately used to refer to a set of practices or procedures, both in my field of engineering and in the language at large (see �here and here). �Think of it as analogous to the word "ideology".

Having said that, I agree that "methods" would have sounded better than "methodologies" in Spike's sentence.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

k.e

Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,19:26

Hey Guys I JUST Remembered why Dembski forgot what he said before he called PvM a scummy quote miner on PT.

His doctor was Spike Milligan . Q series ..ah those were the days.

Quote

DOCTOR (MILLIGAN): (Getting rapidly out of his chair and staring intensely at camera) This is a doctor sketch! (Eyes patient suspiciously) What do you want?

PATIENT: Doctor, do you have anything for Amnesia?

DOCTOR: (Incredulous) For WHAT?

(Patient scratches his head)

MILLIGAN: (Grinning, to camera, out of character) For people with bad memories, here it is again!

PATIENT: Here's what again?

DOCTOR: (Forgetting) Erm...er...(gives withering, cross-eyed look to camera followed by a freeze-frame!!!

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

k.e

Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,19:38

Change ID to IE?
Howabout...

Predictive Interdimensional Directives and Demskian Liturgical Expectations ....PIDDLE

drip drip drip

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,19:45

Quote

I don't usually find myself disagreeing with you, but in this case I must. �"Methodology" is legitimately used to refer to a set of practices or procedures, both in my field of engineering and in the language at large (see �here and here). �Think of it as analogous to the word "ideology".

actually, I both agree and disagree. �The usage you cite in the dictionary reference refers to a general "set" of inclusive methods for entire disciplines, not a specific method(s) used in a study, for example. �To get more specific, you don't read a published scientific article with a "methodology" section in it, instead there is a "methods" section. �
That's why the distinction is useful, not only to seperate what I just described above, but also to identify the specific field that involves itself with the study of methods (which, actually, in this case would more commonly be refered to as "methodology" in the general sense in which you refer to it, and as the first definition in your dictionary reference). �However, it would be odd to say that the field of methodology involves the study of methodologies.

I'm not sure if that's at all clear? �I can try again if not.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

djmullen

Posts: 327
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 08 2006,20:04

Quote (keiths @ June 08 2006,05:45)

Quote

Anybody know Freeman Dyson's email address?

It's dyson@ias.edu. �He's at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ.

Quote

Anybody know Freeman Dyson's email address?

It's dyson@ias.edu. �He's at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ.

I wrote him and received this reply:

"Sorry to disappoint you but I have no comment. � F. Dyson."

GCT

Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,01:35

From the dumb as rocks thread again.

Quote

Second one, obviously. It looks like other objects we know to have been made by the natives he�s looking for. I don�t see why someone would have to result to the explanatory filter to make that conclusion.

Fine. Further investigation finds that the artifact was carved 300 million years ago. Presume there is no mistake in the date. Now what are your thoughts on its origin? -ds

Comment by Tiax � June 8, 2006 @ 10:33 am

Yeah. And what if we found a pre-Cambrian rabbit? Huh? Then what?

bourgeois_rage

Posts: 117
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,02:23

Quote

# 15 You�re right, saying that evolution did it is very much like saying God dit it.

If evolution did it, then who/what created evolution? How come they never have to answer that one?

Comment by Lurker � June 8, 2006 @ 11:58 pm

Ba doom ching!

Clicky Click

--------------
Overwhelming Evidence: Apply directly to the forehead.

Renier

Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,03:00

Quote

(detailed step by step accounts at the molecular level of how individual species evolved by RM+NS alone)

this call for evidence from the same link that rage quoted. Anyone here thinks that even if we could produce such an arm and a leg, from say Bacteria to Fish, that it would stil not convince the fundies? They don't really get it, do they?

Renier

Posts: 276
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,03:05

Quote

It seems that as JS Bach always wrote thanks to Jesus on his manuscripts, so there is an obligation when biologists find amazing things, to give homage somewhere in their paper to the almighty creator EVOLUTION. Otherwise the ignorant �creationists� may give praise where it is not deserved.

from here

Translation :
Sob, snif, boohoo... I want Jeebus to get the praise for this... it's just so unfair!

k.e

Posts: 1948
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,04:00

Nah they're not Jeebus groupy personality cultists they want to praise Sun Myung Moon..... otherwise known as GOD

--------------
The conservative has but little to fear from the man whose reason is the servant of his passions, but let him beware of him in whom reason has become the greatest and most terrible of the passions.These are the wreckers of outworn empires and civilisations, doubters, disintegrators, deicides.Haldane

stevestory

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,04:05

Quote

If evolution did it, then who/what created evolution? How come they never have to answer that one?

Comment by Lurker � June 8, 2006 @ 11:58 pm

LOL that's great. And if we came from evolution, why are there still evolutions?!?!?

stevestory

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,04:18

I wake up this morning to find some new gems:

Quote

1.

Michelle Malkin is awesome. If Anne Coulter is too brash for you there�s always Michelle instead.

Comment by DaveScot � June 8, 2006 @ 10:57 pm

Quote

I got to thinking today about how science is becoming more corrupt, especially modern medicine, and I realized that it is related to the fact that science (scientism) is the religion of our society. I believe every society has a religion. People are in denial if they think it isn�t so. Man is a religious being. If you aren�t conscious of your religion then you are unconscious of it. No matter that a majority of Americans are Christian, science is our societal religion. And, just like the Catholic Church in days of yore, it is a monopoly. It seeks to gain and maintain top position as the only state religion. As it has almost absolute power, it has become more and more corrupt, because that�s what power does.

Comment by avocationist � June 8, 2006 @ 9:56 pm

Quote

Atheism/liberalism is indeed a religion. I can attest to this because I was once an avid devotee.

Darwinism is this religion�s 19th-century creation myth, posing as science, despite the fact that Darwinism�s basic propositions are incoherent in light of modern science.

Moral relativism is this religion�s moral code. But this is transparently self-refuting. Moral relativism is a truth claim about the nature of morality, which says that no truth claim about the nature of morality is valid.

The worst part is that this nihilistic and illogical religion has been established as the State Religion by intellectuals and the judicial system. No heresy or dissent is permitted.

Comment by GilDodgen � June 8, 2006 @ 10:07 pm

If no dissent or heresy is permitted, how am I getting this comment? Was it snuck out by members of la Resistance? Transparently self-refuting indeed.

Irony number 2: This comment is being made on Uncommonly Dense, where no dissent or heresy is permitted.

GCT

Posts: 1001
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink)

Posted: June 09 2006,05:17

http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1197

Quote

The Christian religion, for example, frowns on lying and premarital sex.

	Antievolution.org :: Antievolution.org Discussion Board The Critic's Resource on Antievolution