cogzoid
Posts: 234
Joined: Sep. 2005
|
| Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Mar. 07 2010,15:40) | | Quote (cogzoid @ Mar. 07 2010,16:14) | | Quote (Venus Mousetrap @ Mar. 07 2010,12:34) | Holy crap... I'd forgotten how greasy they could be. Check out their attempts to imitate the other side on the Rube Goldberg Machine.
| Quote | | Above all, please remember that the marble machine only appears to be designed. There is absolutely no evidence in this video that it was designed. After all, any visual evidence that it was designed is only that: the visual, the apparition, the appearance. . . no way past it. . . no underlying meaning, nothing but a phenomenom whose ultimate being can be explained only by those precursors which survived and explain all that we see, they explain everything. . . oops, that is, er . . . oh, nevermind. |
| Quote | I like your humor Tim. I’ll try my hand at it.
No irreducible complexity here, I mean, obviously the marble could be used as a small little round ball, and the wood could be used as smaller pieces of wood, such as firewood, toothpicks, or trash. Not to mention that you could take any one piece, large enough, of that machine and use it for a whittling stick. So obviously all pieces were used in one of those ways, and the firewood, toothpicks, trash, and whittling sticks got together with the ball and decided to self-assemble themselves into a one “self-assembled” self, by accident, of course, of some whittling sticks being more useful than others, some trash more trashy than others, some firewood more firey than others, and toothpicks more picky than others.
How does trash, toothpicks, firewood and whittling become relevant to a complex marble machine, you ask? Well, I don’t have to explain, because it’s enough to show that the individual pieces served other functions, how those functions have any purchase on the current function is only a question that an ID person would ask, we evolutionists don’t bother ourselves with such inanity. It is enough to show that a mousetrap could be reduced to a tie clip, and the question of efficacy and relevance of catching mice by holding ties in place need not bother us evolutionists. ;) |
Nice, Clive. Fancy doing some work on ID, now?
I reckon it must be like the way some oppressed minorities take insults and turn them into self-labels (like 'queer'), except they do it with criticism. 'We don't have a mechanism! We don't have a theory! Get used to it!' |
When I saw the title of this post, I was sure it was going to be about OK Go's recent music video, which I helped design/build. I have seen the horror of watching someone's work get turned into fodder for poorly conceived creationist arguments. I'm so glad that was about someone else's machine. (And what a triumph of engineering and woodwork it is!) |
Is that really done in one take (presumably after many attempts)? |
The final version wasn't one take, but it could've been. There were some human errors that had to be spliced out. It was a lot of work to film, and we plumb ran out of time. We got an A shot of the upstairs and an A shot of the downstairs. We tried until 3am to get an A+ shot of both, but the band had to catch a flight at 6am. I think one more day would've resulted in a seamless video. As it stands, it's not so bad. :)
As for what I did... I was responsible for the stuff from the TV to the paint cannons. That doesn't mean that I built it, or designed everything, but it was my job to manage the awesome team we had, and keep everyone on the same page. My hands got dirty too, but I mostly delegated. I wish I could've been more of a builder, but someone had to step up and manage. It was a heck of a lot of work, but I think the end result was worth it.
|
