RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (424) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... >   
  Topic: Uncommonly Dense Thread 5, Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 13 2014,20:05   

Bill is right on top of the latest pop physics:

Quote
Within such a theory of communication the proper object of study becomes not isolated particles but the information that passes between entities.


http://www.ashgate.com/isbn....4638575

Quote
If neither particles nor fields are fundamental, then what is? Some researchers think that the world, at root, does not consist of material things but of relations or of properties, such as mass, charge and spin.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article....ng-else

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

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 4377
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 13 2014,20:44   

Pretty funny that the Disco Tooters haven't mentioned a word about Dembski's latest book after busting a truckload of nuts promoting Meyer's Darwin's Doubt stupidity.  Must make Dr.Dr.Dr. feel really good about his current status with the professional IDiots.

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"I'm a female retired marine biologist"

Whizz-dumb from Joe "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest female impersonator YEC.

  
Henry J



Posts: 5415
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 13 2014,23:08   

Quote
Quote
Some researchers think that the world, at root, does not consist of material things but of relations or of properties, such as mass, charge and spin.

The "world", or the description of it used by physicists? Properties such as those are what can be detected and measured.

Henry

  
sparc



Posts: 2017
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 13 2014,23:18   

Here's how Ashgate describe Dembski:  
Quote
About the Author: A philosopher and mathematician, William A. Dembski is a senior fellow with Discovery Institute's Center for Science and Culture as well as a research scientist with the Evolutionary Informatics Lab. A cross-disciplinary scholar, he has published widely in the mathematics, engineering, philosophy, and theology literature, and is the author/editor of more than 20 books. Being as Communion ties together two decades of his research on the relation between teleology and information
Maybe it is technically wrong but wouldn't he be better described as some kind of pastor or priest?


--------------
"[...] 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: 2017
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,00:13   

BTW, what about Dembski's "Why Theistic Evolution Fails as Science and Theology" that was announced for November 2011? Didn't O'Leary stop blogging back in 2010 to rewrite it for him? I cannot find it at Amazon or the publisher (Broadman and Holman) and Dembski lists it as "in preparation".
Sounds familiar, though.

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

- William Dembski -

   
Freddie



Posts: 371
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,02:15   

There's a tard fight brewing between Joe and Barb here:



Almost a vintage tard thread like in the good old days, worth a read and a chuckle.

--------------
Joe: Most criticisims of ID stem from ignorance and jealousy.
Joe: As for the authors of the books in the Bible, well the OT was authored by Moses and the NT was authored by various people.
Byers: The eskimo would not need hairy hair growth as hair, I say, is for keeping people dry. Not warm.

  
Cubist



Posts: 528
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,02:21   

Notice the favorable review on the webpage for Dembski's book? Seems appropriate that the quoted reviewer is Rupert Sheldrake…

  
Bob O'H



Posts: 2367
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,06:58   

No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things

So a large inert stone isn't real. Hmm. I refute it thus.

*hobbles away*

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,07:01   

Hortas had a nearly fatal failure to communicate.

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

  
DiEb



Posts: 289
Joined: May 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,08:27   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 14 2014,12:58)
No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
 
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things

So a large inert stone isn't real. Hmm. I refute it thus.

*hobbles away*

Communicate, interact - Dembski doesn't say that a thing has to be able to spread its message, so if you hit a stone, the stone communicates with you.

Therefore stones are real, the ether is not real, the voices in my head are real.

   
Bob O'H



Posts: 2367
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,08:30   

Hm, so if my iPhone is real, does that make my Phone imaginary?

--------------
It is fun to dip into the various threads to watch cluelessness at work in the hands of the confident exponent. - Soapy Sam (so say we all)

   
stevestory



Posts: 12085
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,09:47   

Quote (Freddie @ Jan. 14 2014,03:15)
There's a tard fight brewing between Joe and Barb here:



Almost a vintage tard thread like in the good old days, worth a read and a chuckle.

Barb landed a pretty solid punch, I'd say.

   
Patrick



Posts: 664
Joined: July 2011

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,10:28   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 13 2014,18:02)
And this is why we haven't heard from Dembski for quite some time: He has written a new book.
Being as Communion: What is intelligent design?
UD was allowed to publish two short paragraphs complete with a definition of intelligent design in which the cat is immediately out of the bag.
 
Quote
Intelligent design is the study of patterns (hence “design”) in nature that give empirical evidence of resulting from real teleology (hence “intelligent”). In this definition, real 37[sic] teleology is not reducible to purely material processes.


In the publisher's description - link at UD - there is a helpful review of Rupert Sheldrake: Wikipedia describes him as an "an English author,[3] lecturer, and researcher in the field of parapsychology,[4] best known for advocating his "morphic resonance" concept."

Is "real teleology" the new CSI?

  
OgreMkV



Posts: 3668
Joined: Oct. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,11:44   

Quote (Patrick @ Jan. 14 2014,10:28)
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 13 2014,18:02)
And this is why we haven't heard from Dembski for quite some time: He has written a new book.
Being as Communion: What is intelligent design?
UD was allowed to publish two short paragraphs complete with a definition of intelligent design in which the cat is immediately out of the bag.
   
Quote
Intelligent design is the study of patterns (hence “design”) in nature that give empirical evidence of resulting from real teleology (hence “intelligent”). In this definition, real 37[sic] teleology is not reducible to purely material processes.


In the publisher's description - link at UD - there is a helpful review of Rupert Sheldrake: Wikipedia describes him as an "an English author,[3] lecturer, and researcher in the field of parapsychology,[4] best known for advocating his "morphic resonance" concept."

Is "real teleology" the new CSI?

As compared to fake teleology? Maybe such as those promoted by Muslims, Hindus, and those other religions.

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

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

   
fnxtr



Posts: 3206
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,12:43   

Quote (midwifetoad @ Jan. 14 2014,05:01)
Hortas had a nearly fatal failure to communicate.

Hortae.

--------------
"[A] book said there were 5 trillion witnesses. Who am I supposed to believe, 5 trillion witnesses or you? That shit's, like, ironclad. " -- stevestory

"Wow, you must be retarded. I said that CO2 does not trap heat. If it did then it would not cool down at night."  Joe G

  
CeilingCat



Posts: 2241
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,13:21   

Same thread, message 45:
Quote
So you use a couple verses that seem metaphorical to discount the entire Creation and Flood account in Genesis? The construction of the Ark is metaphorical? The majority of the account of Genesis sounds more like matter-of-fact, historical bullet points. Not metaphor.

Mapou, does it mean anything to you that Jesus Christ himself gave a history lesson on the flood?

For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
Matthew 24:38

Or how about that in the gospel of Peter, we are told straight out that people will come in the last days and deny that the Flood happened? Does that sound metaphorical?

For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water: Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
2 Peter 3:5-6

All science so far.

  
Tony M Nyphot



Posts: 476
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,13:30   

Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 14 2014,05:58)
No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
   
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things


Does this mean that, even given 300+ pages at AtBC, Gary Gaulin was never real?

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

  
sparc



Posts: 2017
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,14:08   

Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Jan. 14 2014,13:30)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 14 2014,05:58)
No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
     
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things


Does this mean that, even given 300+ pages at AtBC, Gary Gaulin was never real?

POTW!

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

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1942
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 14 2014,16:54   

Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Jan. 14 2014,13:30)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 14 2014,05:58)
No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
     
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things


Does this mean that, even given 300+ pages at AtBC, Gary Gaulin was never real?

If only.

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

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2014,16:20   

Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Jan. 14 2014,13:30)
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 14 2014,05:58)
No wonder Sheldrake likes the book - this is how the blurb starts:
     
Quote
For a thing to be real, it must be able to communicate with other things


Does this mean that, even given 300+ pages at AtBC, Gary Gaulin was never real?

I think he's as real as ID Science...

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2014,21:03   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 14 2014,07:47)
 
Quote (Freddie @ Jan. 14 2014,03:15)
There's a tard fight brewing between Joe and Barb here:



Almost a vintage tard thread like in the good old days, worth a read and a chuckle.

Barb landed a pretty solid punch, I'd say.

Take a closer look at this part:



Do Witnesses eat their pets?

--------------
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

  
sparc



Posts: 2017
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2014,23:00   

Is there any post by scordova which isn't followed by his very own comments before any reader gets a chance to express his views?
e.g.

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

- William Dembski -

   
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 15 2014,23:16   

Quote
Do Witnesses eat their pets?


Only when no one is watching.

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

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1267
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,06:00   

Quote (sparc @ Jan. 16 2014,06:00)
Is there any post by scordova which isn't followed by his very own comments before any reader gets a chance to express his views?
e.g.

And what an OP!  
Quote
Radiometric C-14 dates of fossils say the fossils are young.

Oviously, Sal aspires to be the next generation of DI's paradigm-shifting physicists. :D
And I made a joke about carbondating just the other day over at "Science Break".

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,06:46   

Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 14 2014,15:47)
 
Quote (Freddie @ Jan. 14 2014,03:15)
There's a tard fight brewing between Joe and Barb here:



Almost a vintage tard thread like in the good old days, worth a read and a chuckle.

Barb landed a pretty solid punch, I'd say.

"Every moving animal that is alive may serve as food for you"?

God forgot to add "well, when I say every ... please see pages xxx-yyy for a list of exclusions. Pigs, shellfish, bottom feeders ..."

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Quack



Posts: 1961
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,07:05   

Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 16 2014,06:00)
Quote (sparc @ Jan. 16 2014,06:00)
Is there any post by scordova which isn't followed by his very own comments before any reader gets a chance to express his views?
e.g.

And what an OP!    
Quote
Radiometric C-14 dates of fossils say the fossils are young.

Oviously, Sal aspires to be the next generation of DI's paradigm-shifting physicists. :D
And I made a joke about carbondating just the other day over at "Science Break".

I find him horrific.

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

  
Henry J



Posts: 5415
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,10:20   

Quote (keiths @ Jan. 15 2014,20:03)
Do Witnesses eat their pets?

Is the pet a schmoo?

  
Henry J



Posts: 5415
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,10:20   

Then there was this line from a movie:

"Didn't there used to be two of those?"

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2014,13:14   

Sal post headline:"DNA half-life only 521 years, so is dino DNA and insect amber DNA young?"

What he quotes:"To make matters worse, variable environmental conditions such as temperature, degree of microbial attack and oxygenation alter the speed of the decay process."

IDiot.

Of course, under the best of conditions they considered DNA might have a half-life of 1.5 millions years.  Did they consider permineralized?  How do the tests for DNA work - do they look for individual bases or other?

By all means Sal, continue posting YEC crap at the leading ID site.  No way anybody would ever believe ID is just religion in disguise!

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

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

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

  
Kattarina98



Posts: 1267
Joined: Sep. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 18 2014,04:53   

Sal's thread is a deep, rich TARD mine.
Lincoln Phipps is desperately trying to talk some sense into Sal who, when confronted with the limits of carbondating and adequate methods of radiodating, resorts to accusations of fraud:
 
Quote
A living dog today could be bracketed by old rocks if I buried it old rocks! The sedimentation video JGuy provided may suggest how this can be done in nicely stratified layers.

Bracketing living dog today inside layers of old rocks doesn’t make the dog 500 million years old!

Unbelievable you guys will insist on using the rock dates when dates are available in the fossil tissues themselves, unless of course the truth needs to be covered up to maintain a narrative.


Why do you guys even talk to him over at SZ? He's despicable.

ETA: And meanwhile, on the same thread, they discuss the meaning of Bible verses. Genesis is a textbook, you just need to know how to read it.

Edited by Kattarina98 on Jan. 18 2014,11:56

--------------
Barry Arrington is a bitch.

  
  12696 replies since Dec. 29 2013,11:01 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (424) < 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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