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

Antievolution.org Discussion Board > From the Panda's Thumb > After the Bar Closes... > Uncommonly Dense Thread 5

Pages: (527) < ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... >

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,10:43    Fuck me, who's next? Byers?

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,10:52    Joe: Quote The problem is lack of evidence for natural selection being a designer mimic. Not a problem for biology, since biologic phenomena are cladistically organized.  Design has never been observed to be so (including technologic evolution, of course). The big problem for creationism is explaining how design is an evolution mimic.  "Evolution" is hardly the explanation, since the whole point of design is to get away from biologic evolution's limits.*  Life, for one, does not. Glen Davidson *To be done creatively, or, what's that word?  To be creation. -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Ptaylor Posts: 1180 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,14:29    Joe dominates the comments in his thread, and gives us this gem:   Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… I think he means but don't hold your breath. UD link -------------- We no longer say: “Another day; another bad day for Darwinism.” We now say: “Another day since the time Darwinism was disproved.” -PaV, Uncommon Descent, 19 June 2016

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,14:29    Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 28 2014,05:42) Chubs gets a guest post at UD! http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....st-post And he doesn't swear once! (yet). He does a great job of showing how barren ID is, it is fine with lots of stuff being there or not, doesn't predict anything, does like Standard evolutionary mechanisms but proffers none of its own (brace for 'Desine is teh mekunism' numb-nutsery). Editz. Bingo! Quote 20 Joe January 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm Eric- Thank you. True ID is not a mechanistic theory but that does not stop design from being a mechanism. -------------- 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

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,14:42    Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 28 2014,14:29) Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 28 2014,05:42) Chubs gets a guest post at UD! http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....st-post And he doesn't swear once! (yet). He does a great job of showing how barren ID is, it is fine with lots of stuff being there or not, doesn't predict anything, does like Standard evolutionary mechanisms but proffers none of its own (brace for 'Desine is teh mekunism' numb-nutsery). Editz. Bingo! Quote 20 Joe January 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm Eric- Thank you. True ID is not a mechanistic theory but that does not stop design from being a mechanism. And they're against equivocation: Quote Honest question: If your theory thrives on rampant equivocation, what is the incentive to seek clarity? I seriously was wondering when I read that if this was one of the few remaining anti-IDiots.  Next line showed that it wasn't. Yes, design produces the same patterns and evidences of evolution (compatible with biologic evolution, you know--not that anything of the sort has ever been seen, but Designer can do anything so evidence is hardly an issue), and ID isn't mechanistic but can be.  Damn those evolutionists and their equivocations! Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,15:23    Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 28 2014,14:29) Joe dominates the comments in his thread, and gives us this gem:     Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… I think he means but don't hold your breath. UD link JoeTard has posted the first chapter of his "book" on his blog. He took the first entry from Theobald's "29+ Evidences for Macroevolution" and did a Word replace of "common descent" with "common design".     Even with that he fucked up a few entries a la "cdesignproponentist" Maybe he can get O'Dreary to be his proofreader, teach him how to rite gud. ETA:  looks like it's a reprint of something he did back in 2007. -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,15:30    Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 28 2014,14:29)   Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 28 2014,05:42) Chubs gets a guest post at UD! http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....st-post And he doesn't swear once! (yet). He does a great job of showing how barren ID is, it is fine with lots of stuff being there or not, doesn't predict anything, does like Standard evolutionary mechanisms but proffers none of its own (brace for 'Desine is teh mekunism' numb-nutsery). Editz. Bingo!   Quote 20 Joe January 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm Eric- Thank you. True ID is not a mechanistic theory but that does not stop design from being a mechanism. Eric Anderson has the sack to correct Joe and tell him design is not a mechanism.   Quote I think I understand what you are saying. I don’t mean to nitpick definitions too much, but in the design field we typically speak of “design processes” or “design approaches“, rather than a “design mechanism”. There are good reasons for that terminology. A design approach or a design process can make use of mechanisms or implement mechanisms, but the design itself is typically not thought of as a “mechanism.” How will JoeTard react to being called down by one of his IDiot buddies? -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

socle Posts: 322 Joined: July 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,16:11    Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 28 2014,14:29) Joe dominates the comments in his thread, and gives us this gem:   Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… I think he means but don't hold your breath. UD link Please please please let this happen.  Joe, I will tip you 1000 dogecoin if you finish this book and KF posts a review of it on UD.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,16:36    Quote (socle @ Jan. 28 2014,16:11) Quote (Ptaylor @ Jan. 28 2014,14:29) Joe dominates the comments in his thread, and gives us this gem:     Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… I think he means but don't hold your breath. UD link Please please please let this happen.  Joe, I will tip you 1000 dogecoin if you finish this book and KF posts a review of it on UD. So Tard... Wow....Such ignorant..Much foolish..Amaze..So swearing. -------------- "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

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,17:15    Hey, it's giving me a lot more hits on my blog.  Joe really is silly, sending people to compare what he says to what is real. I guess it's time to cross post my ID is Anti-evolution opening. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

REC Posts: 638 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,17:33    Quote 30 Joe January 28, 2014 at 3:56 pm Mapou, Some of the evo responses are priceless. One guy actually chides the OP for not saying what ID predicts, not realizing that is not the topic. Anything to distract from the facts, I guess. Another guy sez that natural selection is a designer because of his misunderstanding of the way we classify phenomena. Again anything to avoid the actual topic- look at LarTanner’s “response” (#15) Classic and priceless… I'm not sure I saw any "evos" reply. KF seems similarly puzzled: Quote 31 kairosfocusJanuary 28, 2014 at 4:56 pm Joe, where are those responses? KF Joe, misrepresenting what people say may work across blogs (e.g what you do to TSZ at UD). Within the same thread, even KF's skeptical.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,17:59    Quote (REC @ Jan. 28 2014,17:33) Quote 30 Joe January 28, 2014 at 3:56 pm Mapou, Some of the evo responses are priceless. One guy actually chides the OP for not saying what ID predicts, not realizing that is not the topic. Anything to distract from the facts, I guess. Another guy sez that natural selection is a designer because of his misunderstanding of the way we classify phenomena. Again anything to avoid the actual topic- look at LarTanner’s “response” (#15) Classic and priceless… I'm not sure I saw any "evos" reply. KF seems similarly puzzled: Quote 31 kairosfocusJanuary 28, 2014 at 4:56 pm Joe, where are those responses? KF Joe, misrepresenting what people say may work across blogs (e.g what you do to TSZ at UD). Within the same thread, even KF's skeptical. Are where they just insta-banned? -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

REC Posts: 638 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,18:06    Quote (Woodbine @ Jan. 28 2014,10:43) Fuck me, who's next? Byers? PLEASE let it be Mapou!!! Crotchety, cursy, and batshit insane: http://rebelscience.blogspot.com/....pot.com Quote In Part I, I gave an interpretation of verses 1 to 7 of the third chapter of the book of Zechariah. I claimed that Joshua the high priest is a metaphor for a sensorimotor mechanism in the brain's sequence memory. I wrote that the Joshua chapter was a continuation (or complement) of the metaphors found in the message to Sardis in the book of Revelation. I claimed that the Biblical model of perceptual learning sharply contradicts modern statistical approaches to machine learning.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,18:49    Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 28 2014,15:29) Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 28 2014,05:42) Chubs gets a guest post at UD! http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....st-post And he doesn't swear once! (yet). He does a great job of showing how barren ID is, it is fine with lots of stuff being there or not, doesn't predict anything, does like Standard evolutionary mechanisms but proffers none of its own (brace for 'Desine is teh mekunism' numb-nutsery). Editz. Bingo! Quote 20 Joe January 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm Eric- Thank you. True ID is not a mechanistic theory but that does not stop design from being a mechanism. John beated me to it. So I will post my favorite Joe comments Numbar Too: Quote In the next court case the evos and ACLU are going to have to deal with the facts presented in the OP. And if they don’t then they will fail- if they do they will also fail. We are Doomed! Numbar Three: Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… It's sad that nothing will come of it. This 'book' would be hilarious!

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,18:51    Quote One strawman wrt ID not being a mechanistic theory is that the antiIDists take that and say that means ID desn’t have any mechanisms. As if… Please Proceed, Joe!

Texas Teach Posts: 2084 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,19:28    Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 28 2014,18:49) Quote (JohnW @ Jan. 28 2014,15:29) Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 28 2014,05:42) Chubs gets a guest post at UD! http://www.uncommondescent.com/science....st-post And he doesn't swear once! (yet). He does a great job of showing how barren ID is, it is fine with lots of stuff being there or not, doesn't predict anything, does like Standard evolutionary mechanisms but proffers none of its own (brace for 'Desine is teh mekunism' numb-nutsery). Editz. Bingo!   Quote 20 Joe January 28, 2014 at 12:47 pm Eric- Thank you. True ID is not a mechanistic theory but that does not stop design from being a mechanism. John beated me to it. So I will post my favorite Joe comments Numbar Too:   Quote In the next court case the evos and ACLU are going to have to deal with the facts presented in the OP. And if they don’t then they will fail- if they do they will also fail. We are Doomed! Numbar Three:   Quote And FYI- I have started writing a book titled “On the Origin of Species by Means of Intelligent Design Evolution”- don’t know when or even if I will finish it, but I did start it… It's sad that nothing will come of it. This 'book' would be hilarious! Maybe Joe, Ray Martinez, and Gaulin could do an anthology and split the publishing costs. -------------- "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

Ray Martinez Posts: 24 Joined: Jan. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,19:40    Quote (Febble @ Jan. 05 2014,16:37) It just dawned on me that ID is dead. Dembski is off all radar.  He doesn't even show up in the search box at South Carolina bible college or whatever. The last post on the Design Inference is a year old. Meyer's book went up like a firework and came down with the stick.   Most of the static websites are moribund.  UD has banned virtually all dissenters.  The few brave enough to wander over to TSZ bail out after a couple of rounds.  The biologic institute inflates its "selected publications" with publications that have nothing to do with the biologic institute and seems to be doing no more than pretending to produce output. Bio-Complexity is moribund. Behe doesn't seem to have much to say. The big guys won't come out to debate.  The small ones mostly won't leave heavily censored sites.  Even the UD newsdesk peddles 6 year old stories as "news". And all the threads are about religion.  Or tossing coins. I don't know why I hadn't seen it before. It's dead. Seems you've forgotten the fact that DI-IDism does accept the concept of natural selection and the concept of evolution to exist in nature. Other than opening up their websites for discussion and dissent, what more could you possibly want? or expect? Besides, the DI-IDist, like the Darwinist, especially the ones who are Federal judges, refuse to allow evolutionary theory to be open for criticism in a public arena, so the DI-IDist learned censorship from you guys. Persons who accept evolution believe in, and practice, censorship. Matt Young routinely censors most anti-Evolutionist posts by sending them to Siberia (BW). So you should stop complaining about closed to discussion articles until the practice is abandoned in domains controlled by Darwinists.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,19:53    Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 28 2014,18:51) Quote One strawman wrt ID not being a mechanistic theory is that the antiIDists take that and say that means ID desn’t have any mechanisms. As if… Please Proceed, Joe! Yes, Joe, tell us... should we listen to Behe when (while in court) he said that ID was about mechanisms or when (while in court a few hours later) he said that ID was not a mechanistic notion? Which Behe to believe?  Use your wisdom Joe, enlighten us.  Show us where Behe (the guy who has actually written books on ID) was wrong. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

fnxtr Posts: 3504 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,19:53    Poof! is a mechanism, you guys. -------------- "[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

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,20:03    Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 28 2014,19:53) Poof! is a mechanism, you guys. Of course it is. Just too fast to see anything happen. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,20:46    Quote (Glen Davidson @ Jan. 28 2014,20:03) Quote (fnxtr @ Jan. 28 2014,19:53) Poof! is a mechanism, you guys. Of course it is. Just too fast to see anything happen. Glen Davidson And it looks EXACTLY like evolution. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

midwifetoad Posts: 4003 Joined: Mar. 2008 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,22:27    It's a shame that the Darwinist judge held the 40 day trial behind closed doors and didn't allow transcripts to be published. -------------- Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

sparc Posts: 2088 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 28 2014,22:37    Thanks for reporting directly from IDiot heaven. But how do you guys protect your brains from being immediately cauterized when you go diving in the UD sea of TARD? -------------- "[...] 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 -

Driver Posts: 649 Joined: June 2011 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,02:54    Wow. They went there. Joe on little evolution but none of that big evolution you hear? -------------- Why would I concern myself with evidence, when IMO "evidence" is only the mind arranging thought and matter to support what one already wishes to believe? - William J Murray [A]t this time a forum like this one is nothing less than a national security risk. - Gary Gaulin

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,10:34    Joe Gallien, eater of donuts, purveyor of strawmen:   Quote Evolution has several meanings. And seeing that ID only disagrees with one definition it is not OK to cal it anti-evolution. It is OK to call ID anti-blind watchmaker, ie unguided, evolution. The Bengalese Finch: A Window on the Behavioral Neurobiology of Birdsong Syntax,KAZUO OKANOYA,Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences Volume 1016, Behavioral Neurobiology of Birdsong pages 724–735, June 2004   Quote ...When female preference in a natural environment guides the direction of evolution... MODELING PHENOTYPIC PLASTICITY IN GROWTH TRAJECTORIES: A STATISTICAL FRAMEWORK http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi............ull   Quote ...A number of quantitative hypotheses can be made for the interplay between environment and development in a hope to address fundamental questions in biology; for example, how the environment affects developmental rate and timing and the length of a particular developmental event in the lifetime of an organism (Parsons et al. 2011) and how the environment guides the development of traits to achieve maximum fitness (Agraval 2001; Beldade et al. 2011). Second, statistical modeling of developmental traits is based on a few parsimonious parameters that can capture the structure of trait development and correlation, thus facilitating the computation of a complex model and its power for the detection of environment-induced differences (Ma et al. 2002; Griswold et al. 2008)... etc. etc. and of course the real issue: http://sandwalk.blogspot.com/2010.......ed.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

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,10:49    Quote (midwifetoad @ Jan. 29 2014,04:27) It's a shame that the Darwinist judge held the 40 day trial behind closed doors and didn't allow transcripts to be published. A typical Evo-Mat tactic, that - hiding in plain sight. Back, and to the left....

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,14:02    Joe is now claiming that the environment (in the context of organism / environment fit) can't guide reproductive success / evolution. This could be CSI of CAEK / Choo choo math good. -------------- "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: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,14:29    Bonus: http://scholar.google.com/scholar....=0%2C44 -------------- "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

Occam's Aftershave Posts: 5287 Joined: Feb. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 29 2014,20:57    Quote (keiths @ Jan. 25 2014,21:13) Batshit77, first human to reach absolute zero in self-awareness:     Quote Jaceli123, sorry I’m not watching any of your off topic rabbit trail videos anymore. You have to do your own homework! Batshit77 reaffirms his status as most self-unaware person on the planet.   Quote BA77: "Mapou, I’ve noticed that when anybody contradicts your own personal opinion on a matter, with hard evidence and quotes by leading experts in the field no less, that you do not present any countervailing evidence, references, or quotes from experts of your own but that you just make bold declarations as to how you think reality ought to be structured and dismiss all evidence and everyone else’s opinion with a wave of the hand and sometimes ad hominem. Why is this? Do you expect just to take your word for how reality is structured without any hard evidence?" -------------- "CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way" "All the evidence supports Creation baraminology" "If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic." "Jews and Christians are Muslims." - Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

CeilingCat Posts: 2363 Joined: Dec. 2007 (Permalink) Posted: Jan. 30 2014,01:22    Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Jan. 29 2014,20:57)   Quote (keiths @ Jan. 25 2014,21:13) Batshit77, first human to reach absolute zero in self-awareness:         Quote Jaceli123, sorry I’m not watching any of your off topic rabbit trail videos anymore. You have to do your own homework! Batshit77 reaffirms his status as most self-unaware person on the planet.       Quote BA77: "Mapou, I’ve noticed that when anybody contradicts your own personal opinion on a matter, with hard evidence and quotes by leading experts in the field no less, that you do not present any countervailing evidence, references, or quotes from experts of your own but that you just make bold declarations as to how you think reality ought to be structured and dismiss all evidence and everyone else’s opinion with a wave of the hand and sometimes ad hominem. Why is this? Do you expect just to take your word for how reality is structured without any hard evidence?" Quote BA77: There’s none so blind as those who will not see. Prov. You cannot make someone pay attention to something that he or she does not want to notice. Edited by CeilingCat on Jan. 30 2014,01:23

Pages: (527) < ... 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

© 2002-2009 Antievolution.org Powered by Ikonboard 3.0.2a © 2001 Ikonboard