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) < ... 212 213 214 215 216 [217] 218 219 220 221 222 ... >

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,08:36    R.I.P Clown Fish. You were far too young to die.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,08:37    Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 09 2016,08:36) R.I.P Clown Fish. You were far too young to die.

k.e.. Posts: 5432 Joined: May 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,09:48    Quote (KevinB @ June 09 2016,15:31) Quote (Henry J @ June 08 2016,20:18)   Quote (stevestory @ June 08 2016,16:11) zeroseven:     Quote 20 June 8, 2016 at 3:41 pm It’s amazing how all those hundreds of millions of cognitively deficient, delusional atheists around the world seem to be able to live such successful and fulfilled lives. I guess they are the type of delusions and cognitive dissonances that don’t have any effect on the ability to live successful lives. HeKS:     Quote Because they don’t actually live like their delusions are true. They give lip service to the delusions and defend them with generally poor arguments They have no idea how foolish an argument this is!  :D Smith: Robinson, I have completed my calculations. According to my deep analysis of sociology, history, economics, and anthropology, all Japanese people must eat Creme Brulee desserts at 3 a.m. without fail. Robinson: Dr. Smith, I just came from Japan, my wife's Japanese, and many of my colleagues are Japanese, and nobody eats creme brulee at 3 am. Smith: Well then they're all Japanning wrong! Robinson: There's another possibility.... "That does not compute!" "Oh, the pain, the pain!" It would explain an awful lot if UD were an Irwin Allen production. The gallant crew of the space ship Jupiter 1+1 are trapped on the lost planet Montserrat. Every episode they are invaded another Guest Star evolutionist, which they have to battle until they can bring Barry the Robot online to deploy the Ban Hammer. With coward Barry mincing in and out of the closet trying to pervert young boys minds. -------------- "I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clown DaveTard suit" dogdidit "ID is deader than Lenny Flanks granmaws dildo batteries" Erasmus "I'm busy studying scientist level science papers" Galloping Gary Gaulin

LarTanner Posts: 36 Joined: Dec. 2015 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,11:14    Quote (Ptaylor @ June 08 2016,20:25) And now WJMurray appears to be deleting comments:   Quote 35 clown fishJune 8, 2016 at 6:27 pm [Stop trolling my thread, CF. -WJM]   Quote 37 clown fishJune 8, 2016 at 6:34 pm [Stop trolling my thread, CF.- WJM] (The 10 reasons thread - you know how to get there) While not surprising, the sense of entitlement by folks like WJM and Banny is something to behold.

NoName Posts: 2729 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,11:16    Quote (k.e.. @ June 09 2016,10:48) Quote (KevinB @ June 09 2016,15:31) Quote (Henry J @ June 08 2016,20:18)     Quote (stevestory @ June 08 2016,16:11) zeroseven:       Quote 20 June 8, 2016 at 3:41 pm It’s amazing how all those hundreds of millions of cognitively deficient, delusional atheists around the world seem to be able to live such successful and fulfilled lives. I guess they are the type of delusions and cognitive dissonances that don’t have any effect on the ability to live successful lives. HeKS:       Quote Because they don’t actually live like their delusions are true. They give lip service to the delusions and defend them with generally poor arguments They have no idea how foolish an argument this is!  :D Smith: Robinson, I have completed my calculations. According to my deep analysis of sociology, history, economics, and anthropology, all Japanese people must eat Creme Brulee desserts at 3 a.m. without fail. Robinson: Dr. Smith, I just came from Japan, my wife's Japanese, and many of my colleagues are Japanese, and nobody eats creme brulee at 3 am. Smith: Well then they're all Japanning wrong! Robinson: There's another possibility.... "That does not compute!" "Oh, the pain, the pain!" It would explain an awful lot if UD were an Irwin Allen production. The gallant crew of the space ship Jupiter 1+1 are trapped on the lost planet Montserrat. Every episode they are invaded another Guest Star evolutionist, which they have to battle until they can bring Barry the Robot online to deploy the Ban Hammer. With coward Barry mincing in and out of the closet trying to pervert young boys minds. With Gordon cheering on their Socratic/Platonic behavior. One does wonder how they reconcile "objective morality" with Biblical support of slavery, rape, genocide, and (depending on where and how hard you look), exclusive heterosexuality with Ancient Greece and modern times. Was the Bible simply mistaken in its support of slavery? Were the Greeks simply mistaken in their boy-love? Or is "objective morality" even more subjective than the "subjective morality" they rail against?

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,16:20    IDK who our new player is, but they're starting off with a bang: Quote 2 StarbuckJune 9, 2016 at 3:02 pm It’s so funny how IDers can’t get behind even this kind of teleology, because it would mean Genesis 1 is false.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,16:41    Quote (stevestory @ June 09 2016,16:20) IDK who our new player is, but they're starting off with a bang: Quote 2 StarbuckJune 9, 2016 at 3:02 pm It’s so funny how IDers can’t get behind even this kind of teleology, because it would mean Genesis 1 is false. :O He either likes coffee or bad Sci-fi TV shows.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,17:27    EZ to batshitcrazy77: Quote Your interpretation of Dr Chaitin’s address is very narrow. He is talking about the issue of modelling evolution in a very general sense. The video comes from before his book was published. And you quote mine it for snippets that seem to support your view. But if you watch the whole video you get a very different conclusion. Dr Chaitin is NOT a supporter of intelligent design. It’s only when you take parts out of context that you get that conclusion. I have seen two people banned because they questioned Cunningham's ethics. Is EZ next?

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,18:16    The world madly careens toward armageddon.... Today's teens smoke less, drink less, and have sex less than any teens on record So would Gordon say their Objective Morality is better than his generation?

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,18:59    Quote (stevestory @ June 09 2016,18:16) The world madly careens toward armageddon.... Today's teens smoke less, drink less, and have sex less than any teens on record So would Gordon say their Objective Morality is better than his generation?  :p And the number that are atheist is increasing. That must really piss him off. He didn't take well to the fact that Canada has had SSM for over s decade and society didn't collapse. And when I mentioned that Canada has absolutely no legal restriction on abortion, and that the government pays for it, yet 99% occur before 20 weeks, he went ballistic. Can someone please tell him that we now have absolutely no legal restriction on Doctor assisted suicide. I would love to hear his reaction to that little gem.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 09 2016,19:06    Quote vjtorleyJune 9, 2016 at 5:09 pm clown fish Plants have everything necessary for them to survive, yet they’re not sentient. Newborn babies can’t survive unless they’re fed by their mothers, and yet they are sentient. I’m sorry, but you’ll have to do better than that. Could someone tell VJT that Clown Fish would love to "do better" but that Darth Arrogant has banned him (or her) for questioning objective morality.

sparc Posts: 2088 Joined: April 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 10 2016,06:10    Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 09 2016,08:37)   Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 09 2016,08:36) R.I.P Clown Fish. You were far too young to die. Isn't that a red hering in disguise? -------------- "[...] 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 -

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 10 2016,21:52    Quote 146 Barry ArringtonJune 10, 2016 at 2:45 pm daveS: “That 2 + 3 = 5 is true by definition can be verified in a purely mechanical, absolutely certain way.” This may be counter intuitive to you dave, but your statement is false. There is no way to verify that statement. It is either accepted as self-evidently true, or not. Think about it. What more basic steps of reasoning would you employ to verify the equation? That’s right; there are none. You can say the same thing in different ways such as || + ||| = ||||| or “a set with a cardinality of two added to a set with cardinality of three results in a set with a cardinality of five.” But they all amount to the same statement. That is another feature of a self-evident truth. It does not depend upon (indeed cannot be) “verified” (as you say) by a process of “precept upon precept” reasoning. As WJM has been trying to tell you, a self-evident truth is, by definition, a truth that is accepted because rejection would be upon pain of patent absurdity. 2+3=5 cannot be verified. It is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity. “Gratuitous torture of a child for pleasure is evil” is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity in the exact same way. Barry makes up for being stupid by also being really confident.

OgreMkV Posts: 3668 Joined: Oct. 2009 (Permalink) Posted: June 10 2016,22:11    Quote (stevestory @ June 10 2016,21:52) Quote 146 Barry ArringtonJune 10, 2016 at 2:45 pm daveS: “That 2 + 3 = 5 is true by definition can be verified in a purely mechanical, absolutely certain way.” This may be counter intuitive to you dave, but your statement is false. There is no way to verify that statement. It is either accepted as self-evidently true, or not. Think about it. What more basic steps of reasoning would you employ to verify the equation? That’s right; there are none. You can say the same thing in different ways such as || + ||| = ||||| or “a set with a cardinality of two added to a set with cardinality of three results in a set with a cardinality of five.” But they all amount to the same statement. That is another feature of a self-evident truth. It does not depend upon (indeed cannot be) “verified” (as you say) by a process of “precept upon precept” reasoning. As WJM has been trying to tell you, a self-evident truth is, by definition, a truth that is accepted because rejection would be upon pain of patent absurdity. 2+3=5 cannot be verified. It is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity. “Gratuitous torture of a child for pleasure is evil” is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity in the exact same way. Barry makes up for being stupid by also being really confident. http://us.metamath.org/mpegif....#trivia I guess he's not into math. I know, it brings up sets and that's a no-no because these IDiots don't even know what that means. -------------- Ignored by those who can't provide evidence for their claims. http://skepticink.com/smilodo....retreat

JohnW Posts: 3217 Joined: Aug. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 10 2016,22:23    Quote (OgreMkV @ June 10 2016,20:11) Quote (stevestory @ June 10 2016,21:52) Quote 146 Barry ArringtonJune 10, 2016 at 2:45 pm daveS: “That 2 + 3 = 5 is true by definition can be verified in a purely mechanical, absolutely certain way.” This may be counter intuitive to you dave, but your statement is false. There is no way to verify that statement. It is either accepted as self-evidently true, or not. Think about it. What more basic steps of reasoning would you employ to verify the equation? That’s right; there are none. You can say the same thing in different ways such as || + ||| = ||||| or “a set with a cardinality of two added to a set with cardinality of three results in a set with a cardinality of five.” But they all amount to the same statement. That is another feature of a self-evident truth. It does not depend upon (indeed cannot be) “verified” (as you say) by a process of “precept upon precept” reasoning. As WJM has been trying to tell you, a self-evident truth is, by definition, a truth that is accepted because rejection would be upon pain of patent absurdity. 2+3=5 cannot be verified. It is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity. “Gratuitous torture of a child for pleasure is evil” is accepted as self-evidently true because any denial would come at the price of affirming an absurdity in the exact same way. Barry makes up for being stupid by also being really confident. http://us.metamath.org/mpegif.....#trivia I guess he's not into math. I know, it brings up sets and that's a no-no because these IDiots don't even know what that means. Yeah, but that was all written before Barry enlightened us.  The revised version of that page will just say "A barely-numerate lawyer in Colorado Springs says it's self-evident.  QED." -------------- 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

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 10 2016,22:36    Now KF is lecturing Dave about this axiom stuff. It's Dunning Kruger Field Day over there.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 11 2016,12:06    A Delusional List Of Alleged Atheist Delusions Posted by jrosenhouse on June 9, 2016 Quote At various times over the last few years I have declared ID to be dead. One of my reasons for saying that is the complete intellectual collapse of Uncommon Descent (UD). When William Dembski started the blog, it was intended as an outpost for serious commentary on intelligent design and related topics. Not for them the standard creationist pyrotechnics, which had made anti-evolutionism a laughingstock among educated people. No, UD was going to show the world that anti-evolutionism did not have to be the domain of crazed religious demagogues, but could instead be defended rationally by scientifically knowledgeable people. For a while, UD was undoubtedly the premier ID blog, a somewhat dubious honor to be sure. But Dembski mostly cut ties with the blog some time ago, and for several years it has been run by vicious idiots like Denyse O’Leary and Barry Arrington. If you are looking for incoherent scorn directed at scientists and atheists, written by people with no conscience about getting their facts right or presenting their opponents fairly, then the UD stable of bloggers is your dream team. ... Edited by stevestory on June 11 2016,13:07

Woodbine Posts: 1218 Joined: June 2007 (Permalink) Posted: June 11 2016,13:13    Rosenhouse.... Quote The question of whether morality is objective or subjective is a complete red herring. I agree. Quote It is a question of no practical consequence whatsoever. I agree. Quote What matters in practice are the reasons you give for holding the moral beliefs that you do. Nah. I'd argue what matters in practice is the content of those moral beliefs - not their alleged provenance. If someone believes that God has told them to cleanse the Earth of Jews then in my opinion it's not the God bit that's the immediate issue - it's the genocidal bit.

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 11 2016,14:14    “No argument can pry doubt from the minds of those wishing not to believe.”  WJM http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-day-21 I nominate this as the motto for UD.  It explains so much Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 11 2016,16:14    Quote (Glen Davidson @ June 11 2016,14:14) “No argument can pry doubt from the minds of those wishing not to believe.”  WJM http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....-day-21 I nominate this as the motto for UD.  It explains so much Glen Davidson My irony meter just broke. Barry Arrington, the man who prevented a valedictorian from giving the valedictory address simply because he was gay, judging others on their morality.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,10:10    Barry Arrogant on WJM's delusional atheists post: Quote daveS, do you assert that it is possible in any conceivable universe for the statement “torturing a child for pleasure is good” to be true? Whenever he is being bested by someone about objective morality, Barfy brings out this argument. Maybe DaveS should mention the fact that some preColumbian mesoamerican cultures believed exactly this.

NoName Posts: 2729 Joined: Mar. 2013 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,10:22    Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 12 2016,11:10) Barry Arrogant on WJM's delusional atheists post:   Quote daveS, do you assert that it is possible in any conceivable universe for the statement “torturing a child for pleasure is good” to be true? Whenever he is being bested by someone about objective morality, Barfy brings out this argument. Maybe DaveS should mention the fact that some preColumbian mesoamerican cultures believed exactly this. He should also point out that this is precisely what his [Barry's] god does.  Eternally. Or does god get a pass because he's "outside the universe"?

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,10:56    Quote (NoName @ June 12 2016,10:22) Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ June 12 2016,11:10) Barry Arrogant on WJM's delusional atheists post:   Quote daveS, do you assert that it is possible in any conceivable universe for the statement “torturing a child for pleasure is good” to be true? Whenever he is being bested by someone about objective morality, Barfy brings out this argument. Maybe DaveS should mention the fact that some preColumbian mesoamerican cultures believed exactly this. He should also point out that this is precisely what his [Barry's] god does.  Eternally. Or does god get a pass because he's "outside the universe"? Yes, there was that morally good act that involved killing all of the first born of Egypt. Or the morally good act of killing all of those children with the great flood.

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,11:47    Not to mention the hardening of Pharaoh's heart, so as to have an excuse for that stuff against the Egyptians...

Jkrebs Posts: 590 Joined: Sep. 2004 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,12:13    This is good, telling it like it is: Quote 51 Prof. S. Joshua SwamidassJune 12, 2016 at 10:38 am @50 BornAgain77 With all sincerity and fondness, I must complement you in your suberb ability to Gish Gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop). Your posts are great examples of “Proof by Verbosity,” and you are at a master at this. You repeat several false and misleading arguments in quick sequence, quoting others rather than explaining actual data. You, sir, are amazingly effective at your intended goal: blowing so much smoke that casual readers are effectively blinded from the truth. Congratulations. To be clear, every argument you raise is false, and is easily demonstrated to be false using the evidence. In fact, many of the papers you quote actually expose the your arguments as false. I have a history of demonstrating that I am not BSing when I say there is evidence that proves a bad arguments false (look at my comments on prior VJ posts). I just refuse to do so when people are GIsh Galloping, even when one does so as expertly as do you. Those of us that care about evidence, I am sure, will just ignore you from here out. I hope you consider learning science some day. It is really amazing, and much more beautiful than an awkward gallop.

Acartia_Bogart Posts: 2927 Joined: Sep. 2014 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,12:20    Quote (Jkrebs @ June 12 2016,12:13) This is good, telling it like it is:   Quote 51 Prof. S. Joshua SwamidassJune 12, 2016 at 10:38 am @50 BornAgain77 With all sincerity and fondness, I must complement you in your suberb ability to Gish Gallop (http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop). Your posts are great examples of “Proof by Verbosity,” and you are at a master at this. You repeat several false and misleading arguments in quick sequence, quoting others rather than explaining actual data. You, sir, are amazingly effective at your intended goal: blowing so much smoke that casual readers are effectively blinded from the truth. Congratulations. To be clear, every argument you raise is false, and is easily demonstrated to be false using the evidence. In fact, many of the papers you quote actually expose the your arguments as false. I have a history of demonstrating that I am not BSing when I say there is evidence that proves a bad arguments false (look at my comments on prior VJ posts). I just refuse to do so when people are GIsh Galloping, even when one does so as expertly as do you. Those of us that care about evidence, I am sure, will just ignore you from here out. I hope you consider learning science some day. It is really amazing, and much more beautiful than an awkward gallop. Damn, jkrebs, you beat me by seconds. That is a masterful insult, on more than one level. It won't be long before batshitcrazy77 accuses him of being a troll and asking that he be banned.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,12:55    holy shit. Didn't see that one coming.

Glen Davidson Posts: 1100 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,13:55    Batshit leaves it to the "unbiased reader":   Quote I consider your post a compliment. Despite your blatant ad hominem, my posts stand on their own merit. And I will leave it to the unbiased reader to decide who is being ‘scientific’ and who is ‘blowing smoke’. OMG, who could win over the unbiased reader better, Swamidass, an actual scientist, or Batshit, former substance addict, present religion/pseudoscience addict? OTOH, the ignoramus has the upper hand among the drooling idiocy at UD. Glen Davidson -------------- http://tinyurl.com/mxaa3p....p Nothing in biology makes sense except in the light of coincidence---ID philosophy

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,15:18    Quote 54 AndreJune 12, 2016 at 1:31 pm BA When someone tells you you’re Gish Galloping you can absolutely consider it a compliment. Dwayne Gish has never lost a debate against a Darwinist… Keep it coming… derp derp derp

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: June 12 2016,15:20    If stupidity were painful, UD would be the Trauma Ward.

Pages: (527) < ... 212 213 214 215 216 [217] 218 219 220 221 222 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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