Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin

Posted: Feb. 19 2015,21:14

Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 20 2015,02:36)

Quote (NoName @ Feb. 19 2015,18:03)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 19 2015,18:32)

Quote (NoName @ Feb. 19 2015,17:01)

Called it!

You and the other creeps should be calling a medical professional for help with your psychotic delusions.

Riiiight. The horde of people unanimous in their understanding that you have produced a pile of garbled verbiage that shares none of the characteristics of actual theories, that is in no way capable of explaining any real world phenomenon, and that has convinced exactly no one that it has any positive value beyond keeping you from aimlessly wandering the streets, those people are psychotic. You, the lonely lunatic responsible for providing nothing of value beyond carbon dioxide for the trees, you are the sane one.
ROFLMAO
Your only qualification for determine psychosis in others is your own life-long experience of the disorder from the inside as it were.
Lunatics Men's club, you're not just a member, you're the founder and president-for-life.

Hey! Gary once got a "will dig into it" from some random dude on PSC. Next stop, Stockholm!

No no no no the next stop is the Tuxedo rental shop THEN Stockholm MOTHERFUCKER!

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

ChemiCat

Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013

Posted: Feb. 20 2015,03:08

It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.

I can't find any reference to the Pre-Cambrian in your not-science "theory", Gaulin.

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 20 2015,18:39

Quote (ChemiCat @ Feb. 20 2015,03:08)

It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.

I can't find any reference to the Pre-Cambrian in your not-science "theory", Gaulin.

If you believe that the computer model(s) and their accompanying theory of operation are "not-science" then you should be thankful for helping to convince me that the rulers of what you call "science" are totally useless to someone like me.

You can now all go live in your own little "science" universe where you have to fund your own damn projects, like the rest of us must do.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Texas Teach

Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

Posted: Feb. 20 2015,18:57

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 20 2015,18:39)

Quote (ChemiCat @ Feb. 20 2015,03:08)

It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.
It's not even English.

I can't find any reference to the Pre-Cambrian in your not-science "theory", Gaulin.

If you believe that the computer model(s) and their accompanying theory of operation are "not-science" then you should be thankful for helping to convince me that the rulers of what you call "science" are totally useless to someone like me.

You can now all go live in your own little "science" universe where you have to fund your own damn projects, like the rest of us must do.

What's funny about that is that Gary would be funding "our" projects* if he made any money worth taxing.

*where "our" projects are actual scientific research into evolution and its related fields.

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

ChemiCat

Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,04:18

Quote

If you believe that the computer model(s) and their accompanying theory of operation are "not-science" then you should be thankful for helping to convince me that the rulers of what you call "science" are totally useless to someone like me.

You can now all go live in your own little "science" universe where you have to fund your own damn projects, like the rest of us must do.

The "theory of operation" is totally disconnected from your Pac-man simulation. Your "computer model(s)" have nothing to do with your unstated definition of "intelligence".
Your "theory of operation" claims RNA is "unimolecular", RNA isn't unimolecular. And on and on it goes. In poor English grammar and borrowed scientific phrases. Your "theory of operation" is a list of untestable assertions trying to force a creator (intelligent cause) into science.

If you have spent money on this "theory" then I have a slightly used Royal Palace to sell you so you can become the Ruler of Science.

Quote

.....like the rest of us must do.

By that do you mean you and Time Cube guy?

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,08:03

Quote

ribonucleic acid / RNA

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a linear molecule composed of four types of smaller molecules called ribonucleotide bases: adenine (A), cytosine ©, guanine (G), and uracil (U). RNA is often compared to a copy from a reference book, or a template, because it carries the same information as its DNA template but is not used for long-term storage.

http://www.nature.com/scitabl....-rna-45

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Texas Teach

Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,08:26

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,08:03)

Quote

ribonucleic acid / RNA

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a linear molecule composed of four types of smaller molecules called ribonucleotide bases: adenine (A), cytosine ©, guanine (G), and uracil (U). RNA is often compared to a copy from a reference book, or a template, because it carries the same information as its DNA template but is not used for long-term storage.

http://www.nature.com/scitabl....-rna-45

Remind us all where you got your chemistry degree, Gary.

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

ChemiCat

Posts: 532
Joined: Nov. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,08:29

Quote

Ribonucleic acid (RNA) is a linear molecule composed of four types of smaller molecules called.....

Not only can't you write in English you cannot READ English either.

So five molecules in a chemical compound are really one! ROFL.

That's two more entities than in your "intelligent cause" so beats your three. Don't try to play Poker, Gaulin.

Jim_Wynne

Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,11:49

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 19 2015,20:09)

I will ~~now go back to~~ NOT ~~working on a~~ rewrite of the theory anymore.

A perfect example of why your writing is so horrid. A sentence of fifteen words is easily reduced to seven without loss of meaning. If this proportion of excess baggage is projected onto your written "theory," one can see how it could be reduced to at most six or eight pages.

The problem with that kind of editing is that it will make the stupidity of the ideas more evident than it already is.

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Jim_Wynne

Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,12:00

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

The problem is that theories of operation are all about mechanisms, and describing how those mechanisms are used, and why they should/will work. Gary's little idea space is cluttered with all manner of decaying detritus but there's not a hint of a mechanism to be found.

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,16:27

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,12:00)

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

I have been writing theories of operation for around 40 years.

You're just another damn nutcase.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,16:40

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,17:27)

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,12:00)

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

I have been writing theories of operation for around 40 years.

You're just another damn nutcase.

And the odds of us believing that ridiculous would be what, do you suppose?
Take a guess, I dare you.

The evidence suggests the only nutcase here is you -- bitter, delusional, and mad as a sack of ferrets.
Oh, but you don't do evidence, do you?

Jim_Wynne

Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,17:03

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,16:27)

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,12:00)

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

I have been writing theories of operation for around 40 years.

Did any of them include mechanisms?

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

Texas Teach

Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,17:37

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,17:03)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,16:27)

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,12:00)

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

I have been writing theories of operation for around 40 years.

Did any of them include mechanisms?

Did any of them include the crayons, or were those sold separately?

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

Cubist

Posts: 558
Joined: Oct. 2007

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:08

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,16:27)

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ Feb. 21 2015,12:00)

On of my favorite parts of Gary's progression in this thread is how he discovers a new (to him) concept and rushes to include it in his not-theory. In the latest case, Gary came across the idea of a theory of operation somewhere, and a very dim light went on in the dark recesses of his cranium.

I have been writing theories of operation for around 40 years.

You're just another damn nutcase.

Some people have 40 years of experience; other people have 1 year of experience, repeated 40 times…

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:10

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:19

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,19:10)

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

And yet here you are. So obviously, no you don't.
How can we miss you if you won't go away?

Why cop such a superior attitude? If we're willing to argue with a scientifically illiterate dysfunctional creep, you could at least play along.
You're the only one of those in this thread.

Texas Teach

Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:19

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,18:10)

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

No you don't. Your 3685 (and counting) posts here are proof of that.

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

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:38

Quote (Texas Teach @ Feb. 21 2015,19:19)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,18:10)

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

No you don't. Your 3685 (and counting) posts here are proof of that.

Ah, seeing your response to our resident twit gave me a flash of insight! His brief post is written in Gaulinese, so apparently he's actually staying here hoping to find a scientifically dysfunctional creep he can argue with, and he won't leave until he finds one. He wants so badly to interact with a true peer and a scientifically dysfunctional creep is as close as he can come to finding one.

k.e..

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,18:47

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 22 2015,02:10)

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

Bingo Gary!

I'm sure massive projection is missing from that list of Gaulin's Modus Operandi.

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

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,19:10

For those who must know: I'm busy explaining the theory to those who are genuinely interested in models pertaining to "intelligence" while catching up with related news. For example:
http://www.newscientist.com/article....9fmjP0s
http://www.roadmapepigenomics.org/....ics....ics.org

Meaningful scientific discussions are impossible in this forum. It's not my fault that the so-called "science defenders" here are only interested in trashing science that does not benefit their academic politics and religious world-views.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,19:15

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,20:10)

For those who must know: I'm busy explaining the theory to those who are genuinely interested in models pertaining to "intelligence" while catching up with related news. For example:
http://www.newscientist.com/article....9fmjP0s
http://www.roadmapepigenomics.org/....ics....ics.org

Meaningful scientific discussions are impossible in this forum. It's not my fault that the so-called "science defenders" here are only interested in trashing science that does not benefit their academic politics and religious world-views.

You have no science. You know it.
You have never explained anything to anyone.
That is why you have never convinced a single person of the truth of any portion of your ridiculous "theory."
Not one. In 7 years or more. Not one, anywhere.

N.Wells

Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,20:35

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,19:10)

For those who must know: I'm busy explaining the theory to those who are genuinely interested in models pertaining to "intelligence" while catching up with related news. For example:
http://www.newscientist.com/article....9fmjP0s
http://www.roadmapepigenomics.org/....ics....ics.org

Meaningful scientific discussions are impossible in this forum. It's not my fault that the so-called "science defenders" here are only interested in trashing science that does not benefit their academic politics and religious world-views.

You just keep telling yourself that, Gary. As long as you don't need anyone else to share your delusion, I'm sure you and your incoherent not-a-theory will be very happy together. Of course, if you want anyone who knows the slightest thing about biological sciences (which excludes the people who gave you a few positive votes at PSC) to gain a good impression of your work, you'll have to change and do some actual worthwhile science, rather than the stuff you are doing.

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,20:46

N.Wells the only thing you are accomplishing is to help make even bigger fools out of the "science defenders" in this forum and others like it including the NCSE blog. But that's what you wanted to do with your time and mine, and now have the reputation that you deserve.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

N.Wells

Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,21:13

Gary, you have been making a fool of yourself here for hundreds of pages and across the internet everywhere you post your nonsense, and for better or worse it's entirely all your own achievement.

JohnW

Posts: 3217
Joined: Aug. 2006

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,21:39

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 21 2015,16:10)

I have much better things to do than argue with scientifically dysfunctional creeps with the mind of a child.

Well, you could give the child her mind back, and use your own.

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

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,22:01

Quote (N.Wells @ Feb. 21 2015,21:13)

Gary, you have been making a fool of yourself here for hundreds of pages and across the internet everywhere you post your nonsense, and for better or worse it's entirely all your own achievement.

The only honest feedback I have received from real people who are well enough educated to understand my situation is that I'm a fool to be in this toilet of a forum allowing bullying nutcases to constantly throw insults at the theory and I.

Thankfully I now spend minimal time here. And that's just to make it more clear that you and the other whiners still have no scientific evidence at all against the theory, while all new scientific evidence from new discoveries and databases such as the earlier mentioned one for epigenetics (that the theory needs more of to accurately model cellular intelligence) only further proves that the theory is actually very explanatory and predictive.

By your own actions you have made it necessary for me to take this forum down in disgrace. Throwing even more insults at me only helps show that you and others have nothing scientific against it at all.

--------------
The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection.

N.Wells

Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: Feb. 21 2015,23:05

Every now and again we tell you that you'd be better off doing anything useful rather than being here. That remains true, and you'd be even better off shelving your irreparable pile of nonsense. Besides the insults, you got constructive suggestions and criticisms, more detailed than anyone else has bothered to give you. Deciding to ignore them totally is your prerogative, but your problems won't go away without your fixing them. The existence of epigenetics is entirely unrelated to your model, which is itself pretty much unrelated to both reality and to your assertions about molecular and cellular "intelligence", the Cambrian explosion, the operation of intelligence, evolution, and natural selection. Worse, you lack operational definitions, and your claims are logically inconsistent, among many other problems. If you want to get serious attention, you've got to fix those problems, although I doubt that that is possible.

"at the theory and I"??? "take this forum down in disgrace"??

Woodbine

Posts: 1218
Joined: June 2007