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

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:24

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:18)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:14)

I'm busy studying scientist level science papers. This one is very very good:

Calcium Signaling
David E. Clapham,
doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.028
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science....7015310

Quote

Main Text
In the furnaces of the stars the elements evolved from hydrogen. When oxygen and neon captured successive α particles, the element calcium was born. Roughly 10 billion years later, cell membranes began to parse the world by charge, temporarily and locally defying relentless entropy. To adapt to changing environments, cells must signal, and signaling requires messengers whose concentration varies with time. Filling this role, calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to rule cell signaling. Here, I describe our current understanding of Ca2+-mediated signaling (complementing several excellent reviews [Berridge, 2005, Burgoyne, 2007, Carafoli, 2004, Petersen, 2005 and Rizzuto and Pozzan, 2006]) and place particular emphasis on emerging themes related to Ca2+ binding proteins, Ca2+ entry across the plasma membrane, and the localized nature of Ca2+ signals.

Feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions guessing.

You're an ass.

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

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:30

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:24)

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:18)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:14)

I'm busy studying scientist level science papers. This one is very very good:

Calcium Signaling
David E. Clapham,
doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.028
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science....7015310

Quote

Main Text
In the furnaces of the stars the elements evolved from hydrogen. When oxygen and neon captured successive α particles, the element calcium was born. Roughly 10 billion years later, cell membranes began to parse the world by charge, temporarily and locally defying relentless entropy. To adapt to changing environments, cells must signal, and signaling requires messengers whose concentration varies with time. Filling this role, calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to rule cell signaling. Here, I describe our current understanding of Ca2+-mediated signaling (complementing several excellent reviews [Berridge, 2005, Burgoyne, 2007, Carafoli, 2004, Petersen, 2005 and Rizzuto and Pozzan, 2006]) and place particular emphasis on emerging themes related to Ca2+ binding proteins, Ca2+ entry across the plasma membrane, and the localized nature of Ca2+ signals.

Feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions guessing.

You're an ass.

True. But I'm also an ass that has forgotten more about chemistry than you'll ever know.

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

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

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:33

But while you're at it feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions "evolved" and are "born" and "captured" particles, etc..

In my opinion their grammar is just fine. But I know how some have nothing better to do than argue over semantics.

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

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:39

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:33)

But while you're at it feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions "evolved" and are "born" and "captured" particles, etc..

In my opinion their grammar is just fine. But I know how some have nothing better to do than argue over semantics.

So you admit that "guess" isn't what you really mean. So what are they actually doing? If they aren't guessing, what does their behavior have to do with intelligence?

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

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:41

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:30)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:24)

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:18)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:14)

I'm busy studying scientist level science papers. This one is very very good:

Calcium Signaling
David E. Clapham,
doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.028
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science....7015310

Quote

Main Text
In the furnaces of the stars the elements evolved from hydrogen. When oxygen and neon captured successive α particles, the element calcium was born. Roughly 10 billion years later, cell membranes began to parse the world by charge, temporarily and locally defying relentless entropy. To adapt to changing environments, cells must signal, and signaling requires messengers whose concentration varies with time. Filling this role, [b]calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to rule cell signaling.[b] Here, I describe our current understanding of Ca2+-mediated signaling (complementing several excellent reviews [Berridge, 2005, Burgoyne, 2007, Carafoli, 2004, Petersen, 2005 and Rizzuto and Pozzan, 2006]) and place particular emphasis on emerging themes related to Ca2+ binding proteins, Ca2+ entry across the plasma membrane, and the localized nature of Ca2+ signals.

Feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions guessing.

You're an ass.

True. But I'm also an ass that has forgotten more about chemistry than you'll ever know.

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

Did you know that calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to "rule" cell signaling? According to your personal view of science that means the ruling ions live in a castle and punish ions that say the wrong thing about them.

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:44

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,13:33)

But while you're at it feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions "evolved" and are "born" and "captured" particles, etc..

In my opinion their grammar is just fine. But I know how some have nothing better to do than argue over semantics.

Show that anyone else on earth shares your massive confusion over whether the theory of evolution makes these claims.
In a metaphorical fashion, one can loosely state that calcium ions evolved through nucleosynthesis in stellar reactions.
But the theory of evolution involves biology, especially at the macro level, individuals, groups of individuals, species, genera, families, etc. [Oh, you're going to get confused over this use of 'family', aren't you?]

The only one here arguing over semantics is you, with your absurdist attempt to dismiss my criticisms as being the mere uncritical acceptance of 'religious' dogma. You haven't shown that religion in any proper sense of the term is involved at all. You haven't shown that there's a "clubhouse", let alone one from which you are brutally and unfairly excluded. There is the field of science, but it's not even in the same country you occupy, let alone within your actual reach.

Worst of all, you haven't addressed any of the criticisms that have demolished your "theory" into its component tard-ons.
But ooooh, you're busy doing sciencey kinds of things! You're important. Utter nonsense.

Finally, let us pause to note the mass destruction of irony meters in the face of your assertion that somehow "in your opinion" serves to, in any way, strengthen or justify a claim. You've so thoroughly established otherwise that we can pretty much take it as natural law that your utterances will be false, and/or gibberish, and generally disconnected from any flow of conversation.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:45

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:39)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,12:33)

But while you're at it feel free to quote any passages that show calcium ions "evolved" and are "born" and "captured" particles, etc..

In my opinion their grammar is just fine. But I know how some have nothing better to do than argue over semantics.

So you admit that "guess" isn't what you really mean. So what are they actually doing? If they aren't guessing, what does their behavior have to do with intelligence?

Hey dumbass, the theory is here:

https://sites.google.com/site.......ign.pdf

If you cannot handle the required grammar (that was not invented by me it's decades old science that many grew up with) then you should have stayed out of teaching science!

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:46

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,13:41)

...
Did you know that calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to "rule" cell signaling? According to your personal view of science that means the ruling ions live in a castle and punish ions that say the wrong thing about them.

???
That seems to be your view, Gary.
I do not see nor comprehend how any rational being could deduce or infer that conclusion from anything Texas Teach has ever said.
But then, this was you doing it, so no rational person was involved other than as the subject of this gross distortion of reality.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:48

Is anyone else as amused as I am that in this forum of asses, Gary remains the only hole?

ROFLMAO

Texas Teach

Posts: 2084
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,12:56

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,12:46)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,13:41)

...
Did you know that calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to "rule" cell signaling? According to your personal view of science that means the ruling ions live in a castle and punish ions that say the wrong thing about them.

???
That seems to be your view, Gary.
I do not see nor comprehend how any rational being could deduce or infer that conclusion from anything Texas Teach has ever said.
But then, this was you doing it, so no rational person was involved other than as the subject of this gross distortion of reality.

This is typical Gary. When he gets caught using a word wrong, he tries to claim that he wasn't being literal. Except that a non-literal reading would make his use of the word both pointless and self contradictory.

I can't tell if he's being dishonest, or he actually fools himself.

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

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:06

And for those who might be wondering what the issue is the "Guess" mechanism is a required subcircuit as shown in this schematic diagram from the theory:

The functional component was best described by David L. Heiserman (for more details you'll have to study his book on building Rodney):

http://www.beam-wiki.org/wiki.......EAMI.29

The critics in this forum are using arguments from ignorance in order to make it appear that they know what they're talking about.

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:16

Nonsense.
What we are challenging, specifically, is your claim that 'intelligence' is explained by the ability to guess and the ability to gauge the success/failure of that guess.
Both are ludicrously wrong, because both guessing and gauging success/failure are themselves acts of intelligence.
This renders your "theory", your proud "explanation," circular at best, incoherent at the most generous, and contradictory in actual fact.
You do not 'explain' a phenomenon by recourse to the phenomenon or one of it's components as a foundational element of the explanation. It's like saying "I can explain nucleosynthesis by telling you that nuclei are synthesized."
There's no explanation there. Nor in any of your effluent.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:16

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:30)

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

Show the readers where I supposedly discuss "atoms" with a tiny brain that somehow allows each to take a guess, etc..

Your inability to quote such a thing ever having been said by me will show how full of manure you are.

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:17

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,14:16)

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:30)

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

Show the readers where I supposedly discuss "atoms" with a tiny brain that somehow allows each to take a guess, etc..

Your inability to quote such a thing ever having been said by me will show how full of manure you are.

"Molecular Intelligence", from your "theory".
'Nuff said.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:21

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:16)

Nonsense.
What we are challenging, specifically, is your claim that 'intelligence' is explained by the ability to guess and the ability to gauge the success/failure of that guess.
Both are ludicrously wrong, because both guessing and gauging success/failure are themselves acts of intelligence.
This renders your "theory", your proud "explanation," circular at best, incoherent at the most generous, and contradictory in actual fact.
You do not 'explain' a phenomenon by recourse to the phenomenon or one of it's components as a foundational element of the explanation. It's like saying "I can explain nucleosynthesis by telling you that nuclei are synthesized."
There's no explanation there. Nor in any of your effluent.

Then show me your circuit that is able to take guesses when necessary.

If you have none then you also prove to have been just another manure filled strawman argument, meant to achieve a religious agenda of one kind or another.

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:25

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,14:21)

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:16)

Nonsense.
What we are challenging, specifically, is your claim that 'intelligence' is explained by the ability to guess and the ability to gauge the success/failure of that guess.
Both are ludicrously wrong, because both guessing and gauging success/failure are themselves acts of intelligence.
This renders your "theory", your proud "explanation," circular at best, incoherent at the most generous, and contradictory in actual fact.
You do not 'explain' a phenomenon by recourse to the phenomenon or one of it's components as a foundational element of the explanation. It's like saying "I can explain nucleosynthesis by telling you that nuclei are synthesized."
There's no explanation there. Nor in any of your effluent.

Then show me your circuit that is able to take guesses when necessary.

If you have none then you also prove to have been just another manure filled strawman argument, meant to achieve a religious agenda of one kind or another.

You really don't understand how this works, do you?
Or you're back to your old pretense.

Your crap doesn't win by default. Your crap does not require a competing circuit to show that on the merits, your "theory" has no merits. It is bafflegab, incoherent ranting, and at best circular.

You can't explain intelligence by smuggling intelligence into the explanation.
That's exactly what you're doing, and we've been pointing out for quite a while now.
That suffices to demolish your pile of effluent.

But there are so many other problems and issues with your effluent. "Molecular intelligence" and your constant refusal to answer the question of what you mean by this, what more is there besides the laws of physics and chemistry is one amongst many fatal flaws in both your effluent and your general approach.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:28

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:17)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,14:16)

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:30)

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

Show the readers where I supposedly discuss "atoms" with a tiny brain that somehow allows each to take a guess, etc..

Your inability to quote such a thing ever having been said by me will show how full of manure you are.

"Molecular Intelligence", from your "theory".
'Nuff said.

If you cannot handle the scientific terminology that is required for a coherent scientific theory then your opinion is just more of the usual scientifically worthless garbage from just another political hack promoting their religious agenda.

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:42

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,14:28)

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:17)

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,14:16)

Quote (Texas Teach @ Jan. 11 2015,12:30)

So, any evidence of calcium atoms guessing?

Show the readers where I supposedly discuss "atoms" with a tiny brain that somehow allows each to take a guess, etc..

Your inability to quote such a thing ever having been said by me will show how full of manure you are.

"Molecular Intelligence", from your "theory".
'Nuff said.

If you cannot handle the scientific terminology that is required for a coherent scientific theory then your opinion is just more of the usual scientifically worthless garbage from just another political hack promoting their religious agenda.

Epic fail.
Terminology needs to mean something. The user of the terminology must be able to specify what is meant.
To all appearances, you wouldn't recognize a 'coherent scientific theory' if it painted itself blue and danced on the piano singing "I'm a coherent scientific theory."
You certainly have no ability to judge whether any given candidate does or does not meet the criteria because you do not know what the criteria are.
We know this because despite being challenged to do so countless times you have never been able to lay out any sort of definition, let alone formal specification, for what counts as coherent or as scientific theory.
Worse, we know this also because no one in the entire world agrees with you on your self-assessment of having a 'coherent scientific theory'. This despite 6+ years of trotting your effluent around the web and desperately ignoring the devastating criticisms it has met at every turn.

As to your attempts at insulting me, well, you're no better at that then you are at making a living, managing a budget, or conceptualizing what does and does not count as a 'coherent scientific theory' in the only world that matters -- the one outside the chorus of voices in your head. (Do they echo? I'll be they echo.)

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,13:45

Let me guess, now I'm going to be called a 'troll'. That's usually Gary's final recourse when he has no evidence, no argument, and no remaining ability to guess at an insult.

But once again, the only agreement you ever get, Gary, is from the voices in your head.
Free hint for the thinking impaired -- they're misleading you. You can't trust them.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,17:26

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:45)

Let me guess, now I'm going to be called a 'troll'.

No. After giving my opinion by calling you a political hack I felt better then went back to work on the neuron circuit. After simplifying even more by just using voltage sources as ion pumps I now need to achieve signal propagation, so I'm now watching this to help make sense of the myriad of charges needing to be accounted for in a model or just the junk you're happy with:

Resting Membrane Potential - Shane Jones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....SWjVLzI

You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either. I have a spring loaded snappy trap that would probably save me the finding them a new home when it warms up outside, but after getting to know them (before they escaped by chewing through plastic cage cover) it seems too cruel, even though they are as much of sneaky pest playing with my head as you are!

--------------
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.

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,17:34

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,18:26)

Quote (NoName @ Jan. 11 2015,13:45)

Let me guess, now I'm going to be called a 'troll'.

No. After giving my opinion by calling you a political hack I felt better then went back to work on the neuron circuit. After simplifying even more by just using voltage sources as ion pumps I now need to achieve signal propagation, so I'm now watching this to help make sense of the myriad of charges needing to be accounted for in a model or just the junk you're happy with:

Resting Membrane Potential - Shane Jones
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v....SWjVLzI

You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either. I have a spring loaded snappy trap that would probably save me the finding them a new home when it warms up outside, but after getting to know them (before they escaped by chewing through plastic cage cover) it seems too cruel, even though they are as much of sneaky pest playing with my head as you are!

Will wonders never cease -- Gary managed to guess a new response.
It's all gibbering nonsense, of course, and typically off-topic.

I'll just note that you continue to make assertions with no evidence or justification. "Political hack" my eye. You're just peevish that you have no hope of addressing, let alone repairing, the holes I've shown make up the entirety of your output.
Why is it, do you suppose, that you never,ever, engage with your critics or their criticism of your 'work'? Are you even aware?

N.Wells

Posts: 1836
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 11 2015,20:29

Quote

You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either.

That's my nomination for "Sentence Of The Month". Could even SteveStory create a gem like that?

damitall

Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,03:35

Gary can't even catch a mouse?

Get a cat, Giggles. They usually have sufficient intelligence to catch a mouse

k.e..

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,03:38

Quote (GaryGaulin @ Jan. 11 2015,20:14)

I'm busy studying scientist level science papers. This one is very very good:

Calcium Signaling
David E. Clapham,
doi:10.1016/j.cell.2007.11.028
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science....7015310

Quote

Main Text
In the furnaces of the stars the elements evolved from hydrogen. When oxygen and neon captured successive α particles, the element calcium was born. Roughly 10 billion years later, cell membranes began to parse the world by charge, temporarily and locally defying relentless entropy. To adapt to changing environments, cells must signal, and signaling requires messengers whose concentration varies with time. Filling this role, calcium ions (Ca2+) and phosphate ions have come to rule cell signaling. Here, I describe our current understanding of Ca2+-mediated signaling (complementing several excellent reviews [Berridge, 2005, Burgoyne, 2007, Carafoli, 2004, Petersen, 2005 and Rizzuto and Pozzan, 2006]) and place particular emphasis on emerging themes related to Ca2+ binding proteins, Ca2+ entry across the plasma membrane, and the localized nature of Ca2+ signals.

Take all the time you need fool. You are never going to produce anything useful and certainly nothing at "scientist level science papers" for fucks sake.

Gary are you not the least bit embarrassed by your constant self immolating denouement?

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

k.e..

Posts: 5432
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,03:41

Quote (N.Wells @ Jan. 12 2015,04:29)

Quote

You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either.

That's my nomination for "Sentence Of The Month". Could even SteveStory create a gem like that?

Are you suggesting that Poe's law breaks down in Gary's case?

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

Woodbine

Posts: 1218
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,04:31

Quote (N.Wells @ Jan. 12 2015,02:29)

Quote

You are an annoying pest, to add to the mouse on the loose in the house that is smart to how the cage mousetrap works, was surprisingly able to with their feet wet with olive oil get out of an almost upright 1800mL glass boiling flask I lured them into with a peanut butter cracker that was bigger than its head, that it stole, and the balancing tube idea that gives it four feet to jump after tipping over from its weight isn't working either.

That's my nomination for "Sentence Of The Month". Could even SteveStory create a gem like that?

That is a doozy....maybe his grammatical powers are connected to the state of his teeth? Like a deranged Samson.

Hey Gary, instead of wasting all these hours doing 'real-science' why don't you get a part-time job, save a bit of money, then get your teeth fixed? Even a mouse could figure that out.

GaryGaulin

Posts: 5385
Joined: Oct. 2012

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,06:39

I already have a day job. And now I have to get back to another day at work.

--------------
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.

Wesley R. Elsberry

Posts: 4991
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,09:23

It's an odd world where reading "scientist level science papers" is a plus, but writing them is a minus.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

NoName

Posts: 2729
Joined: Mar. 2013

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,09:28

And where reading "scientist level science papers" trumps getting a second job so as to afford needed maintenance.
But that's our Gary. The sky on his planet is thought to be the color of the odor of yellow.

jeffox

Posts: 671
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink)

Posted: Jan. 12 2015,12:13

All because he pissed at a mouse. :O ;) :)

Or got pissed at by a mouse.

In the head.

He wrote so.

The peanut-butter covered cracker was just a red herring. . . . .

Science intelligence!

Whatta hoot!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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