RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (1000) < ... 570 571 572 573 574 [575] 576 577 578 579 580 ... >   
  Topic: Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,16:09   

Quote (franky172 @ July 20 2007,15:39)
Dembski is upset no one has used his EF.

His response?

 
Quote
Does Padian mean Wesley Elsberry, Shallit’s sidekick, whose PhD is from the wildlife fisheries department at Texas A&M? Does Padian mean Richard Wein, whose 50,000 word response to my book NO FREE LUNCH is widely cited — Wein holds no more than a bachelors degree in statistics? Does Padian mean Elliott Sober, who is a philosopher and whose critique of my work along Bayesian lines is itself deeply problematic (for my response to Sober go here). Does he mean Thomas Schneider, who is a biologist who dabbles in information theory and not very well at that (see my “withering critique” with Bob Marks of his work on the evolution of nucleotide binding sites here). Does he mean David Wolpert, a co-discoverer of the NFL theorems? Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them.

Yes, Dr. Dembski.  He means people who do math, regardless of their degrees.

Does he mean William Dembski, an obscure discredited mathematician at an obscure southern Bible college with no training in biology?

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,16:17   

Such good tard.  I go on vacation, manage to login on my in-laws' kludgy computer and UD is down.  Perhaps Dr Dr Dembksi is correcting his degrees.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,16:28   

More Dr. Dr. Dembski while UD is down: his Jesus Math article (not the 1+1+1 = 3 proof  :D ) is listed on the Design inference web site as the "Lastest."  Also, it's the coolest and the bestest.

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,16:40   

Davetard will Not be pleased.

   
Rob



Posts: 154
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,16:42   

Dembski, two years ago:  
Quote
Shallit spent the better part of a sabbatical reviewing my semi-popular book No Free Lunch. He can’t leave ID or me well enough alone (prove me wrong, Jeff).


So Shallit obligingly proves him wrong:  
Quote
I do not intend to waste my time finding more errors in more work of yours.


Dembski today:  
Quote
Does he mean Jeff Shallit, whose expertise is in computational number theory, not probability theory, and who, after writing up a hamfisted critique of my book NO FREE LUNCH, has explicitly notified me that he henceforth refuses to engage my subsequent technical work


Shallit spent a huge chunk of time, along with Dr. Elsberry, carefully documenting Dembski's errors.  Dembski chides him for that, never responds to their critique, and invites Shallit to leave him alone.  Shallit does so, and ever since then, Dembski has been razzing him for not responding to his more recent work.

--------------
-- Rob, the fartist formerly known as 2ndclass

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:13   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,08:20)
 Inasmuch as David hadn't offered any religious pronouncements in the post you responded to

Heddle ***IS*** a religious pronouncement.  A walking, talking one.

He's God's favorite, ya know.


(snicker)  (giggle)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:15   

Quote (heddle @ July 20 2007,09:57)
You people have no sense of humor.

Coming from a Calvinist, of all people, that is pretty goddamn funny.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Bebbo



Posts: 161
Joined: Dec. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:31   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2007,20:38)
Quote (GCT @ July 19 2007,17:48)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 19 2007,04:09)
TARDGASM!!!! OMG OMG WTF LOL?

So, to summarize, if you say that ID is a threat, then it is, and if you say it isn't, then you are just putting up a false front.  Heads I win, tails you lose sucka.

Yes, much like when a couple days ago some random doofus at UD declared that the recent upsurge in atheist books was some kind of sign that the 'materialists are afraid'. I'm sure if atheists weren't publishing any books, that would be a clear sign of fear, too.

Oh yes, and Jehu can smell the Darwinists' fear. He said so.

So all the ID books shows the IDers are running scared too.

  
Rob



Posts: 154
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:41   

Dembskian vacillation #392:

Nine years ago, Dembski said:  
Quote
There now exists a rigorous criterion—complexity-specification—for distinguishing intelligently caused objects from unintelligently caused ones.
(Emphasis mine)

In his Dover expert witness report, Dembski claimed:
Quote
Designed objects like Mount Rushmore exhibit characteristic features or patterns that point to an intelligence. Such features or patterns constitute signs of intelligence. Proponents of intelligent design, known as design theorists, purport to study such signs formally, rigorously, and scientifically. In particular, they claim that a type of information, known as specified complexity, is a key sign of intelligence.
(Emphasis mine)

But when critics point out his lack of rigor, Dembski backpedals, as in today:  
Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them. But as I indicated in that book, it was about sketching an intellectual program rather than filling in the details, which would await further work (as is being done at Baylor’s Evolutionary Informatics Lab — www.evolutionaryinformatics.org)
(Emphasis mine)

--------------
-- Rob, the fartist formerly known as 2ndclass

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:46   

Quote (stevestory @ July 20 2007,16:40)
Davetard will Not be pleased.

Woah. The DCA team got Sternberged. Bill D should call homeland security on the FDA.

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

  
Rob



Posts: 154
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:50   

Dembski lists endorsers of his work:
Quote
John Lennox...
Moshe Koppel...
Frank Tipler...
Paul Davies...

But, oddly enough, none of them has made any effort to defend Dembski as his critics have pointed out the fatal flaws in his work.  Nor have they (or anyone else, for that matter) found any use for his work, or tried to develop it further.

--------------
-- Rob, the fartist formerly known as 2ndclass

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 11178
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,17:59   

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

Quote
Would it help to derail ID to characterize Dembski as a mathematical klutz. Then characterize him as a mathematical klutz. As for providing evidence for that claim, don’t bother. If NATURE requires no evidence, then certainly the rest of the scientific community bears no such burden.


http://www.antievolution.org/people/dembski_wa/wad_factors_59.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

  
Bebbo



Posts: 161
Joined: Dec. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:13   

Quote (Rob @ July 20 2007,17:41)
Dembskian vacillation #392:

Nine years ago, Dembski said:    
Quote
There now exists a rigorous criterion—complexity-specification—for distinguishing intelligently caused objects from unintelligently caused ones.
(Emphasis mine)

In his Dover expert witness report, Dembski claimed:
Quote
Designed objects like Mount Rushmore exhibit characteristic features or patterns that point to an intelligence. Such features or patterns constitute signs of intelligence. Proponents of intelligent design, known as design theorists, purport to study such signs formally, rigorously, and scientifically. In particular, they claim that a type of information, known as specified complexity, is a key sign of intelligence.
(Emphasis mine)

The telling word is "purport" - ie. they don't.

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:16   

Quote (Bebbo @ July 20 2007,17:31)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 19 2007,20:38)
 
Quote (GCT @ July 19 2007,17:48)
   
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 19 2007,04:09)
TARDGASM!!!! OMG OMG WTF LOL?

So, to summarize, if you say that ID is a threat, then it is, and if you say it isn't, then you are just putting up a false front.  Heads I win, tails you lose sucka.

Yes, much like when a couple days ago some random doofus at UD declared that the recent upsurge in atheist books was some kind of sign that the 'materialists are afraid'. I'm sure if atheists weren't publishing any books, that would be a clear sign of fear, too.

Oh yes, and Jehu can smell the Darwinists' fear. He said so.

So all the ID books shows the IDers are running scared too.

Correct. Writing or publishing a book of any kind is an admission of abject terror.

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:19   

Quote (Richardthughes @ July 20 2007,17:59)
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....omments

 
Quote
Would it help to derail ID to characterize Dembski as a mathematical klutz. Then characterize him as a mathematical klutz. As for providing evidence for that claim, don’t bother. If NATURE requires no evidence, then certainly the rest of the scientific community bears no such burden.


http://www.antievolution.org/people/dembski_wa/wad_factors_59.html

First comment - By "bornagain" - Jesus Christ, this post is so obsequious that it makes me think "bornagain" is a Dembski sock puppet.  Would a Double Doctor like Dembksi do something this crazy?

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

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

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:23   

Quote (Rob @ July 20 2007,18:41)
Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them. But as I indicated in that book, it was about sketching an intellectual program rather than filling in the details, )

What a bullshit defense! He should have gone with the more respectable "I was just...testing you..."

   
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:30   

Quote (stevestory @ July 20 2007,18:23)
Quote (Rob @ July 20 2007,18:41)
Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them. But as I indicated in that book, it was about sketching an intellectual program rather than filling in the details, )

What a bullshit defense! He should have gone with the more respectable "I was just...testing you..."

Or how about "I was just pulling your leg!"

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
Hermagoras



Posts: 1260
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,18:51   

Dembski's latest:  
Quote
Here’s a fun interview with my friend and colleague Robert Marks. I hope you catch from the interview the amibitiousness of the lab and how it promises to put people like Christoph Adami and Rob Pennock out of business (compare www.evolutionaryinformatics.org with devolab.cse.msu.edu).

Let the comparing (DING!) begin!

--------------
"I am not currently proving that objective morality is true. I did that a long time ago and you missed it." -- StephenB

http://paralepsis.blogspot.com/....pot.com

   
Bebbo



Posts: 161
Joined: Dec. 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:13   

Quote (Hermagoras @ July 20 2007,18:51)
Dembski's latest:  
Quote
Here’s a fun interview with my friend and colleague Robert Marks. I hope you catch from the interview the amibitiousness of the lab and how it promises to put people like Christoph Adami and Rob Pennock out of business (compare www.evolutionaryinformatics.org with devolab.cse.msu.edu).

Let the comparing (DING!) begin!

Rob Pennock is going to be put out of business. Atheist Darwinists are running scared because they sell so many books. It's Waterloo all over again, yet as always Dembski hasn't learnt which side loses.

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:27   

I've got something we can compare science to....

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:33   

Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ July 20 2007,17:13)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,08:20)
 Inasmuch as David hadn't offered any religious pronouncements in the post you responded to

Heddle ***IS*** a religious pronouncement.  A walking, talking one.

He's God's favorite, ya know.


(snicker)  (giggle)

And, uhh, why should your opinion of David Heddle be more valuable than mine or the guy who delivers my pizza?

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Arden Chatfield



Posts: 6657
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:36   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,19:33)
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ July 20 2007,17:13)
 
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,08:20)
 Inasmuch as David hadn't offered any religious pronouncements in the post you responded to

Heddle ***IS*** a religious pronouncement.  A walking, talking one.

He's God's favorite, ya know.


(snicker)  (giggle)

And, uhh, why should your opinion of David Heddle be more valuable than mine or the guy who delivers my pizza?

And why is your pizza any more valuable than mine?  :angry:

--------------
"Rich is just mad because he thought all titties had fur on them until last week when a shorn transvestite ruined his childhood dreams by jumping out of a spider man cake and man boobing him in the face lips." - Erasmus

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3326
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:38   

Quote (Bob O'H @ July 20 2007,13:53)
Albatrossity2, why are you expecting consistency?  They would need some level of understanding first.

Bob

Hey, Bob. Someone over at UD has got your number
Quote
Thirdly, what else is there other than mutation?

A metaphorical touch of the finger of the telic entity.

Take that, you materialist!

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Albatrossity2



Posts: 2780
Joined: Mar. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:44   

Quote (J-Dog @ July 20 2007,18:19)

First comment - By "bornagain" - Jesus Christ, this post is so obsequious that it makes me think "bornagain" is a Dembski sock puppet.  Would a Double Doctor like Dembksi do something this crazy?

ALL of the comments are bizarre. Reinforcing the hypothesis that UD is just an echo chamber, in the fourth comment acquiesce (no irony there) chimes in with a complete non sequitur. Remember, while reading this comment, that this thread is about Dr Dr D whining about how he doesn't get no respect.    
Quote
Whilst I believe chance to be an inadequate explanation for life, I feel the upper probability bound of 10^150 rests on pure speculation. Who can really say, with any empirical basis, there are only 10^80 elementary particles in the universe? For all we know the universe could be twice this size, or ten times or even infinite in size.

It's like those old Chatty Cathy dolls that my sisters had. Pull the string, and some random phrase pops out. Do you think that all of that super-secret DI research money is being used to produce dolls with strings at the back of their necks?

--------------
Flesh of the sky, child of the sky, the mind
Has been obligated from the beginning
To create an ordered universe
As the only possible proof of its own inheritance.
                        - Pattiann Rogers

   
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,19:46   

ah...the finger of the Telic Entity....

Shame we have no idea who it is....


   
cdesign proponentsist



Posts: 16
Joined: Nov. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,20:30   

Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 20 2007,16:09)
Quote (franky172 @ July 20 2007,15:39)
Dembski is upset no one has used his EF.

His response?

   
Quote
Does Padian mean Wesley Elsberry, Shallit’s sidekick, whose PhD is from the wildlife fisheries department at Texas A&M? Does Padian mean Richard Wein, whose 50,000 word response to my book NO FREE LUNCH is widely cited — Wein holds no more than a bachelors degree in statistics? Does Padian mean Elliott Sober, who is a philosopher and whose critique of my work along Bayesian lines is itself deeply problematic (for my response to Sober go here). Does he mean Thomas Schneider, who is a biologist who dabbles in information theory and not very well at that (see my “withering critique” with Bob Marks of his work on the evolution of nucleotide binding sites here). Does he mean David Wolpert, a co-discoverer of the NFL theorems? Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them.

Yes, Dr. Dembski.  He means people who do math, regardless of their degrees.

Does he mean William Dembski, an obscure discredited mathematician at an obscure southern Bible college with no training in biology?

Embedded within Dembski's quote was a perfect example of the (unwitting) irony that UD so consistently and endearingly provides.

Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them.


Seriously, that's the upshot? Wahooo! ID is saved!

Having the Isaac Newton of ID admit his own ideas are insufficiently developed is funny, but the kicker is that, just two paragraphs below that sentence, he blithely quotes his supporter Lennox saying...

Quote
Using recent information-theoretic “no free lunch” theorems, he shows in particular that evolutionary algorithms are by their very nature incapable of generating the complex specified information which lies at the heart of living systems.


That's quite a concrete conclusion for an insufficiently developed idea. It made me wonder if the disembodied telic entity gave Dembski the ability to detect irony. At least, I wondered until the last paragraph of his rant.

Quote
It seems that the modus operandi of ID critics is this: Imagine what you would most like to be wrong with ID and its proponents and then simply, bald-facedly accuse ID and its proponents of being wrong in that way. It’s called wish-fulfillment.


That'd be a big, fat NO

--------------
"Believe it or not, it really helps that the other side thinks we’re such morons." -Dembski

The ID epiphany: Nothing in ID makes sense until you accept they're trying to look stupid.

  
stevestory



Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,20:41   

Quote (cdesign proponentsist @ July 20 2007,21:30)
Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them.


Seriously, that's the upshot?

We know....we know....

   
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,21:36   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,19:33)
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ July 20 2007,17:13)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 20 2007,08:20)
 Inasmuch as David hadn't offered any religious pronouncements in the post you responded to

Heddle ***IS*** a religious pronouncement.  A walking, talking one.

He's God's favorite, ya know.


(snicker)  (giggle)

And, uhh, why should your opinion of David Heddle be more valuable than mine or the guy who delivers my pizza?

Alas, MY opinion of him doesn 't matter diddley doo.  

But if you ask HIM, he'll be more than happy to tell you that he's more holy than you are, and walks more closely with God, and all that.


It's all Heddle is about.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Reciprocating Bill



Posts: 4265
Joined: Oct. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,21:38   

Quote (stevestory @ July 20 2007,21:41)
Quote (cdesign proponentsist @ July 20 2007,21:30)
 
Quote
Wolpert had some nasty things to say about my book NO FREE LUNCH, but the upshot was that my ideas there were not sufficiently developed mathematically for him to critique them.


Seriously, that's the upshot?

We know....we know....

Laugh all you want. ID is just getting off the ground.  When it takes off, LOOK OUT.  



--------------
Myth: Something that never was true, and always will be.

"The truth will set you free. But not until it is finished with you."
- David Foster Wallace

"Here’s a clue. Snarky banalities are not a substitute for saying something intelligent. Write that down."
- Barry Arrington

  
bfish



Posts: 267
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2007,21:42   

Woo Hoo! A half a million views! I think that was me at 500,000.

Unless it was someone else.

  
  29999 replies since Jan. 16 2006,11:43 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (1000) < ... 570 571 572 573 574 [575] 576 577 578 579 580 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

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