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... > Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread

Pages: (1000) < ... 389 390 391 392 393 [394] 395 396 397 398 399 ... >

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,10:15    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 10 2007,09:11) DaveScot prevaricates.     Quote Paleontologist Richard Leakey Says We Are Descended From Apes DaveScot You know for many years I’ve been taking care to avoid saying men evolved from apes because the pedant dominated science establishment is quick to point out that we and apes descend from a common ancestor and anyone who thinks we evolved from apes clearly doesn’t understand evolution. So now we have arguably the most recognized living name in paleontology, Richard Leakey, blurting out the proverbial “I’m so stupid I don’t know what common ancestry means”. What are we to make of that? I’m sure our good pedant friends in the science establishment, through Panda’s Thumb or some member blog, will let us know upon reading this. Dave, why obfuscate by quoting Leakey's casual statement?   Now is your chance to state it loud and clear:  "I, Dave Springer, believe that human beings and the extant great apes share a common ancestor."   Go ahead, don't be shy. Grow some stones. Of course, Leakey's comment was perfectly accurate. Humans are apes. They descended from apes. And they share a common ancestry with other, extant apes. What happens is when someone of DaveScot's 'stature' incorrectly claims or implies that humans descended from extant apes. Here is an example over at Teleological Blog who posted a chart showing that humans descended from mice. My reply immediately follows his comment. Zachriel: Your cladogram is faulty. Modern bacterium are as much derived from their ancestors as are fish or humans. Nor did humans evolve from modern mice, but both evolved from a common vertebrate ancestor. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,10:21    Quote (Ichthyic @ Feb. 09 2007,19:42) oh I think Wingless has been around there for a while now. I also have had the thought several times that he should change his handle to a more relevant one, which should immediately be obvious to anyone who just read what you posted from him. hint: starts with a "B" instead of a "W", but still ends with "less". Hmmm, I would have just changed the "ng" to a "t".

Reciprocating Bill Posts: 4265 Joined: Oct. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:03    Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,10:15) Of course, Leakey's comment was perfectly accurate. Humans are apes. They descended from apes. And they share a common ancestry with other, extant apes. Absolutely. Even DaveScot, with his ridiculous theory of "front loading," may be seen to harbor views on topics crucial to an understanding of evolution that separate him from the YEC and OEC denizens of UD.  Examples: - I gather that he accepts something like the inflationary big bang and a universe that is on the order of 13.9 billion years old. - He accepts that the earth has a history of approximately 4.5 billion years. He accepts our understanding of the geological column. He therefore parts ways with all young earth creationists. - He appears to accept a history of life spanning something on the order of 3.8 billion years, and accepts our basic understanding of the fossil record. - He accepts common ancestry.  Therefore he accepts descent with modification. Here he sheds old earth creationists and separates himself from those who blather on about "barriers" between species.   - He accepts that homo sapiens are great apes, and share common ancestry with other great apes.   That leaves him with "front loading."  However, he repeatedly argues that common experience with human design activities establish that design need not be, and is not, supernatural in nature, and therefore argues that front loading was accomplished by super beings who were, nevertheless, not supernatural in nature.  Here he sheds the remaining deists. [edit] He does retain hard science fiction authors, however. But he rejects and reviles contemporary evolutionary biology. That leaves him in the corner with JAD - a fate he deserves, I would say. -------------- 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

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:05    Tardmac: A poor man's Salvador Cordova: Quote GA Tools TRoutMac | Sat, 2007-02-10 14:56 brutum wrote: "We set a target for the output and how it get's to that target is unknown until it gets there." The key word there, brutum, and you drove right past it, is that "we" set a target. And the "we" here exercised intelligence in setting that target. The target indicates purpose and intent. Thompson may not have known what this circuit would look like specifically, but he used the GA to arrive at a functional circuit. The GA is nothing more than a tool, brutum. Thompson is the intelligent designer, the circuit is the product of intelligent design. "What I dont understand is how the designer is constantly being invoked to deal with complexity and here it is shown how unintelligent equations can generate some level of compexity…" Again, the GA in this case is just a tool used to arrive at a particular target. The intelligence resides in selecting the GA and selecting and specifying all the other components or materials that must be present in order to create the circuit. The very fact that there was any target at all, any intent, however specific or general, indicates teleology, and that indicates design. TRoutMac Intelligent (Graphic) Designer So every evolution experiment ever done, indeed every evolution experiment that ever could be done, automatically supports ID since the experiment was concieved and conducted by a person with some kind of intent. What an idiot.

Faid Posts: 1143 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:17    Quote Basically, squamous cells are “tougher” and hence the external os of the cervix is lined by squamous epithelium, where as the inner part is columnar which is apt for mucous secretion. I don’t see tremendous life altering significance of the external cervix being squamous, but if it was designed, its fully understandable why that little variation is there. This is just very good programming. Go God! Wow. I guess jpark doesn't think much of the inability to produce mucous... Meh, who needs it.  :O As for life-altering signifcance, I wonder if he knows what happens to the epithelium in all those pre-cancerous states... jpark, I think you should stick to... What is it he does, anyway? -------------- A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty: "The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information" "...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

BWE Posts: 1902 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:21    Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 09 2007,13:02) Quote (Kristine @ Feb. 08 2007,17:43) OH JEBUS H. X!   Quote Meanwhile, climatic scientists have nevertheless created absolutely perfect models for the world’s weather patterns extending 100,000 years back and forwards in time (and yet they still can’t tell you if it’s going to rain on the weekend). Just a stupid, stupid thing to say. Good low frequency signals can absolutely be picked out of higher frequency noise. Quote It is harder to see a trend in a noisy time series. For example, if the true series is 0, 1, 2, 3 all plus some independent normally distributed "noise" e of standard deviation E, and we have a sample series of length 50, then if E = 0.1 the trend will be obvious; if E = 100 the trend will probably be visible; but if E = 10000 the trend will be buried in the noise. If we consider a concrete example, the global surface temperature record of the past 140 years as presented by the IPCC: [2], then the interannual variation is about 0.2°C and the trend about 0.6°C over 140 years, with 95% confidence limits of 0.2°C (by coincidence, about the same value as the interannual variation). Hence the trend is statistically different from 0. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....example When you sign up to be part of the Intelligent Design team, they take a hammer and bonk you in the head until you can't pass a Statistics 101 test. Then you're ready to go. I can just see the staff sitting down to design the major. "OK, we're going to need a hammer for this." -------------- Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered When wished on the morning star Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it Look what it's done so far The Daily Wingnut

Faid Posts: 1143 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:28    Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 10 2007,11:05) Tardmac: A poor man's Salvador Cordova:   Quote GA Tools TRoutMac | Sat, 2007-02-10 14:56 brutum wrote: "We set a target for the output and how it get's to that target is unknown until it gets there." The key word there, brutum, and you drove right past it, is that "we" set a target. And the "we" here exercised intelligence in setting that target. The target indicates purpose and intent. Thompson may not have known what this circuit would look like specifically, but he used the GA to arrive at a functional circuit. The GA is nothing more than a tool, brutum. Thompson is the intelligent designer, the circuit is the product of intelligent design. "What I dont understand is how the designer is constantly being invoked to deal with complexity and here it is shown how unintelligent equations can generate some level of compexity…" Again, the GA in this case is just a tool used to arrive at a particular target. The intelligence resides in selecting the GA and selecting and specifying all the other components or materials that must be present in order to create the circuit. The very fact that there was any target at all, any intent, however specific or general, indicates teleology, and that indicates design. TRoutMac Intelligent (Graphic) Designer So every evolution experiment ever done, indeed every evolution experiment that ever could be done, automatically supports ID since the experiment was concieved and conducted by a person with some kind of intent. What an idiot. It's more than that, Steve. Even THINKING of testing the ToE is , in, fact, evidense of ID instead, because that thought process is done by an intelligence. ARGUING for it? Even more. Actually, the very fact that the theory of Evolution was conceived is, in fact, proof for ID, because it wouldn't be conceived without intelligent input! Seems that the only way an argument for ToE would be acceptable, is if monkeys randomly produce it with typewriters. Wait- did I say typewriters? Doh! Curse you, ID ghost in the shell! -------------- A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty: "The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information" "...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

Faid Posts: 1143 Joined: Mar. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:32    Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Feb. 10 2007,09:11) DaveScot prevaricates.   Quote Paleontologist Richard Leakey Says We Are Descended From Apes DaveScot You know for many years I’ve been taking care to avoid saying men evolved from apes because the pedant dominated science establishment is quick to point out that we and apes descend from a common ancestor and anyone who thinks we evolved from apes clearly doesn’t understand evolution. So now we have arguably the most recognized living name in paleontology, Richard Leakey, blurting out the proverbial “I’m so stupid I don’t know what common ancestry means”. What are we to make of that? I’m sure our good pedant friends in the science establishment, through Panda’s Thumb or some member blog, will let us know upon reading this. Dave, why obfuscate by quoting Leakey's casual statement?   Now is your chance to state it loud and clear:  "I, Dave Springer, believe that human beings and the extant great apes share a common ancestor."   Go ahead, don't be shy. Grow some stones. And while you're at it, Dave, find the drawers to finally make that "Radiometric Dating Method Exploding" post. It's long overdue, and the drones at UD are getting restless... :) -------------- A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty: "The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information" "...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:33    Meanwhile, over at Teleological Blog, in discussions with Uncommon Descent denizen JoeG, Zachriel has discarded the term "nested hierarchy" in favor of           Quote The nested hierarchy pattern of interest is an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. So the twigs on a tree, a cohort of Roman legionaries, descendents of an uncrossed lineage, are all examples of a nested hierarchy the pattern of interest. (Too bad mathematicians don’t have a name for such a hierarchical arrangement of subsets strictly contained within supersets.) -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

Richardthughes Posts: 11178 Joined: Jan. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,11:41    DaveTard Sez: http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/2055 ID PREDICTS THIS!* *We just forgot to write it down before hand Ladies, better understanding of evolutionary mechanisms is NOT evidence for design.. -------------- "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

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:22    jerry     Quote The finding that this property exists in “reef coral, termites, and humans” which are in different phyla means that the process must have developed before the Cambrian Explosion or else this remarkable feature “evolved” independently several times... If it is pre Cambrian then it should be in all the members of the phyla in which these organisms belong. What are the odds that such a sophisticated mechanism evolved in the short time before the Cambrian. Let's see. The Precambrian spans from the formation of the Earth about 4500 million years ago to the Cambrian 542 million years ago. The earliest signs of cellular life, which were already quite sophisticated, occurs at least 3500 million years ago. (Other evidence points to protolife at 3800 million years ago.) That means the "short time before the Cambrian" is ~3 billion years, more than ¾ of the time life is known to have existed on Earth. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

phonon Posts: 396 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:27    Oh Lord. http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/2054 Quote The Sound of Mendelian Genetics Exploding Didn't they already cover this? Anyway, haven't they always lauded Mendel for being a "real scientist" because he was a monk that believed in God? http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1146#comment-38915   Quote Reading  wikipedia one would think that Mendel’s research was based on Darwinism, yet according to Dr Jonathan Wells, Mendel’s work owes absolutly nothing to Darwinism. Again we see Darwinism capitalizing on the success of true science (Mendel’s genetics). http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1407#comment-51942   Quote Newton, Kepler, Mendel, and other scientists who accepted supernatural explinations on historical sciences had no problems at all. Kepler? There are plenty of other examples. So now we hear.   Quote Recent experiments cause a central tenet of NDE to miss the prediction again. Genes not found in the parents but found in earlier ancestors are somehow preserved (stored in unexpressed form) and show up again in later generations. Now Mendel is central to Darwinism. But the article he cites doesn't talk about "Darwinism."   Quote Mendelian inheritance, the central tenet of genetics...   Quote RNA back-ups It is possible that the phenomenon is limited to this one plant. But in Nature (vol 434, p 505), Pruitt’s team speculates that it might be a more widespread mechanism that allows plants to “experiment” with new mutations while keeping RNA spares as a back-up. And this is considered "front loading?" The predictive power of ID is simply amazing! It reminds me of the sound of Davetard's brain cell assploding. -------------- With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:33    Quote The girl on the right is Debbie Schlussel. She got a boatload of hate mail from offended atheists due to the program. You should see the threat I sent her. I called it a threat, too. Dang, y'all! I got the perfect way to give Christian girls the ickies--use the "diet" analogy. Atheism is a religion? And we don't have freedom from religion in this country (wouldn't that imply that no one has the right to freedom from atheism, BTW?)? Okay, lil' Debbi cakes: Premise: We have the freedom to choose between diets but not not to diet. Reply: Okay doke, since everything is a "diet," I'm on a "diet." Last night I looked at my homework (towering close to the ceiling at this point) and said, "**** it, we have the freedom to choose homework but not to not do it," and then rented some crap horror films (Don't see Blood and Black Lace, it sucks), got some microwave White Castle cheeseburgers and some oven fries, sat on the couch with the cats (my guy is traveling) and ate my "diet" food along with 2 beers (yeah, FTheKids, I'm on a "diet" just like you), did my "homework" (the MST 3000 takedown of Unearthly gave me some laughs), and "said my prayers" (Grain Belt is a 3-2 beer, unfortunately). Gee, I also "did the dishes" (they're still stacked in the sink), "made the bed" (sheets piled on bed, not on floor--check), and, what else--I'm at the library now--oh, we'll just call that saving the planet. Yeah. If atheism is a "religion," ID is "science." Oh. At least I stuck to my "diet!" Gee, religion gives you an excuse for anything (learn quickly, don't I?). -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

phonon Posts: 396 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:43    You cannot deny the power of the Lord the predictive power of ID. http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/2055#more-2055 Quote Probably exploited during evolution? How about purposely exploited by an intelligent designer, Shalev. This finding comes as no surprise from a design theoretic point of view. We expected it and much more like it. Where was this predicted? Where was it written down? Darwin's Black Box? No Free Lunch? Oh no it was in a comment Davetard made in the past on UD. http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1802#comment-77217 Quote Wow. It took me a moment’s consideration of miRNA (which I’d never heard of before) to accurately describe how they might make synonymous substitutions not so neutral. See how actual designers of codes in real life can drill right through to these things based upon intuition and experience? Ah miRNA's are evidence of an intelligent designer. So cancer is also the result of intelligent design I guess? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_RNA Quote miRNA has been found to have links with some types of cancer. A study of mice altered to produce excess c-myc — a protein implicated in several cancers — shows that miRNA has an effect on the development of cancer. Mice that were engineered to produce a surplus of types of miRNA found in lymphoma cells developed the disease within 50 days and died two weeks later. In contrast, mice without the surplus miRNA lived over 100 days The intelligent designer is a cruel basTARD. -------------- With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:50    Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,11:33) Meanwhile, over at Teleological Blog, in discussions with Uncommon Descent denizen JoeG, Zachriel has discarded the term "nested hierarchy" in favor of             Quote The nested hierarchy pattern of interest is an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. So the twigs on a tree, a cohort of Roman legionaries, descendents of an uncrossed lineage, are all examples of a nested hierarchy the pattern of interest. (Too bad mathematicians don’t have a name for such a hierarchical arrangement of subsets strictly contained within supersets.) JoeG didn't like Pattern of Interest. We've been updated to Pattern X, an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. (I just hope we don't have problems with constructing sets. Last time he got befuddled about the empty set and subsets.) -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

phonon Posts: 396 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,12:57    He links to another post by dougmoron to make his case too. It's long and boring, but it's got one little thing in it that always tickles me when I see it. http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1166#comment-40845 Quote One commentor in this blog noted that we should be looking for hidden copyrights or messages from the designer. I feel this is a worthy area of discussion. Gotta love those supernatural intellectual property laws. I guess they get the Thomas More Law center to serve as counsel? -------------- With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

phonon Posts: 396 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,13:04    Quote (Kristine @ Feb. 10 2007,12:33) Quote The girl on the right is Debbie Schlussel. She got a boatload of hate mail from offended atheists due to the program. Dang, y'all! I got the perfect way to give Christian girls the ickies--use the "diet" analogy. Atheism is a religion? And we don't have freedom from religion in this country (wouldn't that imply that no one has the right to freedom from atheism, BTW?)? Okay, lil' Debbi cakes: Premise: We have the freedom to choose between diets but not not to diet. Reply: Okay doke, since everything is a "diet," I'm on a "diet." Awesome nickname. Lil Debbie cakes. Perfect. And I guess I never give much thought to these things, but that is the perfect comeback to the idiotic argument about "freedom from religion." Just take their two lame premises to their logical conclusion. Atheism is a religion. No one has freedom from religion. So no one has freedom from atheism. yay. Some of the comments in that Shlussel thread are awesome, btw. -------------- With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

phonon Posts: 396 Joined: Nov. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,14:08    More predictions from ID come to pass. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/pu-nds020707.php   Quote New data shakes accepted models of collisions of the Earth's crust They all happened in a global fludd. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/vt-loa020707.php   Quote Loss of a universal tRNA feature reported Until now, bacterial, archaeal, and eukaryotic tRNAs have always been found with an extra guanylate residue at the 5' end of the tRNA molecule. The scientists, led by Kelly Williams of VBI, have shown that tRNAs carrying the amino acid histidine in the alphaproteobacteria Sinorhizobium meliloti and Caulobacter crescentus apparently lack the universal guanylate residue. Kelly Williams, research investigator at VBI, remarked: "The loss of a universal and apparently ancient tRNA feature in two members of the alphaproteobacteria was particularly surprising as it represents a radical departure from previously known identity rules for the histidine-carrying tRNAs." Of course, this is what DaveScot has been saying all along. But these dumb scientists can see past their own preconceived bias against unblind directed purposeful design.     Quote The researchers used bioinformatic tools such as a computer script – specifically written by the group – to probe the tRNA genes in the alphaproteobacteria group. See? The whole thing is like a giant computer script. Biology has been scripted by the great scriptwriter in the sky. Troutmac was right all along. To show my humility, I'll be the first one to stop exhaling CO2. http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2007-02/esa-ucm020607.php   Quote Universe contains more calcium than expected Dumb scientists. They should have just read a book by Dembski and they'd know that the intelligent designer intended for us to have more calcium. He wants us to have strong bones and healthy teeth. The ID movement has been saying this for years. -------------- With most men, unbelief in one thing springs from blind belief in another. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg To do just the opposite is also a form of imitation. - Georg Christoph Lichtenberg

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,16:05    Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,12:50)     Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,11:33) Meanwhile, over at Teleological Blog, in discussions with Uncommon Descent denizen JoeG, Zachriel has discarded the term "nested hierarchy" in favor of                 Quote The nested hierarchy pattern of interest is an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. So the twigs on a tree, a cohort of Roman legionaries, descendents of an uncrossed lineage, are all examples of a nested hierarchy the pattern of interest. (Too bad mathematicians don’t have a name for such a hierarchical arrangement of subsets strictly contained within supersets.) JoeG didn't like Pattern of Interest. We've been updated to Pattern X, an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. (I just hope we don't have problems with constructing sets. Last time he got befuddled about the empty set and subsets.) Jumpin' Jehosephus!! Desperation sets in as JoeG realizes he can't just end the discussion. He waves his hands furiously. JoeG     Quote I just refuse to follow you down a one-way, dead-end street. Zachriel     Quote You are not required to participate in any such discussion. But, in order to follow my argument, you’ll have to, well, follow my argument. If it reaches a dead-end, that will be clear soon enough. My argument begins with a definition of a particular pattern, Pattern X. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

carlsonjok Posts: 3326 Joined: May 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,16:37    Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,16:05)    JoeG         Quote I just refuse to follow you down a one-way, dead-end street. Zachriel         Quote You are not required to participate in any such discussion. But, in order to follow my argument, you’ll have to, well, follow my argument. If it reaches a dead-end, that will be clear soon enough. My argument begins with a definition of a particular pattern, Pattern X. This reminds me of a, probably apocryphal, story about Vince Lombardi.  After a game where his team played particulary bad, he called a meeting.  Standing in front of his team, he held up a ball and began, "Gentlemen.  This is a football.  Stop me if I am going to fast." -------------- 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!)

Kristine Posts: 3061 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,17:17    Is everyone all right over there? Geez. I hope so. I don't like explosions. I like scary movies. Now I'm home again watching Legend of Boggy Creek and too much noise will scare away the creature. (Since I'm alone, any blogs (ID or Evo) that want to hold my blog-hand, you're welcome to, 'cause it's kind of a creepy film).   -------------- Which came first: the shimmy, or the hip? AtBC Poet Laureate "I happen to think that this prerequisite criterion of empirical evidence is itself not empirical." - Clive "Damn you. This means a trip to the library. Again." -- fnxtr

creeky belly Posts: 205 Joined: June 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,17:48    Quote Now I'm home again watching Legend of Boggy Creek and too much noise will scare away the creature. Is that Boggy Creek or Boggy Creek II? If it's the movie I'm thinking of, then there's chicks wrestling in the mud, a kid who can't seem to find his shirt, and a guy that looks like Grissom from CSI who's got a PhD in "Boggy Creek Studies". Oh, and a hick that looks like DaveScot.

Zachriel Posts: 2723 Joined: Sep. 2006 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,17:49    Quote (carlsonjok @ Feb. 10 2007,16:37)   Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,16:05)    JoeG             Quote I just refuse to follow you down a one-way, dead-end street. Zachriel             Quote You are not required to participate in any such discussion. But, in order to follow my argument, you’ll have to, well, follow my argument. If it reaches a dead-end, that will be clear soon enough. My argument begins with a definition of a particular pattern, Pattern X. This reminds me of a, probably apocryphal, story about Vince Lombardi.  After a game where his team played particulary bad, he called a meeting.  Standing in front of his team, he held up a ball and began, "Gentlemen.  This is a football.  Stop me if I am going to fast." Yikes! The moderator had to step in and put an end to JoeG's misery. -------------- You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,17:51    Quote (creeky belly @ Feb. 10 2007,18:48) Quote Now I'm home again watching Legend of Boggy Creek and too much noise will scare away the creature. Is that Boggy Creek or Boggy Creek II? If it's the movie I'm thinking of, then there's chicks wrestling in the mud, a kid who can't seem to find his shirt, and a guy that looks like Grissom from CSI who's got a PhD in "Boggy Creek Studies". Oh, and a hick that looks like DaveScot. OK, now that does sound scary.

Henry J Posts: 5786 Joined: Mar. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,18:25    Re "OK, now that does sound scary." Which one of the four things mentioned? Or some combination of them? Henry

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,18:32    Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,17:05) Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,12:50)       Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 10 2007,11:33) Meanwhile, over at Teleological Blog, in discussions with Uncommon Descent denizen JoeG, Zachriel has discarded the term "nested hierarchy" in favor of                   Quote The nested hierarchy pattern of interest is an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. So the twigs on a tree, a cohort of Roman legionaries, descendents of an uncrossed lineage, are all examples of a nested hierarchy the pattern of interest. (Too bad mathematicians don’t have a name for such a hierarchical arrangement of subsets strictly contained within supersets.) JoeG didn't like Pattern of Interest. We've been updated to Pattern X, an ordered set such that each subset is strictly contained within its superset. (I just hope we don't have problems with constructing sets. Last time he got befuddled about the empty set and subsets.) Jumpin' Jehosephus!! Desperation sets in as JoeG realizes he can't just end the discussion. He waves his hands furiously. JoeG       Quote I just refuse to follow you down a one-way, dead-end street. Zachriel       Quote You are not required to participate in any such discussion. But, in order to follow my argument, you’ll have to, well, follow my argument. If it reaches a dead-end, that will be clear soon enough. My argument begins with a definition of a particular pattern, Pattern X. Clicking on the link, I went over to read a little Zach vs Joe. Joe G says: Quote Umm I live pretty much in the woods. Trees form a branching pattern but that pattern is nothing like Roman legions or descendants of any kind. Descendants don't follow a branching, treelike pattern...hmm...let me think for an epsilon of time

GCT Posts: 1001 Joined: Aug. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,18:48    Quote (Henry J @ Feb. 10 2007,19:25) Re "OK, now that does sound scary." Which one of the four things mentioned? Or some combination of them? :) Henry This part: "Oh, and a hick that looks like DaveScot." Shudder.  I'd hate to get between that man and some cheesy poofs.

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,18:49    Quote (phonon @ Feb. 10 2007,13:43) You cannot deny the power of the Lord the predictive power of ID. http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/2055#more-2055   Quote Probably exploited during evolution? How about purposely exploited by an intelligent designer, Shalev. This finding comes as no surprise from a design theoretic point of view. We expected it and much more like it. Where was this predicted? Where was it written down? Darwin's Black Box? No Free Lunch? Oh no it was in a comment Davetard made in the past on UD. http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1802#comment-77217   Quote Wow. It took me a moment’s consideration of miRNA (which I’d never heard of before) to accurately describe how they might make synonymous substitutions not so neutral. See how actual designers of codes in real life can drill right through to these things based upon intuition and experience? Ah miRNA's are evidence of an intelligent designer. So cancer is also the result of intelligent design I guess? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_RNA   Quote miRNA has been found to have links with some types of cancer. A study of mice altered to produce excess c-myc — a protein implicated in several cancers — shows that miRNA has an effect on the development of cancer. Mice that were engineered to produce a surplus of types of miRNA found in lymphoma cells developed the disease within 50 days and died two weeks later. In contrast, mice without the surplus miRNA lived over 100 days The intelligent designer is a cruel basTARD. ID truly has impressive predictive power. It allows one to predict the research explained in a news story mere seconds after reading it. So that's why they can't get an issue of PCID out the door--there are simply too many submissions to read!

stevestory Posts: 13407 Joined: Oct. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,18:53    Quote (GCT @ Feb. 10 2007,19:48) Quote (Henry J @ Feb. 10 2007,19:25) Re "OK, now that does sound scary." Which one of the four things mentioned? Or some combination of them? :) Henry This part: "Oh, and a hick that looks like DaveScot." Shudder.  I'd hate to get between that man and some cheesy poofs. Well, he was a member of the United States Gluttony Corps, the premier institution dedicated to the slaughter of jelly donuts. SEMPER FILLING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank Posts: 2560 Joined: Feb. 2005 (Permalink) Posted: Feb. 10 2007,20:41    Quote (stevestory @ Feb. 10 2007,18:53) Well, he was a member of the United States Gluttony Corps, the premier institution dedicated to the slaughter of jelly donuts. Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Is chow allowed in the barracks, Private Tard? Private Tard: Sir, no, sir! Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Are you allowed to eat jelly doughnuts, Private Tard? Private tard: Sir, no, sir! Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: And why not, Private Tard? Private Tard: Sir, because I'm too heavy, sir! Gunnery Sergeant Hartman: Because you are a disgusting fat body, Private Tard! -------------- Editor, Red and Black Publishers www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

Pages: (1000) < ... 389 390 391 392 393 [394] 395 396 397 398 399 ... >

Track this topic	Email this topic	Print this topic

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