Antievolution.org - Antievolution.org Discussion Board -Topic::The Bathroom Wall

Posted: June 30 2006,04:29

Quote

edit: dammit, resident beat poet KE beat me to it.

Gotta be quick, Steve.

--------------
“Why do creationists have such a hard time with commas?

Linky“. ~ Steve Story, Legend

richCares

Unregistered

Posted: July 09 2006,11:28

very sad, very sad indeed, please feel sorry for Dembski. How would feel if you went through life being called a dumbshit. Is that something you would like to be remembered by.
JUST FEEL SORRY FOR HIM

Mike Klymkowsky

Unregistered

Posted: July 09 2006,11:28

I completely agree, having just returned from Barnes and Noble, and discovered the increasing number of "main-stream" anti-evolution/anti-biology polemics, I am sad both for their disingenous authors (dare I say lying) and our society as a whole.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 13 2006,16:38

At the moment I'm watching Primetime, on ABC, about a snake oil 'healer' named Adam. This 19-yro dingbat believes, along with his clientele, that he's healing them by manipulating their auras. You should see this. He's got a hotel ballroom full of people, no doubt paying customers, hooked on his nonsense.

Goddam, I went into the wrong line of work.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 13 2006,16:45

http://www.amazon.com/gp....=283155

This is the guy ABC's talking about. They're estimating he's making in the 7 figures.

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

Posted: July 13 2006,16:52

Quote

Reviewer: N. DuQuette (Northern California) - See all my reviews

I really enjoyed Adam's story. He not only tells about his healings but details of how he does it. Never boring. I admire his honesty. He writes in such a way as to bridge the beliefs of the skeptic to the believer. I think anyone who reads this book will come away from it with an expanded belief system.

One of the reviews of the book you linked to. I must agree, my belief system has expanded (if only slightly), by merely reading some of the reviews. Holy Moly! I have new belief in how gullible people can be.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

Posted: July 13 2006,16:57

Makes you wonder if any of his "true believers" have ever seen this.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 13 2006,16:59

Holy Crap. He's actually telling the audience that his medicinal powers were conveyed to him by the gaze of a big black bird he saw on an island, which had earlier come to him in a dream.

I need to get a shiny suit and start healing people. This research engineer salary ain't cuttin it.

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

Posted: July 13 2006,17:30

An island came to him in a dream? It obviously wasn't big enough to do him any physical harm. Too bad. Unless, opf course, his book is a how-to detailed enough to teach me to peddle snake oil?

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 13 2006,17:39

Are you a member of the Militant Grammarians of Massachussets? I know that the parenthetical phrase doesn't describe the word immediately preceeding the comma, but writing the sentence a different way is a little cumbersome.

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 13 2006,17:45

Quote (blipey @ July 13 2006,23:30)

Unless, opf course, his book is a how-to detailed enough to teach me to peddle snake oil?

The problem with selling snake oil is simply that, if after accumulating enough money, you have a great big laugh by announcing the scam, and mocking your followers, which honestly I would not be able to resist, said followers are likely to meet you in parking lots and courtrooms.

Posts: 2061
Joined: June 2006

Posted: July 13 2006,18:43

Quote (stevestory @ July 13 2006,22:45)

The problem with selling snake oil is simply that, if after accumulating enough money, you have a great big laugh by announcing the scam, and mocking your followers, which honestly I would not be able to resist, said followers are likely to meet you in parking lots and courtrooms.

Which is, of course, why you make sure your snake oil is 110 proof.

--------------
But I get the trick question- there isn't any such thing as one molecule of water. -JoeG

And scientists rarely test theories. -Gary Gaulin

Henry J

Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

Posted: July 16 2006,16:25

Quote

Junk Science???

A freshman at Eagle Rock Junior High won first prize at the Greater Idaho Falls Science Fair on January 26.

In his project he urged people to sign a petition demanding strict control or total elimination of the chemical
"dihydrogen monoxide."

And for plenty of good reasons, since it can:

1. cause excessive sweating and vomiting
2. it is a major component in acid rain
3. it can cause severe burns in its gaseous state
4. accidental inhalation can kill you
5. it contributes to erosion
6. it decreases effectiveness of automobile brakes
7. it has been found in tumors of terminal cancer patients.

He asked 150 people if they supported a ban of the chemical.

One hundred forty-three said yes

Six were undecided

Only one knew that the chemical was...

Water!

The title of his prize winning project was, "How Gullible Are We?"

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
He was attempting to show how conditioned we have become to the alarmists practicing junk science and spreading fear of everything in our environment.

The conclusion is obvious.

Wonder if this "logic" reminds anybody of anything?

Henry

Posts: 13407
Joined: Oct. 2005

Posted: July 19 2006,14:36

Arthur Caplan beats George Bush's stem cell policy like a rented mule:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13935219/

mcc

Posts: 110
Joined: July 2006

Posted: July 19 2006,18:37

Quote (stevestory @ July 19 2006,19:36)

Arthur Caplan beats George Bush's stem cell policy like a rented mule:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/13935219/

Fun.

I found this one interesting... if only because it was written by Ronald Reagan's daughter

By the way, a couple of mostly unrelated questions:

1. Did California's independent stem cell program ever go anywhere? Or are they still spending lots of money on trying to select a building to put it in?

2. Did Paley's Ghost ever actually, in the 'abortion' thread, demonstrate that his mythical 'gill slits=abortion' pamphlet ever existed? Just cuirous.

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

Posted: July 19 2006,19:03

1. there is still some legal wrangling going on.

http://www.the-scientist.com/news/display/23342/

one wonders just how many times these idiots have to lose in court before they start getting the slightest clue.

2. why not look for yourself? last i checked, no.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

mcc

Posts: 110
Joined: July 2006

Posted: July 19 2006,19:20

Quote (Ichthyic @ July 20 2006,00:03)

why not look for yourself?

The problem is not so much "looking" as "just trying to understand what on earth paley is trying to say half the time".

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank

Unregistered

Posted: July 20 2006,02:12

Hey,Christensen, I asked you a few questions. Are you going to answer them? Or, like every other fundie I've ever met, are you lethally allergic to answering direct questions?

Forget my questions already? No problem, I'll just ask again. And again and again and again and again, as many times as I need to, until you either answer or run away.

*ahem*

Show us what “scientific criticism of evolution” the standards want taught, that was NOT first presented by IDers or creation ‘scientists” decades ago…. .

(sound of crickets chirping)

Yep, that’s what I thought.

But I’m a little curious —— if this REALLY isn’t about ID, then, uh, what was this “theort of intelligent design” that all the, uh, “witnesses” at the, uh, “hearings”, kept talking about? Oh, and why so many of the, uh, “witnesses” advocated a young earth, separate ancestry for man and apes, and sudden creation of life from nothing —— all of which were defining characteristics of creation ‘science’?

I’d also like to know if you agree with board member Kathy Martin, who told the press, “Of course this is a Christian agenda. We are a Christian nation. Our country is made up of Christian conservatives. We don’t often speak up, but we need to stand up and let our voices be heard.” That sure doesn’t sound like “scientific criticism of evolution” to ME.

Want a question and answer session, Christensen? It begins right now.

Time to put up or shut up.

Sir_Toejam

Unregistered

Posted: July 20 2006,02:13

using facts is a smear tactic eh?

Assuming you mean the reference to the dishonesty of luskin, I'm sure if you give it a bit of effort, you will easily find at least 4 documented cases of luskin deliberately lying, right here on this very blog. completely independent of KSCE.

did you need me to do it for you? are you as handicapped at searching for posts as you are at searching for reality?

no really, go ahead, I'll wait.

or did you actually have something specific you wished to address rather than the nebulous soup you have so far spewed forth?

Did you wish to discuss something specific of Calverts?

did you actually have questions of your own?

nows your chance to ask; or are you just a pussy?

why wait until Jack's talk, when you can ask now?

heck, you could even take to task any of the points i raised. pick one; but do go into detail as to WHY it's incorrect, and provide evidence to support your contention. I know I can.

or, you could just continue to whine like the little baby you apparently are.

boo hoo. I bet you were really red when your side lost at Dover, eh?

#### that "activist" judge, that was appointed by GW on the advice of all the conservatives in Florida.

*snort*

CHRISTENSEN

Unregistered

Posted: July 20 2006,02:24

The anonymous "toejam" follows the standard smear tactics.

They use them all the time at Kansas Citizens for Science.

I call that a double standard.

Anonymous coward.

Sir_Toejam

Unregistered

Posted: July 20 2006,02:57

<quote>3. ID is an alternative scientific theory.</quote>

er, well it is if you redefine what science itself is, like Kansas has already done.

otherwise, in reality, there is exactly as much science to ID as to astrology, as Behe himself has already pointed out.

<quote>You arguing by IMPLICATION JacK, something you just got through smearing me about over at KCFS…

Your double standard is nauseating.

Ironic that you keep mouthing off about Calvert being a LIAR>

The standards do NOT call for teaching ID.

I hope you are going to have question and answer sessions at your speeches!!!
</quote>

one, you don't understand what a double-standard is if you think you have caught Jack in one.

two, Calvert IS a liar. it's been documented at least a dozen times.

three, the 'standards' weaken the very definition of science to the point of it being watery chowder. Heck, like i said, why not just teach astrology, eh?

four, I'm sure Jack will have question and answer sessions, at which time I'm just as sure you won't have an intelligent question to ask, otherwise you would ask it here and now.

you are both a coward, and an idiot.

prove me wrong.

'Rev Dr' Lenny Flank

Unregistered

Posted: July 20 2006,03:01

<quote>The standards do NOT call for teaching ID.</quote>

Riiiggghhhhttttt.

They just call for teaching all the ID arguments, presented by all the IDers.

Prove me wrong, right here in front of everyone. Show us what "scientific criticism of evolution" the standards want taught, that was NOT first presented by IDers or creation 'scientists" decades ago. . . . .

(sound of crickets chirping)

Yep, that's what I thought.

But I'm a little curious ---- if this REALLY isn't about ID, then, uh, what was this "theort of intelligent design" that all the, uh, "witnesses" at the, uh, "hearings", kept talking about? Oh, and why so many of the, uh, "witnesses" advocated a young earth, separate ancestry for man and apes, and sudden creation of life from nothing ---- all of which were defining characteristics of creation 'science'?

I'd also like to know if you agree with board member Kathy Martin, who told the press, ""Of course this is a Christian agenda. We are a Christian nation. Our country is made up of Christian conservatives. We don't often speak up, but we need to stand up and let our voices be heard." That sure doesn't sound like "scientific criticism of evolution" to ME.

I can't WAIT for this whole thing to get to court. It'll be Dover all over again, only worse this time. (snicker)

Flint

Posts: 478
Joined: Jan. 2006

Posted: July 20 2006,03:24

Ichthyic:

Quote

one wonders just how many times these idiots have to lose in court before they start getting the slightest clue.

Well, as your link says, despite losing the bond election and losing every court case, they have already postponed any actual research by a year and a half, and the appeals process promises to double this delay. At three years per lawsuit-plus-appeals, times the number of different suits the fundies can dream up, this might be quite a while. Especially since as time goes by, more opportunities to find litigable issues are sure to arise.

So I think they have a very good clue. Justice postponed indefinitely is justice denied.

Ichthyic

Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

Posted: July 20 2006,12:18

no such thing as indefinetly.

delaying the inevitable is their best strategy, you say?

fine by me.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

Brett

Unregistered

Posted: July 24 2006,19:51

What does this have to do with the ID/evolution debate? A little out of place here, isn't it?

I don't want to make anyone cry or anything, but in my experience whale meat is kinda yummy ice cold and in thin slices.

mcc

Posts: 110
Joined: July 2006

Posted: July 24 2006,21:34

Quote (Ichthyic @ July 20 2006,17:18)

no such thing as indefinetly.

delaying the inevitable is their best strategy, you say?

fine by me.

Well

The thing is, when we're discussing research relevant to potentially life-threatening illnesses, there are many people for whom a difference of two years really is the same thing as "indefinitely"

Jesus Freak

Unregistered

Posted: July 25 2006,07:58

Sir, a Christian Scientist one time told me that they were not a cult and their beliefs were not a cultish issue. Was I ever surprised to find that they were. Why can we not say the same for Evolution? What beliefs make Evolution not a cult? Why believe in Evolution? What does Evolution have to offer me? Does believing in Evolution help me in getting to heaven? What would Charles Darwin do? What do eyewitness accounts say about Charles Darwin? Do we have any outside proof of his existence? Where can I find a local church in regards to the belief of Evolution? Why do people still worship Charles Darwin's teachings today? Thanks for your time and have a great day.

Honest questions about Charles Darwin:

Sir,
I have a question. Was Darwin a liar, a lunatic or a loser? Was he an idiot?
Question no. 2 Did Darwin go crazy at the Galapogos Islands? Was he hallucinating? What do the experts say?
Question no. 3 Are there any eyewitness accounts of Darwin? What do the eyewitness accounts of Darwin at the Galapogos say? Can we prove through Science that Charles Darwin ever existed?

Thanks for your time sir. Have a good day.

Casey Powell

steve s

Unregistered

Posted: July 25 2006,07:58

Hey Casey Powell, why don't you check out UncommonDescent.com. They'll probably make you a moderator.

Corkscrew

Unregistered

Posted: July 25 2006,07:58

<quote author="Some Troll">What beliefs make Evolution not a cult?</quote>

Start with the belief that conclusions should be based on actual concrete evidence. And that they should be challenged if contradictory evidence emerges. And that they should be as parsimonious as possible.

You know, all that scientific stuff.

Casey Powell

Unregistered