Guano (3)

Dirty penguin

Comments that seem to me to be in violation of the game rules will be moved here, and closed to further comment. Do not regard having your post moved here as a reprimand, merely as a referee’s whistle. 🙂

Feel free to comment on them at any other peanut gallery of your choice.

[New page as links no longer work properly on Guano (2)]

Post n° 56711

498 thoughts on “Guano (3)”

  1. dazz: Congrats

    Thanks. Hope you are well. It’s kind of scary here in the USA with the Wuhan virus invading us.

  5. Alan:

    Might help in limiting trolling opportunities if you could refrain from referring to it as such.

    Alrighty, I won’t call it the Wuhan virus. How about:

  7. I think its hilarious. the same crowd who brought us global warming and evolution and all recent wars are doing it again. Don’t obey lockdown unless they are watching. This is a minor flu , not a epidemic, and will pass without much damage relative to other flues and population. There is only a potential minor epidemic that would bother the weker, older/sick, people. Its always been a humbug about its easy catchyness. Having millions of people, with no virus, avoiding millions of others with no virus is stupid. In fact I understand China, as far as they are trustworthy and competent, already are saying the virus is dying out there very quickly. It was poor sampling to look at cruise ships or vaction areas in europe. It shows how people don’t think things through and believe everything they are told in a establishment. It was always a issue of rates. Rate of increase relative to pop. Its sad for those who died/suffered however even the forgotten hongh kong flu in the 60’s was more of a problem.
    Origin thinkers should be smarter. If the numbers remain small will they say they were dumb wrong or Whew out tactics stopped it?!
    Maybe this will start a revolution of slepticism about authority conclusions.

  8. phoodoo: I also will no longer contribute any science discussion here whatsoever, because of the actions of the moderators here.

    When have you ever contributed to any science discussion here? All you do is troll your usual Creationist idiocy. And whine. I will give you that: you’re second to none when it comes to being a butthurt snowflake.

  9. Joe Felsenstein:
    I am used to hearing nonsense from Byers, but this is lethal nonsense.Robert, I hope you’re not in one of the vulnerable categories (as I am), and I hope you don’t visit anyone who is.Fortunately, there is one comfort: Nobody follows your lead.

    As for our beloved President, sadly there are many people who take seriously what he says, and there are whole news networks who amplify his words.

    Wait a minute. I’m like your president? Well I’m sure his info is good.
    Your the math guy! The rate of increase was always trivial. Ny what I have read about Chins they only have 14,000 cases now. think about it. that means the great number did not lead to a great, greater, number. Most recovered in the last month and so there is a great decline so much its America/europe who have more active cases.
    I predict what happened, if accurate from china stas, will happen in Americva/europe, hopefully too, and no one on TSZ wil know anyone who gets this. ( I almost would say knowing anyone tested but play it consrvative)
    Why am i wrong? Does the creationist have to fix everything??
    By the way its not being over 60 years but that , on a curve, usually those over that are weak in recovery from flues. Flues kill many elderly people though they say its old age. If anyone is normal vigorous, i’m sure you, then even if you got it, very unlikely, you would recover as fast as a teenager which would be fast. Don’t get it and I promise you will not! I guess we should all make predictions for numbers in say about June. I think america will be under 100,000 and probably under 75,000, very possible under 50,000. uOtherwise the criticism against Trump should be WHY is america not doing as well as China?(all this is based on stats from China and North americas slow increase.
    No more nonesecence here then anything i write or show me why with math figures.

  10. Allan Miller:
    Robert Byers,

    Like pastors and right-wing pundits? We can but hope.

    Everyone but especially a left wing establishment whose time has passed.
    This might do it but they will say WE ONLY SAID POTENTIAL. We stoped the increase by our coverage etc etc etc.

  11. Alan Fox: I agree and the comment is no longer visible. Admins will need to discuss what follows.

    why? Even if wrong why would this be censored? Let it be a reflection on this creationist! I predict this will not be a epidemic, relative to hugh populations and I disagree with the term when its small numbers relative sorry WHO.
    I gave my reasons and stand by them. I don’t oppose social distacing but think its dumb. Millions of people ado not need to distance from millions of others. yet still to stop the trivial increae it would be right but so would it for the common cold.
    Lets give it two months if the stats on china are not persuasive.

  12. J-Mac: I agree!

    Even if I was wrong it would not change the world and so censorship is absurd. Do you have credibility by the way? Hmmm

  13. PeterP: No you were not. You made a definitive statement that is obviously false which is your typical MO.

    Liar Liar

    BTW: I forgot. We can’t keep you on…

    Come back… 1 year…🤗

  14. PeterP: DNA_Jock: Are you referring to ACE2?

    He should be but is too ignorant of the mechanism of coronavirus injury and incorporation into the cells of the respiratory tract to do so. He evidently did not understand my previous posts outlining this established pathway. Again no surprise considering the source.

    Now I know you are a farmer…and you didn’t read my post and the article I linked…

    BTW: Make sure you use organic manure as you should have sufficient supply now from within…🤣.

  15. DNA_Jock: You may be rather slow on the uptake, but you can get there eventually, it seems.

    It sucks, doesn’t it, when the admin/moderators themselves don’t give a shit about the alleged rules.

    Now, pay attention: back when you were still wittering on ignorantly about statins…

    See above comment.

    What a stupid thing to write!

    See above comment.

    Even the esteemed DNA_Jock, morally superior to us all, cannot resist pounding his chest and declaring how stupid, ignorant, and slow on the uptake other commenters are.

    You make Trump proud D_J!

  16. Alan Fox: Usual rules apply plus a guideline. Let’s be kind and supportive to each other

    Telling the truth is being kind and supportive. Btw, I see a lot of vile comments on this thread. Sorry to see you’re not enforcing your own rules and guidelines.

  18. Alan Fox: Fair warning. You are straying into moderation issues. You know the drill.

    No I am not, you are making that up. I am talking about fun jewish jokes.

  19. I am talking about fun jewish jokes. I can’t make it any clearer that I am NOT talking about the word that scares you so much.

  20. Entropy: That doesn’t look like an objection. It looks much more like someone accepted the argument to be true, and requested more information.

    No, stupid. Someone else objects and Paley [surrogate] replies. It’s a dialog. Is anyone else that dense to not understand this basic structure?

  22. Flint: (And yes, I expect either no response, or your usual “reject before thinking” reaction.

    I suspect it’s reject without reading. Reading for comprehension is beyond Nonlin, as repeatedly demonstrated, just like Nonlin’s inability to deal with abstractions.

  23. Flint: Well, probably because I know what science is and you don’t.

    Haha!

    Flint: And please do recall that I told you your faith might be entirely correct. But since you’ve demonstrated no willingness to think about what you read, I’ll repeat. Many true but unscientific claims can be made, and many scientific but false statements can be made. THIS time, I’ll try a little harder. Scientific claims must be capable of being tested (even if current technology can’t perform the test). Faith claims can’t be tested in this way, which doesn’t make them wrong. It only makes them unscientific.

    You’re going somewhere with this, but you’re a bit confused. This will help: http://nonlin.org/philosophy-religion-and-science/

    Corneel: I did smile a bit when Nonlin denied a link between genetics and evolution.

    I laugh when you struggle to link them.

    Corneel: But those questions are not very relevant for establishing whether species are evolving or not, are they?

    As a matter of fact, you stumbled into the Paley thread. Are you even wearing trousers?

    Corneel: Nonlin, you are denying obvious stuff again. His book has “theology” and “deity” in the title, for crying out loud!

    Corneel, what did I say about his book vs his watch argument? Are you forgetting your memory pills again?

    Remember to take your pills to not forget to take your memory pills.

    Alan Fox: Paley cannot have been making a counter-argument to Darwin’s theory of natural selection as he published it in 1802.

    Don’t you believe the “evolution” cretinism started with that Darwin. There’s an even older fart-er Darwin in that movie to not speak of other, older imbeciles like them.

    Alan Fox: A scientific theory is a model of reality.

    Not enough. Astrology is also a model of reality.

    Alan Fox: But we don’t know what your model is? What is it?

    Sure you do (not model, but proof): http://nonlin.org/intelligent-design/. Unless you also forgot your memory pills.

  24. Wait a minute. Why don’t we use the wonderful powers of “evolution” to tell us what will happen? Also find out who is the “fittest” of them all and let only him have sex will all the women plus Greta… you know for the sake of mankind and to stop Globull Worming.

  25. Alan Fox: Was an argument for his Christian God as creator of the universe. It wasn’t an argument about methods.

    First one is false. Second one doesn’t apply to anything.

    Joe Felsenstein: Yes, but “baited” breath is even stinkier than bated breath.

    Look who’s enjoying the show for free.

    Allan Miller: You’re saying the space of all possible alleles of a finite sequence is infinite?

    Explain to him Joe Falsenstein. Earn your entertainment.

    Allan Miller: That’s hardly independent verification of the paternity test, is it? All male humans of a certain age could be the father. That’s independent verification, that is.

    Sore loser.

    Allan Miller: By the same token, we could exclude the relationship if it was strongly contradicted by the fossil evidence. But, then, we’d seek to verify by picking different genes. Which is how one would verify a paternity test, as it happens. The more genes converge on the same result, the more robust it is.

    Endless stupid bullshit. Not worth addressing.

    Allan Miller: An argument from analogy independently verifies a hypothesis.

    2.b. and 3.c. I’ll add that we call it ‘analogy’ but in fact it’s ‘certainty’ given we know no reasonable alternative to “what looks created has always proved to be created” (also 3.h).

    Allan Miller: OK, computer file copying independently verifies phylogeny.

    How? Make your case.

    Allan Miller: Suggesting that there is no evidence for multiple origins, ie no evidence for separate Creation events.

    This is too stupid to address.

  26. colewd: Think about it in the same way that a software engineer reduces the probability problem of a functional software program coming into existence versus emerging without a coder (mind) behind it.

    That’s what you think they should have written in the paper do you? You think that allows a comparison of the ‘probability”?

    You are mentally ill.

  27. Flint: Kantian Naturalist: Of course not. Absolute certainty is impossible.

    Nonsense. Nonlin demonstrates otherwise with every post.

    Why would you lie about others?

  28. phoodoo: Come on, are you really trying to tell me you think the US is only 100 times worse than China? A 1000 times worse than Ethiopia? Several thousand times bigger fuck-ups than Yemen?

    Only idiots don’t know China is a fucking prison and the other two are shitholes even covid avoids. Some people called socialists think prisons and shitholes are desirable. If only they moved there and leaved us be.

  29. newton: It is relevant to the fundamental difference between the countries which make up the EU and the states that make up the US.

    WTF is this nonsense?

    Allan Miller: “Diversity crap”… Time to eliminate the whites? 🤔

    Suicidal whites like yourself do what suicidal idiots always do.

  30. OMagain: Contingent on what?

    I know you’re a starving, unemployed impresario, but DO make an effort and follow the thread.

    Joe Felsenstein: far more than enough has been said in this thread to convince 99% of lurkers that nonlin.org’s objections to natural selection are vacuous.

    If you don’t understand something, like the very clear and well documented objections I presented, shouldn’t you doubt your own intelligence first and foremost?

    Corneel: You are not paying attention. Several people have already told you multiple times: It did outcompete its cousins within the population into which it was introduced. However, the ability to aerobically use citrate is only adaptive in an environment where other carbon sources, like glucose, are limited.

    Very funny coming from someone that doesn’t pay any attention. The claim was that cit plus is “beneficial”, so why should it “only adaptive in an environment”?!? It’s a FREEBIE because “beneficial”. So they should out compete all e coli.

    And another thing you’re not paying attention to: if “evolution” is not happening in e coli, what are the chances said “evolution” is happening anywhere else?!? “Zero” is the right answer. That’s right.

    BTW, when you claim e coli differ 80% in their genes, you’re committing a fallacy – namely the assumption that we are the sum of our genes. That assumption is demonstrably false.

    Corneel: My guess is this misunderstanding is fueled by your inclination to view all life as being neatly categorized into separately created kinds,

    Your guess is false. Next?

    Corneel: Then you must have excellent eyes. Bacteria are reeeallly small, you know. So what is it exactly that you observe when deciding a microbe is an “e coli”?

    This is plain stupid. And you know it full well.

    Corneel: What is it that makes, say, a penguin a good “design”, if not its ability to survive and successfully reproduce in its habitat?

    I didn’t say that. This is just the mental cage your brain is banging on 🙂 The penguin is no better designed than any other organism existing or extinct. And that’s another failure of “evolution”, the assumptions extinct organisms were somehow inferior.

    Corneel: Obviously, organisms are adapted to their natural environment and it is that fit that helps them persist and multiply.

    Your problem is that “fit” is not observable as truck driver admitted. Yes the crazy story is built on that mandatory step: “some selection happening based on a fit”. So how is that step actually happening?!? Let’s retrace that, shall we? Because without it, your captain and his ship full of shit is going down.

    Corneel: The design arguments you so admire rely as much on that fact as evolutionary theory does.

    Yeah… no, not really. See? Your mental cage is playing tricks on you again and giving you contusions. Better take it easy the rest of the season and maybe give up entirely this contact sport. 🙂

  31. OMagain: Contingent on what?

    I know you’re a starving, unemployed impresario, but DO make an effort and follow the thread.

    Joe Felsenstein: far more than enough has been said in this thread to convince 99% of lurkers that nonlin.org’s objections to natural selection are vacuous.

    If you don’t understand something, like the very clear and well documented objections I presented, shouldn’t you doubt your own intelligence first and foremost?

    Corneel: You are not paying attention. Several people have already told you multiple times: It did outcompete its cousins within the population into which it was introduced. However, the ability to aerobically use citrate is only adaptive in an environment where other carbon sources, like glucose, are limited.

    Very funny coming from someone that doesn’t pay any attention. The claim was that cit plus is “beneficial”, so why should it “only adaptive in an environment”?!? It’s a FREEBIE because “beneficial”. So they should out compete all e coli.

    And another thing you’re not paying attention to: if “evolution” is not happening in e coli, what are the chances said “evolution” is happening anywhere else?!? “Zero” is the right answer. That’s right.

    BTW, when you claim e coli differ 80% in their genes, you’re committing a fallacy – namely the assumption that we are the sum of our genes. That assumption is demonstrably false.

    Corneel: My guess is this misunderstanding is fueled by your inclination to view all life as being neatly categorized into separately created kinds,

    Your guess is false. Next?

    Corneel: Then you must have excellent eyes. Bacteria are reeeallly small, you know. So what is it exactly that you observe when deciding a microbe is an “e coli”?

    This is plain stupid. And you know it full well.

    Corneel: What is it that makes, say, a penguin a good “design”, if not its ability to survive and successfully reproduce in its habitat?

    I didn’t say that. This is just the mental cage your brain is banging on 🙂 The penguin is no better designed than any other organism existing or extinct. And that’s another failure of “evolution”, the assumptions extinct organisms were somehow inferior.

    Corneel: Obviously, organisms are adapted to their natural environment and it is that fit that helps them persist and multiply.

    Your problem is that “fit” is not observable as truck driver admitted. Yes the crazy story is built on that mandatory step: “some selection happening based on a fit”. So how is that step actually happening?!? Let’s retrace that, shall we? Because without it, your captain and his ship full of shit is going down.

    Corneel: The design arguments you so admire rely as much on that fact as evolutionary theory does.

    Yeah… no, not really. See? Your mental cage is playing tricks on you again and giving you contusions. Better take it easy the rest of the season and maybe give up entirely this contact sport. 🙂

  32. Entropy: Again, Darwin talked about the interplay of variation and the environment.

    This is the only thing worth addressing from the whole stupidity. Too bad it was discussed like a thousand times and stupids still don’t get it. That it doesn’t work theoretically and it most certainly doesn’t work observationally. But math genius gets it. Only he doesn’t have anything intelligent to counter with. Probably not truck driver or crazy-when-cornered, to not speak of the less “evolved” ones. Haha.

  33. Joe Felsenstein,
    Surely, we’re in for a treat, then, Joe, since KN actually does self-label as a “Marxist”!

    It isn’t your great-great-grandparents’ “Marxism”, mind you, but something much more “sophisticated”. That’s KN’s political-economic “philosophical” packaged deal that he delivers to undergrad students with apparent “post-modern” impunity.

  35. phoodoo: Has anyone seen Omagain walking around Hamburg with a boning knife?

    libel: a published false statement that is damaging to a person’s reputation; a written defamation.

  36. Alan Fox,

    There seems to be some misunderstanding. I was just wondering if anyone has seen the movie “Omagain Walking Around Hamburg with a Boning Knife?”

    I think it was in Cannes a few years ago. Hard to find now, but it was a very interesting mental thriller. Sort of like Eraserhead meets Flowers for Algernon.

  37. DNA_Jock,

    Jock, I thought you liked movies?

    I realize you don’t understand what they are saying, but “Omagain Walking Around Hamburg With a Boning Knife” has some sparkly things to look at-like the shiny metal prods they attach to the main characters head.

  41. Alan Fox: If I were wrong, you’d be able to give examples.

    You wouldn’t allow me to give examples because …..You are now claiming giving examples is talking about moderation, in your twisted mind.

  43. Alan Fox:
    phoodoo, You could start one. Or you could provide examples of “Design” detection here. Anywhere but the moderation issues thread would be fine. Amaze me by following through with an example of how ID can detect “Design”.

    Boning knives. People can look at them and see their purpose. Now stop trying to censor my posts.

  45. Moron thinks again (disaster!): “why not out of context something?” Sure, that will work in moron land.

    Allan Miller: That ‘preference’ generates a competition.

    False. The peacock is born the way he is. There’s nothing more he can do. Furthermore, that’s why we have definitions (as bad as they are), so people like you don’t start making up stuff. Look up “sexual selection”.

    Allan Miller: Nonlin: You obviously don’t get “self referential”.

    Correct.

    Then that’s that.

    Allan Miller: The genes involved in mate preference are not the same genes as those involved in generating elaborate tails.

    The genome is a package. So yes, it selects itself which is self referential and stupid. Even “natural selection” is not that stupid in this limited sense (fully stupid otherwise).

    Allan Miller,

    Apparently there’s other things you don’t get. Too many. As you can see, Moron got the honor of having his comments objectively addressed. Well, those that are not too moronic… That makes those comments not ad hominid.

    Corneel,
    So Corneel, besides the person, when will you start addressing the ideas too? Let me guess… when you will have half decent counterarguments. I hear they’re working on genetically engineered flying pigs…

  46. Corneel: I really don’t see why I should join ANOTHER thread of you resisting correction by people who are much more knowledgeable than you.

    This is not true. And you know it. If it were something simple and full of blunders, you would have jumped up and down like a happy little monkey to show your superiority. Well, tough! Silence speaks too.

  47. Corneel: I really don’t see why I should join ANOTHER thread of you resisting correction by people who are much more knowledgeable than you.

    This is not true. And you know it. If it were something simple and full of blunders, you would have jumped up and down like a happy little ***unicorn*** to show your superiority. Well, tough! Silence speaks too.

    Alan Fox: Moved a post to guano.

    You seem to be very confused and in clear conflict with your own dogma. I thought we’re all supposed to be a big happy family of organisms. All equal and all that. If not mistaken, Corneel himself, claimed vehemently that humans are nothing special. Then why the discrimination?!? Do you hate fluffy little colorful and wonderful unicorns as well? We shall see.

    This just reminds me. Corneel, why do you put down the piggy? Are you also rejecting your own dogma? For shame!

  48. If ID is about “design detection” then when will it start doing that?

    colewd, recently you were asked about design detection and you responded with a video where you claim that Behe details the process.

    But when you are asked now you say:

    colewd: . Some artifacts exhibit a stronger design signal. ID is useful as a tool too demarcate things that may be out of the reach of science.

    But if you have information that “some artifacts” have a stronger signal then others that presupposes you have better data then a mere youtube video where the process of determining the strength of the signal is detailed.

    So you either have the specific details of “stronger signals” or you don’t. If you did, why did you link to the video instead of the details of where ID has determined that some things have “stronger signals” then other things?

    I’ll tell you why. It’s because you are a fucking liar who will say anything, anything in service of your pathetic “god”.

    Either link to the science of “stronger design signals” or admit your are a pathological liar.

  49. Allan Miller: I think you may be overstretching the analogy a tad.

    I think this is beyond your intelect.

    Allan Miller: OK sir, all done sir, the floor is yours.

    OK. Ask your questions.

    OMagain: Can you name something that the previous model explains that evolution cannot?

    The appearance and fact of design. The unity of life. The universal laws. EVERYTHING. What a stupid question! And the others are far worse.

    Allan Miller: This OP (the fridge-o-matic-challenge) was a bad, indefensible idea.

    You really believe this, or you’re just saying? Either way you’re fucked. Wow!

Comments are closed.