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.
Or kairosfocus and latching.
Why, that’s perfectly true of those who criticise anti-IDers! 😀
(Or perhaps Sal should add to his list of characteristics he dislikes “being picky about grammar”)
I guessed that google would have the backstory so I tried this:
Sal Cordova Darwin puppy.
Hey, presto, returns blog posts discussing the time(s) Sal Cordova posted this lying quotemine:
This links to a time Sal Cordova did it at UD but I gather from reading some of the blogs that Sal Cordova committed that same libel more than once at various sites. Of course, the decent human beings – the evolutionists – provide the entire Darwin quote for context and note that the full passage tells rather a different story. But there’s no sign that Cordova ever corrected his lying quotemine, much less apologized for it.
Is it true that Sal Cordova never retracted nor apologized for his misbehavior?
I would never have conversed with him if I knew he behaved in such a filthy way. Life is too short for me to waste on unrepentant liars.
If you want a similar perspective on Sal, google “erv eats sal’s soul” and click on the first link. I’d quote from it, but this is a family friendly blog.
Patronising bleeder.
(OK, OK, I’ll see myself to Guano….)
Yet you are still throwing feces. Not a very impressive education you have there.
And you still avoid the exercise. We are noticing.
Being a lifeboat church in a cruise ship world
I’m gonna bet that’s not you.
See? You did it again.
Every time you try to hurl feces, you simply end up covering yourself with your own shit.
Do the exercise.
Herrings!
C’mon, Gregory, quit trolling. If you have the names, spit them out. Too bad if you don’t think that would be “any fun”.
None of us are here to be objects of your fun.
If that’s what you’re here for, then you are very cordially invited to fuck right off.
As best I can tell, ‘evolutionism’ is a meaningless character string which is prominent in some strains of Creationist propaganda. In these strains of Creationist propaganda, the ‘evolutionism’ character string seems to refer to Something That Is Very Bad Indeed, and the presence of that character string serves the practical function of providing its intended audience with a suitable focus for their Two Minutes Hate.
Gregory, you are being deliberately, explicitly evasive. This does not reflect well on you. If you have a point to make, make it. Whatever response you were intending to spark off with all this I-know-but-I-won’t-say business, I can tell you that in my case, at least, the response you actually are sparking off is somewhere in the neighborhood of This Gregory schmuck is an arrogant, supercilious asshole who’d rather play condescending word-games than actually engage in genuine intellectual discourse. At this point, your words have not fully persuaded me that you belong in the same absolutely no point in even attempting to engage category as WJM… but if you maintain your present course, it is highly likely that you will end up solidly placed in said category.
I’ve read plenty of summaries provided by the DI and Meyer himself. I want you to deal with the major lies by omission in the book, like the 2 1/2 billion years of life before the Cambrian. You’re obviously not up to the task.
Can’t say as I blame you. Trying to defend Meyer’s ignorance and stupidity in front of scientifically literate folks who know the topic is a no-win situation. A shame though you had to make yourself look like such a fool with that “I LOVE the TRUTH!” bullcrap.
LOL! Now you’re just flat out lying. Amazing how Creationists always resort to lying when cornered.
Go ahead and provide the link to your post in the DD thread where you presented Meyer’s explanation for the 2 1/2 billion years of life before the Cambrian. You can’t do it.
On the Meyer’s Mistake thread this exchange was posted:
thorton: “I want you to deal with the major lies by omission in the book, like the 2 1/2 billion years of life before the Cambrian.”
Mung: “Asked and answered in the “Darwin’s Doubt” thread.”
I’ll point out that this is a flat out lie told by Mung as an evasion tactic. Nowhere in this thread has Mung addressed Meyer’s explanation for the 2 1/2 billion years of life before the Cambrian.
Mung once again proves true those prophetic words by William J. Bennetta:
“In all of these efforts [to defend Creationism], the creationists make abundant use of a simple tactic: They lie. They lie continually, they lie prodigiously, and they lie because they must.”
liar
Says the guy who just got caught in a big fat lie about how he provided Meyer’s explanation for the 2 1/2 billion years of life before the Cambrian.
Why do you keep bringing up this ‘”do you think Meyer is a YEC” distraction?
Did anyone in any thread at TSZ refer to Meyer as a YEC?
Are you completely incapable of having an honest discussion without misrepresenting virtually every statement made?
Once again Mung resorts to lying by out-of context quote mining. Here he juxtaposes two unrelated conversations – OMAgain asking about WJM’s specific claim of assigning “probabilities” to macroevolutionary mechanisms, Dr. Liddle’s general statement about how known probability distributions can be part of an explanatory theory.
I never knew just how basically dishonest Mung was before today. I sure know know.
“I will try to ensure that comments that attack you move to guano.”
Thanks Alan. Then I assume the “arrogant, supercilious asshole” playing “condescending word-games” post should go from this thread, along with this post?
My general observation over the years suggests that the people who know absolutely nothing about any scientific field and how scientific activity works are the people who are the most hostile and critical of scientists and science.
This applies in particular to the ID/creationists. All of them, including these Murray and Gregory characters, will play endless word games and babble incessantly, but they never demonstrate any understanding of any area of science. After a few exchanges with any of them, everything recycles and it gets really boring very quickly.
Their retreat into pseudo-philosophy is just a pretentious word-gaming.
It’s just sad, Mike, that you still won’t admit the usage of evolutionism when I have put evidence right in front of your nose. And yet you call yourself a ‘scientist’? Then you revert to generalisations based on your ‘wise old man of many observations’ tactic with the obvious intention to impugn my character. This is very bad form that belongs in Guano. : (
Please don’t put your false generalisations on me and lop me in with “people who know absolutely nothing about any scientific field and how scientific activity works.” This is ignorant character defamation by someone who has been shown himself not to actually understand nuances of the discourse by attributing ‘evolutionism’ to only IDists and YECists. Will you not buckle down, swallow your pride and admit you were wrong for the health of communication? There are many, many more examples that I could provide that show how ‘evolutionism’ is used outside of IDist or YECist contexts, even if you won’t admit it. Why will you not admit this, Mike Elzinga?
And you have again just insinutated that I am an ID/creationist character. Please stop telling lies in public, Mike. It does not bring you any respect or credibility. It is unscholarly and rude. This, ladies and gentlemen, is sadly what often happens when the ideology of ‘evolutionism’ is exposed for what it is in a house of evolutionists. They don’t want to admit they are ideologues, so to them, ‘evolutionism’ simply does not exist. De-ni-al.
OK, how about “you may be a scientific genius elsewhere, but at TSZ so far you’ve demonstrated you know absolutely nothing about any scientific field and how scientific activity works.”
Better?
thorton,
Wikipedia may eventually catch up. It’s not recommended that students at university quote wiki in their papers. Not always a trustworthy source.
As for the accusation (after having provided evidence, which nobody has denied and only RodW has even faced!), “you know absolutely nothing about any scientific field and how scientific activity works,” well I do hold 4 academic degrees, including a PhD. It seems that some scholars (including the 15 PhDs who judged my defense) think I am not as ‘absolutely’ know-nothing as a few here would like to make me out to be for their own convenience.
Again, back to the source of this huge diversion from Mark Frank’s OP on Orwell and Torley. It is a serious problem when science turns into ideology. This does happen and those who deny it are usually propoents of the perpetration. What is needed is more education, as Orwell supported, about good science … and also how to root out bad science, like YECism, and science that has turned into ideology, like evolutionism. As a rather balanced approach, I have trouble imagining how this could be thought as a problematic suggestion.
No shit? When I was in fourth grade I won second place in the science fair with a vinegar & baking soda model volcano. 😀
The simple fact is no one gives a flying foxtrot if you have 104 academic degrees and a dozen PhDs. All that matters is that in your posting here you’ve shown not the slightest knowledge of any scientific fields nor understanding of how scientific activity works. Yet you still feel fully qualified to attack the evolutionary sciences with your philosophical pop-gun.
That dog don’t hunt Greg.
Mung,
Nice job, Mung-the-IDist. So now, tit-for-tat I should say that you actually deserve to be censored and edited by Cordova? Small and trite is IDism as you represent it.
Alan, you suck at moderating 😉
Mung, have you ever eaten dog poop? That how do you know it’s bad?
You terrible skeptic, you.
A non-argument.
No one would ever eat poop. Is that your claim?
No one would ever eat DOG poop. Is that your claim?
No HUMAN would ever eat DOG poop, is that your claim?
I don’t know that eating dog poop is “bad.”
How do you know that eating dog poop is bad and why should anyone anyone believe you? Cite all the scientific studies you can find.
You just HAVE to love the crappy arguments the “skeptics” here at TSZ revert to.
Oh you’re a terrible skeptic, Mung. Just eat dog poop. Then you’ll know. This is directly analogous to “read the book”.
Either pick being a bad skeptic and a hypocrite or advancing a poor argument. You can’t have your poop and eat it.
Mung, it isn’t bad. It tastes like strawberries. There is no science that says eating dog poop is bad. Absolutely none. Eat as much shit as you like.
I’m confused.
A true skeptic would eat poop? Or a true skeptic would only eat dog poop? No true skeptic would eat poop? Just trying to figure out what all you alleged “skeptics” have imbibed. I do so want to be member of your club.
Poop might be great,Mung. Unless you try it, you wont know. Don’t listen to the estabishment, be a TRUE SKEPTIC(c). We know you love truth, because you told us so, and a truth lover like you wouldn’t lie.
A skeptic doesn’t have to read every book to know shit.
I admire your obsession. I’m not quite willing to compare my poop eating escapades with yours though.
Mung,
Oh I won’t eat the stuff. But I’m not a TRUE SKEPTIC(c) on my HIGH HORSE(r) Like TRUTH LOVER(tm) Mung. 😉
The carrot someone shoved up your ass doesn’t evolve.
What you mean WE, white man?
Don’t try to include us in YOUR need.
Valuable? Valuable to whom? Only to you and your games, not to any of us. Don’t inflate your importance so, it’s unseemly.
Only a Dunning-Kruger victim would write such self-important tripe and expect us to take you seriously.
Oh, don’t bother trying. Your prating will never be missed.
There’s that arrogance again. As if if you don’t spoon-feed us morons carefully enough there is absolutely no chance we can ever get what you are peddling. Get over yourself.
Sorry, Hotshoe but I’ve put this comment here.
His usage seems correct.
So you are trying to impose your own ridiculous ideology on the whole English speaking world. Lots of luck with that.
I’ll call bullshit on that. You need to break away from your own ideology.
“Evolution”, “evolve”, are perfectly ordinary non-techical English words. Using those words in an ordinary way is not evidence of any kind of universalistic aspiration, and has no implications about transcendental design.
Just grow up.
The ordinary non-technical use of an ordinary word does not elevate anything above biology, geology, cosmology or sociology.
Get a life. Go see a shrink about your obsessive-compulsive disorder.
Good old Mung. Blustering Creationist blowhard, still running from all critiques of Meyer’s stupidity, still taking advantage of Dr. Liddle’s generosity to push his IDiot agenda.
Maybe someday he’ll grow a pair and deal with the evidence honestly. But not today.
Well, since in the last two days you slunk back to the cesspool that is Uncommonly Dense and proceeded to call Dr. Liddle a liar in at least half a dozen posts there, at the very least you’re a shit-headded hypocrite.
no links, thorton?
bah
Mung accuses Dr. Liddle of being dishonest
There you go Mung. One more link that you provided at UD when slandering Dr. Liddle.
(shrug) We tried discussing the ideas presented in the book, ideas which Meyer and other IDiots have widely disseminated elsewhere. You cowardly cut and ran from every question asked. So cry us a river about how no one would play with you.
I wonder how long ID sycophants like Mung here will keep beating the drum for Meyer’s stupidity? The book has already sunk like a stone in its Amazon sales – down to almost rank 1500 as of this afternoon. After all the money they blew on PR that’s gotta irk the Disco Tooters no end. Soon Meyer’s folly will forgotten, like a rapidly dissipating fart in a crowded elevator.
Wa, the weasel accuses Myer of lying!!!
Bruhahahahahahahaha!!!!
The weasel assumes complex cellular systems already existed at the abio-genesis event.
Liars don’t make good character witnesses for the prosecution!!!
davehooke,
Are you trying to imitate Thorton’s weasel act there Hooke???
3M papers on the speculative thoughts of ignorance styling itself as an intellectual cut above.
The weasel digging furiously into its burrow!!!
LOL! Good old Mung, valiant defender of the IDiot Meyer and all the stupidity he produces!
Bucking for a job at the DI Mung? You’ve got the blustering rhetorical word games and question avoidance skills to fit right in.