Noyau (2)

…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation

Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.

[to work around page bug]

2,941 thoughts on “Noyau (2)”

  3. Neil Rickert:
    Gregory,
    You quoted me as saying something that I did not say.

    Sorry, formatting corrected. Unintended. (Unlike Swamidass’ intentional outing & doxxing of me here & at PS, which surely even you don’t chalk up to mere ‘confusion’.)

  6. Gregory: Where?

    HERE.

    I’m not sure if you can read that, since it is in Back Porch. So I’ll quote:

    To both Greg Sandstrom and @JoeG (and @Sharon). if you would like to be reinstated at Peaceful Science, please discuss rules and terms with @moderators. Sock puppet-ing and other nonsense is not going to help your case. It is possible that in a couple months we will have a way of including you, but continued shenanigans will prevent that from taking place.

  7. What an arrogant piece of dung this man is. Totally classless.

    First, if I can’t actually read it, why address me as if I can? He made a similar slimey move at PS when he banned me there.

    Second, Sanjay Swamidass’ continual dimunitising of my name reveals his lack of respect, now that he has heard me ask him not to do it. Is this what Alan considers an ‘olive branch’? I consider it a condescending slap in the face. Not a surprise for a man who seems to actually believe & certainly to side with the lying doctor Jon Garvey, while the record here shows he is wrong.

    Third, to lump me together with JoeG, when Sanjay knows I hold a PhD, have worked on this topic for years, have published multiple papers and 2 books on the topic, shows he has no genuine interest in facing my on-going, pointed, accurate and still relevant challenges to his work. So, it means I’m doing the right thing in opposing this proud, hyper-ambitious computational biologist who is forcing the issue, rather than acting with humility as apparently Evangelical Covenant churchgoers like Swamidass should.

    I have no interest in being reinstated on the blog of such a manipulative callous individual as Sanjay Joshua Swamidass is blinded by ideology and ambition, hiding like a coward.

  9. Mung: You condone bad behavior. That helps ensure bad policy continues.

    That is not dissimilar to your stance at Uncommon Descent, if you think about it.

  10. Gregory,

    The simple fact is anyone can create an internet presence and run it how they like, subject to legal caveats. I agree it was a bit mean to lump you in with Joe Gallien but that sort of follows from the sock puppetry.

  11. Mung: You condone bad behavior. That helps ensure bad policy continues.

    And not only that, but by posting anywhere, I condone the burning of natural gas to produce electricity (here in Ontario)*, an important contributor to climate change.

    Between you and Alan, what I depressing day.

    Luckily, at my age I will soon forget all about it.

    ————————
    * Well, likely nuclear power where I live. But complications like that are hardly fit for Noyau.

  13. I literally don’t know how Joshua sleeps at night. The pomp & vanity of this man continues to astound.

    “And no I will not out you @mung. I don’t do that.” https://discourse.peacefulscience.org/t/anonymity-and-peaceful-science/4372/94

    Why, yes you do, Joshua Swamidass. You did it to me here at TSZ & also doxxed me at PS! = P

    “A better question is ‘why are you anonymous?’ He has no valid reason.”

    Would allowing safe haven from scientistic bullies draped in a non-mainstream Evangelical Covenant like Joshua who demonstrate continual disproportion in their ‘science, philosophy and theology/worldview’ conversation count as a ‘valid reason’?

  14. Yes, why should I let someone bully me into posting under my IRL identity, and how does he know I have no good reason?

    Why doesn’t he treat other anonymous posters the way he treats me? He has no valid answer.

    He can actually fix this if it’s a really problem. He can adjust the community guidelines and require people to register and post under their IRL identity. Why doesn’t he?

  21. Alan Fox: BTW, Sal, when did Mike Gene get quite so bitter?

    Like when Obama became President? Just kidding….

    I think he started getting after atheists after his book The Design Matrix was published and then not really accepted by the ID community.

  22. stcordova: Fake News CNN calls actor out for making Fake News. The irony! But sometimes the facts are just too much and the facts TRUMP fake news. Such was the case with Smollet.

    Look an elephant .

    So the standard of conduct should be same for a President,the head of our executive branch, is the same as b-list actor? Unfortunately it seems ,for some if there is an R next to the President’s name even that standard may be relaxed.

  23. stcordova: I hope they throw this guy in jail and keep him there for life for smearing innocent Trump supporters as racists.

    Guess we will first have to find a Trump supporter who is not racist or is willing to accept racism in the furtherance of a goal before determining if anyone is being smeared.

    Life imprisonment for lying and falsely accusing a generic person for a crime?

    What should you get for lying 8,000 times to the American people about just about everything? The Nobel Prize?

  25. His blog postings have become very much a biased attack on atheists.

    I think it’s more against the GNUs, the A+ SJWs. Like me, Mike probably thinks well of the old atheists like John Stuart Mill, Bertrand Russell.

  26. Here is one list of the worlds richest pastors. That said it’s missing the name of one, whom I actually revere which I’ll mention later.
    https://youtu.be/DIlaFbRvU4I

    It is not well known, but boxer George Foreman had a near death experience decades ago and became a Christian and quit boxing for a long time to become a preacher. Then later in life he returned to boxing since he was broke and then became very rich, but he returned to preaching. Here is George Foreman’s story:

    Foreman isn’t mentioned in the list of reach preachers because foreman made his money outside of preaching. For this reason, I believe foreman’s preaching is an authentic expression of his belief in Jesus. He’s had a few issues with multiple marriages and divorces, but I like the guy and I hope he really is a believer in Jesus.

    Morris Cerulo isn’t mentioned either, and I hear he has a private jet.

  28. stcordova: I think it’s more against the GNUs, the A+ SJWs. Like me, Mike probably thinks well of the old atheists like John Stuart Mill, Bertrand Russell.

    So you suggest that he is okay with the atheists that are safely dead. It is the ones that are still alive that bother him.

  29. How many kids has George Foreman named George Foreman?

    Are you also a fan of former football player Jimmy Brown? Repubs trot him onstage at every opportunity too.

  30. So you suggest that he is okay with the atheists that are safely dead. It is the ones that are still alive that bother him.

    I forgot to mention Ayn Rand, the inspiration for the Libertarians and Economic Republicans. Her heir apparent is atheist TJ Rodgers.

    I love this atheist:

    https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB837379519825209500

    Cypress CEO Blasts Sister Who Asked for Diverse Board
    By Ellen Joan PollockStaff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal
    Updated July 15, 1996 11:20 a.m. ET
    It isn’t every day that the CEO of a major high-tech company calls a nun’s views “immoral.”

    And it seems just as unlikely that his slap would result in an outpouring of support from executives and investors nationwide — for him. But that’s exactly what happened when Cypress Semiconductor Corp. Chief Executive Officer T.J. Rodgers took a Catholic nun to task for suggesting he put qualified women and minorities on his board

    My kind of atheist. Away with the abomination affirmative action. Go capitalism!

  33. If the Christian Creationists are right, then there is a a hell, and hence the creation/evolution controversy has the potential to be more than merely an academic/scientific question.

    Here is an account of a near death experience that supposedly converted Ronald Reagan (the pastor, not president!):

    One is entitled to be skeptical of Reagan’s account, and I’d argue one should be skeptical, and if someone wants to do some sleuthing to check out his story, that would be great!

    I know of one charlatan, Mike Warnke, that was called out for his fake conversion….so I hope some investigation of Reagan is done. I want to know if the guy is at least sincere….

    That said, I know a few professing Christians that aren’t professional preachers, and who in this day and age of a post-Christian somewhat anti-Christian USA, have little material benefit to be identifying with Jesus, but have testimonies of miraculous encounters with Jesus.

    For myself, it’s hard for me to run away from the fact it looks like I’ve seen miraculous prayers answered in the name of Jesus. One might rightly question whether I should be absolutely sure before ruling out coincidence, to which I respond:

    I have waaaaay more to lose by offending a Deity by demanding more proof. Besides, what is their to gain by putting faith in coincidence vs. faith in God?

    Athiests to this day have never given me sufficient reason to seek salvation in coincidences, but Jesus offers salvation.

    So though I appreciate the skepticism of atheists or skepticism in general, I’ve chosen to explore options that may have payoffs. An option of “no God, no meaning, no purpose” isn’t an appealing option. I’d rather take my chances in another worldview.

  36. stcordova:
    Athiests to this day have never given me sufficient reason to seek salvation in coincidences, but Jesus offers salvation.

    Problems being that if there’s no gods, then there’s nothing to be saved from. It would be coincidence if this Jesus-god existed, and remember that this Jesus-god is offering you both, condemnation and salvation. It’s a package deal.

    stcordova:
    So though I appreciate the skepticism of atheists or skepticism in general, I’ve chosen to explore options that may have payoffs.

    With so many magical beings to offed, each offering their versions of hell and salvation, I doubt that putting your faith in one will give you any pay-off.

    stcordova:
    An option of “no God, no meaning, no purpose” isn’t an appealing option. I’d rather take my chances in another worldview.

    Which shows how unaware you are that it’s you who finds “meaning and purpose” only if there’s a magical being in the sky, while others find this god to destroy meaning and purpose. If you’re inclined to Calvinism, then what fucking meaning and purpose could there be in everything being a game the magical being in the sky plays for his own glory?

  37. stcordova: My kind of atheist. Away with the abomination affirmative action. Go capitalism!

    Agreed! Don’t allow the illiterate Salvador Cordova to hold those undeserved graduate degrees just for being part of some minority!

  40. stcordova,

    Are you returning your undeserved degree(s) Salvador? You know they’ve allowed you to go on, despite your profound illiteracy, just because you’re a member of a minority, so be consistent.

  41. In other news:

    https://www.nbcsports.com/washington/nationals/bryce-harper-why-he-turned-down-nationals-300-million-contract-offer

    The former Nats superstar signed the biggest contract in professional sports history: 13-years, 330 million dolars with the Philadelphia Phillies.

    Capitalism is glorious!

    No one put guns to anyone’s head for this deal to come about. FREE markets. Bryce will get this money and spend it. Hopefully not on drugs, but people who earn the money like he did.

    The fundamental reason there will be rich and poor in a free-market economy is the Pareto principle:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pareto_principle

    One way of course to “level the playing field” is to stifle rewarding those who are naturally gifted such as Harper.

    Harper is in the entertainment industry. I paid 23 dollars once upon a time to see him play as a Washington National against the Baltimore Orioles. That was my net direct contribution to his immense amount of money. It was the ONLY time I watched a pro baseball game in my whole life, and it was a very special day for me. No one put a gun to my head or coerced me to participate in getting Harper some dollars.

    But if tens of millions will watch him, advertisers will, over time pour that much money to pay him for the entertainment value he provides.

    I fail to see why free markets are evil…

  42. Mike Gene calls out PZ Myers hypocrisy:

    The Inevitability of Climate Change

    FWIW, I’m for environmental conservation. I just think we’re doomed because of the biological and psychological and some economic imperatives that drive over population. Unless we go from 7 billion people to like 200 million people, I don’t know how we can effect serious conservation of the environment.

    People like PZ can just scapegoat conservatives, but well, that’s just a convenient scapegoat BECAUSE I doubt people with his political views will necessarily do better to control emissions unless they turn the world into a hermit kingdom like North Korea and the USSR where the population was just slaughtered.

    Why? The biological, psychological, economic incentives are driving us to global extinction through over population.

  44. Student Loan Time Bomb:
    https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikepatton/2015/11/25/are-student-loans-a-ticking-time-bomb/#3696d4aab7e7

    1) Total outstanding student loan debt is about 1.3 trillion

    2) Student loan debt has doubled since 2009, averaging over 12.0% per year

    3) The number of student loan recipients has increased 4.7% per year since 2007

    4) The average student loan debt per student is $28,973

    5) Student loan debt as a percentage of the national debt is rising

    Student loan debt has become a significant component of the national debt. This is largely due to the expanded role of the federal government. According to Mary Clare Reim, Research Associate with the Heritage Foundation, “93% of all student loans offered these days are from the federal government.” She added, “The government has essentially created a monopoly by offering more attractive loans, thus crowding out private lenders. When students are unable to pay off the loan, the taxpayer is left to pick up the tab.”

    One of the greatest concerns of the student loan program is the potential for defaults. A loan default can occur for a number of reasons. A typical default scenario is the student who has amassed a large amount of debt and cannot or will not repay it. A less obvious example is the recent bankruptcy of the for-profit Corinthian Colleges, a chain of educational institutions with over 85,000 students. The school allegedly misled students about its “job-placement assistance.” This issue has brought the federal government and the California Attorney General to its door. To provide help for the affected students, the federal government is expanding its student debt relief program. Clearly, this is no fault of the student. However, it still increases student loan defaults.
    My thoughts, reduce the cost of education, don’t freaking subsidize and educational culture that doesn’t equip the next generation to cope.

    There needs to be solutions, but one solution is NOT the government helping students to go to worthless institutions that don’t equip students with skills they need to survive. Rather some of these institutions rob the students rather than educate them.

    Prime example of Worthless Institutions? Eh, places with professors like this:

  45. J-Mac:
    Is OMagain suggesting consorship of OPs with thier content subject to what he wants to hear?

    No. I’m suggesting a minimum standard is required to be able to post OP’s on a regular basis. That standard being something like porn. You recognise it when you see it.

    J-Mac: Or has he been self-appointed as a moderator replaceing Mung already?

    I’ve self appointed myself to challenge your dreary bullshit I suppose.

    J-Mac: Either way, we all know where this is going…

    …
    do …
    we?
    What way is it going? Is it going the way you always wanted? Get “censored” then cry about it and write books about it and star in the next shit movie about ID?

    Scientific illiterates don’t get to write articles in nature. Often. So you’ve no right to spew your nonsense unchallenged at any venue.

    J-Mac: “?” trash as I see it…lol

    Good for you. Now, in the marketplace of popularity we’ll see where both our trash piles get us won’t we. And then you can’t complain can you?

    J-Mac: Why don’t you join and a Feel Good Church for Atheists?
    Unlike me, they will tell you what you want to hear…for a fee…;-)

    Your words will be lost like tears in rain unless you let the people whose actual scientific work you think you’ve overturned know! And the way to do that is to formalise your findings and respond in the appropriate venue.

    But doing a hit and run with some shit OP you don’t even understand seems to be your limit.

    As I say, let’s light both our trash pile of OP’s and see how long each burns for…

    …
    …

  46. A note to J-Mac:

    I will approve your latest post, if you agree to make it a guano-free zone. That is, make it a Noyau-like post.

    However, if you do that, you should expect harsh criticism. For your post will be seen as absurd and will be seen as telling us something about its author that he would want to post it.

  47. That seems a reasonable compromise. An OP of such ludicrous content is difficult to comment on without falling foul of the rule on “good faith”. What about it, J-Mac?

  48. Neil Rickert:
    A note to J-Mac:

    I will approve your latest post, if you agree to make it a guano-free zone.That is, make it a Noyau-like post.

    However, if you do that, you should expect harsh criticism.For your post will be seen as absurd and will be seen as telling us something about its author that he would want to post it.

    I agree

Leave a Reply