…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
The Skeptical Zone
"I beseech you, in the bowels of Christ, think it possible that you may be mistaken."
…the noyau, an animal society held together by mutual animosity rather than co-operation
Robert Ardrey, The Territorial Imperative.
Mung,
No, just pointing out your spineless hypocrisy. Being excommunicated from UD would no doubt be painful for you, given your emotional investment in it.
stcordova,
Neutral mutations don’t cause ‘deterioration’ of genomes, by definition. If you’re arguing for ‘mostly detrimental theory’, that is something completely apart. Population-genetic theory suggests that most detrimental mutations don’t get fixed though. Even those close to neutral, certainly not at a rate that exceeds that of beneficial-to-neutral ones.
Regardless of the distribution of arriving mutations, there is a bias in favour of beneficial ones and away from detrimental ones. Neutral mutations don’t suffer any bias, but they don’t deteriorate genomes either. There is zero evidence that the human genome is young. And a chunk of that evidence is directly due to neutral theory, helping date the human-chimp split, and the human-chimp-gorilla, and so on out until the signal of neutral change becomes too weak at a few hundred million years or so.
stcordova,
ENCODE themselves have back-pedalled on the 80% figure, because it is clearly based on a very loose determination of ‘function’.
Anyway, why aren’t YEC’s throwing their weight behind the effort to discover function in the genome, instead of piggybacking on the results of others? If it was so vital and all. Or are you just going to sit back with fingers crossed and crow if it goes your way and quietly forget that line of argumentation if it doesn’t?
You have me confused with Salvador.
Yes.
Oh, and junk in the genome is proof of intelligent design. I’m keeping that one in my back pocket though, so forget i mentioned it.
Oh right. He was the brave one.
Only in the definitions where function is defined by reproductive advantage, a definition that is highly flawed. Something I demonstrated here using arguments Allan Orr took Dennett to task for:
ERATA:
Abosolute fitness may be affected by removal of competing genotype, hence the the S-coefficient of relative fitness is changed. That’s what I was trying to convey with cave fish that have sight, the population doesn’t necessarily decline in absolute fitness if hypothetically the deleterious mutation gets fixed in the population via drift.
Because they are wasting it on 100 million dollar play grounds called Ark Encounter. I’m personally disgusted by all this, but I can’t tell people where to throw their money, but I think you are totally right to call the YEC community out on this.
This may not be a nice thing to say, but most YECs I know don’t really care about science. That’s harsh, but they put their money where their hearts really are like:
https://arkencounter.com/
And their hearts are not in critical thinking like what is found here at TSZ.
Rich, to Mung:
To wit:
No way Mung is going to stand up to Barry while his “good friend” KF is watching. Integrity gets chucked in favor of brown-nosing.
Alas, in response to his heartfelt declaration of friendship, Mung got the brush-off from KF:
Mung could go over to UD and say:
How about:
“Barry, why do you make statements here you do not believe are true? You’ve got a very grandiose personal ethical statement up on your website, which you are clearly not living up to. I’m asking you on behalf of the UD readership to do better and be better in 2016.”
keiths,
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boxer_(Animal_Farm)
stcordova,
That’s not how I define function. And I don’t think much of ENCODE’s definition of function either: something like ‘gives a result in an assay’. That does not distinguish organismal function from noise.
Function doesn’t have much to do with neutral theory: neutral, detrimental and beneficial are all with respect to relative reproductive advantage, regardless of the product or regulatory role (if any) of the genetic stretch in question.
I may start an OP in the New Year, to discuss more fully.
Mocking. Check.
Peanut Gallery. Check.
Everything Elizabeth always wanted from her faithful regulars Richardthughes and keiths. You boys be sure not to let it all go before the New Year now!
I pretty much said all I had to say when you were editing my posts at UD to make them look like I had written something I had not written and when you were deleting my posts at UD. And now you come here and whine and wonder why I choose not to join the pity party. Sorry. Not going to happen. 🙂
Mung,
deflection: check
no one’s buying it, Mung. What’s in Barry’s purse?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gelding
*Edited to change “wallet” to “purse”.
Mung,
Red Herring.
I’m glad I could bring some meaning into your lives.
😀
Do you know if such actions were authorized by the top brass there? Were they known about? Did you object to them–and, if so, what were the results of your complaints?
Yes I complained. Beyond that would be speculation. Perhaps Salvador could fill us in on the results of my complaints. As far as Salvador himself is concerned, they fell on deaf ears.
He would tell me he was deleting my posts because they were off topic. And then he would open threads specifically for off-topic discussions and still delete my comments from them, lol.
I have no sympathy for Salvador and his war against Barry. I’d rather have seen Sal change his ways at UD, he’s obviously a bright guy. Richardthughes and keiths have zero chance of recruiting me to their cause. Zero. It’s time for them to move on.
Thanks, mung, but I was wondering if your complaints about deletions of or changes to your posts were heard by the top brass at UD. I.e., why didn’t Barry do something about this, if he’s so splendiforous (and non-Lizziean)?
I ask because you complain so much about what happens here and blame Lizzie for allowing it. That stuff seems considerably worse to me. Why was it allowed to continue?
Perhaps it’s time to for me to say a few things about deleting and altering Mung’s posts at UD and UD policies (or lack thereof).
The convention was that UD authors had the right to moderate their own threads while Bill Dembski was in charge. I told Mung to stay off my threads. I had no authority to ban Mung. Barry apparently liked having Mung harass me and call me a liar, a moron, and all sorts of names, but did nothing about it. Barry would never want to be seen doing that sort of dirty work himself publicly to me.
That’s Barry, you serve him, but he rather than protect you, he wants to punish you a bit also for disagreeing — imho. On the other hand, he wanted my contributions at UD to drive web traffic. His e-mails demonstrated he had hostility toward me and that he wanted to cower behind private channels rather than call me a Quisling publicly in front of other YECs like JohnnyB and some of the YEC radio and TV hosts that occasionally visited UD while I was there.
Mung had stalked me for years. It really became evident when he started calling me a moron in a discussion about computer science:
Little did Mung know at the time one of my degrees is in computer science, a degree which he himself does not have. I deleted his inflammatory posts, and I point out what JohnnyB said of Mung’s behavior:
I deleted Mung’s posts because he was displaying stalking behavior. Here is an example of his spam stalking of my discussions:
Because Barry wouldn’t ban Mung I resorted to even more aggressive counter measures.
As far as Barry altering posts and comments, he altered my comment by erasing what I said and inserted his comment saying I was spewing venom and was under threat of having my posting privileges suspended. That’s BS from Barry, the king of venom spewers. My irony meter exploded, not to mention Barry erasing my comment left me defenseless to counter his false claim I was spewing venom. How tidy — delete my comment and then say it was something it was not. Create his own evidence!
Barry did nothing about letting Mung go around trolling my discussions. I told Mung he was welcome to post elsewhere at UD but he was uninvited on my discussion and I would exercise my ability to delete, disemvowel his posts and beyond.
Toward the end UD became so much of a farce as a weblog, I really didn’t care. I couldn’t ban the troll so I resorted to more creative counter measures. I warned Mung his posts would be re-written if he continued appearing un-invited. He didn’t heed the warning.
So for a while people were giving him an out pouring of sympathy for his bi-polar alcoholism thanks to me. 🙂 I guess mung didn’t like my sense of humor. 🙂
I did the same to Gregory who has stalked me for about 11 years since the ARN days, but then he ruffled the feathers of the chiefs at UD and he got tossed. But I managed to punish Gregory too before he got tossed. Notice this is disemvoweled post by Gregory is about as coherent as his emvoweled posts. LOL!
When I started my own website, I instituted “thread author sets the rules” policy. I didn’t expect much traffic, and my forums are silent now since for really technical stuff, I either go to people directly to talk (like at science conferences or at universities) or other forums like reddit/r/bioinformatics or reddit/r/biochemistry.
I don’t do the internet thing as much for technical stuff (like say physics or molecular biology stuff related to YEC, etc.).
Some may find what I did to Mung reprehensible. I take no offence for people feeling that way. But now that TSZ has had it’s fill of Gregory…they at least have a chance to be in my shoes for a change in a situation where I had no authority to ban and no GUANO to move posts to.
If I had GUANO, I’d have shoveled Mung’s post permanently there. Heck, I’d have built him his own personal guauno chamber to say whatever he wants about me. At least if I had GUANO, I’d have been able to solve the problem of being accused of deleting and altering Mung and Gregory’s posts. That was a good innovation at TSZ which I did not have available to me at UD. If I had the guano option, I’d have been able to do things in a way that would be mostly consistent with TSZ policies, which I presume, most here find reasonably acceptable as far as transparency.
Finally, I’m not afraid of matching wits with Mung nor do I fear his criticisms, I just don’t want to waste time with trolls. Keiths is a far superior opponent to spar with.
Gregory? Ha, the blackbelt in fumbduckery….
Hi walto,
I have no way of knowing whether my complaints were seen and if they were seen what action was taken.
I think you may have misunderstood some of my sayings.
UD is Barry’s site. Barry’s site Barry’s rules. TSZ is Lizzie’s site. Lizzie’s site Lizzie’s rules. Elizabeth has acknowledged this to be the case.
If Elizabeth wants to allow and even encourage the posting of private emails, and if Elizabeth closes down my threads, and ff Elizabeth doesn’t respond to my complaints, and if Elizabeth make up new “suggestions” willy-nilly and they are enforced as if they are rules even though they can’t be found on the Rules page, and if she fails to curtail her admins when they behave badly, well, it’s her site.
If people want to maintain that this site is still better than UD they are really missing the point. A lot of people here seem to think that UD is the worst site on the planet. Is it the goal of this site to see how close to being the worst site on the planet they can get without actually becoming the worst site on the planet? Will Elizabeth settle for a tie?
1. Fail to reign in an out-of-control admin.
2. Allow/encourage publishing of private email correspondence
3. Shut down a thread calling into question the wisdom of such action
4. Refuse to justify the decision
5. Make up new “guidelines” about where people can complain
6. Force people to suffer abuse if they wish to complain
You do the math.
Blast away Mung, my “Ignore Commenter” shields are up. You have to read what I write, but I don’t have to read what you write.
You’re a liar, Salvador.
I saw you made a comment on the sidebar, Mung.
But it seems I’m having trouble reading your drivel. Wait, I suspect you said something like:
“he is obviously a bright guy”. Me? Awh shucks.
Guess that’s what happens when I let my guard down. I get to see you say something nice.
Ah, the good ole days when Mung would say, “I forgive you Sal” Makes me picture stalker saying to a girl, “I forgive you Susan for slamming the door in my face every time I showed up uninvited.”
Mung’s “I forgive you Sal” had the same creepy ring to it.
I am not here to rehash Salvador’s past. Feel free to sympathize with Salvador all you like, but he gets no sympathy from me. No one forced him to do anything. No one forced him to publish private email between he and Barry. And everyone here knows how well Salvador takes criticism.
Cheers Sal.
LoL. You made a lot of posts in the “beating a dead horse” thread without me saying anything at all bad about you. I just can’t imagine what it was like though, seeing all those comments from me and not knowing whether I was lying through my teeth about you or otherwise just being a big meany.
Maybe you should take me off ignore. 😉
What did you say Mung? I can’t hear you. 🙂
I said you’re a funny guy Sal.
Mung, thanks for your response. I agree with you that the rules (or whatever they are) sitch here ought to be improved, and have said so. I think that sitch is at least as bad (actually considerably worse) at UD, though. You have complained here. You indicate that you complained there as well. To whom, and what (if anything) was done in response?
Thanks.
What Mung actually said here:
Mung hasn’t used the word “funny” to describe me at least since Christmas.
Care to change your story Mung, now that you got caught?
I took my “Ignore Shield” down for a moment to take a stab at Mung’s re-writing of history. The shields are going up again. Bye Mung.
He kind of DID say you are a funny guy, Sal.
To wit:
People are welcome to accept your account of the events. I don’t have any intention of offering an alternative account.
Casey Luskin joins Dembski in ID retirement. Will Barry Arrington be invited to be chief attack gerbil at DI?
The position of Minister of Propaganda has already been filled by Ann “Green Screen” Gauger. Barry could probably help with the ID deadbeats who promised to donate to the DI then reneged.
I wonder if it’s time for another premature prediction from me on the demise of “Intelligent Design”.
First Dr Dembski moves on, then Casey Luskin leaves the Discovery Institute to further his studies. But now the devastating news that Upright Biped is suspending activity (as best as I can make out from the ambiguous phrasing) at Biosemiosis.org.
Is there a trend emerging? As the late John Davison might have said:
Who is next?
He needs some sock puppets to help engage in conversation over yonder. he garnered one comment recently on a remotely related ID topic.
He rode the momentum of Bill Dembski’s influence, but Bill left a long time ago. He has Denyse and KF to keep the ship afloat.
It’s not as if the Quisling hunter has especially endeared himself to the ID community, certainly not the YEC community.
The views are just mostly bots and auto e-mail triggers and critics at this point, imho.
Frankie is at least making cupcakes here at TSZ.
I wish I had come up with polytard. =P
brown-nosing 1, accountability 0: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/how-are-evil-and-chocolate-ice-cream-alike/#comment-594379
There can be only one Joe G!
Yes, Richardthughes, Elizabeth can say something so gobsmackingly stupid and you give her a pass, but me, you want to know if I’ve ever read a book on logic.
No double standard here!
You’ve confused stupidity and dishonesty Mung.
Perhaps I am misreading BA.
It looks to me as if he is saying:
(1) the argument on the problem of evil is a reductio absurdum;
(2) I can produce an absurdity which is not a reductio;
(3) therefore the argument on the problem of evil is unsound.
Neil Rickert,
My broader point is that Mung gripes about perceived ethical shortcomings here yet is perfectly aware of Barry’s contradictory public and private stances yet says and does nothing (and even has a good brown-nose), because he is a gelding who’s testicles are in Barry’s purse.
Too much Egg Nog for Egnor?: Quality meltdown – http://recursed.blogspot.com/2015/12/merry-kitzmas.html
Of course the day wouldn’t be complete without Brave Sir Mung waddling back to UD to kiss Barry’s ass and insult Lizzie.
Brave, Brave Sir Mung.
Rich,
Holy crap, that’s good. Can we get Egnor over here?
LoL. Shallit is getting it handed to him. You all want to be abused why don’t you just abuse each other?
Mung,
You are disconnected from reality unless by ‘it’ you mean ‘the award for evicerating a clueless creationist’. I think I know why you and Joe are our ID regulars – you can’t differentiate winning and losing. Maybe that’s why Barry’s two positions are okay for you.