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.
Hey Robin- Is your brand of navel gazing, practical?
Please hold your breath while you are waiting for me to do that….
Joe, just in case you did not see it I left a comment aimed at you at ATBC.
http://tinyurl.com/ckuwfur
OMTWO-
I don’t care what you have to say- you are nothing but a waste of skin.
And how could you tell? I would expect the purpose of everyone here would be to try to penetrate through your skull in the hopes there’s a brain in there. But given everyone’s total utter lack of success, perhaps I should conclude that’s not their purpose after all. Certainly if we judge by results, it’s not.
Only evoTARDs could equate the masterful sculpting of a block of marble to “throwing stuff out”, and here we are…
Well there isn’t any reasoning with evoTARDs…
Hey skin Flint-
On a level playing field I will demolish any and all evolutionists- you definitely wouldn’t stand a chance.
thorton is still upset because I keep exposing his ignorance.
Umm shalom, evos don’t know how to reason. You chumps are the most clueless sort there is.
I am just here to expose the tard that is evoTARD. And there is plenty of that here.
Fuck you petrushka- your position has absolutely nothing but spewage for support.
BTW ID is still not anti-evolution…
Only a moron would say that redundancy is a waste.
So bald declaration- That is how it was determined?
Go back to cheerleading, Richie pom-poms
And another coward chimes in….
skin Flint-
We are not the product of your bald assertions
Perhaps someday you will be able to test your bald assertions and then move on
How can someone be conceived by accident? Did someone’s dick accidently fall into someone’s pussy?
Patrick-
Don’t ask anyone else for evidence seeing that you have no intention of producing any that supports your position.
Flint-
ID is not anti-evolution. And not even YEC says beneficiial mutations do not occur.
But it is nice to see that you are totally clueless about your opponents positions and you think that ignorance means something.
As I said- on a level playing field I would demolish a piece of shit like you.
You should be thanking Lizzie for protecting your evotardgasms.
oleg chokes, again-
the other side posted this:
http://theskepticalzone.com/wp/?p=859&cpage=2#comment-12910
But thanks for continuing to prove that you are a clueless jerk…
UB, you still forgot to show that the chemistry which takes DNA to protein involves SEMIOTIC information.
You have no argument without it, and you know it. Is that why you keep avoiding the issue?
Upright BiPed
Flint, it means that water can’t be made of oxygen and hydrogen.
…and UB officially jumps the shark. All future responses by him may safely be snickered at and ignored.
Campbell’s soup is hmmmmm, hmmmm good- but Campbell’s soup is not evidence for any RNA world.
shfanim שפנים
Have some tunie
Mod note: edited to remove NSFW link.
Oh…my bad then. I figured with all the effort you put in, you actually intended to write the words you were using and actually cared about what they mean. I suppose I really should have realized my error sooner.
hotshoe writes:
No, no he (or she) doesn’t. Very little courage is required to carry on a discussion in an open online forum. It’s what is to be expected from rational adults.
Refraining from rude rhetorical sniping from within an anti-free-speech echo chamber populated by ignorant, delusional, scientifically illiterate intelligent design creationists is not an activity worthy of praise. I doubt that Mung will stop doing so in any case.
You pay Mung too much of a compliment, Mike. He (or she) may dream of being a thug, but thus far I haven’t seen anything from him (or her) other than bluster that utterly fails at being intimidating.
keiths, how many dimensions in a horizontal plane?
Out of curiosity, are you genetically disposed to making unsupported assertions or do you suffer from a psychological malady?
So I accuse you of ad hom and in response you resort to more ad hom.
“ad hominem” – another simple concept that Mung (and basically all creationists/IDists) can’t comprehend or use correctly.
Add it to the list along with “macroevolution” “microevolution” “information” “complexity” etc etc etc.
P.S. Mung – the first responder in a thread to resort to accusations of “ad hominem” automatically loses. Hee hee. That’s you, sweetie.
Jesus fuck, Mung, is there some reason you’re incapable of understanding what you were (supposedly) following along with gpuccio’s thread over at your home base? Not our job to teach you what your homies say on the concept. Go ask one of them to teach you.
You first, Mung darling. Apologize for your lying in order to construct a dishonest disagreement with keiths’ post.
The evidence is visible above.
Remember, your god frowns on lying. DO NOT LIE is one of your sacred commandments.
I’d hate to see you in hell.
Mung, you’re lying again – or hallucinating. Yes, we know you can’t comprehend what you read – but even an ignoramus can understand that quoted sentence directly from the OP: The ‘islands of function’ metaphor is a variation of another metaphor, the ‘fitness landscape’.
Not exactly the same, not two completely different concepts; one is a variation of the other.
It’s just not that difficult to understand.
Everybody else understood that except you. What in heaven’s name is wrong with you?
You’re pulling my leg, right, Mung?
keiths,
rhetorical question, unnecessary answer: yes, Mung is pulling your leg.
Enough already, indeed!
Har har.
So, it’s not simply a question (it’s an “objection”) but you, you’re simply a skeptic.
Pull the other one, it’s got bells on.
Mung;
Is your response to everything: “Ooo, ooo; somebody posted a comment. Quick; throw feces and run and hide!”?
What can we possibly learn from your assertions? That ID/creationists disagree with science, put on airs and posture? We already know that.
How can we get you to demonstrate that you actually know any science? How can we get you to demonstrate that you know anything?
You didn’t read any of Elizabeth’s post or my comment. And you wouldn’t understand any of it if you tried; which you didn’t.
Mike Elzinga,
It seems to you that marks doesnt have a clue why scientists do simulations?
Elzinga, your arrogance is appalling, really. Marks is light years ahead of you in scientific productivity. If anyone can lay claim to understanding science and how it works, it would be Marks, not Elzinga, a high school physics teacher.
You know nothing of my career. I have spent more years in active research than you, Dembski, or Marks have been alive.
Now go find another bar and someone else to pick fights with; or your taunts will simply end up on the Guano thread.
This is my last response to you.
Mike Elzinga,
The taunts are all yours, Elzinga.
We are only responding to your repeated denigration of those who disagree with you.
If you can’t take the heat…. insults won’t help your argument.
By the way, what counts is results, not time put it. Go ahead and put up your peer-reviewed papers and list of patents. then you can lay claim to understanding science better than Marks.
Mike Elzinga:
“How can we get you to demonstrate that you know anything?”
How can we get you to demonstrate that you aren’t just random noise?
I strongly suspect that it would be much easier to program a Markov process that is indistinguishable from the output of either Joe or yourself than to implement an algorithm that could generate even a fraction of the value of one of Mike’s posts.
Sorry if that’s damning you with faint praise, Mike.
Do what your dishonest friend Patrick did and sign up under an alias, preferably that of a female. This will not only allow you to post at U.D., where your views will be quickly demolished, just as
MathGrrl’sPatrick’s were, but it will give everyone a hearty chuckle in the process. 😀So, Jared, will you be railing against the dishonesty of kairosfocus, bornagain77, Upright Biped, Mung, and the other pseudonymous posters at UD or are you just another hypocrite with one standard for those who agree with you and different one for your opponents?
I’ll also point out that the only thing demolished during my tenure as Mathgrrl was the idea that any intelligent design creationist at UD is capable of calculating any of the alphabet soup of metrics tossed around there as though they had any real meaning. The only person who tried was vjtorley and he backtracked when he got the “wrong” answer. You can see http://www.softwarematters.org/mathgrrl.html for links that support each of these claims.
Folks, WJM’s entire schtick is Assuming One’s Conclusion writ large. He’s directly and explicitly declared that he doesn’t give a damn about whether his worldview has any verifiable connection with Reality As She Is Spoke. “Practicality” is not a concept which is on his radar.
I can see how someone like our hostess, who has a professional interest in cognitive anomalies, would want to engage with WJM, because his cognitive anomalies are surely a most enticing subject of study indeed. But otherwise, I really don’t see why anyone would want to waste their time and effort trying to conduct a conversation with what amounts to a presuppositional tape recorder.
Just Say No to presuppositional tape recorders, kids! You’ll be much happier for it.
William J. Murray,
That “gestalt” word really turned you on didn’t it.
Your mental age and experience appear to be somewhere in the early teens. You appear to have been shielded from the realities and the responsibilities of living in a real world where decisions can make the difference between life and death. This is why “reality” is a hypothetical game to you.
You don’t know what a battleship is. You haven’t lost shipmates on battleships or submarines. There are many of us in this world who have experienced events in which you would not last ten seconds; you would be dead even as you attempted to word-game reality to fit your “gestalt.”
And you don’t know the mathematical difference between a pile of rocks and a battleship. You are simply bullshitting; you can’t even get started on the math.
The molecules of life are not made up of battleship parts or junkyard parts, as ID/creationists continually assert. Yet you keep buying into that notion without any knowledge of science or reality. You don’t have the maturity, the experience, or the judgment to recognize the fake analogies that ID/creationists use routinely. You can’t compare them with reality because you are shielded from reality.
You obviously enjoy playing with words and find word-gaming exciting. That clearly places you in an easily identifiable mental age range; and yours is preteen to early teen.
ID/creationism is aimed at children and teens; it seeks to cut off their curiosity about the world around them by ensnarling them in word-games that kill their interest in the world and burdens them with a life-long loathing of the people who continue to grow and learn throughout their lives.
If your chronological age is considerably greater than your obvious emotional and intellectual age, you are in real trouble; your emotional and intellectual development stopped, and you are stuck in childhood playing childhood games with adults. Many internet trolls are stuck in their early teens.
If this is the case, I would recommend to those who have to live around you that you never be given adult responsibilities; somebody could get killed while you try to word-game reality to fit your “gestalt.”
There is a major and important difference between ID/creationism and science. Science deals with reality; reality that can kill you if you don’t learn the lessons. ID/creationism is a ploy to keep you from learning the lessons of reality in order to insure your loyalty to a narrow sectarian dogma.
I saw that as well. He’s becoming more like Joe with every post, claiming reactions and opinions that simply don’t exist. It is of course a Kiros Focus (He who should not be named despite self-outing on his website) post.
Hey KF, you forgot to turn of comments, you pulpit bully.
[edited]
“He’s becoming more like Joe with every post, claiming reactions and opinions that simply don’t exist.”
Doesn’t kairosfocus claim to follow the teachings of some old book? As I recall, that book had something to say about bearing false witness. I believe it was against it.
Has anyone seen Dembski and JoeG in the same room at the same time? There must be a reason Joe doesn’t get banned from UD.
He appears to be their flying monkey mascot who “feces bombs” anyone who makes a good point against ID. That seems to be all he an that Mung character ever do over there.
Oh dear! Over at UD, Sal says:
Anti-ID critics have propensity to :
1. misread
2. misattribute
3. mischaracterize
4. misstate
5. render the most uncharitable interpretation of what is said
6. and when called on their uncharitable readings and errors, they compound their errors because of a determination to save face
Tell us about Darwin and puppies again Sal?