RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (5) < [1] 2 3 4 5 >   
  Topic: Crackers Don't Matter, Formerly Kick the cracker< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,13:50   

California
PENAL CODE
SECTION 240-248

240.  An assault is an unlawful attempt, coupled with a present
ability, to commit a violent injury on the person of another.

In practice, "unlawful attempt" includes threats, so that if someone were to say "I have a gun, and I'll kill you" that could constitute assault. It would not matter if you really had a gun. The point was that painting threats are prosecuted as "hate crimes" rather than simple assault becasue of the religious, or ethnic nature of the crime. It would still be a crime regardless.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,13:56   

Previous discussion of CrackerGate begins about here on the UD thread.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:19   

I gotta go to a party- a friend just became a citizen.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:22   

As I said, the definition varies by state.  Congratulations.  

Now that we've got you reading the actual law, go for extra credit with a cite that demonstrates that a Catholic in good standing accepting the Host from a Priest, then leaving Mass without consuming it, has committed a crime, much less a "hate crime".

Note that PZM's "incitement to hate crime" didn't specify that NON-CATHOLICS accept communion.  Plenty of catholics are reading his posts on the matter and agree with him, and some have offered to score for him.

After failing at this task, feel free to take up a less challenging one - a cite that supports your claim that a non-Catholic attending Mass and accepting Communion is a secular crime.   More extra credit for evidence that it falls under Hate Crime statutes, federal or in PZM's state.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:25   

I really gotta go- but

The FBI defines a hate crime (a.k.a. bias crime) to be:

       "a criminal offense committed against a person, property
        or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the
        offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual
        orientation, or ethnicity/national origin."

HT to Mark Vandewettering at TO.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:27   

Interestingly, in Oregon it appears that accepting a cracker under false pretenses is never criminal fraud (the possibilities are iterated in our statutes).

So, perhaps the church could sue for civil defraud over the penny or so the cracker costs them ...

I imagine the wine's worth more, though.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:28   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,15:25)
I really gotta go- but

The FBI defines a hate crime (a.k.a. bias crime) to be:

       "a criminal offense committed against a person, property
        or society which is motivated, in whole or in part, by the
        offender's bias against a race, religion, disability, sexual
        orientation, or ethnicity/national origin."

HT to Mark Vandewettering at TO.

As an aside, I find it interesting that religion is the only item on that list that is not beyond one's own control.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:35   

Yeah, that website's not exactly a mystery.  Rather than quoting the FBI, though, I prefer the summary of the statute:

Quote
"a crime in which the defendant intentionally selects a victim, or in the case of a property crime, the property that is the object of the crime, because of the actual or perceived race, color, religion, national origin, ethnicity, gender, disability, or sexual orientation of any person."


Note that a hate crime involves two parts:

1. a crime must have been committed

2. the motivation for that crime was due to religion etc

Acceptance of the Host and removal from the Church can not be a hate crime unless it is first a property crime.

The hate crime statute in itself does not turn non-criminal behavior into criminal behavior, though individual laws against certain hate crimes (cross burning, for instance), very well may.

You might have a shot at demonstrating that the Church was defrauded of a cracker worth a penny or so, civil fraud, but good luck with your criminal charges.

I'd love to see an criminal indictment - "failure to eat cracker" ... "forgot to think of all the starving children in China" ...

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,14:41   

BTW, "kick the cracker" will be offensive to some, but not for the reason you imagined when writing it ...

  
Advocatus Diaboli



Posts: 198
Joined: Nov. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,15:49   



--------------
I once thought that I made a mistake, but I was wrong.

"I freely admit I’m a sociopath" - DaveScot

"Most importanly, the facts are on the side of ID." - scordova

"UD is the greatest website of all time." stevestory

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,16:05   

The reaction of believers to perceived "blasphemy" or "desecration" has long fascinated me.

Some believers feel compelled to defend the "honor" of their God and his prophets, sacred objects or places.  But who could be less in need of defending than the almighty, omnisicient Creator of the universe?  Is it reasonable to suppose that He is overly concerned about being dissed by a few members of one puny species on one planet on the outskirts of one galaxy out of hundreds of billions in a universe that is at least 156 billion light-years across?

And if He were offended by it, He could punish the offenders instantly in the most spectacular way.  If a tornado of fire descended from the skies over Morris, Minnesota and incinerated PZ Myers for desecrating the Host, leaving a pile of smoldering ash, the event would make world headlines and the rate of blasphemy would drop dramatically.  Why do believers think that their God needs "help" in curtailing blasphemy? A fiery tornado outdoes an email campaign every time.

Other believers might concede that their God is unharmed by blasphemy, but complain that they are personally offended by having their beliefs mocked.  To them I would point out the following:

1. Some people think your beliefs (whatever they are) are ridiculous whether they say so or not.  Get used to it.  If you interpret silence as tacit agreement, you are mistaken.

2. People have every right to believe in magic crackers, that Rev. Moon is God, that Xenu was our galactic overlord, or that John Frum will return to the islands with lots of cargo.  They don't have the right to compel the rest of us to regard these beliefs as anything but risible, or to force us to mute our disdain.

3. We all have beliefs that others mock, whether those beliefs are religious, political, scientific, philosophical, etc.  I'm an atheist who accepts evolution, but that doesn't entitle me to suppress open criticism or even outright mockery of either position.  Why should your religious beliefs be exempt from the same sort of criticism and scrutiny?

Last, some believers will complain that such open mockery interferes with their attempts to proselytize.  But again, why suppose that your almighty God is incapable of out-arguing a few blasphemers?  If He wants to get his message across, He can.  If He does nothing about blasphemy, it's because He has chosen to do nothing.  Why do you think you know better?

The irony of all of this is that the anti-blasphemers end up being blasphemers themselves by implying that their God is not powerful enough or smart enough to deal with the situation on His own.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:28   

Quote (dhogaza @ July 12 2008,12:41)
BTW, "kick the cracker" will be offensive to some, but not for the reason you imagined when writing it ...

I lived in Georgia for many years.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:40   

Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,14:05)
The reaction of believers to perceived "blasphemy" or "desecration" has long fascinated me.
<snip>
Other believers might concede that their God is unharmed by blasphemy, but complain that they are personally offended by having their beliefs mocked.  To them I would point out the following:

1. Some people think your beliefs (whatever they are) are ridiculous whether they say so or not.  Get used to it.  If you interpret silence as tacit agreement, you are mistaken.

2. People have every right to believe in magic crackers, that Rev. Moon is God, that Xenu was our galactic overlord, or that John Frum will return to the islands with lots of cargo.  They don't have the right to compel the rest of us to regard these beliefs as anything but risible, or to force us to mute our disdain.

Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance? Does that distain allow you to take church property?

Plus, I also wonder about the predictable reaction of believers- is it incitement to mess with their rituals?

Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

You get arrested.  It is as simple as that.  If you get a good ass kicking resisting arrest, few courts would probably bother prosecuting the family members.

Edited by Dr.GH on July 12 2008,17:44

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
khan



Posts: 1525
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:49   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:40)
Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,14:05)
The reaction of believers to perceived "blasphemy" or "desecration" has long fascinated me.
<snip>
Other believers might concede that their God is unharmed by blasphemy, but complain that they are personally offended by having their beliefs mocked.  To them I would point out the following:

1. Some people think your beliefs (whatever they are) are ridiculous whether they say so or not.  Get used to it.  If you interpret silence as tacit agreement, you are mistaken.

2. People have every right to believe in magic crackers, that Rev. Moon is God, that Xenu was our galactic overlord, or that John Frum will return to the islands with lots of cargo.  They don't have the right to compel the rest of us to regard these beliefs as anything but risible, or to force us to mute our disdain.

Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance? Does that distain allow you to take church property?

Plus, I also wonder about the predictable reaction of believers- is it incitement to mess with their rituals?

Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

You get arrested.  It is as simple as that.  If you get a good ass kicking resisting arrest, few courts would probably bother prosecuting the family members.

Wooosh!

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:51   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:28)
Quote (dhogaza @ July 12 2008,12:41)
BTW, "kick the cracker" will be offensive to some, but not for the reason you imagined when writing it ...

I lived in Georgia for many years.

atlanta ain't georgia.  :)

  
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:53   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,19:40)
Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,14:05)
The reaction of believers to perceived "blasphemy" or "desecration" has long fascinated me.
<snip>
Other believers might concede that their God is unharmed by blasphemy, but complain that they are personally offended by having their beliefs mocked.  To them I would point out the following:

1. Some people think your beliefs (whatever they are) are ridiculous whether they say so or not.  Get used to it.  If you interpret silence as tacit agreement, you are mistaken.

2. People have every right to believe in magic crackers, that Rev. Moon is God, that Xenu was our galactic overlord, or that John Frum will return to the islands with lots of cargo.  They don't have the right to compel the rest of us to regard these beliefs as anything but risible, or to force us to mute our disdain.

Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance? Does that distain allow you to take church property?

Plus, I also wonder about the predictable reaction of believers- is it incitement to mess with their rituals?

Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

You get arrested.  It is as simple as that.  If you get a good ass kicking resisting arrest, few courts would probably bother prosecuting the family members.

How is accepting a cracker then sitting down disrupting a religious observance.  In the original, the priest and other fanatics caused the disruption.  The priest gave the wafer to the kid, it is not their property anymore.  I'd like to see that one go to court.

I've never seen anyone react violently to something like that, so I doubt that fanatical attacks is considered predictable.  Considering that most states have reasonable force laws or definitions for crimes, physically restraining someone for not eating a wafer does not seem to me to constitute, in any sense, reasonable force - since no force seems justified.

If the priest and others want to be offended, then so be it.  That gives them no right for assault.

Your birthday party is a nice strawman, since that is not the same.  Consider that the family gives you a piece of that cake, and you do not eat it, but instead decide to take it home.

Does the family have the right to stop you, to physically try to restrain you and force you to give back the cupcake, to demand for an apology, to ask for police protection for the cupcakes so they make sure that everyone eats theirs at the party?

Priorities.  They need to get some.

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:57   

Quote (rhmc @ July 12 2008,17:51)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:28)
Quote (dhogaza @ July 12 2008,12:41)
BTW, "kick the cracker" will be offensive to some, but not for the reason you imagined when writing it ...

I lived in Georgia for many years.

atlanta ain't georgia.  :)

I rarely ever went to Atlanta- 3 times in 6 years.  Too bad to, it seemed like a fairly nice place. Why did you make a such a silly assumption?

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,19:59   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,01:40)
Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance? Does that distain allow you to take church property?

Plus, I also wonder about the predictable reaction of believers- is it incitement to mess with their rituals?

Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

You get arrested.  It is as simple as that.  If you get a good ass kicking resisting arrest, few courts would probably bother prosecuting the family members.

Why do you keep using these really weak analogies? Dumping a kids birthday cake on the ground != walking away with a wafer from mass (that you have been given) != burning crosses != spraying swastikas on synagogues.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:06   

Quote (jeannot @ July 12 2008,17:04)
Quote (Louis @ July 12 2008,13:14)
Wait a second, this all seems totally cracked to me.

Firstly, regardless of the rights or wrongs of PZ's comments he hasn't actually done anything or incited anyone to do anything illegal.

Secondly, comparing PZ destroying (which he has yet to do btw, he's merely talked about it) a communion wafer to a KKK cross burning or the vandalising of a synagogue with Nazi symbols is hyperbolic drivel of the highest order. Those crimes are demonstrably of a racial, not religious, nature, a fact established in every civilised country on the planet. One of the key arguments in the "offence to religion"/race debates has always been that Jewish religion (for example) can almost exclusively be identified with a specific, and narrow, set of racial groups. The rights or wrongs of this categorisation are immaterial, at least in the UK these matters have fallen under racial discrimination laws, not (despite the best efforts of this misguided government) religious hatred laws.

Thirdly, communion wafers are a commercial product, they can be bought. PZ can perfectly legitimately get his hands on some. Even if someone snuck them out of a mass they have been freely given them by the priest, a reasonable transfer of ownership can be said to have taken place. No disclaimer signed, no contract entered into. To claim that the wafer would have to be stolen in order to acheive this "desecration" is to twist the definition of "stolen" so far that my wife could have me prosecuted for theft of her saliva after a prolonged kiss should she so desire. The sacrament is freely given to people professing that faith. Should that person miraculously change their mind 2 seconds after receiving it.....well how can you prove their lack of sincerity? Even demonstrable premeditation could fall foul of the protections that religious affiliations (and the ability to change them) have under the law.

Fourthly, blasphemy is only blasphemy to a believer, PZ isn't a believer. He can whack off on wafers, burn bibles, get a lady to queef on Qu'rans, tear up Torahs, grind his genitals on Guru Granth Sahibs and shit on sections of every sacred sheet in the world. Hell, I'll even join him. So what? Will this upset some people? Sure. Will it offend some people? Sure. Will it constitute blasphemy in the eyes of some people? Sure. But rather tellingly, such acts only have the significance they are attributed under various belief systems. They are tellingly very seperate from "Get to the back of the bus nigger" or "filthy kike" or "dirty paki" or cross burnings or Holocaust denial or "No Blacks, No Irish" signs, they don't involve discrimination against persons or people on the basis of an unchangeable facet of their birth, i.e. their race.

Threatening to kill someone is a crime. Threatening to kill someone because of their race or religion is a hate crime. Threatening to crumble a cracker in a (probably) comedy fashion, even if it pisses someone off, is not a crime (should said cracker be legally obtained). If it is then I get to play the exact same cards. I get to burn chuches because they "offend" me (they don't but hey, I can claim whatever beliefs I like right?), I get to call for the murder of the Archbishop of Canterbury because his beard "offends" me (it doesn't but hey, when did reality enter into the equation). I get to beat up muslim people on the street because their presence "offends" me (it doesn't, but hey, why let a little thing like the facts get in the way of a good emotive load of shit?).

Guess what? PZ's comments (and maybe actions) WILL offend someone, it's possible that causing offence is quite deliberately intended. Causing offence=/=hate. Not even close. PZ is drawing attention to a demonstrably ludicrous idea and questioning it. He might be doing so in a way that I would not, or that I might tacticly disagree with, but what he is expressedly not doing is anything remotely resembling a hate crime.

To equate the two is to cheapen a) hate crimes and the suffering their victims have been through, and b) to miss the point of what PZ has said.

I suggest people grow up a bit. Given a choice between having my kids beaten up for the colour of their skin or having their most precious holy relic desecrated I know which I'd choose. And I know which is a hate crime and which isn't. I suggest that we stop pandering to the hysterical persecution complexes of people that are afraid to be disagreed with.

Louis

Well said Louis.

Hear Hear!

Well said Louis - I knew there was a reason we keep you around!

Here's my take as a Born & Raised Catholic - Yep, still got that "indelible mark" (seriously - they tell you that!).

So, PZ buys the wafers, I understand @ $.99 a box, = @ $.01 each... He goes to a Catholic Mass, and when the priest gets done fooling around with the wine and the altar boy, the priest gets down to it and "consecrates the hosts"..

So how far does the "magic aura " extend?
1 foot?  5 feet? the whole church?   Whatever, it doesn't really matter - the correct answer is whatever we (or the church) decides is right.  

My point is that PZ could get that priest to turn 1,000 wafers into ...wafers... and do whatever the hell he wants with them.

No crime.  Nothing to see, run along home now.

Yeah, there are some offended Catholics, but it's not a crime against Catholics, it's only that somebody is making fun of their wierd beliefs.  Sort of like some crazy people believing that bacteria flagella have outboard motors and are irreducibly complex.  I know, sounds crazy, but I swear that some wierd professor in PA actually wrote a book about it!

Bottom line - religious people always think they have the theology and the truth and all the answers - and they didn't like PZ's answer.

I just don't see the crime.

edited to move

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:09   

Well, I think that there is an interesting contrast between Mirecki and the assault and battery I think that is waiting for PZ; Mirecki used pejorative language- he called the Catholic pope "an old guy in a dress" and said in an email (as I recall) that teaching his class on creationism and ID would be "a big slap in the fat face of the fundies." About a month later he had been demoted from Department Chair, had some of his classes canceled, and gotten slapped around on a deserted road.

That was an outrage then as it is now.

PZ has encouraged others to take actions on his request that are merely intended to outrage still others.  I think that call for actual physical action alters the entire situation.

Edited by Dr.GH on July 12 2008,18:11

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:13   

Quote (dnmlthr @ July 12 2008,17:59)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,01:40)
Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance? Does that distain allow you to take church property?

Plus, I also wonder about the predictable reaction of believers- is it incitement to mess with their rituals?

Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

You get arrested.  It is as simple as that.  If you get a good ass kicking resisting arrest, few courts would probably bother prosecuting the family members.

Why do you keep using these really weak analogies? Dumping a kids birthday cake on the ground != walking away with a wafer from mass (that you have been given) != burning crosses != spraying swastikas on synagogues.

The kid's cake was cheap, and they shouldn't pray when it offends you. Right? It was a public park and they were being offensive to your tender emotions. They deserved it.

Edited by Dr.GH on July 12 2008,18:16

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:18   

I just reviwed the  page before submitting this and badger3k seems to have got in ahead of me.  Damn you, badger.

--

Let's say there are two cakes. The cake dumped upon the ground could be shown, scientifically, to be  contaminated by real life bacteria. You could take swabs and show a difference: Germ-laden cake ....  nice cake --- not the same! You can't recommence proceedings with the contaminated cake.  You can still feed the other, pristine, cake to your guests with a clear conscience, but if one guest gleefully devours the cake, while another "saves a piece for later", you don't get to demand the death of that person.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:25   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,02:13)
The kid's cake was cheap, and they shouldn't pray when it offends you. Right? It was a public park and they were being offensive to your tender emotions. They deserved it.




--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:27   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:57)
I rarely ever went to Atlanta- 3 times in 6 years.  Too bad to, it seemed like a fairly nice place. Why did you make a such a silly assumption?

most folks who claim to "have lived in georgia" actually lived in atlanta.

care to share what part of the state you resided in?

i've lived on both coasts and a bit in the middle.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:37   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,02:13)
The kid's cake was cheap, and they shouldn't pray when it offends you. Right? It was a public park and they were being offensive to your tender emotions. They deserved it.

Nice strawman by the way, care to elaborate on which one of my posts that's indicative of that type of attitude?

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:38   

Quote (steve_h @ July 12 2008,18:18)
I just reviwed the  page before submitting this and badger3k seems to have got in ahead of me.  Damn you, badger.

--

Let's say there are two cakes. The cake dumped upon the ground could be shown, scientifically, to be  contaminated by real life bacteria. You could take swabs and show a difference: Germ-laden cake ....  nice cake --- not the same! You can't recommence proceedings with the contaminated cake.  You can still feed the other, pristine, cake to your guests with a clear conscience, but if one guest gleefully devours the cake, while another "saves a piece for later", you don't get to demand the death of that person.

Badger's point is much clearer.  I think the question goes to intent. What is the intent of the act.

There are some lame arguments offered that the cost of the cracker/Host is an issue.  That is stupid, as I have stated and then tried to expose by analogy. The cost of the cracker, or the singed lawn, or some paint is irrelevant.

Then there was "the burnt cross" is an implied threat. We then looked at laws on threat and definitions of hate crimes. A threat is to claim you will cause harm to someone. In extortion cases, the threat is all that is needed.  In assault cases a threat (in California) might be all that is needed. In California, there is some leeway in the law about how a threat is perceived, and what you can do about it.

I was once involved in a case where fellow A was in a fight with fellow B.  Fellow A was stabbed with a knife several times by fellow B.  Fellow B was arrested. Fellow B was found innocent because Fellow A had caused the fight by threatening fellow B. Fellow A was then arrested, and charges were dropped on 5th ammendment grounds (basicly there were no witnesses not used in the trial of B, including A, and no evidence in the trial of A could be used without self incrimination (IIRC).

Does the theft of a Host for the purpose of desecration cause emotional harm to others?

I would say it does, and that the act had no other purpose than to cause emotional suffering to others. Is emotional harm a legally recognized thing?  You talk to any lawyer.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:43   

Quote (rhmc @ July 12 2008,18:27)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:57)
I rarely ever went to Atlanta- 3 times in 6 years.  Too bad to, it seemed like a fairly nice place. Why did you make a such a silly assumption?

most folks who claim to "have lived in georgia" actually lived in atlanta.

care to share what part of the state you resided in?

i've lived on both coasts and a bit in the middle.

Augusta.  I taught at the medical college there.  I also taught at Paine College, a private school that is a "historic Black institution," and Augusta College, the local campus of the University of Georgia.  I had an adjunct professorship at Georgia State University, but I never actually had to go there- they sent a few students to me.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
keiths



Posts: 2041
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,20:57   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,17:40)
Does that distain allow you to disrupt a religious observance?  Does that distain allow you to take church property?

My comments above concern blasphemy and desecration in general, and not just the desecration of communion wafers.  There are plenty of instances of blasphemy, such as the case of the Danish cartoonists, where property doesn't figure into the issue in the slightest.

Second, as others have already pointed out, to walk out of a Catholic church with an uneaten communion wafer hardly amounts to  "disrupting a religious observance."  Nor does the actual act of desecration.  As for whether the former constitutes theft, I'll leave that to people who know more about the law than I do.  Either way, it's clear that Catholics are not upset about the purported theft per se -- they wouldn't be this worked up over someone stealing a few paperclips from the bishop's office, after all. They're upset about the desecration that follows the "theft".  If it were somehow possible for PZ to buy his own pre-consecrated wafers before desecrating them, Catholics would be just as upset at the desecration.
 
Quote
Let's imagine that there is a child's birthday party in a public park- The family is deeply religious and they have their eyes closed in prayer.  You are more wise than they are and so you dump the birthday cake on the ground.

As others have already explained, that scenario bears absolutely no resemblance to the act of walking out of church with an uneaten communion wafer.  To produce an equivalent disruption, you'd have to bust into Mass and dump the wine and wafers on the floor before storming back out.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number.  -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,21:03   

If you still don't see the difference between burning a cross and walking away with a wafer there's really nothing I can say. What is the implied threat of the wafer scenario?

As for intent, one of the two is intended to terrorize, the other to be an asshole and possibly make some kind of point.

And what's up with the "I have seen things on the streets" shit? No amount of street cred can save a tortured analogy.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,21:47   

People in receipt of burning crosses, often ended up dead at the hands of the KKK.

People who found their walls daubed with Nazi symbols, often turned up dead at the hand of the Nazis.

People who found their crackers disrepected, often ended up being killed by killing, or threatening to kill their oppressors people whose "religion" is that crackers are just crackers.

The similarities are just frightening.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,21:54   

Quote (steve_h @ July 12 2008,19:47)
People in receipt of burning crosses, often ended up dead at the hands of the KKK.

People who found their walls daubed with Nazi symbols, often turned up dead at the hand of the Nazis.

People who found their crackers disrepected, often ended up being killed by killing, or threatening to kill their oppressors people whose "religion" is that crackers are just crackers.

The similarities are just frightening.

You know of many recent examples?

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,21:59   

Quote (dnmlthr @ July 12 2008,19:03)
If you still don't see the difference between burning a cross and walking away with a wafer there's really nothing I can say. What is the implied threat of the wafer scenario?

As for intent, one of the two is intended to terrorize, the other to be an asshole and possibly make some kind of point.

And what's up with the "I have seen things on the streets" shit? No amount of street cred can save a tortured analogy.

The Catholics seem to feel they are being terrorized.  You either think they have no real emotional response, or that because you have a superior grasp of reality their emotional response is unjustified.

Or maybe they have no right to have an emotional response just because ___?

Edited by Dr.GH on July 12 2008,20:00

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
steve_h



Posts: 533
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,22:21   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,03:54)
         
Quote (steve_h @ July 12 2008,19:47)
People in receipt of burning crosses, often ended up dead at the hands of the KKK.

People who found their walls daubed with Nazi symbols, often turned up dead at the hand of the Nazis.

People who found their crackers disrepected, often ended up being killed by killing, or threatening to kill their oppressors people whose "religion" is that crackers are just crackers.

The similarities are just frightening.

You know of many recent examples?

No I don't, unless you count the recent death threats against PZ, but I'm sure that such incidents live on in the thoughts of previous victims and the people that know them.  The symbols would be just as shocking today. I am neither a Jew nor an African-American. If such symbols have been relegated to the trashcan of history as you seem to imply, I would be delighted to hear about it. I haven't heard of any specific incidents recently but I think it would be unwise to assume that racial extremist are no longer a concern.

For the sake of argument, I will take you at your word. Cracker abuse is the last taboo. Nazis are gone, Racists are gone, but how do we handle the PZ-cracker situation? How do we, or should  we, respect the rights of people who think crackers are just crackers? I say we agree to disagree with kill them express our regret that people with similar outlooks to ours might do something we don't exactly sanction but do sort of understand.

Edited by Steve_h on 2008-07-13  

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,22:30   

Quote (steve_h @ July 12 2008,20:21)
Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,03:54)
         
Quote (steve_h @ July 12 2008,19:47)
People in receipt of burning crosses, often ended up dead at the hands of the KKK.

People who found their walls daubed with Nazi symbols, often turned up dead at the hand of the Nazis.

People who found their crackers disrepected, often ended up being killed by killing, or threatening to kill their oppressors people whose "religion" is that crackers are just crackers.

The similarities are just frightening.

You know of many recent examples?

No I don't, unless you count the recent death threats against PZ, but I'm sure that such incidents live on in the thoughts of previous victims and the people that know them.  The symbols would be just as shocking today. I am neither a Jew nor an African-American. If such symbols have been relegated to the trashcan of history as you seem to imply, I would be delighted to hear about it. I haven't heard of any specific incidents recently but I think it would be unwise to assume that racial extremist are no longer a concern.

For the sake of argument, I will take you at your word. Cracker abuse is the last taboo. Nazis are gone, Racists are gone, but how do we handle the PZ-cracker situation? How do we, or should  we, respect the rights of people who think crackers are just crackers? I say we agree to disagree with kill them express our regret that people with similar outlooks to ours might do something we don't exactly sanction but do sort of understand.

Edited 2008-07-13

I sort of imagine something with Ritz and grape juice- but the rest of the details are murky.

Cheesewiz, there has got to be cheeswiz and big pointy hats.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Badger3k



Posts: 861
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,22:47   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,21:59)
Quote (dnmlthr @ July 12 2008,19:03)
If you still don't see the difference between burning a cross and walking away with a wafer there's really nothing I can say. What is the implied threat of the wafer scenario?

As for intent, one of the two is intended to terrorize, the other to be an asshole and possibly make some kind of point.

And what's up with the "I have seen things on the streets" shit? No amount of street cred can save a tortured analogy.

The Catholics seem to feel they are being terrorized.  You either think they have no real emotional response, or that because you have a superior grasp of reality their emotional response is unjustified.

Or maybe they have no right to have an emotional response just because ___?

I think you have it.

The catholics think that they are being terrorized.

Fear.  They are fearful that their beliefs will be exposed for the ridiculous garbage they are.

Really, I hope that none of them feel like they are being terrorized.  Because if they are, they need to really get their heads out of their posteriors and join the real world.  People around the world are actually being terrorized, threatened, and assaulted, and those people have legitimate issues.  These nutcases don't.  I grew up in the Roman Catholic tradition, and I never really could buy that type of fear and, to use their own words, idolatry, that is reflected by these people's actions.

Do they really think that their god is small enough to be held hostage in a piece of mass-produced wafer, like some of the emailers to PZ have said?

--------------
"Just think if every species had a different genetic code We would have to eat other humans to survive.." : Joe G

  
dvunkannon



Posts: 1377
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 12 2008,23:00   

With respect to Dr. GH's interest in a test case, I think that Mr. Woods' actions are already that case. He's admitted that he went to Mass, took the wafer after it was consecrated, and left with it. If the Catholic diocese wanted to engage in legal action, that was the opportunity. No need to wait for PZ's squidy ninjas to drop from the rafters.

In asking to "score" a wafer, all PZ was asking for was that someone repeat Mr Woods' actions.

--------------
I’m referring to evolution, not changes in allele frequencies. - Cornelius Hunter
I’m not an evolutionist, I’m a change in allele frequentist! - Nakashima

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,02:44   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,03:59)
Quote (dnmlthr @ July 12 2008,19:03)
If you still don't see the difference between burning a cross and walking away with a wafer there's really nothing I can say. What is the implied threat of the wafer scenario?

As for intent, one of the two is intended to terrorize, the other to be an asshole and possibly make some kind of point.

And what's up with the "I have seen things on the streets" shit? No amount of street cred can save a tortured analogy.

The Catholics seem to feel they are being terrorized.


What reason do catholics have to fear for their lives because of the wafer incident? Name a precedent.

Quote

You either think they have no real emotional response, or that because you have a superior grasp of reality their emotional response is unjustified.

Or maybe they have no right to have an emotional response just because ___?


The "you think you're an übermensch" strawman is  getting really old and crusty by now, it's time you make up a new one.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Amadan



Posts: 1332
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,07:39   

I recall a church painting in somewhere in Portugal that depicted a miracle said to have taken place in the 17th or 18th century.

A woman was somehow obliged to a (quelle surprise!) (or should that be que surpresa?) Jew. To discharge this obligation, she had to bring him a consecrated host. Having received it, she surreptitiously put it in her handkerchief. But as she was leaving the church, blood was seen to be issuing from the handkerchief and the sacrilege was disclosed. History does not relate the consequences, but regular readers will surely be able to fill them in fairly accurately.

All this tells us much more about Portuguese Catholicism than about the truth or otherwise of the reported events.

Having grown up an Irish Catholic in reasonably liberal family, I can understand the outrage devout Catholics feel at what is being portrayed, rightly or wrongly, as an incitement to sacrilege motivated by an atheist's derision. I imagine that all religions venerate their martyrs and make a point of recalling real persecution when it did happen to them, and the Catholic Church has an entire bureaucracy dedicated to it. The two buttons labelled Persecution and Sacrilege are big, RED and very easily pushed. But I thought PZ's comments were pretty infantile. It's not as if someone was trying to make Communion compulsory for biology professors.

That said, portraying this as persecution is going miles over the top. It's also more than slightly ironic hearing the chorus of tut-tutting on UD given that at least half of the goons there would consider Catholics about as Christian as Maoist Scientologists.

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,07:48   

Gary, I am very curious to know why you are chucking such a huge quantity of straw around on this issue.

Not only are the views you seem keen to attatch to others demonstrably and manifestly not the ones they are espressing, but the anecdotes, analogies and crimes you are associating with the actual events and arguments are so wide of the mark as to be almost deliberately so.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,10:24   

I'm amazed at how puny and ineffective Chistians believe their God to be.  If you truly believe that the cracker is God, then it should be perfectly capable of looking after itself and would need no help from mere mortals.

Pity the infidel who ate a genuine Jesus-inhabited cracker


--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,14:09   

Quote (Quidam @ July 13 2008,08:24)
I'm amazed at how puny and ineffective Chistians believe their God to be.  If you truly believe that the cracker is God, then it should be perfectly capable of looking after itself and would need no help from mere mortals.

Pity the infidel who ate a genuine Jesus-inhabited cracker

Heheh

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,14:15   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 12 2008,20:30)
I sort of imagine something with Ritz and grape juice- but the rest of the details are murky.

Cheesewiz, there has got to be cheeswiz and big pointy hats.

I got it. Wearing big pointy hats, pass out crackers with cheesewiz and grapejuice while chanting "Don't be a cannibal."

No threats, an artistic expression (depending on the big pointy hats) that clearly derides the ritual of communion.

Be my guest.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,14:33   

Quote (Louis @ July 13 2008,05:48)
Gary, I am very curious to know why you are chucking such a huge quantity of straw around on this issue.

Not only are the views you seem keen to attatch to others demonstrably and manifestly not the ones they are espressing, but the anecdotes, analogies and crimes you are associating with the actual events and arguments are so wide of the mark as to be almost deliberately so.

Louis

Well, there were several things about this that make me angry. First, I have a politically liberal respect for the rights of others to partisipte unmolested in the religion of their choice. Second, I have a professional respect for the rights of others to partisipte unmolested in the religion of their choice. Third, it is cowardly to ask other people to do your dirty work for you. Fourth, PZ was dismissive about the attack against Mirecki.

Finally, I presented a number of scenarios that you would agree are "bad things."  The Catholics view desecration of their ritual objects as a bad thing, on a par with the things I have mentioned. You (and the rest) deny they have valid emotions which is dehumanizing. You deny that they have a right to their practice unmolested and that it is fine to threaten them with the disruption of their religious practice.  That makes you a bigot.

Edited by Dr.GH on July 13 2008,12:35

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,14:43   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,20:33)
Quote (Louis @ July 13 2008,05:48)
Gary, I am very curious to know why you are chucking such a huge quantity of straw around on this issue.

Not only are the views you seem keen to attatch to others demonstrably and manifestly not the ones they are espressing, but the anecdotes, analogies and crimes you are associating with the actual events and arguments are so wide of the mark as to be almost deliberately so.

Louis

Well, there were several things about this that make me angry. First, I have a politically liberal respect for the rights of others to partisipte unmolested in the religion of their choice. Second, I have a professional respect for the rights of others to partisipte unmolested in the religion of their choice. Third, it is cowardly to ask other people to do your dirty work for you. Fourth, PZ was dismissive about the attack against Mirecki.

Finally, I presented a number of scenarios that you would agree are "bad things."  The Catholics view desecration of their ritual objects as a bad thing, on a par with the things I have mentioned. You (and the rest) deny they have valid emotions which is dehumanizing. You deny that they have a right to their practice unmolested and that it is fine to threaten them with the disruption of their religious practice.  That makes you a bigot.

I don't think I agree with any of those things you claim I do.

That makes you mistaken. Try reading what someone actually writes as opposed to what you think they write.

Louis

ETA: Oh and Gary, before you accuse people of bigotry, especially bigotry they demonstrably do not advocate (for example I challenge you to provide one example where I do not support and advocate the free exercise of religion), I'd check your facts. I'll await your apology.

--------------
Bye.

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,16:15   

i fail to see how making fun of catholics and their closely held beliefs is any worse (or any better) than making fun of IDiots and their closely held beliefs.

perhaps the joke was taken a bit further than necessary but quite honestly, a lot of religious beliefs are held up to ridicule on many threads in this forum.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,16:22   

Quote (rhmc @ July 13 2008,14:15)
i fail to see how making fun of catholics and their closely held beliefs is any worse (or any better) than making fun of IDiots and their closely held beliefs.

perhaps the joke was taken a bit further than necessary but quite honestly, a lot of religious beliefs are held up to ridicule on many threads in this forum.

I think it is fine and dandy to ridicule people for believing absurd things. It is rude, and generally unnecessary, but it is certainly First Amendment protected speech.

In the case of ID and creationism in general, they are trying to inflict their beliefs on the public, and use legal tricks to do it. That is a violation of the Constitution.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,16:42   

i'll just go eat a peach.  :)

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,16:56   

Since you refuse to actually read what's written in the thread I see no reason to continue this conversation. Have fun in the hay.

Edit: this/the

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
khan



Posts: 1525
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,17:47   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,17:22)
Quote (rhmc @ July 13 2008,14:15)
i fail to see how making fun of catholics and their closely held beliefs is any worse (or any better) than making fun of IDiots and their closely held beliefs.

perhaps the joke was taken a bit further than necessary but quite honestly, a lot of religious beliefs are held up to ridicule on many threads in this forum.

I think it is fine and dandy to ridicule people for believing absurd things. It is rude, and generally unnecessary, but it is certainly First Amendment protected speech.

In the case of ID and creationism in general, they are trying to inflict their beliefs on the public, and use legal tricks to do it. That is a violation of the Constitution.

If you diss the biscuit
The jebus will hits ya

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
Chayanov



Posts: 289
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,19:11   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 13 2008,16:22)
Quote (rhmc @ July 13 2008,14:15)
i fail to see how making fun of catholics and their closely held beliefs is any worse (or any better) than making fun of IDiots and their closely held beliefs.

perhaps the joke was taken a bit further than necessary but quite honestly, a lot of religious beliefs are held up to ridicule on many threads in this forum.

I think it is fine and dandy to ridicule people for believing absurd things. It is rude, and generally unnecessary, but it is certainly First Amendment protected speech.

In the case of ID and creationism in general, they are trying to inflict their beliefs on the public, and use legal tricks to do it. That is a violation of the Constitution.

In other words, it's bigotry when you don't agree with it. When you do, it's perfectly reasonable free speech. Gotcha. I'm done here, too. There are enough irrational, unreasonable people out there as it is.

--------------
Help! Marxist literary critics are following me!

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,19:56   

Was it illegal?

The answer seems clear, No.

If it is not illegal then the rest of the objections to this activity are irrelevant, although they may be interesting and even hilarious, to the discussion.

the claim that a communion wafer actually transforms into the body of christ is an empirical claim.  Of course, there is no empirical evidence for this claim, and it is unclear to me what sort of evidence could possibly even entail demonstrating the claim.  

So in that respect, this claim is as ridiculous as the claim that 'information increases are impossible by RM+NS', because in this case 'transforms' and 'body of christ' are as ill-defined and arbitrary (as clauses in the claim) as 'information'.  

I am just catching up here after having been away from the circus for a few days.  looking forward to seeing the fallout on pharyngula.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
QED



Posts: 41
Joined: July 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,21:08   

The fallout at present is PZ's posting of two of the more  serious threats against him via emails, complete with headers. One of the respondents was foolish enough to post from his/her workplace. Although it looks to me like someone left their computer account open before leaving for vacation and was set up, that someone is in for one nasty Monday morning when they return.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,23:07   

Quote (QED @ July 13 2008,22:08)
The fallout at present is PZ's posting of two of the more  serious threats against him via emails, complete with headers. One of the respondents was foolish enough to post from his/her workplace. Although it looks to me like someone left their computer account open before leaving for vacation and was set up, that someone is in for one nasty Monday morning when they return.

I love that it came from 1800flowers.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1431
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 13 2008,23:15   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 13 2008,23:07)
 
Quote (QED @ July 13 2008,22:08)
The fallout at present is PZ's posting of two of the more  serious threats against him via emails, complete with headers. One of the respondents was foolish enough to post from his/her workplace. Although it looks to me like someone left their computer account open before leaving for vacation and was set up, that someone is in for one nasty Monday morning when they return.

I love that it came from 1800flowers.

Makes you wonder what the "Burn in Hell, Atheist Scum" Bouquet runs for.  (And whether next day shipping is extra.)

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
QED



Posts: 41
Joined: July 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,00:16   

Quote (Texas Teach @ July 13 2008,23:15)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 13 2008,23:07)
     
Quote (QED @ July 13 2008,22:08)
The fallout at present is PZ's posting of two of the more  serious threats against him via emails, complete with headers. One of the respondents was foolish enough to post from his/her workplace. Although it looks to me like someone left their computer account open before leaving for vacation and was set up, that someone is in for one nasty Monday morning when they return.

I love that it came from 1800flowers.

Makes you wonder what the "Burn in Hell, Atheist Scum" Bouquet runs for.  (And whether next day shipping is extra.)


"For more than 30 years, our passion has been to help you connect and express yourself to the important people in your life..."


There's a "PZ Special" this week for a dozen Rosa anthraxis.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,07:20   

Heated discussion and vehement disagreement:  good.

Gratuitous insults and comparisons to Ftk: not so much.



Quote
Hillbilly Heaven, by Jan Tik


--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,07:39   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 14 2008,13:20)
Heated discussion and vehement disagreement:  good.

Gratuitous insults and comparisons to Ftk: not so much.



 
Quote
Hillbilly Heaven, by Jan Tik

Sorry Lou but that I disagree with. I disagree with your portage also.

Gary has done his damnedest to do EXACTLY what FTK (and her ilk) do:

a) He has chucked around strawmen
b) Falsely accused people of bias they demonstrably do not possess or exhibit.
c) Failed to deal with any argument actually made by anyone, and still adhered to his strawmen as if they were real.

Sorry but WHOEVER does that deserves calling on it. The comparisons made are to FTK's BEHAVIOUR and Gary's BEHAVIOUR not their character. Is it so hard to tell the difference?

Is it also hard to tell the difference between a gratuitous and unsupportable insult and a relatively mild expression of surprise that an otherwise sensible person has to resort to the tactics of the intellectually bereft?

Please restore those posts, they were on topic and not what you appear to think they were.

Louis

ETA: Issue resolved, post restored, inappropriate comment redacted. Guilty innocence or innocent guilt aside.

--------------
Bye.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,08:31   

Louis,

Check your PM box, and let me remind everyone:

Quote
Moderation messages not entered by the moderator are NOT appropriate on the board. Responses to moderation messages will be made via email, not on the board.


"Email" would extend to PMs, obviously.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,08:38   

1) PM Box checked.

2) Issue resolved.

3) I can has cockups on my part.

4) Ignore the man behind the curtain and the cock ups in front of it.

5) Editted repost permitted:

[Graffiti removed from Bathroom Wall. -Louis]

It's always nice to see that what could be a perfectly useful discussion about the one controversial topic surrounding this issue (i.e. tactics) is stymied by hurling around of unsupportable accusations and egregious strawmen.

I wonder what Gary thinks seperates his behaviour from that of, say, FTK.

Louis

ETA: I love how the majority of the "arguments" from the generally hysterical PZ decriers commonly fall into two broad categories: a) the moral equivalent of "Hey, she was wearing a short skirt, she was asking for it!" or b) "I'm offended, therefore I can do anything I like!".

--------------
Bye.

  
lcd



Posts: 137
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,09:21   

While I do not agree with many of the Catholic beliefs, I would not desecrate their beliefs.

Catholics only real problem is they follow the papacy who unfortunately support evolution over the Bible.

So for those of you who have no religious beliefs, do you believe in something else?  What if those beliefs were desecrated?  What would you do?

  
Nerull



Posts: 317
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,09:26   

Not threaten to kill people?

--------------
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

   
mitschlag



Posts: 236
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,09:28   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,09:21)
So for those of you who have no religious beliefs, do you believe in something else?  What if those beliefs were desecrated?  What would you do?

I believe in Truth, Justice and the American Way.

My beliefs have been desecrated by the Bush administration.

What I will do is vote Democratic. :angry:

--------------
"You can establish any “rule” you like if you start with the rule and then interpret the evidence accordingly." - George Gaylord Simpson (1902-1984)

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,09:29   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,09:21)
While I do not agree with many of the Catholic beliefs, I would not desecrate their beliefs.

Catholics only real problem is they follow the papacy who unfortunately support evolution over the Bible.

So for those of you who have no religious beliefs, do you believe in something else?  What if those beliefs were desecrated?  What would you do?

Can you rephrase your non sequitur so it makes some sense?

Substituting an actual belief, gives us as you phrased it, "How would I feel if The Law Of Gravity were desecrated"?

Doesn't make a lot of sense.  Sort of like a belief in Magical Sky Fathers and Moldy Old Books from the Iron Age.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Nerull



Posts: 317
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,09:37   

In other crackergate news, anyone seen PZs stalker, Jason, spouting off anywhere? He apparently came to the pharyngula chatroom and got 'dirt'. What that would be I've no idea.

Our tongue-in-cheek topic? (Wacky cult wants magic biscuit back.) Some friends joking around? Those those not used to it, that can seem kind of odd to come in to. It can be kind of like the joking that goes on here.

I really can't think of anything that was discussed that counts as "dirt", unless they're just going to try and embarrass Skatje again over out of context jokes.

--------------
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

   
lcd



Posts: 137
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:05   

Excuse me if I am a little short fused but I have a terrible headache.

What I was trying to say is why is it ok to belittle, demean or otherwise make fun of a person's beliefs?  Why is Christianity such a source of amusement?

As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

  
Nerull



Posts: 317
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:10   

lcd, do you believe the Earth is flat, pi equals 3, and the sun goes around the earth? Those are all the "Word of God".

Do you believe children should be stoned to death if they don't obey their parents? Do you ever wear mixed fabrics? Those are the Word of God.

You seem to have no problem ignoring the bits of the word of god you don't like, or that are obviously wrong. It's only when something comes along that means you, personally, are not all that special, that you resist it.

--------------
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:11   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,15:21)
While I do not agree with many of the Catholic beliefs, I would not desecrate their beliefs.

Catholics only real problem is they follow the papacy who unfortunately support evolution over the Bible.

So for those of you who have no religious beliefs, do you believe in something else?  What if those beliefs were desecrated?  What would you do?

The issue that has caused me to comment is not whether or not some catholics have got upset, or have a right to be upset (they have and do if they so chose). The issue is not whether PZ's comments or that young chap's (Woods, Cook, what the bloody hell was his name again?) actions were offensive, inoffensive, rude, not-rude, tasteless or not tasteless (your decision will vary according to your subjective tastes as much as anything...how logically consistent those tastes are and your actions based on them is a different issue). The issue that concerns me is that so many people seem to be keen to "justify" (very illogically) the worst kinds of hyperbole, threats, perhaps even violence, and demonstrably terrible argumentation because they claim to be "offended" or "offended for someone else".

And to answer your question, since I don't have "beliefs" in anything like the same sense that a standard catholic belief in the sanctity of the host might be construed, feel free to go ahead an desecrate away. I expect my ideas and claims to be challenged (in a rational, evidence based way, not merely as some form of gainsaying for example). In fact I demand that they are so challenged, I desire that challenge for only under the intense scrutiny of such challenges can the ideas I have be honed to accuracy. I possess no sacred cows, no ideas that are off limits and certainly no idea that I am incapable or unwilling to defend on a rational, evidenciary basis. If it turns out that some of my ideas are wrong, as it has on the past and undoubtedly will again in the future, then I change those ideas based on the evidence.

I realise this is quite probably anathema to you, and evidently something you don't understand based on your behaviour here.

My issue with Dr GH performance on this issue is not that I disagree with his conclusions or claims per se (some of them I vehemently do as it happens, some I don't) but that I disagree with his tactics. He has seen fit to distort what other people have said, flat out lie about other people's arguments and refused to engage in something I know him to be capable of, i.e. civil, reasoned, rational discourse. Whatever his reasons for doing so, that is unacceptable, just like your own idiocy on another thread is. Not because it is offensive, far from it (it takes a monumental amount to offend me, and even then offense is no excuse for anything) but because it destroys any opportunity for anything approaching a rational discourse about any of the subjects relevant to the topic. It muddies waters that need no more muddying.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:14   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,16:05)
Excuse me if I am a little short fused but I have a terrible headache.

What I was trying to say is why is it ok to belittle, demean or otherwise make fun of a person's beliefs?  Why is Christianity such a source of amusement?

As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

No.

One does not "believe" in science. Belief is not necessary.

And there is no emotional investment in the sense you are claiming. If all of science was overturned tomorrow I'd be just as happy as if it weren't. If god exists I'm perfectly happy, just as happy as if he/she/it/they doesn't. It makes no difference WHAT is real. The only thing that's important is how we claim to know what is real. Look at the sig, it might explain it a little better.

So feel free to take a crack at any aspect of science you like. Just make sure you do it well and with evidence. Nullius in verbia.

Louis

ETA: Try to understand that science is provisional,not absolute.

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:15   

Quote (Nerull @ July 14 2008,15:26)
Not threaten to kill people?

Well, that would be a good start.......

;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,10:30   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
lcd



Posts: 137
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:03   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

  
Nerull



Posts: 317
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:05   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,13:03)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

Because your aren't trying to replace it with evidence. Your trying to replace it with religious decree.

As you've found, there is no evidence. ID has lots of buzzwords, and none of which the proponents even know what they mean. There are no experiments. There are no test cases. There is nothing.

--------------
To rebut creationism you pretty much have to be a biologist, chemist, geologist, philosopher, lawyer and historian all rolled into one. While to advocate creationism, you just have to be an idiot. -- tommorris

   
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:11   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,12:03)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

stranglehold over science = failure of any information to provide evidentiary support for another theory

got it.  stranglehold aside, you are still missing the bus my friend.

Quote
fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism


the fight, dear lowest common denominator, is not over new ideas that threaten darwinism.  the fight, good sir, is over old rehashed debunked ideas that threaten the machinery of science itself, and that have no evidentiary support for any other theory, whatsoever.

irreducible complexity?  it appears that complexity, as far as has been explored, is often reducible.  in the big picture this futile exercise of finding 'IC' systems is just chasing Zeno down the rabbit hole.

explanatory filter?  can't even yield a robust conclusion that a peanut butter sandwich is designed.  also begs the question of design, chasing Bertrand Russell down the rabbit hole waving a fuzzy proposition.

so, when it comes to cracker, O LCD, do you think it should be against the law to point out that crackers are in no way whatsoever pieces of the flesh and blood of Jesus or any other god?

should we privilege this nonsense and place criticism of such a nonsense proposition beyond the pale?

don't you think that the fact that people are willing to threaten PZs life for ridiculing cracker belief is a testament to how stupid those claims are to begin with?  

you are being rather silly, and i suspect that it is due to your desire to maintain unanimity under the big tent, that makes you fellow travellers with those who wish death threats upon social critics.  Nice One.

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1191
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:13   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,12:03)
[quote=carlsonjok,July 14 2008,10:30]
Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

There are no new ideas that threaten "Darwinism." The fight is to keep religion out of public schools. If you (or anyone else you know of) comes up with a new idea that threatens "Darwinism," please let us know.

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:24   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,18:03)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

LCD,

The problem is that creationist ideas are:

a) Demonstrably not new ideas. Go back to the older creationist "generations" like the "scientific creationism" of George McReady Price for example, or the Natural Theology of Rev William Paley.

b) Demonstrably not scientific ideas. Even though describing what science is can be a very technical and complex philosophical enterprise, we have a huge series of things we know fail to be science. Creationisms of all known types fail the basic criteria needed to be science. Little things like having evidence supporting them, being falsifiable in the Popperian sense, providing a testable, coherent model of the observed universe. Tiny insignificant things like that.

c) Almost exclusively ideas that demonstrably arise from a very narrow set of specific religious traditions. Taking the species of creationism that infects the USA, it is most commonly of christian fundamentalist origin, but you guys also get Harun Yahya's islamic creationism (which differs slightly) fairly frequently. Further afield the vedic creationism of hindus is wildly different from its judeo-christian-islamic counterparts, yet still unsupported by the evidence, i.e. demonstrably wrong.

d) Demonstrably wrong. I.e. in the vast majority of cases creationist ideas don't merely fail to have the support of the available evidence, they are actively contradicted by it.

e) Frequently espoused by people trying to legislate religious claims as science. No one really cares if someone believes creationism in the privacy of their own head. What people DO care about is creationists trying force their demonstrably erroneous and non scientific claims into the scientific and educational arenas AS SCIENCE. Read (the very nice) book "The Creationists" by Ron Numbers. He's infinitely more charitable to the creationist cause than I would be, and far more dispassionate. You'll learn quite a bit about the history of US creationism.

It's advisable to check your facts before spouting off. The (false) canard of "darwinism having a stranglehold over science" is a lie sold to the religiously motivated/gullible. You've been lied to by whoever told you that. And the good thing is, if you go out and find the evidence, you can demonstrate this beyond reasonable doubt. Start working.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:35   

If this thread ends up centering around LCD, may I suggest a title change in order to maintain a non-hostile atmosphere?

Edit: I write like yoda sometimes.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:39   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,13:03)
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.  I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

"new ideas"

What do you even say to that?

The ideas you're talking about are new ideas in the same sense that astrology is "a new idea".

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:40   

Quote (dnmlthr @ July 14 2008,13:35)
If this thread ends up centering around LCD, may I suggest a title change in order to maintain a non-hostile atmosphere?

Edit: I write like yoda sometimes.

Quite right.  Let's move the discussion back to something interesting, like the original topic.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:41   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,12:03)
   
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 14 2008,10:30)
     
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?

Low, science is overturned all the time and the thought of being the one to do it give scientists serious wood (so to speak).

Your rather interesting way to describe how a scientist would feel overturning science.

Well, I guess it depends on what you mean by "overturning science", now doesn't it?  Science is not a thing that can be lost or destroyed.  It is a process by which our world is investigated.  That process results in a body of knowledge that, as Louis pointed out earlier, is provisional.  When I speak of overturning science, I speak of the process by which that investigation leads to new, and better, explanations for our world.  I suspect that you do not share that definition and I have to wonder if you are operating from the idea that science and religion are locked in a conflict from which one must emerge victorious (thus overthrowing the other).  So, why don't you be a little less circumspect and define what it is you mean?
   
Quote

Still Darwinism remains a core belief of many, even on this board.

Darwinism?  You know, there is about 150 years of additional science that you might want to farmiliarize yourself with.
   
Quote

I read what Louis posted but if that is so, then why is there such of fight over new ideas that threaten Darwinism and its stranglehold over science?

Others have addressed this more parsimoniously than I could, but the direct answer is there is no such fight when the idea has merit as a better explanation.  But ID has no merit. It is a rhetorically sophisticated God-of-the-gaps argument (life is sooooo complex, it just must have been designed).  The only thing ID explains is the dogmatic grasping at the idea of a personal god* and, secondarily, the lack of curiousity about the workings of our world in the mind of the proponent.

* Before you get your knickers in a twist, I am a deist not an atheist.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
George



Posts: 314
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,12:52   

My $0.02 as a Catholic environmental scientist.  Desecrating the communion host is rude and offensive to me and to other Catholics.  Not because God is somehow threatened, but because it shows disrespect to me.  Is this illegal? No. Is it a hate crime? No.  Should people be allowed to do or say such offensive things?  Of course, and I'll defend their right to do so while criticising their choice to do so.  In my opinion, people who threaten violence on the offensive person have the lower moral ground.

Should people be highly offensive in ridiculing religious beliefs?  Depends on what you want to achieve.  If you only want to entertain yourself and like minded readers, fire ahead.  But I think highly offensive ridiculing of beliefs is not the best way to convince people about evolutionary biology.  Emphasis on *highly offensive*, as some mild ridicule can be a good thing I reckon.  Also caveats on the convinceability of people - some are just lost causes.

I suppose my main point is on tactics.  PZ and others often acts like assholes on religious matters, which is sometimes funny and perfectly fine up to a point.  But I don't think they're winning us any friends.

PS I've only been really offended by another poster once in my time in this place, and that was a misunderstanding.

PPS  As a native of Tennessee, I also thought "kick the cracker" referred to Georgians before I started reading the content of this thread.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,13:05   

Quote (George @ July 14 2008,10:52)
PPS  As a native of Tennessee, I also thought "kick the cracker" referred to Georgians before I started reading the content of this thread.

It is a pun. Having lived in Georgia some years, I qualify as a honorary" cracker." Although, more than one friend said, "Are you sure you aren't 'passin'?" or words to that effect. So the racist undertone, and the fact that I am fully aware that my opinion is opposed by PZ's fanclub (and that they would not look in the mirror), and that the last host I ever saw as a Christian (~40? years ago) was literally a soda cracker, made the title inevitable.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,13:10   

Quote (George @ July 14 2008,12:52)
Should people be highly offensive in ridiculing religious beliefs?  Depends on what you want to achieve.  If you only want to entertain yourself and like minded readers, fire ahead.  But I think highly offensive ridiculing of beliefs is not the best way to convince people about evolutionary biology.  Emphasis on *highly offensive*, as some mild ridicule can be a good thing I reckon.  Also caveats on the convinceability of people - some are just lost causes.

I suppose my main point is on tactics.  PZ and others often acts like assholes on religious matters, which is sometimes funny and perfectly fine up to a point.  But I don't think they're winning us any friends.

Thank you for putting into words what I have been struggling with.  The beauty of free speech is that everyone is free to be as loud and idiotic as they want.  And I say God bless both PZ and Bill Donohue for taking full advantage of that freedom.

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,13:26   

Quote (George @ July 14 2008,18:52)
My $0.02 as a Catholic environmental scientist.  Desecrating the communion host is rude and offensive to me and to other Catholics.  Not because God is somehow threatened, but because it shows disrespect to me.  Is this illegal? No. Is it a hate crime? No.  Should people be allowed to do or say such offensive things?  Of course, and I'll defend their right to do so while criticising their choice to do so.  In my opinion, people who threaten violence on the offensive person have the lower moral ground.

Should people be highly offensive in ridiculing religious beliefs?  Depends on what you want to achieve.  If you only want to entertain yourself and like minded readers, fire ahead.  But I think highly offensive ridiculing of beliefs is not the best way to convince people about evolutionary biology.  Emphasis on *highly offensive*, as some mild ridicule can be a good thing I reckon.  Also caveats on the convinceability of people - some are just lost causes.

I suppose my main point is on tactics.  PZ and others often acts like assholes on religious matters, which is sometimes funny and perfectly fine up to a point.  But I don't think they're winning us any friends.

PS I've only been really offended by another poster once in my time in this place, and that was a misunderstanding.

PPS  As a native of Tennessee, I also thought "kick the cracker" referred to Georgians before I started reading the content of this thread.

Well as an atheist, chemical scientist there isn't really much of your $0.02 that I would disagree with.

At least not too strongly, and even then I reckon it would be an "ironing out of details" rather than a disagreement. ;-)

Although the tendancy to claim that you have been personally insulted by someone not cherishing the ideas and things you do in the manner you do is, to be blunt, a very destructive error however heartfelt. An error we ALL are liable to commit (myself included) but nonetheless, to some extent, an error.

Like I said above, the thing that interested me was/is the hyperbole, poor argumentation and strawmen being chucked about. Whosoever is chucking it about. Ascribing positions to people that they simply do not hold, and dogmatically insisting on adhering to that misattribution is the hallmark of intellectual dishonesty.

Do I sympathise with PZ's comments? Perhaps in some instances. Would I do the same thing the same way? Perhaps in some instances. It rather depends on whether or not it needs to be done. Does this mean I agree with every word and nuance. NO! And I suppose that is the crux of it all.

One of the things that PZ has 100% correct though is that there is a carapace of protection surrounding religious ideas and claims. The cry of "offense" is terribly easy to make and so often made that any power it has is lost on those of us who have sussed the trick. Is such protection needed? Will revealing the Emperor's nudity cause cataclysmic social decoherence? I'm not sure. But what I AM sure of is that that protection, and those ideas, demand challenge like any other idea. They need to evolve. No pun intended.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Erasmus, FCD



Posts: 6349
Joined: June 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,13:28   

I like it George.

The questions in my mind are "Is it alright to kick the lost cause" and "Does kicking the lost cause lose you any friends".  Of course "Who needs friends like those" is also a valid question.

I would suggest that these are all questions that are asked in particular contexts and in no way are generalized robust deductions may be made from their answers.

In this case, although PZ has a rhetorical style that I may find abrasive (actually, it is the braying den of squid that I usually ignore, just like Tony Rice is awesome but his disciples I wish to never meet another), I think pointing out the absurdity of cracker worship (in the theological sense, and not in the personal sense of "Haha, george worships a cracker) is an activity with desired ends not orthogonal to the desired ends of pointing out the absurdity of the claims made by anti-evolutionists.

The social context of consecrated communion may have other benefits real or perceived, but at the intersection of the faith claim and empirical reality we should not obscure reason behind warm fuzzy feelings about place and family or whatever is comforting.  

The wafer either is or is not God (although there has been some interesting dualist theology waffling about on the internetz since this event).  To me it seems obvious that there is a connection between this sort of compartmentalization and the sort that goes with the argument regarding design.

ETA negatives

--------------
You're obviously illiterate as hell. Peach, bro.-FtK

Finding something hard to believe based on the evidence, is science.-JoeG

the odds of getting some loathsome taint are low-- Gordon E Mullings Manjack Heights Montserrat

I work on molecular systems with pathway charts and such.-Giggles

  
George



Posts: 314
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,14:13   

Quote (Louis @ July 14 2008,13:26)
Well as an atheist, chemical scientist there isn't really much of your $0.02 that I would disagree with.

At least not too strongly, and even then I reckon it would be an "ironing out of details" rather than a disagreement. ;-)

Although the tendancy to claim that you have been personally insulted by someone not cherishing the ideas and things you do in the manner you do is, to be blunt, a very destructive error however heartfelt. An error we ALL are liable to commit (myself included) but nonetheless, to some extent, an error.

Like I said above, the thing that interested me was/is the hyperbole, poor argumentation and strawmen being chucked about. Whosoever is chucking it about. Ascribing positions to people that they simply do not hold, and dogmatically insisting on adhering to that misattribution is the hallmark of intellectual dishonesty.

Do I sympathise with PZ's comments? Perhaps in some instances. Would I do the same thing the same way? Perhaps in some instances. It rather depends on whether or not it needs to be done. Does this mean I agree with every word and nuance. NO! And I suppose that is the crux of it all.

One of the things that PZ has 100% correct though is that there is a carapace of protection surrounding religious ideas and claims. The cry of "offense" is terribly easy to make and so often made that any power it has is lost on those of us who have sussed the trick. Is such protection needed? Will revealing the Emperor's nudity cause cataclysmic social decoherence? I'm not sure. But what I AM sure of is that that protection, and those ideas, demand challenge like any other idea. They need to evolve. No pun intended.

Louis

To clarify, it's not the "not cherishing" that's insulting, it's the action or the words coupled with intent.  And really, if someone's intent is to insult, then in one sense, the "incorrect" one, it's definitely not an error to feel insulted.  But in the "mistake" sense, I would agree that it's best not to take things personally.  I've thick enough skin in that way.

I'd agree with your and PZ's view of the privileged position of religion wrt the defense of "offense".  I'd widen it to say that those claiming moral offense without explicitly bringing religion into it are similarly privileged.  Why is it that the most prudish and squeamish members of society get to make the rules on things like "foul" language and "indecent" dress?  Goes without saying here at least that any religious based empirical claims should be examined just as rigourously as secular ones.

  
George



Posts: 314
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,14:36   

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 14 2008,13:28)
I like it George.

The questions in my mind are "Is it alright to kick the lost cause"


Depends on who the lost cause is, where you kick 'em and what your footwear of choice is.  For those like DaveScot and Sal, the metaphorical steel-toed Doc to the wobblies is called for.

 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 14 2008,13:28)
and "Does kicking the lost cause lose you any friends".


Depends on who's watching.

 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 14 2008,13:28)
Of course "Who needs friends like those" is also a valid question.

I would suggest that these are all questions that are asked in particular contexts and in no way are generalized robust deductions may be made from their answers.


I knew this question would come up.  This is the question that the "honey" and "vinegar" factions always fall out on.  For e.g.,PZ has argued that we don't need the help of the theistic evolutionists.  I think the answer to that depends on who the we is.  Are you fighting for atheism?  For evolutionary biology free of religion? Different goals mean different friends can be useful.  I reckon some of the more committed atheists forget or disregard this point.  

Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 14 2008,13:28)
In this case, although PZ has a rhetorical style that I may find abrasive (actually, it is the braying den of squid that I usually ignore, just like Tony Rice is awesome but his disciples I wish to never meet another), I think pointing out the absurdity of cracker worship (in the theological sense, and not in the personal sense of "Haha, george worships a cracker) is an activity with desired ends not orthogonal to the desired ends of pointing out the absurdity of the claims made by anti-evolutionists.

The social context of consecrated communion may have other benefits real or perceived, but at the intersection of the faith claim and empirical reality we should not obscure reason behind warm fuzzy feelings about place and family or whatever is comforting.  

The wafer either is or is not God (although there has been some interesting dualist theology waffling about on the internetz since this event).  To me it seems obvious that there is a connection between this sort of compartmentalization and the sort that goes with the argument regarding design.

ETA negatives


I know what you're saying wrt compartmentalization above.  However, I reckon a problem common to creationists is a lack of compartmentalisation of a sort.  The inability to recognise that faith has absolutely nothing to say in certain spheres, like natural science.  I like the NOMA framework, though granted it may not be perfect.

[Edited to sort out quotes]

  
George



Posts: 314
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,14:37   

(Edited to delete duplicate msg.)

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,14:49   

Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?


I am outraged at the continuing attempts, not to overturn science (which is simply evidence based reasoning) but to replace it with superstition, fabrication and mythology.

Homeopathy, astrology, mediums, faith healers, fundamentalists, crystal healers, ear-candlers, cerealogists (crop circle nuts) UFO's are all offering the same snide coin.

Dembski's story of his pilgrimage to the charlatan Todd Bentley is truly pathetic (in the original sense) and is an example of how an otherwise intelligent person can be held hostage by faith.  Unfortunately Dembski is offering the same thing to his follower but he doesn't see the irony.  He feels he's being more open minded:  "Unlike Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer, James Randi, and the skeptical community in general, I don’t throw out all miraculous healings." As a result of his credulity he has financially supported the odious Todd Bentley and profited from other credulous beings.

When you throw out the need for evidence (from controlled experiments and observations) then exploitative people profit whether from 'donations' to 'cure' an autistic child or profits from evidence-free books.

What does Dembski demand from Bentley? Evidence.  What does he fail to provide for ID? Evidence.

Science cannot be 'over-turned' - we would need evidence for that which would simply replace science with new science. But it can be discarded for wishful, woolly thinking.  

I find that profoundly disturbing and I will fight to prevent it.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,15:30   

Quote (Quidam @ July 14 2008,14:49)
Quote (lcd @ July 14 2008,10:05)
As for scientific theories, are you sure you won't care if science is over turned?  Isn't what this is all about?  Fighting to keep one's belief in science over the Word of God?


I am outraged at the continuing attempts, not to overturn science (which is simply evidence based reasoning) but to replace it with superstition, fabrication and mythology.

Homeopathy, astrology, mediums, faith healers, fundamentalists, crystal healers, ear-candlers, cerealogists (crop circle nuts) UFO's are all offering the same snide coin.

Dembski's story of his pilgrimage to the charlatan Todd Bentley is truly pathetic (in the original sense) and is an example of how an otherwise intelligent person can be held hostage by faith.  Unfortunately Dembski is offering the same thing to his follower but he doesn't see the irony.  He feels he's being more open minded:  "Unlike Richard Dawkins, Michael Shermer, James Randi, and the skeptical community in general, I don’t throw out all miraculous healings." As a result of his credulity he has financially supported the odious Todd Bentley and profited from other credulous beings.

When you throw out the need for evidence (from controlled experiments and observations) then exploitative people profit whether from 'donations' to 'cure' an autistic child or profits from evidence-free books.

What does Dembski demand from Bentley? Evidence.  What does he fail to provide for ID? Evidence.

Science cannot be 'over-turned' - we would need evidence for that which would simply replace science with new science. But it can be discarded for wishful, woolly thinking.  

I find that profoundly disturbing and I will fight to prevent it.

Hear, hear and well said.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,17:39   


http://www.jesusandmo.net/2008/07/14/mass/

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,17:52   

Quote (George @ July 14 2008,20:13)
Quote (Louis @ July 14 2008,13:26)
Well as an atheist, chemical scientist there isn't really much of your $0.02 that I would disagree with.

At least not too strongly, and even then I reckon it would be an "ironing out of details" rather than a disagreement. ;-)

Although the tendancy to claim that you have been personally insulted by someone not cherishing the ideas and things you do in the manner you do is, to be blunt, a very destructive error however heartfelt. An error we ALL are liable to commit (myself included) but nonetheless, to some extent, an error.

Like I said above, the thing that interested me was/is the hyperbole, poor argumentation and strawmen being chucked about. Whosoever is chucking it about. Ascribing positions to people that they simply do not hold, and dogmatically insisting on adhering to that misattribution is the hallmark of intellectual dishonesty.

Do I sympathise with PZ's comments? Perhaps in some instances. Would I do the same thing the same way? Perhaps in some instances. It rather depends on whether or not it needs to be done. Does this mean I agree with every word and nuance. NO! And I suppose that is the crux of it all.

One of the things that PZ has 100% correct though is that there is a carapace of protection surrounding religious ideas and claims. The cry of "offense" is terribly easy to make and so often made that any power it has is lost on those of us who have sussed the trick. Is such protection needed? Will revealing the Emperor's nudity cause cataclysmic social decoherence? I'm not sure. But what I AM sure of is that that protection, and those ideas, demand challenge like any other idea. They need to evolve. No pun intended.

Louis

To clarify, it's not the "not cherishing" that's insulting, it's the action or the words coupled with intent.  And really, if someone's intent is to insult, then in one sense, the "incorrect" one, it's definitely not an error to feel insulted.  But in the "mistake" sense, I would agree that it's best not to take things personally.  I've thick enough skin in that way.

I'd agree with your and PZ's view of the privileged position of religion wrt the defense of "offense".  I'd widen it to say that those claiming moral offense without explicitly bringing religion into it are similarly privileged.  Why is it that the most prudish and squeamish members of society get to make the rules on things like "foul" language and "indecent" dress?  Goes without saying here at least that any religious based empirical claims should be examined just as rigourously as secular ones.

LOL I was being mildly delicate with the "not cherishing"!

;-)

The argumentum ad hominem fallacy confuses the person with the validity of their argument. I reckon the reverse is also a fallacy if you see what I mean. I.e. that criticism of the idea/argument =/= criticism of the person. I am perfectly content to respect my religious friends, I am not however perfectly content to respect their religions. Mind you I'm also perfectly happy for them not to respect any of my daft ideas! Not that religious ideas are necessarily daft....oh for fuck's sake you know what I mean dammit!

Although your point about intent (especially when it's obviously offensive) is well taken.

Your mention of "honey", "vinegar" and NOMA in a following post rang bells. ;-) I think very few of the "committed atheists" you mention forget the difference between honey and vinegar. But there areseholes in every group. I don't even think "commited atheists" exist, it's pretty hard to be commited to a lack of belief in something. Intolerant atheists on the other hand, abound! I'm probably one of them!

As for NOMA and religious claims (not just empirical ones)....well I think we know what I think about that!

Oh well!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Amadan



Posts: 1332
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 14 2008,18:04   

Can science be overturned? Interesting Q.

As I understand it, the first thing a scientist has to do before brushing his/her teeth in the morning is to say "I might be wrong".

I am a lawyer qualified to practise in three jurisdictions. As an exercise for the reader, I leave it to you to estimate the arrogance-withdrawal that would provoke in me.

Empirical observation is something we all do reflexively and throughout our lives. But then if you subject the inferences you draw from it to the withering criticism of others who seek the same advantages that you do, even while you are constrained by the need to limit your deductions to those supportable by earlier data and by legitimate mathematics, you come as close as I care to define to "actuality".

"Disproving" science is not a matter of preference, in the sense of asking "Who do you want to tell you what it's all about". It's a question of epistemology: Do you think this statement is objectively verifiable?

If you want to "disprove" science, you also want to shut your eyes and hope the clerk gives you the right change, design your own wing for the plane using Impressionist paintings as your guide, and take up that intriguing offer from Emperor Bokassa's nephew with the locked bank account.

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,07:28   

Melanie Kroll, from whose 1800flowers Email account came the posted death threat to PZ, has been fired:

 
Quote
On Monday, Kroll send Myers a confusing e-mail, explaining that while the threat was sent from her computer, but that she didn't write it. "It seems an e-mail went out from my work account," she wrote in an e-mail message obtained by IDG News. "I apologize and will look into the issue."

She said that her work e-mail was set as the default address on her computer and that is why the it appeared to come from her, adding that the threat was "empty" because "the people who could have used my PC are harmless."

After an internal investigation, the Internet retailer decided to terminate Kroll's position, according to Steven Jarmon, the company's vice president of brand communications. "All 1-800-Flowers.com associates are instructed that any misuse of company systems or equipment for personal purposes is potential grounds for dismissal," he wrote in an e-mail.


ETA: ckroll purports to be the perp

Edited by Lou FCD on July 16 2008,08:37

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,09:39   

Quote (Amadan @ July 15 2008,00:04)
Can science be overturned? Interesting Q.

As I understand it, the first thing a scientist has to do before brushing his/her teeth in the morning is to say "I might be wrong".

I am a lawyer qualified to practise in three jurisdictions. As an exercise for the reader, I leave it to you to estimate the arrogance-withdrawal that would provoke in me.

Empirical observation is something we all do reflexively and throughout our lives. But then if you subject the inferences you draw from it to the withering criticism of others who seek the same advantages that you do, even while you are constrained by the need to limit your deductions to those supportable by earlier data and by legitimate mathematics, you come as close as I care to define to "actuality".

"Disproving" science is not a matter of preference, in the sense of asking "Who do you want to tell you what it's all about". It's a question of epistemology: Do you think this statement is objectively verifiable?

If you want to "disprove" science, you also want to shut your eyes and hope the clerk gives you the right change, design your own wing for the plane using Impressionist paintings as your guide, and take up that intriguing offer from Emperor Bokassa's nephew with the locked bank account.

Amadan,

This is a good point well made, and it cannot be made enough IMO.

The nasty part of me occasionally dreams of a world in which those people who make a nuisance of themselves by denying reality are forced to live with the consequences in all sorts of comedy ways. Also the abject hypocrisy of the faux relativist/anti-science/anti-reason position is not lost on anyone I hope.

Then the sensible part of me remembers that I am an egalitarian, liberal minded sort of chap and that the nasty part of me better just shut up and deal with it!

Science: It works, bitches!

There is one tiny thing I wish to take issue with: This "before brushing your teeth" stuff. Any chance you could mention this action to some of my more personal hygeine challenged colleagues? Some of them are very eminent scientists, and also quite frequently wrong and humble about it, but one does wonder if smelling like a dead badger is part of the package. I ask myself: will I win the Nobel prize if I stop washing? I then ask myself: if so, will anyone turn up if I do?

Louis

P.S. Lou. This person lost their job? I can't say I'm happy, I'm never happy when someone loses their job even if it is by their own amazing stupidity, but if people are going to use work email to send death threats, I think job loss is a pretty good start!

ETA: Modify the above P.S. I should have read further. It seem this lady's husband (or some male with the same surname and access to her PC) accidentally wrote the mail using her work account. Whoa. Now that IS not only dumb but downright BAD. Thus, IMO, sacking her is a bit harsh, a (metaphorical!) rap on the knuckles is probably sufficient. This chap on the other hand is so hypocritically unrepentant (and has a bad case of Fatwah Envy one notes) I hope this lady in his life gives him a large barrel of grief!

FETA: Well, I didn't send an email calling for Kroll's head (like many others, I think the very idea of doing so ridiculous no matter WHO does it), but I WILL be sending an email asking 1-800-Flowers to reinstate her.

Not because I disagree with PZ (I don't). Not because I think death threats via email are acceptable (I don't). And not because I think that she isn't at least partly responsible for all the good reasons people mention on the Pharyngula thread (I do think she is partly responsible).

The reason I'll send the email is because I hope she gets her job back, times are hard and she shouldn't lose her job over what is essentially a relatively minor error of PC security. Simple human compassion (and like Greg Laden, a general dislike of the "rules" being applied so apparently thoughtlessly. People fuck up: deal with it because sure as hell you fuck up too).

--------------
Bye.

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,11:00   

Quote (Louis @ July 16 2008,09:39)
The reason I'll send the email is because I hope she gets her job back, times are hard and she shouldn't lose her job over what is essentially a relatively minor error of PC security. Simple human compassion (and like Greg Laden, a general dislike of the "rules" being applied so apparently thoughtlessly. People fuck up: deal with it because sure as hell you fuck up too).

Louis:

Outstanding sentiment, well said.

However, you have, in one single post destroyed your hard-won image as a kick-ass Evolution-Loving Christian Hating Darwinist.

How will ftk be hating on you now?  You should have thought about the fallout before you posted.  Forcing ftk to change her world-view and possibly forcing her to re-think things may bring about the end-times, or at least a shift in the tard-force of the universe.

Way to go.  I applaud you!

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,11:15   

Quote (J-Dog @ July 16 2008,17:00)
Quote (Louis @ July 16 2008,09:39)
The reason I'll send the email is because I hope she gets her job back, times are hard and she shouldn't lose her job over what is essentially a relatively minor error of PC security. Simple human compassion (and like Greg Laden, a general dislike of the "rules" being applied so apparently thoughtlessly. People fuck up: deal with it because sure as hell you fuck up too).

Louis:

Outstanding sentiment, well said.

However, you have, in one single post destroyed your hard-won image as a kick-ass Evolution-Loving Christian Hating Darwinist.

How will ftk be hating on you now?  You should have thought about the fallout before you posted.  Forcing ftk to change her world-view and possibly forcing her to re-think things may bring about the end-times, or at least a shift in the tard-force of the universe.

Way to go.  I applaud you!

Oh I'm still a total bastard, have no fear....well, actually, have lots of fear....but I digress.

Anyway, she won't read it, and if she does, she won't notice it or believe it. Projection of her own inadequacies is one of FTK's most endearing traits.

And, it would appear, Chuck Kroll's too, as evidenced by his staggeringly unpleasant Notpology.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,11:55   

Apparently, Melanie herself has shown up at Greg Laden's Blog.

ETA her comment, in its entirety:

Quote
First off, it is amazing at all the speculation out there. Number one, i will not be leaving my husband due to this mistake. Number two he is not a crazy lunatic, but a very passionate man when it comes to his party and his religion. He's a great person, great father and yes feels absolutely horrible about what has happened to me. As his wife, am i worried about any threats.. no i am not as i know it was just a rage via email. Did he directly threaten anyones life, no he did not. In any case, the tone and text of the email was not appropriate and he did send an email apology to PZ. For the record and i do not owe anyone anything.. i was on vacation until 7/14, i was called on friday evening and informed that some work was due and the deadline was monday morning. I was also apologized to for being asked to work during my vacation of which i take far and few between. I came in during my vacation as a courtesy to my flowers team. I use my own personal pc for work and yes I do work from home as a sales and service manager. I am extremely careful with my applications and have been a valued ( thought i was) employee for 7 years. Once i completed what i needed to do, i logged off ALL applications. My email is password protected, my RSA log in is password protected as well as my VPN and NO ONE has my complex passwords. My husband went on to the drudge report site that he reads and clicked on a link and came across that man pz's notice and responded as he always does when he is upset. Was his text extreme yes it was, would he follow through, never. I want to clear the air and tried to with my company. I was not logged into work when this happened and somehow when i logged off my exchange server email i use i set it as my default (must have clicked on yes as it does ask upon sigh in). So when my husband click on the email address to respond to the newsletter it was coming from flowers email. I am not sure how as i was not connected to VPN but that is neither here nor there and something i will take up with them. My personal email(optonline) has always been my default. No excuses here folks, this is what went down. I have nothing to hide and no reason or desire to note these blogs. If i hadn't been the dedicated employee i was i would have said "heck no, im not working on my vacation" but i am not the type and felt it my duty to make sure my annual reviews were in time for my team members to receive their annual raises. As for 1-800-Flowers, they are a wonderful company and have always been good to me and my family. They do offer a great service and i sure hope you utilitze them or continue to do so if you are a current customer. On that note, you have no way of knowing if this is me or not, but i can assure you it is. Everyone has their opinions but the things that have been posted about my company and myself are herrendous and quite frankly is making me physically ill. Please enough with the harsh comments about me, my husband and my former employer.


Edited by Lou FCD on July 16 2008,12:58

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,13:17   

It would appear that this is not Mr. Kroll's first go 'round with online death threats.

 
Quote
A few posters have found previous examples of Chuck Kroll threatening people online, and posted links from the Pharyngula blog. Not the first time Mr. Kroll has threatened to kill someone online, assuming that it's the same one.

 
Quote
"I'm coming after you. And I'm putting it in writing, I don't care. God help your fagot communist ass if something happens to even one of those brave kids. I know where you work, it can't be that hard to find someone as ugly as you...You had better pray (opps sorry bad word for you darwinist's)that nothing happens to even one of those kids on our ships or I will take you out myself, and stand over your body to the police arrive. No jury in this nation would convict me I'm sure. You Bastard.

Yours,

Chuck kroll
huntington bay ny"


ETA:  Original comment, made in 2006

Edited by Lou FCD on July 16 2008,14:25

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
Texas Teach



Posts: 1431
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,13:49   

It sounds like we need to sign Chuck up for the Internet Tough Guy Olympics.  Imagine getting him to compete against DaveTard (and his dogs).

--------------
"Creationists think everything Genesis says is true. I don't even think Phil Collins is a good drummer." --J. Carr

"I suspect that the English grammar books where you live are outdated" --G. Gaulin

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,13:57   

Quote (Texas Teach @ July 16 2008,19:49)
It sounds like we need to sign Chuck up for the Internet Tough Guy Olympics.  Imagine getting him to compete against DaveTard (and his dogs).



It would be... wonderful!

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
J-Dog



Posts: 4402
Joined: Dec. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,14:24   

Quote (Texas Teach @ July 16 2008,13:49)
It sounds like we need to sign Chuck up for the Internet Tough Guy Olympics.  Imagine getting him to compete against DaveTard (and his dogs).

I'd say that Our Davie is more intelligent and better educated by a couple degrees of magnitude than Chuckie, but hey, I'd pay good money or crackers, for a view of the cage match.  

It's a win -win.

--------------
Come on Tough Guy, do the little dance of ID impotence you do so well. - Louis to Joe G 2/10

Gullibility is not a virtue - Quidam on Dembski's belief in the Bible Code Faith Healers & ID 7/08

UD is an Unnatural Douchemagnet. - richardthughes 7/11

  
Tracy P. Hamilton



Posts: 1239
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,14:31   

Quote (dnmlthr @ July 16 2008,13:57)
Quote (Texas Teach @ July 16 2008,19:49)
It sounds like we need to sign Chuck up for the Internet Tough Guy Olympics.  Imagine getting him to compete against DaveTard (and his dogs).



It would be... wonderful!

Hey, watch what pictures you post!  We don't want the Ghost of Paley to reappear.  :p

--------------
"Following what I just wrote about fitness, you’re taking refuge in what we see in the world."  PaV

"The simple equation F = MA leads to the concept of four-dimensional space." GilDodgen

"We have no brain, I don't, for thinking." Robert Byers

  
dnmlthr



Posts: 565
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,17:37   

Another suspected Krolling posted over at pharyngula.

 
Quote

   this woman who is the principle of this middle school should be fired on the spot, ther is no need to make a determination to who is responsible. When the person in charge of the school is responsible.

   You see womwn can not have it both way, demand equality and respect, then ask for understanding because " I was flustered by a reporters phone call". If she get's flustered by a phone call, then imagine how she would handle a terror situation, or an emergency.

   perhaps this will make some people in this state wake up, and see that these people we have abdicated our parental duties to, could care less about these children.

   As long as they can get their six to seven months a year off, teach our kids that America sucks and it's ok to have two mommies public education is fine, but if you want good old fashion morals reading, writting and math skills. well that's another thing.

   What's next field trips to whore houses.

   Let's wake up New Hampshire, and let's do what we shoud have done a long time ago, run all these scum bag socialists from our state back to mass where they belong
   - chuck kroll, manchester


Emphasis mine. If it's the same guy it seems to me that he would benefit from taking a walk between writing and pressing submit.

As for Melanie Kroll getting her job back, yeah why not cut her some slack but at the same time I don't find it too plausible.
Whatever negligence displayed on her part has set off a chain reaction that has resulted in alot of negative attention ending up in the lap of her employers. At the very least they've ended up being the butt of alot of bad jokes.

Having been on the clean-up side, albeit on the technical side, after clear breaches of policy, it's just plain bad all around.

--------------
Guess what? I don't give a flying f*ck how "science works" - Ftk

  
khan



Posts: 1525
Joined: May 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,19:06   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 16 2008,12:55)
Apparently, Melanie herself has shown up at Greg Laden's Blog.

ETA her comment, in its entirety:

 
Quote
First off, it is amazing at all the speculation out there. Number one, i will not be leaving my husband due to this mistake. Number two he is not a crazy lunatic, but a very passionate man when it comes to his party and his religion. He's a great person, great father and yes feels absolutely horrible about what has happened to me. As his wife, am i worried about any threats.. no i am not as i know it was just a rage via email. Did he directly threaten anyones life, no he did not. In any case, the tone and text of the email was not appropriate and he did send an email apology to PZ. For the record and i do not owe anyone anything.. i was on vacation until 7/14, i was called on friday evening and informed that some work was due and the deadline was monday morning. I was also apologized to for being asked to work during my vacation of which i take far and few between. I came in during my vacation as a courtesy to my flowers team. I use my own personal pc for work and yes I do work from home as a sales and service manager. I am extremely careful with my applications and have been a valued ( thought i was) employee for 7 years. Once i completed what i needed to do, i logged off ALL applications. My email is password protected, my RSA log in is password protected as well as my VPN and NO ONE has my complex passwords. My husband went on to the drudge report site that he reads and clicked on a link and came across that man pz's notice and responded as he always does when he is upset. Was his text extreme yes it was, would he follow through, never. I want to clear the air and tried to with my company. I was not logged into work when this happened and somehow when i logged off my exchange server email i use i set it as my default (must have clicked on yes as it does ask upon sigh in). So when my husband click on the email address to respond to the newsletter it was coming from flowers email. I am not sure how as i was not connected to VPN but that is neither here nor there and something i will take up with them. My personal email(optonline) has always been my default. No excuses here folks, this is what went down. I have nothing to hide and no reason or desire to note these blogs. If i hadn't been the dedicated employee i was i would have said "heck no, im not working on my vacation" but i am not the type and felt it my duty to make sure my annual reviews were in time for my team members to receive their annual raises. As for 1-800-Flowers, they are a wonderful company and have always been good to me and my family. They do offer a great service and i sure hope you utilitze them or continue to do so if you are a current customer. On that note, you have no way of knowing if this is me or not, but i can assure you it is. Everyone has their opinions but the things that have been posted about my company and myself are herrendous and quite frankly is making me physically ill. Please enough with the harsh comments about me, my husband and my former employer.

If true, that is one messed up dude.

--------------
"It's as if all those words, in their hurry to escape from the loony, have fallen over each other, forming scrambled heaps of meaninglessness." -damitall

That's so fucking stupid it merits a wing in the museum of stupid. -midwifetoad

Frequency is just the plural of wavelength...
-JoeG

  
SoonerintheBluegrass



Posts: 39
Joined: May 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,19:16   

Longtime lurker, first time caller.  I humbly submit . . .  Can we change this thread name to "Crackers Don't Matter"?

(I love that episode, and it's so apropos)

--------------
"And heaven will smell like the airport
But I may not get there to prove it
So let's not waste our time thinking how that ain't fair."

Neko Case

  
Lou FCD



Posts: 5402
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,20:01   

Quote (SoonerintheBluegrass @ July 16 2008,20:16)
Longtime lurker, first time caller.  I humbly submit . . .  Can we change this thread name to "Crackers Don't Matter"?

(I love that episode, and it's so apropos)

Hi SoonerintheBluegrass.  Glad you've started posting.

We'll wait and see what Dr. GH says.  It's his thread, and I don't wanna step on his toes.  I like him a lot, and I don't want him mad at me.

I hear he eats people on his shit list.  He even has blog named "Stones and Bones".  (It should be in your feed reader if it's not already.)  If that don't put the fear of the FSM in you, I don't know what will.

But if he's all good with it, then I'm all good with it.

--------------
Lou FCD is still in school, so we should only count him as a baby biologist. -carlsonjok -deprecated
I think I might love you. Don't tell Deadman -Wolfhound

Work-friendly photography
NSFW photography

   
qetzal



Posts: 311
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 16 2008,20:20   

Quote (Louis @ July 16 2008,09:39)
There is one tiny thing I wish to take issue with: This "before brushing your teeth" stuff. Any chance you could mention this action to some of my more personal hygeine challenged colleagues? Some of them are very eminent scientists, and also quite frequently wrong and humble about it, but one does wonder if smelling like a dead badger is part of the package.

Louis

Maybe it's akin to evolutionary traits like the peacock's tail. Along the lines of, "I'm such a badass scientist that I can be successful even while smelling like a dead badger. Better not challenge me at the next departmental meeting!"

:p

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,04:08   

Quote (qetzal @ July 17 2008,02:20)
Quote (Louis @ July 16 2008,09:39)
There is one tiny thing I wish to take issue with: This "before brushing your teeth" stuff. Any chance you could mention this action to some of my more personal hygeine challenged colleagues? Some of them are very eminent scientists, and also quite frequently wrong and humble about it, but one does wonder if smelling like a dead badger is part of the package.

Louis

Maybe it's akin to evolutionary traits like the peacock's tail. Along the lines of, "I'm such a badass scientist that I can be successful even while smelling like a dead badger. Better not challenge me at the next departmental meeting!"

:p

A very good point. There is no way this can be due to sexual selection like the peacock's tail, perhaps you've discovered a new mode of selection: Revulsion Deselection?

There's probably a better name out there, but the coffee has yet to kick in, I'll be imaginative later.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,11:38   

Back to topic.  

Melanie Kroll was not responsible for writing the death threat and she was not fired for that. She was responsible for breaking  1800Flowers policy and for that she lost her job.  

Everyone seems to be assuming that Melanie, being a woman and all, is a nice person and innocent victim of a violent and abusive husband.  This may be the case but it's speculation.  It's just as likely that she fully agrees with her husband's sentiments and has been bothering other employees and customer.  That is also speculation

Quite why people think they should advise 1800flowers on a personnel matter is beyond me.  We know very little about Melanie Kroll and 1800flowers and this is (should be) a private matter.  

I have unfortunately had to fire people for repeated infractions of IT security policy, fortunately none resulted in the publicity that Melanie's negligence had for 1800flowers.  I know that I would not take kindly to strangers, who know little of the circumstances and history, giving me unsolicited advice.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,12:41   

Quote (Quidam @ July 17 2008,17:38)
Back to topic.  

Melanie Kroll was not responsible for writing the death threat and she was not fired for that. She was responsible for breaking  1800Flowers policy and for that she lost her job.  

Everyone seems to be assuming that Melanie, being a woman and all, is a nice person and innocent victim of a violent and abusive husband.  This may be the case but it's speculation.  It's just as likely that she fully agrees with her husband's sentiments and has been bothering other employees and customer.  That is also speculation

Quite why people think they should advise 1800flowers on a personnel matter is beyond me.  We know very little about Melanie Kroll and 1800flowers and this is (should be) a private matter.  

I have unfortunately had to fire people for repeated infractions of IT security policy, fortunately none resulted in the publicity that Melanie's negligence had for 1800flowers.  I know that I would not take kindly to strangers, who know little of the circumstances and history, giving me unsolicited advice.

Hi Quidam,

I think "advise"/"advice", at least in my case, is possibly too strong a term. "Delicate request to go perhaps easier(circumstances and history permitting) on her". Yes it IS presumptuous and yes it IS probably more than a bit cheeky, but if some people are willing to send emails calling for her head (not that I did) I think it's only fair that some people are willing to send emails calling for leniency over what is ultimately a total storm in a teacup. The whole shebang has been sublimely ridiculous IMO. PZ's comments were pretty innocuous, and the "he was trying to get people to steal hosts and persecute catholics the bigot" brigade are just off the planet.

Anyway, she is quite possibly an innocent victim of her husband's vicious stupidity and what at best could be only a mild lapse on her part. Of course it could be any number of permutations more damning than that, but I'm a firm supporter of innocent until proven guilty. She might share her husbands odious bigotry but then she might not, I simply don't know and thus grant her the benefit of the doubt. I've never denied that my assumption of her innocence is anything but the purest speculation, and I never would! I hope I'm not proven wrong but I rather suspect probably will be!

BTW I agree with all the other points you make, I just think summary dismissal (though I fully understand the justification in this case) is pretty harsh. I think that there are alternatives to be used before sacking someone. (BTW I am responsible for hiring and firing in my current position, and I've done both. I prefer not to fire unless I really have to. Like creationists, potential firees get three strikes!) I especially agree that a lot what people (myself included) have written about M Kroll (good, bad or indifferent) has been pure speculation, hence my plea for clemency: in the absence of any evidence of anything unpleasant I prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt.

Coming from such a dedicated and unrepentant bastard as myself this may seem mildly incongruous, perhaps even self-contradictory, but I assure you it isn't. The ridiculousness of this situation made me curious, which is pretty much the only reason I commented on it. The baying hoardes of PZ haters and the more ridiculous Pharyngulites crying for the blood of the sender of an disgustingly nasty (felonious) email by emailing their boss disgusted me in nearly equal measure. The hypocrisy the baying catholic hoardes amazed me and the lack of anything approach a liberal will in my peers annoyed me.

Rome is the mob. Rather depressingly so.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,12:54   

Quote (Lou FCD @ July 16 2008,18:01)
Quote (SoonerintheBluegrass @ July 16 2008,20:16)
Longtime lurker, first time caller.  I humbly submit . . .  Can we change this thread name to "Crackers Don't Matter"?

(I love that episode, and it's so apropos)

Hi SoonerintheBluegrass.  Glad you've started posting.

We'll wait and see what Dr. GH says.  It's his thread, and I don't wanna step on his toes.  I like him a lot, and I don't want him mad at me.

I hear he eats people on his shit list.  He even has blog named "Stones and Bones".  (It should be in your feed reader if it's not already.)  If that don't put the fear of the FSM in you, I don't know what will.

But if he's all good with it, then I'm all good with it.

Fine with me. I am going on the ocean tonight into the weekend to kill things. Grrrr

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
ReligionProf



Posts: 33
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,13:08   

I finally got around to posting a Biblical studies perspective on the P.Z.Myers vs. the cracker issue:

http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2008....rs.html

--------------
http://www.patheos.com/communi....rmatrix

   
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,15:16   

Quote (Louis @ July 17 2008,11:41)
if some people are willing to send emails calling for her head (not that I did)
Neither did I.

Quote (Louis @ July 17 2008,11:41)

Anyway, she is quite possibly an innocent victim of her husband's vicious stupidity and what at best could be only a mild lapse on her part. Of course it could be any number of permutations more damning than that, but I'm a firm supporter of innocent until proven guilty. She might share her husbands odious bigotry but then she might not, I simply don't know and thus grant her the benefit of the doubt. I've never denied that my assumption of her innocence is anything but the purest speculation, and I never would! I hope I'm not proven wrong but I rather suspect probably will be!

Then your appeal for clemency is based on no information and is meaningless.  You may presume innocence, but you have no responsibility or jurisdiction in the matter.  The people who do, have investigated and made a decision, based on information we are not privy to.

1800Flowers deals with online customers and stores credit card information, addresses and personal information from customers.  Their credibility has taken an enormous hit when nutjobs can apparently access their servers at will.  From Melanie's post she has to connect via a VPN to send or receive email, either she failed to disconnect when done or her computer is set to autoconnect.  That is a significant breach of security with potentially serious consequences.   I'm glad I'm not a customer of theirs with my credit card information accessible to the likes of Chuck.

So I'm going to let them make their own informed decision on this internal personnel matter and not presume to advise them.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Doc Bill



Posts: 1039
Joined: April 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,18:13   

My two cents, but I'm always right;  by definition!

Many corporations over the years have implemented strict email policies.  In a corporation I know, the nicest, sweetest, most inoffensive, all-round wonderful administrative assistant was given a week WITHOUT PAY for sending a family-oriented, G-rated cartoon from her work account that was picked up in a random search by a email sniffer bot.  The rules allowed for reasonable personal email like soccer schedules or notes to the family about shopping, but sending out cartoons, jokes, chain letters, etc were considered over the line.

Sending out a threat, even if one could weasel-word it with a nixplanatory filter to be a not-threat, would be grounds for immediate termination.

Furthermore, he said, one is responsible for one's email account. No excuses.

Once a company is made aware of a breach of policy, they must act or the policy serves no purpose.

So, whether it was fair of not for M Kroll to get canned is immaterial.  She violated her company's email policy and suffered the consequences.

  
Wesley R. Elsberry



Posts: 4807
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,18:39   

It looks like one of the Krolls is stating that Melanie well knew the sort of things that Chuck would post. "Get your own computer and email account" should have been something Melanie worked out long, long ago.

Now would be a good time to do at least that, if not getting a restraining order or similar distancing method.

--------------
"You can't teach an old dogma new tricks." - Dorothy Parker

    
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,18:43   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 17 2008,13:54)
Fine with me. I am going on the ocean tonight into the weekend to kill things. Grrrr

kill something tasty for me.

  
rhmc



Posts: 340
Joined: Dec. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 17 2008,18:56   

Quote (ReligionProf @ July 17 2008,14:08)
I finally got around to posting a Biblical studies perspective on the P.Z.Myers vs. the cracker issue:

http://exploringourmatrix.blogspot.com/2008....rs.html

good view on the situation.  thanks.

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,03:50   

Quote
Fine with me. I am going on the ocean tonight into the weekend to kill things. Grrrr


May the Host be with you, cracker ...

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,04:02   

Quote (Quidam @ July 17 2008,21:16)
Quote (Louis @ July 17 2008,11:41)
if some people are willing to send emails calling for her head (not that I did)
Neither did I.

 
Quote (Louis @ July 17 2008,11:41)

Anyway, she is quite possibly an innocent victim of her husband's vicious stupidity and what at best could be only a mild lapse on her part. Of course it could be any number of permutations more damning than that, but I'm a firm supporter of innocent until proven guilty. She might share her husbands odious bigotry but then she might not, I simply don't know and thus grant her the benefit of the doubt. I've never denied that my assumption of her innocence is anything but the purest speculation, and I never would! I hope I'm not proven wrong but I rather suspect probably will be!

Then your appeal for clemency is based on no information and is meaningless.  You may presume innocence, but you have no responsibility or jurisdiction in the matter.  The people who do, have investigated and made a decision, based on information we are not privy to.

1800Flowers deals with online customers and stores credit card information, addresses and personal information from customers.  Their credibility has taken an enormous hit when nutjobs can apparently access their servers at will.  From Melanie's post she has to connect via a VPN to send or receive email, either she failed to disconnect when done or her computer is set to autoconnect.  That is a significant breach of security with potentially serious consequences.   I'm glad I'm not a customer of theirs with my credit card information accessible to the likes of Chuck.

So I'm going to let them make their own informed decision on this internal personnel matter and not presume to advise them.

Hi Quidam,

I think you've missed my point.

I'm not presuming to *advise* 1-800-Flowers, nor would I. Not only that I agree with basically eveything you've said about internal procedures/culpability/potential security risk etc. Our disagreement isn't about the facts of the case that we know, but about the things we don;t know and actions based upon them. Please don't insist on your interpretation of my words (and using a word I have expressedly not used, nor anything close to its meaning) when I've made what I mean abundantly clear.

I *know* that I know very few (if any) of the details which is precisely why I appealed for clemency, if I had all the details then any appeal for clemency would be meaningless, quite the reverse of what you think in fact, because I could follow the justification for it rather than imagining what it might be. Advise is vastly too strong a term, to the point of meaning something else entirely. You seem also to be assuming that I think 1-800-Flowers will give a shit about my email (or anyone else's for that matter), I don't. I'm also in no position to "let" them make a decision or not, I have no illusions about my ability to influence their decision.

My question is, and remains so if it wasn't clear from the implication in previous posts, where was your outrage when people were emailing 1-800-Flowers calling for M Kroll's head? Pretty much every (perfectly correct) justification for not emailing them you make applies equally to that. Do the people who sent her employer an email calling for her firing deserve some kind of free pass because they were dealing with a potential felony? If that's the case I'd like to report that not only have I speeded when driving, I've parked illegally, loitered with intent, taken a wide array of illegal chemicals, made explosives, caused detenations and a whole slew of other crimes that come under headings as diverse as misdemeanour and terrorism. That's not even counting activist and protesting work I've done! Please insist that Wesley release my email address (which contains my easily searchable surname) and contact my local constabulary. I support you fully in your desire to have me convicted of crimes I will happily admit to.

My point is that if it is presumptuous for ME to contact 1-800-Flowers pleading for clemency (and I agree that it is) it was at least as presumptuous for hoardes of Pharyngulites to contact them calling for blood. The thin veneer of "legal justification" doesn't wash, and IMO is a cover for the worst kind of hypocrisy. If we are willing to get energised to tear something down I think we need also to be willing to get energised to build something up. It's the mob mentality I dislike, the baying hoardes of any stripe. It is, to me, the worst kind of human irrationality. In group/Out group identification, cooperative "violence" etc, these are deep seated reactions to certain situations that we, as humans, possess, and I am a firm advocate of combatting them wherever possible. It seems that many people's compassion extended to someone they agree with (PZ. How horrible and illegal it was to receive death threats) but not to someone they don't agree with (M Kroll. How justified and wonderful she lost her job). Don't you find the very thin justifications to attack someone we disagree with ever so slightly transparent?

Two final things.

1) I am in no way saying that M Kroll's job loss is professionally unjustified. It most likely is. 1-800-Flowers are probably perfectly adhering to their internal policies, I have little doubt that they have come to a decision that is perfectly clear by those policies. The point is slightly more obtuse than that! Nor am I equating M Kroll's an PZ's positions. They aren't equal.

2) On the computing facts of the case: I don't think I have (or would) dispute the POTENTIAL seriousness of such a security break down. Do you have any concrete evidence of the negative consequences you mention? Do you have any evidence of the "enormous hit" 1-800-Flowers' credibility has taken? Or is your support for both just anecdotal? Bear in mind that when I say this I am AGREEING with both of these things. I see precisely how credibility could be hit by this, and it most likely has been, and I am well aware of the potential crimes based on poor IT security (having been a victim of ID fraud a few years ago). My point here is that we're ALL speculating about the potential costs and facts of this stupid incident, and some are as quick to damn as they can be, so I reckon it behooves some to be equally as quick to plea for leniency. Both cases lack a large amount of data to support them, both cases rely on a great deal of emotional appeal and anecdote. Both are bad cases. One perhaps slightly worse than the other, no false equivalence is needed, but neither good.

BTW:

Quote
Then your appeal for clemency is based on no information and is meaningless.  You may presume innocence, but you have no responsibility or jurisdiction in the matter.  The people who do, have investigated and made a decision, based on information we are not privy to.


This is wonderful. Almost these exact words have been used to justify non-intervention in tyranny and torture the world over. I'm not accusing you of anything, but these are telling phrases. Apply those words to an atheist or muslim apostate being imprisoned (shortly to be executed) in Iran for example. My appeal for clemency, whilst gleefully acknowledged as being without much of a factual basis (precisely BECAUSE of that in fact) is based on an acknowledged presumption of innocence and a great dislike of rules being applied in a very "literalist" fashion. I disagree that summary dismissal is the best punishment, based on the little I know, and I am saying so. All the while acknowledging that I have a) little knowledge of the minutiae and b) no power at all. Neither of which invalidates the point about presumption of innocence or my disagreement with the mentality of "persecution" and the "tyranny of the mob". (Both terms are used advisedly and as placeholders for much longer arguments!).

Cheers

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,04:07   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 17 2008,18:54)
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 16 2008,18:01)
Quote (SoonerintheBluegrass @ July 16 2008,20:16)
Longtime lurker, first time caller.  I humbly submit . . .  Can we change this thread name to "Crackers Don't Matter"?

(I love that episode, and it's so apropos)

Hi SoonerintheBluegrass.  Glad you've started posting.

We'll wait and see what Dr. GH says.  It's his thread, and I don't wanna step on his toes.  I like him a lot, and I don't want him mad at me.

I hear he eats people on his shit list.  He even has blog named "Stones and Bones".  (It should be in your feed reader if it's not already.)  If that don't put the fear of the FSM in you, I don't know what will.

But if he's all good with it, then I'm all good with it.

Fine with me. I am going on the ocean tonight into the weekend to kill things. Grrrr

Which means I'm going to have to wait longer for my richly deserved apology I suppose.

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1391
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,09:51   

Quote
Which means I'm going to have to wait longer for my richly deserved apology I suppose.


It may just be an oversight ??? Nobody's perfect.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,10:24   

Quote (Alan Fox @ July 18 2008,15:51)
Quote
Which means I'm going to have to wait longer for my richly deserved apology I suppose.


It may just be an oversight ??? Nobody's perfect.

Nobody's perfect?

Are you calling my mother a liar?

;-)

I'm well aware that nobody's perfect being as I am one of the least perfect people on the planet. I think it's not exactly a big ask to hope that someone who: a) has not dealt with someone else's arguments as they are stated, b) chuck demonstrably erroneous accusations of bigotry about, and c) claims (quite rightly in many cases) to be an exponent of reason, can apologise when they fuck up. I know I do, but then I'm not perfect, see above!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1391
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,10:41   

I don't dispute a) or b), but I would like a link to an example of c) :D. I am experiencing a slight feeling of déjà-vu with Lenny and his reluctance to admit the possibility of an error. I also wonder whether Gary actually realises there is an outstanding issue. So, don't lose any sleep over it. I put Gary in the same folder as John Kwok.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,12:03   

Quote (Alan Fox @ July 18 2008,16:41)
I don't dispute a) or b), but I would like a link to an example of c) :D. I am experiencing a slight feeling of déjà-vu with Lenny and his reluctance to admit the possibility of an error. I also wonder whether Gary actually realises there is an outstanding issue. So, don't lose any sleep over it. I put Gary in the same folder as John Kwok.

LOL I'll remind him, I'm just that type of prick! ;-)

Only Kidding.

I think Good ol' Gazza's not too bad a sort, and I'll get right on finding that link for you...annnnny day now! Same folder as JK? Harsh and IMO a little unfair.

I just love everybody.....hey, this beer's actually kinda good. Merry POETS day to everyone, I'm off to the boozer!

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,12:59   

Quote
Do you have any concrete evidence of the negative consequences you mention? Do you have any evidence of the "enormous hit" 1-800-Flowers' credibility has taken? Or is your support for both just anecdotal?


How about an overnight 12% ($17m) drop in market value?

which recovered after 1800Flowers took prompt and appropriate action.

As for equating this to 'tyranny and torture', I don't think this is in any way an apt comparison.  I think the actions are reasonable and appropriate.  She is not being whipped, waterboarded, deported or even imprisoned. She has lost a job.  It happens all the time for considerably less justification than this.

If my actions or negligence ever cause my company's stock to drop a 12% overnight, I think I might reasonably expect to lose my job too.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Krubozumo Nyankoye



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 18 2008,21:59   

My my what a complex issue and extended web of ramifications.

Let me briefly restate some of the key points, I will try to be concise and inclusive.

Myer's hears of this incident and blogs on it.
Donohue sees Myer's blog and issues a fatwa.
Myer's counter attacks issuing a solicitation for hosts to desecrate.
All hell breaks loose and Myer's web traffic goes through the roof.
A hand full of people commit felonies via death threat.
One of them is actually pinned by their utter stupidity and fired by their employer.
The insanity persists in terms of new threats still being issued today to the effect, this will not be over until we get you fired.

There may be more but I am not a fast reader and I do not have a particularly fast connection, the only reason I can even keep up with some of this is that my real work is on hold for the moment waiting for a drill chuck.

From my remote perspective one has to wonder has the world gone completely bonkers?

Myers in my opinion has done a good thing, he has exposed the utter inanity of the premise that religion should be above critiscism.  Religion is nothing but elaborately codified superstition and as such should not have a voice, let alone an influence on public discourse, let alone global resource management. Yet it still does.

All accusations of bigotry are false in that Myers does not decry catholocism alone but all religions collectively, he is after all just an atheist. No god, no gods. Its all bunkum and fraud. And that is the real issue, the godbots are incensed because their "belief" is being exposed as a cheap fraud.

Religion is the perfect scam of course, look at the history of scientology, they managed to coerce the IRS into submission and no more patently deliberate con game could be imagined.

Of course Myers would by now be served with several lawsuits, subject to a character assassination campaign and dealing with other kinds of intimidation if he had been so audacious as to desecrate an E-meter. The scientologists are not as stupid or crude as the catholic police, they never make direct death threats, but they will kill you if they can find a way.

It is all about believing in higher laws than the laws of man. So it is also easy to flaunt the laws of man. Murder, terrorism, anything is justified because you have been informed from the spirit world that your action is righteous.

Who can deny it? You heard the voice of god in your head and he said - invade Iraq.

Frankly I am seriously dissapointed with the response of the people here and on other blogs and in general that they make such contorted and bizarre excuses for the patently ridiculous claims of the zealots and con men.  

I just lurk for the most part and observe what transpires. But in this instance I see a serious weakness and flaw in the overall conception of empiricism.  

Louis - you have contributed a degree of reasonableness to all of this that is admirable. I travel back and forth to West Africa through London, perhaps we could meet up on one of my layovers?  I do igneous petrology. And actually, smelling like a dead badger after four months in the bush would be a good thing.

To the rest, please get a grip. Its just a cracker!

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,03:03   

Quote (Quidam @ July 18 2008,18:59)
Quote
Do you have any concrete evidence of the negative consequences you mention? Do you have any evidence of the "enormous hit" 1-800-Flowers' credibility has taken? Or is your support for both just anecdotal?


How about an overnight 12% ($17m) drop in market value?

which recovered after 1800Flowers took prompt and appropriate action.

As for equating this to 'tyranny and torture', I don't think this is in any way an apt comparison.  I think the actions are reasonable and appropriate.  She is not being whipped, waterboarded, deported or even imprisoned. She has lost a job.  It happens all the time for considerably less justification than this.

If my actions or negligence ever cause my company's stock to drop a 12% overnight, I think I might reasonably expect to lose my job too.

Wow! Good one! 12% eh? Sheesh! I'm happy to believe that events went as you say, i.e. this 12% drop is due to this event and nothing else. I'm sufficiently economically illiterate to give that the benefit of the doubt! Out of curiosity, did 1-800-Flowers perform differently to similar companies that day? I.e. is this drop in market value directly attributable to this event or is it an issue of coincidence, or perhaps correlation not being causation?

I wasn't equating her job loss to tyranny and torture, I was equating the justification you were using for acceding to the wishes of the appropriate authorities in this case for the justification of acceding to the wishes of appropriate authorities in other cases. I think that was abundantly clear from what I wrote before.

Anyway, since I haven't disputed the factual justification for her job loss (at the very least her job loss could be justified on the basis of following 1-800-Flowers' internal rules, as I've noted) and have been making an entirely seperate point about mob behaviour and its justification, I wonder when you're going to get round to dealing with those points.

Cheers

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,03:10   

Quote (Krubozumo Nyankoye @ July 19 2008,03:59)
[SNIP]

Louis - you have contributed a degree of reasonableness to all of this that is admirable. I travel back and forth to West Africa through London, perhaps we could meet up on one of my layovers?  I do igneous petrology. And actually, smelling like a dead badger after four months in the bush would be a good thing.

[/SNIP]

Well that's the first time THAT'S ever been said! ;-)

When I can pry myself away from work, I am always up for a beer. And practising the obscure West Fante (sp?) swear words and benedictions I learned from a Ghanaian ex-colleague of course.

At the moment I'm trying to get out of going to France on business so I can go to Edinburgh and meet Albatrossity at the end of this month. A general, all comers, London AtBC meet up is not at all a bad idea. No idea WHEN I'll be able to do it (bit of a workaholic tbh) but it should be possible. There's a dedicated thread for this malarky somewhere.

Igneous Petrology? Weren't they a 70s prog rock band ;-)

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
carlsonjok



Posts: 3324
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,06:00   

Quote (Louis @ July 19 2008,03:03)
Quote (Quidam @ July 18 2008,18:59)
 
Quote
Do you have any concrete evidence of the negative consequences you mention? Do you have any evidence of the "enormous hit" 1-800-Flowers' credibility has taken? Or is your support for both just anecdotal?


How about an overnight 12% ($17m) drop in market value?

which recovered after 1800Flowers took prompt and appropriate action.

As for equating this to 'tyranny and torture', I don't think this is in any way an apt comparison.  I think the actions are reasonable and appropriate.  She is not being whipped, waterboarded, deported or even imprisoned. She has lost a job.  It happens all the time for considerably less justification than this.

If my actions or negligence ever cause my company's stock to drop a 12% overnight, I think I might reasonably expect to lose my job too.

Wow! Good one! 12% eh? Sheesh! I'm happy to believe that events went as you say, i.e. this 12% drop is due to this event and nothing else. I'm sufficiently economically illiterate to give that the benefit of the doubt! Out of curiosity, did 1-800-Flowers perform differently to similar companies that day? I.e. is this drop in market value directly attributable to this event or is it an issue of coincidence, or perhaps correlation not being causation?

Well, this incident (obviously) and probably also due to Goldman Sachs downgrading their rating on the stock.  But, surely that latter thing could of only contributed 1 or 2%.  ;)

--------------
It's natural to be curious about our world, but the scientific method is just one theory about how to best understand it.  We live in a democracy, which means we should treat every theory equally. - Steven Colbert, I Am America (and So Can You!)

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,07:01   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 19 2008,12:00)
[SNIP]

Well, this incident (obviously) and probably also due to Goldman Sachs downgrading their rating on the stock.  But, surely that latter thing could of only contributed 1 or 2%.  ;)

Interesting. Thanks Carlson. I'm a self confessed (again!) economic illiterate. I know very very little about the stock market and what have you. Sadly I have only one lifetime to learn stuff in and it seems that there's a lot to be getting on with!

Cheers

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,12:15   

Apology? You want an Apology?

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,13:01   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 19 2008,18:15)
Apology? You want an Apology?

Stunning!

Consider it not only accepted but you get at least three free completely unfounded accusations for the future.

Cheers

Louis

--------------
Bye.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,15:20   

Quote (Krubozumo Nyankoye @ July 18 2008,19:59)
And actually, smelling like a dead badger after four months in the bush would be a good thing.

I found that Baby Wipes (eg brand-name "Huggies") took good care of most wash-up needs in extended dry camps. They had the advantage of not wasting water, and burning quite nicely when they had dried out- making a good fire tinder and cutting down on site waste. I would take 500 sheets /10 crew members /2 weeks. Stinking clothes were still a problem. In a dry camp, I had my crew use a basin of clean water to rinse soap from dishes. (Two crew / 10 stayed in camp each day on a cleaning detail and also to get some rest). After the dishes were done, they would use the rinse water for washing out socks, etc...

I suspect you are better funded than we were.

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Krubozumo Nyankoye



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,21:38   

Quote (Dr.GH @ July 19 2008,13:20)
 
Quote (Krubozumo Nyankoye @ July 18 2008,19:59)
And actually, smelling like a dead badger after four months in the bush would be a good thing.

I found that Baby Wipes (eg brand-name "Huggies") took good care of most wash-up needs in extended dry camps. They had the advantage of not wasting water, and burning quite nicely when they had dried out- making a good fire tinder and cutting down on site waste. I would take 500 sheets /10 crew members /2 weeks. Stinking clothes were still a problem. In a dry camp, I had my crew use a basin of clean water to rinse soap from dishes. (Two crew / 10 stayed in camp each day on a cleaning detail and also to get some rest). After the dishes were done, they would use the rinse water for washing out socks, etc...

<quote>I suspect you are better funded than we were.

Well, on paper that may be true (better funded) but by the time the money reaches us it has been thinned considerably.

Personal hygene and camp protocols are pretty well established, I have worked with the same groups of men for the most part for the past 4 years, consistency is good. Clothing is just expendable, it rots no matter what you do. One priority is to take care of your feet.  I was kind of jesting about the dead badger image, but you wouldn't doubt it at all if you met me when I have just come from the bush. Maybe I should have said I smell like dead curried badger?  

I am not in Africa at the moment else I would not be able to access the net at all. I will probably go back at the end of the year and stay until April or May. Right now I am in Brazil doing the same kind of thing but under much better conditions, it is dry season but it is not dry. We have an office in a small town where I have a sort of lab, I spend two out of ten days there when possible, it depends on whether there is anything in the cores to look at. Its still the bush but you can have hot water if the generator works. Hopefully I will get out of here by the end of September.

What I do is not "research" in any strict sense though I try to keep things honest across the board. In industry it is referred to as "exploration". As one of my clients famously said, " we don't want research, we want facts!".  I wish it were that easy.

Cheers,

  
Krubozumo Nyankoye



Posts: 15
Joined: June 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,22:16   

Quote (Louis @ July 19 2008,01:10)
Quote (Krubozumo Nyankoye @ July 19 2008,03:59)
[SNIP]

Louis - you have contributed a degree of reasonableness to all of this that is admirable. I travel back and forth to West Africa through London, perhaps we could meet up on one of my layovers?  I do igneous petrology. And actually, smelling like a dead badger after four months in the bush would be a good thing.

[/SNIP]

Well that's the first time THAT'S ever been said! ;-)

When I can pry myself away from work, I am always up for a beer. And practising the obscure West Fante (sp?) swear words and benedictions I learned from a Ghanaian ex-colleague of course.

At the moment I'm trying to get out of going to France on business so I can go to Edinburgh and meet Albatrossity at the end of this month. A general, all comers, London AtBC meet up is not at all a bad idea. No idea WHEN I'll be able to do it (bit of a workaholic tbh) but it should be possible. There's a dedicated thread for this malarky somewhere.

Igneous Petrology? Weren't they a 70s prog rock band ;-)

Louis

Well I have not spent much time in Ghana, just touch and go flights on dubious airlines to get to other places.

I know a little Loma, and less Krau.  I know a little Creole ala Sierra Leone and I know a bit of the patois of Guinea. Likewise I have some exposure to the patoise of Zaire, a vague familiarity with afrikanes,  and a passing familiarity with a bit of ethnic portuguese. But I am a pathetically inadequate linguist. I have enough trouble just with english.

Regarding a meet up, most likely case is that I would be heading for Africa near the end of the year, hard to give any exact dates but let's say late Dec. or early Jan.  I would put in for leeway to layover for two days in London. I might get it, I might not. I have three locations I tend to frequent. Earl's court,
if I have the big budget, the King's Head is a good pub with
expats from everywhere. There are plenty of good places to eat.  If I am on a severe budget, I stay in Bromley, close to Down House. At a little B & B run by a Potuguese couple.  I have some friends there too, who are from Peru. In between I might go out and stay at Hove. I had a good friend who lived
there and I often visited with but he died in 2006.  Still I like the area and its a short train ride.

Rock band? no way, rappers yes.

Its in the rocks
you takes your knocks
get tight my man
its an alluvial fan
or volcanic or sediment
you jus can't claim impediment

We like the pretty pictures they make too.

  
Dr.GH



Posts: 2113
Joined: May 2002

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,22:33   

I was lead on a desert archaeology survey. We were documenting a 520 acre section with several ceremonial and village sites.  With little to no soil building for the last 1,200 years, and a very fragile soil, we obviously couldn’t camp too near any specific job site.

Every 6 days, my crew supposedly washed out a week's worth of socks, and underwear as part of their camp detail. We could only fund about 4 weeks per year, and so the project took about ~5 years. I have seen several field projects collapse due to hepatitis, or just plain drunkenness. I always run field work with careful attention to the “hotel” aspect as well as the science.

If you need a rather well-worn crewman who is a great camp cook, make an offer. (Anything is better than finishing this book!)

--------------
"Science is the horse that pulls the cart of philosophy."

L. Susskind, 2004 "SMOLIN VS. SUSSKIND: THE ANTHROPIC PRINCIPLE"

   
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 19 2008,23:19   

Quote (carlsonjok @ July 19 2008,05:00)
Well, this incident (obviously) and probably also due to Goldman Sachs downgrading their rating on the stock.  But, surely that latter thing could of only contributed 1 or 2%.  ;)

OK I retract that.  I wasn't aware of the coincidental downgrading by GS.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
jeffox



Posts: 667
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,02:10   

Rock band?  Howzabout rock banded iron formations!!

Ok, ok, ok, once again, terrible joke, I know.

:)

p.s. I am currently a geology major at UWEC.

  
dhogaza



Posts: 525
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,06:04   

Quote
I found that Baby Wipes (eg brand-name "Huggies") took good care of most wash-up needs in extended dry camps.

Is this part of some sort of field camp universal knowledge base?

I found out about baby wipes when put in charge of buying supplies for a field project in nevada.  Had a rough guide of how much food and other supplies to buy for an average of 25 people over a 12 week period, and came to ... "baby wipes?  baby wipes?".   I was assured of their necessity and, indeed, they are good!

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,10:28   

Quote (jeffox @ July 20 2008,01:10)
Rock band?  Howzabout rock banded iron formations!!

Ok, ok, ok, once again, terrible joke, I know.

:)

p.s. I am currently a geology major at UWEC.

Garnet! What a lode of fuchsite, that joke was the schist.

As my girlfriend said, when I asked if she was cummingtonite: "You mineral the same"

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,10:36   

Quote (Quidam @ July 20 2008,16:28)
Quote (jeffox @ July 20 2008,01:10)
Rock band?  Howzabout rock banded iron formations!!

Ok, ok, ok, once again, terrible joke, I know.

:)

p.s. I am currently a geology major at UWEC.

Garnet! What a lode of fuchsite, that joke was the schist.

As my girlfriend said, when I asked if she was cummingtonite: "You mineral the same"

OH NOES PUN CASCADE!

Unfortunately I can't be bothered with geology jokes, geologists are sufficient, so instead I shall go for snide mockery.

Oh yeah. Well....FELDSPAR YOURSELVES!

There. Consider yourselves mocked.

WRITHE IN SHAME DAMN YOU!

Louis

P.S. Waitress. Veal. All week. Damn Quidam used cummingtonite before I could.

P.P.S. At least I laugh at my own jokes, I'm something of a self-exciting dynamo in that regard. I find it a good stress relief. Others should feel free to talus how they stop going mantle.

P.P.P.S. Ok so I couldn't resist.

--------------
Bye.

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,10:59   

That wasn't very gneiss. I'll graben the bull by the hornblende and hope I don't get horst by my own petard.

Igneous is bliss for the UD crowd because they take design for granite.  That's sedimentary my dear FtK.

BTW I'm a mining engineer, we're on a level below the rest.

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
jeffox



Posts: 667
Joined: Oct. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,12:03   

Ya ya, you know I like magna 'cuz magnatite.  :)

An igneous rock hasn't learned anything yet.  A sedimentary rock just sits there watching television.  A metamorphic rock knows morph casually.  :)

I grew up in a town built by a taconite operation.  If you're interested in northeastern Minnesota's latest mining craze, check out Franconiaminerals website or google Polymet's "Birch Lake project".  Tell 'em that I sent ya, cuz I'll do anything to get a job back home so I CAN GO FISHING EVERY SINGLE FUCKING DAY for the rest of my life.   :)

  
Quidam



Posts: 229
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,12:16   

If you fish on the fucking days, when do you fuck?

--------------
The organized fossils ... and their localities also, may be understood by all, even the most illiterate. William Smith, Strata. 1816

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,13:04   

Quote (Quidam @ July 20 2008,18:16)
If you fish on the fucking days, when do you fuck?

Ahhhh one of life's BIG questions.

Like for example: "If a man speaks in a wood and no woman hears him, is he still wrong?".

Lou FCD provided an elegant solution to this 2 years ago, but it is merely one amongst many possible solutions. All of which seem to have the answer "Yes" according to my wife, but for a series of very different reasons.

Louis

P.S. Fish on the fucking days, fuck on the fishing days. And they say men can't multitask.....

--------------
Bye.

  
EyeNoU



Posts: 115
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,13:56   

Most geologists I know are tuff, gneiss, and a little wacke.

  
Robert O'Brien



Posts: 348
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: July 20 2008,21:03   

Quote (Quidam @ July 18 2008,12:59)
Quote
Do you have any concrete evidence of the negative consequences you mention? Do you have any evidence of the "enormous hit" 1-800-Flowers' credibility has taken? Or is your support for both just anecdotal?


How about an overnight 12% ($17m) drop in market value?

which recovered after 1800Flowers took prompt and appropriate action.

As for equating this to 'tyranny and torture', I don't think this is in any way an apt comparison.  I think the actions are reasonable and appropriate.  She is not being whipped, waterboarded, deported or even imprisoned. She has lost a job.  It happens all the time for considerably less justification than this.

If my actions or negligence ever cause my company's stock to drop a 12% overnight, I think I might reasonably expect to lose my job too.

Hey, dude, there is this kick ass bridge I'd like to sell you!

--------------
Caeli enarrant gloriam Dei

    
digitus impudicus



Posts: 62
Joined: Feb. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: July 23 2008,22:52   

Just an FYI, and to bump this thread back up, PZ put up a new post about crackergate.

  
  147 replies since July 12 2008,13:50 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (5) < [1] 2 3 4 5 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]