RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   
  Topic: Intelligent design is a science, not a faith, Truth in Science dude in the Guardian< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
Jason Spaceman



Posts: 163
Joined: Nov. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,02:40   

Quote
But, whatever the limitations of Darwinism, isn't the intelligent design alternative an "intellectual dead end"? No. If true, ID is a profound insight into the natural world and a motivator to scientific inquiry. The pioneers of modern science, who were convinced that nature is designed, consequently held that it could be understood by human intellects. This confidence helped to drive the scientific revolution. More recently, proponents of ID predicted that some "junk" DNA must have a function well before this view became mainstream among Darwinists.

But, according to Randerson, ID is not a science because "there is no evidence that could in principle disprove ID". Remind me, what is claimed of Darwinism? If, as an explanation for organised complexity, Darwinism had a more convincing evidential basis, then many of us would give up on ID.

Finally, Randerson claims that ID is "pure religion". In fact, ID is a logical inference, based on data gathered from the natural world, and hence it is firmly in the realm of science. It does not rely upon the Bible, the Qur'an, or any religious authority or tradition - only on scientific evidence. When a religious person advocates teaching ID in science without identification of the designer, there is no dishonesty or "Trojan horse", just realism about the limitations of the scientific method. If certain Darwinists also had the intellectual honesty to distinguish between science and their religious beliefs, the public understanding of science would be much enhanced.


Read it here.

   
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,05:51   

If you read this article, you'll want to ask yourself: "Where is this guy coming from? ? ?"

Excellent question, You. Turns out it's an organization that calls itself Truth In Science, which appears to be the UK equivalent of the Discovery Institute. Or one of those Disco Wannabe's, like "SEAO ("Science Excellence for all Ostriches").

File under: "Pseudointellectual Anti-Intellectualism

--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
lkeithlu



Posts: 321
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,06:04   

Fine, then. So, go do the science. Put on your little lab coats and grab your centrifuges.

I don't see how a bunch of engineers, programmers, mathematicians and theologians calling it science makes it so.

They have had ample time to talk. Maybe Michael Crichton could write a novel....

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,06:20   

These guys worry me. So much tard, so openly tardalicious, and yet so little outcry. Could it be there's tard everywhere? No surely not!

Louis

P.S. I am referring to "Truth" in Science, who are an openly YEC group promoting IDC to gull the public/government. YECs promoting IDC. IDC which has nothing to do with religion. Riiiiiiiiiight.

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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,06:38   

Just sent this letter to the Grauniad:

Sir,

Intelligent Design (ID) is not science. It has been demonstrated to be old creationist w(h)ine in new bottles time and time again. This has been done in every sense; scientifically, legally, philosophically and historically. The origins of ID (more properly ID Creationism or IDC) are well known, well documented and easily found. Look at the "Talk.Origins Index to Creationist Claims", or google "Wedge Document" for easily accessible online starting points.

My cry would be "Don't believe the hype!" ID creationists are desperately trying to fool the public and the government of this country, which they consider an easier target than the USA, into believing that their puerile religious apologetics constitute science. They don't. It is impossible to convey the depth and breadth of their dishonesty in one letter, or to people perhaps unfamiliar with the relevant science/issues.

IDC was demonstrably false when it was first proposed, and, dare I invoke Darwin, was shown to be utterly without any basis in fact over 147 years ago. It is nothing more than a political attempt to coerce well meaning people into acceptance of a narrow minded religious dogma, covered up with fancy sounding words. They claim they only want to "think critically" about evolutionary biology, as a scientist I welcome that, but please come up with something new. Something we haven't already thought critically about and discarded as fallacious tripe like IDC. IDC is no truer than its humourous parody from gravitational physics: Intelligent Falling.

Yours faithfully

Louis

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

  
MidnightVoice



Posts: 380
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,07:18   

Grauniad?  I have not heard that term for decades!!  Is it still called that, or are you nearly as old as I am?  :D

--------------
If I fly the coop some time
And take nothing but a grip
With the few good books that really count
It's a necessary trip

I'll be gone with the girl in the gold silk jacket
The girl with the pearl-driller's hands

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,07:31   

Yes it's still called that, especially to afficionados of the Eye. I'm only 32, does knowing that the Grauniad is the Grauniad make me precocious? ;-)

Louis

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

  
oldmanintheskydidntdoit



Posts: 4999
Joined: July 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,08:01   

no, I'm almost your age and I know it as that from the eye also!
Speaking of the eye, I'm sure they'd be interested in this Truth In Science lie-fest......

If you are wondering what the heck we're talking about

http://www.private-eye.co.uk/


On the truth in science website they have a link to
Evidence of evolution

But oddly, there's no corresponding link to
"evidence for ID".

How strange. What does Darwinism have to do with ID? It's the old "disprove Darwinism (whatever that is) == ID is true" fallacy all over again.

Edit: Just sent them this

Hi,
You have a "Evidence for Evolution" link, but I cannot find the "Evidence for Intelligent Design". Do I take it that you think that disproving evolution means ID is true by default. If not, do you have any direct evidence for ID that does not reference "Darwinism" in any way?

---------------------

I'll let you know what they say! LOL

--------------
I also mentioned that He'd have to give me a thorough explanation as to *why* I must "eat human babies".
FTK

if there are even critical flaws in Gauger’s work, the evo mat narrative cannot stand
Gordon Mullings

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,08:06   

Quote
Turns out it's an organization that calls itself Truth In Science, which appears to be the UK equivalent of the Discovery Institute.
Except that they appear to all be hardcore YECs.
Quote
So much tard, so openly tardalicious, and yet so little outcry.
Most of the public think they're harmless religious nutters.

  
Russell



Posts: 1082
Joined: April 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,09:48   

Quote
 
Quote
...Truth In Science, which appears to be the UK equivalent of the Discovery Institute.

Except that they appear to all be hardcore YECs.
Right. I sometimes lose sight of the difference, for some reason.

But speaking of Christian Fundies having their own version of science, their own version of history, their own version of civics... it turns out they have their own physical fitness!Check out Jesus's six-pack of abs as he makes crucifixion look easy:


--------------
Must... not... scratch... mosquito bite.

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,14:09   

oldmanintheskyetc
Thats a great wee e-mail.  Do tell us what they reply.

I personally have noted the link between their essay on the evolution of the horse, and a functionally identical one penned by the same author and published by Creationists.  All TiS have have done is take all the references to the flood out.  

TiS are running a pretty good media campaign.  If you want more examples of Orwellian double think you should have a look at theirnews blog on their website.  IT looks at things in exactly the way that would suggest the people there are deranged.

I've had some fun on the Guardian thread anyway.  GlenDAvidson has joined in as well.

Louis- your letter is likely too long, fine though it is, so will not get published or will be cut to suit.

My forthcoming letter to the Guardian is shorter:


"I note that for a science, Mr Buggs and ID appear incapable of providing any experimental data in their support."

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,16:12   

The truth in science website has some quote mines.  Like this:
Quote
Evolution by natural selection...has lately come to function more as an antitheory, called upon to cover up embarrassing experimental shortcomings and legitimize findings that are at best questionable and at worst not even wrong.

Robert B. Laughlin, A Different Universe (New York: Basic Books, 2005)


Has anyone read this book, so can tell me what the elision is?

Any good resources for creationist quotemines?

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,18:03   

Quote (Russell @ Jan. 09 2007,09:48)
Check out Jesus's six-pack of abs as he makes crucifixion look easy:

Well heck, Christ couldn't have been all THAT buff --- he kicked the bucket after only *three hours* on the cross.  Even common ordinary half-starved poor Roman criminals usually lasted a couple of *days*, and well-conditioned physically fit people (like soldiers who deserted) sometimes lasted over a *week*.

Jesus appears to have been . . . well . . . something of a weakling.

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,18:05   

Quote (guthrie @ Jan. 09 2007,16:12)
Any good resources for creationist quotemines?

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/quotes/mine/project.html

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,18:45   

I suspect that creationism will continue to make inroads across the pond, especially in Eastern Europe. Even the more optimistic polls show a substantial minority of creationist sympathisers in secular countries, and once their creationists learn how to market themselves, scientists will be in for a fight. Letters like Louis's actually help the antievolutionist side; some of our scientists tried the dismissive approach until they saw that Duane Gish and company were painting them as condescending blowhards. It doesn't help that evolution is often defended by militant atheists...people are better at spotting Trojan horses than you guys think. Ya'll need to mobilise theistic scientists like Ken Miller, Francis Collins, and Francisco Ayala to make any headway.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,19:31   

Quote
people are better at spotting Trojan horses than you guys think.


hmm.  I wonder if Louis would agree when we apply that to you?

Quote
some of our scientists


it makes me feel dirty when you use the word "our" and "scientists" together.

what's a "militant" atheist, again?

idiot.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,20:36   

Quote
 
Quote
 
people are better at spotting Trojan horses than you guys think.



hmm.  I wonder if Louis would agree when we apply that to you?


How many back-slappers and yes men does this board need, Fishy? The fact that you can't handle an unpleasant truth is not my concern; fooling yourself is not equivalent to fooling others. Read Finding Darwin's God and see for yourself.

 
Quote
 
Quote
 
some of our scientists



it makes me feel dirty when you use the word "our" and "scientists" together.


"Our" as in "American", Fishy. And what's there to feel dirty about? It's all about the science, no?  ???

 
Quote
what's a "militant" atheist, again?

idiot.


If you have to ask, you'll never understand. Why ain't I surprised?

I see that some anticreationists haven't learned a damned thing. Shame, really.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Steviepinhead



Posts: 532
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,20:44   

Paley's been lonely on "his" own threads.

So now he's following the lads about, hoping for the occasional bone to be discarded in his direction.

And hoping he'll be faster than all the evo-cats, since he's nearly toothless if it comes to an actual scrap.

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,21:07   

Sorry Stevie, try harder. The last thing I need is the approval of this pack. I see an interesting thread, I respond. And the "evo-cats" here are rather kittenish, I'm afraid.  ;)

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,22:38   

Quote
The last thing I need is the approval of this pack


your constant attempts to describe ATBC as a "pack" are as laughable as your attempts at:

geocentrism
phylogenetics
history
politics
and even honesty; considering you admit to playing loki troll FOR  A WHOLE YEAR.

talk about folks not able to learn...

gees.

Dave is insane, so I can pity him for that.

are you as well?

if not, what's your excuse?

all that time you spent as a liberal affect your brain did it?

pathetic.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
BWE



Posts: 1898
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 09 2007,23:09   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Jan. 09 2007,21:07)
Sorry Stevie, try harder. The last thing I need is the approval of this pack. I see an interesting thread, I respond. And the "evo-cats" here are rather kittenish, I'm afraid.  ;)

meow

--------------
Who said that ev'ry wish would be heard and answered
When wished on the morning star
Somebody thought of that, and someone believed it
Look what it's done so far

The Daily Wingnut

   
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,00:56   

GOP: "The fact that you can't handle an unpleasant truth is not my concern"

So you wont post about it and look a twat then...ooops, too late. D'OH!

--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,02:06   

Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 10 2007,00:56)
GOP: "The fact that you can't handle an unpleasant truth is not my concern"

So you wont post about it and look a twat then...ooops, too late. D'OH!

funny I thought he prefers pics of heavily oiled musclemen, usually in process of grappling with each other in one fashion or another.

or is that an unpleasant truth?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,02:39   

Quote (guthrie @ Jan. 09 2007,20:09)
Louis- your letter is likely too long, fine though it is, so will not get published or will be cut to suit.

I agree. I'm usually too long winded.

Louis

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

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,02:46   

Dear All,

I suggest we don't feed the troll. Russell's sig is a good motto when dealing with certain trolls.

Louis

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

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,06:49   

(yawn)  Is the pit yorkie yapping again . . . . .?

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,06:59   

[Cartman]

No Lenny, that's a bad Lenny!

[/Cartman]

If you're going to poke the troll with pointed sticks, at least draw blood. Any moment now the troll will declare WICTORY! Oh wait, it has. Go back to sleep ATBC, nothing to see here. The troll makes pointless, ill informed comment based purely on prejudice and ignorance, designed only to annoy. Film at eleven. Yawn.

Where have all the decent creationists and kooks gone? Oh wait, that's right. There aren't any.

Louis

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

  
Mike PSS



Posts: 428
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,08:05   

Quote (Jason Spaceman @ Jan. 09 2007,03:40)
Quote
But, whatever the limitations of Darwinism, isn't the intelligent design alternative an "intellectual dead end"? No. If true, ID is a profound insight into the natural world and a motivator to scientific inquiry. The pioneers of modern science, who were convinced that nature is designed, consequently held that it could be understood by human intellects. This confidence helped to drive the scientific revolution. More recently, proponents of ID predicted that some "junk" DNA must have a function well before this view became mainstream among Darwinists.

But, according to Randerson, ID is not a science because "there is no evidence that could in principle disprove ID". Remind me, what is claimed of Darwinism? If, as an explanation for organised complexity, Darwinism had a more convincing evidential basis, then many of us would give up on ID.

Finally, Randerson claims that ID is "pure religion". In fact, ID is a logical inference, based on data gathered from the natural world, and hence it is firmly in the realm of science. It does not rely upon the Bible, the Qur'an, or any religious authority or tradition - only on scientific evidence. When a religious person advocates teaching ID in science without identification of the designer, there is no dishonesty or "Trojan horse", just realism about the limitations of the scientific method. If certain Darwinists also had the intellectual honesty to distinguish between science and their religious beliefs, the public understanding of science would be much enhanced.


Read it here.

So is this statement an attempt to introduce the Explanatory Filter to the U.K.?

Or is this the CSI thingy?

I have yet to see (and know I will never see) any real numbers applied to these concepts.  I just wonder if any of the intended audience of this diatribe knows the background of this yammerer's statement.

  
Darth Robo



Posts: 148
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,09:29   

The ID packs that they sent out to school apparently did have links to the DI.  Thankfully, the government already saw the "truthinscience" packs and threw it out.

http://education.guardian.co.uk/schools....&feed=8

I doubt it'll stop places like the Vardy school from teaching it though, but hopefully we can at least limit its teaching to a few fundy schools.

--------------
"Commentary: How would you like to be the wholly-owned servant to an organic meatbag? It's demeaning! If, uh, you weren't one yourself, I mean..."

  
Chris Hyland



Posts: 705
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,09:55   

Quote
The ID packs that they sent out to school apparently did have links to the DI
The video predominently features Behe, Dembski, Nelson, Meyer and Johnson if that counts.

  
Darth Robo



Posts: 148
Joined: Aug. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,10:41   

Yup.  Someone on the Dawkins forum managed to get hold of one.  I've been hanging there a bit since the pc's at work (don't have the best net connection) have trouble loading PT if the comments get above 30 and my net at home went splat.   :(

It's also nice to see this stuff from a UK perspective to see what the fundies are up to over here.  Hopefully at the moment they seem to be not much more than a minor nuisance.

--------------
"Commentary: How would you like to be the wholly-owned servant to an organic meatbag? It's demeaning! If, uh, you weren't one yourself, I mean..."

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,16:25   

I don't know about ya'll, but I think this fella makes a cute mascot for the anticreationist movement:



I can't get enough of him!



Or this guy:



Everyone in the world should be on first-name basis with these critters. These fossils (and the sequences that surround them) illustrate the wonders of evolutionary biology better than any lecture. The MSM might have run stories on these discoveries, but most people haven't gotten the message. I'll bet that less than 5% of the citizens of any country know about these finds, and believe me I've met a lot of well-educated Europeans, Asians, and Australians. How many people know about the GULO gene? How cool it is that we have reminders of our past encoded in our genome.


I miss Stephen Jay Gould's gift of communicating the wonder of the universe around him.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,16:34   

Quote
illustrate the wonders of evolutionary biology better than any lecture.


without the lecture to go with them, they're just pretty pictures.

if you wanted to make an actual valuable contribution, rather than seem a placating loki troll, you might want to go into WHY these particular examples are so illustrative of the wonders of evolutionary biology (or paleontology, at least).

so, why don't you?  seriously.  I'm sure everyone's opinion of you (or at least my own) would be raised by the gesture.

make a new thread, and go into detail as to why these specific examples are so valuable.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,17:05   

Ichthyic:

 
Quote

without the lecture to go with them, they're just pretty pictures.


The lectures are also important, but even highly educated people appreciate the visuals.

Especially frozen paradoxes like Spine Plate who tesselate in time rather than space.

 
Quote
if you wanted to make an actual valuable contribution, rather than seem a placating loki troll, you might want to go into WHY these particular examples are so illustrative of the wonders of evolutionary biology (or paleontology, at least).

so, why don't you?  seriously.  I'm sure everyone's opinion of you (or at least my own) would be raised by the gesture.


Perhaps I will, but not necessarily for the benefit of the P-Nut gallery.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,17:11   

Quote
Perhaps I will, but not necessarily for the benefit of the P-Nut gallery.


oh, of course not.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,17:46   

Save the electrons, Paley.  No one here CARES what you think.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,19:21   

Lenny:

 
Quote
Save the electrons, Paley.  No one here CARES what you think.  (shrug)


The world has passed you by, Lenny. You're just a burnt-out, aging hippie who resents being part of the greatest culture and civilisation of all time.

Ya hate what ya can't imitate. I can see why you want to level society, though: the neckstrain gets to be a bitch after a while.

:D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D  :D

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:11   

Anyhoo, here's another cool guy:



And PZ's a good man to have around.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:14   



--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:25   

I couldn't have thought of a more eloquent response, Richard.

btw, is that a self-portrait?

we should pin that on the ATBC refrigerator.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:25   



--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:28   

tell me gawp, do you read Playgirl for the articles?

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,20:33   

Fishy:

Quote
tell me gawp, do you read Playgirl for the articles?




--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 10 2007,21:12   

Yap yap yap.

(yawn)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,03:52   

Troll Alert. Don't feed it. No, really, it will just get bored and go away. Don't let this asshat waste our bandwidth.

Louis

P.S. on the subject can I be the first to sniff possible trollery on my abiogenesis thread? Am I being paranoid?

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

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,04:49   

Why Acanthostega and not Tiktaalik, ghost?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,05:47   

Faid,

Remind me, what was the troll's position when discussing things with Martin Brazeau?

Louis

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

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,10:02   

Faid:

Quote
Why Acanthostega and not Tiktaalik, ghost?


Don't get me wrong, Tiktaalik is one of the boys, but Acanthostega has specimens that are almost immaculately preserved, allowing for more detailed analysis. Tell you what: why not start a thread on kick-ass transitional fossils and I'll bark for my favorites. Canthy doesn't get the ink of the other guys, and that's an injustice I plan to correct.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,11:27   

By the way Faid, if you don't start a thread I'll probably do it tonight. I'd prefer that the thread has your name, however, because certain people will be less inclined to crap in it. One can hope at any rate.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Richardthughes



Posts: 10756
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,13:35   



--------------
"Richardthughes, you magnificent bastard, I stand in awe of you..." : Arden Chatfield
"You magnificent bastard! " : Louis
"ATBC poster child", "I have to agree with Rich.." : DaveTard
"I bow to your superior skills" : deadman_932
"...it was Richardthughes making me lie in bed.." : Kristine

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,15:51   

Quote
I'd prefer that the thread has your name, however, because certain people will be less inclined to crap in it.


IOW, you haven't the slightest clue why these particular fossils are more or less important than other transitional fossils, so you attempt to lateral and hope someone else will pick up the ball and run with it.

Gawp, I only shit when someone builds a toilet.

It's just that you should have become a plumber, based on how often you do it.

put up a decent thread with good references, and you will have contributed something positive, if nothing else to the lurkers herebouts.  If you really do have knowledge about these specific finds, even if just gained from reading a book, why don't you share it?
Pretty pictures mean nothing, as Richard keeps trying to point out in blunt fashion.

I said what I meant (unlike yourself), and think you could make a positive contribution if you really wanted to.  So far, all i see is an idiot who wants to try and push buttons to kill time (for a whole year, no less!).

btw, that's another one for the fridge, Richie - mommy and daddy are so proud of you!!!

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,16:17   

Icthyic,

Quote
I said what I meant (unlike yourself), and think you could make a positive contribution if you really wanted to.  So far, all i see is an idiot who wants to try and push buttons to kill time (for a whole year, no less!;).


This is part of what I have never understood about the troll. If he is the intelligent human being he claims to be (both parts of which I doubt by the way. I've had more productive conversations with streaks of amoebic dysentery) I seriously don't see the difficulty in contributing like one. He trolls the board deliberately for 12 months or so, claims he is seeing if people can "separate the argument from the arguer" whilst all the while being an obnoxious wanker. He then tries to play the "reasonable" card, yet still behaves just like the wanker he was "playing" before, arguing the same racist, pseudo-right wing nonsense he always has, and making the same non sequiturs and insults about "lefties/libruls/evos" etc.

This Dembskian "street theatre" fools no one. I have called, still call, and, until something vaguely resembling evidence comes in from the troll, will continue to call "bullshit" and "troll". I'm happy to be proven wrong, but then I seriously doubt the troll is even remotely capable of doing so in any sense of those words. My faith in the abilities of humanity is great. My faith in the abilities of things I wouldn't cross the street to piss on if they were on fire, isn't.

Louis

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

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,16:31   

Louis:

Quote
P.S. on the subject can I be the first to sniff possible trollery on my abiogenesis thread? Am I being paranoid?


It's the latter.

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,17:06   

Quote
Posted on Jan. 11 2007,22:31Louis:

Quote:
"P.S. on the subject can I be the first to sniff possible trollery on my abiogenesis thread? Am I being paranoid?"

It's the latter.


It's a distinct possibility. Which is obviously why I mentioned it. I don't trust trolls and kooks. I've seen sock puppetry, loki trolling, concern trolling, flamebaiting etc from certain types of posters. The admirable freedom of the internet is open to abuse by dishonest scum.

Louis

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

  
"Rev Dr" Lenny Flank



Posts: 2560
Joined: Feb. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,17:50   

Is the pit yorkie STILL yapping . . . . ?

Wassamatter, boy --- nobody petting you lately?

In case you haven't noticed, Paley, no one here CARES what you think.  (shrug)

--------------
Editor, Red and Black Publishers
www.RedandBlackPublishers.com

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,18:44   

Quote (The Ghost of Paley @ Jan. 11 2007,11:27)
By the way Faid, if you don't start a thread I'll probably do it tonight. I'd prefer that the thread has your name, however, because certain people will be less inclined to crap in it. One can hope at any rate.

Thanks Ghost, but I'll pass. Mine was a genuine question; I was wondering why you thought the Acanthostega was more important a find than Tiktaalik (which also was an evolutionary prediction come true).
Since your reply basically explains it by personal preference, I understand and accept it- but I also see no point in starting a "Post your favorite fossils" thread.
You, on the other hand, are free to do it; Noone has stopped you from making a thread, in fact it's been a long time since you made one, and if you are worried about those who will "crap in it", as you say, you can simply ignore them.
Although, judging from your eagerness to swiftly respond in likewise manner, seen in your previous posts above (instead of simply ignoring them and focusing on the substance of your posts, if any), one gets the feeling that this is exactly what you are striving for... But feel free to prove me wrong.

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,18:53   

Louis:

 
Quote
 
Quote
 
Posted on Jan. 11 2007,22:31Louis:

Quote:
"P.S. on the subject can I be the first to sniff possible trollery on my abiogenesis thread? Am I being paranoid?"

It's the latter.



It's a distinct possibility. Which is obviously why I mentioned it. I don't trust trolls and kooks. I've seen sock puppetry, loki trolling, concern trolling, flamebaiting etc from certain types of posters. The admirable freedom of the internet is open to abuse by dishonest scum.


Somebody call the WAHHHHHHmbulance.

Louis, you tell me to stay off your thread, and I've stayed off your thread. Now you're whining about the possibility that I MIGHT "troll" on your thread in the unspecified future, and then using this (imagined) scenario as a basis to hurl more insults. Louis, are you sure those chemicals aren't causing brain damage?

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Faid



Posts: 1143
Joined: Mar. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,19:01   

See what I mean?

--------------
A look into DAVE HAWKINS' sense of honesty:

"The truth is that ALL mutations REDUCE information"

"...mutations can add information to a genome.  And remember, I have never said that this is not possible."

  
Ichthyic



Posts: 3325
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,19:12   

Faid, you should post your sig on the BW; Dave's forgotten it again.

--------------
"And the sea will grant each man new hope..."

-CC

  
The Ghost of Paley



Posts: 1703
Joined: Oct. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 11 2007,19:37   

Faid:

       
Quote
Since your reply basically explains it by personal preference, I understand and accept it- but I also see no point in starting a "Post your favorite fossils" thread.


Well, I'll start it then -- but probably not tonight.

I think you're misunderstanding the purpose of this thread. Basically, I'd like to update Kathleen Hunt's Transitional Vertebrate Fossils FAQ.. It's a pretty encyclopedic summary of the major lines of fossil evidence, but as Kathleen herself admits, her work draws some valid criticisms. Part of the difficulty lies in the sheer scope of her project. Perhaps by throwing a spotlight on some of the more important transitions and including a few pretty pictures we can supplement her work and draw in people who find her presentation a little terse. A collaborative effort might work, but with laymen like myself also contributing (and making the necessary revisons when we screw up). I need to grab my copy of At the Water's Edge though -- I want to check my memory against the text, because Zimmer brings up some salient points that are difficult to find elsewhere.

       
Quote
Although, judging from your eagerness to swiftly respond in likewise manner, seen in your previous posts above (instead of simply ignoring them and focusing on the substance of your posts, if any), one gets the feeling that this is exactly what you are striving for... But feel free to prove me wrong.


Yeah, I know you're above all that. Sometimes its fun to beat the hyenas at their own game....strange, you think they'd be better with all the practice they get. But in any case, I will ignore the BS on the transitions thread. I'd actually like your and Eric's input in particular. Fishy's expertise can help keep us in line. Hey, maybe "Ripper" Brazeau can even contribute!  (Well, maybe not). :D

By the way, I also like Glenn Morton's presentation.

[edit: Dare I forget Douglas Theobald and Jim Foley!]

--------------
Dey can't 'andle my riddim.

  
Louis



Posts: 6436
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 12 2007,03:34   

Troll,

I don't remember you being mentioned by name. Shit, at least I admitted the possibility (nay even the PROBABILITY) I was wrong, and being daft and paranoid. You on the other hand seem to just BE paranoid and wrong permanently without the charming self awareness. Oh well.

D4MN! I'm breaking my own rule and replying to the troll. Silly Louis. Back to ignoring proven liars and morons.

Louis

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

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 12 2007,17:16   

For those of you still paying attention, Truthiness in science have another blog post up.
Its typical creationist mince.

From their website:

Quote
Yesterday’s issue of the journal Nature revealed a new twist in the controversy over the origin of animals. The “oldest known animal fossils” have been reidentified as fossilised giant bacteria.

So far so good.

Quote
The animal fossil record is a conundrum to Darwinists.

Not if you've actually read the Origin of the species and some of the other books on biology that have been written since then.

Quote
All of the main animal groups are found fossilised in Cambrian rocks, but there is little evidence for their ancestors in lower strata

THats pretty much a lie if talkorigins is to be believed.

Quote
As fossil expert Philip Donoghue put it in a commentary yesterday: “the degree to which animal evolutionary history extends beyong the Cambrian is a controversy rich in speculation but sparse in evidence.” If yesterday’s reidentification is correct, then the evidence has just become sparser.

In 1998 tiny fossils from southern China were identified as fossil animal embryos, providing evidence for the existence of animals before the Cambrian ‘explosion’. Now it seems that they might not be animals after all, but giant bacteria, similar to species still alive today in seafloor sediments along the Nambian coast. These giant bacteria species are able to control phosphate mineral precipitation and, correspondingly, the fossils are found preserved in calcium phosphate.

The reidentification is still controversial as some aspects of the fossils appear to be different to giant bacteria species today. If anything, the modern species might appear less complex than the fossils, with smaller sized clusters forming, and sometimes an absence of an enveloping membrane. Some of the fossils also seem to contain nuclei, which seems incompatible with them being bacteria.

Problems remain to be resolved, but “No matter” writes Dr Donoghue, “Such quibbles do not diminish the central message of the author’s report, which is that, like all other theories about Precambrian animals, the classification of these fossils is far from resolved, even at the kingdom level.”

As he wrote in the commentary's opening sentence, “The origin of the animals is almost as mysterious as the origin of life itself.”

Or in other words, TiS still do not have a theory of ID and evidence to back it up, so they resort to slagging off the uncertainties of evolutionary biology.  
Not to mention that the Nature article still talks about 600 million years ago, and unsurprisingly TiS do not acknowledge this in their article, possibly because they are all YEC's.  
(Except Steve fuller, who is debating Lewis Wolpert in a few weeks.  It should be a walkover for Wolpert, assuming proper debate rules are followed)

  
guthrie



Posts: 696
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: Jan. 16 2007,07:30   

TiS update-
On their news blog, they have a wee blog roundup.  They mention on 6 different anti-TIS blog posts on 5 different blogs, (And who knows how many comments and readers) and can only report on David Anderson, the scurrilous author of the anti-BCSE website, and Denyse O'Leary, as being pro-TiS bloggers.  
I take it no one else is surprised at the complete lack of popular interest in TiS?  At least us "evolutionists" have a popular movement behind us, as evidenced by all these blogs, but TiS apparently only have only one supporter and a cheerleader.

I know of at least one other UK blog that is supportive of TiS, but I'll let them find it for themselves.

  
  62 replies since Jan. 09 2007,02:40 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (3) < [1] 2 3 >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]