AE BB DB Explorer

Search Terms (separate with commas, no spaces):

form_srcid: deejay

form_srcid: deejay

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.

Your IP address is


form_srcid: deejay

q: SELECT AUTHOR, MEMBER_NAME, IP_ADDR, POST_DATE, TOPIC_ID, t1.FORUM_ID, POST, POST_ID, FORUM_VIEW_THREADS from ib_forum_posts AS t1 LEFT JOIN (ib_member_profiles AS t2, ib_forum_info AS t3) ON (t1.forum_id = t3.forum_id AND = t2.member_id) WHERE MEMBER_NAME like 'deejay%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC


DB_result: Resource id #6

Date: 2006/10/20 14:02:45, Link
Author: deejay
Hello all:

Long time lurker, first time poster ;)  

I hope to contribute to the uncommonly dense thread soon.  First, however, I was hoping that Steve could expand on his judgment that Easterbrook is the worst science reporter ever.  I'm not sure I'd go that far, but I find Easterbrook to be quite annoying in many ways.  For example, when he decided that global warming was a reality, he made it seem like no one's opinion on the subject mattered more than his.  Also, he writes a regular football column for whose word total he pads with whatever random thoughts are on his mind.  At the end of last season, when the column was on, he criticized past efforts in Georgia to label biology textbooks with stickers that evolution was "just a theory" and a similar movement in Utah.  But his spin on the issue was that the whackos who want to label textbooks were giving the "serious" work of intelligent design a bad name.  So in the end, the net effect was to give ID a whiff of legitimacy barely a month after the Dover trial.  Annoying, sure, but I'd love to hear other transgressions from Easterbrook regarding science.  I do know, for example, he's dismissive of dark matter, but that's not my field.  Thoughts, anyone?

Date: 2006/10/20 17:35:08, Link
Author: deejay
Scary, thanks for the welcome, and Steve, thanks for the reply.  I understand a lot of what you're saying; a lot of Easterbrook's work blurs together.  I really used to enjoy his NFL column when I first found it.  The football material was fresh for a while, but then he just repeated the same points over and over.  When he digressed from football into other areas, such as science, there were times he was genuinely curious and often reasonably analytical, but then he seemed to take on something of an anti-intellectual air.  With the issue of dark matter, from what I recall in his "football" columns, he would say something to the effect that it was ridiculous that a large portion of the universe was a substance that scientists couldn't detect, and from there he seemed unwilling to consider the issue more deeply.  When he worked for, he suddenly stopped criticizing the monopoly deal between DirecTV and the NFL for the Sunday ticket.  I stopped reading his NFL column soon afterwards, but checked in at the end of the season and found his annoying take on ID.  At that point, I wasn't all that surprised.  Anyway, thanks for listening and sorry if I derailed the discussion.  Autism is a very scary disease, and the prospect of raising a sick child has been just one of many factors that have discouraged me from breeding.  I've recently softened my stance on that issue, and now I have to stay informed on issues like these.

Date: 2006/12/05 17:02:07, Link
Author: deejay
Delurking to vote that VMartin = GOP.  I could easily be wrong on the specific accusation, but I'm quite confident that Mr. Martin is a sock puppet.

Date: 2006/12/17 20:44:59, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 17 2006,18:56)
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 17 2006,01:41)
Nick's post shows Dembski's email to critics, which has to be seen to be believed.

I didn't notice anything weird. It's the email of a socially maladjusted person being pretentious. If that's not Dembski, I don't know what is.

This is true, but Dembski isn’t always like this.  Sometimes he’s just a pure snake oil salesman with his books, shamelessly pimping them as revolutionary even though he must have had the sense to figure out long ago that there’s nothing of substance in them.  He almost seems sane when he does this, because he’s got rational motives and rewarding consequences for his behavior, even if it is all fundamentally dishonest.

 Other times like this one, you can see his sense of self-importance billowing out of control, and you really have to wonder what’s going on upstairs with this guy.  I really think he’s got himself convinced that he’s got the Darwinists dead to rights with, of all things, an amateur flash animation.  And now, his creation and his victory must be reckoned with by the Darwinian high priests who are almost his intellectual peers. To show that he’s magnanimous in victory, he’ll take out the farting noises if his vanquished opponents do what’s clearly the right and obvious thing and help make his latest Waterloo monument more historically accurate.  

So, yeah, I give Dembski too much credit when I pigeonhole him as a minor league Machiavelli with his books and his promotional schemes.  Multiple PhD’s, though, don’t guarantee against a relapse back into socially maladjusted behavior with consuming delusions of grandeur.  A response from Dawkins only validates Dembski’s conviction that Dawkins is a step below him as a thinker and cultural force.  What would it take to convince Dembski that the reality is that both personally and professionally, he’s worlds closer to his research assistant Joel than he is to a working scientist?

Date: 2006/12/17 22:28:10, Link
Author: deejay
[quote=stevestory,Dec. 17 2006,21:08][/quote]
It's puzzling. Of all the IDers, Dembski's the only one I credit with enough intelligence to know that he's a con artist, but sometimes I wonder if I'm overestimating him.

Yeah, the saddest thing with ID these days is that the only novelty they have left is new answers to the question “How dumb will they be today?”  I liked a post of yours I remember from a long time ago, when you broke down different ID’ers by the level and area of their mistakes: high school stats, undergrad philosophy, etc.  Dembski’s been prolific enough over the past year to score on multiple levels on this scale.  Sometimes I’ve been generous to judge him by his high water marks, but when I read something like this:

The other side is making much about my having attained yet another “new low” in being the creative force behind the Judge Jones School of Law (go to Just to be clear, my aim in this flash animation was not to shake up the convictions of convinced Darwinists. Rather, my aim was to render Judge Jones and his decision ridiculous in the eyes of many young people, who from here on will never take Darwinian evolution or him seriously. If the cost of accomplishing this is yet another lowering of my estimation in the eyes of PT or Richard Dawkins, that’s a price I’m only too glad to pay — heck, I regard that as a benefit of the deal.

I have wonder whether it’s really necessary for someone to explain to Dembski just how wrong this is on so many levels.  If it is, well, then Lord help him, he’s just not that bright.

Date: 2006/12/17 22:54:44, Link
Author: deejay
Steve, I’m enjoying it while it lasts as well, but there’s only so much enjoyment I can derive by looking down on the creationists and their ways.  One good thing that has come out of all the lurking I’ve done here is that I finally got motivated to pick up the Origin of Species, which I picked up used from my local bookshop when they didn’t have The Blind Watchmaker in stock.  I figure my time is better spent seeing what Darwin had to say on the issue of evolution than checking in daily to see what Dembski or DaveScot thinks about it.  Quick question, though, for which I don’t remember your answer: do you think Behe is smart enough to know he’s a con artist?  With him, I see someone who just can’t recognize that his demand for demonstrated step-by-step mutation models complete with fitness scores to support evolution is a world, and do I mean a world, more stringent than the standards he’s content to put forth to support ID.  I think he’s fallen in love with the fact that he was chosen by divine Providence to spread the gospel, but other than that, he does seem to have some level of integrity about him.

[grammar edit]

Date: 2006/12/18 10:08:52, Link
Author: deejay

Thanks a lot for the thoughtful post – the creationists do indeed represent a broad spectrum of irrationality.  I’ve had an interesting year or so delving into the minds of the creationists, and it’s typically only taken a few minutes with each of them to see where they start to go wrong.  From there, the question that has held my attention was “Just what the heck is wrong with this individual?”  It’s been an interesting question to consider, but it came at the price of devoting a chunk of my time to the thoughts and writings of people who really are one of the worst kinds of stupid you can be: aggressively ignorant.  Given their political potential, these people do demand some level of vigilance, but it starts getting depressing spending too much time in their company when there’s so much more to learn about life and where it came from.

So famous last words, I probably won’t be spending as much time here as I have in the past year, as hopefully I’ll be reading more of the thoughts of real scientists.  I liked your thoughts on OOS, and I’m having the same ideas having read only the chapter on domestic variation, in which you get to see how much time Darwin spent pondering dogs and pigeons, and that’s just a small fraction of what the book covers.  I’m also fortunate to have had just enough real science experience to see that this messiness must be overcome in virtually all types of investigation.

Anyway, as I check in here from time to time, I hope to share a bit more about how I got here in the first place and what I saw and learned in the process.    

To get things back on topic, I'll concur that someone who is utterly incapable of seeing the subtleties of flatulence based humor is likely to have a lot of trouble with the subtleties of biological organization.  ID'ers: farts aren't necessarily funny, and jargon isn't necessarily science.  In fact, you guys are a lot funnier discussing jargon than you ever could hope to be blowing raspberries.  Please discuss this paradox amongst yourselves for even greater comedic effect.  Thank you.

Date: 2006/12/18 16:57:31, Link
Author: deejay
I love the multiple levels of the "divine wind" joke; it describes Dembski's kamikaze tactics as much as the flatulence.  Too bad for him that he just splashed harmlessly into the ocean.  Again.

Of course someone without credibility can't kill his credibility, so I imagine he'll be back with more entertainment soon enough.

Date: 2006/12/22 10:21:39, Link
Author: deejay
Grew up in NJ, spent a total of 12 years in Montana snowboarding and attending grad school off and on, recently moved to the Boston area.

Date: 2007/01/01 13:09:55, Link
Author: deejay
Delurking to offer a few thoughts on the end of this thread.

Dave's rants got stale for me a long time ago, and I only learned about this thread’s impending demise through the Evolution/Creationism discussion board thread.  I was around at the beginning, back when AFD first appeared on the Thumb to demand short synopses of why people here accepted the evidence for evolution.  In the interests of having a few posts at the end of this thread summing things up, perhaps Dave should be held to that same standard, and maybe he could encapsulate all that “evidence” he has provided for his UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis.

Of course, as was noted in response to Dave’s initial request, evidence for evolution doesn’t lend itself to a summary in a glib paragraph or two.  The discussion has to be expanded, and expanding the discussion into irrelevant tangents went a long way to creating such a ongoing train wreck of a thread.  But if there was one benefit to those irrelevant tangents, it was that they showed that Dave was incapable of offering evidence or understanding argument for just about any area of discussion the thread wandered to.  I knew from his first post that Dave would be in way over his head with the science, but that whole discussion on Portuguese was just priceless.  The thread could have been shut down after that.  And please correct me if I’m wrong, but I don’t recall seeing any evidence to support an UPDATED Creator God Hypothesis in here, and that’s the best reason to close things down.

The worst thing about the ongoing discussion is that it merely feeds Dave’s deluded abilities about himself.  

I think they never expected me to be so tenacious, be so popular and cause such a stir.

Dave, if you think you are causing such a stir, I strongly suggest that you continue the discussion on your own blog.  The skeptics will gladly follow you there.  If you ever complain about treatment from the moderators here, you need to remember that they have set an incredibly high standard for you to uphold.  I defy you to allow 11,000 comments from them.  After that, you can complain all you want.

And huge props to all those who took the time to debunk Dave’s claims.  I learned a lot about geology in particular, even if Dave didn’t.  I'll also echo those who urge Eric to pursue something bigger after serving such an intensive apprenticeship here.  To quote the Beastie Boys: “A slight distraction can get you paid.”

Date: 2007/01/02 10:55:25, Link
Author: deejay
Sadly, the site is not a parody. The site has several different authors who are long on passion and short on talent.  Most of them are capable of putting a sentence or even a paragraph together, but the idea of defending a thesis with evidence is beyond the scope of their abilities.  I had fun reading the article, and Ed’s post reflects my initial reaction to is, which is “uh, you’re really not developing an argument here, and that just makes your inflamed rhetoric look even more pathetic.”  Too pathetic indeed to deserve a considered response.  

I’ve been guilty of devoting too much energy to arguing with the box of rocks that is Red Reader.  I try not to do such things any more; for one it’s downright cruel.  Secondly, it’s hard to derive satisfaction from a debate in which the opponent is too dumb to know when he lost.  Please see our friend AFDave for evidence.  Dave got stale hard and fast, but part of the fun in taking on Dembski, DaveScot and the Discovery Institute over and over is that they do have some sense of when they lose.  For all their bluster and refusal to admit defeat, you can see their tacit recognition of their shortcomings with each brief retreat and subsequent reemergence with slightly modified tactics.

Given what’s at stake and given the type of people who are leading the antievolution charge, resisting them will always be necessary and warranted.  We are fortunate indeed that we have such dim adversaries.  The challenge this dynamic poses is determining the tipping point at which mocking must yield to mercy.

Date: 2007/01/02 12:22:25, Link
Author: deejay
Oh, is that where former dumbest commenter on UD ran off to? Can't say I'm surprised.

Last I remember seeing him was in March, when he suddenly surfaced on the thumb commenting as gj.  It was as if he had kept in private reserve a special dose of uncommon density to share with us all for the occasion.  I couldn’t resist responding to him because after I got banned at UD, he kept arguing with me on the same thread.  I’m not proud of my intemperate response to him on the thumb, but I do confess that it felt good to vent a few choice words at him.  I haven’t seen him since, and I certainly haven’t gone looking for him.  Perhaps he had the sense to realize he was in over his head with the antievolution thing.

Date: 2007/01/03 12:43:19, Link
Author: deejay
from Tim:

Since that time the thread-starter has begun using the word 'intractable' to describe his YEC position, as well as describing himself as an 'amateur scientist'. The words intractable and scientist form an oxymoron of the highest order, but I'm sure this point is lost on the  thread-starter, just as so many other seemingly simple points are lost.

Well put, Tim.  One of many beautiful pearls tossed to our resident swine.

Date: 2007/01/08 16:22:30, Link
Author: deejay
somebody's been very busy "reviewing" all these books...wonder who?

Could it be Walter Monheit, the movie publicist's friend?

"Icons of Evolution has intelligent designs...on the Pulitzer!"

[d'oh, syntax edit]

Date: 2007/01/08 16:43:05, Link
Author: deejay
"In The Case for the Devine Designer , the author doesn't know who the devine designer of nature is, but we know the devine designer of this book is the intelligent choice...for Stockholm!"

Somebody stop me before I triple blurb

Date: 2007/01/10 15:01:38, Link
Author: deejay
Argy, for Dave to know what "chromosomal non-disjunction during meiosis I" means, he must know first what meiosis is. And chromosomes. And, as we all know, he has proven he does not:

Davetardom in all its glory.

Just when I thought the folks at UD was running out of novel ways to embarrass themselves, along came Dave with his mangled explanation of how the immaculate conception could be an example of parthenogenesis.  His fundamental errors with meiosis and the way he refused to admit any of them were just textbooks example of delusion.  Who was it here who won $5 by betting DS wouldn’t admit he was wrong?

Dave may not pass a Biology 101 midterm, let alone a final, but apparently he’s the authority on genetics at a “leading” ID site.  So sad.

Date: 2007/01/11 11:53:24, Link
Author: deejay
To the extent that Dembski actually wants a debate with Forrest, I imagine that his fantasy of how it would play out goes something like this:

"Oh, yeah, Barbara?  The jerk store called, and they're running out of you!"

Date: 2007/01/13 09:16:53, Link
Author: deejay
Materialistic ideology has subverted the study of biological and cosmological origins so that the actual content of these sciences has become corrupted. The problem, therefore, is not merely that science is being used illegitimately to promote a materialistic worldview, but that this worldview is actively undermining scientific inquiry, leading to incorrect and unsupported conclusions about biological and cosmological origins. At the same time, intelligent design (ID) offers a promising scientific alternative to materialistic theories of biological and cosmological evolution -- an alternative that is finding increasing theoretical and empirical support. Hence, ID needs to be vigorously developed as a scientific, intellectual, and cultural project.

IOW, Goddidit.  

And if any actual scientists out there have any questions, they can ponder them at their unpaid positions in our department of nature appreciation.

Date: 2007/01/13 10:33:53, Link
Author: deejay
Speaking of UD’s new images, Doesn’t the flagellum look a little HR Giger-ish?  

I’m not sure that kind of imagery goes over well with UD’s intended audience, but then again, Bill could be reminding us that ID doesn’t rule out an alien designer.  

Like a lot of others here, I had some of my preconceptions on what DaveScot looked like confirmed.  Dave’s angry and aggressive persona reminded me of a right wing state senator from where I used to live in Montana.  The guy’s name is Joe Balyeat, and he tried to make tax increases possible only through voter initiatives, meaning the state legislature itself was forbidden from raising taxes.  He wasn’t shy about using Christian Reconstructionist philosophy to justify his political stances.  Whenever I thought of Dave growing his fungus or cyberstalking JAD, I imagined a doppelganger of this guy:

Sorry the image is so frighteningly large, but the size gives the full effect

Date: 2007/04/14 19:29:43, Link
Author: deejay
De-lurking to ask FtK a couple of questions; I'm really just too curious as to why you're here.  What, again, do you hope to accomplish?   What, after 115 posts, do you think you have accomplished thus far?

Date: 2007/04/14 19:43:08, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Ftk @ April 14 2007,19:37)
De-lurking to ask FtK a couple of questions; I'm really just too curious as to why you're here.  What, again, do you hope to accomplish?

Nothing, other than just having some fun.

What, after 115 posts, do you think you have accomplished thus far?

Not a thing.  I'm basically just shooting the breeze and getting to know some interesting folks.  That's pretty much it.

Thanks for answering my questions.  I did quite rudely cut in front of some other people who had some questions for you as well.  Perhaps if you have the time you could answer some of their questions as well.  Thanks again.

Date: 2007/04/19 10:24:54, Link
Author: deejay
Yogi Berra said it best:
You can observe a lot by watching

Date: 2007/04/19 11:20:58, Link
Author: deejay
To continue, at best I’m only going to make a very modest contribution towards making this board more informative and/or entertaining.  As others have noted, what will make this board more interesting is another creobot, and  after a short layoff, I definitely spent more time here once FTK got active.  

She provided a measure of entertainment for a while, but man she got boring fast.  In  contrast, AFD kept me entertained for a couple of months.  To me, the whole AFD thread climaxed with the Portuguese discussion, because it showed that not only did Dave understand nothing about science, he understood nothing about argument.  

As Mr. Vibrating makes clear, it’s hard to have an argument if you don’t know what one is.  FTK has tried to avoid getting into a scientific discussion, but in the course of arguing about not arguing, she has demonstrated that her understanding of evidence and logic is on par with Dave’s.  

Date: 2007/04/19 21:17:29, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Ftk @ April 19 2007,20:59)
Here a big news flash for ya:

I couldn't give two hoots if you people take me seriously or not.  :)


Should anyone take your views on IDC and science seriously?

Date: 2007/04/25 08:31:37, Link
Author: deejay
Well, yes, there is an iota (or is it a scintilla?) of truth in Inhofe’s remarks.  There’s also more than a little bit of sophistry, because after all, Al Gore and Cheryl Crow aren’t exactly average Americans, no more than America is an average country.   You could just as well ask the average American to lower his carbon footprint to that of an average person across the earth, but that’s not going to score as many points with Inhofe’s political base.
And yes, it is really obnoxious when you see Hollywood types patting themselves on the back for driving hybrid cars to do errands while flying first class tens of thousands of miles a year.  But you have to ask the net effect of their awareness campaigns.  If Al Gore has ten or even a hundred times the carbon footprint of an average American, that could easily be offset by encouraging tens of thousands of others to lower theirs.  Is that appealingly egalitarian?  Of course not.  Is it effective?  I say yes.  

And as for Cheryl Crow, her toilet paper idea is about as vacuously self-satisfied as her songs.  Ugh.

Date: 2007/04/25 08:56:51, Link
Author: deejay
I’ll go on record saying that the Kenya AA from the Coffee Connection was the best drip coffee I’ve ever had, with a really strong taste of blackberries to it.  The Coffee Connection was a local Boston chain that flourished in the late 80’s/early 90’s, but was then unfortunately bought out by Starbucks.  I used to get their beans by mail order when I was in college, so we’re talking ‘91/’92 here.  I’m not sure if the discussion here is slamming the AA bean (have to disagree) or the light roast (have to agree).  

A catalog from another chain back then claimed that there was ten times as much Jamaica Blue Mountain sold in the US as was actually grown, and most of what was grown was sold in Japan.  IOW, most of what you’d find would be a cheap blend.  This catalog sold 100% JBM for $35/lb in ’91, and it basically admitted that it was nice coffee, but only expensive because of its rarity.  

I’m not sure whether I ever had the Kona from Coffee Connection.  It was around $15-$16/lb back then, and with most other varieties around $8-10, I didn’t see a need to spend more than I had to as a broke college student.  The Sumatra and the aged Sumatra were very nice, as were Ethiopian, Celebes, and the occasional peaberry variety they had for sale.  In fact, even the cheaper Columbian, Brazilian, Panamanian or Guatemalan stuff blew away anything else I could find then or now because of the quality of their roasts.  I can’t say I know much about espresso, but since no drip coffee has even come close to what I could get from the Coffee Connection back in the  day, I’ve basically given up being snooty about my choice of brew.

Date: 2007/04/25 22:29:35, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ April 25 2007,19:06)
Several times lately people have pointed me to Moose Drool. I'll have to check it out.

Hi Steve-

I lived in Montana for 12 years, and as much as I'd love to be a homer for the local stuff, I still prefer most of the brews from Deschutes, particularly Black Butte Porter and Obsidian Stout.  Deschutes makes a pale ale called Mirror Pond, and lots of people like it, but I much prefer Sierra Nevada, which is my default beer.  

I agree with Wes on Spaten Optimator, but I have worlds more international beers still to try.

Date: 2007/05/03 10:53:24, Link
Author: deejay

I have to extend a big, big doff of my 'tard cap to Richard for that post.

Date: 2007/05/29 23:02:34, Link
Author: deejay
Hi Lou-

The last picture of your original post has a nice view of the floor of the skull from above.  The bone that makes up a good chunk of the floor of the skull is the sphenoid bone.  Click on image "sphenoid bone, upper surface" in the wikipedia entry for a decent look at this bone in humans.  The holes on either side above this bone are where the optic nerves come in, and the holes on either side below this bone are where the internal carotid arteries come in.  In the very center of this bone is a depression where the pituitary gland sits, called the fossa hypophysea in the wikipedia entry.  Your skull has a prominent dorsum sellae, the wall right behind the depression.

The very top center of this same photo is the ethmoid bone, where the olfactory nerves come in.  The big hole in the very center of your last entry on the first page is the foramen magnum, where the spinal cord leaves.  

Hope this helps you with some of the orientation and function.  I only know human anatomy, not comparative anatomy, and it was a fun exercise for me to wrestle with the homology.  All description guaranteed accurate or your money back.

Date: 2007/06/07 14:55:00, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ June 07 2007,14:47)
those hard, chewy little yellow and white granules that come on the bottom of good pizzas and sometimes loaves of bread--what is that?

Uh, cornmeal?
Did I miss a joke?

Date: 2007/06/07 14:59:26, Link
Author: deejay
I didn't notice the use of cornmeal as a pesticide until just now.  Ouch.

Date: 2007/06/07 19:45:36, Link
Author: deejay
After reading Irons's piece, I agree with what Irons himself freely admits, namely that Jones does a better job laying out the relevant facts of the case.

As for the decision's aftermath, Irons does a decent job describing the DI's effort to smear Jones.  I do wish he'd refrained from making explicit reference to culture wars; I don't think that really adds anything after he makes clear that there's no substance to the attacks on Jones.

Given that this paper was written for a legal forum, I wish that Irons had taken on the DI's ridiculous claim that
90.9% (or 5,458 words) of Judge Jones’s 6,004-word section on intelligent design as science was taken virtually verbatim from the ACLU’s proposed ‘Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law’ submitted to Judge Jones nearly a month before his ruling.”41

Assuming you accept the calculation of 91%, is there a clearer way to announce to a legal audience that your side not only lost, but got demolished?

Of course, maybe Irons could let that quote speak for itself.

Date: 2007/06/07 20:00:47, Link
Author: deejay
Thanks, Wes.  I just love the three significant figures in the DI's claim.

Date: 2007/06/07 20:09:12, Link
Author: deejay
I also just love the opening to the DI's piece:

The year 2005 was the year the theory of intelligent design (ID) made the headlines. It was featured on the cover of Time magazine, its study was seemingly endorsed by the President of the United States, and it became one of the most talked-about
issues in the public square.

Quite the scientific revolution you've got going on there, folks.  As an undergrad studying psychology, I had my introduction to how science works with the Garcia Effect

The wikipedia article is pretty shabby, but the point is clear:  One study in an obscure journal brilliantly exposed the limits of behaviorism.  No discussion in a vapid newsweekly needed, no lukewarm endorsement from an anti-intellectual president required.

Date: 2007/06/07 20:33:52, Link
Author: deejay
You know, that wikipedia article is so bad, I thought I'd try to do a quick summary for anyone who is interested.  The article does mention one part of the study, namely that if you irradiate mice after letting them drink sweetened water, they quickly learn not to drink the sweetened water because they associate the radiation-induced nausea with the flavored water.  No surprises there, except that the learning took place faster than conditioning models suggested.

But there's more to the story, at least if I recall my professor's summary accurately.  If you rigged the water bottle so that it clicked every time the rat drank, and then irradiated the rat later on, it would not avoid the clicking water.  

However, if you shocked the rat after it drank the clicking water, it would avoid the clicking water.  If you shocked the rat after giving it sweetened water, it would not avoid the sweetened water.

At the time, classical conditioning models held that there didn't have to be any sort of intrinsic similarity between two cues in order to associate them.  The study elegantly showed that some connections are easier to make than others.

I got food poisoning after eating some bad fish in the first grade, and to this day, I simply can't eat seafood.  It just tastes wrong.

Date: 2007/06/07 20:37:17, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ June 07 2007,20:18)
I love this bit:

Casey: (And Wesley asserts that only 38% of the whole ruling was taken from the plaintiffs’ findings of fact.)

Wesley: Not so much “asserted” as “demonstrated”.


A very old Simpsons quote:

Yeah well I'll be frank with ya Lisa and when I say frank I mean, you know, devastating. ...

Date: 2007/06/09 22:35:50, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ June 09 2007,22:30)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ June 09 2007,22:43)
"Mrs. Simpson, don't you worry. I watched Matlock in a bar last night, the sound wasn't on, but I think I got the gist of it."

Does anybody else see the Lionel Hutz character and think, " know, I think I am that guy...."

"Works on commission?  No, money down!"

Date: 2007/06/09 22:59:24, Link
Author: deejay
What I am trying to figure is how Behe got H.R. Giger to do his cover art. And why.

Giger was the first thing that popped into my head when I saw the flagellum at the top of the new design at UD.  

I wonder what Dembski and Behe think of the Frankenchrist poster insert

Date: 2007/06/10 08:54:14, Link
Author: deejay
Sheesh...why is it sooo hard to believe that I've read peer-reviewed papers, and who really cares?  

Ftk, my initial urge for a response to this quote was to call dibs on using it in my sig.  I thought that might be a little mean, so instead I'll ask whether you want a constructive answer.

Date: 2007/06/10 11:48:48, Link
Author: deejay
From Ftk:

I find myself asking why, why, why and how do they come to that conclusion?

If we make the very generous assumption that you have indeed read any original peer-reviewed literature, then this statement is about as clear an indication as any that you understood none of it.

Date: 2007/06/10 12:07:56, Link
Author: deejay

Your response came up as I worked on mine.  Thank you for making the concession you didn't understand what you read.  It's a step.

Where we are now is dealing with a question Steve posed on your old thread:

The general question is, 'how do you get someone who doesn't know the first thing about science, to understand that a particular pseudoscience they like isn't science?'. FtK proves on a daily basis that we haven't found the answer to that question.

Since you don't understand how science works, you are unfortunately incapable of making a competent comparison between ID and science.  Do you realize this?  Again, I appreciate the fact that you concede gaps in your knowledge.  Do you concede this point as well?

Date: 2007/06/10 19:39:29, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ June 10 2007,18:45)
Uncommonly Denyse has made it her business to simultaneously display and celebrate ignorance, to a degree that must be read to be believed even for those familiar with her usual drivel. This post is beyond ridicule, save self-ridicule.

Go here, where UD has effectively become an extension of the Uncommonly Dense thread of AtBC, and rendered it unnecessary.

Wow.  That piece was on par with Jesse Nickles's essay

Date: 2007/06/11 11:52:08, Link
Author: deejay
One more time, Ftk:

From Steve:

The general question is, 'how do you get someone who doesn't know the first thing about science, to understand that a particular pseudoscience they like isn't science?'. FtK proves on a daily basis that we haven't found the answer to that question.

From me:

Since you don't understand how science works, you are unfortunately incapable of making a competent comparison between ID and science.  Do you realize this?  Again, I appreciate the fact that you concede gaps in your knowledge.  Do you concede this point as well?

Well, Ftk, do you concede that you are incapable of making a competent comparison between ID and science?

Date: 2007/06/11 11:55:27, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Louis @ June 11 2007,05:57)
Quote (PennyBright @ June 10 2007,21:52)
FtK's problem is not about being educated -- it's about being educable.



Ok you have won another prize. This is right on the money again. I'm running out of cheques!


P.S. FTK that isn't nasty btw, being educable speaks as much to attitude (i.e. something over which one has some control) as much as ability (less so).

Well spoken, Penny and Louis

Date: 2007/06/13 17:18:44, Link
Author: deejay
From Behe:

[The Edge of Evolution] develops a framework for intelligent design as a comprehensive scientific statement, defining the principles by which Darwinian evolution can be distinguished from design, and fits design theory together with the findings of cosmology, chemistry, and physics into an overarching theory of the universe.

ID won't match your pathetic level of detail, but ID will blow away your pathetic level of self-congratulation.

Date: 2007/06/18 10:48:51, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ June 17 2007,17:53)
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 17 2007,17:12)
I am baffled. Is the reason you dislike chopping onions by hand because they cause a mild irritaion to your eyes? If so, why eat stupidly hot dishes? Shut Up, that's why.


Why onions make you cry

One thing the article doesn't mention is that you can prevent the sulfuric acid from forming on the moisture on your eyes by running the onion under water for a second or two.  The sulfuric acid will form mostly in the water on the onion rather than on your eyes.  

I've had good luck with this, but mostly I just try to chop faster.  I didn't spend all that money on my knives just so that they'd look good hanging on a magnetic holder.  Well, maybe in part  ;) , but I do like to think I'm halfway decent with them.  And cleaning a knife is a lot easier than cleaning a food processor.  

One other downside to the rinsing technique is that if you're making a salad, it's nice to have dry ingredients so that the dressing clings better.  I go through enough paper towels patting down the lettuce after rinsing the dirt off the "prewashed" stuff I buy, and having wet onions means having one more thing to dry off.

Date: 2007/06/18 10:56:14, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ June 15 2007,04:15)
Wiggum: Afternoon, Homer.  Care for some chili?  I've added an extra ingredient just for you. The merciless peppers of Quetzlzacatenango! Grown deep in the jungle primeval by the inmates of a Guatemalan insane asylum.
Homer: Uh, Wiggy?  My chili's getting cold.

From the same episode, after Homer is able to down the peppers by coating his throat with melted candle wax:

Nice try, Chief Wiggum.  Don't quit your day job.  Whatever that is.

I think of this line every time I see Dembski fall flat on his face with a new post about how ID is growing by leaps and bounds.

Date: 2007/06/18 11:47:14, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 18 2007,11:26)
Quote (deejay @ June 18 2007,10:48)
Why onions make you cry


Yeah, that is a sorry-ass article.  My bad for even linking to it.

Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 18 2007,11:26)
Mouth breathers is a term used here to indicate sub-normal intelligence. Seems (from the link) they have the edge when it comes to smarts.

Check out #7 on this list

Date: 2007/06/23 15:12:46, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Ichthyic @ June 23 2007,13:24)
You're mind is already set.

Did FTK ever bother to look up the definition of projection?

or possessive pronouns for that matter?

Date: 2007/06/25 08:36:17, Link
Author: deejay
from Ftk:
I guess that is something that I should not question, but merely accept.

Ftk, it's a real shame that after several years of obsessing over the topic of evolution, you still have no idea how science works.

Date: 2007/06/25 10:09:23, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 25 2007,09:51)
Quote (deejay @ June 25 2007,08:36)
from Ftk:
I guess that is something that I should not question, but merely accept.

Ftk, it's a real shame that after several years of obsessing over the topic of evolution, you still have no idea how science works.

I'm sure she questions the bible on a daily basis. Why doesn't Genesis talk about bacterial life?

I'm sure Walt Brown has an answer for that one.  But that darned atheist conspiracy is keeping him from publishing it in the journals.

Date: 2007/06/26 22:15:16, Link
Author: deejay
I'll echo the backhanded praise for "They Live."  Classic fight scene.

My favorite MST3K movie isn't exactly sci-fi, but the producers did find room to include Mitchell in the series' oeuvre.

You guys watch Joe Don Baker movies?

An absolutely wretched movie that drew upon classic sci-fi for "inspiration" is Free Enterprise  The user rating for this movie at imdb is an irony-free 6.9/10.  I find praise for this movie as difficult to fathom as I do the antievolution movement, but some on this board may choose to respectfully disagree.

Date: 2007/06/27 22:12:54, Link
Author: deejay
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ June 27 2007,18:18)

But ATBC is different -->  we don't actually argue with fundies here -- we just laugh at them.

These options are not mutually exclusive.

But when it stops being fun hanging out here, a breather is necessary.  Happy trails to you, Icky, if indeed you move on.

Date: 2007/06/29 13:18:22, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Stephen Elliott @ June 29 2007,10:51)
 Ftk, as a controling point, try and parody an "evilutionist" on an ID site. Pretend that you suport evolution on UD, argue pro-evo arguments there. See how long it takes to get banned.

Can you really not see the difference?

Unfortunately, this assumes that Ftk is capable of making pro-evolution arguments.  She's had months of opportunity here to learn them, and years of opportunities elsewhere.  Currently, her understanding of evolutionary theory isn't good enough to pass a basic high school level test on the subjet.  This just strikes me as really sad.

A couple of rhetorical questions, Ftk:  Do you understand that in spite of the laughs some here have had at your expense, many people on this board have made a very genuine effort to improve your understanding of evolutionary theory?  In spite of their best efforts, for which they stand to receive no tangible rewards, you are deciding to play the victim.  Why is that?

Just to be clear, you don't have to answer these questions here.  But you might want to find someone who can help you find constructive answers to them.  Good luck to you.

Date: 2007/07/02 22:22:26, Link
Author: deejay
Great blog, reverend!

I'm full right now, but your steak-frites recipe got me hungry all over again.  What kind of oil do you use for cooking the frites?  I ate at Les Halles once, and IIRC, they use peanut oil.

Date: 2007/07/02 22:40:18, Link
Author: deejay
Nice touch.  How long can you use it for?

Date: 2007/07/02 22:51:07, Link
Author: deejay
Well, fly that freak flag high -- I look forward to your next blog entry.  There are still plenty of recipes in Steven Raichlen's How to Grill book I'd like to get to, but I'm happy for another source of inspiration.

Date: 2007/07/03 11:24:13, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 03 2007,09:49)
Quote (J-Dog @ July 03 2007,09:36)
Per Ed Brayton at ScienceBlogs, there is nothing in the US Constitution that gives him permission to do this.  Very interesting.

Ed is talking about executive privilege, which really has nothing to do with the power of the President to issue pardons and reprieves.  The latter power is codified in Article II, Section 2 of the Constitution.

This is true.  Bush's application of justice here may be capricious, but it is constitutional.  

Bush will (hopefully) pay a stiff political price for this move, and I imagine that it will stand as a primary example of his imperial approach to the presidency.

What's bugging me, though, is the fact that the times he openly flouted the constitution, as with the electronic eavesdropping program and executive signing statements, he wasn't criticized as harshly as he seems to be now.

Date: 2007/07/04 07:24:34, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 03 2007,13:21)
Provides 2400% of your RDT (Recommended Daily Tard):

That would be the Vitamin A of Tard, wouldn't it?
As in high levels are toxic.

Date: 2007/07/04 07:56:09, Link
Author: deejay
I extend my thanks to both our resident reverends for replies to my earlier comment.  I feel, well, is "blessed" the right word?

Date: 2007/07/04 16:45:27, Link
Author: deejay
It's a good day for Brats steamed in beer, then pan grilled, and topped with caramelized onions.  Unfortunately, this apartment dweller doesn't have an outdoor grill.  I hope others on this board got the charcoal or, even better, wood chips, fired up today.

Date: 2007/07/05 08:25:15, Link
Author: deejay
From "Chris Torvik" on PT yesterday:

If evolution is completely true all down the line, then why aren’t there creatures that are currently representing the middle stages of the transformations from one species to another at the mammalian level?

To be honest, though, I have seen some really inner city people, when I visited my friend in Philly some 20 years ago, that really, really did like a lot like a monkey, or a missing link. I swear to God, but then looks CAN be deceiving.

I’m not trying to be racial or flippant. I saw it with my own eyes. Has anyone else had this culture-shock type of experience (for lack of a french word)? I know what I am talking about is very politically incorrect; but please, can someone expound on this?

My first thought here was to question the whole "never attribute to malice what can be attributed to incompetence" axiom.  To create plausible deniability for his Wikipedia antics, would Chris have someone else post this comment at a time or by a means that would have demonstrably been impossible for him?  

Or maybe he just has a very serious problem.

Date: 2007/07/05 14:39:31, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ July 04 2007,16:30)
Too bad FtK bailed before she understood the question about the icefish, or read the paper about the genetics of why primates can't make vitamin C.

How close, in your opinion, was Ftk to achieving a rudimentary understanding of these issues?

Date: 2007/07/05 14:52:38, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Kristine @ July 04 2007,19:58)
Quote (deejay @ July 04 2007,15:45)
It's a good day for Brats steamed in beer, then pan grilled, and topped with caramelized onions.  Unfortunately, this apartment dweller doesn't have an outdoor grill.  I hope others on this board got the charcoal or, even better, wood chips, fired up today.

We made veggie dogs. *Ducks*

Okay, I'm not as kewl as Rev. Chimpy! But I gotta save room for the tequila and beer.

Hi Kristine-

I didn't mention meat specifically in the original post, because you can stay vegetarian and still have a lot of fun with a grill.  Branch out from those veggie dogs when you feel inspired.  


Great post.  Seeing your toys in action has given me lots of ideas for the wedding registry.

Date: 2007/07/05 15:25:25, Link
Author: deejay
That's pretty much what I saw from her as well during the limited amount of time I've been exposed to her.  I admire the patience you showed with her.  

I didn't deal with her at kcfs or anywhere else before she showed up here.  I understand that there might be plenty of people in Kansas who are sympathetic to her views, but did she ever hold any sway over any of them?  Wasn't it clear to anyone listening that she really wasn't even working at a high school level of scientific understanding?  It does seem like now she's only got the usual roll-call of nutters on her side at her blog, but was this different in the past?

Date: 2007/07/05 23:27:57, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ July 05 2007,20:25)
All that shrugging must give you Trapeziuses of Steel.

Don't forget the levator scapulae

Steve, if you keep posting images like that, you're going to lure GoP to this thread.

Date: 2007/07/11 10:12:04, Link
Author: deejay
A buddy of mine is a bartender at dive bar in the town in Montana where I used to live.  He worked day shifts on Thursdays and Fridays, and when the regulars filed in at 10AM for their first beers, they'd give their orders as "A can of coffee, please."

Date: 2007/07/11 10:34:01, Link
Author: deejay
On the Thumb, there’s a piece about “Creato-Terrorism” and some of the commenters talked about having their Darwin fish vandalized or receiving notes on their windshield to the effect that they will burn in hell.  I was wondering whether anyone here had stories to share about similar experiences.  IIRC, there was a New York Times article a while ago about a guy who went around leaving surveys on cars sporting various versions Darwin or Christ fishes.  The survey had some standard multiple choice questions and a free response section, and the guy who did the survey said that some of the free responses he received were several paragraphs long.

Because something as small as a sticker can stir such passions, I’ve taken the Toothpaste for Dinner approach to bumper stickers in general.  It’s also because I’ve gotten older, have my own business, and I don’t want to stick my opinions in my clients’ faces.  

I admit that when I see the version of the “Truth” fish swallowing the Darwin fish, I get riled enough to be tempted to leave a note either with the ninth commandment or the url for the Kitzmiller decision, but I haven’t followed through.  ‘

Stories, anyone?

Date: 2007/07/11 17:29:56, Link
Author: deejay
Thank you all for your responses.  I’m sorry about your vandalism experience, Louis.

No one got any notes?

How about any thoughts on yielding to that urge to leave a note in response to the “Truth” fish swallowing the Darwin fish?  As noted above, I thought about something short and sweet, like a “Thou shalt not bear false witness” comment, or the URL for the Kitzmiller decision.  

I’m probably at least a year too late bringing this up, anyway.  On top of that, I simply don’t see as many “Truth” fish in Massachusetts as I did where I used to live in Montana.

Some of Glen’s post-meltdown posts are on the Bathroom Wall, where said discussion probably belongs.  I don’t recall the original source.

Date: 2007/07/12 07:32:12, Link
Author: deejay
Quote ("Rev Dr" Lenny Flank @ July 11 2007,18:20)
I *really* like the darwin-fish variant that serves as my avatar.  

But what will the offspring be like?  Or is it...oh yes, I see. Never mind.

Date: 2007/07/13 12:12:48, Link
Author: deejay
I'm trying to decide whether Sal has gotten dumber since the first time I encountered him.  But is this question even worth considering?

Date: 2007/07/25 08:24:34, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Joe G @ July 24 2007,21:40)

And ya know something Lenny- I hope I am in the middle of it and have to testify in a Court of Law.

ID will surely get a favorable ruling once I am finished.


What specific role do you envision for yourself here?

Date: 2007/10/30 13:41:51, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (carlsonjok @ Oct. 26 2007,17:20)
  Greatest Joke Ever Told!!!!

Don't you mean this one?
Edit: short version


Further proof creationists have no sense of humor.

That was painful.

Date: 2007/11/06 10:01:03, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ Nov. 05 2007,22:09)
Quote (blipey @ Nov. 05 2007,16:44)
Did you see that Rev. Dickhead Phelpslost his first lawsuit?

Hope they collect.

I have mixed feelings about that. The emotional side of me thinks it was the right verdict, the principled ACLU side of me thinks it was wrong.

Seconded.  When the Aryan Nations lost a crippling $6.3 millon lawsuit, it was because its members had shot at the car of people driving near the compound and then held them at gunpoint, and not for saying anything offensive.   The article mentions that the standard in this case was whether the church's actions were "highly offensive to a reasonable person."  I imagine there's more to the case, but I was really surprised when I first read about this decision.

Sorry if OT

Date: 2007/11/07 18:58:37, Link
Author: deejay
My modest contribution:
Botnik's theme would be "Phantom Tard" by Metallica.

Nice work bringing Black Flag into the mix, R.Bill!

Favorite memories:

1. DS agreed to meet with some of the ATBC crew at another blog.  When he was late, RTH noted that you could count on DS to be "tard-y"

2.  Someone else here (please claim the credit you deserve) broke news of Dembski tripping over his own feet yet again by saying that Dembski had been "hoist by his own pe-tard."

Date: 2007/11/07 19:27:30, Link
Author: deejay
The banination theme is more Metallica:
"For whom the tard tolls"

Date: 2008/02/15 21:04:52, Link
Author: deejay
The recipient will receive a certificate of achievement, a $100 award, and an autographed copy of Dr. Michael J. Behe’s newest book, The Edge of Evolution: the Search for the Limits of Darwinism.

The first runner up will receive a certificate of achievement, a bottle of single malt scotch (please contact Dr. Dr. William A. Dembski for delivery details), and two autographed copies of Dr. Michael J. Behe's newest book.

Date: 2008/03/19 09:29:55, Link
Author: deejay

Great report!  I think you did the right thing by focusing on the whole "event" of the screening rather than going into the details of the movie itself.  It's no surprise to hear that much of the substance of the movie is the same old, same old.  It was good to hear the critical questions some members of the audience asked.  Those questions are quite telling: the reason this movie will be a flop is that a decent enough percentage of the intended audience will see right through it.  


That's a great idea about contacting the ADL.  My pessimistic side takes a Lenny Flank view on this one; Lenny always liked to say that people who support ID weren't persuaded by the science, so it's futile to try to dissuade them through the science.  Similarly, I have serious doubts that anyone who is sympathetic to the movie's message will be persuaded by the anti-Semitism angle, so it follows that debunking the anti-Semitism angle will only go so far.  Still, I like the idea of people here taking on the science while others, like the ADL, take on the philosophy.  If Stein gives a TV interview promoting the movie, it can be tough to pin him down on the science in that format.  But it would be very easy to make him squirm by being able to point out that the ADL rejects the argument that makes up a huge percentage of the movie.

Date: 2008/03/25 17:57:13, Link
Author: deejay
Did anyone make it to the March 19th screening in Cambridge, MA?  I only found out about that the day after, but I was working that night anyway.  Of course all the fun happened the next day.

Date: 2008/04/05 15:50:32, Link
Author: deejay
Very nice reply, Wes.  But are you prepared for the ultimate rebuttal?

Date: 2008/04/19 08:42:03, Link
Author: deejay
According to my cable guide, NeinStein was supposed to be on Larry King last night (was this a repeat?), but he got bumped for breaking news on the Eldorado polygamist cult.  Poor Ben got stifled by the Darwinist conspiracy yet again.

Date: 2008/05/21 10:48:08, Link
Author: deejay
Hey Hermagoras-

Happy Birthday!  Beautiful day here in Boston.

Date: 2008/05/23 09:04:22, Link
Author: deejay
For those interested:

69 guests, 14 Public Members and 1 Anonymous Members   [ View Complete List ]
>deejay >khan >Richardthughes >Reciprocating Bill >fusilier >olegt >ashwken >Amadan >MillstoneCam >Doc Bill >PTET >J-Dog >Paul Nelson >Moorit

9:57 Eastern

Date: 2008/05/23 09:39:53, Link
Author: deejay
If you try to put yourself into Stein's mindset (a horrible place, I know), this idea is not too surprising. The thing is, Stein and the rather childlike people he's now making a living off of consider 'Darwinism' to be the opposite of 'Christianity'. Since the two are 'rivals', they think Darwinism is supposed to explain all the same things as Christianity. And of course, since Christianity can be pressed into service to explain anything, they think they've scored a great rhetorical coup when they point out that Darwinism doesn't explain everything. USA! USA! USA!

Hi Arden – I really appreciate this insight a lot as well.  I think it goes a long way towards describing the thinking of traditional creationists.  It also helps a lot with understanding Dembski’s rallying cries against materialism, and  Behe’s insistence on step-by-molecular-step descriptions of evolutionary histories.

The person I’m doing my best to figure out right now is good old Kevin Miller.  He may have run away from here, but the sad truth is that he was a lot more substantive in his posts here than he has ever been at his own blog.  It’s pretty lame; one of two credited screenwriters for Expelled is basically trolling at his own blog.  His posts are mostly just brief snippets of other people’s dishonest and/or substance-free endorsements of Expelled, and he’ll add virtually nothing of his own analysis of what are really just sound bites.  His commenters take him to task and press him for details, but they never come.  Instead, he’ll just post another sound bite that he knows will tick off his remaining readers, and the cycle continues anew.    

With fewer comments each time, though, I imagine his efforts will fade into oblivion. With Kevin, there may just not be all that much to figure out.

Date: 2008/05/29 21:54:49, Link
Author: deejay
It looks like this thread is becoming a virtual chili cook-off, so here’s my chili con carne recipe, FWIW.  It’s gotten us through lots of football Sundays :  


2 lb ground sirloin or ground bison
~3/4 lb sliced bacon
16 oz canned stewed tomatoes
~30 oz canned tomato sauce
16 oz canned kidney beans
16 oz canned chili beans
2 small or one medium onion
4 cloves garlic
1 red and 1 green bell pepper
2 or 3 raw jalapenos
3 tsp chili powder, or more to taste
2 tsp cumin, or more to taste
Black pepper
Tabasco sauce
Sesame oil
Cheddar cheese

Dump tomatoes, tomato sauce, chili and kidney  beans into large stock pot and let simmer over low heat.  Finely dice raw jalapenos and add to pot.  If your stewed tomatoes are whole, break up with a wooden spoon.

Slice bacon into one-inch pieces and cook in frying pan over medium heat.  Cook, but do not brown.  Add all but a few pieces to stock pot.

Dice red and green bell peppers into half inch squares, and cook in frying pan, using the remaining pieces of bacon and as much of the bacon grease as your conscience will allow.  Cook over medium heat until tender, and add to pot.

Dice onion and garlic and cook in frying pan over medium heat with sesame oil, leaving aside some chopped onion as an optional garnish.  Cook for ~2-3 minutes, and add beef (or bison).  Cook until done, seasoning with black pepper and Tabasco to taste.   Drain excess grease, add to pot.

Season with cumin, chili powder, pepper and Tabasco to taste.  Longer simmer times help blend and thicken things, but eat it when you’re ready. Tomato paste is an optional thickening agent. Serve in bowls, topped with ground cheddar and raw diced onion, with saltines on the side if, like me, you’re too lazy to make corn bread.

Date: 2008/06/08 18:08:30, Link
Author: deejay
Hi Albatrossity-

Thanks for passing on the NYT link; I might have not have read the piece otherwise.  The opening line offers the most succinct summary yet of what I've experienced the past couple of years:

"When it comes to science, creationists tend to struggle with reality."

Date: 2008/06/10 12:48:37, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (carlsonjok @ June 10 2008,11:42)
I'm surprised no one has commented on this little gem from Davescot:

I thought it would be fun to check out this thread, as it was the rare UD post to address evolutionary biology.  My experience in 7 easy steps:

1.  Make the mistake of thinking the OP was written by "Patrick"

2.  Laugh at Patrick as he put on grown-up clothes and pretended to be a scientist interpreting experimental findings

3.  Realize with horror that it was actually written by Behe

4.  Simultaneously cringe and laugh at the fact that this is the best material written by ID's best author

5.  Unequivocally laugh as broadbill uses the first comment to demolish the post

6.  Simultaneously cringe and laugh as DS uses the second comment to threaten bannination

7.  Rinse and repeat.  They're every bit as transparent as they were when I first found them 2 1/2 years ago.

I did scroll down far enough to find DS's analysis that Behe's math is "incontrovertable".  UD is the gift that keeps on giving, provided your idea of a gift is a big shiny new box of stupid.

Date: 2008/06/10 21:56:26, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ June 10 2008,13:58)
Quote (deejay @ June 10 2008,12:48)
1.  Make the mistake of thinking the OP was written by "Patrick"

Patrick has some very lax ideas when it comes to attribution. I can dig up some links if you are interested?

The attribution is indeed very sloppy, but I'll take the blame for the error.  I'll be glad to read any links for entertainment value -- thanks much in advance.

Date: 2008/06/17 14:30:46, Link
Author: deejay

That was some outstanding work, but I'd rather see an ugly, oversized cardigan any day of the week.

Date: 2008/06/18 19:24:02, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Quidam @ June 17 2008,16:15)
If a stretched cardigan is more exiting than young taut feminine buttocks (whatever the colour), then you are too far gone for science or art to help.

I assumed there was an "outie" and not an "innie" at the bottom of that cleft.  I feel like I failed a high stakes spinning lady test.

/shows self out

Date: 2008/06/23 11:25:45, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ June 23 2008,12:21)
Rich: I'm confused. Which discovery institute fellow gave me which book? Produce some evidence or stop it with the bald assertions. I assume you are bald, btw, that's why you wear the tard hat.

Don't quit your day job, kevinmillerxi.  Whatever that is.

Date: 2008/06/23 11:41:16, Link
Author: deejay
He's not only the tard club president, he's also a client.

Date: 2008/06/26 11:01:08, Link
Author: deejay

Date: 2008/10/07 21:07:33, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Oct. 07 2008,19:01)
I've definitely missed you.

Why?  Do you prefer your past humiliation to your current irrelevance?

Date: 2008/10/08 11:55:41, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (JohnW @ Oct. 08 2008,11:48)
Quote (deejay @ Oct. 07 2008,19:07)
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Oct. 07 2008,19:01)
I've definitely missed you.

Why?  Do you prefer your past humiliation to your current irrelevance?

"There's only one thing worse than being talked about..."

Indeed.  Kevin has much to learn from jam doughnuts.

Date: 2009/01/09 14:07:10, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (American Saddlebred @ Jan. 09 2009,07:26)
I used to get high with my tutor.

This past spring I did SAT prep with a kid who had recently undergone a big academic improvement after he started taking ADD medication.  In our second lesson, we started looking at the math section, and I began my usual introductory speech about what to expect on the test.  I droned on for a minute, and then suddenly his eyes started darting around.  I could see a wave of sheer terror beginning to break over his body as he realized he was going to have to put up with an hour and a half of this.  

"Excuse me, I'm sorry," he said, getting up from the table.  "I just realized I forgot to take my ADD medication."  He came back a minute later, and the rest of the lesson went fine.  

I like to think I'm pretty even keeled about the pros and cons of ADD medication, but it was still pretty sobering (wink) to see that my company would be absolutely intolerable without the aid of some pretty serious drugs.

Date: 2009/01/11 21:29:24, Link
Author: deejay
Bravo, Louis, but of course with the usual caveat about degree of difficulty when it comes to debating Kevin.

Meanwhile, I'll just snatch a piece of particularly low-hanging fruit.  Here's Kevin again on After... :

How exactly does
a good idea at the beginning—a good high concept

pair up with
My pitch to David was, “Let’s do Point Break in the world of urban exploration.”


Given that the movie was set in Moscow, what exactly was the plan here?  Patrick Swayze robbing the toilet paper store while wearing a Gorbachev mask?  Keanu Reeves as the free-spirited KGB agent assigned to track him down? John C. McGinley as the gulag-rehabilitated company man futilely trying to get Reeves to do it by the book?  Inquiring minds want to know.

Then again, maybe it's just too high concept for me to get.

Date: 2009/01/13 23:53:17, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Jan. 13 2009,22:34)
... I even did the research...

Cue Dorothy Parker -

You can lead a whore to culture, but...

Date: 2009/01/17 17:26:33, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (kevinmillerxi @ Jan. 17 2009,16:00)
2) I love a challenge, and a few of you definitely provide that.

Evidently the current challenge is reading for comprehension.  What follows is a little bit harder.

Date: 2009/01/19 10:39:33, Link
Author: deejay
I'm also intrigued by the continuing saga of Caroline Crocker.  My speculative explanation for how she could fail where Casey Luskin succeeded is that she has her own agenda.

Crocker's web site lets you know that she'll deliver a canned creationist presentation for a mere $2000, plus travel expenses.  It's another grand if you want her to customize the Powerpoint.   I have no idea what sort of compensation the IDEA center director position entailed, but I believe the DI had Dembski down for a stipend in the range of $30K/year.  I believe there is some demand for Crocker's presentations, as her rates have been boosted significantly since I saw them posted a year or so ago.   Given a choice between doing something for the DI and making $7500 for "a weekend of four talks," the wallet is going to win that decision every time.  

The overriding theme of Crocker's website is a bizarre combination of narcissism, martyrdom and unabashed venality [edited to add: and, oh yeah, flat out dishonesty]. In her own way, she's even creepier than Dembski.  

Back to the thread, the issue of relative creepiness brings up this:  

From Kevin:
Something that really irked me during the time I worked on Expelled was the fact that people who occupied the various sides of this debate were more interested in hunkering down in their chosen corner and talking ABOUT the people who disagreed with them rather than actually trying to engage the other side(s).

If you're still reading, Kevin, I'll just reiterate that the act of engagement has been done.  We've seen Crocker's slides.  It's a shame that all your "research" has left you unable to see just how wretched these slides are.  The consequence of showing them, an unrenewed contract, is no worse that what many competent instructors face year in and year out.  

Crocker's "ideas", and of course they're not even vaguely her own, have been engaged and have been quickly found sorely wanting.  It's boring.  It's been done.  What's left is a discussion of "who in the hell would not only say this, but also put it in front of a college class?"  As the 1100+ pages of the UD thread, 300+ pages of the FTK thread and nearly 100 pages of this thread will attest, that discussion is a little bit more interesting.  It's interesting because there aren't clear answers.  Are these people dishonest?  Incompetent?  Both?  If so, how?  How can they be competent in other areas of life?

Or maybe they're not so competent in other areas of life.  After all, Crocker also has this to say of the Design of Life blog
A website specifically designed to keep students informed about the latest developments in ID and evolution. Maintained by Denyse O’Leary, a professional writer who understands ID and can communicate clearly.

Date: 2009/01/19 12:23:48, Link
Author: deejay
To Lou and J-Dog:

Thanks a lot for the recognition!  I can't help but notice, though, how crowded the POTW room is, and it's only Monday afternoon.  Hmmm...

; )

Date: 2009/01/20 08:33:01, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Doc Bill @ Jan. 18 2009,17:58)
I met this web designer recently and here's a site he did relevant to this thread.  (Who'd a thunk it?)

The guy in the videos is the designer.  Nice photography.


Yes, the phototgraphy is really nice.  As for the music..., my wife thought I was watching porn when she heard it.  

Just another false positive for her XXXBanatory Filter.

Date: 2009/01/23 08:53:20, Link
Author: deejay
Happy Birthdays!!!

Date: 2009/01/25 00:18:53, Link
Author: deejay
Thanks afarensis!  I love the quote you cite, or more accurately, I love its description of a terrible problem.  

Just earlier today,  I was dabbling in the blogs of some unabashed Christian apologists.  Writing comments, I was struggling to put into words how the creationists' response to Dover is even more cynical and nihilistic than the attempt to put ID on equal footing with evolutionary theory.  That response has been essentially that if we can't teach our view, we'll just teach the view that science is worthless anyway, so don't even bother.  The quote summed up the consequences of this response very nicely.  

It was nice to see Lenny show up in the references.

The period needs to be removed for the Matzke link to work.

Date: 2009/01/28 17:48:12, Link
Author: deejay
So. Does the picture represent the output of

1 year
1 month
1 week
1 tough-ass day as moderator....

for "Mr. Teve Tory "?

Or a really, really, tough ass day?


Date: 2009/01/29 09:44:52, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 29 2009,01:32)
Seriously, if anyone knows where the 5 o'clock thing came from, please let us know.

It's a convenient shorthand for the general rationalizations for drinking ("Hey, it's after work!  Party time!!!") and rules for consumption (I'm not going to be one of those stinking daytime drunks!") that substance abusers come up with to justify their behavior as their control over it starts to slip away. Because there's a certain inherent irrationality to the "rule", you're going to have a hard time finding a solid philosophical rooting for it.  Of course I'm sure it works reasonably well for some people.  

A friend of mine told me all this.

I like Cohen brothers movies a lot, and I think they get held to a higher standard than most filmmakers.  They're so massively talented, and it's almost as if they're obnoxiously reminding you of that fact when they repeatedly hammer on their characters' weaknesses and flaws.  Showing Malkovich's character run afoul of the 5PM rule, which itself is a cliche, was a pretty crude way to show his.  But they nailed all the details, such as the use of the shot glass to measure the alcohol.  His character was screaming to himself he was in control, whereas it was screamingly obvious to the viewer that he wasn't.

[/pedantic armchair psychologist and highly amateur film critic]

Date: 2009/01/30 09:45:35, Link
Author: deejay
So what are people eating/drinking for the Super Bowl ™ Big Game?  

I'm headed here to pick up meat for some chicken and andouille jambalaya.  According to Wikipedia, I make it the inauthentic way by cooking the rice separately in chicken stock and adding it to the pot afterwards, rather than by cooking the rice in the pot with all the meat juices and added stock.  It's still good by me, and I'll be pressed for time on Sunday.  

We've got some Dogfish Head 60 minute IPA and Guinness Draught on hand, plus I can whip up some margaritas with fresh squeezed lime juice.  

I'm fine withy my inauthentic jambalaya, but I'm more militant with my margaritas.  It's supposed to be a 3:2:1 ratio of tequila : triple sec : lime juice, or apparently 7:4:3 according to the IBA.  Either way, it's half tequila and no sugar.  Go to a bar and order a margarita, and it will be half sour mix, which is of course sweeter than soda.  That's good for disguising some cheap booze, but right now I'm using Patron silver and Cointreau.  I also make them with 1800 Reposado and Grand Marnier, but I prefer the former.  I'm looking to finish off that bottle of 1800 and pick up something else if anyone has any suggestions.

Date: 2009/01/30 12:32:23, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Jan. 30 2009,13:00)
Pulled pork BBQ
Chili (chipotles in adobo sauce included)
black bean salsa
Homebrew: Oatmeal Stout and India Pale Amber

Awesome!  Are you making the pulled pork yourself?  I picked up Steven Raichlen's "How to Grill" a few years back as an entry level text, and of course as long as I'm living in this apartment, I'll be stuck on entry level.  He's got a recipe in there for pulled pork, and he talks about regional variations.  I'm not much of a pork fan, but I just love a good pulled pork sandwich.

Date: 2009/01/30 12:36:34, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (J-Dog @ Jan. 30 2009,11:38)
Regrettably, my wife will not allow the selfless, caring Hooters Girls to make house calls, but she will allow us to partake of this on our wings.

I would love a nice warm room temperature Guinness to go with them, but it's just not as good in the bottles.

Party on dudes, and dudettes.

Nice!  I'd make some wings myself, but the jambalaya is probably about all the spice I need.  What's your technique?  I like to bake them first, and then fry them.  If you're not frying, you're not trying.  The nice thing about baking them first is that you don't need to worry about fully cooking them in the fryer; you can just get them to your desired level of crispiness.

Maybe you could convince your wife to don the tight white shirt and orange shorts.

Date: 2009/01/30 13:32:38, Link
Author: deejay
Thanks for the reply, Tony M, and all the wisdom imparted.  I hear you on the whole straight vs. mixed in a margarita issue on quality tequila.  I'm going to have to try the mix you used with the agave nectar.  I'm not too surprised that Grand Marnier was outdone in the orange category; I think it's the weak link in the 1800 margarita I make.  I just might pick up that El Jimador if I don't splurge on something fancier when the 1800 is gone.  Your experiments were indeed heroic.

I'm headed off to NH for the weekend, and then back Sunday at 4 Eastern, with just enough time to cook before kickoff.  I really look forward to reading more replies when i get back.

Date: 2009/02/01 15:21:07, Link
Author: deejay
Hi Tony M-

Happy Birthday!!!! It looks like if you try to match your age in shots, you won't make it to the next one.  Happy tipping of the wrists, and enjoy the game or whatever you're doing!!!

Time to start chopping the peppers!

Date: 2009/02/01 15:22:11, Link
Author: deejay
Quote (J-Dog @ Jan. 30 2009,15:04)
Quote (deejay @ Jan. 30 2009,12:36)
Maybe you could convince your wife to don the tight white shirt and orange shorts.

I'd rather convince her to doff the tight white shirt and orange shorts.

Ba Dum BUMP!

I like the proper emphasis on the bumping ;)

Date: 2009/02/05 09:08:49, Link
Author: deejay
Folks descended from regimes that even ran concentration camps are bound to show, even in discussion, that they don't respect the human race that are free.

tmac, is English your first language?  If so, I have no idea what you are trying to say here.  Surely you are familiar with how the US set up internment camps for not only Japanese nationals, but also for US citizens of Japanese descent.   I tried following some of the links you posted, but the web design of those pages shows a lot of the typical problems of sites of that stripe.

But please do answer Louis and Richard's questions first.