AE BB DB Explorer


Action:
Author:
Search Terms (separate with commas, no spaces):


form_srcid: dogdidit

form_srcid: dogdidit

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is 54.205.175.144

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.

form_author:

form_srcid: dogdidit

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 t1.author = t2.member_id) WHERE MEMBER_NAME like 'dogdidit%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC

DB_err:

DB_result: Resource id #4

Date: 2008/03/13 11:21:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 12 2008,16:12)
I also pointed out that one could derive an estimate of the minimum number of alleles in the human population based upon the information in two comments, this one and this one. I get 27,600 on the back on my envelope for that figure.

Unlurking here to check my arithmetic:

~23,000 loci in the non-redundant proteome (per HAI abstract)
~20% of those are polymorphic (per Colby's primer)
~6 alleles per polymorphic locus (per...reference?)

yields 27,600 alleles (Dr. Elsberry's number).

And of course it's obvious that this cannot be used in a unitary fashion in the sim(s) under discussion. Seems more sensible to define a proteome with 27,600 loci (if we're doing humans here), 4,600 of which are polymorphic loci with an average of 6 alleles. Nowhere is there a meaningful place to enter "how many alleles in the proteome?".

The next question is, how to model mutation? Is it contrained to the polymorphic loci and only amongst the defined alleles? Seems to me that rules out a lot of novelty.

Apologies to all if my arithmetic is flawed or my terminology and ideas are unschooled (NOT a Bio PhD).

Great thread btw; keep it up! Already on my second bag of popcorn...

*re-engages lurking device*

Date: 2008/03/13 11:36:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
I should have said "define a proteome with 23,000 loci" not 27,600. (Dang; post #1 and already he goons it...)

Date: 2008/03/14 10:19:34, Link
Author: dogdidit
This assumption is at the core of bFast's sim:
   
Quote (bFast @ Mar. 13 2008,17:00)

[...] This point illustrates that many alleles are beneficial in one situation are detrimental in another.  Such alleles, like my quirky smile, are likely to neither dominate nor deteriorate in the population. They are just adrift.  Yet in any darwinian struggle, they are balanced.  They are placed on a continuum from very detrimental to very beneficial.  Most alleles by far, including my dental one, in most darwinian conflict sit in the middle as inconsequential.  Some alleles bounce between beneficial and detrimental.  

Thus no allele positively contributes to fitness in all survival situations ("darwinian conflicts"??) except for the "1" allele at the first locus of the genotype of the one lucky organism in the colony. The rest either oscillate back and forth in fitness value or play no role at all.

This might make sense if he were trying to simulate the varying pressures of the environment, and how changing conditions modulate the survival value of phenotypic differences. But then ALL the members of the colony should be simultaneously encoutering the same environmental pressures (I'm thinking of the Grant's study of the Galapagos finches, my familiarity with which coming entirely from Joseph Weiner's book). Instead the environment in his sim is entirely chaotic - sometimes hornets, sometimes bears.

Date: 2008/03/24 09:31:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 24 2008,07:43)
       
Quote (bFast @ Mar. 14 2008,14:39)
Zachriel, we have a problem.

Well, it's been ten days. And still no answers to my questions.

Nor are any answers expected. bFast was working backwards from his conclusions, which were the same as his assumptions.

But thanks anyway, Zachriel, for completing Allele Blender. I have an idle interest in evolutionary computation, but it never occured to me that Excel could be used so ably as a tool for prototyping and visualization. Nice work! Now if I only knew squat-all about VBA...

To the other forum members:
I feel I should apologize for not using my name as my username when I came aboard. This is the first internet forum I have participated in, and anonymity seemed prudent when I registered. "dogdidit" is an obvious play on "goddidit", but my wife and I also raise shelties so "dog did it" is a frequent explanation for an endless sequence of household misadventures. I'm even contemplating a canine LOLcat for an avatar. Uh, LOL.

I had intended to stay as a mere guest here (this is a fun place to kibbitz) but when I saw bFast use the term "signal to noise", my thirty plus years of experience in radar and communications engineering told me to sit up and pay closer attention. Hey, that's MY stuff! I've grown weary from engineers' frequent resort to (bad) reasoning by analogy - the brain as a computer, DNA as software - and I was suspicious that this was another example of a misleading metaphor. Or is this a term commonly encoutered in genetics or molecular biology?

Well, I won't overstay my welcome. Cheers!

Tom Moloney-Harmon
BS Physics, Harvey Mudd College
MSEE, Johns Hopkins University
Science nerd

<And now, ladies and gentlemen, back to your internet forum discussions, which are already in progress...>

Date: 2008/03/25 08:33:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 24 2008,09:51)
Physics questions?

Why do the up and down quarks have the electric charge values that they have?

Henry

Conservation of charge.
The proton and neutron have charge +1 and 0, respectively, and since they were each posited to contain three quarks, the quarks had to have fractional charges (+2/3 for up, -1/3 for down) to make the arithmetic work out. A proton is two ups and a down, a neutron is two downs and an up.
I don't know if these fractional charge values have ever been independently verified; quarks interact with each other via the stong nuclear force, and that has peculiar properties that prevent quarks from being seen in isolation. But the quark model (or "quantum chromodynamics" as it is called nowadays noIamnotkidding) seems to work as a scientific theory, and QCD may in fact predict fractional charge from more fundamental laws. At this point you'd be better off with answers from a real physicist, and not Some Engineer with a stack o Scientific Americans...
To add to your fun, there are four other quarks (strange, charm, top, and bottom); help yourself but all the good puns have been taken.

Date: 2008/03/25 09:48:39, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (BWE @ Mar. 25 2008,09:28)
Reminds me of the Eddie Murphy stand-up routine where his family is named after breakfast cereals.

Yeah, the goofy names and the fractional charges and what-all kept quark theory from being readily accepted into the Standard Model of particle physics...until they started making predictions with it, which were borne out by experiment. Gee, what a concept.

Date: 2008/03/25 12:21:27, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 25 2008,12:12)

Do you guys have a Post-of-the-week award?

Date: 2008/03/26 07:55:47, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 25 2008,15:20)
       
Quote
and QCD may in fact predict fractional charge from more fundamental laws.


That's what I was wondering - whether the -1/3 and +2/3 were implied by current theory, or determined empirically.

And if it's implied, is the reasoning expressable in language that I would understand or would it shoot over my head?

Henry

This is probably one of those instances where if you had to ask the question, you won't understand the answer. The Standard Model employs "gauge theory" and invokes "special unitary group" mathematics and if you know what either of those are, you're way smarter'n me. We never studied that stuff in undergrad physics.

I think (take the above comment as an indication of how accurate the rest of this comment might be) it is true that the fractional charge nature of quarks is still an unsolved problem, and probably one with a Nobel Prize dangling from it. The question must be maddening to the particle physicists: the electron has unitary charge (-1) and it contains no quarks or any other constituent component, so why the fractional charge nature of the quark? We can be confident that there are plenty of (competing) hypotheses that answer the question, but so far none of these have graduated to theory AFAIK.

BTW the fractional charges were indeed confirmed empirically, as of course were the existence and number (and masses) of the quarks themselves. Teh Big Physics Boyz Haz Skillz.

Date: 2008/03/26 08:19:09, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 25 2008,17:48)
From before:

must.
swallow.
coffee.
before.
reading.
forum.

Wow.
Okay, so the FNG sits back in slack-jawed admiration.
And dammit that was STARBUCKS dammit, not that swill from the company cafeteria. Cost more than this shirt.

Back to work...

Date: 2008/03/27 12:40:45, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Jkrebs @ Mar. 27 2008,07:11)
Over the last week or so I did something I haven't done in a long time - I got involved in a long discussion with ID advocates over at UD here.  Some of you have paid some attention to this.

A heroic demonstration of patience and perserverance (and monomania, had you choosen to keep it up). The UD chimps/humans thread is up to 573 posts and weighs in at 1.2 Mb, tho much of that is due to kairosfocus' terse and cogent posting style.

Hey Jkrebs, did you ever decode moderator Patrick's little note at 418?
Quote
418

Patrick

03/24/2008

1:09 am
stiabehbtetca
ludclaecotfde
rfiuqgerthonsi
iyrjotskihal
wohmwohnstaoh
tspelpqmaxred
esdivtorpuydav
erlwai,xkcayj
nizagayrtes
aelp

These are single-byte coded graphic characters. There are 256 possibilities per character. Each takes 8 bits to encode. There are 120 characters. So 960 bits.

I had to laugh at Patrick's "use" of the EF on this thing.
1. His specification immediately reveals that it isn't a random bitstream; only 27 of the 256 possible characters are expressed, and 25 of them more than once. It's not even worth the trouble to compute likelihood of noise. One hypothesis dead.
2. Assuming it's codetext, the tools to send into the game are things like letter frequency analysis and index of coincidence. EF rides the bench, forlornly watching the game.
3. Letter frequency analysis reveals the the four most frequent letters in the codetext are a, e, t, and i. The four most common letters in English written communication are.....anybody?.....anybody?
4. But nevermind all that; the code breaks upon inspection with good ol Mark I, mod 0 eyeball. Game over. The EF heads back to the locker room, it's uniform spotless. I'm a puzzle geek so I won't spoil the piddlin fun of deciphering this.

If this was the example to show the power of the EF, I missed it. Or wait, was it this?
 
Quote
496

Atom

03/25/2008

4:34 pm
[..]
To borrow your weather analogy, let’s say that all those interacting forces (laws of nature plus chance) suddenly spelled out a verse from Shakespeare in the clouds.

Now we are scientists so we have to investigate. I am an ID scientist, so I say “What are the odds that the words could be formed by chance? We’ll have to approximate, but if we restrict ourselves to an area so many meters across and assume (to be generous) that clouds naturally form letters (thus side-stepping the issue of how many states water molecules can take and still be letters), we can then estimate the chances of an N-letter message forming by chance from Shakespeare.”

(I do the calculations quickly on my super-computer)

“Ok, this is specified and sufficiently complex…I’m inferring design on this one.”

This defies comment.

Question for the forum here -- and I realize this is akin to tossing a handful of french fries into a flock of seagulls* -- but what the heck good is the EF? Can it's utility be illuminated by something better than these lame examples? And why doesn't it have an output somewhere labelled "don't know". (I'd put it on the one labelled "design" but that's just my gut feeling.)

Feel free to steer my to the archives. I'd search but you folks post a lot, and I tend to get distracted by all the cartoons and LOLcats I run across...

* an experiment I once observed, and do not recommend be repeated

Date: 2008/03/27 15:17:15, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (sparc @ Mar. 27 2008,15:06)
     
Quote
what the heck good is the EF?
Tough question indeed. At least there is evidence that it is specified by ignorance and fueled with an overdose of (8R,9S,10R,13S,14S,17S)-17-hydroxy-10,13-dimethyl-12,6,7,8,9,11,12,14,15,16,17-dodecahy-
drocyclopenta[a]phenanthren-3-one
which would make it some kind of moelcular machine, presumably at the nm level because it has not been observed directly as yet. However, it does not seem to be too complex (see carlsonjok's comment). Thus, it's still under debate if it was intelligenly designed.

Thanks, sparc! Your two posts cover the subject from soup to nuts!  :p

Off to curl up with Uncle Wes' paper now...

Date: 2008/04/01 21:43:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
More from DT's peroration on the value of scientific knowledge for its own sake.
Quote
We have discovered incredibly complex nanomolecular machinery and abstractly coded specifications for their construction in all living cells.

What are nanomolecules? Like regular molecules only really really tiny?
What 'hard sci-fi' should I be reading to learn this scientifical stuff?

Date: 2008/04/01 22:02:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Hermagoras @ April 01 2008,21:30)
O’Leary has a thin skin:          
Quote

Frank Beckwith writes,
“Who would have ever thought that it would take a Fork to show us that Denyse is done?”
Beckwith thinks this is a joke, I suppose, to judge from the smiley.
Readers here may not realize that I spent considerable volunteer time blogging on Beckwith’s behalf, when he was struggling for tenure himself at Baylor.
At THAT time, he thanked me.
But as soon as he HAD tenure, his attitude changed. Suddenly, he did not want to know his old friends any more.
No, Frank, I am not done.
And, if you continue in this path, you will doubtless hear from me again.
But I would advise you to stop, and consider justice.

Emphasis, o delicious emphasis, added.

It gets thinner:
Quote

33
DLH

fbeckwith at 29 and O’Leary at 32
I wonder what is the meaning of “done”?
From yourdictionary.com
adjective
1. completed; ended
2. sufficiently cooked
3. socially acceptable because acceptable to arbiters of good taste: usually in a negative construction it just isn’t done

I vote for 3. Appreciated by arbiters of good taste.
But then, on reflection, 2 would fit with “Fork” - tasty? delicious? as in well written?

34
O'Leary

DLH, please read what I WROTE at 32 above.

What do YOU think is the point of what I am trying to say?

Date: 2008/04/01 22:05:44, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ April 01 2008,22:00)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ April 01 2008,21:43)
More from DT's peroration on the value of scientific knowledge for its own sake.
       
Quote
We have discovered incredibly complex nanomolecular machinery and abstractly coded specifications for their construction in all living cells.

With other people I wouldn't mind as much, but DT's use of 'we' there is especially offensive. Dave (and his friends) haven't discovered shit, except for thousands of new ways to humiliate yourself on the internet.

Not only haven't they discovered shit, they heap scorn and abuse on others who actually have. WHAT an inferiority complex.

Date: 2008/04/02 07:22:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ April 02 2008,00:56)
     
Quote (Bob O'H @ April 01 2008,22:23)
I'm resisting the urge to go to Denyse's thread and ask what DLH's real name is.

This has been driving me batty.  Well, OK, driving me mildly annoyed.  Still, I wonder if it's just an initialism from his actual name or some ID inspired acronym. I imagine that if it is an acronym, and we knew what it stood for, it wouldn't make any sense and we'd all then be stuck trying to figure out what the hell it was supposed to mean.  I myself like to think it stands for Dembski's Logic-Impaired Horror.

I assumed he was a moderator at UD, just from the way his posts appear -- correct assumption? But no evidence of a 'DLH' in their list of contributors.

Speaking of which, OMG is that really a photograph of David Springer?! * horse laugh * Which one of you hacked their site and put that up? With all the money Dave claims to have made designing nanomolecular computers, you'd think he could afford to hire a photographer and get a decent publicity shot. Or maybe he did, and that was the best they could come up with.

Date: 2008/04/04 07:15:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (uriel @ April 04 2008,02:45)
Apparently, at least in this country, conservatives have decided that jingoistic pablum is most meaningful currency they have to offer. And ID fits that bill to a tee.

I'm drawn to the same conclusion. Conservatives have turned to the banana republic model: the majority of property in the hands of a small number of controlling interests (rolled from one generation to the next unmolested by taxes) + old-tyme religion for everyone else. Call it Banana Republicanism.

I know this is headed for the bathroom wall but my interest in (anti-)anti-evolutionism came from a chance encounter with Coulter's Godless and her rant against evolution. I had thought myself a conservative; I hadn't realized that science was now to be broken up and fed to the fire for votes. Wikipedia led me from Godless to Jim Downard's most excellent rogeringcritique of her book at Talk Reason. From there to the KvD transcripts, and from there to here, and many stops and diversions along the way.

AND And and I'm now venting too. But I took a pass through UD this morning, and I need to vent. Otherwise meh branes will explodiate.

Date: 2008/04/04 09:31:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Bob O'H @ April 04 2008,07:44)
Hands up who wants to try it out on Kairosfocus.

Pass. He is decidedly do-looped on due diligence:

Same source (Thanks for this BTW. Yet another hour of my life frittered away...)

Date: 2008/04/05 16:28:43, Link
Author: dogdidit
Really?
Quote
I think Dr. Dembski has something like three PhDs.

So that would make him Dr. Dr. Dr. Dembski??

Date: 2008/04/06 21:22:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ April 06 2008,21:08)
Larry Fafarman saith:

           
Quote
Also, natural selection does not necessarily consist of just culling. For example, a bird that is a mutation of a lizard can enter a new ecological niche, and other lizards are unaffected at least for the moment. That is natural selection, too.

Natural selection of the "super-" variety, I suppose.

As for Thom English, I wouldn't be surprised if he nailed DS with another comebacker on parsimony that was just as between-the-eyes deadly as his previous one. But DS apparently uses a different brand of Razor.

Date: 2008/04/08 11:24:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ April 07 2008,09:55)
 
Quote (slpage @ April 07 2008,09:30)
       
Quote (dogdidit @ April 05 2008,16:28)
Really?
   
Quote
I think Dr. Dembski has something like three PhDs.

So that would make him Dr. Dr. Dr. Dembski??

Gee, that would not be an attempt to agument via authority or credentialism, now would it?

Like how DaveScot spells out "Mister" in Mister MacNeill. That's Master of Science Education MacNeill to you! Or, hey Teach, if you prefer.

I have never seen Allen MacNeill make an appeal to his personal authority in lieu of argument.

The 65-year-old okusan who taught us conversational Japanese on Sundays was referred to, politely, as "sensei", even though the only credentials she had were patience, humor, and the willingness to teach. (Pretty good credentials.) I think "Professor MacNeill" ought to be sufficient even for a boor like David Springer. Although with all the insults and stupidity that he has to put up with over there, perhaps "Saint" will soon be in order.

Date: 2008/04/09 08:49:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Nomad @ April 09 2008,03:35)
On the other hand when I used to work with a YEC I did take issue with his denial of relativity.  His exact words were "an hour is an hour, no matter how fast you're going".  Unfortunately I didn't know then what I know now.  I didn't know that GPS satellites have to take time dilation into account to keep their clocks accurate compared to ground based systems.  I also didn't know that the effect had been measured by sending atomic clocks up into airliners.

I really would have liked to see his response when I told him that this effect that he so smugly proclaimed didn't exist had not only been detected, but meant that GPS satellites had to make adjustments in their time keeping in order to work properly.

I also once asked him what happened to the dinosaurs (like I said, he was a full on YEC).  His response, and I want to stress that he said this with a straight face, was that they had all been killed by a warrior king.

He was a nice enough guy, it's not like he appeared to be barking mad if he wasn't discussing science or religion, but that warrior king thing let me know that I was wasting my time and that I'd better let it go in the interests of continuing workplace harmony.

Actually that is a pretty good definition of relativity! :)

An hour is an hour in one's own frame of reference. You might have gotten more purchase with your YEC friend had you confirmed his intuition by telling him that insistence on exactly that physical invariance led Einstein to his conclusions about reality: things had to be the way Special Relativity described them in order for that hour to remain an hour.

Flattery gets your further (unless your goal is just to count coup) and to be honest, his intuition was valid. Following that intuition is what led to Einstein's remarkable insights.

Besides, you needed to keep him talking. The warrior king thing? Priceless. Next time take notes; could be a novel or screenplay in there.

Date: 2008/04/09 09:29:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
I am convinced DS is writing hisself a sci-fi novel. Or channeling Arthur C. Clarke. link
 
Quote
A perfectly plausible explanation for this is that the earth, as soon as was able to support organic life in any form, was purposely seeded with it (Francis Crick and Leslie Orgel’s directed panspermia). The purpose of that was to terraform the planet so that it could eventually support oxygen breathing land animals. The first seeding culminated in the Ediacaran biota. A second seeding of modern forms of life took place in the Cambrian. If we suppose that rational man and an industrial civilization capable of repeating the cycle of directed panspermia was the ultimate goal more terraforming was required at least in as much as laying down large stores of easily accessable fossil fuels to power an industrial civilization. In order to repeat the cycle and ensure that life continues beyond the point where the earth is able to support it (the sun will eventually fry the earth into a cinder in another few billion years) there must be some means of identifying young planets able to support life (astronomy), the ability to transport life to them (space exploration), and the ability to customize forms of life suitable for the new environment (genetic engineering).

Of course, if the space aliens travelled all the way to earth just to stick anal probes up our butts seed the planet with new life and program it to go out an find a new world to live on, why didn't they just perform the latter task themselves? Oh wait, that'll be in the second volume. Tard Wars will be a multi-volume set.

Date: 2008/04/09 14:19:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Sorry, RB - Arden beat you to it. link
(I may have to spool up some Laurie Anderson tonight. Haven't listened to Mister Heartbreak in years...)

Date: 2008/04/09 15:42:34, Link
Author: dogdidit
Oh goody, I love French.
 
Quote
Salut Gil,

Je ne savais pas que David B. paralait français. Est-ce qu’il a des livres en français?

J’aime bien les discussions sur ce site ainsi que les sujets que tu commence.

Lâche-pas!

Translation: "I salute you with my underwater breathing apparatus. I didn't know David B. was a French paralegal - savage*!! Do they still eat liver with quills in France? I'm getting ansty for the discussions on this site to commence. I've lost my pass(word)!"

*Apache French. Or Comanche, I forget.

High School wasn't a waste of time after all.

Date: 2008/04/09 20:14:14, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (ERV @ April 09 2008,18:25)
EXPELLED: EXPELLED for plagiarism

EXPELLED == EPIC FREAKING FAIL

Oh, and I know, I know, I'm justa n00b, but once again I have to ask the moderators: POTW? POTM? POTY??????

ERV you need to live up to your handle and make copies of yer terrific bad self.

Date: 2008/04/09 20:20:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (J-Dog @ April 09 2008,17:40)
WWDD?

What Will DaveScot Do?  His Sciencey Pal, and Teacher, Sci-Am has turned around and stabbed him in the back and panned Expelled.

What Will Davie Do?

http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?id=sciam-reviews-expelled

Reach for an issue from that other stack of magazines next to his bed??

Let us now draw a curtain across this sordid scenario...

Date: 2008/04/10 08:14:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Doc Bill @ April 09 2008,23:21)
"Bill" is your very own Doc Bill, joke writer for dheddle.

(Who doesn't pay very much, I might add.)

Erm- doesn't pay his Bills?

*ba-dum-BUMP*

Thank you, thank you, I'm here all week folks. Don't forget to tip your waitress.

Date: 2008/04/10 08:47:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,April 10 2008,08:24)
You can count on this tard.
     
Quote
For the record, I also don’t take seriously those people who accuse others of immorality of one sort or another if that person doesn’t believe there is any transcendent, source of absolute morality.


Translation: God keeps me from being a lyin cheatin monster. (Opps, oh wait, it doesn't...)

I utterly loathe this fractally-wrong stupidity. For starters, the letter was from two XVIVO partners and their lawyer. All atheists? And you concluded that just how, exactly? But more importantly is the stupid belief that you can't have personal morality unless you believe that Thor Zeus Shiva Ra Ur Baal YWHW Jay-zuz Allah Spaghetti Monster Ceiling Cat will kick your ass for all eternity in his personal torture chamber if you don't follow the rules as they were clearly written down in the Quran BIBLE Talmud Book of Mormon Mode D'emploi Yellow Pages. ARRGGGHHH!!! At the end of the day, you still have to choose to act ethically or not, REGARDLESS OF WHAT COSMOLOGY YOU SUBSCRIBE TO. It's still a personal choice. It always will be.

OTOH *becoming calmer; smiling now* I utterly enjoy the prospect of sitting back and watching the Epicfailed: The Movie faeco-ventilatory event play itself out. Life is good.

Date: 2008/04/10 09:03:09, Link
Author: dogdidit
The DESIGNER to the rescue:
Quote
52

DeepDesign

04/10/2008

8:11 am
What does this finding do to ID?

http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/.....101021.htm

53

DeepDesign

04/10/2008

8:24 am
Perhaps the designer, introduced new information so that the lungless frog could breath out of it’s skin.

And just in the nick of time, too! The lungless frog was about to ass-fix-he-ate.
Another crisis averted by Divine Design Intervention.

Date: 2008/04/10 15:15:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ April 10 2008,15:01)
FtK walks the christian path:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/legal....-229599

       
Quote
47

FtK

04/10/2008

2:50 pm
Jack *is* a fascist…

*snicker*

[Don’t ban me, Dave. I couldn’t resist.]

Dave can't ban her, or Gods iPod, or anybody; he is too busy being hypnotized by Allen MacNeill's superior Jedi skillz. What I am especially enjoying are the sucker punches Allen keeps sneaking in under DS's limp defenses, viz:
Quote
Notice that this would not include an empirically vacuous “if it’s not the naturalistic mechanism, it has to be magic” argument.

BIFF! POW!

Date: 2008/04/10 16:48:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
You just can't make this stuff up:
Quote
[DT to Jack Krebs] Were you this offended when Judge Jones was caught plagiarizing some 90% of his science “opinion” straight from an ACLU brief?

Spin, thy name is DaveTard.
DTs lovely and talented sidekick poachy shows continued grasp of comic timing:
Quote
Well, if this goes to court, maybe this time we’ll get a solidly conservative judge appointed by President Bush, rather than some ACLU loving liberal.

If poachy is a sockpuppet, I doff mine cap in awestruck admiration.

Date: 2008/04/10 16:50:08, Link
Author: dogdidit
[Arden beat me to it - damn! ] :angry:

Date: 2008/04/10 21:32:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Maya @ April 10 2008,17:39)

I'll take the short bus home.

Man that is soooo sig block material.  :D

Meh, later. Don't know each other, really. First date kinda thing. Save it for later maybe.

Date: 2008/04/10 21:52:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
The poachy hits just keep on coming.
Quote
Quote
[self-serving comment from Uncomely Denyse:]
Knockoff books demosntrate that one has discovered a winning formula.

I guess it depends on your definition of winning. Clearly, Denyse, you aren’t motivated by money, since you seem cool if people don’t buy your book.

I tried to add something to this but it's just so...so...so poachy. One cannot add, one can only subtract. One simply steps back and gazes in wonder. The (Sockpuppet)Master at work. Often imitated, never duplicated. I suddenly feel the need to cry.

....

I'm better now. Poachy, please, we need more. Your fans await you!

Date: 2008/04/10 22:03:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dochocson @ April 10 2008,21:53)
I think we're underestimating ID brain trust. After several arduous hours of perusing posts on the issue, it struck me.

Ben Stein wasn't chosen just for his scintillating screen presence, he's a comedian.

This will all perk along for a while, then Casey Luskin will hold a press conference annoucing thatExpelled is just a parody, and therefore not subject to copyright law!

Then he'll pull off his mask, revealing that he is actually Wes Elsberry. Furthermore, it will be revealed that Dembski is actually PZ Myers, DaveScot is Richard Dawkins, and FtK is ERV.

I thought Angelina Jolie was ERV???
Deeply disappointed...o wait, am I on the wrong thread again??

Date: 2008/04/11 06:35:37, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Maya @ April 11 2008,06:23)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ April 10 2008,21:32)
       
Quote (Maya @ April 10 2008,17:39)

I'll take the short bus home.

Man that is soooo sig block material.  :D

Meh, later. Don't know each other, really. First date kinda thing. Save it for later maybe.

That's cool.  I don't want to be your rebound sig.  I can see you're still not over your last one.

Well played.
My first reply didn't quite hit the tone I wanted. Your "short bus" comment almost got the better part of a mouthful of good wine to come out my nose. VERY hilarious.
Just so we're cool, amigo.

Date: 2008/04/11 07:00:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (ck1 @ April 10 2008,19:08)
I noticed UD has a thread on ERVs.  I am a virologist and I have been working on ERVs for 30+ years, so I sent in 3 comments to answer questions that came up.  Only one of those comments has appeared.

All of my comments were focused on science -- no commentary, no insults.  Links to papers.

Was I wasting my time?

Are scientists not welcome at UD?

I've read your posts there - keep it up! Yours come across as intelligent and informed, and you avoid their hot buttons. Similar to the approach taken by Professor MacNeill, whose posts I (a total biology numbskull) find entertainingly informative. How long he can keep it up before their demands for an exogenous designer become overwhelmingly shrill is anybody's guess. In the meantime, one can always hope that somebody is paying attention...assuming that's his (and your) objective.

Association with AtBC might not be healthy for your long-term status there, naturally.

Date: 2008/04/11 07:07:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
bfast got his wish.

@didymos
I like the avatar: L Ron Hoover, ridding a tomato of its engrams with the e-meter. ALL SCIENTOLOGY SO FAR!

Date: 2008/04/11 08:26:23, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dogdidit @ April 11 2008,07:00)

Association with AtBC might not be healthy for your long-term status there, naturally.

Not that it's lethal - Bob O'H seems to be able to cross the divide. But make no mistake, the ubersturmBANfuhrer is on the constant prowl for his next victim. Their totem god needs frequent sacrifices.

Date: 2008/04/11 09:09:09, Link
Author: dogdidit
The sharks are circling. Charlie to poachy:
Quote
Be honest and take your banning like a man.

Old thesis: poachy is a sockpuppet.
New thesis: Charlie is. To survive, the stronger sockpuppets fling the weaker ones into the maw of the Banninator.

Date: 2008/04/11 10:06:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (BCtheEra @ April 11 2008,09:21)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ April 11 2008,09:09)
The sharks are circling. Charlie to poachy:
       
Quote
Be honest and take your banning like a man.

Old thesis: poachy is a sockpuppet.
New thesis: Charlie is. To survive, the stronger sockpuppets fling the weaker ones into the maw of the Banninator.

See?!  Science is always changing!  How can it be trusted to provide a foundation for reality?!

More to the point, my thesis is testable. From our poachy:
Quote
FYI. You might want to google “Leopold Stotch”, then tell me who is the troll.

Hypothesis confirmed!!  :D We can use this theory to partial order the UD sockpuppets and form further testable predicitions.

Date: 2008/04/11 10:12:50, Link
Author: dogdidit
I run time-consuming matlab batch jobs on computer A, which frees up me and computer B to trawl for gems. Here's a sparkly:
Quote
“Genes that do code for proteins may recruit some or all of this junk DNA to regulate when, where and how much they are expressed.”

Genes are recruiting? I understand that sometimes these things are just a form of speaking, but in this context, I can’t possibly imagine what physical process he could be referring to.

You could, oh I don't know, ask a biochemist??
Quote
Has anyone else noticed that when evolutionists get stuck they automatically start anthropomorphizing their research subjects?

They do that to refresh Creationist quote-mining filters.
Quote
Someone please explain the physical process a gene uses to recruit regulatory elements, and please do so without reference to existing regulatory processes and DNA, since the emergence of this is precisely the phenomena you are supposing to explain.

(my bolding)
*cue the moving goalposts*
link

Date: 2008/04/11 11:41:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ April 11 2008,11:02)
           
Quote (Maya @ April 11 2008,10:19)
           
Quote
59
Frost122585
04/11/2008
12:27 am
Someone needs to explain to me how they get video of Meyers, Dawkins and all the Darwinian materialists saying all this stuff. I mean did Ben just go right up to them and say “hi were doing a movie called Expelled (no intelligence allowed) and its about exposing your side for the psychopaths that you are. Just for the movie’s sake can you please give us your side of the argument as blatantly and as vile as you can possibly say it?

And then they set up the HD cameras?

From what I have seen that they have captured on tape, this movie is gold.

Hmm.  Maybe they lied?

It is called video-mining.  :D

If you sit down in front of the cameras with a Michael Moore or a Mike Wallace, you ought to have a reasonable expectation of what can happen next. Of course, people still get caught unawares; they never realize how completely misleading the process can be until they find themselves or their issues "framed" through the magic of video editing into a narrative they can barely recognize. But at least the interviewees were given forewarning.

In the case of Crossroads Expelled there was no forewarning whatsoever. The filmmakers video-mined, yes. But first, they lied.

Frosty has no friggin idea. Even if he did, where's the harm in a little Lyin Fer Jesus?

Date: 2008/04/13 19:38:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ April 13 2008,17:37)
     
Quote (Louis @ April 13 2008,18:15)
Poe's law?

Poe's law:
         
Quote
Similar to Murphy's Law, Poe's Law concerns internet debates, particularly regarding religion or politics.

"Without a winking smiley or other blatant display of humor, it is impossible to create a parody of Fundamentalism that SOMEONE won't mistake for the real thing."

In other words, No matter how bizzare, outrageous, or just plain idiotic a parody of a Fundamentalist may seem, there will always be someone who cannot tell that it is a parody, having seen similar REAL ideas from real religious/political Fundamentalists.

As in, renting This Is Spinal Tap on video several years ago, and watching it along with my wife and brother in law. At the end of the movie we had to convince him that the movie was a spoof and Spinal Tap was a fictional band. He thought they were pretty cool (he was/is a heavy metal headbanger) and responded to our explanations with blinking incredulity.

All three of us enjoyed the movie immensely, so I'm hard pressed to say what life lesson to draw from this episode other than "shut up, watch the movie". The actors who played the Spinal Tap band members, having discovered (I suppose) that the gig was kinda fun (and they were able to play those instruments) apparently went on to record an album or two, and made some public performances. I'm sure my brother in law became aware of that and has concluded that we were either liars or idiots or both.

Date: 2008/04/13 20:24:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,April 13 2008,20:07)
what about "A mighty wind"?  Surely no one could view that and not get the joke.  Spinal Tap is a bit more out of the realm of my daily experience (I've actually played with people that tried that shitty sound from AMW).  Turn it up to eleven, lick my love pump, herpes, etc.  that shit is too good to be true.

Didn't see A Mighty Wind so I can't compare. I think the same company of actors/writers did Best in Show, though, didn't they? Lemme tell you, from my experience in the dog world, nothing in that movie is exaggerated. All totally believable, even the guy with [glances down anxiously] two left feet.

But the "one louder" bit in Spinal Tap is an instant classic. Rob Reiner staring into Christopher Guest's blind, arrogant, obstinant stupidity, trying to explain the meaninglessness of a meaningless scale of numbers, to utterly no effect whatsoever...

...which neatly brings us back on-topic, doesn't it?

Date: 2008/04/14 15:52:56, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Ptaylor @ April 14 2008,15:30)
DT has another <0.3 day.
See the comments. For posterity:
         
Quote
Dick to the Dawk on Bill Maher
DaveScot

I watched Dawkins on the Bill Maher show last night. Among other interesting things he said was when it comes to belief in gods if you were to rate his belief on a scale of 1 to 10, with 1 being most belief and 10 being least he puts himself at a 6. Then he compares belief in gods with belief in fairies and pink unicorns. So I guess he’s conflicted about those too. Bill Maher then ridiculed religion in predictable trite ways which caused Dawkins to reconsider the belief rating and up it to “6 point 9?. Hilarious. Richard Dawkins is really a centrist on religious beliefs. Who’da thunk?

Too bad Bill Maher didn’t ask Richard Dawkins to rate his belief in the existence of material intelligent agents who can alter the course of evolution by tinkering with the DNA of living organisms. Personally I put that “belief” at a 1 (no doubt) unless someone convinces me that Craig Venter doesn’t really exist.

Watch that '1 to 10' figure over the next few hours.

Didn't take long. DLH tidies up:
Quote
Dawkins does say 6 out of 7 ((1 being highest, 7 lowest)
He then drops to 6.9 out of 7.

DaveScott - I second Leo Hale’s recommendation to correct the primary post from 6 out of 10
to 6 out of 7.
DLH fails to mention that the rest of the primary post falls apart after this change is made. Hmm - this looks like a job for the Obliviator. Has DS ever had to send his own posts to www.offtopicpost.com before?
Quote
I love being right.

How's that working out for you now? :p

Date: 2008/04/14 16:13:03, Link
Author: dogdidit
That last is directed to Dave, meant to say.
And the Ikonboard smiley feature is, uh, mildly annoying. :angry:

Date: 2008/04/15 19:24:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ April 15 2008,17:06)
     
Quote
kairosfocus:

The only seriously mentioned evo mat alternative
Is a quasi-infinite array of sub cosmi,
To soak up the config space,
And that plainly moves out of science into
Ad hoc speculative philosophical metaphysics.

I just felt like posting that lovely bit of doggerel. But I have no idea what it means.

Keep reading; this should clear it up:
 
Quote
The result: a quasi-infinite array of life-facilitating sub cosmi, each within the contrext of a quasi infinite array of non-life facilitating sub cosmi.

Any questions? (Strictly speaking, "ZOMGWTF???" is not a question.)

I hope I haven't quoted him out of contrext.

Speaking of doggerel: on the same UD thread he introduces us to "ad hocery" (though I think there is good argument to be made that "ad hockery" is more orthographically correct). Looks tailor-made for a double-dactyl, just in case the limerick composers around here need a new challenge.  :)

Date: 2008/04/15 20:48:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (olegt @ April 15 2008,19:36)
dogdidit,

What the heck is a cosmus?

I think it's a word used by doofi.

Date: 2008/04/15 21:17:55, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (BWE @ April 15 2008,19:49)
Oh dammit. Why did I open this thread? Why why why?

They are the tardiest gaggle of Tards ever to grace the internet. Honest fundies like Ken Ham got nothing on them.

Nothing.

I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.
I will not read UD tomorrow.

You will read UD tomorrow.

Date: 2008/04/16 07:43:27, Link
Author: dogdidit
I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time k.e. puts on his clownDaveTard suit.

Date: 2008/04/18 06:44:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ April 17 2008,13:48)
Interweb folks, what would be the effect of us all putting expelled exposed links in our sigs?

I'm not an interwebber but Apollos over at UD has an interesting factoid:  
Quote
Blog comments (and typically forum comments as well) instruct Google and other responsible crawlers to ignore comment hyperlinks. (rel=”nofollow”)

It makes a good spam deterrent, and prevents Google bombing from spurious blog and forum commenting.

You need a cluster of “legitimate” sites, committed to the same purpose, for a Google bomb to work properly, AFAIK.

Plausible, and therefore a very rare gem indeed from the tardpits. Of course, the explanation could simply be that apollos is a sock puppet. Oh wait, so is everybody else on UD.

Date: 2008/04/18 08:16:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Venus Mousetrap @ April 18 2008,08:10)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ April 17 2008,21:41)
Woowee!

"Red Carpet" Premier Gala Thingy:


The church was booked so we went with 'plan B'.

My God, even their photography sucks, and I am NOT a photographer. However I know that the three top rules of photography are:

1) Don't point camera at sun.
2) Don't point camera at things that are pointing at sun.
3) Don't photograph people next to trashcans.

Of course, it may be one of the writing staff, in which case I apologise to the Dalek homeworld for insulting one of their offspring.

4) When getting the gang together for a group photo, agree beforehand on a dress code.

Date: 2008/04/18 08:40:18, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ April 18 2008,07:23)
Your comments as of yet have all the link magic intact.

Good.
Speaking of which: ExpelledExposed is still holding at #8 on a Google search for "expelled". Pharyngula's thread is at #5. Best of all, News Results for expelled is #1, just below the movie showtimes widget. The reviews are *snigger* less than glowing.

Date: 2008/04/18 10:14:12, Link
Author: dogdidit
Dr AT?

Date: 2008/04/21 15:39:08, Link
Author: dogdidit
Great. KF now has frosty delivering the mail for him. Deeply buried is this nugget:
Quote
So, let us call on the denizens of the evo mat cave of manipulative shadow shows: “step into the sunshine, and step out of the shade . . .”

"Quick, young Robin - to the Evo Mat Cave!!"
DO DO do do do do do do MAT MANNNNNN!!!

Date: 2008/04/21 21:40:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
BEJEESUS I wonder if KF computes the FCSI of ink molecules randomly forming themselves on a page of newsprint every time he sits down to read the paper!

Also, I note that "chance and necessity" has taken on all the qualities of a meditation mantra. KF employs a number of mantras or prayer beads ("red herrings", "ad hoc", "evo mat", etc. -- he seems to have written ONE post, which he regurgitates again and again in slightly modified form each time) but others at UD return to the same prayer beads repeatedly as well.

This is the hallmark of the cult member: the use of thought-stopping loaded language as a form of self-hypnosis. Soon it will be time for the kool-aid.

Date: 2008/04/21 21:51:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
Apparently DS isn't the only one channeling Arthur C Clarke:
(DLH)    
Quote
ID seeks to detect empirical evidence of Intelligent Design.
It explicitly does NOT seek to identify or prove the intelligent cause. It is possible to detect design without proving the designer. See the Monolith in Space Odessy 2001.

Oh yeah- the monolith! Hey folks, what about the monolith?

ALL SCIENCE (FICTION) SO FAR!

Date: 2008/04/23 10:54:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ April 23 2008,10:33)
So… Does Ben Stein have cancer? Or does someone close to him have it? :O This is beginning to look like a “They’re suppressing alternative cures”/”My kid got autism from mercury in drugs and they’re all covering it up” kind of a phenomenon – a hyperbolic fight extrapolated from a personal tragedy.

No, I think this particular hobby horse is being ridden by Walt Ruloff, the Executive Producer (i.e. it was his money, not Ben's) and Chief Conspiracy Theorist of Expelled. The suppressed cancer cure story is to scare the rubes.

Date: 2008/04/23 15:22:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reginald Beasley @ April 23 2008,15:01)
 
The lawsuit is here!

Yoko sues!

Hint: before posting, check upthread to see if Arden Chatfield has beaten you to it.
:angry:  :angry:  :angry:

Date: 2008/04/23 15:52:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reginald Beasley @ April 23 2008,15:34)
         
Quote (dogdidit @ April 23 2008,15:22)
           
Quote (Reginald Beasley @ April 23 2008,15:01)
 
The lawsuit is here!

Yoko sues!

Hint: before posting, check upthread to see if Arden Chatfield has beaten you to it.
:angry:  :angry:  :angry:

He should have been more clear about it!  I did a quick search for "Yoko" and "sue" and got all excited.

I still have the first non-subtle scoop of Yoko suing, I still win the 40 dollars :p

I think it was a bottle of single malt but either way, mazel tov! :)

Tom

Date: 2008/04/24 06:27:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ April 23 2008,21:09)
   
Quote (JLT @ April 23 2008,18:36)
The Expelled producers reply:

       
Quote
Executive Producers of EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed Statement on Lawsuit by Yoko Ono

The fair use doctrine is a well established copyright principle based on the belief that the public is entitled to freely use portions of copyrighted materials for purposes of commentary and criticism.

We are disappointed therefore that Yoko Ono and others have decided to challenge our free speech right to comment on the song Imagine in our documentary film.

Based on the fair use doctrine, news commentators and film documentarians regularly use material in the same way we do in EXPELLED: No Intelligence Allowed .

Premise Media acknowledges that Ms. Yoko Ono did not license the song for use in the Film. Instead, a very small portion of the song was used under the fair use doctrine.

Unbiased viewers of the film will see that the Imagine clip was used as part of a social commentary in the exercise of free speech and freedom of inquiry. Unbiased viewers of the film will also understand that the Imagine clip was used to contrast the messages in the Documentary and that the clip was not used as an endorsement within Expelled.


In short: OH NOES WE'RE BEING EXPELLED!

They should start immediately with producing a new movie.

I have some music suggestions:

Poor, poor, pitiful me, by Warren Zevon.

If it weren't for bad luck, I'd have no luck at all, Hee-Haw gang.

Liar, by Henry Rollins.

Wonderful World (don't know much about [Nazi] history, don't know much [evolutionary] biology) , by Sam Cooke

Warren Zevon has some advice:

Send lawyers, guns, and money
The shit has hit the fan!!

Date: 2008/04/24 11:26:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Bob O'H @ April 24 2008,02:49)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,April 24 2008,01:59)
Bob is this power responsible for the high proportion of these pro-ID students winding up as engineers?  and hausfrau in BFE, Blue Heronville?

The hausfrau is none of our doing.  But yes, we do hate the engineering profession.

Hey, I represent that remark!  :angry:

Oh wait. I hate us too.

Date: 2008/04/24 16:39:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
The moderator war between Creobot DLH and Double Secret Agent DaveScot is the "self-licking ice cream cone". Blog meets performance art.
Like many public spectacles, sometimes it's more fun just to watch the spectators, like Andrea here:
Quote
DLH:
Is the flood “genocide” the “Worst”?
Or “most effective”?
Or “best” - morality based?


Andrea:
I always wondered that. Why didn’t God just snap His fingers, kill everyone instantly except Noah etc, and be done with it? Why subject the whole of humanity (and all animals) to the terror of the fast-raising waters, the mad rush to high ground, the horror of seeing everything destroyed and their loved ones drowning like rats? Inscrutable, isn’t it?

That right there is a future atheist.
...
Or a sockpuppet. You guys... :angry:

Date: 2008/04/24 22:05:44, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Texas Teach @ April 24 2008,17:06)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ April 24 2008,16:39)
The moderator war between Creobot DLH and Double Secret Agent DaveScot is the "self-licking ice cream cone".

Thanks ever so much for the image of DaveScot licking himself.  I think I shall now be sick.

Well that really wasn't what I had in mind, but now that you mention it... *urp*

Reminds me of the riddle: why does a dog lick his oh never mind, here comes Lou FCD...

Date: 2008/04/24 22:18:00, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ April 24 2008,16:58)
Ironic that Dave put Allen MacNeill on moderation for linking to his epic post http://evolutionlist.blogspot.com/2008/03/godwins-darwin.html which Allen has just reposted...

Predictions?

DaveScot continues to demonstrate testicles (which he may or may not be licking) and admirable moral fiber. The secret L-dopamine injections are therefore working. However, this is only a temporary reversal of his chronic condition, and he will be slipping back into irreversible creobotarditude within a few days. Predictions: banninations all around by early next week. Recommend ya'll get your next generation UD sockpuppets up and running while the getting is good.

Date: 2008/05/01 16:23:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ May 01 2008,13:51)
Sal's a genius:                    
Quote
To cut to the chase, our best instruments can only measure out to 400 light-years using triangulation. Anything beyond that is a guess. As our instrumentation improves, what will happen if we discover Quasars are only 5000 light years away, or the great galaxy in Andromeda is 100 times closer?



The distance to SN1987a can be measured using triangulation.  It is 168,000 light years, just as the distance was thought to be for the Large Magellanic Cloud before the supernova was observed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki....f_light

If Andromeda were 100 times closer, then it would have to be 100 times smaller, and the stars 1,000,000 times closer together than they are in our galaxy.  (volume scales as distance cubed, star density is number of stars (one trillion) divided by volume.  Maybe Sal could propose that stars can be 100 times smaller!  :p 


The sun's diameter is approximately 100 times that of Earth's. Good luck with stellar nucleosynthesis there, Sal! :p

BTW, the triangulation using SN1987A and its reflection off the planetary nebula actually computes the time delay from the supernova event, not the distance. IOW the trigonometry tells us that the supernova occured 168,000 years ago - independent of the speed of light! The distance is therefore 168,000 LY if we assume s.o.l. is constant.

Sal, of course, can choose to weasel on geometry, or argue that the s.o.l. is anisitropic, or started out fast and then slowed down after a year. Or just quit screwing around and invoke GAWDIDDITism.

Speaking of weaseling:            
Quote
I think the issue of the univrse’s age is open for more inquiry. I have my biases, but I’m officially undecided at this time.

Sal is a liar.

Date: 2008/05/01 16:28:28, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ May 01 2008,16:21)
 
Quote (Ptaylor @ May 01 2008,16:04)
Huh?
Did anyone notice a post by Dr Dr D about the Darwin-Hitler 'connection' that was up for a few minutes? Something about critics getting their panties in a bunch. It was above the Pseudo-documentary post but it's gone now.

Oh man I hope someone here can get a copy for us

Perhaps Reciprocating Bill has a copy. :p

Date: 2008/05/01 22:11:21, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (JonF @ May 01 2008,19:01)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ May 01 2008,17:23)
BTW, the triangulation using SN1987A and its reflection off the planetary nebula actually computes the time delay from the supernova event, not the distance. IOW the trigonometry tells us that the supernova occured 168,000 years ago - independent of the speed of light! The distance is therefore 168,000 LY if we assume s.o.l. is constant.

Er, nope. The actual quantity measured was the difference between the arrival times of the leading edges of the direct and indirect beams. Since the speed of light is constant today, the distance traveled by the direct beam in between its arrival at Earth and the arrival of the indirect beam is the same as the distance traveled by the indirect beam on its way to the ring, and that distance is the difference in arrival times multiplied by today's speed of light ... as long as the leading photons of the two beams never traveled at different rates. But they could have traveled at identical rates that are not the same as their rates today without changing that relationship. So we know the distance from the star to the ring at the time of the explosion, even if the speed of light varied during the last 186,000 years and even if it varied spatially (as long as it didn't vary too rapidly as a function of position).

Given that distance and the angle subtended by the ring, the distance to the star is easily calculated, but it tells us nothing about the speed of light in the past.

D'OH! That's what I get for treating scribblings on my whiteboard as primary sources. Caught doing "math in public". Bad, dogdidit, very bad.

Thanks JonF.

Date: 2008/05/05 22:17:21, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (rhmc @ May 05 2008,19:48)
   
Quote (Henry J @ May 05 2008,11:44)
   
Quote
Biology is just stamp collecting.


So, is that why they're trying to stamp out the teaching of it? :p

damn philatelists.

anyone remember archie and jughead from firesign theater?  :)

(don't crush that dwarf...?)

...hand me the pliers?

Wow, that just burrowed right out of the dope-scorched DMZ of my brain. Wonder what else is living in there...

(I think I just spotted Nick Danger, Third Eye...)

Date: 2008/05/08 09:48:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Nuggets from DaveScot [1] [2]:
Quote
This was pretty much given as a moral lesson in a famous Star Trek episode where Spock sacrificed himself to save others and famously explained himself “The needs of the many must outweigh the needs of the few.”

and
Quote
What if the baby was Adolf Hitler and you knew what he would grow up and do. Would you strangle him in his crib?

Space opera, time travel... Wonder how that sci fi novel of his is coming along? Working title: Permian Panspermian. Dave if you are reading this, you can use that with my permission. Free of charge! Have it at. It even has the word "sperm" in it. Cool, huh?

Date: 2008/05/08 11:01:39, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
10
Jon Jackson
05/08/2008
3:21 am

The point of the Dostoevsky passage cited above was the cruelty, not the death. Tigers do kill children but they don’t gleefully torture them to death.

JJ never saw a cat play with its prey.

Date: 2008/05/12 10:59:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ May 12 2008,10:55)
Quote (stevestory @ May 12 2008,10:27)
 
Quote


90

DaveScot

05/10/2008

11:51 am

Tard Alert!

DLH

I don’t care if Sarfati is the Pope. In fact he’s a 144-hour creationist and when one of those calls me the moron the results aren’t going to be pretty if I respond in kind. So I removed him from the situation before it got worse.

He’s got AiG or wherever to say what he wants. I’m not sure why he was even here in the first place.

Linky?

Here.

Date: 2008/05/12 11:06:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (ERV @ May 12 2008,10:58)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ May 12 2008,08:52)
DESIGN DETECTION SCORECARD

AtBC:

Judge Jones Flash animation voice : Dembski
Gloppy: Marks
Fuzzy dog turd in my garden : Sal

UD:

*Tumbleweed*

These design detectives aren't very good. If you can't even *hide* design, you've got bugger all chance of finding it.

PS - we didn't even use the EF  ;)

We also figured out the 'Dick-Dawk' animator was Edmondson.

And the Expelled cell animation was an XVIVO rip-off.

PS "EF" - Exploratory Finger? Bend over and cough...

Date: 2008/05/12 11:16:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (J-Dog @ May 12 2008,11:03)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ May 12 2008,10:59)
       
Quote (Mr_Christopher @ May 12 2008,10:55)
         
Quote (stevestory @ May 12 2008,10:27)
         
Quote


90

DaveScot

05/10/2008

11:51 am

Tard Alert!

DLH

I don’t care if Sarfati is the Pope. In fact he’s a 144-hour creationist and when one of those calls me the moron the results aren’t going to be pretty if I respond in kind. So I removed him from the situation before it got worse.

He’s got AiG or wherever to say what he wants. I’m not sure why he was even here in the first place.

Linky?

Here.

I like the "comments are now closed on this thread".

He does that here as well. Saves him the trouble of banninating all the Old Testament quoting posters one-by-one. Besides, that would empty the pews and leave him talking to an empty room.

I think he is getting tired of being witnessed to, though. Gee, Davey, what was that you were saying about "lie down with dogs, get up with fleas"?

Date: 2008/05/12 16:20:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ May 12 2008,16:03)
Oh, c'mon.  Seriously?

joseg:
Quote

So I wonder about the giraffe with its long neck, to pick an easy example. The classic explanation is that giraffes with longer necks could reach leaves higher in trees, and had a survival advantage when food was scarce. That seems reasonable enough. But I wonder if the giraffes that strained and wished they had longer necks experienced some sort of stress, and giraffe-style wishfulness, that released any chemicals that could influence the odds of producing a long-necked child. In other words, do creatures guide their own evolutionary path through their desires?”

I think he [Scott "Dilbert" Adams] may be on to something.

Isn't there a JoeG over there and at Telic Thoughts?  I smell a Lamarckian rat.

I laughed out loud when I read joseg's post. Straining and wishing they had longer...necks?!

P.S. For JoeG at AtBC see this thread.

Date: 2008/05/16 10:26:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Haven't yet seen a kf tardologue, which I thought Annyday was attempting. Not sure that Wesley can afford the bandwidth, unless you (losslessly) compress the kfness to "sadly linked always evo door mat red strawmen burn herrings" or something like that.

Date: 2008/05/16 10:31:07, Link
Author: dogdidit
Oops forgot to add the oil of ad hominem. Maybe that's why the herrings burned...

Date: 2008/05/17 09:00:08, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (digitus impudicus @ May 16 2008,23:31)
Can someone explain to me rationally the whole F-35 and evolution thingy?  after 16 beers, that concept still doesn't make sense...

It's simple, really. As stash explains:
Quote
We look inside the cell, and, behold, it is a high-tech world.

Stash claims to work at a company that produces parachutes for the ejection seat for the F-35, so presumably he would know high-tech when he sees it. I haven't peered into the innards of the cell myself (erm, which cell??) but I am waiting with anticipation for stash to reveal precisely which high-tech machinery he has observed. Semiconductor devices, such as field-effect or bipolar junction transistors? Amplifiers, diodes, switches, NAND gates, integrated circuits? RF modulators, filters, and up-converters? GaAs MMICs? FIR filters, forward error correction circuits, encryption devices with key-fill? CCD arrays, laser diodes, CRT or LCD or plasma displays? HDTV? iPods? Bluetooth? MPEG-1? -2? -4? (Poor MPEG-3; always a bridesmaid...) Magnetrons? Travelling wave tubes? High voltage power supplies? Lasers, radars, wireless communication, fiber optics? Memory using magnetic media, optical drive, static or dynamic or flash RAM? Solid fuel rockets? Parachutes?

I sure hope stash doesn't keep me waiting...

Date: 2008/05/17 12:40:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (olegt @ May 17 2008,09:34)
       
Quote (dogdidit @ May 17 2008,09:00)
       
Quote (digitus impudicus @ May 16 2008,23:31)
Can someone explain to me rationally the whole F-35 and evolution thingy?  after 16 beers, that concept still doesn't make sense...

It's simple, really. As stash explains:
     
Quote
We look inside the cell, and, behold, it is a high-tech world.

Stash claims to work at a company that produces parachutes for the ejection seat for the F-35, so presumably he would know high-tech when he sees it. I haven't peered into the innards of the cell myself (erm, which cell??) but I am waiting with anticipation for stash to reveal precisely which high-tech machinery he has observed. Semiconductor devices, such as field-effect or bipolar junction transistors? Amplifiers, diodes, switches, NAND gates, integrated circuits? RF modulators, filters, and up-converters? GaAs MMICs? FIR filters, forward error correction circuits, encryption devices with key-fill? CCD arrays, laser diodes, CRT or LCD or plasma displays? HDTV? iPods? Bluetooth? MPEG-1? -2? -4? (Poor MPEG-3; always a bridesmaid...) Magnetrons? Travelling wave tubes? High voltage power supplies? Lasers, radars, wireless communication, fiber optics? Memory using magnetic media, optical drive, static or dynamic or flash RAM? Solid fuel rockets? Parachutes?

I sure hope stash doesn't keep me waiting...

It's not Stash, it's GilDodgen.

Whoops, my bad. As I has no EF (edit function *glares as Wesley*) I will amend the embedded quote above. Better? I left the parachutes in for Gil.

Date: 2008/05/18 08:08:03, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ May 17 2008,23:23)
   
Quote

As I has no EF (edit function *glares as Wesley*)


A PM is generally more effective.

More effective than whining and snark?
*reddens*
*checks to see button is still there*
Thank you Doctor Wesley.  :)

Date: 2008/05/18 08:20:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ May 18 2008,07:42)
 
Quote (Alan Fox @ May 18 2008,05:17)

Hey, that's not entirely fair on John, Lou. He is a vehement critic of UD's climate change denialism. Scroll to see why I say "not entirely"!


Oooh, that was totally worth it.  Now I know what DLH stands for.  Thanks JAD.  I love it so!


(edited: broken quote)

Mystery solved! An engineer, and an admin on the ReasearchID wiki. It is hard to believe isn't it?

PS This was my first visit to JAD's blog, I have to ask: is it always so lonely there?? Novi seems very sad indeed.

Date: 2008/05/18 08:45:46, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ May 18 2008,08:12)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ May 18 2008,09:08)
   
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ May 17 2008,23:23)
         
Quote

As I has no EF (edit function *glares as Wesley*)


A PM is generally more effective.

More effective than whining and snark?
*reddens*
*checks to see button is still there*
Thank you Doctor Wesley.  :)

... um... not to cast doubt on Wesley's conclusion, but...

apparently, the glare works just fine.  In fact, in every documented use of glaring (sample size = 1), the glare has an efficacy of 100%.

It could be that the Wesley Glaring Response Function is a state machine with additional, as yet un-modeled outputs. A hypothesis! Hey, I'm all about the empiricism, so let's give it a whirl:

*glares at Wesley*

This should prove interesting. If I get sent to the Bathroom Wall, would someone come fetch me? I don't want to be stuck talking to FtK all by myself.

Date: 2008/05/18 10:10:35, Link
Author: dogdidit
.RAF OS STCEFFE LLI ON

Date: 2008/05/18 10:11:30, Link
Author: dogdidit
Dmmt lks lk wsly brrwd th dsmbwlr frm dvtrd.

Date: 2008/05/18 10:43:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
The Banninator kicks the cadaver:

19

DaveScot
05/18/2008
10:19 am
freemind

I realize you’re banned but thought I’d use your own logic against you.

According to your logic only a PhD botanist should be considered an expert on whether the effects of higher CO2 concentrations are good or bad for agriculture. Obviously you and I are incapable of reading about the relationship between CO2 and plant growth. Well, obviously YOU are incapable, in any case.

Date: 2008/05/18 18:08:43, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ May 18 2008,15:23)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ May 18 2008,08:11)
Dmmt lks lk wsly brrwd th dsmbwlr frm dvtrd.

Technically, 'y' is a vowel there. :angry:

Sharp eyes! I felt I needed the 'y' for readability.
The 'dsmbwlr' should be 'dsmvwlr', too.

Date: 2008/05/19 09:44:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Hey guthrie, DT is talking to ya! :p

Date: 2008/05/19 10:00:17, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ May 19 2008,09:54)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ May 19 2008,09:44)
Hey guthrie, DT is talking to ya! :p

Shouting over the fence from the safety to Tardonia...

I thought it was "Tardistan".

They seem to be non-stop on AGW denialism these days. Ran out of ID research to talk about, I suppose. With the Old Testament off limits, there's not much left to discuss, so anti-AGW it is! Uncommonly Warm!

Date: 2008/05/19 16:53:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ May 19 2008,16:06)
       
Quote (Richardthughes @ May 19 2008,14:01)
ID predicts: There will be no math in this thread...

http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....r-other

Barry A:
Quote
You know nothing else about the tree other than what you can infer from a visual inspection.

That is the IDers problem in a nutshell.  They know nothing about biology, in this instance, trees.

:D

In the backgound of the photograph there are woods or a forest (kinda hard to see because of the tree... *AHEM*). ANYhoo, BarmyA doesn't explain why this tree (designed) is any different from them other trees (designed) and deserves to be singled out for attention.

Own Goal!

Date: 2008/05/20 10:13:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
24
bornagain77
05/20/2008
6:50 am

Left a word out:

I haven’t searched the theological reasoning for the to^pless laminins

25
bornagain77
05/20/2008
6:50 am

top … less laminins

The nanny filter strikes again. No browsing titty-bar websites for BA77!  :p

Date: 2008/05/21 08:35:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ May 21 2008,02:33)
Paul Giem defines science:
Quote

A question-begging definition of science would be the explanation of events in nature by means of natural processes.

I agree, that does beg some questions.  For instance, did you even read that before you hit "submit"?  Are you as big of a jackass as the above suggests?  Lastly, you do realize that "events in nature" means natural events, which by definition are the result of natural processes?

He (and the rest of ID) flounders in the ambiguity between two dichotomies:
- natural vs artificial (man-made)
- natural vs supernatural (dog goddidit)

HT to Zachriel for summarizing this earlier on this thread...here somewhere...I'd find it if I weren't so lazy...

In my freshman year of college, the physics curriculum was called "Natural Philosophy". And this was in an Engineering school, just so's you know.

Date: 2008/05/21 08:56:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
"Neo-Palean" - that's gold right there. But I'm new at this; has "Paley-ontology" been taken?

Date: 2008/05/21 11:04:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Alan Fox @ May 21 2008,08:27)
   
Quote
Yes, Blair has left office, but Brown isn't any better.

I thought the name George, and difficulty with language, suggested another national figure.

George II??  ;)

Which reminds me:
@Lou FCD.
I didn't want this to be a downer so I didn't post it to your birthday thread, but when I learned you had turned 41, I thought, "A year from now, you will be done with 41, and we will be done with 43."

Date: 2008/05/21 16:12:30, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Annyday @ May 21 2008,15:59)
Hide the children, O'Leary's opening a new blog. May The Designer help us all.

That should help to ease the over-crowding on her current blogs.

Date: 2008/05/21 16:30:45, Link
Author: dogdidit
From your lips to Dog's ear. I will be among friends this evening and intend to hoist a refreshing beverage or two (well, fer starters). One of those toasts will be yours. Salud, skol, prosit, sani tate, naroc, slainte, kampai, cheers, mud in yer grill. Happy belated.

244 days.

Date: 2008/05/22 13:54:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ May 22 2008,13:16)
   
Quote (Bob O'H @ May 22 2008,11:12)
Denyse is rather coy        
Quote
7
O'Leary

05/22/2008

7:50 am

Tard Alert!

Bob O’H, I own three Blogger blogs, each of which supports a book, present or proposed. I am paid to blog at several sites and volunteer blog or guest blog at others. It is a congenial way of life for a freelance writer.


Does this mean she has finally, mercifully, quit referring to herself as a 'journalist'?

I'm sorry, I refuse to believe anyone pays Denyse to blog anywhere.

I on the other hand have no difficulty believing that someone would pay Denyse to blog somewhere else.  :)





Date: 2008/05/22 16:46:34, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ May 22 2008,15:35)
And, in keeping with their well-known spirit of fair play, the UDenizens continue to "argue" with leo, despite knowing full well that he will not be able to point out their errors again.

Relativistic effects. As RBill explained, they wrote their posts before leo was banned, but back-modification by the loudspeaker makes it appear they are deliberately speaking to a ghost. It's unintentionally funny - imagine actors on a stage, ignoring the cops who have swept in to haul away one of their troupe, and continuing to speak lines to him (and pausing for the responses he is no longer able to make) with nary a pause.

It's a fine form of farcical theater. As RBill puts it:

Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ May 18 2008,08:28)
The discussion, now headless, runs 'round the barnyard:

Sums it up perfectly for me.

Date: 2008/05/22 17:21:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ May 22 2008,17:06)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ May 22 2008,17:46)
       
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ May 22 2008,15:35)
And, in keeping with their well-known spirit of fair play, the UDenizens continue to "argue" with leo, despite knowing full well that he will not be able to point out their errors again.

Relativistic effects. As RBill explained, they wrote their posts before leo was banned, but back-modification by the loudspeaker makes it appear they are deliberately speaking to a ghost. It's unintentionally funny - imagine actors on a stage, ignoring the cops who have swept in to haul away one of their troupe, and continuing to speak lines to him (and pausing for the responses he is no longer able to make) with nary a pause.

That would be Carlson's insight.

Oops! Thanks. Didn't look far enough up-stack... ???

Date: 2008/05/23 06:45:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Bob O'H @ May 23 2008,00:25)
OK, which one of you managed this?  
Quote

4

The A-Team

05/21/2008

8:14 pm

Tard Alert!

Connecting Al Gore and al Quaeda–real classy.
http://www.expelledexposed.com.....th/crocker

(HT to F2XL for pointing it out)

Yabbut meanwhile, F2XL isn't getting his homework done (FCSI calculations using the EF, remember?). I think he's hoping you and Allen will forget. Daniel King takes him to task for malingering:  
Quote
F2XL,

YOU HAVE UNFINISHED BUSINESS ON ANOTHER THREAD…

...but F2XL is starting to come up with lame exuses:              
Quote
Yeah I know. I’m making sure as many ID critics who are skeptical of the X filter and CSI along with Irreducibility are paying attention to it.

If 100 posts is the cut-off point for each thread then I may have to continue it to another relevant thread.

"Uh- yeah, that's it! The 100-post cutoff. That's why I couldn't do the assignment, Perfesser. That darned thread cut-off... (Erm- what was the question??)"

Date: 2008/05/23 06:58:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Never mind, Bob. I see he is still posting on the espalier thread. I salute your admirable restraint for not screaming out loud "CUT TO THE FRICKING CHASE".

ETA Apologies to F2XL for the "malingering" and "lame excuses" comments above.

Edited again to betterize the apology.

Date: 2008/05/23 12:45:27, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ May 23 2008,11:56)
       
Quote (Alan Fox @ May 23 2008,11:31)
Bloody hell you read a lot into my post. No really, what is Starbucks?

A coffee house chain that's based in (ahem) Seattle of all places.

The coffee's mediocre, the prices are outrageous, and it's the place to see and be seen by the mindless hordes of lemmings that wouldn't know good coffee if it bit them.

Most irritating of all, instead of ordering your coffee in small, medium, or large, it crashes right through the stupid and pretentious barrier by labeling its sizes as "tall, venti, and grande" (or maybe vice versa on the last two, I forget).

Tall, grande, and venti, in that order. You can actually get small, medium, and large sizes, too. They just don't advertise them. (Americans prefer their coffee supersized, along with everything else.)

Alan, Starbucks is coffee almost as good as the average coffee served throughout Europe and South America. It is head and shoulders better than the thin swill that typically passes for coffee here in the states (what my Dutch friends call "look-through coffee"). Other than that, Starbucks is indeed mediocre and over-priced. But when you can't find anything that meets your standards, lower your standards. Hence I go there often. :) It's really good coffee!!

Date: 2008/05/28 20:20:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (raguel @ May 28 2008,17:55)
Meh, still no edit button :(

Try glaring at Wesley. That seems to work.

Date: 2008/05/29 13:57:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Same old, same old.  
Quote
Bob, you need to show us that there is a credible route from the assumed tail-less E coli and the tailed one. We know that intelligences can traverse such search spaces, but we have no good reason to see that the abstract possibility that chance can do so will have any material effect in the real world where we have to address availability of search resources.

My emphasis. The Demand might have been as predictable as the Tornyard in a Junknado. Argumentology recapitulates Tardology??

As far as KF's assertion about what intelligences can do, I maintain that an "intelligent designer" (e.g. a human) would have to "traverse the search space" in the same manner as evolution does: start with an initial, rudimentary design, try some variations, capture the best results, and repeat. Archimedes was intelligent, but he didn't design the Pentium chip - that took many steps of recursive design over thousands of years. Quite a traverse over the search space of "machines that enable computation", from sketches in sand to microprocessors in silicon (sand), and yet a functionally viable ability to perform mathematical algorithms has never disappeared.

Of course, if the designer is Teh Designer then He can leap to the final answer without having to poke around with false starts, trial and error, and intermediate steps. Not being omniscient, humans don't work that way. We experiment, we modify our technology, and we do our best to survive on good enough while maintaining an eye out for better. That is intelligent design as we best know it. If the "islands of functionality" are indeed surrounded by vast swaths of empty, non-functional space, then we are as likely or unlikely to get there as is evolution.

For this reason I am slowly coming to the conclusion that Intelligent Design (and The Argument Regarding) ultimately has more to say* about intelligence and design than it does about evolution and the origin of life. Our ability to solve problems (to design with intelligence), and the insight, creativity, and inspiration that support it, are likely the result of unguided processes of variation and selection, taking place in the un-conscious mind, or in the marketplace of ideas. Thus evolved life looks like it was intelligently designed because intelligence and design depend on evolution. One recognizes the other.

All IMHO of course. Off the top of my head, or out of my ass, and straying dangerously close to woo...

*I'm ignoring for the moment the ultimate motivation for ID, which is to GET TEH BIBLE BACK IN R SCHOOLS AND JEBUS BACK IN R HARTS YOU HOMOS.

Hey, the tardsuit™ feels good!

Date: 2008/05/29 17:12:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Ptaylor @ May 29 2008,15:13)
M Caldwell won't be around much longer:
     
Quote


165

M Caldwell

05/29/2008

2:33 pm

Mr O’H,

It seems Patrick is bent on running this thread into the sand with an inane post of mindless blather.

ETA: Wow S/he has pulled all the stops out - see comments starting here, including:
   
Quote


Dave,

You are a bright guy. Why in God’s name to you continue to hang about with these losers?

and
   
Quote


23

M Caldwell

05/29/2008

2:51 pm

Oh and Gordon E Mullings,

You are the most verbose, vacuous and vapid commenter it has ever been my misfortune to encounter.

Sort of the blog equivalent of suicide by cop.

Date: 2008/05/30 07:36:44, Link
Author: dogdidit
It's simple, really.

1. Swallow coffee.
2. Set cup down.
3. Read AtBC UD thread.

Why can't I learn???

Date: 2008/06/10 15:36:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
BA77:
Quote
Venter, reservedly, talks, in the video, of the interwoven complexity of the bacteria that prevents the genome from being reduced much below approximately 500 genes.

Denyse:
Quote
Re “disparage” as a cue word, Bill was thinking, of course, of a recent punishment handed out by the Alberta “human rights” commission

Is BA77, taking, writing lessons, from, Denyse?

I'd call sockpuppet but BA77 seems to be able to get through a paragraph without a single scare quote. Denyse goes through them like a chain smoker with a brand new carton of Lucky Strikes.

Date: 2008/06/11 21:11:50, Link
Author: dogdidit
Behe Patrick has a go with front-loaded bannininininination:

5
CameronP
06/11/2008
11:42 am

“That, my friends, is a true example of how well the theory of evolution has been tested. It hasn’t been tested at all.”

Very, very bold claim.

Please cite evidence.

A nature.com search of the word “evolution” gives 60,000 results (I realize not all the results are scientific papers, and some papers use “evolution” in different ways, however, many, many thousand still use evolution in the ways criticized here, I’m just not good at filtering them out).

That’s a whole lot of not testing.

EDIT: This loony tune has already been banned by me. - P


Th- th- th- that's all, folks!!

Date: 2008/06/13 10:13:23, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ June 13 2008,09:14)
Dembski exercises his God-given right to ban.
Quote
William Dembski: Duncan: Maybe this blog’s not for you. The Internet is a big world.

Or is that the Divine Power to ban?

Well he does have a Master's of Divinity. The "Divine Dr Dr"?

(Apologoes to Bette...assuming she'd give a rat's ass...)

Date: 2008/06/17 09:53:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
Whoops! Bad news for the fan club: poachy joins the honor roll:
Quote
3
DaveScot
06/17/2008
9:22 am

By popular demand poachy is no longer with us.

Recap: DT had just posted some screed from Edward Bernard Glick about our commie pinko draft-dodgin college perfessers. A sample:
Quote
[Glick:]
It’s August 1968. Anti-Vietnam War demonstrators have just wrecked the Democratic national convention in Chicago and ruined Hubert Humphrey’s chances to become President. So what did these Marxist demonstrators and their cohorts elsewhere do next?

They stayed in college. They sought out the easiest professors and the easiest courses. And they stayed in the top half of their class. This effectively deferred them from the military draft, a draft that discriminated against young men who didn’t have the brains or the money to go to college.

...with more nastiness to follow. poachy had a nicely paced come-backer:
Quote
What is even more infuriating is how one of these guys could get 5 draft deferments and then end up as the vice president of the United States. Talk about virulence of a bankrupt ideology.

That made my day. Easily worth a sock-puppet. Alright, you guys, who was it? FESS UP!!

Date: 2008/06/17 21:36:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ June 17 2008,17:53)
 
Quote (carlsonjok @ June 17 2008,18:37)
Oh, and about Poachy?

*raises hand sheepishly*

Well done, young man.

I doff Rich's TardCap to you.

Hell with that, I doff my entire skull. Opps I mean RtH's entire skull. There IS a skull under that tardcap, isn't there, Rich? Though if it's a tardcap, then it really ought to be...oh wait, here comes Quidam with a picture of it now...a greenish something...

Ah well. NICE run with poachy, I will miss him. Of course, we still have-

Nope, I'd better not say. Otherwise "poof" and he's gone, too.

Date: 2008/06/17 21:48:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ June 17 2008,20:41)
   
Quote (olegt @ June 13 2008,15:34)
Check out the other books published by Harvest House in the same series:
Wrestling with Angels: Adventures in Faith and Doubt.
Why Guys Need God: The Spiritual Side of Money, Sex, and Relationships.
O2: Breathing New Life into Faith.

All science so far!

"Thirty Days to Taming Your Tongue"?
:O

Speaking of which, I added "creationist d--chebags." Just working the bag, boss.

They're on to you:    
Quote
breathtaking inanity (16)
discovery institute pseudoscientifi c rub... (15)
anti-science (13)
cdesign proponentists (12)
creationism (12)
fugly sweater (9)
assinine (8)
quackery (7)
apologetics (6)
religion (5)
evangelism (4)
religion and politics (2)
creationist d--chebags (1)
hes got the whole world in his vise (1)
lolcreationists (1)
no shimmies allowed (1)
turd sandwhich (1)

And obtw T-E-R-D get it rite you guise.

Date: 2008/06/18 15:01:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (CeilingCat @ June 18 2008,14:35)
I love this:      
Quote
Ted Davis:
Throw in the rhetoric about “dancing on gravestones” (claims that we’re living in the last generation of evolution, claims that sound like the Millerites waiting for the second coming), and they start looking for the exits.


IDM = ID Millerites.  I like it!  Sal, Dr. Dr. D., most of the rest of you: You are IDM advocates.  Flee to the mountaintops!

I suppose that makes Dembski the Great Disappointment.

Date: 2008/06/18 15:03:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ June 18 2008,14:56)

So much for the big TEnt.

What's the age of the earth again? :p

4.5 billion years, for sufficiently small values of billion.

Date: 2008/06/18 15:32:26, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ June 18 2008,10:39)
And someone is supposed to say, "That bag's working you." :)

Last night:
 "Honey, what are you laughing at?"
 "Uh, nothing dear."
 "Are you on the computer?"
 "No, I...uh...watching some TV here..."
 *sneaks off to basement to dry eyes*

The "just working the bag, boss" comment was too perfect. Put me right over the top.

Bloody wonderful movie by the way. As hard to watch as Raging Bull. But wonderful.

Date: 2008/06/18 20:23:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dnmlthr @ June 18 2008,18:12)
Wrong place to post this I guess, just need to vent.

Today sweden passed a law that not only allows a government agency to intercept any landbased communications that crosses the border, but requires internet and telephone providers to route their traffic through what's in the bill is called (I shit you not) "cooperation stations".

Complete and utter failure.

I'm pissed. And slightly inebriated. But mostly pissed.

I believe our British friends use "pissed" to mean drunk, so you're covered either way. If you're still pissed, I recommend you get more pissed. If that makes any sense, you're not pissed enough.

And, uh- zip that up, there's a lad.

Date: 2008/06/18 20:50:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ June 18 2008,17:11)

I'm glad I made you laugh. And now we have a new set of literary allusions to hit them with. Mo Chúisle versus creationist douchebags!


I couldn't get that film out of my head for 36 hours straight after seeing it (on my birthday).

Dembski: "I can't live without my welfare!" Hey, Dembski - re your fugly book - "Get a job, punk!" :)

Mo Chúisle fo shúisle!!

I'm glad the movie got into your head, though I can't honestly explain why. But those are my favorite kind of movies: the ones that get into your head. I hope it was a good birthday.

Date: 2008/06/19 07:40:03, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ June 18 2008,23:12)
 
Quote (olegt @ June 18 2008,20:35)
Dave counters:
     
Quote
You need to get out more. George W. Bush is an ID advocate and he’s arguably the most powerful man in the world. Collins and Miller together don’t amount to a pimple on his butt. I know it’s harsh but scientists and academics in general don’t get a lot of respect outside their sheltered world. Heck, even Ann Coulter makes them look insignificant by each and every metric you named.

DaveTard measures 'success' in science by what George Bush and Ann Coulter believe. Words fail me.

DaveTard's life seems to be defined by man-crushes on higher echelon alpha males: Michael Dell, William Dembski, Craig Venter, George Bush, and Ann Coulter.

Date: 2008/06/25 14:47:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 25 2008,14:22)
I KNOW WHY DAVETARD HAS A MANCRUSH ON VENTER:

http://www.jacksofscience.com/biology....ill-you

     
Quote
You may have heard of Craig Venter before, as his former company Celera Genomics was one of the two groups responsible for publishing the first human genome sequence. However, Craig Venter is crazy. So crazy, that Craig Venter just might kill you if you get him angry. Why, you ask? Here are five starter reasons:

5. He's infamously cut-throat

He's been called alternately "Darth Venter", "a one man superpower ", and "an asshole". But how did Venter get this reputation? It likely has something to do with him patenting human gene sequences for profit. Also, blowing up Alderaan.

4. He was in Viet-Nam

That's right, Venter was in the shit. Probably explains the 1000-yard stare in this picture.

3. He's a billionaire

Craig Venter is so damn rich that he could pay to have a piano dropped on you and your loved ones, every day of the year for the next 300 hundred years [($1,000,000,000 / $8000)/365]. Plus, he has two magic science boats, a team of brilliant lackies, and a cool rain jacket.

2. He sequenced his own genome

He really did. If you think one Craig Venter might kill you, imagine what an army of clone-Venters could achieve.

1. His lab recently created the first synthetic genome

If you thought Venter's heyday had past, think again. The J. Craig Venter Institute is has been busy creating life from scratch in the lab. While the JCVI argues that their technology could be used to create bacteria that produce electricity/oil/hydrogen, I can only think this might be the start of something bad, especially coming from Darth Venter.



Boat + Cash + Vet... what's a Tard not to love?

"Magic science boats...Ahhhhh-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-h-..."

Date: 2008/06/26 09:48:55, Link
Author: dogdidit
Is it me or does this entire thread appear to be motivated by nothing more than DaveTard lamely searching for the right opportunity to do some chest thumping about his allegedly high IQ score?

Date: 2008/06/26 09:55:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
Tribune7 quotes Eric Hoffer (link). How interesting! Trib, have you read The True Believer?? If so...did, er, anything occur to you while you were reading it? Any moments of introspection, or clarity, or philosophical unease?

No??

*sigh*

ETA: great book btw, although I haven't picked it up in 25 years. Should do so, and add it to the Book Club.

Date: 2008/06/27 11:33:49, Link
Author: dogdidit
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. -Admin]

Quote (Louis @ June 27 2008,11:13)
We I've few been we told happy by few Carlsonjok and Lou FCD and J Dog we people in academia band that of I am brothers Arden and Erasmus are for just he like today who this, sheds but most of them either his because blood I lived with rasmus's with me they smell bad, are socially inept and in all ways identical to the worst elements of Erdos except that they are both severely retarded because their mothers shall be my brother (who had no friends) be he ne'er so vile or even though she this day bathed them way less often than shall I gentle she should have, because his there were other 'benefits' condition. they were both slack jawed yokela, extremely lazy, and regularly dropped them on their heads.

Found a coupla typos. Whew! I think I got em all.

Date: 2008/06/30 08:22:07, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Chayanov @ June 30 2008,02:19)
   
Quote
Since the price of oil and other natural resources is in the news, it occurred to me that the wonderful usefulness of petroleum, gold, copper, aluminum, iron, titanium and all the others is quite a happy coincidence. Why should these wonderful resources be laying just beneath the surface for us to use on this particular planet? It hardly seems we could have evolved into beings who would find these things useful to ourselves, since we had to become highly intelligent beings to make anything useful of them in the first place.


Monkeys don't find gold useful, but we do, therefore God.

I think he's stretching it to include himself among those "highly intelligent beings."

Yes, the Earth's crust is provdentially filled with oil and copper and titanium but not one stinking magnetic monopole or dilithium crystal. All of the resources convenient to intelligent minds for constructing telescopes and observatories with which to stare longingly at distant worlds circling distant stars and none of the unobtanium needed to reach them. That God is a real practical joker, he is.

Date: 2008/06/30 20:30:14, Link
Author: dogdidit
"Ballay"? WTF?

(ballay ballay ballay...)

Oh, BALLAY!!!! Duh.

And yet he spells "NASCAR" correctly. Go figure.

Date: 2008/07/01 13:27:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (lcd @ July 01 2008,13:08)
There are millions of people who THINK they are Christian.

I think RtH gets credit here for calling "no true Scotsman". Out of curiosity, what was the pot up to?

Date: 2008/07/01 14:33:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
Dude just pick ONE question, everybody will follow along.

But *hint* make it a sciency one. Who gives a rat's ass about Mao? (sorry Arden) You got a bunch a science types here (plus chatty kibbitzers like yours truly). Ask a SCIENCE question. Like maybe one about *stares at ceiling for a minute* oh, I dunno, EVOLUTION maybe??

Or crap, okay, atheistic killer Darwinistictators.

Or the part where Darwin himself advocated "culling the weak". That was...in which of his works does that appear, again?

Date: 2008/07/01 16:56:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wolfhound @ July 01 2008,15:17)
What the fuck is wrong with engineers?  Almost every time we get some flaming godbot spewing AIG crapola like it has some sort of value, it's an engineer.  Or do they call blocklayers "cement engineers" these days like garbage men are "sanitation engineers"?

To all of you engineers out there who are not asshats, you have my sympathy.

1, I are a engineer.
2. I are not a flaming godbot.
3. I are an asshat..but hey, the first step on the road to recovery, nome sane?
4. "what the fuck is wrong with engineers?" - I ask myself this question EVERY DAMN DAY. Followed shortly by "god I hate us". But at least the pay is good, and they let me play with some interesting toys.

Date: 2008/07/03 18:52:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
I get a strong breeze from my monitor every time Richardthughes puts on his clownDaveTard suit.

<puzzled>

Anyhoo: Happy Birthday!

Date: 2008/07/11 07:09:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (lcd @ July 11 2008,06:34)
While I can see the real issue we would or actually do have with putting a large rock in such an orbit, as we say in Church, nothing is impossible for God.  If God willed it, then that's all that is needed.

Yabbut what if it God had created the rock so heavy even He couldn't lift it? What then, huh? Huh?

*smugly slaps dust from palms*

Date: 2008/07/11 07:23:21, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (csadams @ July 11 2008,07:01)
 
Quote (lcd @ July 11 2008,06:34)
We know from scientific studies in the past, light was much faster.

Is this statement generally accepted by professional astronomers?  

I mean, I can understand that until matter dispersed enough after the Big Bang to let light travel without being absorbed/re-emitted by electrons, light traveled much more slowly.  But that only lasted a matter of what, a picosecond?

It seems to me - and I'll defer to science pros here, of course - that if the speed of light is slowing, we'd see that that change reflected in basic electromagnetic interactions.

You might want to take a look at this.

Not a science pro either, but the speed of light is derivable from Maxwell's equations, and equals (citing from meomory here - too lazy to google) the inverse root of the product of the electric and magnetic constants. (Hey reel scienz guys, how my doin?) So if the speed of light is changing, then either Maxwell's equations are changing or one or both of those constants are changing. So you are correct - that ought to lead to a wide variety of observable phenomena, both astronomical and every day.

BTW the fireball following the Big Bang was sufficiently ionized to prevent the release of light for three hundred thousand years. The echo of that release following de-ionization is detected as the CMB.

Date: 2008/07/11 07:42:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (csadams @ July 11 2008,07:33)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ July 11 2008,07:23)
BTW the fireball following the Big Bang was sufficiently ionized to prevent the release of light for three hundred thousand years.

Meh.  300 000 years or a picosecond, does it matter which one I believe on this thread? :D

Apparently not, since on this thread 3.5 billion = 6,000 for sufficiently small values of billion. :)

Date: 2008/07/11 08:40:00, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (lcd @ July 11 2008,07:31)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ July 11 2008,07:09)
 
Quote (lcd @ July 11 2008,06:34)
While I can see the real issue we would or actually do have with putting a large rock in such an orbit, as we say in Church, nothing is impossible for God.  If God willed it, then that's all that is needed.
Yabbut what if it God had created the rock so heavy even He couldn't lift it? What then, huh? Huh?

*smugly slaps dust from palms*

Even Hawkings addressed this supposed issue in his books, "A brief History of Time".

The question actually makes no sense.  It's akin to an oxymoron, like "military intelligence" or a "living corpse".  I think the more proper term is "Excluded middle".

Excluded middle - correct. It is an absurdity, and deliberately so. My intention was to highlight the absurdity of proclaiming  
Quote
If God willed it, then that's all that is needed
whenever one is trying to defend a religiously-motivated hyposthesis that demonstrably violates the laws of physics.

Did you get my point?

Bonus question: why are there "laws of physics", anyway?

Date: 2008/07/11 08:59:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
DaveTard, poster child for cognitive dissonance:  
Quote
For instance, I could easily murder someone like Timothy McVeigh if I found out he was planning to kill a bunch of innocent people. The only thing that would stop me would be the threat of punishment. You can’t just go around killing people by unilateral decision.


DaveTard, master of theology:  
Quote
My conscience, which is really no more than my own self-reflection,


DaveTard, comedian:  
Quote
My conscience, which is really no more than my own self-reflection,

Quote
One instance that comes to mind is with Abbie Smith (ERV) who's got to be the most obnoxious arrogant snot I've ever seen except for when I look in a mirror.

Date: 2008/07/11 12:00:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Ftk @ July 11 2008,09:21)
I've told you numerous times that I do not know how old the earth is, and I'll likely remain open minded about that for some time to come.

FWIW I see no conflict between (a) knowing the age of the Earth and (b) being open-minded about the subject. In fact, one follows from the other. The scientific method is all about "open-mindedness". Science was able to determine the age of the Earth precisely because scientists were willing to be "open-minded". I think you are being rather something else.

ETA: no intention to pile on here. I edit slo-o-o-o-o-o-wly...

Date: 2008/07/11 13:31:24, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 11 2008,13:26)
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 09 2008,22:42)
 
Quote (keiths @ July 09 2008,18:07)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 09 2008,13:42)
     
Quote (keiths @ July 09 2008,16:04)
Hey Lou,

What are you planning to major in?  Last I checked, tardology was still not part of the curriculum.

Biology ed.

You ain't gonna teach them kids that we's descended from munkies, is you?

Yeah, and not only that, but I'm going to sacrifice them to the Flying Spaghetti Monster afterwards.

Got my entrance exam scores today.

I did OK, apparently.

Mazel Tov!




*glances around*

Hmmm...find a better place to celebrate mkay?

Date: 2008/07/13 19:35:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,09:30)
 
Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,10:04)
 
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,06:58)
I was after all, pulling 20+ year old algebra from my arse, and the stance may have been conducive to extraction.

'Arse'?  Lou, you've been spending too much time hanging out with the Brits in this forum.

P.S. Congratulations.

Thanks.

I have a strange quirk about addressing people in their own terms, sometimes.  I especially love Britishisms anyway, but even if I notice an incoming link to my blog, when I follow it back to a non-English language blog I'll take the time to GoogleTranslate my thank you into the blogger's native tongue.

I guess that's a little odd, but it seems polite to me.

:)

I've been granted the opportunity to travel to a number of non-English speaking countries over the last two decades. It takes only a modest investment of time to learn how to say the basic words of politeness - 'please', 'thank you', 'hello', 'goodbye', and so forth - in just about any language. I find a little willingness to cross the linguistic divide can be a real door-opener, and I thank my fellow American travellers who do not do the same (it was a long plane trip - you couldn't learn four foreign phrases in six hours??). Their total lack of effort let's my pitiful linguistic exertions stand head and shoulders above.

And if that doesn't work, I tell them I'm Canadian. Dead useful in places like Antwerp. ;)

p.s. "arse" is a great Britishism.
p.p.s. So is "dead useful".

Date: 2008/07/13 21:04:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (J-Dog @ July 13 2008,19:51)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 13 2008,19:35)
     
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,09:30)
       
Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,10:04)
         
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,06:58)
I was after all, pulling 20+ year old algebra from my arse, and the stance may have been conducive to extraction.

'Arse'?  Lou, you've been spending too much time hanging out with the Brits in this forum.

P.S. Congratulations.

Thanks.

I have a strange quirk about addressing people in their own terms, sometimes.  I especially love Britishisms anyway, but even if I notice an incoming link to my blog, when I follow it back to a non-English language blog I'll take the time to GoogleTranslate my thank you into the blogger's native tongue.

I guess that's a little odd, but it seems polite to me.

:)

I've been granted the opportunity to travel to a number of non-English speaking countries over the last two decades. It takes only a modest investment of time to learn how to say the basic words of politeness - 'please', 'thank you', 'hello', 'goodbye', and so forth - in just about any language. I find a little willingness to cross the linguistic divide can be a real door-opener, and I thank my fellow American travellers who do not do the same (it was a long plane trip - you couldn't learn four foreign phrases in six hours??). Their total lack of effort let's my pitiful linguistic exertions stand head and shoulders above.

And if that doesn't work, I tell them I'm Canadian. Dead useful in places like Antwerp. ;)

p.s. "arse" is a great Britishism.
p.p.s. So is "dead useful".

You go popping off about "arse", and the next thing you knows you're stuck right in the middle of a fight-to-the-death match of Morningside Crescent.

Yikes. And me armed with nothing more than a ten-year-old NYC subway map. Still, if it breaks out, I could divert to the "LGE" to buy a little get-away time. It would take 'em hours to figure out whereinhell that is...

Date: 2008/07/14 04:18:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ July 14 2008,02:34)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ July 14 2008,03:04)
   
Quote (J-Dog @ July 13 2008,19:51)
         
Quote (dogdidit @ July 13 2008,19:35)
         
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,09:30)
             
Quote (keiths @ July 12 2008,10:04)
             
Quote (Lou FCD @ July 12 2008,06:58)
I was after all, pulling 20+ year old algebra from my arse, and the stance may have been conducive to extraction.

'Arse'?  Lou, you've been spending too much time hanging out with the Brits in this forum.

P.S. Congratulations.

Thanks.

I have a strange quirk about addressing people in their own terms, sometimes.  I especially love Britishisms anyway, but even if I notice an incoming link to my blog, when I follow it back to a non-English language blog I'll take the time to GoogleTranslate my thank you into the blogger's native tongue.

I guess that's a little odd, but it seems polite to me.

:)

I've been granted the opportunity to travel to a number of non-English speaking countries over the last two decades. It takes only a modest investment of time to learn how to say the basic words of politeness - 'please', 'thank you', 'hello', 'goodbye', and so forth - in just about any language. I find a little willingness to cross the linguistic divide can be a real door-opener, and I thank my fellow American travellers who do not do the same (it was a long plane trip - you couldn't learn four foreign phrases in six hours??). Their total lack of effort let's my pitiful linguistic exertions stand head and shoulders above.

And if that doesn't work, I tell them I'm Canadian. Dead useful in places like Antwerp. ;)

p.s. "arse" is a great Britishism.
p.p.s. So is "dead useful".

You go popping off about "arse", and the next thing you knows you're stuck right in the middle of a fight-to-the-death match of Morningside Crescent.

Yikes. And me armed with nothing more than a ten-year-old NYC subway map. Still, if it breaks out, I could divert to the "LGE" to buy a little get-away time. It would take 'em hours to figure out whereinhell that is...

Morningside Crescent? The Scottish version of the game? I think you mean Mornington Crescent.

Anyway, the NYC version is Madison Square Garden....well depending on the day of the week....

But I digress:

Award for most universally clueless: FTK.

Says it all.

Louis

Careful, I think it rubs off.

<sotto voce>

Psst! Thread? THREAD??

</sotto voce>

Date: 2008/07/14 06:37:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
"cock up" - great Britishism.

Date: 2008/07/14 12:36:48, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (keiths @ July 14 2008,11:44)
     
Quote (Louis @ July 14 2008,09:11)
         
Quote (EyeNoU @ July 14 2008,16:40)
Nice alliteration, Louis. Spiro Agnew couldn't top that.

Spiro T Agnew? The world's favourite anagram?

To those pondering this, the classic anagram is of "Spiro Agnew" without the "T".

Unless you had something else in mind, Louis?

Oh that. GROW A ... SPINE? PINES? SNIPE? Uh...

Here's fun:

http://wordsmith.org/anagram/index.html

Got 3,500 anagrams for "Spiro Agnew". Adding the "T" -- he never left home without it -- yielded over 16,000. A cursory glance at the 16,000 yielded "Orating Spew". Works for me...nattering nabob of negativity that I am. :)

Date: 2008/07/14 18:48:56, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (lkeithlu @ July 14 2008,18:31)
Once again (and I think I've said it before) why does an attorney think he has the expertise to critique a paleontology paper? Like me reading JAMA and passing judgment on medical papers written by doctors. Mileage, mileage, mileage. If you have not studied, measured, compared fossils over and over, a paper such as this is OUTSIDE your level of expertise. Period.

The flip side of this. I love it when real experts discuss on PT and other sites the fossils that are made public. It opens a window for folks like me to see just how experts look at such a fossil and how they compare various features. Without blogs, I could never read these interchanges! WAAAAY cool. Like being a fly on the wall when those on the inside talk "shop".

Hear! Hear! This is one of the main reasons I lurk at sites like PT, Pharyngula (spelling??), and ERV. (I hang out here for the pure, uncut, military-grade tard...but a little science now and then would also be nice. Speaking of which: FTK? Common descent, or jellyfish, what's it gonna be????)

And science guys, don't talk down for the benefit of the uneducated kibbutzers! Make them (er, us) work for it!

Date: 2008/07/15 09:43:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (keiths @ July 15 2008,01:07)
   
Quote (CeilingCat @ July 14 2008,22:34)
In the "Healing" thread, Patrick comes through with a great steaming pile-o-tard.  He even seems to be talking about himself in the third person.          
Quote
Lakeland is the center of Bentley’s activities in Florida, an area close to Patrick. In fact, the Church of Patrick’s own brother, Michael, is apparently being ensnared by Bentley’s enticing words, from the leadership on down to Michael’s own friends.

KeithS deems that paragraph Denyse-worthy.

Indeed. From this nugget I learn that
- Florida is an area near Patrick (which puts him in...Georgia??);
- there is a Church of Patrick (!);
- it has a brother named Michael (presumably a church as well??);
- (Church of?) Michael is being ensnared by Bentley's enticing words;
- those words seem to emanate from the leadership (of...something??), Michael's friends, and echelons in-between.

Clearzabell.

I greatly enjoy the thought-derailing, zen-like state of standing waves that my brain enters when confronted with Denyse's prose, and I am glad to see others getting into the act. Patrick needs only to fall face first into the keyboard every now and then to add the requisite number of typos and misplaced punctuation and the act is complete!

Date: 2008/07/15 09:57:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (carlsonjok @ July 15 2008,09:47)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,09:43)
I greatly enjoy the thought-derailing, zen-like state of standing waves that my brain enters when confronted with Denyse's prose, and I am glad to see others getting into the act.

HA HA THIS IS YOU


BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

Date: 2008/07/15 10:02:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Trouble in paradise:
 
Quote
50
tb
07/15/2008
9:36 am

blockquote does not work properly here any longer, it shows good in the preview yet it turns out terribly in the site itself!

Can anyone FIX THIS PLEASE!

And no editory function. Unintelligently designed? Failure to evolve?

Date: 2008/07/16 07:51:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 15 2008,15:57)
BONG.

Which is more than onomatopoeia. Or, uh, so I've heard.

{sound of bubbling and inhaling}

Huh? Is that the pizza guy? Did he bring the extra brownie ice cream too?

Have you ever looked at your hands, I mean REALLY looked at them?

Ah, Daniel-san! How's the horses?

 
Quote (Louis @ July 15 2008,10:02)

UD: source of all that is "true", for a given value of "true". A very low value at best. Possibly a negative one.

More like square-root of negative one.

(Get it? GET IT? HAR HAR I MAID A MATHS JOKE)

Date: 2008/07/16 11:30:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Chayanov @ July 15 2008,23:29)
   
Quote (blipey @ July 15 2008,23:20)
Ftk:      
Quote
Is this link that is dated 2007 fairly accurate?  I’m just curious if those 13,000 fossils represents approx. 1,400 individuals.  


What a load of crap!  Nice find, Ftk!  Fourteen hundred individuals is practically nothing!  Nothing at all!  It's just as you said, Ftk, barely a coffin full!  Wow, can't understand what the hell scientists are supposed to learn from 1,400 individuals.  Hell, I study 1,400 things before breakfast everyday.

It does rather lead to the question, "If 1400 individuals are insufficient for studying hominin evolution, then how many would be required?"

Followed by, "And how did you arrive at that figure?"

Not that I expect an answer. If we had complete skeletons for 14,000 or 14 million individuals, the creobots would still insist that was nothing more than a pathetic level of detail.

Argumentum ad hominid?

Date: 2008/07/16 12:51:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (olegt @ July 16 2008,10:10)
Tard advisory

Tardmeters around the world registered a strong uptick this morning, indicating an influx of fresh, unscreened tard in the environment.  The source was traced to a naked singularity in the tard field that had escaped from the UD bunker and was last seen at Telic Thoughts.  

Click on the link AT YOUR OWN RISK.  You have been warned.

olegt, have you ceased posting at TT? Or are you banned batted bagged barred just like Zachriel?

Same question for Zachriel.

(Oh, and we are on the wrong thread, but what the heck, anything to get this tired old warhorse of a thread up to 1,000 pages*, where we can give it a decent Viking burial: put it on a burning boat, set the boat adrift in the middle of the internet, celebrate with mead and wenching as we watch it float off into the mist, and then await the thread's as-yet-unnamed successor to arise Phoenix-like from the ashes- which oh crap are floating down the bloody river, now whose stupid idea was that anyway...)

*30,000 posts, Arden

Date: 2008/07/17 14:00:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (stevestory @ July 17 2008,12:54)
The penultimate page.

Questions abound:

Does Ikonboard have a lurking P1K problem, like the Y2K problem (that never materialized) eight years ago?

Should we celebrate the first post on page 1000, or the last? (Let's face it, we all celebrated 1/1/2000 even though the new millenium technically didn't begin for another 366 days. Those that pointed that fact out were branded nerds.)

If Ikonboard "resets" at 1,000, does the topic (UD) likewise reset, through some unknown quantum tunneling process that only born^again^77 can explain? And if so, would all the banninated posters and sockpuppets come flooding back? Where will they all sleep?

Will dogdidit quit spamming the thread trying to get the page count up to the millenium?

***

Dunno if I am ready for the mead and wenching tonight. I'll have to clear that with the wench.

Date: 2008/07/17 21:49:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (khan @ July 17 2008,20:32)
As a dog returneth to his vomit, so a fool returneth to his folly.

Hey, get your own vomit, dammit.

Well as a dishonorary n00b, who only showed up around page 950 or so, and have since then consistently failed to advance this or any other AtBC thread forward in any meaningful way, I have only one thing to say...

*reaches for pick and shovel*

...fuck

Date: 2008/07/18 13:41:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Texas Teach @ July 18 2008,12:41)
For his birthday, why don't we send the Dr Dr a copy of the full, original UD thread?  You know, something to show how much we care.

The director's cut, on DVD and Blu-ray, including all the posts that got bounced to the BW.

And, uh, a "Mature Content" warning label on the shrink-wrap.

Date: 2008/07/24 07:49:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ July 23 2008,22:59)
       
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 23 2008,19:34)
arden, after SHF you stay the hell away from my garden.

'SHF'?

The End of Days. Apocalypse. Supper's Ready (for you aging Genesis fans). When the balloon goes up. A faeco-ventilatory event.

Um, returning to thread: I find that TT is much better enjoted live then discussed here, thanks to the substantially lower frequency of bannination (as compared to UD), which permits AtBCers to participate in situ. In particular, I am repeatedly impressed by the ju jitsu of Zachriel's discussion style, most recently exemplified on the thread the presently ends here. I watch, and I learn.

Date: 2008/07/24 09:35:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
While FTK is off having her laptop simonized, can ya'll explain the use of "transitional" in technical terms that a paleontology-challenged doofus like myself can understand? Or was this an exercise for FTK to complete?

I'm assuming a "transitional" would be a fossil of an individual from a species whose line of descent lies between an earlier known species and a later known species. IOW the fossil is not from a species we already knew about, nor is it of a species from which no known descendent species developed (an extinct line), nor is it a fossil of an extant species (e.g. the neighbor's house cat). But I make these assumptions from a wealth of ignorance.

ps @ afarensis, this was superb.

Date: 2008/07/24 11:54:17, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2008,10:30)
One obvious problem in popular writing about transitionals is the common notion that one fossil  is a descendant of another, and an ancestor of yet another.

I tried to avoid that error, and referred only to species, though perhaps the grouping is even broader than that. For some reason I want to assume that it is exceedingly unlikely that any individual found fossilized is the direct ancestor of any living animal, or of any other individual in the fossil record. But from where I picked that up, I have no eye deer. (Possibly from news media stories about the "Eve" studies on human mitochondrial ancestry.)

Quote (midwifetoad @ July 24 2008,10:30)
It seems to me that with graphics and animation technology, someone could come up with a good flash video illustrating how something could be a transitional and at the same time be on a dead branch of the tree.

I suffer from the TV-induced attention deficit disorder of the rest of my generation, so bright colors and loud noises work for me. (Farty sounds, not so much.)

Date: 2008/07/28 17:26:49, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dvunkannon @ July 28 2008,17:13)
GilDigan is amazed that Fox News would publish OOL "nonsense". Heck, Fox has a whole Evolution and Paleontology site! Three cheers for our fact based network!

ps - how do I link directly to a UD comment, like all the cool kids?

The numeral at the top left of each UD post is a permalink.

Date: 2008/07/31 08:18:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Assassinator @ July 31 2008,07:07)
 
Quote (dhogaza @ July 31 2008,05:40)
 
Quote
I find it amusing there is only an English version of conservapedia.

Actually, you'll only find American there.  The fact that Wikipedia allows the use of English is one of the signs of its liberal bias.

(I am not making this up).

You mean people like this:

That's just offal.

Date: 2008/08/05 08:34:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (slpage @ Aug. 05 2008,07:40)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ July 24 2008,07:49)
The End of Days. Apocalypse. Supper's Ready (for you aging Genesis fans).

Well, I'm not that aging, but I saw them in Albany last September.  I had to sit throught their post-1980 top-40 garbage, but the handful of old gems they played - anad played well - was worth it.
It killed me to see hundreds of thirty-somethings get up and leave during their last encore song - the Carpet Crawlers...
Losers...

A fan? Cool!! Pre- or post-Gabriel departure? :)

I first saw them at the Whiskey-a-Go-Go in Hollywood is nineteen-mumbledy-something. Peter Gabriel in a giant tetrahedral papier-mache head, bouncing around to Apocalypse in 9/8 time. I was so-o-o-o-o-o stoned.

Date: 2008/08/05 21:27:55, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (slpage @ Aug. 05 2008,12:22)
I've even got my kids (7 and 10) humming along to 'Watcher of the Skies'...

Too funny! Next thing, they'll be doing an entire vaudeville version of "Harold the Barrel" in your living room.

Reminds me of a colleague who's kids "rediscovered" the charms of Monty Python's Holy Grail. Entire scenes of dialogue being recited randomly throughout the house, and the toddlers dragooned into shouting "NI!" at almost any prompting...

*looks around in surprise*

What, too off-topic? Oh, uh- something to do with B B King, right? Oops, wrong thread...

Thanks for the memory lane visit, slpage. Cueing up Foxtrot as soon as I'm done here.

Date: 2008/08/10 13:56:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Actually that's W+, W-, and Z. Three particles mediate the weak nuclear force.

As for the "God Particle", IIRC that was a nickname given it by Leon Lederman in his epynomous science book, written back in 1993 partially in an attempt to preserve funding for the Superconducting Supercollider. Alas, the US Congress decided that while they liked Big Science, they didn't like it enough to pay for two big projects...so the SSC was cancelled and we built the International Space Station instead. Diplomacy, cooperation with the Russians, blah blah blah...

Lederman claimed to have wanted to call it the Goddam Particle but his editors balked. I'm not a physicist, and can't assess how important it is to the Standard Model (Lederman seemed to think it was needed to prevent a crisis in the SM at high energies) but it's obvious that people like Joy hear the term "God Particle" and go to their unhappy place. It was a joke, Joy. Get a grip.

<edited for spellerfication>

Date: 2008/08/11 12:05:27, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 11 2008,07:05)
   
Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 11 2008,01:18)
Now getting back to an ID Textbook which I am waiting for for my kids to learn something other than Darwinian materialism.

No need to wait, lcd.  They've already got one.

That's the one with the transitional fossil in it, and that fossil succinctly, eloquently, and unequivocally should tell you all you need to know about the "science" of Intelligent Design.

     
Quote
The basic metabolic pathways (reaction chains) of nearly all organisms are the same. Is this because of descent from a common ancestor, or because only these pathways (and their variations) can sustain life? Evolutionists think the former is correct, cdesign proponentsists accept the latter view.


(emphasis mine)

Ho. Ly. Crap. I never knew this. Had no friggin clue. I've seen the term "cdesign proponentsists" here and on PT and elsewhere and wondered "yeah, a typo, but so what?".

Lou, you just made mah day. :D

Date: 2008/08/11 13:07:07, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Lou FCD @ Aug. 11 2008,12:21)
As glad as I am to spread the warm fuzzies, you should send your thanks to Barbara Forrest

       
Quote
During her testimony the defense would again ask the court to exclude Forrest from testifying as expert witness. Judge Jones allowed them to present their case for dismissing her and then denied their request. Forrest would go on to testify on the religious origins and nature of the intelligent design movement, the wedge document, and also demonstrated that the drafts of the textbook at the center of the court case Of Pandas and People, substituted terms such as "intelligent design" and "intelligent designer" in place of "creationism" and "creator" in an attempt to circumvent the ruling in the Edwards v. Aguillard which determined that teaching creationism in public schools violated the Establishment Clause of the United States constitution. Her testimony had a significant impact on Judge Jones's decision.[7]

Good point. Actually, I read most of the KvD transcripts this past March, including Barbara Forrest's testimony. Debunking Pandas and exposing it's blantantly creationist origins was a fine accomplishment. Nothing so satisfying as exposing lying liars. I just didn't know about the "cdesign proponentsists" thingie (what we call a "paste-o").

@ LCD:
Ed, I salute your intellectual journey. When you first posted here I was rude to you, and that was wrong (on, well, several counts). I owe you an apology, and I hope you can accept it. I also wish you well for your search for answers, here and elsewhere.

Date: 2008/08/12 08:05:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
olegt, does Joy have a background in particle physics?

In my opinion, Joy is frustrated by Zachriel's superior ju jitsu, and it is showing. Her tiger-style no match for his monkey-style. (erm- mixed cultural references here...)
She hung this out there:  
Quote
I personally am of the opinion that Higgs doesn't exist - they'll never find him, he's not there to find.
...and now she has to defend it. So far, without success. What a pointless opinion to assert!
 
Quote
Now, I know how they work. They'll claim for a few years that they "might" have found him. They'll pour over readouts until they're cross-eyed, then they'll predict Higgs is so close to approaching the equally missing graviton that they'll never have the power to find him. But he'll remain in their model, because their model relies upon the existence of a "God Particle." Sad, really.
Sad, really. Quite the anti-scientist. Has she revealed this side before?

Date: 2008/08/22 11:43:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
Years ago (more years ago than I care to calculate just now) I took a college class in (classical) quantum mechanics. The professor didn't assign a text, but instead explained that all the material for the class would be presented on the blackboard during his lectures. Therefore (1) it was important to attend every lecture, or at least get notes from a buddy, and (2) it was important to take comprehensive notes! But the professor made it abundantly clear that good note-taking alone was insufficient; he strongly recommended that we re-copy our notes after class. His theory was that when we re-copied the notes, the study material would have to pass from our eyes to our hands, and would therefore have a good chance of encountering our brains along the way, where some of it might stick.

I took his advice. It was very effective.

Dude, keep up this blog and you are going to be a serious biology-knowing science geek fer sure.

Date: 2008/08/26 07:43:46, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Aug. 25 2008,22:18)
Why can't we all just get a long log?

Fixed it for you.

AND I'm on topic! w00t :)

ETA: shoulda scrolled to the end of the thread first before posting. Crap.

Very funny post, Deadman_932 (if that's your real number).

Date: 2008/08/26 17:11:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Lossless compression simply eliminates the redundancy. Shannon estimated the redundancy of English at 50%, so 2:1 reduction should be possible without loss of information.

As for dnmlthr's question, the text with random symbols by definition has more "information" than a similarly sized copy of Shakespeare. Semantically, it could be reduced to RAND(N) for all any human reader would care, but (per Shannon) the "semantic aspects of communication are irrelevant to the engineering problem". In contrast, the document consisting of "AAAAAAAAA" is readily compressed to a couple of parameters (namely "A" and the number of A's).

Compression (and for that matter, coding) does need to know what set of symbols to be used.

If stevestory repeats his test with a string of random characters, I'll bet he sees no file size reduction after zipping. That's because the message has no redundancy to be removed.

Date: 2008/08/26 17:51:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 26 2008,17:32)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 26 2008,18:11)
If stevestory repeats his test with a string of random characters, I'll bet he sees no file size reduction after zipping. That's because the message has no redundancy to be removed.

Interestingly that didn't happen. Having read an Erv post recently, I went to google and said "Gives me the random numbars pleez" and it sent me to Random.org and I got 10,000 numbers in a single column and put that in a text file and it said "Your filez are 38.2 kilobytes LOLZ" and when I zipped it it became 16 kilobytes. Not sure what's going on there. Maybe, because i had the numbars delivered in 1 columnz, there was like an End of Line charactar that was stripped out and that was the compressian diffarance. Kthanxbi!

Lost my bet. Farg. I shall now eat me a beer.

Date: 2008/08/26 17:55:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (stevestory @ Aug. 26 2008,17:32)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 26 2008,18:11)
If stevestory repeats his test with a string of random characters, I'll bet he sees no file size reduction after zipping. That's because the message has no redundancy to be removed.

Interestingly that didn't happen. Having read an Erv post recently, I went to google and said "Gives me the random numbars pleez" and it sent me to Random.org and I got 10,000 numbers in a single column and put that in a text file and it said "Your filez are 38.2 kilobytes LOLZ" and when I zipped it it became 16 kilobytes. Not sure what's going on there. Maybe, because i had the numbars delivered in 1 columnz, there was like an End of Line charactar that was stripped out and that was the compressian diffarance. Kthanxbi!

Heywaitaminnit. Random numbers .ne. random text. Winzip cheeted. Or cheeto'd. Or something.

*eats another beer*

Date: 2008/08/26 21:32:12, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 26 2008,18:14)
Antievolutionists want to confuse and conflate meaning and information. Spetner, Gitt, Truman, and Dembski... all of them want meaning to be folded within whatever sort of "information" they propose.

Shannon's discussion of information explicitly excluded meaning. Algorithmic information theory only cares about one aspect of meaning: what is the shortest program and input that can generate a string?

Critique of Dembski's "complex specified information"

Well, they are certainly free -- and more power to 'em -- to extend Claude Shannon's seminal work and the field of information theory in general to incorporate mathematically sound concepts of "functional", "complex", and "specified" to go along with "information". Big Claims require Big Proof, though. So far:
- Big Claims: many
- Big Proof: not so much.

I will give them credit for spurring me to tackle Shannon's classic paper. Not my primary speciality (which is radar) but I can occasionally brane when I don't haz the dumb.

Date: 2008/08/27 13:17:15, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (goalpost @ Aug. 27 2008,12:21)
Ok, so I send two messages:

Both messages contain a human DNA sequence - ACGT etc etc, each letter coded as two bits, ie 00 = A, 01 = C, 10 = G, 11 = T. This message is non-compressible.

Actually, it is very compressible if it is a DNA sequence, since codons (triplets of base pairs) code for only 22 possible states - start, stop, and twenty amino acids - even though the symbol set could accommodate 64. So the real measure of information in DNA is no more than 4.5 bits (log2 of 22) for every three base pairs, not 6 bits (log2 of 64).

(There may be other functional purpose by the apparent redundancy in the DNA code. For starters, it confers some point mutation error immunity to -some- amino acids...but that's an archival storage relieability issue, not a communication issue. The error imunity redundancy could be restored at the receiver but the inital information would be lost. That might matter to molecular biologists who want to use the genome data and point mutation distributions for cladistics and synteny and other cabbalistic darwinian materialist evolander corruptions...)

Quote
It has maximum complexity as I understand it.

What is your measure of complexity?

Quote

Message one's sequence codes for a protein.
Message two's contains junk DNA.

Does message 1 contain more information?

Difficult question. What you're asking is how much entropy (uncertainty) is there in the sequence of amino acids (our message set) in the proteins that make up the human proteome. Are some amino acids rarer than others? Are some amino acids sequences more likely than others? If the answer is yes, then the entropy of the source will be less than that of a source whose symbols have equal probability. That would reduce the information content from 4.5 bits per codon to something less.

Junk DNA, assuming it is not under selection pressure (else why would it be "junk"?), would be likely to accumulate mutations more rapidly than DNA related to the proteome, yes? Those mutations should help to "shuffle the deck" and over time one would expect the symbol set to drift toward equiprobability. (But never quite get there - equally random sequences of base pairs does not code for equally random sequences of amino acids.) So my guess is that yes, the junk DNA has more information (as defined by information theory) than DNA that codes for proteins.

BTW IANAB. I are uh injineer.

Date: 2008/08/27 17:24:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (slpage @ Aug. 27 2008,13:57)
       
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 27 2008,13:17)
Actually, it is very compressible if it is a DNA sequence, since codons (triplets of base pairs) code for only 22 possible states - start, stop, and twenty amino acids - even though the symbol set could accommodate 64. So the real measure of information in DNA is no more than 4.5 bits (log2 of 22) for every three base pairs, not 6 bits (log2 of 64).

Yes, but isn't the compression you write of 'conceptual' (I can't think of a better word)?
Sure, you can run a computer file through a compression algorithm and all that, but DNA is physical - more akin to trying to 'compress' a CD as opposed to the 'information' ON the CD, if my point is making any sense.

The OP spoke about using bits to encode the nucleotides:
Quote (goalpost @ Aug. 27 2008,12:21)
Both messages contain a human DNA sequence - ACGT etc etc, each letter coded as two bits, ie 00 = A, 01 = C, 10 = G, 11 = T.

...so I was responding to that. I would agree that compressing functional DNA does not seem possible. Perhaps a very large steam press...

Quote
Quote
Quote

Message one's sequence codes for a protein.
Message two's contains junk DNA.

Does message 1 contain more information?

Difficult question. What you're asking is how much entropy (uncertainty) is there in the sequence of amino acids (our message set) in the proteins that make up the human proteome. Are some amino acids rarer than others? Are some amino acids sequences more likely than others? If the answer is yes, then the entropy of the source will be less than that of a source whose symbols have equal probability. That would reduce the information content from 4.5 bits per codon to something less.

Junk DNA, assuming it is not under selection pressure (else why would it be "junk"?), would be likely to accumulate mutations more rapidly than DNA related to the proteome, yes? Those mutations should help to "shuffle the deck" and over time one would expect the symbol set to drift toward equiprobability. (But never quite get there - equally random sequences of base pairs does not code for equally random sequences of amino acids.) So my guess is that yes, the junk DNA has more information (as defined by information theory) than DNA that codes for proteins.


OK, so while we are discussing hypotheticals, how about this one.

Two DNA sequences, both 1000 bps long, both identical with one exception - one sequence starts with TAA instead of TAC.
The 'functional sequence' has a measured information content of (just tossing out a number here to make it simple) 1000.
Would the non-functional sequence have a content of 999 or 0?

1000. That assumes a C is as likely as an A. Functionality ("semantic content") is irrelevant.

@Turncoat: yep, I am using Shannon's definition (and thanks for not mentioning my errors).

Date: 2008/08/29 18:06:48, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (goalpost @ Aug. 29 2008,15:30)
       
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 27 2008,13:17)

         
Quote (goalpost @ Aug. 27 2008,12:21)
Ok, so I send two messages:

Both messages contain a human DNA sequence - ACGT etc etc, each letter coded as two bits, ie 00 = A, 01 = C, 10 = G, 11 = T. This message is non-compressible.

Actually, it is very compressible if it is a DNA sequence, since codons (triplets of base pairs) code for only 22 possible states - start, stop, and twenty amino acids - even though the symbol set could accommodate 64. So the real measure of information in DNA is no more than 4.5 bits (log2 of 22) for every three base pairs, not 6 bits (log2 of 64).

You're quite correct, I forgot about that bit. Let me rephrase the question, then:
I send 2 messages, both DNA sequences as before. Each is coded in such a way that it may not be further compressed. Each is of the same length, and contains the same number of DNA triplets.

One has 'usefulness'  - it codes for a protein. The other doesn't.
Does the 'useful' message contain any more information by virtue of its 'usefulness'?

The challenge is coming to an acceptable definition of "information". Shannon's definition had to do with the entropy of the source, but this is a bit confusing because "entropy" is a poorly understood concept (at least, for me) so I prefer to think of the measure information as the reduction in uncertainty at the receiver (which is also consistent with Shannon's interpretation).

If you are sending me a symbol, and I have no idea what it might be, then each bit of information you send represents a reduction of 50% in my uncertainty. (I'm assuming that we are dealing with symbols selected from a finite and discrete set.) Let's assume you are sending a hexadecimal number in binary format. I expect to receive xxxx but I have no idea if the x's are 1's or 0's, so my uncertainty at the outset is that the symbol belongs to one of sixteen possible states, from 0 to 15. Your first bit -- let's assume it's a 1 -- cuts my uncertainty in half, since now I know that the symbol is of the form 1xxx and therefore the set [0 7] are ruled out and the symbol must lie in [8 15]. Eight possible states; half as many as before. Half the uncertainty.

Notice that at no time do I rule that your message is cogent or noise. A 1,000-character post on AtBC contains the same quantity of "information" as a 1,000-character post on UD (shudder!! except we also know that the UD can't be a post from kairosfocus) if both are written in the same language.

Applying this to DNA (and here I wander out of engineering and into microbiology - ALERT! ALERT!), mRNA (m = message!) is a message from the cell nucleus to the ribosome: "Here. Make this protein". The ribosome will read the mRNA three bases at a time and use those triplets (codons) to determine* which amino acid to append to the polymer it is assembling. It does not care whether the polymer is useful or toxic or garbage or a viroid. The semantics of the message are irrelevant to the measure of information.

* I'm overlooking the role of tRNA and the myriad other helper molecules that help make the magic happen.

In information theory, there is AFAIK no way to measure the "usefulness" of the message. (Is a viroid useful? To the virus, it is. Are point mutations useful?) The IDers might wish to extend information theory to do just that, but so far they've not come up with the goods. "FCSI" and other concoctions appear to me as just so much unsubstantiated wishful thinking. I appreciate their desire to distinguish between "useful" and "useless" information but the science does not help them and they have not extended the science to do so. Invoking "information theory" in the defense of their efforts is nothing more than intellectual hi-jacking.

Claude Shannon was a brilliant man, and Bell Labs was the "Google" of it's day. Interestingly enough, his doctoral thesis was An Algebra for Theoretical Genetics. However, as far as I can tell he earned only one doctorate.

Date: 2008/08/31 21:22:36, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Daniel Smith @ Aug. 30 2008,12:47)
As far as I'm concerned, all this talk about information, complexity, and specificity is irrelevant if it doesn't apply to real world biochemical systems.

Erm - well, it does seem relevant in light of the attempts of the ID community to make various claims that the genetic code shows evidence of complex specified information having been injected into it (shh! don't say by who!) without a shred of science or measurement behind the words "complex" or "specified" and predicated on a listener's confusion or lack of understanding as to what "information" is and how it is measured in statistical terms. So the first order of business would be to clear the cobwebs of obfuscation out of the way. "Information" has a solid mathematical foundation beneath it; it even gets to be a "theory"! "Complexity"? "Specified"? Jury still out.

As for:  
Quote
I'd be intensely interested in an algorithm that mirrors real biological evolution.

Any simulation must be judged by the level of fidelity one is looking for, but would Blondie24 (Anaconda) fill the bill? Not an algorithm, really, but more of a process (which is what evolution is). Random variation and natural selection -- it's all there. No targets, no external fitness measure, no guidance, no CSI injected; just live (and spawn) or die. Close enough?

Date: 2008/09/02 07:42:27, Link
Author: dogdidit
Unobtainium has many popular uses in engineering.

Date: 2008/09/02 07:50:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 31 2008,19:09)
 
Quote
Have they mentioned s orbitals/p orbitals etc yet?


Didn't sound like it. I thought about mentioning that in the transition metals the electrons are added in the next to highest shell instead of the highest, but decided to wait to see if that was the next chapter. (Also in the "rare earths" the new electrons are added to the second shell from the top.) It's because those orbital have the next higher energy level, and additions are made to the lowest still empty energy level, even when that's not the top shell. It's also why the transition metals aren't overly different from each other chemically - their outer shells are all 1 or 2 electrons (with 1 (or is it 2?) exceptions where the "outermost" shell is actually empty).

Henry

SPDF!! I thought I had succeeded in forgetting all that. Thanks for nothing.

I'd imagine Reese and Campbell would cover just enough QM to understanding the how's and why's of chemical bonding, but never haven studied biology I am ignorant of just how much QM and chemistry foundation would be needed. Certainly an understanding of bonding energy would be important.

I've been eyeing up Lou's textbook; would all agree it's a pretty good choice for an autodidact self-learner?

Date: 2008/09/03 07:41:38, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Assassinator @ Sep. 03 2008,06:13)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ Sep. 02 2008,07:50)
I've been eyeing up Lou's textbook; would all agree it's a pretty good choice for an autodidact self-learner?

I won't say per definition. I've been discussing with someone over ID and evolution for about a year now. The guy also has read Biology from Campbell and calls himself an auto-didact, but if you see him talk about evolution and all the subjects around it... Imo, you should always keep some experts on the field around to clearify things. Especially with things like biology and evolution, which include so many other subjects (nuclear physics for example) and the sometimes necessary backgrounds, it's incredibly difficult to teach yourself.

A valid point. Truth to tell, unless I intend to work in the field (and I don't) there is really not much chance of me reaching the level of understanding of even a bachelor's degree candidate. Books are fine but the social transactions of mentoring relationships (starting with professor-student and going on from there...and lasting a lifetime) are absolutely essential. That is partly why I struck out "autodidact"; this is not at all the same as picking up a manual on LISP or perl and banging out some code, and even in engineering there is essential knowledge that can only be gained with the help and guidance of mentors. Not everything is written down in books. And the relative importance of all that is written is not always evident.

What I am looking for is a deeper undertanding that what can be gained from reading books written for the lay public. I can withstand a higher level of technical detail. Engineering is not much help but I do have a Physics bachelors that I dust off from time to time. The fundamentals never change; that's why they are called...well, you get the idea.

 
Quote
But still, I can recommend Campbell. It helped me understand a lot of stuff about various subjects.
Dank u wel, Assassinator!

ETA: Thank you Albie as well for your recommendations.

Date: 2008/09/03 07:48:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
BTW Lou, if you want to master the elements of the periodic table, I highly recommend a mnemonic.

Date: 2008/09/05 09:43:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 05 2008,05:13)
As you've made such an effort to act the twat I suppose it should be recognised. Your Delta Tau Chi name is:

MUD STUFFIN


I think you're onto something ehere. Rearranging the letters in his nym, I get:

DELL EMPLOYED MUD STUFFIN

It's Davetard.

Date: 2008/09/05 12:07:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Sep. 05 2008,11:57)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ Sep. 05 2008,09:43)
       
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 05 2008,05:13)
As you've made such an effort to act the twat I suppose it should be recognised. Your Delta Tau Chi name is:

MUD STUFFIN


I think you're onto something ehere. Rearranging the letters in his nym, I get:

DELL EMPLOYED MUD STUFFIN

It's Davetard.

Where was was the "Y" in the original handle?

Don't tell me that's the only thing you found wrong with my bogus anagram. :O

All seriousness aside (as Steve Allen used to say), this is what made me call "Davetard":
Quote
I mentioned in another thread how I loved watching Vox Day slap atheists around. The only one who can top him in that department is DaveScot. I'd be willing to bet that Dave has more knowledge than the top-5 most knowledgeable "Darwinists" here put together.

DT has done this before, has he not?

Date: 2008/09/05 16:14:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dvunkannon @ Sep. 05 2008,14:54)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 31 2008,22:22)
As for:            
Quote
I'd be intensely interested in an algorithm that mirrors real biological evolution.

Any simulation must be judged by the level of fidelity one is looking for, but would Blondie24 (Anaconda) fill the bill? Not an algorithm, really, but more of a process (which is what evolution is). Random variation and natural selection -- it's all there. No targets, no external fitness measure, no guidance, no CSI injected; just live (and spawn) or die. Close enough?

Gil Dodgen of UD fame gives an amazingly positive Amazon review to Blondie24, back in 2001. Maybe he wasn't saved back then.

No doubt by now Jebus has shown him where the CSI was injected.

edited for spelling

Date: 2008/09/11 11:20:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
3
sheldonr
09/11/2008
10:42 am

Correction: to be published in “Instruments, Missions and Methods for Astrobiology XI” (2008) Proc. of the SPIE, eds. Hoover, R.B. et al.

link

SPIE = The International Society for Optical Engineering (the acronym is defunct). The proceedings of an engineering conference is not quite the same as a peer-reviewed science journal.

Still, this will raise some eyebrows. And, uh, note the name of the editor(s) of the Proceedings. ;)

Date: 2008/09/11 20:54:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
7. Hitchcock's obvious infatuation with Kim Novak. Look at the way he lights her, steve; he was hopelessly head-over-heels in lust love. C'mon, it jumps right off the film.

Back on topic: meant to toss an HT to RBill a month or two back for reminding me about Laurie Anderson's Mr. Heartbreak. I dug the CD out and spooled it up a few days later -- still highly listenable. For some reason that put me in a techno mood and that led to Come With Us by the Chemical Brothers, cranked up "one louder". And then the missus came downstairs and said turn it down, and down it went.

Date: 2008/09/11 22:26:49, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 11 2008,18:32)
   
Quote (BWE @ Sep. 12 2008,00:20)
I read in one of the recent science mags (science news maybe?) that the quantum effect of the water molecule have a lot to do with the emergent chemical properties and that water made with deuterium is fundementally different in that the bond is much tighter or something like that.

[/blithering]

Not entirely blithertastic my friend.

Ask yourself why (for example) hydrogen sulfide or hydrogen selenide don't behave the same way as water (in their liquid states). Elements from the first period tend to be unusual for their group by virtue of their comparatively small atomic radius and high electronegativity (simple explanation. More complex stuff involves maths, quantum mechanics, and depending on how far one wants to go, molecular orbital theory).

Isotope effects (H to D for example) can alter the strength of the bond sufficiently to noticeably affect the dissociation constants or the pka for example.

Oops, I appear to have got all excited and mildly chemical again. Apologies.

Louis

You mean second period, correct? That is, home of oxygen, nitrogen, and flourine, the chief electronegative culprits in hydrogen bonding? I'm not nitpicking, I just want to make sure I understand. My college physics never got this far. Excuse me for being a noisy kibbitzer.

It seems to me that "hydrogen bonding" is a bit mislabelled; it's more to do with the electronegative elements than hydrogen. I read somewhere that even carbon can participate in "hydrogen bonding".

ANYHOO- Lou, hydrogen bonding is pretty critical in biochemistry. The two complementary strands on DNA are held together with hydrogen bonds. And I believe hydrogen bonding also plays a role in protein folding. So you're going to spend some time studying it, I imagine.

As for deuterium chemistry, I am slack-jawed. The extra neutron is electrically neutral, and can interact with the electron cloud only weakly (literally), I thought, so WTF? Guess I needed to stay in school a little longer.

Louis, if I had a cap, I'd doff it. *cap-doffing motion*

BWE, let me borrow this:
</blithering>

Date: 2008/09/12 06:38:24, Link
Author: dogdidit

TURN THAT CRAP DOWN!!!!!

Or at least put on Enya...

Date: 2008/09/12 06:54:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 12 2008,03:10)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 12 2008,05:12)
   
Quote
The extra neutron is electrically neutral, and can interact with the electron cloud only weakly (literally),


Is it that it interacts weakly with the electrons, or simply that it doubles the inertia of the atom it's in, making it more resistant to getting shoved around by outside forces? (Also heavier gravitationally, of course.)

Henry

The second one.

Louis

Ah, hadn't considered momentum. I heard hoofbeats and thought of zebras. Great discussion, Louis and BWE! Though it's more science than I can handle right now (7:30 am and in a seriously un-caffeinated state). I'll flatter myself by pretending I'll read up and understand it later.

BTW Henry J is right, we shouldn't be ignoring gravity; why, it's the strongest force in the universe doncha know!  :p

Date: 2008/09/12 07:12:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Badger3k @ Sep. 11 2008,23:49)
Wait a minute - species do not change due to natural processes, but because they are infected from space?  Seriously?  ???

Seriously! I'm waiting for the people who run SPIE to wake up and realize that a couple of nutballs - Sheldon and Hoover - have hijacked one of their technical forums and are using it as a vehicle to promulgate bizarro panspermian creationism. Keep popcorn handy.

Date: 2008/09/20 17:39:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Wesley R. Elsberry]

Quote
atheist high priests and gurus like Darwin, Dawkins, Hitchens and Atkins

Low-carb is atheist?! Who knew??

Date: 2008/09/25 07:28:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 20 2008,17:58)
Being a strictly non-partisan kind of guy, I think it is likely that the mortgage bailout will drain every available dollar from the federal budget for several years, effectively rendering presidential policy moot.

We did this once before, in the 80s.

Late 80s to early 90s. We deregulated the Savings and Loan business in the 80s, and half of them promptly went tango-uniform. The government was forced to step in with bailout $$ and the Resolution Trust Corporation to prevent a financial melt-down. President was a guy named 'Bush'. Any of this sound familiar?

The cost of the bailout forced Bush to raise taxes, thereby violating his campaign promise to do no such thing ("read my lips") and so angering the Republican base that their already lukewarm support of him dried up, allowing Clinton to deny him re-election in 1992.

Bush Sr.'s status as a "one-termer" status puts him on a par with Jimmy Carter and Herbert Hoover. The shame, the shame! Bush Jr's presidency is largely about redeeming the family honor. It's all about Daddy.

Date: 2008/09/25 13:23:03, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 25 2008,09:36)
               
Quote
Late 80s to early 90s. We deregulated the Savings and Loan business in the 80s, and half of them promptly went tango-uniform. The government was forced to step in with bailout $$ and the Resolution Trust Corporation to prevent a financial melt-down. President was a guy named 'Bush'. Any of this sound familiar?

I was working in the mortgage industry and remember it somewhat differently. Mortgage interest rates went from 9 percent in 1978 to nearly 18 percent in 1982. All kinds of tricks were invented to enable people to buy houses. ARM loans, which quickly rose to market rate, and something called a Graduated Payment Mortgage, in which the first year's payment didn't even cover interest. People found themselves, after three years owing more than they had borrowed, and monthly payments twice what they had started at.

Foreclosures skyrocketed in the early to mid 1980s. At the time I was working on mortgage software, Bank of America had at least 150 people working on foreclosures. That's just people using the software I helped write.

The economy killer was interest rates. From 1984 to 1992, mortgage interest rates fell from 14 percent to about 8 percent.

http://www.freddiemac.com/pmms/pmms30.htm

Well, I can't claim to any expertise in the mortgage industry, but I believe my history was correct. The RTC was created in 1989 in response to the S&L crisis of the late 1980s. The RTC took over more than 700 failed thrifts by the mid 90s; the FSLIC took over several hundred others. These events post-date the ones you mention (which no doubt contributed to the crisis).

For investors and depositors who had their life savings tied up in these institutions, the impacts were devastating. In many cases the private insurance the S&Ls carried was not enough to cover the losses and the depostiors simply lost their savings, or were returned pennies on the dollar (until the government stepped in). The collapse of Old Court Savings and Loan, here in Maryland, was memorably devastating. Some small satisfaction could be gained by seeing its president, Jeffry Levitt, hauled off to prison for fraud. The same could not be said for the consequences suffered by Neil Bush (funny how that Bush name just keeps on turning up, doesn't it?!), who was director of the Silverado S&L when it went belly-up in 1988 to the tune of $1.3B taxpayer dollars (I think he paid a $50k fine for fiduciary irresponsibility), or for Senator John McCain, who, as a member of the Keating Five, was cleared of wrongdoing in that influence-peddling scandal by the Senate Ethics Committee, receiving only a hand-slap for poor judgment.

George Bush never quite lived down that "read my lips; no new taxes" pledge that he made in 1988 and broke in 1990. It surely helped to cost him the election in 1992. However, the tax increases he agreed to, as well as the pay-as-you-go federal budget processes he helped enact, eventually led the country from annual deficits to annual surpluses (at least, in the last three Clinton budgets). Ahh, the good old days.

And now, back to the thread topic...

Date: 2008/09/26 09:11:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Sep. 25 2008,13:57)
RTC may have been created in 1989, but the damage was done by high interest rates and bad loans made a decade earlier. It takes years for people to default on mortgages when the default is due to creeping payments, and it can take years to foreclose on loans after default.

The costs associated with foreclosure, coupled with huge numbers of properties that had to be liquidated quickly at less than the value of the note, did in the savings and loans.

This cycle will repeat every time government policy makes loans available to vast numbers of people who will be unable to repay them. The current mess is exacerbated by loans made that exceed the market value of the property. This is a fact regardless of who deserves the blame. I suspect there is more than enough to go around.

Fair E Nuff, but your original post referred to the impact on the federal budget, which became an issue when the RTC was formed and funded in 1989 to take over the failing thrifts:
Quote
Being a strictly non-partisan kind of guy, I think it is likely that the mortgage bailout will drain every available dollar from the federal budget for several years, effectively rendering presidential policy moot.

What available dollars? The S&L debacle of the 80s/90s eventually cost the taxpayers somewhere around $125B, and the upfront costs were enough to prompt the Republican president to raise taxes (at a considerable cost to his political career, I might add...but then George Sr always placed service before self-interest, a habit of mind that he failed to instill in his sons). This time around the upfront costs look to be more like ONE TRILLION DOLLARS

and no evidence so far that the Republican president's son has any intention of raising taxes. In fact, he remains dedicated to making permanent the cuts he enacted or are on the way; most importantly, the elimination of the inheritance tax in 2010. Just because our children are to inherit a crushing burden of debt does not mean that his children are. Or John McCain's.

Does he think that we can get there by cutting discretionary funding? Freezing the science budget? Gee, we could whack the financing for NPR; $200M down, $999,800M to go!

Perhaps it's too much to expect a lame duck president to do anything, but his presumptive Republican replacement isn't showing us anything different. Even as he air-drops himself into the bailout fray (though parachute rides ought to be something he avoids), McCain continues to self-identify as a de-regulator and tax-cutter. Not exactly the temperament one needs given that the problem was caused by lack of regulation and oversight, and whose solution will inevitably require new taxes. New taxes were going to be required anyhow, to pay for the unfunded liabilities of Social Security, and Medicare. And the cost of the War in Iran Iraq. Read my lips.

And what are we to make of his poor judgment (the Senate Ethics Committee's words, not mine) he displayed in the last bank crisis? "Good judgment comes from experience, and experience comes from bad judgment"?? Perhaps, but I also believe "past performance is a reliable predictor of future behaviour". I'm just sayin'.

Quote
The disastrous economy and high interest rates that made Carter a one-term president were the result of paying for the Vietnam War. Again, it often takes a decade or more for policy decisions to result in a national crisis

Don't overlook the 1970s oil shock. Or the Teheran embassy hostage crisis (which locked Carter in the WHite House, effectively denying him the ability to campaign). JMHO but had Desert One led to a successful raid (Entebbe-like), Carter would have been re-elected in 1980.

Don't get me wrong, mwt. I'm a registered Republican. I voted for Reagan in 1980. I read Jude Wanniski, and supply-side economics, and A Time For Truth. I am not playing partisan politics here. I am just noting that we are well and truly screwed. The last thing we need is leadership dedicated to screwing us in even further.

Sorry, all, for the huge OT post. Time for a trip to the loo, Lou?

Date: 2008/09/26 09:24:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 25 2008,18:14)
'Twas not all for naught:
     
Quote
Update (added by DaveScot):

...Broadcast television didn’t exist in 1929, dummy...

Perhaps you omitted it (you quote-miner, you) or perhaps DaveTard made another rearrangement, but the snippet now reads:
Quote
Broadcast television didn’t exist in 1929, dummy, and Hoover was president. Fail.

So, let me gets this straight:
1) Biden extemporizes, fails to get his facts right, and is therefore a moron dummy.
2) BarmyA extemporizes, fails to get his facts right (and fails to note all of Biden's errors), and is therefore...

...a tard.

Okay, sure. I got it. Thanks for listening!

Date: 2008/09/26 12:21:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 26 2008,11:05)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Sep. 26 2008,15:11)
[SNIP]

This time around the upfront costs look to be more like ONE TRILLION DOLLARS

and no evidence so far that the Republican president's son has any intention of raising taxes.

[SNIP]

By the way, I'm sending you a bill for a new keyboard and my afternoon double espresso.

This section of your comment caused major coffee expulsion through my nose. Which strangely isn't as pleasant as it sounds.

Louis

Date: 2008/09/27 09:09:46, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (huwp @ Sep. 27 2008,06:14)
I think that's about it.  There are loads of others here and most of them are a bit dotty too.

Anyway, welcome!

Huwp

Don't forget Albus Dumbledore Doctor Doolittle Wesley Ellsberry, who feeds the animals, stocks the bar, and hammers out the magick one tag at a time.

Date: 2008/09/27 12:01:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richard Simons @ Sep. 27 2008,09:24)
     
Quote (Ftk @ Sep. 26 2008,22:26)
Isn’t it just common sense to test drugs on organisms with similar architectures? Again, I don’t think we need to assume common descent there.

If you do not assume common descent, what is your justification for assuming that, because they have similar architectures, they will have similar physiologies? That is like assuming that because the Boeing 767 and the Airbus A330 have similar architectures they should react similarly to an electrical fault on the flight deck.

In fact they might have identical structures in some areas, especially if their designs took place in the same time period. They might, for example, use the exact same engine. Some of the avionics elements might be identical (obtained from the same commercial vendors).

Whereas a Boeing 747, whose design pre-dates that of the 767, could have remarkably different engines, avionics, flight controls, landing gear designs, etc., even though it is from the same manufacturer, simply because it was designed in an earlier era. It might have even been assembled differently than the 767 -- whereas the A330 and the 767 might be assembled using similar techniques, since advances in the engineering state of the art tend to bridge the discipline spanning different manufacturers. We all swim in the same pool of technology, and that pool moves.

(I know of this first-hand because as a radar designer I have had the unique opportunity to study our competitors in detail, and now no longer experience the shock of discovering that their designs and technologies, year after year, differ very little from our own, even though radar designs of today differ markedly from those of a decade or two ago.)

Date: 2008/09/27 14:51:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Sep. 27 2008,13:47)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Sep. 27 2008,13:01)
Whereas a Boeing 747, whose design pre-dates that of the 767, could have remarkably different engines, avionics, flight controls, landing gear designs, etc., even though it is from the same manufacturer, simply because it was designed in an earlier era. It might have even been assembled differently than the 767 --

Well, YEAH. By a tornado in a junk yard, doncha know.

I serves em up nice n easy, I does.

Date: 2008/09/28 09:57:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (PTET @ Sep. 28 2008,06:51)
What's really scary is that Palin still doesn't get why she's mocked for claiming that living next to Russia counts as foreign policy experience... Like no-one at the GOP has told her that yet...

Does she ever mention the other foreign country that she lives next door to??

Date: 2008/09/29 06:59:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (keiths @ Sep. 28 2008,21:30)
Pat Boone.  He's a maverick.

"Maverick"? Here ya go:

Date: 2008/09/29 07:03:35, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Sep. 29 2008,06:56)
In classic UD fashion, after the bannination BarryA and StephenB, the next two commenters, continue to debate the banned as if he was still among them and able to reply.

Then Dave pulls out the FtK card with this interesting noun construction (my emphasis)    
Quote
All I know is classical materialism is dead yet there are hoardes of scientists who think it’s still alive and well.

It's a collective noun. "A hoarde of misers", e.g.

Date: 2008/09/30 12:54:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Spottedwind @ Sep. 30 2008,09:59)
I knew that, who said I didn't?

HAR HAR THIS IS YOU

Date: 2008/09/30 15:56:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 30 2008,14:29)
It's up to parties to put forward better candidates under the current system, but I wouldn't argue against a certain degree of qualification being required for the post.

The American political system typically chooses President's from its pool of current and former executive leaders: state governors, presidents (up for re-election), and sitting vice presidents. This election cycle is the first in 100 years to break that rule, since neither candidate fits the 'former elected executive' criteria. That's one missing qualification, right there.

I don't know if military experience prepares anybody to be commander-in-chief; everybody in uniform has a senior commander, from whom emanate orders. It would be useful for the President to know the risks and limitations of military power, e.g. that foreign dictators are remarkably difficult to kill with Tomohawk missiles. But that sort of wisdom ought to be attainable from history, and common sense. (And a little outrage - why doesn't the weapon system do all the things we were promised it could do when we bought it?!)

Date: 2008/10/01 07:55:18, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ Oct. 01 2008,04:11)
DaveTard:
Quote

McCain’s a military guy so this is like battle planning for him. He’s just keeping the Obama campaign enough off balance so its vulnerable.

Erm- McCain's last actual combat experience didn't turn out so well, did it?

Date: 2008/10/01 19:22:47, Link
Author: dogdidit
Minor note to dvunkannon: the Great White North starts at the 49th parallel. 54°40' was the northern limit of the esrtwhile Oregon Territory, which Polk or Reagan or somebody wanted to claim back in 1492 (for either the Inuits or the Winter Olympics'). Thus Uncomely Denyse's IQ has further south to be north of.





Date: 2008/10/02 08:17:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
17
William Wallace
10/01/2008
12:54 am

Men and women are different?

They lied to me at University.

SRSLY?? Not much of an empiricist.

University for me was some mumbledy-odd years ago, but I do recall spending a considerable amount of time engaged in empirical investigation on this matter. Some experiments were, um, more successful than others, but in the long run the hypothesis was more than satisfactorily verified. *ahem*

Looks like Willy Wally short-changed himself on his education. Perhaps he should have spent less time alone in the dorm, working on his "masters".

Date: 2008/10/02 08:38:30, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 02 2008,08:22)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ Oct. 02 2008,08:17)
     
Quote
17
William Wallace
10/01/2008
12:54 am

Men and women are different?

They lied to me at University.

SRSLY?? Not much of an empiricist.

University for me was some mumbledy-odd years ago, but I do recall spending a considerable amount of time engaged in empirical investigation on this matter. Some experiments were, um, more successful than others, but in the long run the hypothesis was more than satisfactorily verified. *ahem*

Looks like Willy Wally short-changed himself on his education. Perhaps he should have spent less time alone in the dorm, working on his "masters".

A Master debator in Micro-biology perhaps?


function [bon mot] = cleverWordPlay(willy, master, debater, 'hard science', wanker, short-changed, microbiology)

Damn, it won't execute...

Date: 2008/10/02 08:39:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2008,21:30)

FtK can you think of any particular reason why Notropis minnows or Etheostoma darters both contain hundreds of species yet are found only in North America?

You're wasting your breath. FTK has repeatedly said she does not believe in mackerel evolution.




I'll get my coat.

Date: 2008/10/02 09:25:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
drum roll
high hat
great audience
all week
try veal
tip waitress waitstaff



this thing on?



get coat

Date: 2008/10/02 12:58:03, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Oct. 02 2008,11:29)
       
Quote (dogdidit @ Oct. 02 2008,07:39)
         
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 01 2008,21:30)

FtK can you think of any particular reason why Notropis minnows or Etheostoma darters both contain hundreds of species yet are found only in North America?

You're wasting your breath. FTK has repeatedly said she does not believe in mackerel evolution.




I'll get my coat.

I disagree.

She does believe in a Holy Mackerel! sort of evolution.

What are you, some kind of comedian?
.
.
.
.
drum roll high hat great audience try veal tip waitress thing on? get coat

Date: 2008/10/03 06:27:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
EYE FOUR WON THOUGHT BLIPEYS POST WAS BUDDHA-TASTIC

*sound of one hand golf-clapping*

Date: 2008/10/03 06:47:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
8
DaveScot
10/02/2008
2:49 pm

When I say Darwinian evolution I mean the term writ large accounting for the entire history of life on earth. Do I really need to tediously qualify it at every mention? I don’t think so. Most of the subscribers and audience here recognize by now that micro-evolution by chance & necessity is not being disputed. We don’t dispute facts. We dispute theory.

My bolding. On-line now at UD:    
   - ten true believers;
   - twelve yet-to-be banninninated skeptics;
   - a couple dozen sock puppets (you know who you are *wags finger*);
   - and fifty AtBCers observing from beyond the electrified fence.

Davetard really needs to conduct a census.

Date: 2008/10/03 06:50:00, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 03 2008,00:41)

Looks like there's been a little editing of DaveTard's post:    
Quote
12

DaveScot

09/30/2008

10:49 pm
TomRiddle is no longer with us.

Larry Fafarman is in timeout, again.

Covered already. Behold!

Date: 2008/10/03 07:02:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
While we're at it, I've been thinking about this consistent concoction of DT's:
 
Quote
8
DaveScot
10/02/2008
2:49 pm

Blah blah blah  chance & necessity  blah blah blah...

God Teh Designer tinkers with his creation;
other parts of it are governed by ever-lasting law ("necessity");
and random chance governs the third portion of the firmament.

Have I got it right?

Hmmm.. . Tinkers...to Evers...to Chance...


OH NOES!! DAVETARDS IS A CUBS FAN!!!!

Date: 2008/10/10 07:32:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 09 2008,14:05)
You mean get my hands dirty and actually deal with PEOPLE (as opposed to nice quiet round bottomed flasks)?

So, erm- you like em nice, quiet, and round-bottomed?

[/freudian]

Date: 2008/10/10 08:02:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 10 2008,07:35)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ Oct. 10 2008,13:32)
     
Quote (Louis @ Oct. 09 2008,14:05)
You mean get my hands dirty and actually deal with PEOPLE (as opposed to nice quiet round bottomed flasks)?

So, erm- you like em nice, quiet, and round-bottomed?

[/freudian]

I'm not picky, I'll take an erlenmeyer too.

[/Jungian]

Louis

Ah, yes, the erlenmeyer! Brings back fond memories of sophomore year chem lab...experiments under the hood...titrating, uh, something...into something else...excitingly bright endothermic chemical reactions...the instinctive need to observe the fun from up close... violent paroxysms of coughing.... the lab professor strongly recommending that I pursue a career in anything but O-chem, lest I kill myself at an unfortunately young age (or worse, on his watch)...

Good times.

Date: 2008/10/11 20:37:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
11
BarryA
10/11/2008
7:51 pm

terry fillups, even the leftists at ABC News knew they could not make the blatantly false connection between Palin and the Alaska Independence Party stick. See

http://blogs.abcnews.com/polit.....-frin.html

It took me 30 seconds and one Google search to debunk your balderdash. You are on probation. If I catch you trying to use this site as a forum for spreading glaringly untrue, easily-debunked-with-30-seconds-of-effort lies again, you will be outta here.

Gee, BarmyA, I can use Teh Google too! From a different post by the same "leftist" at ABC News:
Quote
So the facts are: Gov. Palin was not a member of this third-party ("Alaska First -- Alaska Always") that wants Alaskans to get a vote on whether or not the state can secede from the U.S. But her husband was a long-time member, and at least two AIP officials recall her attending the 1994 convention, though she says she did not attend.

linky

This would seem to support terry fillups point made earlier in the thread:
Quote
The question you are ignoring is the Palins association with the secessionist AIP.

It took me 30 seconds and one Google search to debunk your balderdash, BarmyA. You are on probation. If I catch you trying to use UD as a forum for spreading glaringly untrue, easily-debunked-with-30-seconds-of-effort lies again, you will be mocked. MOCKED I tell you. Mercilessly mocked, with all the mocking mocked-up mockery I can summon.

So there.

Date: 2008/10/13 12:48:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 13 2008,12:13)
Davetard says:

Quote
In any case, if McCain is polling behind Obama in the final week before Nov. 4th, they’re likely going to blast Obama’s refusal to provide the public with school records, birth certificates, and passport and foreign travel history among other things across every television screen in every battleground state. Rumor has it the RNC has documented proof that Obama isn’t qualified but they’re keeping it to themselves as long as possible and hopefully forever but not if that means losing the election. It’s their ace-in-the-hole to be turned over only if absolutely necessary

"Rumor has it" LOL!! An authoritative-sounding statement that is totally bereft of authority -- you can just make shit up and plaster "rumor has it" on the front and it's true! It IS a rumour! It's my rumour, that I, ah, just made up, but so what, it meets the minimal standards of veracity required of rumor, i.e, none whatsoever.

This particular rumor has much dumb. If the RNC had any such evidence they would be briefing it at a press conference as we speak. DT lives in a fantasy world; the occasional sand up his buttcrack is his only reminder of Reality.

Date: 2008/10/15 15:21:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 15 2008,13:24)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 15 2008,07:21)
you materialist darwinist from ATBC cannot show me how selection she make tiny spider the mimic of ze tiny ant.  yet selectionist propagandakegaggen materialist insist on "Yet It must Be So" ignoring great works of ze Daniel Smithikaggen and Heikertinger that show it may or may not be so but eez impossible to ze prove.  Frustrated darwinist so we have here, that cannot provide an electronikagen by electronimorgen account of step by step since is all in selectionist heads.  As Great biologist and my frind Davison say I Love It So!

Not enough capital letters in that. ;)

No pictures of ladybirds either.

Date: 2008/10/15 20:15:37, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Oct. 15 2008,20:04)
   
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 15 2008,17:08)
CHat-field
You made rain for L.A.
We've got ten grand
For you to go cook us some rain
Science from the cooking pot mixing up with the air
Feeling thunder
Nights since they have started
Now the clouds won't stay apart
A little California voodoo
Care of CHatfield and his brother (Louis?)...

I assume this is some kind of pop culture reference here, but I confess I have no idea what it refers to.

This might help.

Date: 2008/10/17 08:48:39, Link
Author: dogdidit
Pea. Owe. Tee. Double you.

Date: 2008/10/29 14:59:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
From Arden's Salon excerpts:

Quote
(I feel like I'm back to recapping episodes of "America's Next Top Model," but I love it.)
The Presidential campaign is the best Reality Show on TV. Might win an emmy! It's got my vote.

Quote
Wallace struck back, telling Ana Marie Cox: "There's obviously an organized campaign to lay blame for things at my feet and I'm not going to engage before the campaign ends. I have a very long relationship with Fox News and the notion that someone would call me a coward on the air and accuse me of putting $150,000 on my credit card without a single person calling and checking with me suggests that something is going on."
This is fun. Is there a denial of the charge anywhere in there? Nope!

Quote
Palin is a nasty and very skilled political opportunist who is giving as good as she's getting, smacking Barack Obama, Joe Biden and now McCain (his staff, anyway) with savage glee.
John McCain was aboard the USS Forrestal when some of its on-deck ordnance caught fire, started to squib off, and tried to sink the boat. In fact it was his jet's fuel tank that the errant Zuni rocket went through to start the conflagaration. The fire was no fault of John's, but you would think he'd have a personal appreciation of the risks involved in handling pyrotechnics. Apparently not.

Date: 2008/10/30 13:54:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (jeffox @ Oct. 29 2008,21:40)
     
Quote
John McCain was aboard the USS Forrestal when some of its on-deck ordnance caught fire, started to squib off, and tried to sink the boat. In fact it was his jet's fuel tank that the errant Zuni rocket went through to start the conflagaration. The fire was no fault of John's, but you would think he'd have a personal appreciation of the risks involved in handling pyrotechnics. Apparently not.


When I was in boot camp, we were required to view the on-ship videos of this event for our "this is what happens if things really fuck up" training.  'Twas something one never forgets.  Especially since it showed at least 2 500 pound bombs going off, killing both the first and second teams of firefighters topside.  Ick, ick, ick.

My understanding of those events comes from personal recollections related to me by former aviators. The main cause of the Forrestal tragedy was the failure to only use -- per the rules -- insensitive munitions, i.e. bombs that would withstand a fire long enough to permit the firefighters to douse the flames. Bad shit happens when you don't follow the rules, especially when those rules were written in blood.

It is also a dictum among fighter pilots that if you got shot down, it's because you did something stoopid. Sounds like Right Stuff machismo to me (I'm not a fighter pilot) and I don't actually know why McCain got shot down, but he does have a life-long history of making rash, ill-considered decisions, the most recent example being the selection of Bible Spice to be his running mate and America's next Commander-in-Chief-in-waiting.

Quote (jeffox @ Oct. 29 2008,21:40)
Carriers were not the kind of ship I wanted to serve on, anyway. [..]  Plus they're mighty big TARGETS.

Spoken like a true bubble-head -- not that you're wrong! But the Navy always buys the boats they think won the last war. Two centuries of tradition unblemished by progress.

Sorry to stray off-topic. Uh, lemme see... something about Arden's wife, Louis's mother, and pickles? LOLcats to follow.

Date: 2008/10/30 13:56:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 30 2008,13:54)
How does one distinguish between "we don't presently have an explanation for that" and "we'll never have an explanation for that"?

It's about the same as the difference between "I don't know" and "I give up".

Date: 2008/10/30 22:08:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 30 2008,21:53)
 
Quote (carlsonjok @ Oct. 30 2008,22:42)
 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 30 2008,21:14)
   
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 30 2008,21:37)
I'm going to have to see that. Never seen it, though I'm a huge Gene Hackman fan...once in a while, when the fancy strikes, I think about someone like Gene Hackman, and realize that looks aren't everything :-)

I swear, Gene Hackman squirted out of his mother looking like a middle aged man. Then he became one. Now he's up there and still looks that way. Timeless.

One of my favorite Mystery Science Theater 3000 episodes was "Space Travelers" with Hackman and (among others) Gregory Peck. It was pretty odd seeing a couple Oscar winners getting the MST3K treatment.

Wow. I saw that as "Marooned" in the theater when I was a kid. Seems to me the events of Apollo 13 were simultaneously underway in real-space.

Holy crap. Was that based on the Martin Caidin novel by the same name?

{googles}

Yup. Even better, see this from the Wiki entry for Marooned (the movie):
 
Quote
In his book "Lost Moon," Apollo 13 commander Jim Lovell reported that he had taken his wife, Marilyn, to see "Marooned." This added to her worries in the weeks leading up to the launch of the ill-fated mission. (The 'nightmare' scene in the Ron Howard film Apollo 13 depicts this.)

Date: 2008/10/30 22:14:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 30 2008,21:01)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 30 2008,21:58)
steve was it a vent for the sewer drain?  maybe like there was an old sink or an old toilet in the wall?

It was black PVC, and as far as I can tell, it's designation was Ass Vomit Drain. That's a reasonable approximation, AFAIK.

Dude, listen to 'Ras, you might need to vent that sucker. There's probably methane in that ass vomit stench. ka boom. Call a plumber. Even one named Joe.

Date: 2008/10/30 22:29:44, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 30 2008,22:17)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Oct. 30 2008,23:08)
Holy crap. Was that based on the Martin Caidin novel by the same name?

{googles}

Yup.

I read that as adolescent well before the release of the movie. What I most recall is a love scene on a motor boat which I re-read several times. I think "breasts" were mentioned, and that's all it took to pop-off my pent up adolescent libido.

Good memory. I don't remember squat from the book, though I do recall spending a considerable portion of my adolescence wrestling with my, ah, libido. If "breasts" were mentioned, then, well...

*cough*

His No Man's World was kick-ass totally believable-to-my-young-mind jingoistic space opera. My favorite Caidin novel. I wonder if I would love it again after mumbledy-some years later? Did it have breasts in it?

Date: 2008/10/31 07:09:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Oct. 31 2008,06:04)
   
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 31 2008,04:48)
     
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Oct. 30 2008,22:13)
Any "Dark Star" fans here?

Both the film and the spectrum game :)

The only passage I recall is an orange ball chasing guys through aluminum ductwork. There weren't any breasts. I would have remembered them.

Ah yes. The Alien. It's demise was what one might have expected.

And don't you remember one of the astronauts trying to teach existential materialism to a bomb, to get it to not explode? Almost as good as breasts.

(Apologies for spoilers.)

Date: 2008/10/31 15:49:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 31 2008,14:18)
 
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Oct. 31 2008,12:56)
In your opinion, what is the resolution of the apparent "chicken or egg" paradox?

Colonel Sanders did it.

The Japanese did it first. oyako don:

mmmm....hungreeee....

Date: 2008/11/05 09:41:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (k.e.. @ Nov. 05 2008,02:00)
PRAISE DOG AND HIS HOLY CLAW.

HOWWWWLLLLLLLLL!!!!!!!!!!!!

{holds face to breeze}

Ahhhhhhh......

Date: 2008/11/06 09:00:50, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Amadan @ Nov. 06 2008,03:13)
Actually, I understand that Gov. Palin is going to take off the next six months or so to finish her book.



It's called The Bridesmaid's Best Man, by Barbara Hannay.




This comment was sponsored by Acme Joke Recycling Inc. No beauty pageant contestants were harmed in the making of this comment

Cover art for Sarah's book is readily available....though the publisher might be looking for something with towels. (Towels are hawt.)

Date: 2008/11/06 09:55:50, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Nov. 06 2008,06:17)
 
Quote (ERV @ Nov. 05 2008,19:57)
   
Quote (Dr.GH @ Nov. 05 2008,19:38)
I saw it referenced to the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/

Two varients at DailyKos that are linked to the Times:
http://www.dailykos.com/images/user/28416/map1.jpg

LOL I know that!  I wanted to see the source and bigger pics :)  Those maps are itty bitty.

The source is here.

If you go to slide #14 on this slide show, you can get links to county maps for each state for the 2008 election, but I don't see a way to get bigger versions of the map above.

Here are the bigger maps.

Date: 2008/11/06 16:58:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dhogaza @ Nov. 06 2008,15:32)
Regarding Palin's request to speak in Arizona.  This was strange for a couple of different reasons, and speaks again to her ignorance of the world beyond the borders of Wasilla.  Add ignorance of election night tradition to the list.

She wanted to give her concession speech *before* McCain, not after.  In other words, to be the person making the concession official.  To steal the spotlight from McCain.  That's just bizarre.  I suspect this might be the first time a losing VP candidate made such a request since they started running on a unified ticket (once upon a time VPs ran, and were voted for, separately).

Separate elections for the POTUS and VPOTUS effectively ended in 1804, I believe. Palin got one vote: McCain's. That is the sum total of democracy behind her candidacy.

I'm going to miss her; the soap opera was gangs o' fun.

Date: 2008/11/07 08:06:59, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (J-Dog @ Nov. 07 2008,07:43)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Nov. 07 2008,06:59)
For certain values of "ID community", it works, as in, "the ID community of William Dembski and Denyse O'Leary".

One hopes the rest didn't think they, like, mattered or something.

It's too bad that O'Leary can't be sent back to AK, also.  Palin and her have so much in common.  Except I don't

ever want to see O'Leary do some "fancy pagaent walkin'".

Or greet you at the door wearing nothing but a towel...

(And with that thought, I shall now gouge my brain out with a letter opener.)

Date: 2008/11/12 17:59:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 12 2008,16:35)
 
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 12 2008,13:40)
P.S. He did turn me into a newt, but luckily I got better.

Ah well, no newts is good newts.

Actually, his mother was a newt, but his father smelled of elderberries.

Date: 2008/11/20 08:47:43, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (CeilingCat @ Nov. 20 2008,04:50)
I think this gives us new insight into Granny Spice's way of "thinking".  Judging from her writing, she's probably underbussed a lot of the time.

under + buss = kiss ass? As in: "Now that he has left UD, Davetard no longer has Dr Dr Dembski to underbuss."

Date: 2008/11/26 17:56:15, Link
Author: dogdidit
Could Clive Hayden be the new admin at UD?  
Quote
3
Clive Hayden
11/26/2008
1:23 pm

qwerty017, if you’re going to make an argument, then please have a respectful demeanor, no snide or flippant attitude, please.

(And it should go without saying that asking a poster to avoid a snide or flippant attitude in responding to one of Uncomely Denyse's posts is a request for superhuman restraint. REALLY, now...)

Date: 2008/12/02 08:10:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 01 2008,23:03)
The shaved ass speaks, in reverse troglodyke:

Quote
*And no, eco-nuts, don’t write to tell me that humans cause ecological destruction worldwide. Quite the contrary. Humans have greatly increased the diversity of species,subspecies, and varieties worldwide (for good or ill), and in any event are the only species that has ever attempted to prevent other species from extinction.


I wonder what it means by diversity?

I wonder what it means by species?

I would give my copy of Duh I Shat You A Brain to know what it means by subspecies.

And varieties, what is that?

What a stupid nearly human-like creature.


And she answers! In reverse troglodyke:
Quote
Humans also breed a vast number of varieties of species, by taking advantage of existing natural genomes (dog = bulldog, chihuahua, pekinese … )

These breeds do not, of course, become separate species because, left to themselves, they would either die or breed back into the feral wolfhound type of dog that does nt need any human help.

But the many dog breeds are certainly biodiversity, if you go by difference in appearance.

Does that include their appearance when taught to walk backwards with a shaved ass?
Quote
There are certainly more species alive in North America today than there were ten thousand years ago, when the vast ice sheet was melting. We probably have examples of every important species in the world, tended by a large conservation-minded population.

It is safe to say that if we do not have an example of a given species here, someone is trying to acquire it - or will try to acquire it when he learns of its existence.

ZOMG she thinks zoos increase biodiversity!!!!!11111

Quote
Humans carry plants and animals all over the globe, thus introducing them to places they could never have reached on their own. That certainly increases biodiversity.

Un. Buh. Lievable. Even the UDenizens (and sockpuppets) are not swallowing this stuff.

Date: 2008/12/02 10:10:49, Link
Author: dogdidit
Humans also introduced the rat kind to Hawaii, and since the rats haven't yet succeeded in eating all of the bird kinds that were native to the islands - viola! TWO kinds where previously there were only one! More diversity!

Plus there's a zebra at the Honolulu zoo. So there. That makes up for our elimination of the smallpox virus species.

Date: 2008/12/02 10:50:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Dec. 02 2008,10:34)
Various P4 labs still have smallpox virus on hand. Or did circa 1985. Maybe that's changed since then.

I would have assumed as much (but wondered if I was being paranoid by assuming so). Regardless, it's fun to watch Denyse careen about in the dense underbrush of the English language trying to find her ass with both hands a scientifically valid use of the word "species". Anywhere from dog breed to virus, apparently, depending on what they look like.

Date: 2008/12/02 11:12:33, Link
Author: dogdidit
I'm learning boo koo good stuff from Denyse:
Quote
Wasn’t “Free Willy” discovered in a badly run Mexico zoo? Repatriating that poor creature to the southern hemisphere did not work, apparently, and he died. In my view, he should have been repatriated to a properly run aquarium in North America, as - given his history - he was not likely to become accustomed to a human-free environment.

1. You can get a sound scientifical edumacation from movies (Free Willy, Expelllled, etc.)

2. "Repatriating" is the term one uses to describe the return of an animal to it's natural habitat...or to another aquarium. A properly-run North American* aquarium, to be precise.
   * North America = Canada and US.

3. Free Willy had a history. (Does that mean he could write? Or is that a euphemism for his rap sheet? You know: killer whale? Cimon, do I have to spell it out for you?)

4. Free Willy needed humans in his environment to survive. (Preferably, humans carrying buckets of fish? Or maybe just humans wearing iPods, Big Johnson t-shirts, and bored expressions. We can't be sure, but we removed humans from his environment and he died, so there ya go, some empiricism for ya...)

I heart UD.

Date: 2008/12/02 12:17:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 02 2008,11:30)
           
Quote
4. Free Willy needed humans in his environment to survive. (Preferably, humans carrying buckets of fish? Or maybe just humans wearing iPods, Big Johnson t-shirts, and bored expressions. We can't be sure, but we removed humans from his environment and he died, so there ya go, some empiricism for ya...)


roflmao.  I haven't seen a big johnson t shirt in a while.  guess i don't hang out at the aquarium enough.

What better to wear to a showing of Free Willy?

Re the fish kinds: dragon fish, a darter, and a sturgeon? The dragon fish was interesting to read about. The male carries the fertilized eggs? Don't tell Midwifetoad! Convergent Evilution!! TEH DESGNER LIVES!!!!!

******

Unrelated note: Google has this new (to me) feature that brings up the top hits as you type in your search query. I was googling Baltimore Aquarium and when I got as far as "Baltimore Aq-" the Google drop-down had several choices, including:
  Baltimore Aquarium - 400,000 results
  Baltimore Aqarium - 1,890,000 results

I qit right there.

Date: 2008/12/02 14:56:57, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (keiths @ Dec. 02 2008,14:30)
   
Quote (dogdidit @ Dec. 02 2008,09:12)
2. "Repatriating" is the term one uses to describe the return of an animal to it's natural habitat...or to another aquarium. A properly-run North American* aquarium, to be precise.
   * North America = Canada and US.

Kinda reminds me of 'rendition' as a euphemism for outsourcing torture.

Funny, I made the exact same connection. And "rendition" slides my imagination oh so easily to "render", as in Nazi death camps and bars of soap made from...

*shudder*

Date: 2008/12/02 21:30:35, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote

b) the Province of Ontario has banned the continued breeding of a variety of dog (the pit bull) unknown to wild nature, and currently (controversially!) on a sort of “death row” here.

Just like Free Willy Wonka, the Killer Wail. Kept inna Mexican aqarium, awaiting rendition. I just hope they don't keep them bullys in a human-free environment -- poor buggers'll die!

(Speaking of Killer Wales, where the hell is Louis??)

Date: 2008/12/03 12:34:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Nerull @ Dec. 03 2008,11:48)
So what are those characteristics, and how do they measure them, and how do they they tell the diffrence between something designed and something that only appears superficially that way? (Like an arrowhead shaped rock)

Or

versus

?

Date: 2008/12/03 16:28:26, Link
Author: dogdidit
I'm saving those threads with Olofsson and ribczynski and Sal Gal on them. This is the Golden Age of UD Moderation, but it won't be long before some new ayatollah comes along to 404 the whole smash into Obliviation. (Plus they're fun to read. tee hee!)

Date: 2008/12/03 16:29:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Dec. 03 2008,16:22)
Patrick once again makes his excuses and leaves.

Well, just leaves actually
       
Quote

173
Patrick
12/03/2008
4:46 pm

Prof Olofsson,

Sorry if I seemed to be directing that at you. I think your criticisms are interesting and that if they lead to the tightening up of ID tools and methodology–if warranted–then it would be fruitful.

In any case I need to get going now.


All talk and copying other peoples work is Patrick.

Is there a list of "ID tools and methodology" Patrick?

None are warranted.

ETA: damn, John W's was funnier funny. :angry:

Date: 2008/12/03 17:11:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Kristine @ Dec. 03 2008,16:54)
     
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 03 2008,11:47)
Along the same lines.
           
Quote
gpuccio: ... humans can very easily generate CSI through design, and nothing else can ...

Prof_P.Olofsson: Conclusion: we have designed ourselves!

Or to put it another way: we have designed the Designer (i.e., God). Intelligent design is just taking man as the measure of all things (which is humanism) and applying it to a supernatural realm, which is precisely what believers are supposed to avoid doing (because it's called, oh, idolatry and all that).

But they don't get that. Who gets that? An atheist. Would they listen to me? No.

Crap science, bad theology. It's what they want.

Not always; sometimes they want bad science, crap theology. Like Daniel here, a wannabe prometheus who proposes to storm the gates of heaven:
 
Quote
Second, science may be able to actually discover the supernatural world through the study of the natural world.  It is a cosmic opportunity.  We can look into living things and try to determine what a being capable of designing life might have been thinking.  It could conceivably reveal to man the mind of God!

Date: 2008/12/04 07:03:58, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (CeilingCat @ Dec. 04 2008,03:42)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ Dec. 03 2008,16:28)
I'm saving those threads with Olofsson and ribczynski and Sal Gal on them. This is the Golden Age of UD Moderation, but it won't be long before some new ayatollah comes along to 404 the whole smash into Obliviation. (Plus they're fun to read. tee hee!)

DaveTard's way ahead of you:
           
Quote
171

DaveScot

12/03/2008

10:43 pm
ribczynski

I asked you to stay out of this thread several days ago. If you continue to post to it I’m just going to delete them as I did just now.

Link

Ah but the unredacted goodness still spins on my hard drive. And the abridged thread now has that deliciously stupid, wires-crossed-referenced quality we've all come to know and love from past UD application of the selective obliviator.

Alas, rib and the UDenizens were not in mid-conversation, so we were not blessed this time with a demonstration of the headless chicken run 'round the barn phenomenon. Rats. Better luck next time.

Date: 2008/12/04 07:13:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Your morning tard:
Quote
70
jerry
12/04/2008
7:50 am

One should be careful to not confuse common ancestry with common descent. They are wildly different concepts and yet evidence for one is used to conclude the other is true.

There's more but not everybody has had their coffee yet.

Date: 2008/12/04 11:55:15, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 04 2008,09:34)
 
Quote
PaV: You verge on being dishonest, not because I’m trying to make you angry, but because you’re on the verge of being intellectually dishonest... Dembski has pointed out the limitations of the Bayesian approach in a logically convincing manner. It appears you simply don’t want to admit it. I can now see why Dembski doesn’t take the time to argue with his critics. It doesn’t seem to get anywhere.

Prof_P.Olofsson: It’s getting pointless discussing with you. You have no idea what we are talking about. I have refuted Dembski’s claim about the rejection region E* by showing that there is no such rejection region in a Bayesian analysis.

PaV, I would counsel caution when arguing statistics with someone who wrote a textbook on statistics.


Wrote a textbook on statistics and is apparently a Zapatista:
Quote
Olofsson: Basta!

Date: 2008/12/04 14:20:37, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Bob O'H @ Dec. 04 2008,14:11)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Dec. 04 2008,11:55)
   
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 04 2008,09:34)
 
Wrote a textbook on statistics and is apparently a Zapatista:        
Quote
Olofsson: Basta!

Basta is Swedish for sauna.

Over here in Finland it is well known that basta is of inferior quality, and so we should feel sorry for Prof. Olofsson.

And of course "sauna" as we all know is from the latin phrase mens sauna in corpore sano, which loosely translates to "The men's sauna is off limits to corporate crazies".

edited to fix that wacky iB code schtuff

Date: 2008/12/04 14:59:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 04 2008,14:50)
 
Quote (Amadan @ Dec. 04 2008,12:44)


Say it’s not true! The Filter Explanat’ry
No longer will feature in Dembski’s inanity.
Exquisitely tuned to rule out coarse reality
Its meaningless jargon bejewelled his banality.
DaveTard who once proudly the filter did bruit
Now firmly maintains that he always saw through it.
Denyse never managed to work out the numbers
But she knew it was right, and so onward she lumbers.
And the rest of the sheep meekly follow their lead,
And patiently wait for the Doctor’s next screed –
A Bayesian search for Noah’s lost Ark,
Which it finds in the Baylor Cafeteria Car Park.

Post of the week.  Also post of last week and next week.

HOMOS. I NEW IT WAS POST OF THE WEEK AT FIRST GLANTS. IN FACT, I KNEW THAT LAST WEEK, SO IT WILL BE POST OF NEXT WEEK IF WE MAKE IT POST OF THE WEEK THIS WEEK. GOT THAT? RIGHT THAT DOWN

- DAVETARD

Date: 2008/12/08 07:56:15, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Dec. 08 2008,03:08)
Gil says
     
Quote
There is no way this kind of technology can be explained by random changes and natural selection. It is far beyond our trivial understanding, and is obviously the product of an intelligence far beyond what we can even imagine.

So we can't understand the designers designs and we can't even imagine the extent of his power.
Then Gil says (first part is a quote he's responding to):
     
Quote

Well, if there’s “no way this kind of technology can be explained by random changes and natural selection,” I guess we should just give up now.

Huh? No, we take it apart, analyze it, and figure out how it works, so we can learn from the superior design of a superior designer.

So we figure out how it works using our trivial understanding which is insufficient? Huh?

Doh.

RoyK's rejoinder over there caught me in mid coffee-gulp:
Quote
Huh? You’re the one who said the designer was beyond our imagination. Your invocation of said designer was so referential I heard organ music while reading it.

I think he meant reverential but whatever, a snort is a snort. RoyK, you owe me for a new keyboard.

Date: 2008/12/08 10:16:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Clive, your own posters attest to the utility of the Uncommonly Dense threads at AtBC:
Quote
joseph:
Hey rib,

I just read your comment over on ATBC. It is a lie.

The rest of JoeG's comment:
Quote
I did not take the Buggs’ paper as evidence for creation.

But I do take you for a fool.

So Clive, how's them criteria for your moderation policy holding up?
Quote
I told you my criteria. Inappropriateness is determined on a case by case basis, some arbitors will be condescension, name-calling, rudeness, incivility, etc.

Date: 2008/12/11 09:01:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Amadan @ Dec. 11 2008,08:49)
And on the Third Day . . .


I peed my pants, amadamn you.

Date: 2008/12/16 08:32:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Why didn't somebody tell me?!
Quote
All that’s needed from a Darwinian perspective is simply the ability to procreate. There is no need to maintain the personality and the intellect.
And to think of the countless hours I spent on dates making small talk...

Date: 2008/12/19 21:01:17, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Badger3k @ Dec. 19 2008,17:47)
What is the story behind the "squirrels with lasers on their heads" - was it in response to something?  I'm sure it's less interesting than it sounds, but since we're "discussing" origins, I figure I'd ask.

Unless Dogdiddit, in which case, I guess that settles it.

Quote
Sharks with frickin laser beams attached to their heads

Whew! Thanks Lou. For a minute there I thought *I* was going to have to pony up them frikkin sharks.

Back to sleep.

Daniel? Still here? ....Nah, fuck it. Back to sleep

Date: 2009/02/12 07:48:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
To Charles:

Happy birfday to you
You sussed out the Zoo
Your cousin's a monkey
And your ancestor's, too!


;)

Date: 2009/02/12 08:01:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 11 2009,18:50)
I've always thought it was an amazing coincidence that Lou Gehrig died of Lou Gehrig's Disease.


(Yes, yes, I ripped off that line from a Sopranos episode. You get no points for announcing that. :angry:)

Um, that was Father's Day, actually.

Billy Crystal: You're a tragic hero. You're Lou Gehrig.
Robin Williams: Who?
Billy Crystal: Lou Gehrig. Everybody knows Lou Gehrig. The baseball player. He died of Lou Gehrig's Disease.
Robin Williams: Wow, what are the odds on that?

Date: 2009/02/12 10:49:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 12 2009,09:17)
Quote (dogdidit @ Feb. 12 2009,06:01)
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Feb. 11 2009,18:50)
I've always thought it was an amazing coincidence that Lou Gehrig died of Lou Gehrig's Disease.


(Yes, yes, I ripped off that line from a Sopranos episode. You get no points for announcing that. :angry:)

Um, that was Father's Day, actually.

Billy Crystal: You're a tragic hero. You're Lou Gehrig.
Robin Williams: Who?
Billy Crystal: Lou Gehrig. Everybody knows Lou Gehrig. The baseball player. He died of Lou Gehrig's Disease.
Robin Williams: Wow, what are the odds on that?

Well, now I know where David Chase ripped off the joke from.

Talent borrows, genius steals.

(erm- ripped this offa Oscar Wilde)

Date: 2009/03/10 09:35:56, Link
Author: dogdidit
[Graffiti moved to Bathroom Wall. - Lou FCD]

Quote (carlsonjok @ Mar. 09 2009,18:56)
           
Quote (olegt @ Mar. 09 2009,16:29)
AmandaHuginKiss,

I don't think anyone can fix the burst housing bubble by talking it up.  Toxic assets held by many banks are real, not a figment of imagination.  I would think that someone supposedly knowledgeable in economics (Stein) should understand that.

At this point, the housing bubble is the least of our problems.  Sure, it is an issue, but I think you do a disservice by calling them toxic assets.  Certainly, alot of the mortgages are underwater, but they are still backed by tangible assets (the real estate itself).[snip]

I wish this were sufficient. But with asset-backed CDOs (and CDO-squared, and CDO-cubed, and...) the relationship between bond and underlying asset can be divorced. Principle in a CDO is paid back in seniority order, so given sufficient decline is the value of the mortgages, the subordinate ("mezzanine") CDO tranches could easily be worthless; all value paid out to the senior tranches (rated AAA though perhaps AAAAAAAAA is more like it) and nothing left for the 'toxic' levels. Erm, hence the name.

Makes the name ("collateralized") rather a lie, doesn't it?

While we're at it: the CRA is not to blame; the GSEs are not to blame (except in a systemic way, as banks; generally, they are more victim than villain); derivatives prevent global decoupling (the SHF event is planetary); American consumers need to stop the spending and Chinese ones need to start; Ben Stein is an idiot. Need a new thread?

Edited for improverizement.

Date: 2009/03/10 14:20:24, Link
Author: dogdidit
Yay! Kicked to the BW!

{checks box, scans list for next}

Date: 2009/03/11 19:49:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Even DAVETARDS is joining in the beat-down.

I was really enjoying erasmus' riff on UD here the last cople of days but he can stand down now. This shit just writes itself.

Date: 2009/03/12 13:49:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (dvunkannon @ Mar. 12 2009,12:13)
Clive, I'm sorry I called you a psychologist. And I'm very sorry your clients call you a psychologist.

Unnecessarily long.

Quote (dvunkannon @ Mar. 12 2009,12:13)
Clive, I'm sorry I called you a psychologist. And I'm very sorry your clients call you. a psychologist.

Better.

Date: 2009/03/23 13:16:43, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (FrankH @ Mar. 23 2009,12:11)
 
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 23 2009,11:50)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Mar. 23 2009,10:39)
 
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 23 2009,10:05)
   
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 23 2009,10:01)
What's really lovely about "cake CSI" is that it would seem that a cake baked by a literate person following a printed recipe has loads, and about the same cake baked by an illiterate person has none at all.
Also (and mentioned before) is that 'a perfect sphere of aluminium of radius 1 meter' is clearly designed but has much less 'CSI' than 'a pebble' because of it's ease of description.

what about a 1-km perfect sphere of plutonium?
That can be measured by the size of the resulting hole.

How to get the 1-km perfect sphere together in the first place is left as an exercise for the reader, with the hope that the reader will do his experimenting in another solar system or galaxy.

Talk about a "great design" to even get that much Pu close enough to even take a spherical shape.

Honestly, I'm not even sure "beaming", ala Star Trek, all of that together could be pulled off.  Doesn't take much of that stuff to start fizzing all by itself, no "gun" required.

Start with a larger sphere with subcritical density and then implode it. Kids, don't try this at home.

Date: 2009/04/07 12:29:23, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Maya @ April 06 2009,18:53)
 
Quote (dvunkannon @ April 06 2009,18:31)
   
Quote (Advocatus Diaboli @ April 06 2009,16:55)
     
Quote (Dr.GH @ April 06 2009,15:49)
         
Quote (dvunkannon @ April 06 2009,11:14)
As a CS geek, I always pay attention to women wearing nothing but spock ears.

Well, that perked up my ears.


Only ears?


Star Trek sure has changed since Kirk.

If you can sashay with that much cachet, you don't need to worry about holding a conversation, Maya!

You just made me sprain my neck checking to see how my dimples compare!

Camera + mirror (+ USB cable + upload + jeez, do I hafta spell it out for you?)

Actually, I'm just replying to move the picture to the next page of the thread.

:: whistling happily ::

Date: 2009/07/14 09:44:09, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (1of63 @ June 28 2009,18:29)
Quote (blipey @ June 03 2009,09:35)
Wow.  They seem like nice guys.  How again is Vox qualified to lecture the British electorate?

The standard British response to a lecture from Vox Day will be a gesture involving two fingers and a reference to the Biblical commandment to go forth and multiply.

Re the British two-fingered salute: how is it dis-ambiguated from V for Victory?

Date: 2009/07/22 08:25:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 21 2009,09:18)
Daniel as much as fun as it was to point out the errors in your arguments it sounds as if you might have slipped a couple of gears.  Please get checked out ASAP so that we have more tard to go around some day, it would be a shame for all that crazy to go to waste in a round room somewhere down at Bedlam

Raevmo agrees:
Quote
But seriously, and no offense intended, you need some professional help, dude.

Heh heh.

Date: 2009/07/23 09:24:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reed @ July 22 2009,21:33)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ July 22 2009,06:25)
 
Quote
But seriously, and no offense intended, you need some professional help, dude.

Heh heh.

It is not my habit to venture into the tard mines. Being cowardly and fearing for my sanity, I am content to feed on those morsels brought to the surface here. However, upon seeing the above, I inferred that a particularly choice nugget must be lurking nearby. Against my better judgment, I was drawn to seek it out. Holding my breath against the foul vapors therein, I descended into those loathsome pits, ...

You walked right into my trap BWAH HAH HAH HAH
 
Quote
...and lo, what did I behold ? A diabolical gem of tard:  
Quote (denial @ tard,pit)
The forces are already beginning the strategic alignments of disparate God-hating groups. One key element will be conservative Muslims aligned with extreme left-wing radicals and atheists. Such alignments make no sense in the physical world, but they make perfect sense in the spiritual world.

That's right, God-hating groups like conservative Muslims. Makes sense in the spiritual world Daniels psychotic delusion. Seriously dude, get help.

Daniel's current get-thee-behind-me-Satan histrionics over on TT shows that he is struggling mightily with his faith. Daniel, just let it go -- if it doesn't come back to you, it never was truly yours.

Daniel is a True Believer.

Date: 2009/08/25 08:53:49, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (carlsonjok @ Aug. 25 2009,05:24)
 
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 25 2009,05:09)
When I was a kid, humans still had 48 chromosomes.  :angry:

Well that is what happens when you give this damn younger generation everything.  They don't appreciate what they have been given and go and lose two chromosomes.  If I had it to do over again, those kids would work for their own chromosomes, just like I did.  

*shakes fist at young punks*

Momma don't take my chromosome
Momma don't take my chromosome
Momma don't take my chromosome awa-a-ay!

Date: 2009/08/31 16:44:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Alan Fox @ Aug. 24 2009,12:36)


Evidence of intelligent design?

Spotted on a walk near my home this weekend.

That's an inukshuk, an Inuit land marker. Evidence of davetard.

Date: 2009/09/03 15:49:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Advocatus Diaboli @ Sep. 03 2009,15:02)
Ouch. MeganC replies:

   
Quote
Her ashes are nearby, so I guess the answer to your question would depend your ‘worldview’.

Damn, she put some stank on that one. Marry me, MeganC.


On an unrelated note: sixteen more posts until we have a 5-handle on the number of pages on the UD2 thread. I can remember when the ol' jalopy still had that new car smell.

Date: 2009/09/03 16:00:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Sep. 03 2009,15:53)
That 1k post mark will roll around any time now and then we'll have to pull Steve Story away from his chewin' baccy, crazy triathlon training, suspicious booze combos and molesting wild animals (but not squirrels, that's Deadman's dept) to start a third.

Sounds like the UD1K party from the end of the old thread. Perhaps we need someone other than ras to plan the festivities? Cause if it's squirrels again, I'm going to the movies instead.

Date: 2009/09/04 08:04:02, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote
1–> Drag a distractive, subject-changing red herring across the track of inconvenient truth.

2 –> Lead it out to a strawman misrepresentation of the argument being objected to.

3 –> Soak same in subtle or blatant ad hominem mischaracterisations and slanders or innuendos.

4 –> Spectacularly ignite, clouding, confusing, poisoning and polarising the atmosphere.




(I know, an oldie. But who doesn't love a bonfire? Somebody hand me a marshmallow...)

Date: 2009/09/04 08:21:37, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (DaveH @ Sep. 04 2009,02:20)
The RING CYCLE (abridged)

SCENE: A fantastical fitness landscape with many snow-covered inaccessible peaks.

ENTER: A ridiculous little man in silly round spectacles. His mighty horned helmet of personal incredulity keeps slipping over his eyes. He is wearing a rather stylish sweater.

Elmer WaDD (for it is he!) sings: "Be vewwy quiet! I'm hunting weasels!"

WaDD spots a wabbit hole. He feeds the barrel of his shotgun into it, not aware that the barrel pops up out of another hole behind him and points at his arse.

He pulls the trigger of "peer-review" and shoots self in the ring-piece.

Bugs R Welsberry (casualy chewing carrot): Meeeeeh, What's up, DocDoc?



FINIS

This scene comes after the Good Dr^2 and his minions do a quick little vaudeville song-and-dance piece, avec canes and straw boaters:

‘SUPERCALIFRAGILISTICEXPIALIDOCIOUS’
is a string that weasels find but only if precocious-
-ly we add that mystic stuff lurved by the whole TARD nation:
Functionally specified and complex information!

Date: 2009/09/17 13:10:29, Link
Author: dogdidit
Zachriel, have you been site-banned there? Or have the rigours of tard-mining sidelined you for a while?

edited for orthographic rectitude

Date: 2009/09/30 15:09:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
I call sock. And a darned good one, too.
Quote
15
absolutist
09/30/2009
2:10 pm

Consciousness doesn’t store anything in the brain. Long-term memories aren’t found in the brain. Brain aren’t hard drives and neuro-scientists only establish correlations between brain states and states of consciousness. The usual objection is: but then how come when you get brain damage or Parkinson’s you can’t remember things? But, if your car breaks down do you immediately think you are your car?

Brains are super cool but too many people have been brainwashed by Hollywood to think that brains are computers, people are animals and loose behavior is the norm.

Date: 2009/11/12 07:38:23, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Maya @ Nov. 12 2009,06:32)
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 12 2009,06:23)
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 11 2009,20:25)
   
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 09 2009,04:33)
     
Quote (Alan Fox @ Nov. 08 2009,16:20)
     
Quote (someotherguy @ Nov. 08 2009,10:14)
         
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Nov. 08 2009,14:38)
           
Quote (RDK @ Nov. 08 2009,13:24)
           
Quote (someotherguy @ Nov. 08 2009,13:06)
               
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 08 2009,12:09)
               
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 08 2009,09:30)
                 
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 05 2009,07:25)

     
Quote (Lou FCD @ Nov. 05 2009,00:03)

     
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 04 2009,23:02)

     
Quote (RDK @ Nov. 04 2009,18:07)

     
Quote (deadman_932 @ Nov. 04 2009,19:13)

     
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 04 2009,18:54)

     
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 04 2009,16:43)

     
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Nov. 04 2009,13:59)

     
Quote (keiths @ Nov. 04 2009,14:32)

     
Quote (jerry @ Nov. 04 2009,whenever)
I know he has a PhD in mathematics but he failed to understand the implications of Behe’s Edge of Evolution and on his blog mocked him because of his short sidedness.

On behalf of all small polygons, I object to this slur.

It's a deep-seeded short sidedness, too.

It's a doggy-dog world, for all intensive purposes.

Jerry is a bowl in a china shop.

Jerry deserves a pullet surprise, but this is a mute point.

Indeed, for it seems Jerry could care less about what you have to say.

That's because he's a naval gazer.

I thought he won the Noble Prize for naval grazing.

It's time for him to shit and get off the pot.

BA77 warms the coggles of my heart. Yours?

RB, I think you need to curve your enthusiasm for these eggcorns.

They say the pun is mightier than the sword.

I have nothing but the up-most respect for BA^77, irregardless of his rather lengthy posts.

Is this what you folks call a nested hierarchy?

I have it on good authority that no such thing exists.

Wes'll be so mad if you break his forum!

Like BA77, you speak with undo bias.

Anyone have more eggcorns? Speak now or forever hold your piece.

Noledge is power, sayeth Frost122585. And just saying your a Chrsitain does not make you one. It simply doe snot.

Stare at the squares.  Innie or outie?

Next, Ted hires Archie.

Date: 2009/11/25 07:54:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Raevmo @ Nov. 25 2009,04:54)
Why is it so important to the fundies that climate change (let alone AGW) isn't happening? Would it somehow reflect badly on Jeebus? Can someone please explain?!?

I find it baffling that they readily believe that Earth was designed for life, but insist that human activity couldn't possibly be re-designing Earth. Cognitive dissonance, anyone?

Date: 2009/12/10 15:50:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
olin is barrybanned.    
Quote
12
Barry Arrington
12/10/2009
4:11 pm

Everyone is free to comment here, but if snarky putdowns are all you have to offer, don’t be surprised if you find yourself in the same category as olin, i.e., “no longer with us.”

The time tag of olin's offending post is left dangling, like the cheshire cat's smile.

P.S. Had to hunt around for this thread; thanks for winterizing it, RBill. Shall I drain the oil back out and remove the spark plugs again?

Date: 2009/12/14 08:24:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Dec. 13 2009,17:58)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Dec. 10 2009,16:50)
olin is barrybanned.        
Quote
12
Barry Arrington
12/10/2009
4:11 pm

Everyone is free to comment here, but if snarky putdowns are all you have to offer, don’t be surprised if you find yourself in the same category as olin, i.e., “no longer with us.”

The time tag of olin's offending post is left dangling, like the cheshire cat's smile.

P.S. Had to hunt around for this thread; thanks for winterizing it, RBill. Shall I drain the oil back out and remove the spark plugs again?

Did you notice how it started on the first pull? A can of Stabil at the end of banning season does the trick.

Stabil?! Man, how can you drink that stuff? I had to down a coupla red bulls just to wash the taste from my mouth.

Last spring I put the snow blower away with an entire bottle of Makers Mark. I'll stick with plan A, thankyouverymuch.

Date: 2010/01/04 08:54:32, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (k.e.. @ Jan. 03 2010,22:59)
His whole schtick is based on dogs doing it with cats

Not that there's anything wrong with that....

Date: 2010/01/12 13:25:25, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Jan. 12 2010,12:15)
 
Quote
Maybe cars are like Bacteria and have lateral transfer?


May sound stupid, but it's true.

I recall a scandal some years ago where Cadillac was short on engines and installed some Chevy engines at the factory. The design was identical, but Caddy charged a lot more for engines with their badge. I don't recall if they were ever manufactured in different plants.

Not to mention, many innovative features jump from the original brand to other brands.

The first Chrysler K cars (the front-wheel drive Omni and Horizon) had VW engines in them. Perfect example of HGT.

And then there were those Oldsmobiles that GM sold in 1977 with Chevy 350 engines instead of the "Rocket 88s" that the customers had been led to expect (and had paid a premium for).

Date: 2010/01/25 12:10:30, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Jan. 25 2010,11:46)
In response to a comment about how orthodox economic theory treats stimulus spending:

   
Quote
Bradford: You made a specific reference to factories having excess capacity and then cite retailers and landlords benefiting from government profligacy at the expense of the rest of us. You have no idea as to the manufacturing set up of the book makers. This is pure BS motivated by leftist attachment to governmental activism...

You have to understand that I have little patience for your bait and switch tactics and your make believe expertise. You're banished to the land of tard containment aka da swamp.

Banned! And it's an open thread and a discussion that Bradford introduced. By the way, it's not "tard containment," but the Tard Acquisition and Repository Department.

TARD: you can't stop it, you can only hope to contain it.

Date: 2010/01/27 07:36:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (MichaelJ @ Jan. 26 2010,20:08)
Hasn't she also somewhere said that humans have increased biodiversity on the planet due to all of the types of dogs we have bred.
Check my sig. ARF!

Date: 2010/01/27 16:43:35, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Jan. 27 2010,15:47)
Low grade ore, but lots of it. This is followed from one of Cornelius Hunter's crossposts.

   
Quote
Zachriel: Now, it can be shown that the presence of antibiotic resistance is a heritable trait. That is, the offspring of antibiotic resistant bacteria will normally be antibiotic resistant, and the offspring of non-antibiotic resistant bacteria will normally be non-antibiotic resistant.

Joseph: Umm no.

Zachriel: Really? You're actually saying that antibiotic resistance is not a heritable trait?

Yet no ID Advocate ever says a word about Joe G on any of the forums he participates in.

I've noticed that the ID community seems to follow a variation of Reagan's Eleventh Commandment: "Thou shalt not speak ill of any fellow Republican IDer." This applies to IDiots in general, not just ID Joe.

Date: 2010/01/28 16:03:04, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Bob O'H @ Jan. 28 2010,05:06)
Sorry, but I think she's telling porkies.

¿Por qué?

Date: 2010/02/01 08:20:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 01 2010,07:32)
(Sign on door to Chemistry Lab: "No Demons Allowed Beyond This Point")
I believe that refers to Maxwell's demon, actually -- it's a thermodynamics joke.

Date: 2010/02/05 13:34:45, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Feb. 05 2010,12:40)
Acceptable discourse from ID guy:

 
Quote
Only a crackpot would say such a thing.

OTOH I have provided solid reasoning why you are a crackpot.

However you, being a crackpot, just don't seem to be able to learn from your mistakes.

However your willfull ignorance prevents you from learning.

Otherwise you are just a crackpot who sez things just to say them.

That is only useable to people interested in deception.

That is a crackpot's position.

Do you really think that your continued subterfuge helps your case?

And you are the crackpot kind.

Now you are just lying.


Well, at least crackpot is an improvement over crack-whore.

Date: 2010/03/04 10:35:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (fnxtr @ Mar. 04 2010,10:26)
 
Quote (Cubist @ Mar. 04 2010,00:07)
   
Quote (Joe G @ Mar. 03 2010,06:57)
(P)erhaps you can tell me how it was determined that teh bacterial flagellum evolved via an accumulation of genetic accidents?
For the purpose of discussing ID, I am perfectly willing to stipulate that the theory of evolution is dead, dead, dead... that evolution has been taken out behind the barn and shot thru the head with empirical data... that evolution is an ex-theory. With this stipulation, the answer to your question is: "Actually, it never was determined that the bacterial flagellum evolved via an accumulation of genetic accidents; some folks thought so for a while, but they were wrong."
Now that your question has been answered, can you please explain how one would go about determining that the bacterial flagellum was (is?) the product of design?

I was wondering when someone would get around to this.

GI Joe?

Okay, we're in a parallel universe.

There is no theory of evolution.

Your go.

IDiot Joe isn't coming back anytime soon. olegt killeded him here.

olegt counted much coup that day. There must be some reward for that kind of complete rhetorical tardemolition (other than a handsomely-framed LOLCAT from carlsonjok...which I admit can brighten any room in the house).

Date: 2010/03/07 19:26:24, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ Mar. 05 2010,21:28)
The cause of excessive handwaving on Telic Thoughts has been determined.

Quote
Bradford: Bruuuuuph.

What, no sound effects?? Telic Tards' production values are clearly not up to Dembskian standards.

Date: 2010/03/11 10:55:56, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Mar. 11 2010,10:48)
Quote (Joe G @ Mar. 11 2010,10:41)
There are models that demonstrate it takes agency involvement to get nucleotides.

Flasks were designed, therefore any experiment that makes use of a flask proves ID.

It's the last gasp argument of an ID proponent that's got nothing else.

As long ago as 1997, if not before, the generation of nucleotides in open space has been discussed.
Link

Here's something with nice big letters dicussing UV light and nucleotides
Link

I viewed that link on my computer. My computer was designed, therefore ID.

Date: 2010/03/31 20:28:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Louis @ Mar. 31 2010,15:47)
   
Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 31 2010,19:26)
   
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 31 2010,12:46)
     
Quote (Henry J @ Mar. 30 2010,22:31)
Must have been one of those Next Generation camera phones!

PoTW!

For that? :D

POTW.

Louis

POTW!

P.S. I had a POTW once. Can't seem to find it now thanks to that damned Hard Largeon Collider.

Date: 2010/05/13 11:36:06, Link
Author: dogdidit
Richardthughes sighting at TT.

Congratulations RtH on resisting the urge to shout
"OWN GOOOOOOOOAAAAAALLLLLLL!!!!!!!

edited to remove superfluous O's

Date: 2010/05/21 08:34:05, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ May 19 2010,06:26)
Quote (Zachriel @ May 18 2010,20:10)
Historically, people have been fairly well stuck to the Earth's surface — which was Adams' point.

Human attempts to overcome the gravity well.








Shuttle only takes humans to orbital velocity, not escape velocity. Apollo took humans to a smaller nearby gravity well, but did not quite achieve Earth's escape velocity (according to teh Google, from whence all knowledge cometh).

Date: 2010/05/21 08:48:40, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (SomaRover @ May 20 2010,11:15)
     
Quote
JoeG: Except it isn't deep by any measure and only people living in Antarctica live near the bottom of it.

JoeG could be right.

The Earth bulges at the equator due to its rotation, so the poles are slightly deeper in the gravity well.

That's why the Ariane rockets are moved to French Guiana for launch: the equatorial regions are higher up in the gravity well. *snigger* Talk about being accidentally right...

 
Quote
Once again JoeG sets himself up to be the greatest Poe to have ever lived. All hail JoeG. When will he reveal himself?
He already did.

Edit: okay, so I don't really understand what a "Poe" is. But Joe's exchange with olegt, wherein he inadvertantly reveals his not-so-hidden identity as "ID guy", was priceless. So I'll leave the linky.

Date: 2010/05/21 13:26:34, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ May 21 2010,12:10)
   
Quote (ppb @ May 21 2010,10:47)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ May 21 2010,09:48)
That's why the Ariane rockets are moved to French Guiana for launch: the equatorial regions are higher up in the gravity well. *snigger* Talk about being accidentally right...

Equatorial launches are also an easier path to geosynchronous orbit where most communications satellites end up.

I don't think the gravity difference is significant, but if you launch near the equator, in the direction of the earth's rotation, you get a free 1000 mph added to your velocity.

Correct. That's why (almost) all space launches are west-to-east. Several thousand mph of delta-V for free, as long as you don't mind having an equatorial orbit.

(And the Russians, notably, DO mind. Their TV satellites are in high-ellipticity polar orbits, not down on the equator at geo. Line-of-sight issues.)

Edit again: didn't see Reeds post. Great graphic!

Date: 2010/05/24 08:11:54, Link
Author: dogdidit
Mazel tov, Lou and Kristine! I like the pics -- hey Kristine, can you fly in that habit??

Good luck in O-Chem, Lou. The lab work in my undergrad class nearly killed me. Try not to lean too close to things that, uh, look "interesting".

Date: 2010/05/24 08:28:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Quack @ May 23 2010,02:43)
Sorry guys, nitpicking maybe, but something happens inside of me when I read about hz - or other units.
Hertz

That's the way that I am, can't help it.

Yup. Physical units named after individuals are spelled out in lower case, but capitalized in abbreviation. Thus:

hertz -> Hz
newton -> N
watt -> W

OTOH units not derived from names (proper nouns) are lower case wheter spelled out or abbreviated:

foot -> ft
meter/metre -> m

Not entirely sure why, but dem's da rules.

Date: 2010/05/24 08:52:10, Link
Author: dogdidit
Yes. "Double dog dare" is not acceptable chem lab procedure, as much as your classmates might encourage you to think otherwise.  >:-(




A propos of nothing: desperately wanting to fit in really sucks.

Date: 2010/05/24 09:04:12, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (sledgehammer @ May 22 2010,10:17)
Quote (Louis @ May 22 2010,06:50)
 
Quote (didymos @ May 22 2010,02:38)
 
Quote (Louis @ May 21 2010,15:48)
   
Quote (sledgehammer @ May 21 2010,22:16)
   
Quote (OgreMkV @ May 21 2010,12:20)
     
Quote (ppb @ May 21 2010,12:33)
     
Quote (midwifetoad @ May 21 2010,13:07)
       
Quote
He's asking me out on a date? How sweet.


Ask him if he's a top or a bottom.

Quark, that is.

He's definitely no charm.

But he is strange.

What  beauty!  I get a charge out of it, no matter which way you spin it.

The truth is he'll never show. The ID Guy/Joe pair won't split, between them they barely make 2/3 of a human. They're glued together. They'll never get their part on.

Louis

That was aces!

I thought it merely fine, man. These things have yet to gel, man.

Louis

To that I hoist ein stein to the new tone, Ian. I'll try not to be a Bohr.

Ein stein? Make that zweig!

Date: 2010/06/09 09:09:48, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (CeilingCat @ June 09 2010,00:45)
Denyse just plain weirds out:        
Quote
Oh, and another piece of misinformation on the page is, “The spread of bacteria that can resist antibiotics is a good example of evolution in action.” Yes, if evolution means tossing out working equipment, to avoid detection and destruction. But most people want to know how the equipment was created, and – to the handwringing of Darwinists – find their particular theory unconvincing.

Here is an example: You are a pro-democracy dissident in a totalitarian regime, and you type a newsletter. You get a tip that the secret police are coming, and you row out into the middle of a nearby lake and throw your whole system into it.

Of course, the secret police could arrest you without cause, but they would prefer to have a cause, so that the government-supported and -funded media can trumpet you as a villain.

Now you don’t have that system any more. You are reduced to getting unwanted books at lawn sales and writing messages at agreed pages, known only to the person whose page it is. Then you arrange discreet delivery at the homes of democracy supporters, by various covert means. Still, you manage. They really want the messages.

But someone rats, under torture. Now, you are reduced to hiding baggie-wrapped messages in grapefruits, delivered by a sympathetic travelling fruit vendor. Soggy, but not without information value. Until …

Maybe, messages could be hidden in leafy thickets or in their root systems … I mean, if you inserted them carefully, in plastic – because they grow variously, so they will not likely be watched. But the recipient must be warned. This works, until …

Still, the system goes on because there is an intelligence that wants to hear the news about dissent from the Totality.

Okay, this is the evolution!! of a communications system – if you, as a total Darwinist, like the British Council – believe that bacterial resistance shows evolution in action.

Sure it does, Amoeba. Now let me no longer detain you, but dump you quickly into your latest new pond.


WTF!!??  

Oh yeah, the title is "Coffee!!: A message from “so-called Denyse O’Leary” …"

Link

Bolded part: at first I thought that Denyse was suggesting that amoebae are bacteria. Then I realized that this is in code -- Denyse is telling us she has dysentery!

Or maybe she has denysentery. The symptoms present at the other end of the alimentary canal.

Date: 2010/07/06 11:07:41, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Zachriel @ June 24 2010,11:16)
 
Quote (khan @ June 05 2010,13:43)
We all have our limits.

Speaking of limits, don't even think about looking at this thread, wherein Zachriel and Joe G 'discuss' the nested hierarchy, a.k.a. Pattern X.


Best comment from ID Joe:
Quote
At one time I was studying to become a marine biologist.

Date: 2010/08/07 10:33:19, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 07 2010,06:51)
An interesting view of effective contribution, per capita.

I'm wondering if france gets relatively better marks because of it's use of nukes.


Per capita responsibility is fine, but using a map colored this way creates the impression that (for example) 20 million Aussies are responsible for as much CO2 as 300 million Americans. Perhaps the map should display emissions per square kilometer? Or do away with the map and bar-chart the results, stacked in magnitude order?

You're assumptions are correct about the French nukes, from which they derive an overwhelming proportion of their electrical power. They generate enough to export.

Date: 2010/08/09 09:26:20, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 07 2010,13:22)
Okay, well... we're sparse on the ground, relatively wealthy, and cold. That's my excuse.

(hums "Blame Canada! Blame Canada!...")

And blame the Guyanese, too. What are they up to down there?! Meth labs? Do Americans meth consumers take the responsibility for the CO2 emitted by Guyanese meth labs? What ever happened to good old American meth? *sigh* More jobs out-sourced and off-shored...

Date: 2010/08/09 09:34:16, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 07 2010,13:47)
I think per capita is fair and reasonable, considering we are talking about human caused emissions.

I agree. I just find the correlation to terretorial area troubling. Not as troubling, mind you, as AGW denialism, so maybe let's not argue over technicalities.

Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 07 2010,13:47)
It's a bit scary to think how India and China will look if they continue to industrialize, without going for better technology.

If they are copying us, they are screwed and so are we.

Date: 2010/08/12 16:26:37, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (olegt @ Aug. 12 2010,16:16)
Bonus problem:

Show that Gaps evolve into FAIL.

GAPS > gape > gale > gall > pall > pail > FAIL ...
.
.
.
... > bail > ball > bald > bard > TARD!

Thus proving that TARD evolved from the GAPS.

Date: 2010/08/12 16:35:42, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 12 2010,16:27)
2 solutions, no common ancestors apart from the seed...

But then: convergent evolution, something about nested hierarchies, link to the ISSS website, blind and undirected chemical processes, baraminology...therefore ID.
</ID JOE>

Date: 2010/08/12 16:48:51, Link
Author: dogdidit
ID guy:
 
Quote
Nice job olegt.

You have proven that "evolution" just pulls shit out of the air in order to be attractive.

air > hair > chair > char > car > care > hare > hire > shire > shirt > shit

Yup. Hey, this is fun!

Date: 2010/08/12 16:50:31, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (olegt @ Aug. 12 2010,16:40)
Add set theory to the list.

Empty set meets empty head.

Date: 2010/08/16 15:21:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Along those lines:
 
Quote
Bilbo says:
Oleg(t),

So you're the last resident critic at TT. Can I get you a cup of coffee? The New York Times? A neck massage? I don't know how long it will be before you get banned, too. But I figure you deserve special treatment for lasting this long. And thank you. You're the only thing stopping TT from being a complete echo chamber.

olegt, you have the power. Use it wisely.

Date: 2010/08/16 15:22:47, Link
Author: dogdidit
Actually, Rich, it was Glenn Beck you dissed.

:wags finger:

Date: 2010/08/16 15:40:52, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 16 2010,15:25)
     
Quote (dogdidit @ Aug. 16 2010,15:22)
Actually, Rich, it was Glenn Beck you dissed.

:wags finger:

Well, that's understandable then. I would have banned me also. He is 'the voice of reason'.

Voices, he hears them. The difference between Bill O'Reilly and Glenn Beck is the difference between selling the Kool-aid and drinking it.

Date: 2010/08/16 15:41:53, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 16 2010,15:39)
Someone should invite Bilbo here if he wants to chat.

Maybe olegt will. I could read the NYTimes while oleg is getting that neck massage.

Date: 2010/09/01 09:46:22, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (didymos @ Sep. 01 2010,08:52)
Well, that certainly worked out well for Joe.  Thorton just thought it was funny.  After that Joe has two posts in a row which read "This post was removed by the author."

Make that three in a row. And then another, later. Pulling them back to fix the typos, no doubt.

More lulz from that thread:
 
Quote
Kyler said...

Some Joe G science:

Joe G at ARN

"That doesn't count the experiments I conduct in my basement. Some labs would be jealous of the equipment I house & use there.

For example I now know that ticks are more attracted to watermelon rinds then they are to orange peels or orange slices. I also know that dragonflies play."

That basement must be one hellacious pig-sty. No wonder he gargles with bleach. Probably bathes in it, too, after every trip downstairs to check out his "experiments".

Date: 2010/09/01 11:31:48, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 01 2010,10:14)
 
Quote (dogdidit @ Sep. 01 2010,07:46)
       
Quote
Kyler said...

Some Joe G science:

Joe G at ARN

"That doesn't count the experiments I conduct in my basement. Some labs would be jealous of the equipment I house & use there.

For example I now know that ticks are more attracted to watermelon rinds then they are to orange peels or orange slices. I also know that dragonflies play."

That basement must be one hellacious pig-sty. No wonder he gargles with bleach. Probably bathes in it, too, after every trip downstairs to check out his "experiments".

"What do you mean your basement?!?" -- Joe's mom.

Joe's mom is in the basement. Been sitting in a rocking chair. For a looooooooooong time...

Date: 2010/10/28 13:35:13, Link
Author: dogdidit
This is fun, and SFW: toy.

Edited to add: from here. Maybe this is only new to me.

Date: 2010/11/11 08:15:11, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (KCdgw @ Nov. 11 2010,07:43)
 
Quote (KCdgw @ Nov. 11 2010,07:39)
 
Quote (sledgehammer @ Nov. 10 2010,17:45)
   
Quote (Robin @ Nov. 10 2010,14:03)

     
Quote (olegt @ Nov. 10 2010,15:57)
     
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 10 2010,15:52)
           
Quote (KCdgw @ Nov. 10 2010,15:45)
           
Quote (fnxtr @ Nov. 10 2010,15:41)
             
Quote (Albatrossity2 @ Nov. 10 2010,13:19)
             
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 10 2010,15:00)
               
Quote (didymos @ Nov. 10 2010,13:51)
               
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 10 2010,12:49)
                 
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 10 2010,14:41)
                 
Quote (Louis @ Nov. 10 2010,13:34)
                   
Quote (Zachriel @ Nov. 10 2010,20:24)
                   
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 10 2010,14:20)
                     
Quote
The modified salmon includes a gene from an eel. Any explanation has to explain that fact.

That requirement is apt to leave them floundering.

Cod happen.

Gentlemen, is this really the plaice for this sort of behaviour? Louis

Well, not if people are gonna carp about it!

I can't believe what I'm herring. LOLer-Skates.

I shall not be reeled into this undignified pun cascade.

So this then will be your sole reply on this matter?

You all have finally jumped the shark.

I knew something smelt fishy about this thread.

I'm getting a haddock over all this

Are you having a wet bream?

I am afraid this is eel-conceived.

I am dolphin*-ly not impressed. Methinks it's just time to clam up. * fish, not the mammal

It all smells of, ick, theology!

Makes me want to tuna-out.

And its a crappie thread, besides.

Stop this, you bass tards!

Date: 2011/02/17 16:33:01, Link
Author: dogdidit
Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 17 2011,16:27)
Expect "Jack" aka Design_Dude to soon join Joe and Jim. IOW the same vocabulary and phrases, which will be attributable to sheer dumb luck.

Fixed it for you.

 

 

 

=====