| Quote (John_H @ May 24 2006,04:58) |
Well, this: has to count as pretty compelling evidence of the divine origin of mathematics, if you ask me.  |
That equation is a thing of beauty, isn't it?
form_srcid: keiths
form_cmd: view_author
Your IP address is 38.107.191.98
View Author detected.
view author posts:
Retrieve source record and display it.
form_author:
form_srcid: keiths
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 'keiths%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC
DB_err:
DB_result: Resource id #4
| Date: 2006/01/17 18:13:51, Link 71.131.201.150 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It gets even better... DaveScot just "accidentally" deleted all of my comments (I was posting as 'woctor'). Notice that he turns comments off so nobody can complain about the censorship:
|
| Date: 2006/01/17 18:45:05, Link 71.131.201.150 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
He's even invited John Davison back on the blog. See this thread: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/667#comments Check out John's first post:
I'm with Mr. Christopher -- that site is the best! |
| Date: 2006/01/17 22:40:42, Link 71.131.201.150 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Davison posted on UD today. I put a copy of his post on the AtBC "Official Uncommon Pissant Discussion Thread." It's pretty funny (as usual for JAD). |
| Date: 2006/01/19 11:18:51, Link 71.131.202.230 |
| Author: keiths |
| Salvador Cordova is now a 'contributor' at UD. His first post? "Intelligent Design in the National Football League." |
| Date: 2006/01/22 13:21:59, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Red Reader regularly makes a fool of himself on UD. My favorite example is his response to John Davison's "Prescribed Evolutionary Hypothesis". Apparently the word "Evolutionary" set Red off like Pavlov's bell:
After a few other comments were posted, Red realized he was on the "wrong" side of the issue. He sheepishly retracted his criticism:
I love it when ID supporters have to be told what the "correct" position is. Of course it's even worse when your opponents know your position better than you do. I once had to tell Josh Bozeman to "stay on your own side of the argument!" when he picked the "wrong" side. |
| Date: 2006/01/22 13:41:47, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Another good Red Reader story. He criticized me once for not agreeing often enough with ID supporters:
Apart from the bizarre probabilistic reasoning and the oxymoronic idea of Josh Bozeman making a "logical, fair, reasoned" point, the fact was that I did agree with ID supporters (including DaveScot -- forgive me) when they said something sensible. I even defended Bill Dembski on a couple of occasions when he was unfairly attacked.
Needless to say, no such examples were forthcoming. |
| Date: 2006/01/22 21:25:32, Link 71.131.208.6 |
| Author: keiths |
| My sister dated a guy named Darwin in high school in Indiana (not a particularly evolution-friendly place). To my knowledge he was never taunted for it, but he was also the starting varsity quarterback which granted him a certain degree of immunity. |
| Date: 2006/01/23 10:50:14, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||
DaveScot has heaped scorn on many (if not most) ID supporters in the past week. No wonder they're rebelling against him.
True to form, Dave manages to alienate many (if not most) ID supporters by labeling their skepticism of common descent as laughable, disparaging them for trying to "cling to a strawman version of ID." Whether he realizes it or not, he also slams ID leaders who reject common descent, including Jonathan Wells, Paul Nelson and Stephen Meyer. Best of all, he manages to contradict himself. Here is Dave responding to a comment of mine on December 24, 2005:
I'm expecting him to stage a late night coup and ban the other moderators (including Dembski). Let's hope the server is under Dembski's physical control so he can hit the reset button. On the other hand, I'm beginning to think sir_toejam is right that Dembski wants DaveScot to run the blog into the ground so that he can dismiss it as a few months of "street theater." Keep going, Dave. You're doing great! |
| Date: 2006/01/23 11:53:31, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Earlier, stevestory quoted a commenter on UD who suggested that DaveScot give up his role as moderator:
The commenter's name was 'Shane', and he complained that his post had been deleted the first time around. Guess what? It's been deleted for a second time. Complain about DaveScot, no matter how honestly or constructively, and you're out of there. Like I said, Dave, you're doing great! Keep at it! |
| Date: 2006/01/23 12:44:55, Link 71.131.208.6 |
| Author: keiths |
|
haceaton, Giving your son an unusual first name can lead to later political success. Check out these names of southern politicians who hold (or held) prominent elected offices: Lauch Faircloth Erskine Bowles Saxby Chambliss Hale Boggs Wyche Fowler Kaneaster Hodges Lawton Chiles Strom Thurmond |
| Date: 2006/01/23 13:36:28, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
This may be nothing new to you veteran PTers, but I'm seeing John Davison in action for the first time and I'm finding it quite amusing. After a detailed description of how to induce "semi-meiotic" reproduction, John declares:
I'll bet the Christians on UD are loving that. Who invited him back? Oh, yeah... it was DaveScot. |
| Date: 2006/01/23 13:43:54, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Russell wrote:
Then we'd be having all the same arguments with Jupiterian fundamentalists. |
| Date: 2006/01/23 14:03:38, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
stevestory wrote:
I offered Dave some assistance, but my comment was deleted:
|
| Date: 2006/01/23 14:13:11, Link 71.131.208.6 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Russell, You're probably right. I have a somewhat pessimistic view of humanity's propensity to produce large numbers of dogmatists, regardless of historical circumstance. Modern Europe seems to be the exception rather than the rule. If Julian ever has a sibling, any thoughts on what you'd name him or her? |
| Date: 2006/01/23 17:31:28, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Julie Stahlhut wrote:
I'm fascinated by the question, especially since I was raised as a literalist Christian and then had to reason my way out of it in adolescence. Ocellated (a Christian who accepts evolution) has a post on this topic on his blog. I added my two cents' worth in a comment. http://www.ocellated.com/2006....olution |
| Date: 2006/01/23 17:51:31, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
Pro-ID Shane, who suggested that Dave step aside as moderator, tried posting his comment for a third time after seeing it deleted twice. This time Dave left it standing but disemvoweled it. Shane's plea:
|
| Date: 2006/01/24 06:42:14, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Zardoz wrote:
A month ago DaveScot was still claiming to be agnostic on the issue:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/606 Of course, you can distinguish the two (unless the Designer is perverse and "plants" the evidence to make common descent appear to be true). |
| Date: 2006/01/24 07:47:42, Link 71.131.208.6 | ||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||
Charliecrs wrote:
No, Charlie. Many questions asked and successfully answered. And the evidence comes not only from the fossil record, but also from molecular biology, the geographic distribution of species and fossils, vestigial structures, embryology, and more.
I don't have the contempt for "bible believers" that you are apparently expecting. I was raised as a biblical literalist and so I can empathize with those who still accept the Bible as God's word, although I no longer do so.
Yes, the Earth is very old. This by itself is a necessary but not sufficient condition for evolution to have occurred.
Yes, but not just the fossil evidence. Also genetic similarities, morphological and molecular homologies, and the chromosomal fusion data that has recently come to light.
It's not Darwin I accept, but evolution. As for understanding it, you might find it beneficial to learn more about evolution so that you'll know why its proponents find it to be such a compelling explanation for life's diversity. |
| Date: 2006/01/24 14:15:03, Link 208.54.15.1 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Mr Christopher wrote:
On behalf of Josh Bozeman, allow me to inform you that you are abnormal, but not for a Darwinist. You are like all of the other cowardly Darwinists who are afraid to face up to the implications of their godless ideology. Under your philosophy, love and morality are illusory. It is hypocritical of you to be nice to children and pets. Please commence raping, pillaging, and stealing candy from babies immediately, so that we can blame Darwinism for your crimes. This is crucial, as the scientific arguments against Darwinism seem to be going nowhere. |
| Date: 2006/01/24 18:21:07, Link 71.131.208.6 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Borges said "I have always imagined that Paradise will be a kind of library." I could go for that, along with a private room for occasional, uh, conversations with the young, attractive assistant librarians. |
| Date: 2006/01/25 06:21:12, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
stevestory wrote:
Imagine what it must have been like to work with Dave. He also mentioned once on UD that he has children (poor souls). Russell wrote:
Dave confirms the pattern in this quote from UD:
|
| Date: 2006/01/25 09:59:53, Link 66.92.189.152 |
| Author: keiths |
|
That thread is hilarious. It looks like ID's "Big Tent" may be too cozy for Bombadill and DaveScot. For the record, I agree with DaveScot that many people (especially fundamentalist Christians) don't like to hear about the complexity of animals' social interactions, since acknowledging them makes humans seem less special -- less "created in God's image." |
| Date: 2006/01/25 18:18:58, Link 66.92.189.152 |
| Author: keiths |
|
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned these factors: 1. Kooks are like snowflakes. No two are exactly alike, and each is fascinating in his or her own way (though it does get old listening to the same kooks over and over -- it helps to have a steady stream of new kooks). 2. The whole question of why people (both kooks and non-kooks) believe what they believe is extremely interesting. 3. It's entertaining to watch kooks in extremis. Some of my best belly laughs of the past year have come from watching the goings-on at Uncommon Dementia (no offense to the honest and polite ID proponents there who are unfortunately overshadowed by the goofy or rude ones). 4. Defending a position properly requires knowing the subject matter thoroughly. Even answering a kook will sometimes cause you to learn something new or to think through your position more carefully. 5. It's good to know your opponents' arguments as well as or better than they do, because then you can be confident that you're testing your own beliefs against the best available counterarguments. Continued testing is the best prophylactic against complacent acceptance of comfortable (but wrong) ideas. Having said all that, I think it's important to take a break if you start finding yourself to be more irritated than entertained. There are plenty of intelligent and articulate Darwinians available to "cover" for you until you're ready to rejoin the fray. |
| Date: 2006/01/28 13:52:25, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
PuckSR says of DaveScot:
Dave doesn't usually own up to his mistakes, but he does surreptitiously change his opinions in response to countervailing evidence. Witness his conversion over the last month from agnostic to believer on the common descent issue. It wouldn't surprise me to see him become a neo-Darwinian as more evidence comes to light. As for Dave being a "posterboy" for the ID movement, forget about it. He's not smart enough, and any intelligence he does display is overshadowed by his infantile demeanor. David Berlinski is ID's real agnostic posterboy. He's a lot smarter than Dave, has credentials, and is much less obnoxious. He also writes better (if a bit floridly). What they have in common is a desire to see themselves as principled intellectual loners who have followed the evidence into the wilderness while the scientific establishment remains sheep-like in well-worn pastures. |
| Date: 2006/01/28 16:29:29, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Looks like Orville Johnson is giving his 56K modem (or his anonymous proxy) a workout. But he is incorrect about DaveScot's views on common descent. On December 23, I asked Dave (based on a prior comment of his):
DaveScot replied:
(From http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/606 ) For the record, it's quite easy to distinguish between common descent and common design, unless the designer mimics common descent. And PuckSR: Nice scam for getting unbanned at Uncommon Dementia. I hope it works! |
| Date: 2006/01/29 06:36:18, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
There are also some unmistakable DaveScotisms in the O. Johnson posts. I think it's both JAD and Dave, and maybe some others from UD. |
| Date: 2006/01/29 13:27:19, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
|
Sorry for feeding the trolls, but common descent vs. "common design" is a frequent source of confusion over at Uncommon Dementia and might be worth addressing here. "Otto the Orthopedist" wrote:
Otto, If an omnipotent deity of unknown temperament is running amok, you have no way of being logically certain of ANY empirical observation of the outside world (cf. Descartes and the "evil demon"). Does the Sun truly exist, or is a deity fooling us? Is the Earth 4.5 billion years old, or did the deity just make it look that way? GW Bush "hisself" might be illusory, but DaveScot voted for him. Why doesn't Dave claim to be agnostic regarding the President's existence, if logic "requires" it?
Construct phylogenetic trees based on multiple morphological and molecular characters. Common design does not require similarity between the trees. Common descent demands a high degree of similarity. The only way to get similar trees with common design is if the designer is mimicking common descent. As Dave and John like to say, write that down. And pass it on to all of the other Ottos.
Otto, dear, talk to your colleagues in plastic surgery. They can fix that, you know. Keith S. |
| Date: 2006/01/29 15:30:34, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Indeed. And shame on Judge Jones for upholding the Constitution when Dave could have explained his proper role as a puppet of the executive branch. Dave's response when the Dover ruling was announced:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/587#comments More of Dave's fascistic, chain-of-command thinking. |
| Date: 2006/01/30 02:09:37, Link 71.131.240.86 |
| Author: keiths |
| They've been publishing David Berlinski's anti-evolutionary screeds since at least 1996. |
| Date: 2006/01/30 20:22:39, Link 71.131.240.86 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I thought Sepp Blatter (FIFA president) was God. But as a Yank, I have only a passing acquaintance with European religious customs. (I listen to the rituals on the BBC. Pretty words that mean nothing to me: FIFer, UEFer, Sepp Blatta, Real Madrid, Bayern Munich, Frankfurter Allgemeine (oh wait, that's a newspaper), and my favorite: Galatasaray.) As for Falwell, wacky as he is, he looks oddly sane next to Pat Robertson. For an amusing take on the Creation Museum that Falwell mentions, see "Greetings From Idiot America" by Charles Pierce: http://www.aboyandhiscomputer.com/Greetings_from_Idiot_America.html |
| Date: 2006/01/30 20:45:24, Link 71.131.240.86 |
| Author: keiths |
| ID's "Big Tent" is shrinking rapidly over at UD, and it looks like the "common designists" are being left out in the rain. |
| Date: 2006/02/01 00:11:05, Link 71.131.189.176 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
It looks like stevestory is the winner, assuming we don't find the stone rolled away from the tomb in three days. His prediction was made 21 days ago:
http://www.pandasthumb.org/archive....omments Congratulations, Steve! |
| Date: 2006/02/01 00:28:02, Link 71.131.189.176 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
DaveScot is still gunning for the "common designists":
|
| Date: 2006/02/01 00:51:17, Link 71.131.189.176 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Looks like we've gotten under Dave's skin:
Yes, Dave... and it was Harriet Miers' idea to withdraw her nomination, despite the strong protests of President Bush. |
| Date: 2006/02/03 05:04:22, Link 71.131.185.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Another psychedelic gem from Red Reader (to be read in your best William Shatner "Beat Poet" voice):
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/752#comments |
| Date: 2006/02/04 10:32:15, Link 71.131.185.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It's fun to watch John and Dave squabble, split up, and then reunite when they realize they have no other friends. That's happened at least three times since I started watching. Here's an interesting take on John's penchant for monologues: http://decorabilia.blogspot.com/2006....ce.html |
| Date: 2006/02/04 10:34:53, Link 71.131.185.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It's fun to watch John and Dave squabble, split up, and then reunite when they realize they have no other friends. That's happened at least three times since I started watching. Here's an interesting take on John's penchant for monologues: http://decorabilia.blogspot.com/2006....ce.html |
| Date: 2006/02/04 19:37:56, Link 71.131.185.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Phishy, it was Inoculated Mind who guessed the password, not me. And somehow I suspect his self-esteem will survive your disbelief. As for guessing the password, come on. We're talking about DaveScot here. The password was guaranteed to be something hostile, childish, and anti-Darwinian. Inoculated Mind just followed the evidence where it led... |
| Date: 2006/02/04 20:21:55, Link 71.131.185.128 |
| Author: keiths |
|
For those who haven't seen it, Kent Hovind's appearance on "Da Ali G Show": http://www.thewilsonshouse.com/guest/Ali_G_vs_Kent_Hovind.wmv Best moment: A lingering shot of Hovind's stunned face as Ali G accuses him of failing to flush the backstage toilet. |
| Date: 2006/02/06 06:50:02, Link 71.132.14.237 |
| Author: keiths |
|
"Cosmo Theorist" Dr. Raj Baldev just made his third appearance on Uncommon Descent, this time posted by a new moderator named Scott: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/784 Don't these guys ever learn from each other's mistakes? |
| Date: 2006/02/06 07:06:47, Link 71.132.14.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
The post has been deleted, but I saved the link to the article on "Dr." Raj Baldev: http://internationalreporter.com/news/read.php?id=854 Some choice excerpts:
|
| Date: 2006/02/08 20:01:55, Link 208.54.15.1 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Denial and harsh reality are fighting it out in Bill Dembki's head. Looks like denial is winning at the moment. |
| Date: 2006/02/13 07:28:57, Link 71.132.1.72 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I think DaveScot has adopted John Davison as a surrogate father. It all fits: the perennial squabbles and reconciliations between the two of them, the instant invitation for JAD to rejoin UD once Dave was put in charge, Dave's habit of leaping to John's defense whenever he thinks John has been slighted, and this very DaveScottish attempt to rile up the folks over here so that they'll give JAD some attention:
On the other hand, pressmydigitator could be JAD himself begging for some attention, which would be sadder still. |
| Date: 2006/02/13 10:55:47, Link 71.132.1.72 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
stevestory wrote:
Steve, You're thinking of Jim Pinkoski's masterpiece. PZ Myers posted the cartoon on Pharyngula last June. Follow this link and scroll down: http://pharyngula.org/index/weblog/comments/pinkoski_again/P50/ |
| Date: 2006/02/17 08:00:59, Link 71.132.9.23 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Hi, DaveScot. So backtracking on trackbacks wasn't humiliating enough for you, and now you want to flog your (and JAD's) front-loading ideas here? By the way, "phylogenetic stem cell" is an improvement over the Nietzschean "uber-cell", but it still leaves something to be desired. Might I suggest "front-loaded orthogenetic precursor", or FLOP? |
| Date: 2006/02/20 09:23:41, Link 71.131.192.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Here's JAD's latest blog entry. He's attempting to burn his last bridge:
|
| Date: 2006/02/25 13:24:13, Link 71.132.9.27 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Russell wrote:
The only way PicoScot has an IQ of 153 is if he got tested before the accident. |
| Date: 2006/02/26 10:12:43, Link 71.132.4.224 | ||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||
jeannot asks PicoScot:
I can save Davey the trouble. Here's an exchange we had on UD:
Here is the comment I was referring to:
Dave's response:
Dave banned me shortly thereafter, so I never got a chance to respond. Note that Dave, who likes to criticize the concept of macroevolution because it hasn't been observed in the lab, is proposing the following: 1. An extraterrestrial designer. 2. A "seed-ship" created by the designer. 3. A "nanoscale" computer in the cell. 4. The deliberate terraforming of Earth. 5. An error-correcting mechanism in cells which is different from the one currently known to be operating, and sufficient to protect unexpressed genetic material for billions of years. 6. An uber-cell (aka "library organism"). 7. A "distributed database" of genetic information scattered over millions of species. Not one of these seven chimeras is confirmed by science. I echo Sir Toejam's question about cognitive dissonance. Perhaps PicoScot's brain is lacking a consistency detector. It's also interesting to contrast his professed agnosticism in this thread regarding common descent vs. common design with his recent statement:
|
| Date: 2006/03/07 08:34:46, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
I thought I'd jump in here and back Steve up. An individual photon has an energy, but not a temperature. You can talk about the temperature of a *group* of photons, if they have a certain distribution of wavelengths, but all that means is that a black body at the specified temperature will give off photons having the same distribution. Specifying the temperature of solar radiation tells you nothing about the amount of energy being delivered to Earth. The temperature of the radiation stays the same no matter how far you are from the sun, but the energy delivered per unit area drops off dramatically. DaveScot wrote:
The only thing DaveTard gets right in that quote is that degrees Kelvin is a measure of temperature. What's really funny is that Dave provided a link to the thesaurus as "proof" that temperature and heat are synonymous. If he's getting his physics education from the thesaurus, it might explain a lot of the inane things he's saying. It takes a certain amount of heat to boil a cup of water. Put the same amount of energy into a swimming pool and you won't notice the temperature increase. Temperature and heat are not the same. |
| Date: 2006/03/08 05:04:18, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
steve story wrote:
I'll join the applause, not only out of admiration for their acting skills, but also out of sheer relief that the arrogant yet clueless DaveTard doesn't really exist. It's mindboggling to see him proved wrong day after day, yet continue to hold forth confidently on things he knows nothing about. Usually it's insecure people who feel the need to boast as much as Dave does, but an insecure person would surely find it unbearable to be as consistently (and publicly) wrong as Dave. My current theory is that he is insecure, but with a fortress-like denial mechanism to shield him from awareness of his own stupidity.
That's right. It violates the 2nd law of thermodynamics, and you can get 20 to life for that at Folsom. |
| Date: 2006/03/09 11:34:41, Link 70.239.226.25 |
| Author: keiths |
|
SirRamicCap/DaveTard, You are clearly an electrolytic capacitor, not a ceramic cap. Ceramics tend to age well. Electrolytics deteriorate badly over time, and they explode if you hook them up backwards. Let's hear how you would calculate the black body temperature of a single photon. The fact is, it can't be done, because a black body produces a spectrum of radiation. A photon of a given energy could be from the low end of one black body spectrum, the middle of another, and the high end of a third. When physicists talk about the 3K cosmic microwave background, it is a spectrum they are talking about, not a single wavelength. You like to lecture folks on UD about doing their homework before commenting. How about taking your own advice? Better yet, don't. It's far more entertaining to watch you flounder around, trying to cover your mistakes. Heat must be synonymous with temperature, because the thesaurus says so, eh Dave? |
| Date: 2006/03/09 14:31:27, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
SirRamicCap/Incapacitard bluffs:
Translation: "Don't know answer... Must buy more time... Need excuse... Um, I asked you first?" Okay, Dave. Like secondclass said, you need enough photons to establish the distribution. If the distribution fits the black body profile, you can then establish a black body temperature. As I wrote in my previous comment:
Your turn. How you would calculate the black body temperature of a single photon? P.S. Thanks for the "Wiendemo" link. It makes my point beautifully. |
| Date: 2006/03/10 00:32:47, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Here's something to keep us entertained while DaveTard searches desperately for a face-saving answer to the single-photon question:
|
| Date: 2006/03/10 14:32:10, Link 71.131.250.213 |
| Author: keiths |
|
You know, DaveTard comes off looking so pathetic in all of this that for a minute there, I was actually feeling sorry for him. Such a complete and public humiliation must be hard for him to swallow. Then I thought about everything he's said and done to other folks, and the feeling passed. |
| Date: 2006/03/10 15:59:42, Link 71.132.19.115 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dave, do you beat your wife out of anger, or for pleasure? Observe the question mark. A question mark denotes a question, not a statement or assertion. |
| Date: 2006/03/10 17:31:41, Link 71.132.19.115 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Check out this link: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/comdesc/ After you've read it, get back to us if you still have questions. |
| Date: 2006/03/11 08:51:39, Link 71.131.253.107 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Arden, Regarding your confession, isn't it also true that you are a card-carrying member of the American Communist Lawyer's Union (ACLU)? And your photo bears a striking resemblance to someone known to be involved in the assassination of President Kennedy... Warmly, Kent Hovind |
| Date: 2006/03/11 10:00:18, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
While we're at it, where were you on the date of Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction? And aren't you personally acquainted with Jolene, the shameless hussy who seduced Bobby Sue's husband on episode #633 of the Jerry Springer show? In Christian humility, Kent Hovind |
| Date: 2006/03/11 11:47:58, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
No, he's regressing much further, to his elementary school days. Check out this schoolyard bully taunt from same thread:
|
| Date: 2006/03/11 18:12:07, Link 71.131.253.107 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Aardvark, You're missing the self-evident point that criticizing religion is "hate speech", while saying bad things about atheism is simply acknowledging the truth. If you haven't absorbed this, you haven't been spending enough time at Uncommon Descent. In deep Christian humility, Kent Hovind |
| Date: 2006/03/11 20:26:16, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Steve, Spoken like a true connoisseur. As a fellow aficionado, I commend to you the following recording, featuring musical genius and Scientology founder L. Ron Hubbard performing his composition, "Thank You For Listening": http://www.ronthemusicmaker.org/eng10.ram Dave and Doug can only dream of playing at L. Ron's level. In awe, Keith S. |
| Date: 2006/03/11 20:46:41, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Mr. Christopher, Believe you me, it bugs the crap out of Dave to be proven wrong. Check out this comment he felt compelled to add, apropos of nothing, to the Berlinski thread on PT:
The fact that he bothered to look that up shows how desperate he is to salvage a shred of dignity after the "black body photon temperature" fiasco. |
| Date: 2006/03/13 13:20:27, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Unless you have some evidence I find acceptable that I am profoundly retarded I think you should take your comments elsewhere. -dt |
| Date: 2006/03/13 17:22:09, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dave may not care whether anyone likes him, but believe me, he cares about whether he is respected. A big part of that is wanting to be right. I've been watching him for a few months now, and I've seen the elaborate gyrations he goes through to avoid admitting a mistake to anyone, friend or foe. Accurate criticism cuts him to the bone, which is why he invents reasons to ban intelligent skeptics from UD. It's also why he invents new aliases to come here (and to PT) to defend his well-trampled name.
I've had it with your crap, STF. I've been reading Scientific American cover-to-cover each month for more than 30 years, and I've forgotten more than your daughter has learned in her whole life from books. (I came up with the idea for the printing press long ago and only recently discovered that Gutenberg had the same idea). Right now I'm sitting on my boat, next to my waterfront property (purchased with my stock options -- did I tell you I used to work at Dell?), wondering with my high IQ why people like you make me do their research for them. Start reading, or you're history. -dt |
| Date: 2006/03/14 04:15:08, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
"UDites"-- I like it. The assonance with "Luddites" gives the right connotation of a group of antediluvian diehards fighting tooth and nail against modernity. Dismissive speech leads to dismissive actions, but the one being dismissed is you. Sayonara. -dt |
| Date: 2006/03/14 13:23:56, Link 71.131.253.107 | ||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||
Here's a good one from the days when Red Reader and I still got along. Watch how he interprets the following passage from an abstract Dembski posted:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/569 What’s the difference between "establish" and "create" and what is the significance of these words? A wrong answer means you’re out of here. A right answer concedes my point. Enjoy. -dt |
| Date: 2006/03/14 13:48:23, Link 71.131.253.107 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Althea, You can find the entire text of the foreword here. |
| Date: 2006/03/14 19:48:37, Link 70.239.226.25 |
| Author: keiths |
| For problems with your santorum, my doctor recommends Preparation H. |
| Date: 2006/03/16 06:11:25, Link 71.131.203.34 |
| Author: keiths |
|
There were two thermo threads. DaveTard's humiliation occurs on this one: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/886#comments |
| Date: 2006/03/16 06:27:51, Link 71.131.203.34 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
DaveTard reaches the pinnacle of blissful self-unawareness:
|
| Date: 2006/03/16 12:00:55, Link 71.131.203.34 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Are we supposed to infer that the Designer put the double helix there? Dembski is wisely silent on this, though I note that he filed this under "Intelligent Design", not "science". |
| Date: 2006/03/16 12:06:31, Link 71.131.203.34 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Oops, forgot to threaten/ban myself... You'd be wise to be silent, too, or you may need to find another blog in the galactic center. -ds |
| Date: 2006/03/20 06:04:07, Link 71.131.231.3 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Now even that comment has been removed. Shades of Dembskian "street theater." You're next, pal. And this ain't no rehearsal. -dt |
| Date: 2006/03/21 15:08:10, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
tnewell wrote:
I was just about to complain about how boring UD had become, but DaveTard came through with a brilliantly idiotic and jingoistic diatribe. My favorite part of the thread so far is this comment by crandaddy, who indirectly labels DaveTard a "knee-jerk reactionary wacko":
There's a lot of passive aggression among the subcommandants at UD these days. |
| Date: 2006/03/21 15:44:33, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Re-emvoweled:
|
| Date: 2006/03/22 06:19:19, Link 71.132.13.159 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Doug Moron retakes the lead in the asininity stakes, comparing Faust to a porn video:
|
| Date: 2006/03/23 08:13:41, Link 71.132.13.159 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
He seems to be a manager, judging from this quote:
Can you imagine working for a pious blowhard like Doug Moron? I'd love to hear what his subordinates say behind his back after being forced, for the umpteenth time, to watch the Black Knight scene and hear a hypocritical sermon on intellectual honesty. |
| Date: 2006/03/23 08:28:40, Link 71.132.13.159 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
More on Doug's background:
Juxtapose that "promise" with the following:
|
| Date: 2006/03/28 09:58:42, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
stevestory wrote:
DaveTard to Alan Fox on John Davison's blog, after a series of anti-French tirades:
Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, Steve. If only it meant something to be flattered by Dave. |
| Date: 2006/03/29 04:55:23, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Hi Alan, Sorry for blowing your cover. I visit Davison's blog from time to time. It's not as much fun as the Dembskitarium, but it does have its absurdist charms, like: - Dave's lame attempt at a comeback when you tweaked him about the 2nd law. - JAD's strange masturbatory obsession. - Only one thread, but 823 comments. - An extended discussion of the geography of the Maginot Line. - The pitiful spectacle of Davison trying to steer the conversation back to his PEH as the bullets whiz by over his head. |
| Date: 2006/03/29 05:00:48, Link 71.131.224.237 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Speaking of the 2nd law, we're still waiting for an answer from DaveScot/PicoGonad on the black body temperature of a single photon. How about it, Dave? |
| Date: 2006/03/29 22:34:37, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Don't forget Barry Arrogant. He's new, but quite retarded. Still, it will take a few readings of No Free Lunch to elevate him to DougMoron's level. |
| Date: 2006/03/29 23:07:30, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I don't know if he can pick up corn with his pecker, but Dave2LoT certainly knows how to crow like a rooster. http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/967#comments |
| Date: 2006/04/09 20:54:05, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dave does seem to believe in front-loaded panspermia, though he gets testy when asked to justify it, especially if someone asks where the designer or designers came from. Dave's support of FLP comes up in the following thread, intertwined with some entertaining attempts by Josh Bozeman to justify the Bible's treatment of slavery. For those who suspect that Dave is a closet Christian, note that he slams the God of the Bible as "one bipolar messed-up God" in one of his comments. http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/587 Based on this and many other Davisms, I think he truly is religiously agnostic. At other times he clearly hides behind the word "agnostic", as when he claims to be agnostic on the issue of common descent, but then proceeds to slam his fellow IDers as "unscientific" when they argue for separate creation. |
| Date: 2006/04/10 00:03:35, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Serious thought is not something Dave indulges in. He's much too busy with the important work of huntin' down atheist liberal commie church-burnin' Ebola boys and calling his fellow IDers "wusses"... Below is a link to a thread where I point out that Dembski's ideas, if true, would require an ultimate supernatural source of CSI. Dave naturally disagrees, but ends up appealing to the authority of a video game, since he can't come up with a better argument. An amusing moment in the thread:
We can be sure it wasn't the last. http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/603 |
| Date: 2006/04/10 01:41:15, Link 71.131.224.237 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Reading some of those old threads reminded me of how much more interesting Uncommonly Dense was when the half-life of a dissenter was more than two comments. To quantify the damage DaveTard has done to the blog, I computed some statistics for December 2005 (the last month Dembski was in charge) and March 2006 (under Sgt. Dave): (Note that Dembski mothballed the blog on December 26th, so it was only in operation 26 days during the month). Contributors (Dec): 1 (Dembski) Contributors (Mar): 10 (Dembski + 9 others) Posts (Dec): 75 in 26 days (2.9/day) Posts (Mar): 103 in 31 days (3.3/day) Comments per post (Dec): 24.7 Comments per post (Mar): 12.9 Despite Dave's lame attempts at inflaming the wingnut contingent, he's only getting half the comments per post that Dembski was. On the other hand, the MTBRR (mean time between retarded remarks) is much lower under DaveTard, so we don't have to work nearly as hard for the same entertainment value. And without intelligent dissenters to shoot them down, folks like Red Reader (aka glennj) are venturing further out on the crackpot limb. |
| Date: 2006/04/11 00:43:50, Link 71.131.224.237 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
DaveTard likes attention, it's true, but what he really craves (and never gets) is respect. Anyone who feels compelled to talk so often about his money, his IQ, his patents, his putative computer expertise, and his Googling speed (!) is clearly insecure and looking for approval. Notice that he responded within two hours when I posted the stats showing that he gets only half the comments per post that Dembski did. I think he saw the Head Toady role at UD as his chance to undo his reputation as a blogospheric laughingstock. He must be disappointed at the results. Try Googling "DaveScot" (took me 6 seconds) and see how hard it is to find someone other than DaveScot saying something positive about DaveScot. You know that's got to bug him. |
| Date: 2006/04/11 11:09:40, Link 71.131.224.237 |
| Author: keiths |
|
How deliciously hypocritical: 1. Dembski quotes an article describing the fudging of data by scientists, and... fudges the data. He titled the post "The Fetid Little Fingers of Science." Perhaps the stench is coming from his own hands. 2. Dembski the seminary professor removes the one sentence in that entire excerpt which could be construed as referencing his faith. Talk about hiding your lamp under a bushel. Good sleuthing, PointyQ. |
| Date: 2006/04/15 00:20:24, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
ID's Goodwill Ambassador, DaveScot, spreads the cheer:
|
| Date: 2006/04/17 22:11:34, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
"Design theorist" DaveScot comes to the aid of "Doctor" Kent Hovind in a new post at Uncommonly Dense that is worth reproducing in its full glory:
|
| Date: 2006/04/17 22:28:35, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Following the link in DaveTard's post leads to this gem:
What is WRONG with everyone? Would you make Jesus pay for a building permit?
|
| Date: 2006/04/18 23:25:59, Link 70.239.226.25 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Is it just my impression, or is DaveScot exhibiting signs of hypertardation lately (even by DaveScot standards)? I'm beginning to think that he's really on our side, and that his goal is to undermine Dembski's blog by making it look idiotic. That Hovind thread is a piece of work. |
| Date: 2006/04/24 19:08:58, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
In his latest UD post, Salvador Cordova writes:
That sounds like a cry for help. Anyone want to offer Sal some examples of how cool it is to be an IDer? |
| Date: 2006/05/06 05:46:30, Link 71.131.210.77 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I hereby nominate Gil for a spot in the Tard Hall of Fame, alongside DaveTard and DougMoron. Speaking of which, I've been jonesing for a hit of DougMoron, but he hasn't posted for a few weeks. Did he go the way of BarryA? |
| Date: 2006/05/11 12:55:28, Link 71.131.210.77 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Salvador bypassed DaveScot to get Dembski's approval for the GMO thread. Dave fires back:
|
| Date: 2006/05/14 19:56:36, Link 71.131.197.59 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Dembski eats crow over his smear job on Kevin Padian: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1122 |
| Date: 2006/05/14 23:34:24, Link 71.131.197.59 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
From a commenter on Dembski's apology thread:
The sad thing is that he seems to be sincere. Mats must not be aware of Dembski's "street theater" and "Amazon review" escapades; otherwise he would not be able to say those things with a straight face. |
| Date: 2006/05/18 16:59:10, Link 71.132.3.132 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
|
How to argue like DaveScot: Here's an amusing example of DaveTard's "skill" at argumentation, taken from Salvador's Genetic ID thread at Uncommonly Dense. A commenter named Hypermoderate has just explained, using Dembski's own words, why Dembski's "specified complexity" argument is circular. Dave responds:
Hypermoderate responds:
Dave's skillful retort:
Let's watch the replay, with translation: HM: Dembski's SC argument is circular. DS: Is not! Natural selection is circular! (Please ignore the fact that I know NS is not circular, since I accept that it produces things like antibiotic and pesticide resistance). And you think a tautology is circular! HM: A tautology is circular. Can you refute my specified complexity argument? DS: Umm....You're stooopid! So there! |
| Date: 2006/05/18 20:48:48, Link 71.131.210.101 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Wes, Your UD mirror site is a terrific resource for retrieving posts and comments as they appeared before they were deleted or altered by the Thought Police. The only problem is that we don't get to see the comments that DaveTard censors before they even see the light of day. Since many of the most interesting commenters are on Dave's moderation list, he gets a chance to see (and delete) the comments before we see them, and before your mirror site gets to archive them. I have an idea for how we can begin to bypass Dave's censorship: 1. Mirror all of the UD posts and comments as you do now. 2. Accept new comments at the mirror site (on a per-UD-thread basis). As word gets around that the mirror site is uncensored, people will start posting comments there rather than on UD. People who have been banned from UD will be able to comment. Even most ID supporters will start to prefer the mirror site, because they don't like the Tardlerized version of UD any more than we do. The beauty of it is that since all posts and comments are mirrored, you won't miss anything by going to the mirror site. On the other hand, if you stick with DaveTard, you miss all of the posts he censors (and you have to wait half a day for him to approve the ones he doesn't censor). You also miss all the posts from dozens of thoughtful, interesting people who have been banned at UD for no good reason. The key would be to organize things on a per-thread basis on the mirror site. Right now comments on UD end up as separate posts on the mirror site, which makes it hard to get a thread-oriented view of the comments. What do you think? |
| Date: 2006/05/19 18:25:55, Link 71.131.210.101 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Dembski has posted a link to a list of 20 proposed candidates for the title "Fourth Law of Thermodynamics." I think he's miffed that his "Law of Conservation of Information" didn't make the cut. It's tough being the "Isaac Newton of information theory" when everyone regards you as more of a Wayne Newton. |
| Date: 2006/05/19 21:22:02, Link 71.131.210.101 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
My name is Legion: for we are many. Haven't you heard of the NCSE's Project Keith? It's the evolutionary successor of Project Steve. All of the Keiths who accept evolution have banded together into a single, powerful Darwinian consciousness which can vaporize Cobb County textbook stickers and copies of Of Pandas and People by the power of sheer thought...
If Wes's existing blog mirror doesn't violate copyright laws, I can't see why the new one would. The same information is being replicated in both cases. However, the UD folks might be able to make a case that we were denying them revenue by decreasing the click-through traffic on their blogads. To avoid the issue altogether you could do the following: 1. For each new UD post, automatically create a post on our blog which links to the UD post. 2. Folks could start at our blog and follow the link to UD to read the post, the blogads, and any comments left by UD loyalists. 3. By simply hitting the back button, they'd be at a page where they could comment on the post free of DaveTard's censorship. This thread (the Official Uncommonly Dense Discussion Thread) is great for laughing at the goings-on at Dembski's madhouse, and would continue to play that role. But wouldn't it also be nice to be able to go to a single place where you could see a UD post, read the comments pro and con, and contribute to the discussion without censorship, the way Dembski's blog should have worked in the first place (and the way practically every other blog does)? |
| Date: 2006/05/22 08:06:55, Link 71.131.195.176 |
| Author: keiths |
| Sergeant Doof Tard, USMC. |
| Date: 2006/05/22 09:10:12, Link 71.131.195.176 |
| Author: keiths |
|
If Sergeant Doof Tard didn't exist, we'd have to invent him, just to make ID look ridiculous. Please, Wayne -- whatever you do, leave Davey in charge. |
| Date: 2006/05/24 01:56:12, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Shalini's post was relevant, polite, and truthful...or in other words, utterly out of place on Doofski's blog. Hence the banning.
Don't forget, this is the same Doofski who: 1. Praised his own book anonymously on Amazon.com. 2. Panned his opponent's book anonymously on Amazon.com. 3. Raised a stink on UD about Jeffrey Shallit's deposition, and then, when he was shown to be wrong, attempted to erase the evidence. 4. Reported Eric Pianka to the Department of Homeland Security. 5. Smeared Kevin Padian unfairly and then had to publicly apologize. He is not known for his discretion, especially when he's in a bad mood. After making an idiot of himself over DaveTard's ACLU post yesterday (Right on, Wayne!), he must be feeling a bit cranky, to shalini's detriment. |
| Date: 2006/05/24 02:02:43, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
That equation is a thing of beauty, isn't it? |
| Date: 2006/05/25 11:40:42, Link 71.131.229.180 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Having humiliated himself by attacking the ACLU over a bogus urban legend, Davey now feels compelled to justify himself by digging up and posting as many ACLU-related issues as possible. Knowing that people like DaveTard exist is strong motivation to join the ACLU. I joined the ACLU (and Americans United) after Dover, but if I hadn't done it then, I'd be doing it now. Keep up the recruiting efforts, Davey! |
| Date: 2006/05/25 12:25:41, Link 71.131.229.180 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Entertainment is the one good thing to come out of the ID movement, and UD is a prodigious source of it. Many of us are addicted. If this comedic wellspring ever dries up, I think we'll have to put stevestory on methadone. |
| Date: 2006/05/25 13:08:13, Link 71.131.229.180 |
| Author: keiths |
| I'm pretty sure great_ape was being sarcastic with the sodium comment. |
| Date: 2006/05/26 02:37:03, Link 71.131.229.180 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
If you pray over your irony meter it will repair itself. |
| Date: 2006/05/29 11:17:03, Link 71.131.216.145 | ||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||
Sgt. DimBulb has apparently forgotten his "blackbody photon temperature" humiliation and is now presuming to lecture his intellectual superiors on spectral absorption:
Later, after a commenter named Zachriel has helpfully supplied an absorption spectrum for chlorophyll, Dave writes:
Dave apparently doesn't understand that because of the way the retina is built, many different spectra can result in the same perceived color. In this case, reflectance is high from blue-green all the way to orange, but Dave insists that only green light is being reflected. He closes his comment in typical condescending Tard fashion:
Dave's been subscribing to Scientific American for 30 years, as he will proudly tell you. The question is, does he ever actually read it? As a bonus, he proceeds in his next comment to contradict himself in the space of two sentences (besides spelling compressible and compressibility wrong):
Link to thread |
| Date: 2006/05/29 17:42:44, Link 71.131.216.145 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Over on the gullibility/incredulity thread, crandaddy pees his pants with excitement:
They may be digging a grave, crandaddy, but don't get too excited until you see which theory gets buried. |
| Date: 2006/05/29 17:46:44, Link 71.131.216.145 |
| Author: keiths |
|
It occurs to me that "gullibility/incredulity thread" is a pretty accurate description of every thread on Uncommonly Dense. Gullibility on the part of the sycophants who lap it up, and incredulity on the part of those who are about to be banned. |
| Date: 2006/05/31 15:58:46, Link 71.131.216.145 | ||||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||||
|
Some select comments from an old but good thread on UD entitled Why I ruthlessly edit comments on this blog: From the one and only member (ever) of the Josh Bozeman Fan Club:
Dan searches for more common ground:
...but Josh dashes his hopes:
Here's DougMoron (in his pre-contributor days) demonstrating his objectivity:
I can't decide if this one is sardonic or not:
Or this one:
hlwarren gets fed up and bails:
DaveScot manages to alienate everyone by digging up dirt on his opponents and making a tasteless reference to AIDS-related dementia. Even Dembski slaps his wrist:
|
| Date: 2006/05/31 17:16:16, Link 71.131.216.145 |
| Author: keiths |
|
In case any of you were wondering, Paley's mathematical "argument" is bogus and purely obfuscatory. Don't waste any time on it. Eric is right to pin him down on parallax. You should also ask him to explain the phases of Venus and Mercury. |
| Date: 2006/06/02 10:16:32, Link 71.131.216.145 |
| Author: keiths |
| The full paper is available here. |
| Date: 2006/06/02 10:55:57, Link 71.131.216.145 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Chandra Wickramasinghe's group at Cardiff University says:
|
| Date: 2006/06/07 10:37:42, Link 71.131.183.108 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dave Springer must be the least self-aware man on the planet. |
| Date: 2006/06/07 13:48:42, Link 71.131.183.108 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Hilarious. Dembski accuses Pim of 'kludging' the two passages together, but it turns out that Dembski did it himself. I guess ID is capable of detecting kludges, but says nothing about the identity of the kludger. |
| Date: 2006/06/07 18:52:18, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dembski doesn't seem to realize that the 'sick, dirty feeling' has nothing to do with PT and everything to do with himself. He is the one posting anonymous reviews of his own books on Amazon. He is the one reporting Eric Pianka to the Department of Homeland Security. He is the one trashing Jeff Shallit's deposition, then making the evidence disappear when his accusations turn out to be unfounded. He is the one smearing Kevin Padian, and now he is the one offering half-apologies for falsely accusing Pim van Meurs of quote-mining. Ah, but you see, it's PT's fault for baiting him. What self-respecting person could do all of that and NOT experience a 'sick, dirty feeling' when looking in the mirror? Logs and motes, Bill. Logs and motes. |
| Date: 2006/06/08 00:45:52, Link 71.131.183.108 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It's dyson@ias.edu. He's at the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, NJ. |
| Date: 2006/06/08 19:23:02, Link 71.131.238.47 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Sir Fishy, I don't usually find myself disagreeing with you, but in this case I must. "Methodology" is legitimately used to refer to a set of practices or procedures, both in my field of engineering and in the language at large (see here and here). Think of it as analogous to the word "ideology". Having said that, I agree that "methods" would have sounded better than "methodologies" in Spike's sentence. |
| Date: 2006/06/11 11:51:56, Link 71.131.178.203 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Banning you also violates the SLoT, but you're still out of here. -dt |
| Date: 2006/06/11 19:54:12, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Sgt. Doofus informs us that there is no such thing as a fitness function in nature:
This is the same DaveTard who has said many times elsewhere that natural selection maintains the status quo by weeding out mutants. It's a good thing Dave is stupid, or the cognitive dissonance would have exploded his head long ago. |
| Date: 2006/06/12 17:15:45, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Bill Dembski on Ann Coulter's new book:
But to IDers like me, these are good things.
Liberalism, materialism, whatever. They all look the same to me. It's an ism, and isms are bad.
We're being attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture! Keep your hands off my total worldview! |
| Date: 2006/06/12 19:48:08, Link 71.131.178.203 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
Dembski's newest post, entitled "Frank Beckwith Rips PvM (and Brian Leiter) a New One" (wording very close, but not exact -- the post hasn't appeared yet in Wes's Memory Hole) has now been retitled "Frank Beckwith Impales PvM (and Brian Leiter)". I guess Dembski had second thoughts about one violent metaphor and decided to replace it with another. He's been creepier than usual lately. Perhaps it's due to DaveTard's influence. Recall Davey's fantasy about
which appeared beneath a post entitled "PZ Myers Vies with Eric Pianka for Top Psycho Scientist Award." But for the "Scientist" qualifier, Davey could have won hands down. What do you suppose the conversation is like when Dembski discusses his unChristian revenge fantasies with his Maker? |
| Date: 2006/06/14 20:02:06, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Lest anyone think that a combination engineering/flying background dooms one to creobotulism, let me assure you that there are plenty of non-creobot pilot/engineers in the world (including me and 3 out of 12 fellow employees at the company where I work). On the other hand, there might be a connection between creationism and flying too high too long without oxygen... |
| Date: 2006/06/14 20:32:48, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Early in the thread:
Later in the thread, Salvador admits that the magneto didn't fail at all, but rather the plugs got fouled:
Translation: The left magneto failed. Well, not the physical magneto. (The spiritual magneto?) Okay, I screwed up by running the mixture too rich during cruise and fouled the plugs. The Designer bailed me out. The moral of the story: Don't fly with Salvador. |
| Date: 2006/06/14 23:12:41, Link 70.239.226.25 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Let's parse Davey's little adventure: He was an inexperienced student pilot about to embark on a cross-country solo flight. He noticed what he thought was an airspeed indicator error on takeoff. Instead of landing immediately and getting the AI checked out, like any sensible pilot would do, he proceeded to fly the entire cross-country in what he believed was a defective aircraft. Not only that, he split the difference between what the airspeed indicator said and what he thought it should say, even after testing for the actual stall speed. The result was that he took off, climbed, approached, and landed, all at airspeeds too close to the stall speed. As for his instructor being impressed that Davey noticed the discrepancy, consider this: rotation speed is 55 knots in a Cessna 172 (which is what Davey previously mentioned flying). If he tried to rotate at 55 MPH, he was rotating at 48 knots, which is the clean stall speed for a C-172. At that speed, the airplane would have at most staggered out of ground effect with the stall horn blaring. Anyone failing to notice that is deaf as well as stupid. I think we can be grateful that Davey gave up flying and now spends his time in his boat ogling nude sunbathers on the shores of Lake Travis. |
| Date: 2006/06/15 09:19:50, Link 71.131.178.203 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Looks like dedicated AtBC reader DaveScot's pride has been wounded:
And this gem:
Stay tuned, Davey. I'll reply when I get some time later today. |
| Date: 2006/06/15 09:27:38, Link 71.131.178.203 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Faid is Greek. I'm willing to bet that his English spelling is better than your Greek spelling. |
| Date: 2006/06/17 12:38:14, Link 71.131.183.245 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
On the "infinite monkeys" thread, Dave "Otto" Scott gets his physics wrong even when (presumably) trying to make a joke:
|
| Date: 2006/06/18 17:15:11, Link 71.131.183.245 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dave "Otto" Scott reveals that he is as (un)qualified to talk about aviation as he is about biology:
It's pretty clear that Otto can tolerate both, or he would have banned himself a long time ago.
"blithers on" = "dares to criticize me, the great Otto Pilot!"
So when the FAA says it is illegal to fly VFR without a functioning airspeed indicator, altimeter, etc., that's just a Darwinist conspiracy to sell more flight instruments, eh, Otto? How do you fly at the exact traffic pattern altitude without "relying on" an altimeter? When your engine fails, how do you set up the best glide speed without "relying on" an airspeed indicator? Do you wet your finger and stick it out the window?
Every pilot should be able to land after detecting an instrument failure. It's the ones who keep going after noticing a problem on takeoff that don't belong behind the yoke.
Are you aware that you can use an instrument without staring at it, Otto? It's called "scanning".
Wrong. Read the Cessna 172 manual: NORMAL TAKEOFF 1. Wing Flaps -- UP. 2. Carburetor Heat -- COLD. 3. Throttle -- FULL OPEN. 4. Elevator Control -- LIFT NOSE WHEEL (at 55 KIAS). 5. Climb Speed -- 70-80 KIAS.
True, if you're an inexperienced pilot who has never done a short field takeoff on a gusty day.
Spoken like a true novice. Real pilots have to deal with a range of conditions. Bay Area pilots know the difference between taking off solo from Palo Alto on a cold winter day, versus Lake Tahoe with three passengers in July: C-172, 1900 lbs., sea level, 32 deg F, no wind: ground roll 470 ft. C-172, 2300 lbs., 6000 feet, 77 deg F, no wind: ground roll 1500 ft.
Wrong again. You simply cannot use the same pitch attitude at Lake Tahoe as at Palo Alto. Tahoe's elevation is over 6000 feet. You have to drop the nose to compensate for the decrease in power available at full throttle at that altitude.
Not true. You previously admitted to splitting the difference between the airspeed indicator reading and what you thought it should be:
That means you were flying too close to the stall in all of the critical flight phases.
A pox on those Darwinist instrument manufacturers! They know that ID supporters don't read the fine print!
Sorry, Otto. You can't blame your instructor: Federal Aviation Regulation 91.3: The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft. And besides, your instructor wasn't the one who decided to keep going after noticing something funny with the airspeed indicator. Summary: 1. Student pilot Otto prepares for a cross-country solo. 2. He selects a plane he has never flown before. 3. He fails to familiarize himself with the panel. 4. He ignores the takeoff procedure specified in the manual. 5. He notices something funny with the airspeed indicator on takeoff. 6. Rather than landing to get it checked out by an instructor or mechanic, he continues flying to his destination, even though it is illegal to fly with a broken airspeed indicator. 7. During the flight, he "splits the difference" and therefore ends up flying too slowly during critical phases of the flight. 8. At his destination, he still doesn't seek advice from an experienced pilot or instructor. He doesn't call someone at the home airport. He simply turns around and flies back. 9. Having screwed up, he tries to explain how VFR pilots don't "rely on" their instruments. 10. In case that doesn't work, he puts the blame on his instructor. The funny thing is, having observed Otto in action for the last six months on UD, none of this surprises me. |
| Date: 2006/06/19 20:40:08, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Lots of nice ironies in this OttoTard quote from a year ago:
|
| Date: 2006/06/20 17:57:04, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
This "strong gravity" fiasco has really shaken DaveScot's confidence. You can tell he's feeling insecure when he starts boasting compulsively:
Yes, Otto, I have some questions: 1. If you had a college-level vocabulary at age 9, what happened to it? 2. Having read about all of the most important discoveries of the last 40 years, why have you forgotten almost all of them? 3. Did you skip the articles on the 2nd law of thermodynamics, black body temperatures, hemoglobin, and blood types? 4. Did you make yourself a millionaire or did Dell? 5. For the last six years you "haven’t been burdened with being a computer whiz kid." Was there a time when you did carry such a burden? 6. Did you know that gravity is the weakest of the fundamental forces? Try Googling "gravity strongest force" and "gravity weakest force" and compare the results. Took me 35 seconds. Why do I have to do your homework for you? I can spoonfeed this stuff to you if you'll stop making faces and spitting it out. |
| Date: 2006/06/20 23:14:08, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||
Berlinski via GilDodgen:
Here's Gil's post. I am still reeling from the sheer intellectual force of it:
Note the penetrating argument, the careful marshalling of evidence, the incisive critique of our position. We should simply admit that Gil is right. Low-market computer-selling sound-mixing semi-literate church-burning Ebola boy SteveS stubbornly responds:
Gil's rejoinder:
Ouch. I'm sure Steve is still smarting from that one. |
| Date: 2006/06/21 18:23:30, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Otto Didact wrote:
I'm beginning to think that Dave isn't a college graduate. It would explain a lot: 1. He never talks about earning his engineering degree, his GPA, etc. 2. His insecurity and braggadocio may may be the result of trying to prove himself to his degreed colleagues. 3. I can't remember how many times I've wondered to myself, "How could this guy have survived engineering school without knowing that?" 4. He immediately gets defensive (see the above quote) whenever the subject of qualifications comes up. I used to think it was because he didn't have a science degree. Now I think it may be because he has no degree at all. |
| Date: 2006/06/22 09:06:11, Link 71.131.249.211 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I'm also against eating polyester, but on non-Biblical grounds. The fibers get stuck in my teeth and it gives me the runs. |
| Date: 2006/06/25 00:11:45, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Like many mental illnesses, SN and OM cause their victims to reject treatment, if they're aware of the sickness at all. If we can't cure them, at least we can work to limit their impact on society. |
| Date: 2006/06/25 19:29:16, Link 71.131.249.211 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Josh did try to come back at least once under a different name. Problem was, even DaveTard could recognize the distinctively contentless logorrhea of a Bozeman post and promptly rebanned him. |
| Date: 2006/06/25 23:57:31, Link 71.131.249.211 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
I think she's still the same old avocationist. Here's something she posted on the Weinberg thread yesterday:
|
| Date: 2006/06/27 11:14:21, Link 71.131.222.227 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Slightly off topic, but this does remind me of some of our friends at Uncommon Descent. Enjoy. (Full video here.) |
| Date: 2006/06/27 17:43:20, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Here's one I dug up a week ago:
|
| Date: 2006/06/27 20:48:55, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||
Selected comments from this thread:
|
| Date: 2006/07/01 13:01:30, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
GilDodgen advocates attacking
|
| Date: 2006/07/04 22:35:11, Link 71.131.222.227 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dembski also appears to enjoy administering an occasional spanking to DaveScot. Too bad it took a "trusted colleague" to make him aware that his blog was turning into The Jerry Springer Show. |
| Date: 2006/07/04 22:48:26, Link 71.131.222.227 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I missed this on my first read-through:
I think we have a new name for a favorite DaveTard tactic. |
| Date: 2006/07/04 23:04:44, Link 71.131.222.227 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
An interesting glimpse at how Salvador sees himself:
|
| Date: 2006/07/05 07:19:31, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||
I suppose I shouldn't be surprised, but DaveTard is as bad at lying as he is at biology and logic. Look at how his Scientific American "credential" morphs over time:
|
| Date: 2006/07/06 04:38:46, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
They do indeed: http://www.sciam.com/article....B7FFE9F |
| Date: 2006/07/09 00:52:21, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
That little valentine was actually from GilDodgen, not DaveTard. |
| Date: 2006/07/09 19:19:12, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It sounds like Dave was a smart kid before the accident. It's a shame that a simple blow to the head not only devastated his intelligence, but rendered him incapable of boasting effectively. Davey, here's some advice on how to brag better: 1. Don't be so eager to boast. Your eagerness betrays your insecurity and makes people doubt you. 2. If you must brag, brag about something you're good at. It's jarring to hear you bragging about your intelligence, your logical thinking ability, and your scientific knowledge when you make glaring errors every day in each of those areas. Did you really think we wouldn't notice the discrepancy? 3. Let your performance speak for you. People recognize competence even without the bluster. The trick is being competent first. Learn some biology, take some classes, go back and read those science supplements. 4. Let others do your bragging for you. Have you noticed that brilliant people don't need to do their own boasting? If you're good enough, people will notice it and remark on it. Google "DaveScot", and you'll see that you're not making the impression you're hoping to make on other people. 5. Keep your boasts consistent. Have you been reading SciAm cover to cover for 20, 30, or 40 years? Pick a story and stick to it. When you contradict yourself, we know you're lying. Regards, KeithS |
| Date: 2006/07/10 00:31:52, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||||||
Dedicated AtBC reader DaveScot digs his hole a little deeper:
Translation: I've been reading SciAm every month for 36 years, except for the years when I didn't read it every month. And I've been a subscriber for almost 40 years (see below), except for the years I didn't subscribe to it. As for reading it from cover to cover, let's just forget I ever mentioned that... Dave is learning firsthand that you need to take good notes in order to be a successful liar.
|
| Date: 2006/07/10 00:42:28, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
A definite case of Tard Fatigue Syndrome. I prescribe two Yuenglings and a chapter from Endless Forms Most Beautiful. |
| Date: 2006/07/10 07:26:03, Link 71.131.190.244 | ||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||
Arden, If it's any consolation, I heard a rumor that JanieBelle is rumored to be DaveTard's alleged illegitimate daughter. Of course these are only rumors, so I can't be held accountable for repeating them. Stop the ACLU! |
| Date: 2006/07/13 00:51:06, Link 71.131.234.84 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
Severe Irony Alert In a comment wherein he links to his infamous intellectual dishonesty thread, dougmoran says:
Doug -- look in the mirror and repeat that to yourself five times. |
| Date: 2006/07/13 01:01:28, Link 71.131.234.84 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Sometimes it's the finer points that make a piece of tardity special. Witness the mixed metaphors in this bit of wisdom from (il)lucID:
Alley cats with holy grails and worms morphing into cuckoos. Welcome to ID Land. |
| Date: 2006/07/13 11:36:47, Link 71.131.234.84 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Hi Florian, Welcome to AtBC. Perhaps I'm misunderstanding you, but doesn't the word "lineage" itself denote the concept you're asking about? Isn't the path followed by a lineage the same as the lineage itself? After all, if it had followed a different path, it would no longer be the same lineage. |
| Date: 2006/07/17 20:19:20, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dembski just wiped out the entire Libidinous Genius thread, restarting it with this comment:
I think the thing that really pissed him off was seeing DaveTard dump on Denyse O'Leary, whom Dembski has described as a compadre. That's it, Dembski. I've tolerated you on my blog long enough. Go in peace, but go. -dt |
| Date: 2006/07/17 21:23:18, Link 70.239.226.25 |
| Author: keiths |
| Dave "I'm an agnostic" Tard further undermines his credibility (if such a thing is possible). |
| Date: 2006/07/17 22:48:41, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Davey was wounded by Dembski's slap:
Someone should explain to self-styled "computer whiz kid" DaveTard that he could open up a second window for posting comments without disturbing the administrative windows. Switching between them would only take a couple of keystrokes. I hope he does quit. UD will be a lot more interesting when intelligent dissenters aren't banned on a whim. Besides, he'll still be commenting, and Davey's entertainment value comes 90% from his inane comments, and only about 10% from his doofy moderating. I know that most of the other contributors will be happy to show him the door. |
| Date: 2006/07/20 07:46:42, Link 71.131.227.176 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
|
Hi Wiwaxia, My two cents' worth below.
I think that's a decisive difference. The minimal "ingredients" of a Darwinian process are replication, variation, and selection. The apparent "selfishness" of the gene arises out of an interaction of these ingredients.
The physical gene doesn't survive the organism's death, but it's not the physical gene that Dawkins was concerned with, but rather the information encoded therein. Also, a carbon atom doesn't "care" whether or not it becomes part of a living organism. Any accommodation by the organism to the physical properties of carbon benefits only the organism, not the carbon atom. |
| Date: 2006/07/24 06:01:40, Link 71.131.246.76 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Some unintended humor from Barry Arrogant:
Particularly when the lawyer is Barry. |
| Date: 2006/07/24 17:17:30, Link 71.131.215.4 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
DaveTard announces his goals for UD in a post dated January 8, 2006:
What do you think, folks? Did he succeed? Just asking (as Barry Arrogant would say). Six short months later, the goalposts have shifted just a tad:
Still, I miss the ol' re-Tard. |
| Date: 2006/07/26 09:35:34, Link 71.131.242.83 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Actually, that comment is not from Denyse, but from someone called "DLH". Denyse's comment is the next one in the thread. |
| Date: 2006/07/31 00:56:14, Link 71.131.181.183 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
|
I thought y'all would enjoy this amusing exchange between Salvador Cordova and MikeGene at Telic Thoughts: Salvador wrote:
MikeGene gently rebukes him:
Salvador responds:
Interesting. So Salvador admits that he is incapable of being objective about ID, but apparently his subjectivity doesn't disqualify him from commenting ad nauseam on every ID-related blog on the planet. |
| Date: 2006/08/02 04:50:45, Link 71.131.181.183 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
An interesting exchange between Barrett1 and Dembski on the "troll of the month" thread:
EDIT: Sorry, incorygible -- you were ahead of me by only two minutes so I didn't see your post. |
| Date: 2006/08/03 01:00:55, Link 71.131.181.183 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Yeah, I used to think that stevestory would take it the hardest when DaveScot went to the Great Blog in the Sky, but now Arden is the one jonesing for a D-Tard fix. And look at how much his avatar has aged recently... |
| Date: 2006/08/03 21:56:16, Link 71.131.182.161 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Here's crandaddy in response to a Dembski post praising Michael Shermer as a "mensch":
And here's crandaddy, 13 hours earlier:
|
| Date: 2006/08/04 20:19:44, Link 71.131.182.161 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Is it just me, or does anyone else think Steve's a little too earnest in his search for the truth about UDOJ? I think he is JanieBelle, and that he's trying to throw us off the scent by playing the diligent detective. Banning himself from UDOJ was a nice touch. |
| Date: 2006/08/06 02:13:11, Link 71.131.182.161 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I'll admit that the idea of DaveTard conversing with his own sockpuppets is amusing. The only problem is that JB and Kate are consistently smarter than Dave. He simply doesn't have the brainpower to pull it off. By the way, Richard, is that a Semper Fi hat in the photo you posted? I'm starting to put two and two together...  |
| Date: 2006/08/07 10:45:05, Link 71.131.238.47 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Sal just posted this over on Telic Thoughts:
International TV! That's like, way better than national TV, isn't it? Tune in. Could be good for some laughs. |
| Date: 2006/08/08 22:50:50, Link 71.131.188.231 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
|
I'm finding Salvador Cordova's delusions of grandeur incredibly entertaining. Besides incessantly flogging his upcoming "international TV" appearance on D. James Kennedy's ultra-fundy Coral Ridge Hour, he is also: 1. Linking to his own comments on other threads, using bombastic titles. For example, in this thread, he links to a comment he made on the Cornell ID class website, using the title "Salvador cuts Nick Matzke off at the pass". Ride 'em, Sal! 2. Describing his legendary (in his own mind) exchanges on the Internet:
How generous of you to acknowledge that Hoppe is a "worthy counterpart", Sal. Future historians analyzing Huxley v. Wilberforce and Cordova v. Hoppe will note that not only were you brilliant, but magnanimous in victory as well! 3. Getting out the message that it's cool to be an IDer:
But Sal, we already knew IDers were cool guys like Dembski and Granville Sewell. |
| Date: 2006/08/08 22:55:53, Link 71.131.188.231 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
And humble, too:
|
| Date: 2006/08/13 05:46:11, Link 71.131.225.2 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Salvador's "international TV" appearance is now available for viewing. He must be crushed -- after hyping his appearance all over the blogosphere, he ended up with less than a minute of screen time. The interesting part of the segment is when they show Caroline Crocker lying for Jesus. She states, "I did one lecture where I gave them the evidence for and against evolution, just the scientific evidence. I was so careful when I wrote that lecture not to be partial in any way." Then they start flashing slides from her lecture on the screen. I paused the video to get a look. The first slide shows a picture of a monkey with a banana, a picture of a slovenly man in his underwear, and an arrow with a question mark over it connecting the monkey to the man. In her second slide she manages to mention that Darwin "failed at medical school (could not dissect)" and "was a rich kid who enjoyed partying, drinking, and gambling". Her third slide mentions Archaeopteryx and Eohippus as "Presumed Transitional Forms", stating that "Archaeopteryx has been questioned as a fraud" and that "Eohippus is same as modern-day hyrax", apparently confusing the genus Hyracotherium, to which Eohippus belongs, with the family Hyracoidea, which contains the hyrax. Judge for yourselves -- same or different? Hyrax Eohippus Her fourth slide, titled "Scientists are Confused", says that "scientists have differing opinions on this issue; intelligent design is gaining ground". She then quote-mines Gould and Eldredge before finishing with a quote of Wernher von Braun (whom she specifically cites as a "rocket scientist") saying "It is unscientific to teach evolution only." Utterly shameful that the Darwinian fascists would have a problem with such a fair-minded, impartial defender of the truth as Caroline. |
| Date: 2006/08/13 05:58:11, Link 71.131.225.2 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Look who's gone groveling back to UD to lick his master's feet:
Let the synergistic tarditude begin! |
| Date: 2006/08/13 08:24:17, Link 71.131.225.2 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Where's stevestory? I arranged DaveScot's return to UD just to commemmorate Steve's achievement in surpassing the 2000-post milestone at AtBC. Well done, sir, and please enjoy your prize. |
| Date: 2006/08/13 09:26:17, Link 71.131.225.2 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
At least he avoids the abominable "Jone's", which I've seen several times at UD. |
| Date: 2006/08/13 18:37:54, Link 71.131.245.19 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Salvador shares his pain:
Ouch. |
| Date: 2006/08/18 18:00:11, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Major Tard and Sgt. Tard kiss and make up:
Awwww, aren't they cute? The good news is that this should elicit more Tardtainment from the Sergeant. The bad news is that his finger will be back on the banninator button (at least on his own threads). And you're the first one outta here! -dt |
| Date: 2006/08/21 02:14:07, Link 71.131.182.142 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Earth to Salvador... Come in, Salvador...
|
| Date: 2006/08/21 09:09:25, Link 71.131.207.112 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dembski is comfortable with common descent up to a point:
"Squared with the Christian tradition" means that humans were either separately created, or are at least very, very special in their intellectual and moral qualities (i.e. created in the image of God). So to Dembski, any news that animals are stupid is good news for humanity's specialness. Kind of pathetic that he goes around looking for ways of feeling superior to dolphins. Regarding South Africans and the ToE, maybe it has something to do with the Coriolis force. |
| Date: 2006/08/22 10:32:41, Link 71.131.213.82 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Allen MacNeill vents his disgust at UD, and Salvador "explains" why UD is an intellectual wasteland:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1486 |
| Date: 2006/08/22 18:45:48, Link 71.131.249.200 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Tom English is exactly the kind of opponent DaveTard fears the most. He's: 1) Much smarter than Dave; 2) Has his impulses under control, unlike Dave; 3) Systematically dismantles Dave's arguments and backs up his assertions with evidence; and 4) Doesn't take Dave's bait. In a confrontation with someone like Tom, Dave comes off very badly. The longer the exchange goes on, the more obvious it becomes that Dave doesn't know what he's talking about. On the other hand, arbitrarily banning his opponent makes him look like an intellectual coward. He generally hangs in until the humiliation of looking stupid outweighs the humiliation of running away like a little girl. He then declares his opponent "boring" and bans him or her. Dembski works in much the same way, although he tends to involve himself in fewer confrontations, preferring to let others do the dirty work for him. He also plays it safe, posting things without committing to a position on them. I take heart in the fact that any fence-sitters who stumble onto UD looking for a serious discussion of ID instead get to see these two wimps running away from their opponents in embarrassing disarray. |
| Date: 2006/08/24 00:25:53, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
What the fork???
Uh, lucID -- Who's missing that "sense of rational" again? |
| Date: 2006/08/24 18:24:35, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dave wants to project confidence, but inside he is a timid and insecure. If he were confident in his abilities, he wouldn't feel the need to ban every opponent who puts up a fight. He'd seize the opportunity to show his superior intelligence by trouncing the interloper instead of banning him or her. Dave absolutely craves respect. The constant bragging (about Dell, his "yacht", his IQ, his technical skills) is an attempt to gain admiration from his blog audience (hence his anger at having his posturing "spoiled" when someone outthinks him). The best recent example of this was on the GilDodgen checkers thread. Gil declared himself "one of the world's leading authorities" on computer checkers. Dave couldn't stand to be ignored while Gil was basking in glory, so he submitted this pathetic "me too" post:
A more confident man would have been secure enough to let Gil have his moment without demanding a share of the spotlight. |
| Date: 2006/08/24 22:05:16, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Yes, and WAD ought to be willing to part with it, given that it's only his "playground":
On the other hand, without Uncommonly Dense, where would Dembski: 1. Stage his "street theatre" performances? 2. Buttress his Napoleonic fantasies via arbitrary bannination? 3. Smear evil Darwinists like Padian and Pianka? 4. Acquire bootlickers like Salvador? 5. Showcase his statistical skills? Plus, UD is probably the first playground in Dembski's life where he sometimes manages to avoid being beaten up by the other kids. |
| Date: 2006/08/24 22:10:20, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
This part may hit a little too close to home for Sgt. Tard:
|
| Date: 2006/08/25 01:40:18, Link 71.131.249.200 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Joseph vies with lucID for the Best Supporting Tard nomination:
|
| Date: 2006/08/26 04:25:49, Link 71.131.249.200 |
| Author: keiths |
| Not a peep from Denyse since August 20th. |
| Date: 2006/08/28 10:05:13, Link 71.131.249.200 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
What the fork does Salvador think a "genus level" speciation event looks like? |
| Date: 2006/08/28 15:24:34, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Sgt. Tard is actually proud of the fact that he hasn't read Dembski's books:
You see, Dave and Dembski reached the same conclusions, even though Dave doesn't know what Dembski's conclusions are (beyond "some stuff was designed"). Therefore Dave is a genius. Bonus tard quote from the same thread:
|
| Date: 2006/08/29 19:16:04, Link 71.131.249.200 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
What ever happened to the series of articles that Tardus Maximus promised us on the relevance of nanotechnology to ID? We're being deprived of our rightful tardtainment!
|
| Date: 2006/08/31 19:03:11, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I like my tard straight up. Like argy says, the key is having no faith in the reasonableness of humanity. If you think that people should be intelligent, observant, and reasonable, then facing UD sans alcohol is distressing and depressing. If, on the other hand, you have a healthy, cynical attitude about humans, then you can simply savor the tard as one more fascinating freak of nature, like a two-headed kitten or a rain of frogs. The other nice thing about UD is that it makes you appreciate the non-tards in your life. For example, I work at a small company with thirteen smart, friendly, and reasonable people. We've been careful to hire non-tards and the effort has really paid off. We enjoy working together, everyone carries his weight, and a lot gets done. I shudder to think of the damage an employee like DaveTard could do to a company like ours. |
| Date: 2006/08/31 22:09:48, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Does TardBoy really think that life existed before atoms formed, 300,000 years after the Big Bang? And that this doesn't require extraordinary evidence? Or is he also a Big Bang skeptic? Wouldn't surprise me. I'm skeptical of your continued presence on this blog, homo. Nature doesn't have the guts to violate my law of biogenesis. I'm 5'10', 220#, dumb as an ox, and carry concealed. --dt |
| Date: 2006/09/03 21:49:31, Link 71.131.184.45 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Time has a new article on the talented Ms. Harris: Katherine Harris' Comedy of Errors |
| Date: 2006/09/06 08:50:45, Link 71.131.195.192 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
| Date: 2006/09/07 14:37:54, Link 71.131.195.192 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Le Tard reveals more of his impoverished inner life:
|
| Date: 2006/09/08 07:15:51, Link 71.131.195.192 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Davey grovels at the feet of WAD and DOL:
Who knew how desperate Dave was to get back into the UD fold? |
| Date: 2006/09/08 11:23:21, Link 71.131.228.55 |
| Author: keiths |
|
I disagree with johnnyb on a lot of things, but I have to say the following in his defense: 1. He's polite and respectful of his opponents, and unlike Sal, he's genuine about it. 2. He doesn't quote-mine. 3. He actually reads the biological literature. 4. You can have a rational discussion with him. |
| Date: 2006/09/08 11:27:32, Link 71.131.228.55 |
| Author: keiths |
|
LouFCD spills the UDOJ beans: http://udoj.blogspot.com/2006/09/all-good-things.html#full |
| Date: 2006/09/08 11:33:37, Link 71.131.228.55 |
| Author: keiths |
| Any bets on how Le Tard will attempt to spin his suckerdom? |
| Date: 2006/09/08 21:33:12, Link 71.131.228.55 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Binge and purge... |
| Date: 2006/09/09 08:33:27, Link 71.131.228.55 | ||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||
|
Astute reader Joseph manages to embarrass himself twice with his earnest responses to a couple of parody posts from www.thebrites.org. From the first post:
And from the second post:
How fitting, then, that Joseph's own blog is an unintentional self-parody entitled Intelligent Reasoning. |
| Date: 2006/09/11 04:04:50, Link 71.131.210.124 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
A typical weekend in the whirlwind romance of JAD and Le Tard, taken from the thread entitled "John Davison, Are You Listening?":
Bravo. A true pas de deux des tards. |
| Date: 2006/09/12 21:36:36, Link 71.131.188.101 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
An amusing friendly fire incident on UD. Salvador has a twitchy trigger finger:
It's hard to tell one comment from another when you're deleting so many. At least Barry deserved it, if the post by djmullen above is any indication. |
| Date: 2006/09/14 11:36:33, Link 71.131.187.121 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I like it, Richard. Sort of a "Hermit God of the Gaps." |
| Date: 2006/09/14 20:52:13, Link 71.131.187.121 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Jujuquisp, My suggestion is to join the ACLU and/or AU, or to make another donation if you're already a member. I joined both organizations largely because of what I witnessed at UD. Someone once suggested making a donation to the ACLU in DaveScot's name, making sure that he was notified of the gift. Sounds like a nice way to do some good and tweak Dave at the same time. |
| Date: 2006/09/16 14:05:01, Link 71.131.187.121 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Denyse O'Leary:
Sounds like a pretty accurate description of Dembski's time at Baylor, but no, she was actually referring to Baylor's denial of tenure to Francis Beckwith. |
| Date: 2006/09/16 22:29:41, Link 71.131.183.78 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
That's at least three of us who joined on account of Le Tard. I'm beginning to suspect that he was planted at UD by the ACLU. That UDOJ business? Two sock puppets baiting a third. |
| Date: 2006/09/18 16:30:30, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||
He's been talking about that site since December. December 26, 2005:
August 10, 2006:
September 18, 2006:
When he gets the first piece of overwhelming evidence, I'm sure the site will go up. |
| Date: 2006/09/18 22:32:49, Link 71.131.205.249 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Screw IC, SC, and CSI. Gil's got the answer:
|
| Date: 2006/09/18 22:39:13, Link 71.131.205.249 |
| Author: keiths |
| Wes, don't you understand? To oppose intelligent design is to oppose Jesus. Of course we need ID-friendly folks on the editorial board! |
| Date: 2006/09/19 20:28:19, Link 71.131.178.230 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Arden is a Great Man. But even He stands in awe of That Magnificent (Quotemining) Bastard and Inventor of the TardCap™, Richardthughes. |
| Date: 2006/09/20 12:21:17, Link 71.131.233.161 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Tom English manages both to bash Granville Sewell and to d@mn Salvador Dorkova with faint praise, all in only eight words:
I give it a 9.5. |
| Date: 2006/09/20 12:30:10, Link 71.131.233.161 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
The first time I flew out of Auckland (I'm a Yank) they came on the public address system to announce that "Chicken was delayed for flight 371 to Sydney". I figured Kiwis must really be obsessed with their in-flight meals, until I realized that "chicken" was really "check-in".  |
| Date: 2006/09/21 00:00:16, Link 71.131.219.96 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
| Date: 2006/09/21 18:00:39, Link 71.131.178.249 | ||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||
|
| Date: 2006/09/22 10:05:39, Link 71.131.178.249 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Steve, you hellbound heathen, don't you know a message from the Almighty when you see one? Does it have to be in foot-high characters? I am the Designer. Bill Dembski is my prophet. And the flagellum really is irreducibly complex. I can't explain about the Post (would have made more sense if it were the Moonie-owned Times). But God transcends logic. Who are we puny humans to attempt to understand him? |
| Date: 2006/09/23 21:41:50, Link 71.131.195.241 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Carlos mocks him, and little Scott scampers away. Let's see if he returns to the thread to salvage his manhood. |
| Date: 2006/09/25 22:47:25, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Salvador Cordova:
Oh. Well in that case, I guess it must be true. |
| Date: 2006/09/27 10:15:32, Link 71.131.227.249 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Heddle slams Jonathan Wells at UD:
|
| Date: 2006/10/02 23:15:26, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Following Carl Sachs' example, Karl Pfluger mocks Scott's bold-font threat:
|
| Date: 2006/10/03 18:00:21, Link 71.131.205.206 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Blipey, Be sure to bring a video camera with you. There's likely to be a huge comedic payoff in a face-to-face meeting with Il Tardissimo. |
| Date: 2006/10/04 06:52:44, Link 71.131.218.22 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Any junior-level engineer knows the difference, which is why it must be particularly painful to Dave to have his ignorance pointed out. He's already sensitive about not having an engineering degree. His misunderstanding of science has been pointed out many times. Now his lack of basic engineering knowledge is being exposed. No wonder he banned Tom and Karl. |
| Date: 2006/10/05 16:56:24, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||
Speaking of touchiness, Davey is desperately trying to salvage his credibility as a hardware designer:
Davey, those of us who do chip design know all about analog issues. But we also know that you don't do functional simulation of a microprocessor at the transistor level. You could have learned this in engineering school if you hadn't dropped out. You might want to brush up on ID, also. Isn't it a little embarrassing when a Darwinist has to point out your misunderstanding of "irreducible complexity"?
Good grief, Dave. You're a moderator on an intelligent design weblog. Stop embarrassing yourself. Do some homework. |
| Date: 2006/10/06 11:36:15, Link 71.131.217.6 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Davey digs himself in deeper:
Dave, It's painfully obvious to everyone (including the folks at UD) that you're bluffing. Why keep pretending to understand how chip simulation is done? You're just making yourself look ridiculous. Perhaps you've done some board design, but you clearly don't understand chip design methodology. First of all, do you really think that a gate-level simulation becomes non-boolean just because gate delays are added? Secondly, in 20 years of chip design (microprocessors, ASICs, and FPGAs) I have never used, nor seen anyone use, nor heard about anyone using a gate-level simulation for timing analysis. Can you do it? Of course. But why would you? It's the wrong tool for the job, and there are much better tools available. What's wrong with using a gate-level simulation for timing analysis? Here are two biggies: 1) Your vectors (or testbenches) have to achieve 100% path coverage (not just node coverage) to guarantee that you haven't missed any critical paths. Not only is this impossible to achieve (or even to approach) for most designs, it also means that your verification suite has to be nearly complete before you can do significant timing analysis. A stand-alone timing analysis tool has no such limitations and requires no vectors or testbenches. 2) To isolate a timing path using gate-level simulation, you have to a) produce a failure, b) debug from the failure back to the critical path, c) fix the path, and d) resimulate to find the next failure. Step (b) in particular takes a huge amount of engineering time, all for the sake of highlighting one or a handful of critical paths. A timing analyzer, by contrast, identifies hundreds or even thousands of critical paths all at once. The engineer simply has to fix the paths and rerun the analyzer. This is why the EDA vendors sell timing analysis tools, and it's why everyone buys them instead of trying to piggyback "cheap and cheerful" timing analysis onto their functional simulations. We've pretty much run that topic into the ground, unless you aren't embarrassed enough yet. Now let's hear why your definition of irreducible complexity is the right one, as opposed to Behe's and Dembski's. |
| Date: 2006/10/09 14:32:02, Link 69.227.37.230 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
DaveScot:
Oddly enough,Dave, I actually do believe that you've spent thousands of hours debugging your own crappy designs. You appear to be just the kind of careless thinker who would slap something together and then "design" it in the lab.
How many times do we have to prove you wrong before you'll give up, Dave? Your latest mistake is confusing switch-level simulation with transistor-level simulation. Read the following. It corrects your mistake and explains a bunch of other points that Tom English, Karl Pfluger, 2ndclass and I have been making all along.
http://www-ee.eng.hawaii.edu/~msmith....=119950 |
| Date: 2006/10/15 08:32:38, Link 71.131.176.132 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Preserving the exchange for posterity:
|
| Date: 2006/10/17 20:24:16, Link 71.131.208.164 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dembski is promising us some actual research within the next year:
|
| Date: 2006/10/24 13:05:05, Link 71.131.208.164 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Dang. I've been looking forward to seeing Ken's shiny new museum ever since I read this. Would it be immoral of me to give money for the preservation of this monument to human stupidity? |
| Date: 2006/10/31 01:33:01, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
http://materialscience.uoregon.edu/taylor/art/TaylorlCCS2002.pdf |
| Date: 2006/11/02 14:53:04, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Just posted the following at Hovind's blog:
|
| Date: 2006/11/02 18:28:27, Link 71.131.208.164 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I wonder what Joel makes of this: Top Evangelist Rev. Ted Haggard Resigns Amid Allegations of Gay Affair |
| Date: 2006/11/03 09:36:54, Link 71.131.208.164 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Salvador:
Curious, my ass.
Who, on the entire planet, would be persuaded by this evasion? It is beyond pathological when you can't admit something that is obvious to both your allies and your detractors. Salvador disgusts me. |
| Date: 2006/11/04 20:42:16, Link 71.131.208.164 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
JGuy wrote:
Not to mention the mechanism which makes kids grow vertically when they're standing up, yet horizontally when they're lying down. Don't you chance-worshipping heathens know it takes God to make tall, strapping kids out of Cocoa Puffs? |
| Date: 2006/11/07 20:33:27, Link 71.131.176.199 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Michaels7 raises an important question:
|
| Date: 2006/11/09 02:54:13, Link 71.131.176.199 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Davey's hurting for sure:
http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/35#comment-100 |
| Date: 2006/11/09 23:09:24, Link 71.131.176.199 |
| Author: keiths |
 |
| Date: 2006/11/09 23:39:25, Link 71.131.217.111 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dembski just posted this:
...which of course reminded me of this great moment on UD, when the 'Isaac Newton of information theory' managed to misinterpret some Google search statistics so badly that he concluded that
|
| Date: 2006/11/15 08:21:30, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
|
For you juxtaposed quote fans: Salvador, after deleting a post by 'zapatero':
Salvador:
|
| Date: 2006/11/20 12:58:10, Link 71.131.217.111 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Welp, this rant from D'oh Leary deserves to be reproduced in its full tardaceous glory:
|
| Date: 2006/11/22 00:29:56, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
I love it. Davey sets out to ridicule P.Z., but instead has his error pointed out to him by everyone, even getting lectured by Joseph, for tard's sake. And he still can't admit that he's wrong! Instead, he's off frantically Googling for some obscure reference that supports his position that gravity is the strongest force... Oh, wait. Same tard, different debacle... DaveScot, 01/06/2005:
P.S. Welcome back, Faid. Where've you been, man? |
| Date: 2006/11/22 01:27:15, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
Gil Dodgen just posted a thread at UD entitled Priceless Entertainment -- For Free! He might as well have been referring to Diploid Dave's thread. Meanwhile, the frantic Googling continues:
Now Davey may be a few neurons shy of a quorum, but even he must realize that the absence of the word "parent" in a definition hardly excuses his error. The hole gets deeper, and Davey keeps desperately digging... |
| Date: 2006/11/22 01:44:31, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
|
Holy crap! It gets even better. Davey went back and edited his comment to make it look less ridiculous. Compare the DaveTard quote as it appears in Altabin's comment versus mine: DaveTard, from Altabin's comment:
DaveTard, from my preceding comment:
Attaboy, Dave! Now maybe you should sneak back and edit the original post. |
| Date: 2006/11/22 03:45:09, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Yet the original post still ends with this:
C'mon, brave boy, how about an Update 3? I'll even write it for you if you find it too painful: "I was wrong about the meaning of 'diploid'. Thank you to Allen, Joseph, and all of the others who pointed out my mistake. Also, I sincerely apologize for calling Allen MacNeill a 'pedant'." |
| Date: 2006/11/22 06:41:06, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Joseph rubs Diploid Dave's face in it (emphasis his):
LOL. Somatic cells, Dave. Got it? Write that down. |
| Date: 2006/11/22 09:49:58, Link 70.239.226.25 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
PZ gets in on the fun:
|
| Date: 2006/11/22 12:51:59, Link 71.131.217.111 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
It's so hard to find a good housetard these days. |
| Date: 2006/11/24 19:23:56, Link 71.131.218.100 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
One 2LoT "expert" praises another:
|
| Date: 2006/11/24 19:58:14, Link 71.131.218.100 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Keep in mind that Davey uses a cartoon definition of atheism:
Le Tard would hate to admit it, but by his definition even Dawkins is not an atheist. Dawkins' new book, after all, has a chapter entitled "Why There Almost Certainly is no God". In the book he states
|
| Date: 2006/11/27 15:20:23, Link 71.131.218.100 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Like watching paint dry. UD gets this way periodically whenever they manage to chase off or ban all of the intelligent people. Look no further than the Pinker thread. 27 comments full of error after inanity, piling higher and higher, and not a single intelligent challenge to offset the stench. Gil Dodgen even manages to condescend to Pinker, which is hilarious given that Pinker under general anesthesia could still out-think Gil. Things were hopping for a while at UD after LeTard got sacked, and for a short while after he got back, when the leash was still tight. Those days appear to be over. |
| Date: 2006/11/27 15:37:09, Link 71.131.218.100 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Wouldn't that be great? Maybe we could get him to talk again about how great it was to be an Old Testament slave. |
| Date: 2006/11/27 15:49:01, Link 71.131.218.100 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
I just popped over to Josh's website to see what he's been up to, and found this great "they all look the same to me" comment:
|
| Date: 2006/11/28 11:12:01, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
On the Pinker thread:
You think anyone at UD will give him an honest answer? |
| Date: 2006/11/28 22:19:11, Link 71.131.210.128 |
| Author: keiths |
|
On the subject of nested hierarchies, check out this new thread at UD: The Sound of a Nested Hierarchy Shattering Don't miss the comments. They're tardelicious! EDIT: Oops, mcc -- our posts crossed in the ether. |
| Date: 2006/11/28 22:30:49, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Actually, it looks like at least a four-way collision. Phonon and Zachriel were actually talking about the "shattering" thread on the previous page. It's a little confusing because of all the DaveTard flashback quotes on this page. |
| Date: 2006/12/02 12:05:38, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Applying Davey's tool of choice to the question at hand: http://tinyurl.com/y3wqwq Quod erat demonstrandum. |
| Date: 2006/12/03 12:56:42, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||||||||||||||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||||||||||||||
Dembski, regarding rumors of a new job:
For the good of my soul, I read Dembski's message. It's a long discussion of whether Jesus suffered enough to redeem our sins. What this has to do with Dembski's employment is beyond me. Perhaps by suffering in obscurity at West Southwestern Bible and Taxidermy College, Dembski is doing his part to save us all. I've selected some choice excerpts from Dembski's message for your edification. Here he puts his math PhD to good use:
And there you have it. Of course, this sorta blows the "day-age" idea that the six days of creation were days to God, but eons to us. Dembski engages in a little self-analysis:
Koo koo ka-choo. More math from Isaac:
Dembski would feel right at home with Professor Sharon K. Robbert, who writes:
Dembski:
So when we delight in the happiness of others, we are being "cheap and self-indulgent." God is not a Church-burning Ebola Boy:
But Demsbki admits to being a church-burner himself:
Amen. |
| Date: 2006/12/03 19:37:51, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Mike, You missed one:
Yes, Kirk Cameron, who along with his banana-buddy Ray Comfort pioneered the argumentum ad fructum for God's existence: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2z-OLG0KyR4 Check out these two responses: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1zMfUay6Ss http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bdkRzkXbZ1M |
| Date: 2006/12/03 20:26:03, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||||||
| Author: keiths | ||||||
Robin Levett:
Sgt. Tard replies:
Of course, Bullock's article completely supports Levett's assertion:
Question for the panel: Could DaveScot really be stupid enough to misinterpret Bullock's article? Or is he scared of Levett and looking for an excuse to hit the 'ban' button? While granting that Davey is simultaneously stupid, dishonest, and cowardly, I think cowardice is the driving force in this instance. |
| Date: 2006/12/04 09:20:38, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
H fckng sshls. plgz t DvSct NW bfr gt pssd ff nd strt fckng wth . dn't wnt t mk m md. Trst m n ths. r scrt scks bg tm. |
| Date: 2006/12/05 22:39:29, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Dembski:
Wes was just pointing out that you don't get listed in the Baylor faculty/staff directory simply by "staying in touch with Baylor colleagues." Dembski may not be ditching the West Southwest Bible and Taxidermy College, but it does look like he's starting something new at Baylor. |
| Date: 2006/12/07 03:49:00, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Jonathan Wells is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, if this is any indication. From the "Case for a Creator" DVD thread on UD:
Yes. It simply, but effectively, shows that Jonathan Wells is either an incredible doofus, or Rev. Moon's mendacious lackey, or both. |
| Date: 2006/12/07 13:18:20, Link 71.131.210.128 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
A foolish consistency is the hobgoblin of little minds. A foolish inconsistency is the province of big Texas-sized minds like Davey's. |
| Date: 2006/12/07 15:41:04, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Ah, the fundies stole his adolescence, so now he's reliving it through JanieBelle and Kate. Luckily I escaped fundyland at 14, still early enough to sow my oats. I visited BJU in the 80's. Highlights of the trip: 1) The "dating lounge", where prim couples held hands on sofas under the watchful eyes of chaperones, and 2) The chain-link fence surrounding the campus, topped with strands of barbed wire. You'd have expected the barbed wire to be canted outward to repel intruders, but no, it was canted inward, as if BJU were a prison (which I suppose it was, for people like Lou). |
| Date: 2006/12/07 16:02:57, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Wow. It must have been wrenching to leave after 18 years as pastor.
I'd certainly be interested in reading and commenting on them. |
| Date: 2006/12/07 21:08:57, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Scary, I know your reference to "psychosis" was for comedic effect, but it's still worth stressing that perfectly normal, mentally healthy people are nevertheless subject to self-deception. We all know about sensory illusions, and cognitive illusions abound as well -- the Monty Hall paradox being a notorious example. The beautiful thing about the scientific style of thinking is that it gives us a way of approaching the truth despite these inherent weaknesses. |
| Date: 2006/12/08 01:06:37, Link 71.131.192.51 |
| Author: keiths |
|
ScaryFacts, I cross-posted our last couple of comments to your blog so that we can continue the conversation there. I look forward to hearing about your experiences. |
| Date: 2006/12/08 01:15:44, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Anyone care to guess what qualifies one as an "honest and open" atheist in Borne's eyes? |
| Date: 2006/12/08 03:59:11, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Have you guys seen Errol Morris's classic documentary Vernon, Florida? http://www.errolmorris.com/film/vernon_clip.html http://www.errolmorris.com/film/vernon.html |
| Date: 2006/12/08 04:13:32, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
What? And violate the spirit of the Big Tent? You should know better, Kristine -- ID does not take a position on the cause of AIDS. That issue can be addressed when the culture war has been won and Of Pandas and People is back in the classroom where it belongs. |
| Date: 2006/12/09 11:37:39, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
When Davey bans you, he's not attacking you -- he just happens to be attacking all of your ideas simultaneously. |
| Date: 2006/12/10 10:01:01, Link 71.131.192.51 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
As the year 2006 draws to a close, let us pause to reflect on the great strides made recently by the science of intelligent design. A mere four years ago, when ID still languished under a cloud of disrepute, Dr. William A. Dembski published this prescient map of ID's road to respectability: Becoming a Disciplined Science: Prospects, Pitfalls, and Reality Check for ID In it, he helpfully outlined a set of objective standards by which the progress of ID could be judged:
There you have it -- an objective set of standards for judging ID's progress. What do you say now, scoffers? |
| Date: 2006/12/14 17:42:26, Link 71.131.209.46 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Ekstasis waxes ecstatic over circumcision:
No word from Ekstasis on the Designer's incredible foresight in providing the requisite skin for snipping, thus providing mohels with employment for centuries to come. |
| Date: 2006/12/15 02:05:34, Link 71.131.197.191 |
| Author: keiths |
|
Playing the Judge Jones animation at OE, I noticed that the cadences and Chicago vowels of the judge's chipmunk speech resembled those of a certain disreputable intelligent design proponent. Suspicious, I sampled the audio, slowed it down, and lowered the pitch. Sure enough, it's Dembski. 1. Here's the original. Fart noises have been removed for your protection. 2. The slowed-down, pitch-adjusted version which confirms that Dembski is the voice of Judge Jones. 3. For comparison, a clip from Dembski's recent sermon at the West Southwest Bible and Taxidermy College. 4. I also discovered that if you slow down Dembski's voice and play it backward, you get a prophetic message regarding the future of the Intelligent Design Movement. |
| Date: 2006/12/15 02:48:47, Link 71.131.177.231 |
| Author: keiths |
| If the links in my previous message don't work for you, you can get the audio files here. |
| Date: 2006/12/15 11:10:44, Link 71.131.179.17 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Slime-ador Cordova is at it again. In his latest post at UD, he quotes from Lauren Sandler's book Righteous, but just happens to omit a few key phrases and sentences. Here's the quote, with the missing parts reinserted and bolded. I've corrected Slimy's spelling and transcription errors:
What is wrong with that boy? |
| Date: 2006/12/15 13:50:38, Link 71.131.208.19 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Sorry about that, Arden. Yahoo Briefcase is acting very Tardy right now. You may have to reload multiple times to get the links to work. If all else fails, go here and keep clicking on the 'Dembski' folder until it opens: http://briefcase.yahoo.com/bc/woctor |
| Date: 2006/12/15 20:45:09, Link 71.131.208.19 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Ha, ha! No worries. I/We am/are not planning to put it on my/our resume/resumes anyway. Besides, taking credit for catching Salvador in flagrante delicto would be like congratulating myself for noticing that the sun rose this morning. |
| Date: 2006/12/16 09:40:01, Link 71.131.196.178 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Things are hopping over at Overweening Arrogance:
That's almost four comments a day! It makes me wish I were one of the cool guys, like Bill, Jonathan, and TRoutMac -- hangin' out with the kids, trashin' Dawkins, smokin' a little weed... |
| Date: 2006/12/17 09:57:04, Link 71.131.201.233 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
A little bit of chipmunk spin from Dembski:
Let's savor this bit of inanity:
Who are these "many young people" who, having heard a few animated farts, no longer take Darwinian evolution seriously? |
| Date: 2006/12/17 10:10:44, Link 71.131.201.233 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
Dave plants another kiss on Dembski's cheek:
If Davey thinks we're stuffed shirts, it's only because 80 percent of the humor on this thread is at his expense, and he hasn't learned to laugh at himself yet. |
| Date: 2006/12/17 10:19:33, Link 71.131.177.104 | ||||
| Author: keiths | ||||
Thanks for doing your part to extend our 15 minutes of fame, Alan.
Subtle for Dave, yes. |
| Date: 2006/12/17 12:29:32, Link 71.131.179.17 | ||
| Author: keiths | ||
|
