AE BB DB Explorer


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


form_srcid: rossum

form_srcid: rossum

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is 54.205.236.46

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.

form_author:

form_srcid: rossum

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 'rossum%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC

DB_err:

DB_result: Resource id #4

Date: 2008/12/11 06:48:53, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (CeilingCat @ Dec. 11 2008,00:13)
Also, Dr. Dr. D, try running God through your Design Filter.  

Is He random?  Nope.  
Is He law-like?  Nope.
Conclusion: God is designed.

If I'm wrong, please show me my error.  

(Thanks to RBH for this one.)

No need to, already been done: God and the Explanatory Filter.

rossum

Date: 2008/12/22 10:49:54, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Arden Chatfield @ Dec. 21 2008,23:15)
That's it. Coal in your stocking, you bastard.

:angry:

Just coal?



rossum

Date: 2009/01/09 17:24:10, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Tony M Nyphot @ Jan. 09 2009,12:20)
Quote (Henry J @ Jan. 09 2009,09:49)
And, French and Spanish make...

...Euskara?

I very much doubt it.  Euskara was there before any of the Indo-European languages arrived.

rossum

Date: 2009/01/18 06:53:09, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Marion Delgado @ Jan. 17 2009,20:33)
This discovery is indeed Nobel caliber, but I am already girding my loins to be expelled from the Nobel process.

Irrelevant anyway - it is questionable whether or not Stockholm is a valid move in MC.

rossum

Date: 2009/01/24 08:49:54, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Reciprocating Bill @ Jan. 23 2009,19:24)
BTW, Daniel, I'd be interested in seeing your code for a simulation of God Theory in action. Pseudocode will do.

Won't that amount to a hideously long series of assignment statements?

/**
* smites the indicated object.
*
* @param object to be smited.
* @return object is returned to the void from whence it came.
* @throws see Thunderbolt extends Throwable.
*/
public void smite(Object target) { ... }

/**
 * inflicts the indicated number of plagues on the target object.
 *
 * @param int the number of plagues to be inflicted in the range 1 to 10 inclusive.
 * @param object the target of the plagues.
 * @return long the number of dead bodies resulting.
 * @throws FrogException if the number of plagues is not in the correct range.
 * Note that this may as a side effect either result in a call to smite(programmer) or turn the programmer into a frog.
 */
public long inflictPlagues(int num, Object target) { ... }

rossum

Date: 2009/02/07 06:51:57, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Daniel Smith @ Feb. 06 2009,19:47)
I could be wrong.  It's possible that there is no God and that all life accidentally appeared through sheer luck and coincidence.
I'm open to that possibility, but it's going to take a heckuva convincing case to make me switch to that position.

Why take such an either-or position?  An omnipotent God can make things happen any way He wants to.  If God wants something to happen by a miracle, then it happens by a miracle.  If God wants something to happen by natural laws, then it happens by natural laws.  If God wants something to happen by luck and coincidence, then it happens by luck and coincidence.

rossum

Date: 2009/04/03 07:47:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Quack @ April 03 2009,06:39)
I once had a link to a display of evolutionary relationships. It was circular, starting at the center with branches outwards to the periphery. It was possible to zoom in on details.

Anyone got the link?

Try http://www.zo.utexas.edu/faculty/antisense/Download.html and have a look at the "Download Graphic Images" link.  That seems to be something like what you are looking for.

rossum

Date: 2009/04/19 06:25:33, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (CeilingCat @ April 19 2009,04:28)
A box of rocks contributes to theology:            
Quote


716

StephenB

04/18/2009

10:38 am

We need to show that an personal agent created the universe. To do that we must show that an impersonal, changeless cause could not have done so.

So, we begin with a self-evident truth as the premise and work our way through those things which necessarily follow:

Premise: For all impersonal, unchanging causes that have always existed, none can begin in time.

1. Therefore: All effects that have always existed could not have begun to exist

2. Therefore: All impersonal, unchanging causes that have always existed could not have begun in time.

3: Therefore, no effect can begin to exist if its impersonal, unchanging cause always was.

4: Therefore: No impersonal, unchanging cause can begin to exist if its effect always was.

5: Therefore, no impersonal, unchanging cause can exist without its effect.

6: Therefore, no effect can exist without its impersonal, unchanging cause.

7: Therefore, the impersonal, unchanging law cannot cause the universe to begin to exist.

8: Therefore, a personal agent caused the universe to begin to exist.

If someone needs for me to demonstrate why each follows from the other, let me know.


Wow! Where to begin?

It might be enough just to change "impersonal" to "personal" and vice versa.  The argument works just the same whatever adjective is used, try it with "pink unchanging causes".  The important part is the "unchanging" nature of the cause.

An unchanging personal cause has exactly the same problem:  On the first day God said "Let there be light", and on the second day God said "Let there be light", and on the third day God said ...

Of course a changing cause, whether personal or impersonal, cannot be eternal since anything that changes cannot be eternal.

rossum

Date: 2009/07/20 08:47:34, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,July 20 2009,07:54)
O bama?  WTF

Make that "O'Bama".  He is Irish, which is why he can't find his birth certificate - he is looking in Hawaii or Kenya when he should be looking in Dublin.  :D

rossum

Date: 2009/08/03 08:59:40, Link
Author: rossum
How about a look at the Wedge Document and adding the "Five year goals" and "Twenty year goals" to the timeline.

The Wedge Document was released in 1999 so the Five year Goals can go under 2004:
  • To see intelligent design theory as an accepted alternative in the sciences and scientific research being done from the perspective of design theory.
  • To see the beginning of the influence of design theory in spheres other than natural science.
  • To see major new debates in education, life issues, legal and personal responsibility pushed to the front of the national agenda.


rossum

Date: 2009/08/30 05:18:38, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Bob O'H @ Aug. 30 2009,04:40)
 
Quote (someotherguy @ Aug. 29 2009,23:39)
Best not.  If Gordon found out about that video he would probably write a post so long that it would make Gould's "The Structure of Evolutionary Theory" seem brief and to the point, arguing that what is plainly obvious to any reasonable person just ain't so.  And who would want that?

I think kf of The Kairos Institute is already aware of the video: was it him who claimed that the programme was changed between 1986 and 1987?  This was the last time Weasel came up, so I'm not going to be bothered to check for it.

I think he's now saying that this shows something about quasi-latching.  But I'm incapable of following his arguments.

The video is linked in Denise's OP to the thread:  
Quote
On the other hand,from a (video-run of the program , go to 6:15), it seems to be the latter.


rossum

Date: 2009/10/05 06:47:31, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 04 2009,17:55)
Quote
Um, what's the square root of the real number -1 again?

That question is either imaginary, irrational, transcendental, unreal, or irreducibly complex.

Henry

So is that imaginary faith, irrational faith, transcendental faith, unreal faith, or irreducibly complex faith?

rossum

Date: 2009/10/17 16:14:27, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (khan @ Oct. 17 2009,15:40)
Quote (ERV @ Oct. 17 2009,16:31)
lol, wat?

She's here.  You guys are in trouble.

They are only in trouble if she is wearing the Leather Thigh-boots.  I just hope for their sake that she isn't wearing the full Doris the Dominatrix outfit...

rossum

Date: 2009/10/19 12:37:36, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 19 2009,11:39)
Um, not information as we know it, Jim.

<mode=Trekkie Nerd>Make that: "It's information Jim, but not as we know it."</mode>

rossum

Date: 2009/10/29 08:08:29, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Constant Mews @ Oct. 28 2009,22:07)
The only point that matters is whether Christians must regard it as genuine history in order to be considered Christians.

Floyd's problem is worse than that.  Jesus did not reference a literal version of Genesis, He referenced a non-literal version.

At Mark 10:6 Jesus said: "But from the beginning of the creation God made them male and female."

Which shows that Jesus did not interpret Genesis literally.  On a strict literal interpretation this is wrong twice over, firstly because Adam (and presumably Eve) were made some time during day six, not at "the beginning", but more than a hundred and twenty hours after the beginning. Secondly with Adam being made before Eve, there was a time when there was male and not female.  Both of these points show that Jesus was not interpreting Genesis literally.

If Jesus did not interpret Genesis literally then it is surely allowed for others not to interpret it literally.

rossum

Date: 2009/10/29 10:48:20, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (FloydLee @ Oct. 29 2009,09:55)
Both in Mark 10 and Matt 19, Jesus is quoting from straight Genesis verses.

My apologies for phrasing my thoughts badly.  Jesus was indeed referring to verses from Genesis, my point is that He did not interpret them literally.

 
Quote (Mortenson @ AiG)
In other words, Jesus is saying that Adam and Eve were created at the beginning of history.

You have just lost the game Floyd.  If history started when Adam and Eve were created, then everything that is described in Genesis as happening before the creation of Adam and Eve, i.e. days one to five, cannot be history and should not be taken as history.  Yet, your case is that all of Genesis has to be taken as history, not just part of it.  Your own source is telling you that you lose.

 
Quote (Mortenson @ AiG)
.....Jesus is reaching farther back in history for the basis of his teaching on marriage. The Pharisees go back to the time of Moses’ writings in Deuteronomy, whereas Jesus goes back to the beginning of time.

So AiG are denying that days one to five were part of time and hence that they cannot have been 24-hour days as you insist.  Why are you quoting from such a heretical website Floyd?  Again you lose.

 
Quote (Mortenson @ AiG)
Jesus spoke these words about 4000 years after the beginning.  If we equate those 4000 years with a 24-hour day, then Jesus was speaking at 24:00 and the creation of Adam and Eve on the sixth literal day of history would be equivalent to 00:00:00:35 (half a second after the beginning), in the non-technical language of Jesus here is the beginning of time.

In the technical language of science, Dr. Mortenson is accusing Jesus of making an error; he is accusing Jesus of lying.  Jesus, being omniscient as you believe could have said "near the beginning..." or "close to the beginning..." and been perfectly truthful.  Instead Dr. Mortenson is accusing Jesus of error.

I already knew that AiG was appallingly bad at science.  Until now I have never bothered to read their apologetics stuff.  From the look of this article you picked their apologetics are just as awful as their science.

 
Quote
So, Jesus is indeed saying that Adam and Eve were at the beginning of creation.

That is indeed what He said, and it shows that He did not interpret Genesis literally.  If He had interpreted Genesis literally He would have said "near the beginning...".  Are you going to follow Dr. Mortenson into heresy and accuse Jesus of lying?

rossum

Date: 2009/10/30 17:32:06, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (J-Dog @ Oct. 30 2009,10:15)
4.) Mornington Crescent

Saint Ockwell

rossum

Date: 2009/11/02 16:10:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 02 2009,15:10)
6) Dembski, Nelson, and Behe have both stated that ID as a scientific theory needs a lot of work and is not ready for the limelight.  How do you respond to that statement from three of the largest figures of ID theory?

You left out Philip Johnson:
Quote
I also don’t think that there is really a theory of intelligent design at the present time to propose as a comparable alternative to the Darwinian theory, which is, whatever errors it might contain, a fully worked out scheme. There is no intelligent design theory that’s comparable. Working out a positive theory is the job of the scientific people that we have affiliated with the movement. Some of them are quite convinced that it’s doable, but that’s for them to prove... No product is ready for competition in the educational world.

Berkley Science Review (Spring 2006)

Make that four of the largest figures in ID.

Date: 2009/11/04 10:55:44, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (dheddle @ Nov. 04 2009,08:16)
Or, more mundanely, the ability of our universe to produce rocks appears to rest on a razor's edge.

The universe is better tuned for rocks than it is for us.  The greatest part of the universe is interstellar and intergalactic space which in extremely inhospitable for us but hospitable for rocks.  Rocks can survive in the cold and anoxic conditions that occupy 99.99% of the universe, while we cannot.

We are merely an an unintended consequence of a universe designed to be hospitable for rocks.

rossum

Date: 2009/11/11 15:16:14, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (J-Dog @ Nov. 11 2009,14:43)
One of their 8 reasons ID = Teh Fail is Dembski's Sweater!!111!

That sweater is a fail, even in ID's own terms:  
Quote (Dembski @ ARN)
Attracting Talent. Are we continually attracting new talent to intelligent design's scientific research program? Does that talent include intellects of the highest caliber? Is that talent distributed across the disciplines or confined only to certain disciplines? Are under-represented disciplines getting filled? What about talent that's been with the movement in the past? Is it staying with the movement or becoming disillusioned and aligning itself elsewhere? Do the same names associated with intelligent design keep coming up in print or are we constantly adding new names? Are we fun to be around? Do we have a colorful assortment of characters? Other things being equal, would you rather party with a design theorist or a Darwinist?

Source: Becoming a Disciplined Science

Would you want to party with that sweater?

rossum

Date: 2009/11/12 12:27:16, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Raevmo @ Nov. 12 2009,10:26)
Looking for a date, Joe? With grease or dry?

"If spit doesn't work, it's not true love."

rossum

Date: 2009/11/19 10:43:36, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (sledgehammer @ Nov. 19 2009,09:49)
I've got the whipped cream and chocolate sauce covered.

Yeah, but you are meant to whip the cream after you cover yourself with it.  At least that is what my mother always did.

rossum

Date: 2009/11/24 09:15:34, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Steverino @ Nov. 24 2009,07:46)
Apparently, by asking the question does God exists, we have proved his existence!

So, the question is "Does the Invisible Pink Unicorn exist?"

rossum

Date: 2009/12/07 13:55:01, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (blipey @ Dec. 07 2009,10:54)
I agree.  What I was trying to get at is the science-deniers' tendency to think that erasure is an appropriate (and logically sound?) response to criticism.

Since they seem to think that everything true and worth knowing is written in THE BOOK, it stands to reason that if something is erased from THE BOOK then it cannot have been true or worth knowing in the first place.  QED.

rossum

Date: 2009/12/18 06:51:37, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (CeilingCat @ Dec. 18 2009,06:46)
Why does God hate Canada?

Because some of them speak French of course.

rossum

Date: 2009/12/22 11:14:01, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (k.e.. @ Dec. 22 2009,07:55)
I'd like to see her wrestle a seventh day adventist white pointer shark.

Shark wrestling?  Here you go.

rossum

Date: 2010/01/18 10:23:43, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Jan. 18 2010,09:52)
I think the original book review I paraphrased went like this:

This book is novel and good. However, the parts that were good were not novel, and the parts that were novel were not good.

It is an apocryphal quote from Dr Johnson: "Your manuscript is both good and original. But the part that is good is not original, and the part that is original is not good."

rossum

Date: 2010/01/27 15:05:24, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Zachriel @ Jan. 27 2010,06:52)
Also, if there is a plausible process by which left-handed amino acids are produced or selected (perhaps polarised light or beta decay), and a plausible process of assembly (perhaps mineral templating), then those exponents simply vanish.

Ask and it shall be granted: Freezing Effect on Chirality Generation of DL-Alanine-N-Carboxy-Anhydride Oligomerization in Aqueous Solution.

Quote
Our studies indicated that an enantiomeric excess of L- or D-Ala appeared in some oligopeptide fractions. Their excesses were significantly larger in the frozen than liquid solution.


rossum

Date: 2010/03/19 12:41:34, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Mar. 19 2010,04:00)
In addition, an example of the Explanatory Filter in action would be great.

Been there, done that, got the link: God and the Explanatory Filter.

rossum

Date: 2010/03/21 06:40:01, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Thought Provoker @ Mar. 19 2010,14:12)
Hi Rossum,

I liked your link.

I don't suppose Dembski or any other big name ID proponent offered a rebuttal to this did they?

I have never seen any rebuttal offered, which does not mean that there isn't one out there somewhere that I have not seen yet.

rossum

Date: 2010/03/22 07:52:38, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (BillB @ Mar. 22 2010,03:42)
Quote (Amadan @ Mar. 22 2010,00:31)
   
Quote (Louis @ Mar. 21 2010,04:49)
Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear. Mornington Crescent eh?

Tut tut.

Fairlop.

Louis

Totteridge & Whetstone (Ha! It's still Sunday here! Bet you forgot about low tide too.)

It ain't Sunday any more, and it's the 22nd so ...

Mansion House.

A move into the City.  Interesting.

Bank.

rossum

Date: 2010/05/25 18:55:36, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Louis @ May 24 2010,16:06)
Quote (Henry J @ May 24 2010,19:45)
 
Quote
I'll try not to be a Bohr.

At least chemistry is an elementary subject - at least on a periodic basis.

Ignore him, he's just looking for a reaction.

Louis

Fermi la bouche?

rossum

Date: 2010/06/20 11:33:41, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Tom Ames @ June 19 2010,22:23)
It's not quite what I had in mind with the OP, but does anyone else remember Christopher Langan's* "Cognitive Theoretic Model of the Universe"? It was sort of a verbal analog to TimeCube, and WMD seemed to think it was The Shit for awhile.

*Oops. By mentioning his name I may have just brought down upon our heads the wrath of his internet troll-posse (Hi Genie!). Sorry about that.

ISCID still remembers him: http://www.iscid.org/christopherlangan.php  

But does ISCID have anything other than memories anyway?

rossum

Date: 2010/06/20 11:45:27, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (khan @ June 20 2010,10:19)
"watch us like hyenas"  ?

Yeah.  They sit around looking at members of the Hyaenidae saying, "I really like that hyena," to each other.  We watch them doing it.

:)

rossum

Date: 2010/06/29 04:39:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Nils Ruhr @ June 29 2010,04:24)
So why do you claim junk-dna, generally, has no function?

Because Junk DNA generally has no function.

In round figures about 5% of our genome directly codes for proteins.  A further 5-10% is conserved and so likely has a function other than direct coding for proteins.  The remaining 85-90% is junk with no specific function.

The articles ID people, like Sal Cordova, promote are about new functions discovered for the 5-10%.

rossum

Date: 2010/08/02 07:43:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 01 2010,21:17)
Harrumph.

I'm sorry, there is no station called "Harrumph".

I will invoke that Boris Extension (aka the Bonking Boris Extension) and play:  Hoxton.

rossum

Date: 2010/08/21 08:44:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Doc Bill @ Aug. 20 2010,18:17)
South Kensington.  I need a museum fix.

Tut tut sir.  There is a separate Mornington Crescent thread for that sort of thing.  Think of the poor innocent children who may be reading this thread, unaware of its nefarious contents.

rossum

Date: 2010/08/24 06:24:54, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (J-Dog @ Aug. 23 2010,20:46)
Now if only someone would set one of these bad boys loose in the Chicago River...

Too late, the French have it in Bordeaux...



rossum

Date: 2010/09/16 15:53:50, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 16 2010,15:26)
But above all else, just enjoy the game for its simple pleasures.

Which reminds me, has the Boris-Bike supplement to Stovold been approved yet or are we still waiting for the white smoke to appear?  Mind you, we have been waiting for that since they replaced the steam engines on the Circle Line.

Which inevitably brings us to the gateway to the south: Balham.

rossum

Date: 2010/09/20 07:55:29, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 19 2010,18:28)
I thought I understood it at one point, but researching the classic games I realize I'm kind of at sea.

I'm sorry, but sea areas are not allowed, so no Dogger, Fisher or Bight.  We might at a pinch allow Southend or Margate which would perhaps suffice as they are on the coast.  That would however require Kielmansegge's interpretation which many have questioned, including Rev. Thorpe-Fanshawe in his notable tome "Stovold for Experts".

Stockwell.  (The interpretation as St. Ockwell has been disallowed due to the Pope's visit.)

rossum

Date: 2010/09/20 12:35:41, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 20 2010,10:04)
btw rossum, don't think the Invigilators didn't notice your two sequential plays.

'cause they did.

(stern look)

Sorry sir.  I won't do it again sir.  [Stands in corner looking sheepish.]



rossum

Date: 2010/09/24 08:43:33, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ Sep. 24 2010,05:34)
Finsbury Park (which had the same traditional role, though the claim of privilege in defamation cases is, sadly apocryphal).

Yes, a pity about that.  Your case come up next week I understand.

I think that a move to the south will impact certain not quite so well laid plans:

Southwark.

rossum

Date: 2010/09/30 11:01:37, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Jkrebs @ Sep. 30 2010,09:59)
I believe that Stephen has to amend his law of causality now to exclude human acts of free will.  I wonder why he hadn't thought of that before?

Maybe God only just gave him the free will to think it?

rossum

Date: 2010/10/01 07:53:47, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Seversky @ Sep. 30 2010,18:06)
On the one hand we have some one who follows a religion that involves stories about walking, talking snakes, sticks that turn into snakes, water turned into wine, a man raised from the dead, all created by an eternal, uncaused, self-sufficient deity who created everything out of nothing for no apparent reason.

Well that is obviously not Tru-Christianity™, no siree Bob.  Tru-Christianity™ has all that and two magic trees as well.

rossum

Date: 2010/10/02 08:09:59, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Badger3k @ Oct. 02 2010,03:25)
Quote (fnxtr @ Oct. 02 2010,00:18)
Quote (Henry J @ Oct. 01 2010,21:48)
 
Quote
10. The "higher," more complex animals must have been produced immediately by God, and God alone.

Giraffes?

Henry

No, I think he means alpacas and bighorn sheep.

Oh, and yaks.

Yaks?  Oh, you mean Bigfoots (or is it Bigfeet?).

If we are in Yak country then it's probably Yeti.  Go to the back of the Cryptozoology class.

rossum

Date: 2010/10/13 15:11:34, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 13 2010,10:45)
Also, you don't type when you're sitting nekkid at a computer.


Or so I'm told.

They told you wrong.  You can type one handed.


Oh.  Erm... :O

rossum

Date: 2010/11/19 07:28:26, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Nov. 19 2010,05:33)
Joe:
   
Quote
If I am involved in a Coirt case about ID vs the ToE your experts are going to have to answer all those questions you assholes have been avoiding.

And the best part is no one will be able to pin any religious motivation on me.

For me it is just a matter of time- once my kid gets to HS I will make sure this goes to Court.

Link

Has JoeG been reading about the Vise Strategy?

You might want to study that a bit more first Joe.  Possibly some problems down the line.

rossum

Date: 2010/11/25 07:59:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Maya @ Nov. 24 2010,09:57)
Quote
He has also published a pro-ID paper in Protein Science [M.J. Behe and D.W. Snoke, "Simulating Evolution by Gene Duplication of Protein Features That Require Multiple Amino Acid Residues," Protein Science, 13 (2004): 2651-2664.].

If I remember correctly, that paper supported evolutionary theory, not ID.

You do.  It did.  IIRC is was dealt with some time on day 12 of the Dover trial.  A simple IC system can evolve in about 20,000 years in a population of one billion bacteria.  There are a lot more than one million bacteria in one ton of soil.

The paper itself is here: http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=2286568

It is a useful one to refer ID creationists to.

rossum

Date: 2010/11/30 18:18:12, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Maya @ Nov. 30 2010,15:37)
Yes indeed.  Shooting a large can of beans with a rifle to make the small can of tomato sauce you balanced on it fly up and then laughing at your brother who missed the flying can with a shotgun would be wrong.

Specially for Maya:



The Hello Kitty AK-47.

Me, I prefer the "Motha' T".  :)

rossum

Date: 2010/12/03 09:50:43, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Dec. 02 2010,11:47)
1) Who is going to sue first for a First Amendment violation (you'd think a 300 cubit ark was a pretty obvious endorsement of one religion)?

AIUI the tax break is because it will bring tourists and jobs to the area.  In itself those are religiously neutral.  The problems might come when they start hiring and ask prospective employees to sign one of their fundie "Statement of Faith" things.  At that point non-fundies can start suing.

IIRC the Creation Museum has something like that for its staff so I imagine that Ham will go down the same route with the Ark experience.

rossum

Date: 2010/12/03 10:05:35, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Zachriel @ Dec. 03 2010,07:03)
Or, here is the same program in APL.

'Hello World!'

Yeah, but Chuck Norris can do it in 11 bytes of Assembler (and a roundhouse kick).

rossum

(You may replace Chuck Norris with Bruce Schneier if you wish.)

Date: 2010/12/10 09:19:22, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Hermagoras @ Dec. 10 2010,07:48)
An Open Letter to some UD regulars    
Quote
To:  vjtorley, Clive Hayden, tribune7, kairosfocus, StephenB, Upright Biped, Shogun, mynymn, allanius, Lamont, andrewjg, and Ilion

Re:  perceived dangers of Teh Buttsex

If it hurts, yer doin it wrong.  

Love,
Hermagoras

"If spit doesn't work then it's not true love."

:)

rossum

Date: 2010/12/16 12:53:53, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Woodbine @ Dec. 16 2010,06:44)
It's ISCID v.2.

Not quite.  It's ISCID v.3.  Remember the Journal of Evolutionary Informatics?

Announced, never published anything and all that is left is a dead web address.  Seems to sum up ID pretty well.

rossum

Date: 2011/01/21 08:20:07, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kris @ Jan. 21 2011,08:04)
Science cannot prove that intelligent design or creation, of the universe or biological organisms or their building blocks, are or were impossible.

Correct.  Science cannot prove that an undetectable being of infinite power (Ubip) did something and then perfectly covered up her tracks.

Science cannot prove that Ubip is not going to turn the soap in your bathroom into the most delicious and nutritious food overnight.  Despite that, how many people do you know who try taking a bite out of their bar of soap every morning, just in case?

Science works within limits, which is part of what gives it its power to explain things within those limits.  A Ubip is outside the limits of science so the actions of the Ubip, or similar, are not susceptible to scientific enquiry.

rossum

Date: 2011/01/28 08:39:02, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (MichaelJ @ Jan. 27 2011,21:01)
I believe that you could create a theological position that supports Abortion (As somebody wrote somewhere recently "If men had babies, abortion would be a sacrament").

Start by reading Numbers 5:11-31.  If you suspect your pregnant wife has been sleeping with someone else then take her to the Temple and the priests will procure an abortion for you.

rossum

Date: 2011/02/11 03:50:55, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Sol3a1 @ Feb. 10 2011,17:45)
Any other things that could stop new life, besides being food and time to do so, that can be used?

Oxygen.  We no longer have a reducing atmosphere.

rossum

Date: 2011/02/16 06:04:55, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ Feb. 15 2011,17:05)
Got, guffaw, any worked examples of the Explanatory Filter in action?

Here's one I prepared earlier: God and the Explanatory Filter

rossum

Date: 2011/03/01 08:12:21, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 01 2011,07:28)
"Islands of functionality" is one of those great metaphors being slowly strangled by facts.

"Continents of Functionality"?

rossum

Date: 2011/03/06 12:42:02, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Mar. 05 2011,16:36)
That's part of why I wrote the response about information increase the way I did. I showed that the assertion failed for the two most-used formal definitions of information and an informal one as well. I don't have to wait around for a probably never-arriving definition from a religious antievolutionist. If they want to continue to claim no information increases are possible, they have to pony up their reason why not, not just assert it.

ISTM that the ID use of 'information' is a reincarnation of the old Creation Science argument about Biblical 'kinds'.  When ID dropped God and replaced Him with the Designer they had to drop all the Bible references as well.  Hence the replacement of "yes, but that is just evolution within a kind" with "yes, that is evolution but there is no increase in information".

The overall technique is still the same.  Pick something ill-defined.  Refuse to define it when asked.  When faced with an awkward question use the word du jour, still undefined, to refute the opposition's argument.  Since the concept remains terminally fuzzy it can be used to respond to a great many questions.

$0.02

rossum

Date: 2011/03/16 16:28:18, Link
Author: rossum
Guitar Heaven: Nagoya Guitars

rossum

Date: 2011/03/17 18:29:16, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ Mar. 17 2011,18:16)
Crap to creo?

Carp to creo.

Even creos are vertebrates, and it gets past the naughty word filters on some sites.

rossum

Date: 2011/03/31 13:05:05, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Robin @ Mar. 31 2011,11:37)
...what's that dear? I can't marry another woman? Oh...(sigh)

Easily solved.  If you are female, move to Vermont.  If you are male move to Saudi Arabia and convert.  I suspect that it might be easier to persuade MathGrrl to move to Vermont.

Gender reassignment surgery and then Vermont perhaps?

rossum (who usually tries to be helpful)

Date: 2011/04/15 10:58:51, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (oldmanintheskydidntdoit @ April 15 2011,10:11)
That makes him at least as intelligent as a crow.

I sense a new commercial opportunity:

Herbal Brainiac!  Specially formulated for Corvidae!! Increase your intelligence now!!!  Just send $44.99

rossum

Date: 2011/04/29 15:19:57, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kristine @ April 29 2011,13:38)
And if the aliens are using public broadcasting to educate their own about contraceptives and abortion, what then?

The Pope is going to have some very strong words for them.

rossum

Date: 2011/05/11 17:19:41, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ May 11 2011,10:29)
Well, his version of evolution that actually has no relationship with any real version or theory of evolution.

Joevolution?

rossum

Date: 2011/05/23 19:03:31, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (khan @ May 23 2011,18:59)
Don't mess with me, I've debugged COBOL in HEX.

COBOL?  Ha!  I see your COBOL and raise you Burroughs Extended ALGOL-60!

rossum

Date: 2011/06/15 07:29:07, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Quack @ June 15 2011,01:03)
What's up with talk.origins newsgroup? Down?

I assume that the robo-moderator has a problem so no posts are getting through.

rossum

Date: 2011/06/15 11:58:05, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Texas Teach @ June 15 2011,10:45)
<Wonders if flaming oil of ad hominem kills fleas>

Flaming oil of ad pulexium?

rossum

Date: 2011/06/16 09:05:52, Link
Author: rossum
Is there any news on the issue at talk.origins beyond "the robo-moderator is on vacation"?

rossum

Date: 2011/07/21 07:28:25, Link
Author: rossum
I was trying to search the Talk Origins Archive site today, but Google is rejecting all searches:

"We're sorry...

... but your computer or network may be sending automated queries. To protect our users, we can't process your request right now."

I can search Google normally from my computer.

Has someone hacked into talkorigins.org?

rossum

Date: 2011/07/22 07:26:34, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ July 22 2011,07:06)
I've updated the TOA search page with the new Google search. I'm not happy about it.

It may look strange, but it works now.

Thanks for the fix.

rossum

Date: 2011/07/22 08:19:00, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Patrick @ July 21 2011,18:16)
Many Individual Conservatives Helping Elect Leaders Everywhere

I think I prefer Barry's version:

Many Individual Conservatives Helping Elect Ludicrous Leaders Everywhere

rossum

Date: 2011/07/25 05:47:32, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Woodbine @ July 25 2011,00:15)
Same here. Using Chrome....
 
Quote
www.antievolution.org contains content from www.mathsavers.com, a site known to distribute malware.

Looking at the HTML, FtK's avatar image is from there:

http://www.mathsavers.com/graphics/light/light_heaven_10.jpg

rossum

Date: 2011/07/28 12:01:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Alan Fox @ July 28 2011,10:48)
Quote
Interestingly this is why New Zealand is such a nice place to live.


Nothing to do with the sheep, then?

That's Wales.

rossum

Date: 2011/07/31 04:32:50, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (J-Dog @ July 30 2011,16:14)
Quote
with Kristine's foot in a fashionable pump


And Rex Ryan can't wait for the Non-UD Certified - Adult XXX Version*!

* And apologies for the redundency.

Here it is.

Date: 2011/08/04 12:24:47, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Aug. 04 2011,11:23)
Quote (JohnW @ Aug. 04 2011,09:08)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Aug. 04 2011,05:25)
yeah right like you lot don't do that afterwhile playing rugby

Fixed.  You've seen scrums, yes?

Yes. The "ot" is elided.

(waits for penny to drop...)

You mean your haven't yet?  Dropped that is.  :D

rossum

Date: 2011/08/08 11:26:26, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 08 2011,11:05)
How would you tell whether a random string is or is not a sequence from the expansion of pi? :p

Very easily.   :D

rossum

Date: 2011/08/23 17:51:06, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Aug. 23 2011,17:12)
Quote (Richardthughes @ Aug. 23 2011,15:24)
Indeed Gents. For example the (non)calculation of CSI. I didn't actually see any, erm, numbers. Like the SI of an apple is 2.9 x 10^354, or whatever.

Man up Mullings!

PaV accidentally puts his finger on the gaping hole (one of them anyway) in the CSI argument:

   
Quote
PaV

Does the Grand Canyon represent some specified pattern, known beforehand?


Go on PaV.  Give us the specified pattern for an enzyme or a protein that you knew beforehand, not one you measured and declared to be specified after the fact.

There is always a specification known beforehand.  The specification is in the mind of the Designer before he/she/it/they set to work.

Since we now have a specification, let's see the calculation.

rossum

Date: 2011/09/09 06:35:43, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Sep. 08 2011,22:45)
Mighty Casey has struck out. Again.

A hit, a hit, my kingdom for a hit!

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uzl6LEfouEE">Shakespearian Baseball</a>

rossum

Date: 2011/09/12 08:58:50, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Sep. 12 2011,08:17)
Is Panda's Thumb down? or is it just me?

Me to, so it's not just you.

rossum

Date: 2011/09/23 06:42:48, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Patrick @ Sep. 23 2011,06:16)
Elizabeth Liddle destroys the "ID is too science" argument in [URL=http://www.uncommondescent.com/evolution/paper-“the-origin-and-relationship-between-the-three-domains-of-life-is-lodged-in-a-phylogenetic-

impasse”/comment-page-1/#comment-400613]one magnificent post[/URL].

Hopefully working link to her excellent post: here.

The link is http://www.uncommondescent.com/evoluti....-400613

rossum

Date: 2011/09/26 11:50:58, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ Sep. 26 2011,11:27)
As much as I have to admit Shakespeare and DaveTard shouldn't match, this is most likely a POTW...

Given the current state of Physics, shouldn't it be POLW (Post of last week)?

rossum

Date: 2011/10/06 06:10:16, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Oct. 06 2011,04:28)
Please tell us where a Scientific Method has determined that a bacteria has evolved into anything but a bacteria

Try mitochondria.

Quote
or a fruit fly has evolved into anything but a fruit fly?

You don't understand common descent and the twin nested hierarchy, do you.  For your first piece of homework go and find out how many different species of fruit fly there are.

Quote
Fossil were accumulated and faked,

What do fakes prove?  Do the faked Hitler diaries prove that Hitler didn't exist?  There are plenty of non-fake fossils.

Quote
soft t-rex tissues disproved radiomagic dating, punctuated equilibrium was hypothesized to no avail, fruit flies were zapped but to avail, DNA hybridization is racked with fraud because its to no avail. The very fact that the basic tenets of evolution theory changes every decade is enough to expose its faith based pseudoscience.

We already know that creationist websites tell lies, and that some people believe that lies that they are told by creationists.  You don't need to tell us again.

rossum

Date: 2011/10/06 07:44:00, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Oct. 06 2011,06:58)
Mitochondria? Why ya so hesitant to elaborate?

Why are you so hesitant to look?  Afraid that you might find some real facts that show you have been lied to by your creationist sources?

Quote
You dont have the slightest idea how many fruit flies there are but what is your point?

How many species of Fruit Fly.  You haven't done your homework.  You haven't even read the question correctly.

Quote
Micro-adaptations are stem from preexisting phenotypes selected via an intelligently designed survival mechanism?

And your evidence for this piece of wishful thinking is?  The answer to your homework question is relevant here.  If you don't understand the relevance then consider the phrase, "...or a eukaryote has evolved into anything but a eukaryote?".

Quote
Lies? Can you actually defend your defensiveness?

Yes.  Creationists have no evidence to support their position.  So they lie to try to concoct some evidence in their favour and they lie to try to disparage the evidence for evolution.  Google "Gish Bullfrog" for a notorious example of a creationist lying about the evidence.

rossum

Date: 2011/10/06 17:58:38, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Tracy P. Hamilton @ Oct. 06 2011,16:31)
Looks like where chicken Joseph lives.

I thought he lived in the car park next door.

rossum

Date: 2011/10/14 07:30:50, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (paragwinn @ Oct. 14 2011,01:20)
Didnt Spain try that already with their pieces-of-eight? :p

That was Bytecoin.  Bitcoin is pieces-of-one.  :D

rossum

Date: 2011/10/21 11:01:50, Link
Author: rossum
So, lets have a closer look.
Quote (forastero @ Oct. 21 2011,10:40)
For instance:

ID--superior designer made order from disorder

Evolutionism--a chance explosion accidentally and randomly made some primordial soup spontaneously generate into a bacteria-like critter that accidentally turned in to all kinds of other creatures by some punctuated solar radiation

Was your "superior designer" disordered?  If so then you are making order from disorder, which is what you are claiming cannot be done by evolution.

Was your "superior designer" ordered?  If so then where did that order come from, how did it originate?  Was there an even more superior "superior designer" designer to create that order?

Quote
ID--An elaborately designed endocrine system that purposefully selects ancestral phenotypes in accord to environmental stimuli

Evolutionism--Miraculous genetic mistakes survive and often replace ancestors if they happen to occur at just the right time and niche

Evolution does not rely on miracles, that is the province of creationists.  Do some calculations on the size of populations and the number of mutations an individual carries.  The appearance of a specific mutation is not that unlikely over a few generations.

rossum

Date: 2011/10/25 15:39:23, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Oct. 25 2011,01:10)
No wonder y’all wont try  to explain to me  the origin of the up to 100 different Cambrian phyla.

Some advice.  You really need to check your information before posting here.  We have only identified 13 phyla that were present during the Cambrian, and four of then were also present in the Vendian, before the Cambrian started.

It is possible that a few other phyla were present during the Vendian or Cambrian, it is just that we do not have any fossil record of them -- think small and squishy marine invertebrates that don't fossilize well.

It is worth pointing out that all land plant phyla started after the Cambrian.  Not a lot of ID sites wittering on about the "Cambrian Explosion" tell you about that.  Yet another reason to check your sources carefully.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/01 06:58:54, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 01 2011,02:35)
Described recently as "the most important evolutionary event during the entire history of the Metazoa," the Cambrian explosion established virtually all the major animal body forms

A few points.  Was the description correct or incorrect?  A Muslim might describe Christianity as a false religion, is that description correct?  What evidence can you provide that this description is a correct one?  For example, I disagree.  I think that, "the most important evolutionary event during the entire history of the Metazoa," was the original evolution of the first Metazoan, back well before the Cambrian.

Note that plant body forms are not mentioned.  All land plant phyla appeared after the Cambrian.  Why is that?

Note the word "virtually", not all but "virtually all".  Many animal phyla, but not all of them, and no land plant phyla at all appeared in the Cambrian.  Looking at the figures, nine animal phyla and no land plant phyla appeared in the Cambrian, of a total of 45 phyla.  Nine of 45 is 20% of metazoan phyla.  Important, but not overwhelmingly important.

Quote
Compared with the 30 or so extant phyla,

Animal phyla.  Again, your sources are omitting plant phyla.  Ever wonder why your sources are leaving out inconvenient data?

Quote
some people estimate that the Cambrian explosion may have generated as many as 100.

And some estimate a lot less.  Where is the evidence to support this estimate?  After all, the people giving the estimates are scientists, and you know that scientists can't be trusted when it comes to evolution and biology.

Quote
as James Valentine of the University of California, Santa Barbara, recently put it   Lewin, R. (1988) Science, vol. 241, 15 July, p. 291

Bwahahaha!  You don't read this stuff before you post it, do you.  1988 is not "recently", it is ancient history for biology.  We hadn't even sequenced the human genome in 1988.  That may be recent for theology, but it isn't recent for biology.

Quote
And they weren’t “all” squishy invertebrates either. Heck, even fish have been found in the Cambrian

The non-fossilised ones were usually squishy.  I wasn't talking about the one that we have fossils for in that sentence.  You might also look at the dates for the Cambrian Explosion and the dates for actual early fish fossils.  We have probable chordates, such as Pikaia, from just after the Cambrian Explosion but no vertebrates.  The vertebrates appear later.

Your creationist/ID sources are supplying you with faulty information.  You really need to double check what they tell you before posting.  Be sure that we will check things if you don't.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/02 07:42:21, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 01 2011,23:02)
because the Cambrian simply represents a benthic environment

And your evidence for land dwelling organisms in the Cambrian is ... ?

rossum

Date: 2011/11/02 07:52:19, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 01 2011,23:24)
In the recess of your subconscious, youd likely see that your hostility toward design is simply a hostility toward God as indicated by its transference toward Christ. Iow, many members have no problem with Mohammad or Buddhist garb even though those religions would probably be more intolerant of yourselves

I have no hostility towards design.  I have designed things myself.  I have no hostility towards Jesus, though I think of Him as a Bodhisattva, which might be seen as hostile by some.  As you might have surmised from my avatar, I an Buddhist, and I can assure you that Buddhism has no problems with either evolution or atheism.  Both origins and gods are irrelevant to the goals of Buddhism.

I do have problems with unscientific explanations based on an unevidenced designer, whose proponents will not even put a date on when the designer/s worked.

ID is a political, not a scientific movement.  It has just enough 'scienciness' to make it look scientific to non-scientists and to make it politically plausible.  It does not have enough science to actually qualify as science.

If the designer did design the bacterial flagellum, then when did this event happen, and what evidence do you have to support that date?

rossum

Date: 2011/11/02 15:17:40, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 02 2011,13:13)
According to Buddha, one shouldnt make haughty claims of whats the gods cant and cant do until one reaches a of very high plane of spiritual knowledge. Your passion for the teachings of materialists men over spiritual enlightenment prove that you havnt reached this plane

And where did you find this gem in the Tripitaka?  Buddhism generally tends to ignore gods.  They aren't particularly relevant to following the path.

Quote
Yes spiritual because, Buddhism is about leaving the material and becoming one with the demonic goddess in tantric meditation, which leads to many a secret sadomasochisms and was indeed incorporated by the likes of Hitler

Bwahahaha!  You lose - Poe's Law.  Your knowledge of Buddhism in general, and of Tantric Buddhism in particular, is obviously insufficient.

Quote
The Brahmajala Sutta seems to indicate creationism but maybe you can give us your take on the following...

Certainly.  A being dies from a very high plane and is the first to be reborn in a newly formed lower plane: "Then a certain being, due to the exhaustion of his life-span or the exhaustion of his merit, passes away from the ?bhassara plane and re-arises in the empty palace of Brahm?."

Being on his own, since he was the first to be reborn in the empty palace in the lower plane, he wishes for companions: "Then, as a result of dwelling there all alone for so long a time, there arises in him dissatisfaction and agitation, (and he yearns): 'Oh, that other beings might come to this place!' Just at that moment, due to the exhaustion of their life-span or the exhaustion of their merit, certain other beings pass away from the ?bhassara plane and re-arise in the palace of Brahm?, in companionship with him."

Since he wished for companions, and they duly appeared, he suffers from the delusion that he caused them to appear, when in fact it was the exhaustion of their previous karma.  However, he continues with his delusion and claims great powers for himself, on the basis of his mistaken understanding: "Thereupon the being who re-arose there first thinks to himself: 'I am Brahm?, the Great Brahm?, the Vanquisher, the Unvanquished, the Universal Seer, the Wielder of Power, the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that are and are to be. And these beings have been created by me. What is the reason? Because first I made the wish: "Oh, that other beings might come to this place!" And after I made this resolution, now these beings have come.'"

The being claiming to be Brahm? is mistaken.  This is nothing to do with creationism, but about the mistaken claims of a powerful god to be, "the Lord, the Maker and Creator, the Supreme Being, the Ordainer, the Almighty, the Father of all that are and are to be."  You, or your source, has misunderstood the meaning of this passage.  The Brahmajala sutta points out a number of errors found among non-Buddhists.  This passage is from the section about the error of believing in an eternal creator-god who made the world.  Contemporary Buddhists often use it to argue against followers of the Abrahamic religions.

As I said before, your knowledge of Buddhism is insufficient.  All you have done here is to shoot yourself in the foot.  The god claiming to be the creator is making a mistaken claim, based on his own error.

You would do well to restrict yourself to arguing about topics where you have some knowledge.  Buddhism is not one of them.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/02 15:19:31, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 02 2011,13:15)
Quote (rossum @ Nov. 02 2011,07:42)
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 01 2011,23:02)
because the Cambrian simply represents a benthic environment

And your evidence for land dwelling organisms in the Cambrian is ... ?

rossum

Which ones?

Any land dwelling organism from the Cambrian will do.  Show us your evidence please.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/03 06:08:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 02 2011,20:12)
Hmm so your saying the story represents one spirit being impersonating a creator and another spirit being dismissing his claims?

No.  The Abrahamic god, worshiped by Jews, Christians and Moslems, is mistaken and his claims are in error.  He claims to be the Immortal Omnipotent Creator, but his claims are wrong.   He is long lived, but not immortal.  He is powerful, but not omnipotent.  He didn't create the world, but is deluded in thinking that he did.

Quote
Tantric rituals involve ...

There are two possibilities here.  First, you have been initiated into one of the Tantric lineages, and in the process sworn yourself not to reveal its secrets to the uninitiated.  In this case you are an oath breaker and not to be trusted.  Second, that you have not been initiated and that you are talking about things of which you have no knowledge.  Again, what you say is not to be trusted.  I consider that the second possibility is more likely.

Tantras are secret.  Even when they are written down, they are written in coded language so that the uninitiated cannot understand them.  Knowing that the translation of "a red herring" is "a pink fish" does not help you get to the real meaning of the text.  The words of a written Tantra are deliberately designed to be misleading to the uninitiated.  You cannot learn Tantra from a book; you have to be initiated.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/03 16:19:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 03 2011,12:39)
When you Buddhist and pseudist gonna explain why you dance to the tune of spontaneous generation from primordial soup that accidentally exploded into a super huge zoo?   Oh I remember. There was this thing called abiogenesis where spontaneous but accidental aggregation of lipids and proteins formed primitive spaghetti monsters from the fountain of soup.

You have already shown us that you do not understand either evolution or Buddhism.  We can now add abiogenesis and chemistry to the list.

Chemistry is not an "accidental" process.  Do you think is is "accidental" that exactly two atoms of hydrogen, not three, not four, but always two, combine with a single atom of oxygen to make a molecule of water?  Hint: valency.

Read something about abiogenesis and learn where proteins appeared in the process.  Hint: it wasn't either at the start or in the middle.

Quote
Many years later Chandra Wickramasinghe and fred Hoyle who calculated that the chance of obtaining the required set of enzymes for even the simplest living cell was one in 1040,000. Since the number of atoms in the known universe is infinitesimally tiny by comparison (1080), he argued that even a whole universe full of primordial soup would grant little chance to evolutionary processes.

We now know that you can't even properly proof-read the stuff you cut and paste.  Go back to the original you copied this from and check those numbers.  You will see "10^40,000" and "10^80", or their equivalents.  You are distinctly failing to impress here.

Wickramasinghe and Hoyle were excellent astronomers.  They were less good biologists.  Their probability calculations included the effects of random mutation, but failed to include the effects of natural selection.  Since evolution includes both random mutation and natural selection, their numbers do not reflect evolution.  GIGO.  I suggest that you redo their calculations with the effect of natural selection included.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/03 16:32:27, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 03 2011,16:13)
Wow! I always heard that the Buddhist big wigs considered Jesus a great prophet but I didnt know that their scriptures cited him and Abraham as arrogant

You heard wrong.  Buddhism doesn't do prophets, we leave that to the Abrahamic religions.  Jesus is normally considered to be a Bodhisattva.  Abraham we don't think about much, since we ignore most of what he said.  All the best bits were repeated by Jesus anyway, and being prepared to make a human sacrifice of your own child to appease a bloodthirsty god is definitely un-Buddhist behaviour.  It is YHWH we see as arrogant, claiming to be what he isn't.

Quote
{list of Buddhists doing unwise actions}

Yes, some Buddhists fall short of the standards they should be following.  So?  People of all religions, and of none, do sometimes fall short of moral standards.  Timothy McVeigh was American, does that mean all Americans are morally wrong and that no moral person can be an American?  No, I don't think so either.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/03 19:31:31, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 03 2011,18:12)
Oh yes Buddhist do have so called Messianic prophesies  http://www.maitreya.org/english....ism.htm

You are just showing your ignorance of Buddhism.  The Maitreya is a Buddha, not a Messiah.  A Messiah is a concept from Judaism, not Buddhism.  Please don't get you religions mixed up.  It merely shows up even further your basic lack of knowledge about the stuff you are copying from the Internet.

Quote
Adi Da was suggested by his devotees to be Maitreya

And his devotees were wrong.  The Maitreya Buddha has not come yet.

Quote
The Buddha gave him this prophecy:

The Buddha is a Buddha, not a prophet.  Again, you are misunderstanding Buddhism.  If you apply concepts from Judaism directly to Buddhism, you will usually be making an error.

Quote
Timothy McVeigh was just one agnostic who confessed: "science is my religion".

Irrelevant.  I said that he was an American, which is correct.  I said nothing about his religious beliefs, or lack thereof.  My point obviously missed you completely.  My apologies for my mis-estimate of your level of comprehension.

Quote
Buddhism is violent in essence and influences many.

Go through the Bible and count up the number of people God kills, or orders to be killed.  Go through the Tripitaka and count up the number of people the Buddha kills, or orders to be killed.  Compare the two numbers, and get back to us on which of the two religions "is violent in essence".  We can agree that Buddhism influences many.

Quote
Oh and another reason tantric rituals are kept secret is because often involve casting spells

And you know this how?  If they are secret, then you don't know what happens in them.  If you know what happens in them, then they aren't secret.  Or perhaps you believe that everything you read on the Internet is true?  That would explain a few things.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/04 07:07:21, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 03 2011,19:53)
Wow! You you cut off your own scriptures to save your face.

You ignorance of the nature of the Tripitaka and its contents is manifest.  No Buddhist in the world accepts all of Buddhist scripture.  The Tripitaka is a collection.  Imagine that Christian scripture, in addition to the the Bible also contained the works of Arius, Nestorius, John Chrysostom, Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther, John Calvin and Joseph Smith.  Nobody accepts all of that.  Buddhists use the parts of the Tripitaka that they personally find useful, and ignore the other parts.  Again, I will remind you that it is unwise to assume that Buddhism approaches things in the same way as Christianity.

Quote
Bottom line is that Buddhism references Messianic prophecy.

The Messiah is a Jewish concept, not a Buddhist one.  The Maitreya Buddha is not a Messiah.  Prophecies of the Maitreya have no connection to Jewish prophecies of the Messiah.

Quote
The phenotypic plasticity of epigentiic immunity (also referred to as the biological arms race) is another way of explaining the Hebrew war against the Canaanites.. This magnificently designed system sends out macrophages (myocytes, monocytes etc..) to encapsulate and destroy cells infected by antigens, viruses, bacteria etc..

Canaanites such as the Amalakites and the Mycenaean Greeks were given over to very depraved lifestyles such as fornication,necrophilia, bestiality, coprophillia, rape, homosexuality, lesbianism, incest,, pedophilia, and human sacrifices. Thus it is more than likely that all the beast and children were slaughtered to prevent the spread of not only deadly behavior, but STDs. Lev 18:03-26.The Hebrews and other peoples of the Exodus were the immune system of God's creation and emerged from that immune cell known as the Ark, which inhabited that cleansing Flood--that great apoptosis which removed the malignant killers of the trees and megafauna

Is it just me, or is this meaningless word-salad?  forastero makes more sense when he is copying from Wikipedia.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/06 05:29:18, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (forastero @ Nov. 06 2011,02:57)
Giant ice meteors  also hit the earth

And the heat resulting from the impact of these "Giant ice meteors" was enough to ...

You may fill in the dots once you have done the calculation.

rossum

P.S. If you really want to impress us, you need to learn the difference between 'meteor' and 'meteorite'.

Date: 2011/11/09 14:24:22, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Nov. 09 2011,12:25)
I agree totally, though I think what he meant on the atoms things was 10^80.

I think that what he meant was to copy/paste something.  He was too lazy or incompetent to check that what he pasted read the same as what he copied.  That is an inclusive 'or' by the way.

Quote
Not that really changes anything.

Indeed not.  Copied rubbish is still rubbish, even with added typos.  After all, we all know that typos cannot add any extra information.  :)

rossum

Date: 2011/11/13 16:02:57, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Richardthughes @ Nov. 11 2011,11:01)
I've started a fund to better understand Gallien-Tard Syndrome, to help those unfortunate souls who can bench 300lbs, but can't jump up and down.

Memory loss.  He forgets to put down the 300lbs before he tries to jump up and down.

rossum

Date: 2011/11/20 06:17:11, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Quack @ Nov. 20 2011,06:03)
The link doesn't work well, I get redirected but can’t find the article at  http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/articles.php?issue=10&article=evolution

I have located http://sciencereview.berkeley.edu/read.......ng-2006
That is issue 10, with subjects like Berkeley vs. Intelligent Design, and The Dawn of Multicellularity, but no 'evolution' article.

The Johnson quote is on page 33.

rossum

Date: 2011/12/04 12:32:15, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wolfhound @ Dec. 04 2011,09:27)
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 04 2011,09:37)
 
Quote (Wolfhound @ Dec. 03 2011,21:58)
 
Quote (fnxtr @ Dec. 03 2011,12:59)
My ex with CAIS (complete androgen insensitivity syndrome) and a friend who switched from outie to innie really brought that home to me... especially when -- let's call the new her "Deirdre" -- originally said she'd be a lesbian but later had a boyfriend.

James, my 6'4" ex-fiance with the sepulchral voice, now goes by the legal name of "Nova".  And she's married. To another woman.

your powers are amazing, are you a wizard?

Hey, now, *I* wasn't the one waving the wand!

But you could be ....  :)

Date: 2011/12/15 08:39:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Henry J @ Dec. 11 2011,20:17)
I would think that deliberate design (intelligent or not) would produce way more copying from one "lineage" into another than what is seen in biology.

But maybe that's just me?

Henry

It's not just you.  Look at designed animals: unicorns, dragons, pegasi and all the other fantasy animals humans have designed.  Mostly they are a mixture of parts taken from different lineages.  Avian wings on a horse makes a pegasus.  Bat wings on a big lizard make a western dragon.

The norm for a designed animal is to have way more cross-lineage copying than an evolved animal.

rossum

Date: 2011/12/31 05:23:26, Link
Author: rossum
Ryan FR-1 Fireball

P51 => FR-1 => F80

rossum

Date: 2011/12/31 10:39:33, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 31 2011,08:17)
you mean heartless athiest matreyanalists don't you know if you break their little shitty analogy toys they'll have nothing left but some stinky fingers and scattered pubic hair

All your analogy are belong to us.

rossum

Date: 2011/12/31 16:19:39, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kristine @ Dec. 31 2011,12:34)
Do they think that their cousin can give birth to their sibling? :O

Well, daddy was very friendly with cousin Ellie-Mae a few months ago.  :D

rossum

Date: 2012/01/08 17:19:00, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 08 2012,16:30)
As for the "near-death experiences", isn't it interesting that some creationists would embrace occultism rather than science?

"The enemy of my enemy," perhaps?

Date: 2012/01/26 09:48:18, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kattarina98 @ Jan. 26 2012,09:32)
Please, finish and publish this novel. Here's your cover:

Hmmm, lets see.  ID is mostly political, so we'll need some politics in the novel.  Sex.  Yes, definitely sex.  Sex sells, and we want to sell.  Science?  No, science is boring and doesn't sell that well.  Better avoid science, this is about ID after all.

Here is my first draft: politics, sex and no science.  Warning, may contain naugahyde.

Quote
Sultry, pouting, Hillary Clinton ran her hands over her enormous twin Capitol Domes, causing her tight black naugahyde bustier to heave alarmingly as it struggled to restrain her ample assets.  Posing in the doorway, she looked at the man, sitting in his chair, crying.

"John, stop that now!  Or strict Mistress Hillary will be very annoyed."

"I'm sorry Mistress Hillary," he said, struggling to contain his tears as he nervously eyed the whip dangling from her wrist.  "It's just those nasty Democrat Representatives in the House.  They never do what I say.  And the Republicans are almost as bad."

Hillary strode masterfully over to where the Speaker was sitting in his chair, "Never mind John, let mommy Hillary take care of it."  She cradled his head into her softly billowing chest, as she felt his hands fondling her shapely legs in their tight leather thigh-boots.  'There's more than one way to skin a nauga,' she thought as her own hand moved decisively towards John's long leopardskin gavel and ...


:D

rossum

Date: 2012/02/08 06:44:14, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Quack @ Feb. 08 2012,04:22)
I learned aeons ago that blood flow to the brain increase when a person is performing some intelligent action like kopfrechnen. (Got kopfrechnen from Duden, couldn't find an English translation of 'hoderegning'.) "Head calculation"? doesn't look good to me.

Try "mental arithmetic".  A case where English uses its Latin roots rather than its Germanic ones.

rossum

Date: 2012/02/14 16:33:08, Link
Author: rossum
“Can the moon exist and not exist at the same time and in the same formal relation?”

Let M = "the moon exists".

Let ~M = "the moon does not exist".

Let F = the formal relation "(M AND ~M) => FALSE

F is true.

QED.

You were saying, Mr Arrington?

rossum

Date: 2012/04/30 18:07:36, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (kn0808 @ April 30 2012,16:14)
Your criticism towards Dembski would be much more founded if you actually had an argument against him or his belief.

You are obviously not looking carefully enough.  Dr Dembski states that regular processes cannot generate CSI.  This is incorrect, regular processes can generate CSI.

CSI involves specified information, so we need a specification.  I will use the specification: The text of the King James Translation.

Now here is a piece of text:

Va gur ortvaavat Tbq perngrq gur urnira naq gur rnegu ... Gur tenpr bs bhe Ybeq Wrfhf Puevfg or jvgu lbh nyy. Nzra.

This text does not meet our specification.  It is of exactly the correct length, note the large ellipsis in the middle, but it does not contain the text of the KJV.  It is complex, because of its length bit it is not specified, hence there is zero CSI present in this text.

Now apply a regular process to this text.  ROT13 is a regular process, a MOD 26 alphabetic shift of +13: a <-> n, b <-> o etc.  What do we get when we apply this regular process to the text above?  We get this:

In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ... The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

That changed text meets the specification, and is the same length.  Hence it is complex, specified and it is information.  The transformed text contains CSI -- Complex Specified Information.  A regular process has gone from zero CSI initially to a large quantity of CSI after its application.  This invalidates Dr. Dembski's claim that regular processes cannot generate CSI.

rossum

Date: 2012/05/03 14:46:26, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (REC @ May 03 2012,13:18)
PaV blusters some BS:

mike:

Quote
We recently had a rehash discussion about that here at UD. The argument comes down to what constitutes an homologous protein.

One protein–can’t remember it’s name–had only ONE amino acid in common with another protein, yet it was termed “homologous.”


WTF is he talking about? Not only clueless about how homology is determined-but two proteins of, say, 300 amino acids can't share just 1 amino acid in common!

Two strands of Poly-A DNA would give two strands of nothing but lysine.

Perhaps that is what he meant, tough I doubt it.

rossum

Date: 2012/05/07 09:06:23, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ May 07 2012,06:40)
Quote (Woodbine @ May 07 2012,10:14)
 
Quote (The whole truth @ May 07 2012,08:39)
dembski's 'office' will probably be one of the parking spaces, complete with a portable outhouse for him to do his research in.


POTW

Can someone please add the appropriate Judge Jones style sound effects.

rossum

Date: 2012/06/21 12:05:40, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Dr. Jammer @ June 21 2012,11:56)
The Darwinist must attempt to explain everythingrelated to the biological world, including human nature,  via his creation myth. That's never been in doubt.

The question is, are those explanations convincing?

The IDist must attempt to explain everythingrelated to the biological world, including the Designer,  via his or her creation myth. That's never been in doubt.

The question is, firstly, do those explanations even exist, and secondly are those explanations convincing?

Quote
For the rest of us, we who aren't Darwin fundies, the explanations remain far less convincing. We require a much higher standard of evidence than do you religious folk.

For the rest of us, we who aren't ID fundies, the explanations remain far less convincing. We require a much higher standard of evidence than do you religious folk.

Note here, that one of the ways to tell a content-free post is to take it and turn its arguments round to face the other way.  If it works just as well in the opposite direction, then the original post was just content-free rhetoric with no real substance.

rossum

Date: 2012/06/22 09:44:11, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Dr. Jammer @ June 21 2012,18:42)
After all, I've seen many valid pro-I.D. arguments regarding the origin of life,

Somehow I doubt it.  Is the Designer alive?  If yes, then there is no ID explanation for the origin of life currently available.  If no, then you are proposing that something dead is capable of intelligence.  While an advanced supercomputer may well be possible, that begs the question of the origin of the advanced supercomputer.

ID does not explain the origin of life.  It assumes life, and uses that assumed life to explain other life.

rossum

Date: 2012/06/22 16:14:55, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Dr. Jammer @ June 22 2012,15:00)
The argument regarding the source of the information found in life.

I.D. can explain it. Those who reject I.D. cannot.

False.  Or are you again asserting that the ID's Designer is not alive?  You are starting with an Intelligent designer, so you are starting with unexplained complexity, intelligence, information etc.  If you were proposing a theory of Unintelligent design, then you might have a chance of explaining the origin of these things.  However, we already have a good theory of Unintelligent design...

rossum

Date: 2012/07/29 12:20:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Richardthughes @ July 29 2012,11:20)
UD moderators, please wipe Joe's arse for him.

Isn't there a law against cruel and unusual punishment, even for UD moderators?

Date: 2012/08/12 05:32:37, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Quack @ Aug. 12 2012,02:57)
What, frozen? I'd rather use thawed.

But if we thawed than then, they wouldn't be crunchy.

Date: 2012/08/22 13:53:08, Link
Author: rossum
Bumparooney.

Date: 2012/09/01 17:19:47, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 31 2012,13:15)
 
Quote (k.e.. @ Aug. 31 2012,06:30)
 
Quote (Henry J @ Aug. 31 2012,01:32)
That's one way to toe the line?

Why? They're all lion down.

That's just purr-fect.

You're my mane man.

Date: 2012/09/10 11:51:50, Link
Author: rossum
[quote=Occam's Toothbrush,Sep. 10 2012,11:31]
Quote (Henry J @ Sep. 09 2012,22:50)

Did you know you can calculate the CSI of water by counting the number of letters in the recipe?  
   
Quote
Water

Ingredients:

1 cup water

Directions:  

Add water.

Serves: 1 (serving size 1 cup)

Nah, this is the real recipe:

Quote
Water

Ingredients:

1 sachet dehydrated water

Directions:  

Add water.

Serves: 1 (serving size 1 cup)

Dehydrated water is very useful in the desert -- much lighter to carry.  Just add water and drink.

Date: 2012/10/04 07:04:43, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Bebbo62 @ Oct. 04 2012,04:54)
Junk DNA is only a prediction of ID if you make assumptions about the designer and the kind of design it employed.

Correct.  I tend to phrase it as a question to the ID person quoting the 'prediction':  "Why is it not possible for the ID designer to make a genome with a high percentage of useless DNA?"

That very often bumps up against the "God can do anything" meme which tends to cohabit with the ID meme.

The same question usually works with many proposed 'falsifications' of ID when the discussion goes that way.

Date: 2012/10/05 16:13:17, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Kristine @ Oct. 05 2012,15:42)
 
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Oct. 05 2012,14:58)
what in the hell are you women doing try to work anyway? sinful and disgraceful

Ain't it? :p You should see the pr0n I've also been writing, brother! Check out my new avatar for the clue. ;)

Maybe the Government could sponsor pr0n to get people into work.

Hmmm,  That gives me an idea...

Quote

Sultry, pouting, Hillary Clinton ran her hands over her enormous twin Capitol Domes, causing her tight black naugahyde bustier to heave alarmingly as it struggled to restrain her ample assets.  Posing in the doorway, she looked at the man, sitting in his chair, crying.

"John, stop that now!  Or strict Mistress Hillary will be very annoyed."

"I'm sorry Mistress Hillary," he said, struggling to contain his tears as he nervously eyed the plaited leatherette whip dangling from her wrist.  "It's just those nasty Democrat Representatives in the House.  They never do what I say.  And the Republicans are almost as bad."

Hillary strode masterfully over to where the Speaker was sitting in his chair, "Never mind John, let mommy Hillary take care of it."  She cradled his head into her softly billowing chest, as she felt his hands fondling her shapely legs in their tight leather thigh-boots.  'There's more than one way to skin a nauga,' she thought as her own hand moved decisively towards John's long leopardskin gavel and ...

Continued on page 94.



I didn't say it was a good idea.  :)

rossum

Date: 2012/10/07 05:26:18, Link
Author: rossum
Possibly off topic, but this is a piece I keep for when the CSI argument pops up:


CSI and Regular Processes

Dr Dembski asserts that it is not possible for regular processes to create Complex Specified Information (CSI).  This is incorrect, it is perfectly possible for a regular process to create CSI in large amounts as I shall demonstrate.

The "S" in CSI stands for "Specified", so we need to have a specification for our example.  I shall use, "The text of the King James Bible" as the specification for this demonstration.

Here is some text which meets the specification:

Quote
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ... The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


For practical reasons I have elided much of the actual text.
 
Here is some text of the same length which does not meet the specification:

Quote
"Va gur ortvaavat Tbq perngrq gur urnira naq gur rnegu ... Gur tenpr bs bhe Ybeq Wrfhf Puevfg or jvgu lbh nyy. Nzra."


The first text contains information and also meets the specification, hence it contains specified information.  The complete text, without the elision, would be long enough to be complex and so contain CSI, Complex Specified Information.

The second text contains the same amount of raw information; it is the same length and drawn from the same character set.  The calculation of Shannon information will give the same value.  However the second text is not specified information because it is not the King James Bible.  The second text contains information but it contains zero CSI because it does not meet the specification.  It only contains CUI: Complex Unspecified Information.

Now we will apply a regular process to the second text: an alphabetic barrel shift of 13 places, also known as ROT13.  If we apply this regular process to the second text it changes to:

Quote
"In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth ... The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen."


This of course now contains exactly the same amount of CSI as the first text.  Previously it contained zero CSI because it did not meet the specification.  After applying the regular process it meets the specification, so we have increased the amount of CSI present purely by applying a regular process.

Contrary to what Dr Dembski has stated, this simple example shows that a regular process, such as ROT13, can create CSI.  Since a regular process can create CSI it is therefore incorrect to assert that a regular process cannot be the origin of any CSI found in living organisms.  This is a major problem for ID's attempts to use the presence of CSI as a marker of design.  CSI can be generated by non-design processes such as ROT13.


rossum

Date: 2012/10/07 11:26:11, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Oct. 07 2012,08:14)
The are ways to demonstrate algorithmic processes generating CSI; Jeff Shallit and I have done that before. However, the example cited is not one of them. In fact, Dembski's "The Design Inference" devotes a chunk of text to the discovery of specifications for encrypted text.

It is always possible to find a specification for encrypted text: "The string which when decrypted with the Caesar cypher, key 13, gives the text of the King James Bible."  The problem is knowing the specification in advance.

However, using that specification, the actual text of the KJV does not meet the specification, and so has zero CSI.  The regular process of decryption will destroy CSI, but conversely, the regular process of encryption will create CSI.

If we are allowed to change the specification in mid-calculation then we can effectively set any value of CSI we want to zero; just switch the specification to: "A design for a working perpetual motion machine."  Such a specification cannot be met.  Hence it would be 'easy' to show that nothing at all had any CSI and there was no design to be found anywhere.  Hardly the result that the ID side wants.

Dr Dembski's search for specifications for encrypted text, without knowing the key, is effectively a search for a universal code breaker.  In cryptography, if the output of an encryption algorithm can be distinguished from random, then that encryption is considered to be broken.  A mathematically perfect encryption cannot be distinguished from random, without the key.  I am sure that both the NSA and GCHQ would be very interested indeed if Dr Dembski had made any progress in this area.

I agree that my piece is far from rigorous, but I think that it is at about right level for most internet discussion fora.

rossum

Date: 2012/10/16 04:00:18, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 15 2012,19:59)
What's this about dembski and the flood?

Read Dembski's "Clarification" over pages 8 and 9.

http://www.baptisttheology.org/documen....ity.pdf

That link is probably long enough to get munged, so here is a version with added spaces:

www.baptisttheology.org/ documents/ AReplytoTomNettlesReview ofDembskisTheEndof Christianity.pdf

Date: 2012/10/17 08:12:14, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Amadan @ Oct. 17 2012,07:35)
Similarly, hospitals are designed, ergo babies must be too.

Come to think of it, supermarkets are designed too. That accounts for cows (including the loosely bound bovis hamburgensis sub-species), pigs, chickens, and Cheetos plants.

That's pretty much all of Nature right there!  

Evolution is doomed, suckers!

Don't forget Spaghetti Trees.

Date: 2012/10/18 11:54:12, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (stevestory @ Oct. 18 2012,11:19)
Quote (olegt @ Oct. 18 2012,09:06)
This little gem from gpuccio will brighten your fall day.
 
Quote
I don’t what to elimimate subjectivity. The foundation of all my thinking is objective subjectivity, that is consious representations.

snoooorrrrrrtttttttAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHhhhhhhhhhh

...that's the good stuff.

It is now available on prescription, just ask you doctor for Oxymaroon.

Date: 2012/10/24 10:26:04, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Lou FCD @ Oct. 24 2012,08:24)
No, he recanted before they could yell, "no take-backs!"

If you look at the relevant SES page, Dembski is sharing with Hugh Ross and Fazale Rana, both from Reasons To Believe, an OEC organisation.  Perhaps SES is not as exclusively YEC as some other places, which might be why Dembski picked it.  He seems to be OEC or similar himself.

Date: 2012/10/24 16:43:56, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Oct. 24 2012,14:02)
Quote (sparc @ Oct. 24 2012,12:40)
Is it a common practice at US schools to run the same course under three different numbers and two designations at the same time in the very same room?
     
Quote

AP862 Intelligent Design [...] Start Date 1/14/2013 End Date 1/19/2013 Time MO,TU,WE,TH,FR 6:00pm-10:3 [rest not displayed] SA 8:00am-4:30pm

SC401 Evolutionary Biology & Intellige [rest not displayed]  [...] Start Date 1/14/2013 End Date 1/19/2013 Time MO,TU,WE,TH,FR 6:00pm-10:3 [rest not displayed] SA 8:00am-4:30pm

[... one other course by another instructor]

SC501 Evolutionary Biology & Intelligen [rest not displayed]  [...] Start Date 1/14/2013 End Date 1/19/2013 Time MO,TU,WE,TH,FR 6:00pm-10:3 [rest not displayed] SA 8:00am-4:30pm

Sometimes.

Most colleges or universities will run an undergrad and grad course on the same subject at the same time, with the same teacher.  The grad students have extra work (lab time, outside research, etc) assigned.

I have seen some junior colleges offer the same course with two different designations in the same room with the same teacher at the same time.

This is because technical school programs (automechanics, cosmotology, etc) are not accepted by other colleges for transfer.  In auto mechanics, it's not that big a deal, but it is a big deal in computer science courses.  

You might have a 2-yr technical degree in computer programming.  Since it's a tech degree, no 4-yr school will accept it for a bachelor's degree.  But there is a 2-yr academic program specializing in computer programming.  If we say that both degree plans have a requirement for a course in C++, then you would need to give the students that are planning on transferring a different course number, one that is accepted by 4-yr schools.  

Why not have the technical degree take the academic course?  In some states, the entry requirements for technical degrees and academic degrees are very different.  Further, the state (like in Texas) may require that technical degrees only are allowed 5 academic courses (usually 2 semesters of freshman English, a social studies, a fine art, and speech).

So we have to have a special academic course with certain requirements and a technical course with different requirements... even though they are exactly the same course.

I don't think I could explain 3 different versions though.  But then, I'm willing to bet my new house that the school isn't regionally accredited and that's the only accreditation that matters.

I did a degree in Mathematical Physics.  About a third of the lectures were standard physics lectures which were shared with physics students and given by a physics lecturer.  Another third were applied mathematics lectures shared with mathematics students and given by mathematics lecturers.

Where there is an overlap in course material, then it makes sense for students on different courses to share classes.

Date: 2012/10/26 10:59:24, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fnxtr @ Oct. 26 2012,09:46)
Quote (CeilingCat @ Oct. 26 2012,03:55)
1: The first talking head is Michael Cremo, author of "Forbidden Archeology".  I've read this book and it's pure crank.  Basically, if you carve some weird characters into a rock and rub dirt on it, Cremo will proclaim it genuine and build a story on how ancient civilizations visiting America before Columbus left it there.  Even if you're in Kansas.

So he's a Mormon, then.

IIRC, Michael Cremo is a Hindu -- Hare Krishna.  The universe is a lot older than a mere 13.5 billion years.

Date: 2012/11/06 15:15:12, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Henry J @ Nov. 06 2012,14:30)
Quote
And we are still no stinking apes!

Yeah, we take baths and they don't! (Well, some of us, sometimes.)

Every six months, whether I need one or not.

Date: 2012/11/16 15:15:42, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 16 2012,14:35)
I'm interpreting these graphs as Gary's Dunning-Kruger score over the last ten years.

That makes sense.  His Dunning score on the X-axis and his Kruger score on the Y-axis.  Or is it vice versa?

Date: 2012/11/20 09:56:02, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Cubist @ Nov. 20 2012,09:15)
So if this CSI thingie genuinely is the sure-fire Design-detection tool which you ID-pushers assert it to be, it seems to me that you should be able to use it to distinguish random garbage from meaningful text that only appears to be random garbage.

That is a very significant thing to do.  The NSA/GCHQ would be very interested in a distinguisher like that, which could tell the difference between an encoded message and junk.  It defeats one of the obvious ways to block traffic analysis -- just fill up the comm link with junk when it is not being used, so it always appears to be running at the same capacity.

The first attack against a cypher is often a distinguisher, that is a way to tell the output of the cypher from true random.  One of the attacks against the RC4 keystream (due to Mantin and Shamir) showed that the second byte of the keystream was 0x00 with a frequency of 1/128 instead of the expected 1/256.  Obviously that attack only works for RC4 and not for other cyphers.  What the Discovery Institute claims to have is a general distinguisher, valid for all current and future cyphers.  Hence they are in effect claiming to have a way to attack any cypher whatsoever.

If CSI really is such a distinguisher, then the Discovery Institute is being very unpatriotic in not offering it to the NSA immediately.

Date: 2012/11/21 10:41:09, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (JohnW @ Nov. 21 2012,10:24)
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Nov. 21 2012,06:03)
 
Quote
Pyramids are antennas.


Yes, it's well known that huge piles of limestone and marble blocks make excellent antennas. You can also make a little hole in the middle and stick dead people in - they're dual-function. And the dead people probably help with the reception.

If the Egyptians were so brilliant, why didn't they invent the tinfoil hat?

They did.  What do you think the pyramids were covered with before all that sand wore away the outer covering?

They thought big back in those days.

Date: 2012/12/04 15:47:37, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Erasmus @ FCD,Dec. 03 2012,10:51)
 
Quote (JohnW @ Dec. 03 2012,11:44)
 
Quote (onlooker @ Dec. 03 2012,08:23)
This comment by Reciprocating Bill deserves more visibility:
   
Quote
If your definition of "plausible" is "That which UB and the Budweiser toads (Joe and Mung) find it plausible," I’ll pass.

That's the best assessment of those two I've seen yet, with the slight difference that the Budweiser Frogs have a certain charm.

I think Budweiser itself is a better comparison: gassy, tasteless and nausea-inducing.

watch it son

No, watch this instead:



rossum

Date: 2012/12/12 14:20:51, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (k.e.. @ Dec. 12 2012,09:08)
weasels without balls.

That's does, bitches or jills to you, mate.   :D

rossum

Date: 2012/12/19 15:03:28, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (olegt @ Dec. 19 2012,12:57)
I think Vincent Torley is just dumb, a Ph.D. in philosophy notwithstanding.
 
Quote
What it demonstrates is that there was a considerable difference between the public statements Hitler made about Christianity and his own private views, which were probably anti-Christian.

The removal of anti-Christian books from lending libraries was probably done to appease the Churches and to get them on side. Hitler would have viewed this as a small price to pay, to secure their support.

The removal of anti-Darwinian works may well have been for the same reason.

However, the fact that biology textbooks all taught Darwinian evolution during the Third Reich, and that Nazi publications taught human evolution and even criticized creationism surely speaks for itself. That “trumps” the fact that Darwin-friendly books were banned from libraries. What was on the school curriculum (Darwinism) was what really mattered.


I have it on good authority that Newtonian mechanics and calculus were on the school curriculum in Nazi Germany. I wonder what Dr. Torley would make of it.

One of the problems about not having a lab is that a stock photo of a computer won't let you access Wikipedia.  In particular, it won't let you access the List of authors banned during the Third Reich: D.

Yet another example of the high quality of research we have come to expect from ID.

Date: 2012/12/31 11:43:02, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (stevestory @ Dec. 31 2012,07:55)
Quote (The whole truth @ Dec. 31 2012,02:45)
And what the hell are "pyjamas"?   :p

It's a pervert thing. Some kind of getup worn by weirdos who don't sleep nekkid.

I suspect they wear them in the shower too.

I hear some people even wear special clothes to go swimmin'.  Kinda weird that.

Date: 2013/01/23 06:07:20, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (stevestory @ Jan. 22 2013,18:50)
UD is celebrating their 10,000th post.

Not strictly true.  Their 10,000th post was some time ago.  It is their 10,000th undeleted post.





Date: 2013/02/04 13:04:32, Link
Author: rossum
OT: King Richard III

"A hearse, a hearse, my kingdom for a hearse!"

Sorry, couldn't resist.

rossum

Date: 2013/02/04 14:26:15, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (midwifetoad @ Feb. 04 2013,13:47)
KRIII seems to have been found buried beneath a parking lot. There's no accounting for taste in burial sites.

Not strictly true.  The site is in England where we say "car park".  Apparently certain upstart former colonial types across the pond call it a "parking lot".

rossum

Date: 2013/02/17 16:22:11, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (The whole truth @ Feb. 17 2013,15:56)
Hey Doc, did you find any rabbit fossils when you were there?  ;)

Of course he did.  Darwinists only go there to pick out all the rabbit fossils and move then to some later strata.  We wouldn't want the DI people to find them now, would we?

Date: 2013/02/27 05:31:07, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Bob O'H @ Feb. 27 2013,04:18)
Quote (damitall @ Feb. 27 2013,03:10)
Whenever I see a scriptural reference to a verse from Ecclesiastes with the abbreviation "Eccles", I cannot help but think of the character from the Goon Show (a British radio comedy show from the 50's)
Eccles was a very silly person with a very silly voice -highly suited for reading out "scripture"

You've mixed up boy-scout extraordinaire Bluebottle with The Famous Eccles. Mind you, Eccles reading bits of wisdom from the Bible would still be amusing.

Both Eccles and Bluebottle are in "What time is it Eccles?"

Classic stuff.

Date: 2013/03/14 16:25:28, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (CeilingCat @ Mar. 14 2013,13:34)
The latest procedure is to chant "Wanker" three times while looking at a picture of Barry.

Only three times?  Call me Wanker!

Date: 2013/03/19 05:23:49, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 18 2013,21:38)
The question really is, how many possible combinations spell out an actual message in any language?

Which leads immediately to the question of how many possible languages there are in total.

Date: 2013/03/21 12:53:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 21 2013,11:41)
But, we live in a country where nearly half the public disbelieves evidence provided by fucking thermometers, so it shouldn't surprise me.

Well if that's what 50% of USAnians do with thermometers, it's no wonder America is such a weird place.

Date: 2013/05/28 15:12:17, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (OgreMkV @ May 28 2013,10:38)
yay... I may have home internet by Friday.  Supposedly, they are digging a trench now.

A trench?  Luxury!

rossum

Date: 2013/06/05 06:46:45, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (JohnW @ June 04 2013,16:51)
Quote (stevestory @ June 04 2013,14:01)
 
Quote (olegt @ June 04 2013,16:15)
This should tell you everything about Joe's patience:
   
Quote
I have yet to get beyond 10 rolls without hitting a 4.

One roll of a die is not a 4 with the probability of 5/6. Ten rolls in a row have no 4 with the probability (5/6)^10 = 0.16. So it takes about 1/0.16 = 6 trials of 10 rolls to succeed.

Roll the die a hundred times, Joe, and you will likely see 10 rolls in a row with no 4.

Bonus track:

   
Quote
And computer simulations are a different ballgame. When you are rolling a die you cannot exactly duplicate each and every physical movement- there are intangibles involved.

attach a muon detector to you computer, like I did in my senior year at NCSU in physics, and you will def get randomness involved.

Attach a stupidity detector to your computer, go to Joe's blog, and...

Since the quantum particle for intelligence is the anti-moron, then the particle for stupidity is the moron.  You need to attach a moron detector.

The exact statistics are still being looked at.  CERN are trying to determine the half-life of the moron as we speak.

For random number generation, I prefer LavaRnd, (no not Lavarand).

Date: 2013/06/07 15:00:25, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Occam's Toothbrush @ June 07 2013,10:26)
Why won't this board let me use the word Nostrad@mus?

Mabus/Markuze is somewhat fond of it...

Date: 2013/07/05 15:47:36, Link
Author: rossum
Ray Comfort.  Wasn't he the guy up for a Best Supporting Actor award for his performance supporting a member of genus Musa?

rossum

Date: 2013/07/07 13:21:08, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (fusilier @ July 11 2008,08:25)
It takes XIXth century bronze, cast iron, and tool steel to stand up to XIXth century TARD.

But are are allowed to apply a little XXIst century miniaturization:



rossum

Date: 2013/07/26 03:58:43, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (JohnW @ July 24 2013,16:34)
I was hoping for Elvis, or Earl.

Earl?  He's a Prince, not an Earl.  He was born into the purple, after all.  I wonder if he can sing?

Date: 2013/08/13 15:26:06, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (midwifetoad @ Aug. 13 2013,14:53)
Quote
PZ appears to have seriously put is foot in his mouth and it now kicking his own ass.


What a bucket of snakes. Is there any place to get the story of what PZ said and the background of what Shermer allegedly did, with all the hysteria?

I'm sorry, the the posters to all the discussions are too busy trying to hack each other to bits to deal with mundane things like facts.

Try: this.

Date: 2013/08/19 03:51:49, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Aug. 18 2013,22:07)
Quote (clamboy @ Aug. 18 2013,21:51)
Goodness, those two threads on morality have driven William J Murray into heretofore unwitnessed fits.


William J Murray, this is going to be harsh, but it needs to be said:


William J Murray, go have sex with someone. That's an order.

Preferably alive, and with their consent.

With IDiots you never know...

... and not with yourself either.

Date: 2013/08/23 04:01:09, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Ptaylor @ Aug. 23 2013,00:19)
Hi REC - I'm not a scientist and I don't understand the relevance/meaning of '1950' in your comment or on the PLOS ONE page. Is it the year 1950 or something else?

AIUI Carbon dates are measured before the year 1950.  After 1950 atmospheric nuclear weapons tests put too much C14 into the atmosphere.  1950 makes a convenient baseline for measuring from.

Date: 2013/08/28 03:57:23, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ Aug. 27 2013,16:46)
This is a feature IDC inherited from its intellectual lineage of deceptive creationism. (Deceptive creationism being the clade of all creationisms that rely upon calling the existing body of antievolution arguments or a subset thereof "science" for the purpose of trying to insert them into USA public school science classrooms.) Part of the argumentation is the "oppositional dualism" noted by Judge Overton in the McLean v. Arkansas case: it is asserted that either evolution or creation is true, thus anything that puts evolution in doubt counts as evidence for creation. IDC is fully on board with the oppositional dualism seen in creation science.

Oppositional Dualism immediately puts IDC and the others outside science, since in science there is always a third option, "We don't know."  Dembski's 'Explanatory Filter' fell down on this point.  It always produced a definite answer by assuming a default.  If there is a default, then it should be, "We don't know".

$0.02

Date: 2013/08/30 10:17:04, Link
Author: rossum
Quote
I would like to thank The Designer who gave us ... the Fall.

At last, we know the True Identity of the Designer!  It can only be ... Mark E. Smith.

Date: 2013/08/31 05:44:49, Link
Author: rossum
Another review of Meyer's book, by Michael Schulson: Creationism 3.0: Meet Intelligent Design’s Huckster.

Date: 2014/01/01 04:25:40, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Bob O'H @ Dec. 31 2013,15:44)
Of course Cantor would know that.

(actually does anyone know a proof of Cantor's statement? It seems reasonable, but number theory isn't my area)

Cantor is correct.  Pi gives an infinite stream of digits with no repeating pattern.  Any finite string of digits will be found in Pi an infinite number of times.  Of course, the longer your search string the more digits if Pi you have to calculate to find it.

Date: 2014/01/01 15:35:47, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (DiEb @ Jan. 01 2014,07:40)
I'm afraid that it isn't proven yet that pi is a normal number (though most mathematicians would bet that it is one...) At the moment we cannot say that each finite number can be found in the decimal representation of pi - but every short string of numbers (birthdates, etc.) has been found :-)

I'm not sure that full normality is required.  Only base 10 needs to be looked at, and even then, equal proportions of each digit are not required.  If, for example, '1' occurred at twice the frequency of any other digit, then all the specified strings would still appear somewhere in Pi.  You might just have to search further to find them.

Date: 2014/01/04 10:29:11, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Richardthughes @ Jan. 03 2014,20:29)
TodAy, at skool, we lurned, commas:

Quote
And if science can only allow a certain amount of luck in any given model, the materialism, and by extension darwinism, are scientific non-starters as they rely on luck, so what is left, scientifically?

Maybe not just commas.  Perhaps s/the/then also?  It appears to have started life as an if ... then ... sentence, but somehow got morphed.  Random mutation in action, right in front of your eyes, boys and girls.

Date: 2014/01/17 16:19:55, Link
Author: rossum
http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/....tme....tme.com has PT down for everyone at 22:00 GMT

Date: 2014/01/22 05:48:15, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (Driver @ Jan. 21 2014,19:21)
I thought quarks and whatnot were Buddhist.

Only in the south, on Tuesdays.  Otherwise they are Zoroastrian.

Date: 2014/03/26 15:24:03, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (KCdgw @ Mar. 26 2014,13:57)
How do you know it's the right "2"?

You don't.  But there will be a new 'Number Two' in the next episode.

"You are Number Six..."

Date: 2014/04/15 16:34:53, Link
Author: rossum
Quote (k.e @ Feb. 08 2007,18:12)
SUCK THAT DOWN HOMO STAMP COLLECTORS-dt

Too late I'm afraid, the HOMO STAMP COLLECTORS are all drooling over the new Finnish Tom of Finland stamps.

 

 

 

=====