AE BB DB Explorer


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


form_srcid: rthearle

form_srcid: rthearle

form_cmd: view_author

Your IP address is 54.224.158.39

View Author detected.

view author posts with search matches:

Retrieve source record and display it.

form_author:

form_srcid: rthearle

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

DB_err:

DB_result: Resource id #6

Date: 2005/05/04 12:49:12, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote
Potential uses for the data collected here range from pure scholarship (tracing the deployment of antievolution arguments over time) ...


In this case wouldn't it me more useful to be able to search by argument rather than by source?

Roy

Date: 2005/05/04 13:01:06, Link
Author: rthearle
Russell Humphreys has responded to Kevin Henke's criticism of the RATE group's helium diffusion articles at http://www.trueorigins.org/helium01.asp

Personally I think Kevin should refuse to comment until Russell gets his response published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal.

Roy

Date: 2006/10/03 02:24:16, Link
Author: rthearle
From www.uncommondescent.org:

This Account Has Been Suspended
Please contact the billing/support department as soon as possible.

Looks like they haven't paid their bill.

Roy

Date: 2012/04/17 09:41:31, Link
Author: rthearle
There is a new paper up at bio-complexity, the Disco Institute website that claims to be a peer-reviewed publication. However, a quick read of the text shows that any peer-review it has received is so poor that it doesn't even qualify as proofreading.

The most glaring example is the caption to figure 12, which gets the contents of the two graphs the wrong way around. Figures 7 & 8 are also dubious, in that they give the exact same probability for finding a good solution as for finding a merely adequate one, which is non only obviously suspect, but also contradicts the rest of their data (cf figure 4). Another example is in the section headed "Effect of selection skew" where is written "As noted, it is easy to obtain a solution with a score of 1246. The optimal solution has a cost of 1212. Consequently, there is a very small range of possible costs that are of interest, especially when contrasted with the range of possible costs, 0 - 100000.". The problem here is that that is not the range of possible costs. No solution can have a cost less than the optimal 1212, and the upper value of 100000 is an arbitrary high number assigned to invalid configurations in order to exclude them from consideration. An actual calculated cost cannot* exceed 33000.

But possibly the worst claim made in the paper is this: "Every search algorithm terminates with a solution that has a specific cost." That's complete nonsense that would raise alarm bells with anyone having any familiarity with genetic algorithms and evolutionary simulations at all, let alone with the Steiner tree search algorithm being discussed in the paper. Elsewhere in the paper the actual termination condition for this algorithm is stated, and it isn't at a solution with a specific cost - it's after a set number of generations. It could instead have been implemented to stop either when several generations produced no improvement, or on user command, both of which are widely used in other genetic search algorithms. But it could not have been implemented with the termination condition that the authors claim all search algorithms stop at, since the simulation being discussed can and has been used to find Steiner trees for arrangements for which the optimal solution is unknown - and you can't program an algorithm to stop at a solution with a specific cost if you don't know what that specific cost is.

Any proper attempt at peer review would pick up these points and other less glaring errors. The proposed conclusion is that papers published in 'Biocomplexity' are peer-reviewed not for quality, but for conformity.

Roy

*This is an estimate based on the worst case i can think of; I haven't done an exhaustive calculation.

Date: 2015/03/21 07:35:24, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 20 2015,20:57)
Barry may have inside knowledge. The TV tax collection is farmed out to a private company, and Barry may know something about that.

He doesn't - unless he thinks being sent an annual letter (which I often ignored) counts as violence.

Roy

Date: 2015/05/03 12:00:06, Link
Author: rthearle
Stop press: Sal Cordova has proved that Boltzmann's constant = 1.

details here

Date: 2015/09/15 14:11:32, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote
The death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ is one of the most reliably documented events in all of human history.
Comment 4

Date: 2015/11/11 17:25:55, Link
Author: rthearle
Just checked BIO-Complexity, the Discovery Institute's peer-reviewed journal, to see if they have published anything this year (they haven't, but it is only November). I did notice though that the last paper they published last year - Reeves/Gauger/Axe on enzymes - is listed with a citation of "BIO-Complexity 2014 (4):1−16". This struck me as rather odd since BIO-Complexity only published four papers last year in total.

A few moments of digging uncovered that BIO-Complexity is indeed publishing each article as a separate issue, even when they're just 6 pages long and published less than a week apart.

Is this normal for on-line journals? I haven't seen anything similar elsewhere. Or could it be an attempt to make their output seem greater than it is?

Roy

Date: 2015/11/18 14:31:51, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ Nov. 17 2015,16:58)
STOP THE PRESSES!  STOP THE PRESSES!

That intellectual fountain of Creationist knowledge Bio-Complexity finally published its first article of 2105!

Bio-Complexity 2015

Of course it's the usual hand waving, this time from junior IDiot in training Winston Ewert.  Ewert has once again "disproved evolution" by making his own custom computer simulations of evolution and watching the population crash when he runs them.  Can anyone say John Sanford / Mendel's Accountant?  :D

"These typically use per-nucleotide (or nearest analogue) mutation rates orders of magnitude higher than biological
rates. This paper compares models using typical rates for genetic algorithms with the same models using a realistic
mutation rate."

I bet he doesn't use realistic genome or population sizes.

Date: 2015/12/30 06:51:09, Link
Author: rthearle
From the Discovery Institute's latest peer-reviewed article comes a vital question:  
Quote
If we shared a digital versatile disc (DVD), is information being destroyed?
Answers on a postcard please.

Date: 2016/04/09 05:59:33, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote (sparc @ Feb. 02 2016,12:44)
Quote (k.e.. @ Feb. 02 2016,09:08)
Over at Evolution Creationist News & Victimhood Lee M. Spetner a retired PhD physicist and Jewish creationist spits chips over David E. Levin's review of Spetner's latest vanity publication for sale on Amazon.

The false handedness of  the DNA molecule on Spetner's book should not be left unnoticed

Quote
The false handedness of  the DNA molecule on Spetner's book should not be left unnoticed
I don't think it's clear enough which strand is in the foreground for that charge to be made.

Date: 2016/05/29 09:56:24, Link
Author: rthearle
After all these years at UD I've finally been censored - apparently for mentioning "malaria" and "designer" in the same sentence.

Date: 2016/05/29 10:02:42, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote (rthearle @ May 29 2016,09:56)
After all these years at UD I've finally been censored - apparently for mentioning "malaria" and "designer" in the same sentence.

...and 2 more in quick succession. Apparently asking Barry what he did when confronted with a man begging for help with his malarial daughter is sufficient to have your post removed.

Date: 2016/05/29 10:17:55, Link
Author: rthearle
Quote (Acartia_Bogart @ May 29 2016,10:11)
The voice from the sky has spoken.

Posted but not visible:

Asking what you did when accosted by a man with a malaria-infected daughter is "trollish behaviour"?

Date: 2016/05/29 10:32:11, Link
Author: rthearle
This post was deemed unacceptable by the UD censor:
Quote
Quote
When I was in Kenya a man begged me for help treating his little daughter, who had contracted malaria.
That must have been horrible. What did you do?

 

 

 

=====