form_srcid: steve_h
form_cmd: view_author
Your IP address is 38.107.191.96
View Author detected.
view author posts:
Retrieve source record and display it.
form_author:
form_srcid: steve_h
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 'steve_h%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC
DB_err:
DB_result: Resource id #4
| Date: 2006/01/27 14:42:06, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScott is right. You really should attack the ideas and not the despicable, fact-resistant, agenda-pushing, fake scientists that hold them |
| Date: 2006/02/17 06:14:24, Link 194.209.71.244 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Re: the front loading. Doesn't that mean that the common ancester of humans and all other apes (which JAD and DS accept) had to be more complex than humans or any ape? - it had to have the information to make all subsequent apes including humans. And the common ancester of all mammals had to be much more complex than any mammal including humans. Normally creationists/IDers seem to think that Humans are the most complex of The Designer's creation because of music, philosophy, science etc. etc., and not what you are left with, having discarded most of the information from some ancient single celled ancestor. |
| Date: 2006/03/02 07:46:37, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
That explains why I couldn't view this forum from home yesterday. I can read and post from work though. Couldn't you allow read access to banned users? The UDers complain that evolutionists go further in thier attempts at censorship, because P.T bans people outright (omitting, of course, that only a handful of people and thier sock puppets have been so banned) |
| Date: 2006/03/06 04:17:46, Link 194.209.71.244 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I wonder if DS's ruling on entropy is intended to draw a line under the whole thing. I can imagine Valerie, who has been pointing out the rather obvious flaws in the arguments so far, getting a long overdue ban if she disagrees with this one. If DaveSchrott is right and there are indeed different kinds of entropy for heat and information, I wonder which one the 2nd law of thermodynamics is referring to. I quite like the idea of the sun sending information rather than heat in the second comment (whether true or not). I wonder which, of a science book, a book on ID or an empty diary all of equal mass, keeps you the warmest when burned  |
| Date: 2006/03/07 13:29:52, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Wow! apparently, human beings can design things. Maybe therefore all things are designed? Grasping at straws anyone? These particular designers seem to have used their knowledge of evolutionary theories to bring about a desired result using an evolutionary process. That sure will put those nasty Darwinians in thier place! They don't appear to have used any input from the ID community though apart from the phrase "Intelligent Design" and they don't seem to be suggesting that thier work shows ID is a better explanation than natural selection for what we see in nature. |
| Date: 2006/03/08 15:59:27, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
Come to think of it, the one thing he gets right in that quote is wrong. Temperature is measured in kelvin, not degrees Kelvin (N.B. I am not a physicist so I apologize in advance for any schoolboy bloopers in my post) (Also, I'm not a schoolboy) To prove it, here's what it says on wikipedia (Sorry DaveScrott, I couldn't find a thesaurus definition) at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelvin
I thought everybody knew that ! See also: DaveSchrott |
| Date: 2006/03/12 01:31:37, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Do'h!, I should have known that it is the international standard that is wrong, not DaveScrote. |
| Date: 2006/03/15 08:33:39, Link 194.209.71.244 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security How’s this for ID research … I get the impression that if any scientist uses any of Dembski's favorite words in any context, Dembski is now going to claim their work as a branch of ID. Let's see your impression of someone falling off a blog, dt. |
| Date: 2006/03/15 13:03:29, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
No, any field that uses design, or mentions design, or uses any of the following terms: complex, specified, information, snake oil, scam. I hereby design-ate you an ex-commentator, dt. |
| Date: 2006/03/15 15:17:06, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Mathematician/Cosmologist wins religion prize, for "progess toward Research or Discoveries about Spiritual realities" in religion, shock, horror. http://www.templetonprize.org/ Does the John Templeton Foundation support intelligent design? No!, er, I mean yes!, er... I mean, as long as it doesn't contradict the bible |
| Date: 2006/03/16 06:52:32, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
They are still on the original 'Thermodynamics fo^W by Dummies' thread (886 not 884) Confusion about 2LoT in regard to heat and information |
| Date: 2006/03/16 06:59:10, Link 194.209.71.243 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Oops. It's been pointed out already. Sorry. |
| Date: 2006/03/17 03:21:53, Link 194.209.71.244 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
There's comment by someone named MRMorris which just happens to be the same name as the Prof. quoted in the article. It says this nebula can be explained by current physics. Scrot, noted for knowing who the experts in any given field are, immediately notes that he is making up stories (but curiously doesn't ban him). I wonder if it's the same M. Morris - Commenter #4 certainly seems to think so. Has Dembski set a trap for Scrot? |
| Date: 2006/03/19 05:36:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
It is quite reasonable to accept Stevestory's statement that Mattison0922 is an ID supporter. Mattison has already told us he is a closeted IDT supporter. He is the only person who can know if that is true or not,so we can only take his word for it. I am prepared to accept Mattison0922's claim to be a biologist, despite the fact that people on the internet often claim credentials they don't have. I think Arden Chatfield was wrong in this case, but then he was talking probababilities (or "odds") and had a point. What is it that makes the following question an "obnoxious demand"?
As DaveScrot might say, "see the question mark?". Also was ds being obnoxious when he asked Mattison to prove his credentials by entering the relevant details into his database or when he wrote the following?
If so, why haven't you castigated him for it? After all, describing Arden Chatfield's question as an obnoxious demand, while ignoring DaveScrot's would fit the definition of Hypocrisy that you gave. |
| Date: 2006/03/19 08:00:06, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
My correspondence with Eugenie Scott on ID in the universities HTH. |
| Date: 2006/03/19 14:12:28, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
HTH: Hope this helps (Assuming you are not going to use the information for 'evil' purposes ) |
| Date: 2006/03/22 13:04:41, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I have to sympathise with ds here. I frequently make such slips: "their" instead of "there" or "they're"; "not a play" instead of "and a play"; or "No, that's completely wrong! Check your facts or be banned, you idiot " when I mean "Oops! maybe that was a typo". However, in common with all right-thinking people, I also think, that any small admission of error by the ID side, no matter how insignificant, does indicate that everything about ID and the speaker's religion is completely wrong. This admission could just be the thin end of the wedge (not that wedge, a different one). (warning: may contain non-counting grammatical errors, typos and/or sarcasm) |
| Date: 2006/03/23 04:08:51, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Listen to your Doctors: They know the Truth.
|
| Date: 2006/03/23 12:06:54, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
(Off Topic) Sunstorm
Immediately after the same author claims them all as his own (in the "front-loading" group). No prizes for guessing who it was. |
| Date: 2006/03/25 09:02:29, Link 194.209.71.243 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Stevestory, is there a particular inconsistency in that post which you feel deserves this award or is that the whole post contains so many that it somehow instantly qualifies him for a less specific "lifetime services to inconsistancy and self-contradiction" award? The main ones I would count in that thread are: He asserts that no evidence can prove or disprove that gods exist or would act in a particular way and also that he is more able follow that "real evidence" to whereever it leads. (Contradiction spotted by ctaser, who was subsequently banned for it) (in reply 14) He seems to be saying that he has more freedom to reach a decision based on all of the evidence, precisely because he's already made his mind up and therefore can't be swayed by the evidence (at least thats what I understand by "can't threaten his worldview") (Contradiction spotted by woody, who was subsequently banned and/or disemvowelled for it -- but only having responded to an additional clarification by DS) He says atheists must preclude certain possibilies because they have already decided the "theory" is wrong and then in reply 5 says theres a faction in the atheist camp that is open minded. (my emphasis and quotation marks) He says that atheists, having decided they don't believe n God, are rejecting an infinitite number of potential truths. He's doesn't seem to realise that by accepting on faith that a particular god is the truth, he too is ruling out a infinite number of truths (-1 for his God, but +1 for potential truth of "no God"). However he doesn't mention that he's doing this so maybe it's not in the same class. In an article/thread about intellectual dishonesty, he is intellectually dishonest. He holds atheists and theists to different standards on grounds of the stance he wrongly assumes each has taken. When a contradiction is pointed out he answers it with a link which he claims explains why there is no contradiction but which turns out to be a syllabus for a logic course with no answer. |
| Date: 2006/03/26 03:20:13, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
100 More Heretics in 30 Days
In comment 2 we learn of another academic, Francis Beckwith, who has been turned into a verb after being denied tenure by the evil atheist metarialist dictatorship at Baylor university, the worlds largest *cough*baptist*cough* university. Just shows how far the insidious influence of Darwin has reached -- AFAICT Baylor doesn't even have the life science departments in which the Darwinists normally lurk, discussing ways to suppress real science, etc. It does have a school of engineering and computer science though. I am surprised they didn't pounce on this chance to permanently secure someone who could teach and research thier design recognition program. |
| Date: 2006/03/26 07:49:54, Link 194.209.71.244 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Hope, not Proof
But let's assume that ID is right, that all life is designed and it is the moral obligation of all designed things to do whatever the designer designed them for. Surely the work of ID is now just beginning and it shouldn't just congratulate itself on a job well done and concentrate on wringing money out of the terminally stupid. They should tell us how they are going to scientifically determine what our purpose is so that we can fulfil it. If the designer wants us to hurt each other, or is taking bets on how the middle east turns out, or which nation will press the button and destroy the world, then anybody not involved in needless violence may actually be acting in an immoral way. |
| Date: 2006/03/26 08:22:15, Link 194.209.71.244 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Except of course for the original designer. Every known designed thing was designed by something more complex than it. Applying the "theory" of design tells us that the original designer must have been designed as well which is ludicrous. That's a false positive. I know how the other side try to get around this one. They describe anyone who points it out as a boring panda:
|
| Date: 2006/03/28 13:31:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
I would like to add that I can in no way condone forcible deportation of people who are sensitive to offence they might cause to muslims, jews and/or jehovah's witnesses. And I certainly would not in any circumstance
What *WE* Are Up Against! |
| Date: 2006/03/31 07:53:23, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
http://www.bath.ac.uk/news/articles/archive/minimalgenome290306.html
The study is partly right and partly wrong. The above bit is obviously right (apart from the as...than), but
</tard> |
| Date: 2006/03/31 13:46:01, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Is a zygote capable of suffering? Is the woman who carries it? At which point does the zygote's right to a miserable existence on earth and the likelihood of a future in underscored's brimstone-and-torture-land(*) - as opposed to its otherwise guaranteed one-ness with him and eternal cosmic bliss - outweigh the mother's right to her freedom? (*) I wanted to write "####" but it got hashed-out, and I was afraid it might get confused with a naughty word of some sort. |
| Date: 2006/03/31 14:03:56, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
And that there is no time to hang around asking philosophical questions. Any stalling results in the death of the two month old and the end of the contents of the thermos. Act! |
| Date: 2006/03/31 14:21:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Good Democracy, Bad Democracy, and No Democracy
Scrote banning an entirely reasonable poster for posting something he agrees with. |
| Date: 2006/04/01 14:00:57, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
TD, What does the human zygote have that the equivalent in a dog or a rat or a fish does not? As I see it, the only thing that it currently has is potential, but it is not currently more conscious, more capable of suffering, more intelligent, morally superior, or in any way 'better' than those others. Every human sperm and egg has potential but we allow millions and lots respectively to go down the pan (or whereever) without undue worry, so why kick up a fuss here? As I see it, the only thing you might claim for the human zygote apart from potential that the others don't have is a soul, but that's religion. What is being lost that wouldn't also be lost if the sperm and eggs donors had decided to go to church instead of having sex? Also, I missed your answer to the "who would you save" diliemma and can't find it. Could you repeat it for me please? |
| Date: 2006/04/02 04:48:22, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| All non-answers, TD. As far as I am concerned, your "Troll" status is confirmed - I can be a little slow to catch on sometimes. If any one else, from any side of the discussion, thinks I have wrongly dismissed any honest answers I will be happy to elaborate, but I will not be feeding TD directly any more. |
| Date: 2006/04/03 11:18:06, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Please note, that many us at atbc do not condone the use of nuclear ebola bombs to destroy churches. However, maybe I'll report myself to my local Fremdenpolizei just to be on the safe side. |
| Date: 2006/04/04 07:54:33, Link 194.209.71.245 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/04/04 12:41:42, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
They are the same thing: http://www.google.ch/search?q=photon+energy+triangle - 351,000 hits. |
| Date: 2006/04/04 13:43:47, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Well duh! This whole spanish-italian differentiation is just a scam to sell spanish-italian dictionaries to the unwary. However, I seem to have taken us off-topic. Apologies to TD, and I will limit such proofs to the UD thread in future. |
| Date: 2006/04/06 11:34:39, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
It has come to my attention that another American academic may be planning wholesale slaughter. The Mathematician, philosopher and theologian of whom I speak may have joined some sort of death-cult which is eagerly anticipating an end of the world scenario in which everyone not on thier side will be gruesomely slaughtered (and perhaps tortured), leaving themselves to enjoy a new idyllic existence in the aftermath. Not only that but they all think such an occurence will be a good thing. Maybe giant mutant multi-headed beasts will be involved. Maybe some of them are trying to think of ways to make it happen sooner and are engaged in breeding and design programs .... I haven't seen any transcripts or anything yet, but it makes you think doesn't it? So, should I report this guy to the cops? Would it be an idea to hint that he might be armed so they go in shooting?  |
| Date: 2006/04/06 11:55:03, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Yes, I've heard of vices being mentioned. Not in respect of the end of world scenario, but to extract information or force confessions from opponents while they are waiting for that. (I think your take is correct, but I would not like to go on the record about that until I've seen the transcripts) |
| Date: 2006/04/06 12:05:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Time goes fast when you're having fun. Maybe you could try holding parties in your lab? |
| Date: 2006/04/06 15:02:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
[UPDATE:] $1000 reward and $1000 bet — Pianka again
Also, why withdraw the reward? Isn't this the time to pay up? I'm confused - am I missing something here? AFAICT this is all about a speech at the Texas Academy of Science on 3.3.2006. Am I confusing two different events? |
| Date: 2006/04/10 11:22:59, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
DaveScott, how about publishing the top referral sites? My hunch is that PT and similar sites and will feature prominently and that referrals from sites critical of pseudoscience will probably outnumber those from sites dedicated to design recognition (aka engineering), biology, palaeontogy etc., and/or which are not taking the piss. |
| Date: 2006/04/11 12:53:13, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Not quite what I expected. But three of the top six were from sites pointing out the stupidy of UD and its owner (antievolution, leiterreports and pandas) and the fourth is from wusses (who don't count ). The one I don't understand is newyorktimes.com. The New York Times' official page was always at www.nytimes.com. www.newyorktimes was originally some sort of cybersquatting advertising site which was eventually given up after a bit of a fight. If you visit newyorktimes now, you get redirected to nytimes. Maybe on non-IE explorers the redirect happens invisibly so that newyorktimes stays in the address of the referral. But I'd expect more referrals from nytimes unless someone has been, say, tweaking the results. Also mentions of Dembski in the nytimes have been quite rare in the last six months. Most were before September. The exceptions during the boom time for UD being two in December which relate to a story about some judge who rejects teaching Intelligent Design and one entitled "Intelligent Design Might Be Meeting its Maker". I don't have a subscription for the nytimes archive, but maybe they having a bit of a chuckle too. |
| Date: 2006/04/11 15:36:56, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I make it 1.08% vs 0.94%. About 40% of the (reported) direct referrals from external web sites are from sites like PT and antievolution. The majority are from people who go directly to the site using bookmarks. Maybe these are in the same ratio but I suspect those bookmarks are mostly us and the registered posters at UD. Dave, what percentage of visits are from IP addresses associated with banned users? Anyway why stop at 6? nobody stops at six unless 7-10 tip the balance in favor of the 'other side'. |
| Date: 2006/04/12 12:49:40, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Congratulations to Uncommon Descent Bloggers!
I think many of us have long suspected that Dembski's approach to ID is that "Writing stuff you know ain't true can be a good way to make money" . Very different from science related blogs such as The Panda's Thumb where the emphasis is not on generating revenue but on improving public knowledge about a subject and correcting the misinformation of scam artists. However, I'm not sure revenue is DaveScot's motivation despite his claims. Does he get a cut of it? Is he really deliberately making ID and its followers look stupid because he sees it as the best way to contribute to ID? The "Can't admit to non-trivial mistakes" explanation still seems the most likely to me. However, FWIW I do accept his explanation of the newyorktimes thing and the termination of the list at place six. For completeness Dave, I think designinference.com should not count as an external referrer as it's also owned by Dembski - UD is just its blog section. That would reduce serious external interest in your blog to trace amounts but if that was your plan all along... |
| Date: 2006/04/14 03:47:07, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
In which case we have one zygote which began at conception which becomes two which began at the time of the split. We had one "person" and now we have two, so one is slightly older than the other, even though they both began at the same time(s). |
| Date: 2006/04/14 12:24:48, Link 194.209.71.245 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Oops! sorry Nike, I've not been following this thread very closely, but I just went back and found your comment. I like the way that it that must not be fed subsequently quotes your questions about these examples but makes no attempt at all to answer them. |
| Date: 2006/04/15 06:50:32, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Don't scientists often obtain useful information by examining fossilized feces? If so, I think this proves that all crap is actually intelligently designed road map. |
| Date: 2006/04/15 11:13:14, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Oh dear, I think I foresee an upcoming mathematical tour de force which 'proves' that our DNA contains a notarized hidden instruction manual. Unfortunately the contents of that manual will remain unknowable without considerable outlay. |
| Date: 2006/04/16 02:39:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
“Darwinian theory of evolution is silent on the question of whether a supernatural intelligent designer exists”
|
| Date: 2006/04/27 12:52:22, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| A Tenner (Sterling) says we never get (3)-(5). Possibly on account of us being too rude, not deserving of the truth, or similar. (Max. 1 taker) |
| Date: 2006/04/28 08:03:41, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/04/28 14:48:19, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
It's worse than that -- it's not just him, there are loads of 'em. |
| Date: 2006/04/28 15:25:49, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Worse than that. He was elected twice! (Well, maybe once, sort of) If you have a comeback, I hereby offer advance notice of my desire to give in on this one. |
| Date: 2006/04/28 15:44:21, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
(Added quote) |
| Date: 2006/05/02 10:49:39, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1086#comment-33058 and http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1624642/posts?page=34#34.
|
| Date: 2006/05/03 06:13:30, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
Good to see ds showing some intellectual honesty and correcting a mistake by a fellow ID supporter. http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/1090
However, it's not the first time someone has made that "mistake" (charitable version) at UD: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/922
I also recall someone (I think it was Dembski) arguing that someone who was designing things was therefore utilising ID "theory". I don't recall enough details to find it. |
| Date: 2006/05/12 09:01:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
The first of those regular expressions only matches quotes with no attribution. The second mathes only one with them. So as long as you do something like
This has been driving me crazy for ages. Thanks for the code snippet. |
| Date: 2006/05/12 11:02:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Not sure that a full parser is necessary. If you add a (.*) to the front of your pattern (To slurp up the longest text that doesn't contain {quote}, you can find the last complete inner quote. Then iterate until you find no more or you hit a limit (to avoid infinite loops if there is a mistake). I also combined the handling of {quote=} and {quote} forms, otherwise it still gets hopelessly muddled.
produces
edit: purged spurious last if. My deepest sympathy to anyone that can make any sense of the above "edit" comment. Do you have the code that handles hyperlinks handy? They've caused me considerable annoyance of late. |
| Date: 2006/05/12 11:27:56, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
genetic-id, an instance of design detection? (topic revisited)
I think there is a way we can use the explanatory filter to detect man-made alterations to crops without using a library of genetic patterns. At first it doesn't seem so easy because the EF tells you only that all crops are designed and nothing more, whether by the Intelligent Designer or an intelligent designer. However, modified crops have been designed twice, once by each [Dd]esigner so there is a way - put it through the Explanatory Filter twice ! Or three times if you want to know if a man made design has been illegaly copied. Nobel prizes and license fees to the usual address. |
| Date: 2006/05/12 23:47:37, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Wow thanks Wes. I didn't expect you to implement it. I thought you'd say it would be far too slow because it has to loop once for each quote tag. One way to make it faster would be to do this only when text was being input by the user and turn matched "quote"s to matched IQUOT../IQUOT (or similar) and save that in the DB. Then when viewing you could process the start and end tags separately with simpler regexps (Simple string replacement for end tag) in one pass because you know they already match up. Of course you then have to handle internal tags entered directly by the user. And you'd have to turn IQUOT back to QUOTE for editing. Etc. etc. etc. Re. the other topic: I'd like to see the page number which contains the first post entered after my last page view (not made in the current session) so that I could go directly to where I left off last time. Alas, I fear that may be impossible |
| Date: 2006/05/15 12:27:29, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Is there such a thing as copyright protection for blogs? if not, I guess it won't be long before some people complain loudly that there is. If so, it might be more ethical only to publish links to copies of modified posts rather than the entire content. Also if not, I think in future I might link to the advert free copy rather than providing dumsbki and scrote with the "oxygen of publicity" that they crave (shudders at thought of mrs T.) Where are people like BarryA when you need them? |
| Date: 2006/05/17 14:01:08, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I think the word you're looking for is (Der/Dieser) Diskussionsfaden or (Der/Dieser) Thread. The english version of most technical words often finds it's way into German, which explains why I can be nearly ten years in a german speaking land and still suck at German (unless you count the other reason, which is that I'm not very bright) Gewinde refers to the sort of thread you find on a screw. Umlauts are no problem here (eg äöü) if you have a German keyboard. Otherwise, on windows (and maybe PCs generally), you can hold down the alt key and enter the three digit ascii code, one digit at a time on the numeric keypad before releasing the alt, so ü=alt-(1+2+9) ö=alt-148 and ä=alt-132 (Uppercase versions are left as an exercise in googling for the reader). Failing that you can write "ueber", "Goedel", "Schoenborn", Motoerhead etc. "ß" is alt 225 and isn't on my swiss-german keyboard as the swiss always use "ss". Also the tall skinny 'S' was IMO almost certainly intended as self deprecating humor. |
| Date: 2006/05/18 09:39:20, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
S.P. Near Basel. Egbooth: I'm the wrong steve but see: http://www.uncommondescent.com/index.php/archives/896 Main post, and comment 14. Also at comment DM provides as supporting evidence a link he obviously hadn't looked at. That was March 8th, and ran alongside 'Hate Speech' and "Heat=Temperature". Erratum: Hmm, "Der Thread" probably only refers to lightweight processes etc. |
| Date: 2006/05/19 13:19:17, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Creationist anti-ID bumper stickers?
|
| Date: 2006/05/19 14:21:55, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Were you on your boat at the time you thought this? - heroically peering into a perfectly adequate, though not quite state of the art, marine microscope while struggling with a nasty bout of scurvy? No, I thought not. Evolution loses. |
| Date: 2006/05/21 14:01:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Ironically the answer to this question comes from GilDogen on Comment on God’s best gift to intelligent design by GilDodgen or God’s best gift to intelligent design if you are not concerned with historical accuracy and enjoy contributing to UD hit counts.
Incidentally, Wesley, I had some trouble getting multiple URLs within a quote to work correctly, so in the end, I quoted only the first of thee URLS. You really should encourage your loser geeks to sort this out using whatever pyschological subterfuge you can. |
| Date: 2006/05/22 14:32:16, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Ignore, Laugh, Fight, Win
This quote is ruined for me by association with Robbie William's screechtastic single "First they (find another station quick)". However the quote obviously doesn't apply to ID. There have been numerous rounds of laughing and losing to both scientists and lawyers - However, as sometimes, Ghandi comes to the rescue with an ID-centric quote:
|
| Date: 2006/05/24 11:54:35, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Woody Allen’s Match Point
I don't understand what Dembski is getting at here. I for one, have never heard a non-fictional atheist try to justify murder this way. However it is a much loved argument used by creationists and attributed to atheists, despite our frequent attempts to explain to them that get our morality from living with other human beings. He should be praising Allen for helping to spread the lie for him/them. Thinks.... Would ID supporters sink to those sorts of depths? I wonder...
|
| Date: 2006/05/25 12:32:18, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||||||
The whole Kevin Padian thing was started by Denski. The posts no longer appear (If I were to be charitable, I would assume that it's because KP asked Denski to remove the offending comments. If I were to be less charitable, based on the two-faced 'apology' I might have assumed it was removed as part of the cover up of embarrassing mistakes. Threads 1109, 1113 and 1114 are no more; PT was mostly down that day; and there was no anti-blackhole mirror back then; so I have no quotes for this one. IIRC, it was all based upon the allegation that an observation that an audience was largely "young, asian and fundamentalist" was the same thing as saying "All asians are young fundamentalists" or something, although it wasn't spelled out quite like that. He just observed that it was somehow "racist" and left the mob to determine the finer detail.
To which Denski comments:
DaveTard is not OT:
|
| Date: 2006/05/25 13:09:38, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
You guys need to buy yourselves some decent irony meters. They are very expensive and they tend to explode after only a few seconds at UD, so if you rely on them too much you'll never have spare cash for anything else. Ok, maybe the manfacturers should go to Saatchi & " for something more catchy. The point is, most of great_ape's posts don't seem to be toeing the party line. I think he's having a gentle dig. edit: towing->toeing |
| Date: 2006/05/29 13:17:28, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
'Tard is right. Notice the peak in the blue region - most of the light received from the sun is in the blue region too - that's why the sky is blue (I can't find an appropriate smiley which shows how sarky I'm being here, could you do something about that Wesley?) Also note: this graph was produced by people who are part of a conspiracy. It appears to show aborption trailing off at the periphery when in actual fact it, it jumps back to about 50% for all values outside the visible range, bringing up the average (searches for smiley again, D@mn! ). |
| Date: 2006/05/29 13:56:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
No, he could have been some sort of omnipotent omnibenevolent, omniscient super-alien of infinite grace who lives inside this universe, which he designed to be just right for him, and subsequently saw to be good - I mean, er, you're a boring panda, consider yourself triple-plus-and-then-some banned (again). |
| Date: 2006/05/29 14:39:40, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
It would be blue. However, there's so much blue that the blue receptors in the eye are completly overloaded. The non-blueness of the sun is a side effect of the human visual system, er, and and cameras and such. (For non-Brits, sarky = sarcastic, pertaining to a low form of mocking 'wit', which we Brits sometimes confuse with irony). Smilies etc. |
| Date: 2006/05/29 14:49:28, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
priceless. Everything is 100% efficient if you use the right definition. |
| Date: 2006/05/30 12:28:02, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I agree. But once again, it's one of those that Denseski posts without adding any comment of his own. He gets to say "Id proves that people who don't believe in God are wrong wrong wrong" under the classification "intelligent design" and have his morons whoop and ye-hah and generally agree, but then he can still later say that "ID doesn't take a stance on who the designer is, we are not responsible for what Jerry Bergman says". |
| Date: 2006/06/01 12:48:30, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
This guy doesn't approach the reported remarks the same way as Dembsi
to which Denski starts inventing racist motivation behind the remark, and podcast fundy says
edit: I thought in the original, Padian was remarking that his current audience was mainly "young", "asian" and "fundamentalist". PF is reporting a version that's been summarised by a different number of editors. |
| Date: 2006/06/06 12:58:41, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Hi, Wesley, whose mailbox runneth over. I have never voted in a poll. If I simply look at the results, I am informed that I have already voted. Which one got my vote in each case - the first one on the list? |
| Date: 2006/06/07 16:17:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/06/08 15:27:53, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Sneaky. Now they are trying to kill evolution once and for all by associating it with themselves. We're doomed, doomed I tell you. |
| Date: 2006/06/09 15:39:59, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
English (fails to impress) German (could do better). Other (can order beer) |
| Date: 2006/06/22 13:38:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
Uncommon Descent Sees Record High Traffic in May No big surprise there. That was the month of the Padian affair. Dembski had to issue a public apology to someone he(*) had libelled, and disappear some threads related to it. Public Retraction and Apology to Kevin Padian,disappeared topic 1114,disappeared topic 1113 May was also the month of the laughable photoshop forgery of marines praying to The Designer, and a major spam attack (which I suspect may have inflated the posting statistics). UD thrives on making itself a laughing stock. Last time Otto wrote on this subject, he boasted about how they boost the stats by favoring sensationalist crap over academic substance:
Congratulations to Uncommon Descent Bloggers! - Steve_h, a member if the Fangclub. (*) edit: they->he, disappered->disappered, topc->topic , add space after period. |
| Date: 2006/06/24 15:33:49, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
In an OT quote-mining comment at "Uncommon Descent Sees Record High Traffic in May, Scordova reports:
Despite scordova's "hear hear" remark, there is no mention of Demsbki or his sychophatic following at UD. PZ Myers, Dawkins and Stephen Jones are mentioned among the good guys but the nearest thing to a mention of UD is
|
| Date: 2006/06/30 06:32:16, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
One prediction of front loading is that if you keep cloned bacteria isolated from each other but otherwise in identical conditions they will all experience roughly the same mutations in roughly the same order. Naturally, no so-called scientist who is part of the conspiracy would ever dare to do the experiment. Front loading also explains why certain identical features are found in diverse places in the 'tree of life'. Conventional Darwinism can't explain that so they normally just deny that it happens. The common ancester was a single celled organism which had dna code for producing high intelligence and opposable thumbs, but that code usually only gets executed if you are human. However, if you zap the right 'call' instruction into the dna of a bacterium (or change the call address of an existing one) it will instantly acquire those traits. See, for example, the famous picture of a mouse suddenly spouting a human ear. That set the Darwinists in a real panic and they had to invent a rather implausible alternative explanation. |
| Date: 2006/07/03 07:12:25, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Peters is still slighty better qualified to speak on biological matters than the average Joe riding the Riesel-Waco omnibus. |
| Date: 2006/07/08 07:16:32, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Anyone else think it's ironic that the UD folk are identifying Ken Miller as a closit ID supporter so soon after they accused him of lying under oath? |
| Date: 2006/07/08 07:34:45, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Ann Coulter weighs in on Darwinism
Ann Coulter’s “Flatulent Raccoon Theory” — and my role in it
Q) Does this mean we should ask about the origins of the designer? A) You're banned. |
| Date: 2006/07/20 12:59:33, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||
I added the following
If it somehow makes it through, I imagine an obvious comeback would be "but they are not biological systems". The question didn't specify biological. * "Precious thing" is a reference to "the league of gentlemen" but that's not important. |
| Date: 2006/07/22 12:12:47, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
We've gotta stop pulling things out. Sadly, not an issue for me these days. |
| Date: 2006/07/22 16:45:00, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Is there any way to search for all my own comments? - or those of another person? I seem to recall seeing the posting history of a particular naughty person one time, but maybe that was recreated manually, or maybe I subsequently constructed a false memory, as can happen. |
| Date: 2006/07/23 05:50:26, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScott still seems to be infuencing things via William Dembski's subconscious:
or maybe he was inspired by this ID classic from DougMoran:The Problem of Improvable Design |
| Date: 2006/07/24 11:14:23, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Wesley, the bit about "quantum computation" being a natural tool (cue jokes), and probably some of the others, is a little counter-intuitive to me. Can you elaborate on that? The appearance(?) that someone at UD might have a valid point is disturbing me somewhat. Has this has already been dealt with somewhere? |
| Date: 2006/07/24 13:23:59, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Meanwhile, despite our initial doubts, the ID Research wiki continues to go from strength to strength. |
| Date: 2006/08/11 15:26:49, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
This just in from a respected colleage:
Filed under: Intelligent Design — William Dembski @ 5:126 am Comments (0) |
| Date: 2006/08/19 15:48:45, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I'd be happy to chip in with an insubstantial donation for a new server. It would be nice if you could indicate how much is needed and how long into the future at current rates the running costs are covered etc. as I wouldn't want to be subsidising a life of luxury. I also often get the "text only version". I guess that's because an attempt to retrieve the images and stylesheet, have failed. Have you been under DoS attack, or has your "declining popularity" since Kitzmiller reversed? |
| Date: 2006/08/20 13:40:54, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Ditto. Please don't spend it all on beer and prostitutes unless you really have to. |
| Date: 2006/08/22 10:47:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Of course Evolution gives over half a billion. Narrowing down to Evolution+Biology a mere 87.7 million - of which .edu sites feature prominently in the first few pages. "Intelligent Design" + "Biology" still gives a whopping 11.5 million but no .edu sites near the top (mainly the usual suspects and newspapers). The first result on that search is to "Intelligent Design Theory: Why it Matters" (See almost any topic started by D.o'L recently to see the irony). Levelling the field on T7's second query: "Theory Of Evolution" 3.3 Million "Theory Of Intelligent Design" 0.147 million Of those .147, Skeptics Dictionary and the Flying Spaghetti Monster ranked above all of the usual suspects bar one (The Intelligent Design network). edit: Narrowing->levelling |
| Date: 2006/08/22 12:32:31, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
That's not fair. Much research has been done and the algorithm has been modified accordingly:
|
| Date: 2006/08/22 16:17:31, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Dembski isn't as good as banning people as I remember. I think he should get DaveScot back in as the banning Tsar. The DaveScot who is just an uninformed author at UD and and commenter at UDOJ just isn't funny enough when he isn't the official banninator of the ID movement. |
| Date: 2006/08/26 10:46:19, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
| Date: 2006/08/27 11:18:40, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Except now it seems that it was creationists who were responsible for all of the theories that fuelled the genocide and communism. Darwin was only a plagiarist. However, if Hitler ever plagiarised anyone, that was because of Darwin. ;-)
I expect Blyth did that as well. Further proof that Hitler was a Blythist / Creationist who would no doubt be an ID supporter if he were around today. |
| Date: 2006/09/13 15:58:12, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Doh! I never could tell the difference between a rhetorical flourish and making up stuff about your opponents to make them look bad. Also, BarryA removed a comment of mine on that thread consisting only of remarks he had made and which had no "whiney" additions of my own. I wonder at which point those words became unacceptable. |
| Date: 2006/09/13 16:26:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Someone said they like juxtaposed quotes:
First quote from UD/1600 yesterday. Second from http://alanfox.blogspot.com/2006/09/ken-miller-is-creationist.html three days ago. So are Dembski's decisions sound or aren't they? BTW, following the link to Strangelove's/Cogzoid's first banning, it looks like he was banned for hypocrisy: Criticising sarcasm while employing it at the same time. Edit: apostrophe added. |
| Date: 2006/09/21 08:03:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
1) Mr Christopher has already suggested blocking google from buud. Then it could not interpret it as a link farm and UD could not be damaged (traffic-wise). 2) How about changing it so that only _modified_ articles and comments are shown. I'm sure that would come under 'fair use' -especially as one grateful commenter recently pointed out:
|
| Date: 2006/09/21 08:24:33, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Also, you could have any links back to UD generated by javascript (a trick many sites use to hide email addresses from robots) - just show the post number (eg UD<nnnn>) as text. |
| Date: 2006/09/23 09:02:01, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Thanks Carlsonjok, it's nice to have one's efforts appreciated. Never did get a reply. |
| Date: 2006/09/28 12:32:27, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
|
EDIT: Update. Apologies to DaveScot. My post showed up with an apology. I just posted this to UD - it didn't show up. I don't consider it a serious mistake on DS's part, but it is a factual error, and he was just using 'irksome' 'factual errors' as an excuse to threaten Carl Sachs with bannification. I guess I've been identified as a spammer since I pointed out light-heartedly a few days ago that Denyse O'Leary had explained what the point of her post was twice with two conflicting explanations. DaveScot http://www.uncommondescent.com/archives/1657#comments :
I'll get me coat. |
| Date: 2006/10/01 10:55:20, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
At Overwhelming'dence, the "LATEST NEWS" page (http://www.overwhelmingevidence.com/oe/news) bears a striking resemblence to UD's front page. Don't those high school students realise that Google may see this as a "link farm", thus causing real damage to UD? I was going to comment on this at UD but decided to read the recent comments first:
"similar entities"? Entities owned and run by the same people. |
| Date: 2006/10/01 15:44:21, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Steve Story: wow you've got 30 points and are in joint second place on the highest users board. I think someone will have to step in and restore you to your rightful place before long. I'm sure the points system will be abused -- there's no way of telling if points are from genuine users or from some sort of bespectacled points tzar, or his research assistant (delete as appropriate). Maybe user's should be required to enter a anonymous reason for their plus/minus-ing activitities, that will force him (or him - delete as approproate) to be creative at least. I will not be registering. I'm sure most of the contributors are forty-somethings, but I think there is something 'icky' about representing oneself as a schoolkid at my time of life. |
| Date: 2006/10/03 12:11:42, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I didn't realise Gil banned anyone. DS banned Tom English and Scott is looking hard for an excuse to ban Karl Pfluger (and is currently insisting that he demonstrate that "Avida proves that blind, comatose, natural mechanisms can build highly complex, specified, cellular machinery which requires all of it’s components simultaneously to function" when what Karl actually said was that "Avida has shown that a Darwinian process is capable of producing irreducible complexity." Gil has retreated to proclaiming that his sound drubbing at the hands of Tom and co. shows how much he has hurt them, and countered with an ID standard argument from personal incredulity (this time about bat evolution), and the guys are rallying around to help rebuild his ego. |
| Date: 2006/10/09 14:45:57, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
In Memoriam: Thread 1695 "The Real intelligent Designer" quietly blackholed on 9-oct-2006. Leaves some orphaned links on the 'recent comments' page (for the time being). I honestly have very little recall of the original post despite commenting on one of the comments. Wasn't it by ID's pre-eminent research assistant? In the interests of balance, I should take this opportunity to criticise Richard Dawkins (or his pet web master) for pulling the embarrassing 'God is testable' article (frowns). edit: relocated apostrophe. edit edit: opportunity- IC->ID. Am not going to read whatever results this time. |
| Date: 2006/10/10 12:57:51, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
Pete Chadwell (TRoutMac) has some articles featured at the DI and is also referenced here http://www.evolutionnews.org/2006....ll.html
|
| Date: 2006/10/10 15:06:05, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
UD: iIllustra Media: Case for a Creator Documentary
Surely they mean cdesigner? |
| Date: 2006/10/28 11:46:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
You couldn't be more wrong. Sam Chen (SChen24, top contributor and moderator/banninator) features in a new podcast about OD at IdTheFuture in which he tells us among other things of his dislike for supression of discussion, and about recent activity at OD. [Disclaimer: All quotes are slightly paraphrased and have bits missing - I don't do transcripts, I type too slowly and I overshoot most of my attempts to wind back to the bits I missed, then I get bored and frustrated. I don't think I have changed any of the meaning though]
Some notes: Despite having nearly a hundred active members, the "users by points" link shows just over thirty, including admin, wmad and test54 (which I guess are there for testing of the points system during development as they are all on negative points). Maybe that means they've banned twice as many as they have allowed to stay. He say's anyone can contribute, not just students, so I take back the remarks I made when SteveStory registered. It also means TRoutMac isn't breaking any rules. Also I can't find any mention of Carson Holloway on the site (Or just Carson or Holloway. I've a feeling Sam Chen was fleshing out the content on the fly. |
| Date: 2006/10/30 16:32:29, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/11/08 16:32:11, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Just been reading Emkay's explanation of the trinity. I don't want to be accused of bringing religion to UD so I thought I'd add a few additional trinities here: Human senses: Taste, Touch, sight, hearing, and er #### #### ####.^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^W Human Senses: Chemical (taste, smell), Remote (Sight, Hearing), Contact (Touch) Solar System: Sun, things that orbit the sun (Planets, Planetoids, asteroids, Comets), and things that orbit the things that orbit the sun (Moons). Porridge: too hot, too cold, just right. Things for filling a god-shaped hole: Power, Sex and Money. (Emkay had them down as bad things but failed to note they are a trinity) Sexuality: Heterosexual, Homosexual, Bisexual. Relationship (1): Husband, wife, and child Relationship (2): Husband, wife and girlfriend Relationship (3): Husband, wife and milkman Recreation: Sex, Drugs and Rock'n'Roll Payment details: Cash, Card or Cheque Soccer: Attack, Defence, Midfield. Soccer: First Half, Second Half, Extra Time. Soccer: Normal Time, Extra Time, Penalties. Soccer: Win, Draw, Lose Soccer: Home, Away, Neutral Venue. Soccer: Players, Fans, Officials. Types of taste: Any three from {Sweet, Sour, Salty, Bitter, Astringent, Pungent and Umami} Bag of marbles: First marble, Second marble and the Rest of the marbles ^W^W^W^W^W^W^W^W Bag of marbles: The Bag, The Marbles and the, er, Containment. Certain Things: "Death", "And", "Taxes". Soccer (which we call "cricket" in England) seems to crop up quite often. God must be a fan. |
| Date: 2006/11/08 16:48:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Don't tell Mourinho that. |
| Date: 2006/11/22 16:44:17, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Actually it's worse than that: Dembski not smart. A very large proportion (89%) of the "dembski smart" matches are qualified using "not". It turns out that Demsbki is objectively less than 1% smart. ;- |
| Date: 2006/11/22 18:11:19, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
It's very OT but ... One of the things that spoiled the last two seasons of TV's "24" was that every time I saw Jack Bauer's love interest, Audrey Raines (played by Kim Raver), I couldn't help but think of William Dembski -- every single bloody time. Anyway, I just used google to find "24", then "Kim Raver" and, with the help of "google images", several pics of her, and I've convinced myself that they are, in fact, different people. Now if there should ever be another series of "24" and he is not in it, I will enjoy it just that little bit more. (I thought about doing a "private-eye" style "lookalikes" feature where side by side images have their captions "accidentally" interchanged, but after due consideration I realised that I couldn't be arsed) |
| Date: 2006/11/27 15:25:55, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Maybe all of the contributors are busy writing articles for their UncommonlyDense4Kids site. |
| Date: 2006/11/27 18:42:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||||||||
1a. Use the "quote" button, shown at the top-right of every comment, to quote an entire post. 1b. Enter some text in the first window, cut bits from the quote which you don't want in the second window. 1c. Preview - you see a preview of your post. The first window is now modified to include the quoted text in quote tags. You can now proceed exactly as if you'd entered the quote using method 2. Normally I preview again at this point. Method 2. 2. and/or enter quoted text between
where x is normally the poster name, and y the date. You can write anything in place of x and y but they must be seperated by a comma. (see page one of this thread for some convoluted examples).
It asks you for an email address. The email address will be displayed an an email link by dressing it up with bb stuff which eventually gets replaced by html stuff. The stuff gets written at the end of the input area, not at the current cursor position so you may have to cut and paste. Alternatively click not the button but enter
I don't know if 4 & 5 are possible. Answers to 1,2, and 3 have so far proved dissapointing in regards to improving wealth and influence
edit: the bit about CODE was completely wrong. |
| Date: 2006/11/27 18:52:48, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Using guesswork and preview
I couldn't get level 2 items using
Wesley, what software are you using? Is there a version freely available for inspection somewhere? |
| Date: 2006/11/27 19:00:37, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I don't know about using other fonts etc, but if you see any examples (which I haven't), you could always try using the "quote" button to see how the original poster did it. (edit) However the "posting abilities" section suggests that some users (Wes, Steve Story) could be entering plain HTML which would give them full control over the appearence of thier posts (boo hiss etc). (/edit) |
| Date: 2006/11/28 21:14:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Wasn't that Phillip E. Johnson using the battleship Titanic metaphor, Lou(*)? (How to sink a battleship) * or whoever. |
| Date: 2006/11/29 17:34:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/11/29 19:43:19, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/11/30 15:29:17, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I guess it does. Sorry, Lou and Kristine. |
| Date: 2006/12/01 13:03:57, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
I found a ib301.zip by guessing at filenames: A list
red otherBig non-proportional font MMMMMMMMMM. Thanks for the correction, Scary
Comic sans Edit: corrected font name as per the following post. |
| Date: 2006/12/03 21:13:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
It looks like talk.origins has been hacked. AFAICT this site has never contained any advertising except a link to the panda's thumb for years. See www.archive.org for snapshots of it in the past. I would advise everyone to be on the lookout for anyone with any or all of the following attributes: a grudge against Wesley; a history of threatening him or his sites with hacking; personal experience of the damage that delisting can cause; and an inability to suppress his or her glee at the delisting. added for legal reasons. |
| Date: 2006/12/04 18:34:25, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
The page about the delisting of talkorigins has been removed. There is a statement to that effect by Davescot on Dembski's 'Schadenfreude' post. Nothing wrong with that, the post didn't just dissappear without trace as was so often the case. I was just about to make a copy for the record of that page because the last thing on it was DaveScot asking if anyone would be willing to trawl through www.archive.org for evidence of hacking in The archive might have provided neutral confirmation of rewriting of history, which is a common occurence at UD, but as it was blocked, Wesley set up his own archive, BUUD, so that some evidence of deletions would remain. After the UD delisting DaveScot complained that BUUD might have been responsible because the guys at google may have seen it as an attempt by UD to manipulate thier google page rank and threated to set the lawyers on Wesley. Wesley being a classy fellow, stopped BUUD because it seemed to be the right thing at the time. There was also a comment in the "talkorigins delisted" thread to the effect that Google had informed DaveScot that BUUD would not have been a factor in their delisting and he retracted his ealier claim and mentioned an email that he sent to Wesley. Does this mean BUUD could be restarted? Not that Wesley would necessarily want to of course. |
| Date: 2006/12/04 18:45:22, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| I should have added: Thanks to William Dembski for his call for restraint and expressing a wish for talkorigins to be relisted as soon as possible. |
| Date: 2006/12/11 16:34:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Q1) How does consciousness work? A) It is designed. Q2) How does an atom bomb work? A) It is designed. Q3) How does my computer work? A) Designed, designed, designed, designed. Q4) Why do my knees and back hurt? A) They are well designed. The unrelated discipline of religion, gives additional insights to Q4: Without any challenges, the world would be hideously boring and meaningless (Gil on self-refuting argumentation). Hmm, isn't he describing Heaven there? |
| Date: 2006/12/13 19:39:24, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I'm just surprised that Hitler and Stalin weren't included. Those UD (sic) adolescents must be slipping. |
| Date: 2006/12/13 22:22:59, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I should add. I'm a closet ID supporter, I think Dr Dr Dembski is just great and that blacks, homos, democrats and people who understand either information theory or the second law of thermodynamics should be brutally XXXXXXXXXX in the name of the my favored deity (or alien). Edit: XXXX this XXXXXXX censorship software. Ha ha ha. No one will fall for this obvious trollery. I'm just going to kick up a big fuss about it and act as if everyone did. |
| Date: 2006/12/15 21:17:17, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2006/12/21 19:17:16, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Originally Nottm, UK (Go magpies), then London (Go Smoke FC), Swindon (Go Robins), Rüegsauschachen, Switzerland (er, yay! ) and now near Basel, Switzerland (Hopp FCB). |
| Date: 2006/12/28 18:01:26, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
This is absolutely disgraceful! This UD person is seriously advocating the mass killing of evolutionists using guns and bombs, and is possibly considering nuking Oxford because it's where Dawkins lives. It's almost as bad as the fart animation. Someone should get on to homeland security first thing in the morning. [/disgustedshockhorror] |
| Date: 2006/12/28 18:16:13, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| and what's more, the moderators, who usually act so swiftly to ban commenters for polite informed criticism of ID, stand idly by and allow this hateful incitement to go unchallenged. Unbelievable. (Wrings hands) |
| Date: 2007/01/12 06:13:34, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I don't think DS is contradicting himself in the above (*)example. He sometimes argues that according to RM+NS, anything not immediately useful will be lost. From his own perspective, there are designed mechanisms which allow stuff to be conserved indefinitely (eg for front loading of human beings into a much more complex single celled ancestor). Edit: (*) New page. D'oh! |
| Date: 2007/01/12 15:35:06, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
He argues that if RM+NS is correct, things not immediately useful would be lost. Some stuff with no apparrent immediate use does not get lost, therefore RM+NS is wrong. Designed things are an exception, because there could also be other mechanisms designed to preserve stuff that survives; to delete stuff that doesn't survive; and to modify stuff when the time is right. IDers do not need to find out what they are because that sort of detail is only valued by people with nothing better to do in the soon to be closed down biology departments. |
| Date: 2007/01/12 21:32:44, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
For a limited time only, a slightly more intelligent version of uncommonly dense and no one banned so far. EDIT: s/tad/tard |
| Date: 2007/01/21 18:33:24, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Well, it's taken some time, but what finally seems to have tipped the balance was me pointing out that html tags inserted into the title of a post, were left unmatched after the thread title was abbreviated for use in the previous-thread link at the top of the page. Those comments no longer appear, although an ID friendly comment about fire investigators' shameful disregard for the non-material were allowed to stand. :-) edit: Also Dave, I found another bug. I still get the comment box despite being banned. Of course, I will respect your wishes and not add any more comments until, for example, a future regime, indicates that polite disagreement is, for the time being at least, tolerated. edit1: added prev para. edit2: added "edit:" |
| Date: 2007/01/21 19:16:54, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Incidentally, you seem to have been a little muted on the evolutionary psychology threads. Can we expect a few insights in the foreseeable future? |
| Date: 2007/01/21 19:32:39, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| AIR, DS has used ID to determine the cause of a fire on one occasion at least: he figured that readers of the panda's thumb web site had set fire to a church, but it later turned out that the instigators were local christian thugs. Anyone still got the link handy? |
| Date: 2007/01/21 21:36:31, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Perversly some people are able to distinguish between "Fire Marshalls do not consider supernatural causes" and "Fire marshalls should only consider supernatural causes". Although not at UD where such people are banned. PS. Thanks Carlsonjok. Someone mentioned this before. Maybe it was you. IAC I am pleased to have made an impression sometime, someplace, somewhere (*), and can return slightly invigorated to my otherwise pointless designerless existence. ed: |
| Date: 2007/01/25 14:15:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
There are other valid alternatives. A common ancester of A and B would need DNA for A and B. Therefore B may inherit some DNA that was intended for a distant descendant of A (or C or D or ...) intended to be used in a very particular situation which may never actually arise. In such cases, this DNA could be preserved indefinitely by carefully crafted information preservation mechanisms or simply be allowed to gradually degenerate into junk. As there's a whole lot of DNA required by creatures which are not B, there could be a lot of junk. Conservative estimates vary between 0 and 100% although with over 700 of the world's best and bravest scientists mulling things over in thier spare time, that could get narrowed down very quickly. A prediction: Front-loading predicts that all of the so-called junk DNA is being used in a subtle way, or was used by an ancestor in the past, or could be used by a descendant in the future, or could be present because it could one day be used in a different branch of the tree of life by a totally different hypothetical creature, in some hypothetical situation beyond our understanding, or could just be accumulated junk. |
| Date: 2007/01/25 19:47:42, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Sorry to nitpick but the noodlepack-mesobrainstalk interface is known to be IC and can never be transversed unless the sparky angelhair is "in knip". Other than that, I think you've nailed it. |
| Date: 2007/01/27 18:16:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Difficult to be believe - he really is that 'ard! edit: i before e. |
| Date: 2007/02/15 15:30:52, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I get a different result (9.8%) for the second calculation by using 1 - odds of all happening on different days. However, my combinatorics never reached the dizzying height of 'rusty', so I could be wrong. |
| Date: 2007/02/16 15:33:56, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Another poster at UD getting everything bass ackwards
|
| Date: 2007/02/17 06:53:28, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Definition of science extended to include 'Gut Feeling' at UD.
|
| Date: 2007/02/19 15:26:26, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
But at least we don't have to worry about the increased temperature melting the ice caps, causing desertification and playing havoc with the weather. All the incoming energy (which is another word for temperature, IIRC) will be simply be lost turning ice into water and water into vapour and dumped into a more energetic atmosphere. |
| Date: 2007/02/20 09:21:36, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I wasn't being entirely serious. It was a reference to DaveScot insisting that (other) people check their facts before posting.
|
| Date: 2007/02/21 13:19:48, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
So if Dembski ever realizes his dream of "sternberging" all of the biologists at his university (apart from maybe Sternberg if he's there), he will actually be damaging ID research. |
| Date: 2007/03/02 10:24:59, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
(Typos mine) Extract from Dembsk's proposal for a book on real ID that he would write for the TF. I suspect this chapter was missing from the book on ID-lite that he actually delivered. They should ask for their money back. |
| Date: 2007/03/04 11:51:28, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
Not to forget: typically dishonest? Check. PZ added an update to his post pointing out that Luskin had dishonestly mangled the "quote" by joining two separate comments from different websites months apart. He did this a day before DS copied PZ's post to UD. It was the only bit missing from DS's copy. No wonder PZ gets a little miffed sometimes.
|
| Date: 2007/03/04 19:46:13, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Bwahahaha. From a computer's point of view there was never any difference between producing a list of the most populular "titles" and the most popular "cryptic numbers". If you want to convert a "cryptic number" to a title enter something like http://www.uncommondescent/archives/2125 and see how the url morphs into something more tard-friendly or just look in the database (assuming you are some sort of computer dell millionaire whizz-entity). |
| Date: 2007/03/04 20:42:11, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
For the unitiated (and DS) here's a quick explanation about how the "cryptic numbers" at UD work. Each time a new topic/post is initiated at UD it is assigned a unique number. The numbers begin at 1 and increase by one for each new post. It is an entirely trivial procedure to convert any number between 2 and (currently) 2129 to a corresponding title (although post 1-n (eg 10) are generally taken by a wordpress "intro" post and test posts by the site's admin which are subsequently deleted.) One disadvantage of this system is that 'missing' posts become conspicuous by thier absence which is not a good thing if your site wishes to "disapear" embarrassing posts. Any indivudual missing number may be explained as a "draft post which didn't reach the high standards expected of the site" or in some cases a post which was dissappeared because it was so obviously full of crap that even your typical ID supporter would smell a rat. A snake oil salesman (motto: Caveat Emptor" = let the buyer beware) would no doubt switch to a non-numeric system. |
| Date: 2007/03/05 16:52:31, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I copied the last bit of the signup URL of wikipedia to the end of a conservapedia one and got this:
|
| Date: 2007/03/05 17:02:47, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Prediction: If you clone bacteria, split them into several groups and then keep them under identical conditions, all of them will experience the same mutations in the same order. This has been tested once, on mushrooms, in Dave's basement lab, but didn't yield the expected result. |
| Date: 2007/03/05 17:37:12, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
From conservapedia: News:
from the grauniad:
|
| Date: 2007/03/05 17:59:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Also from the News section:
That wired news is almost entirely about how everyone is taking the piss. However at the end
The entry on the arboreal octopus reads:
|
| Date: 2007/03/09 06:45:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Barry talks about his piles
Shah shah shah (*). They won't be using ID to further the research will they? To get any further they would have to resort to materialist science. Any conclusion they 'tentatively' (yeah right) reached was foregone - as they had almost certainly concluded all life was designed long before they'd even heard of ID. (*) I think it means "Why am I cursed with this idiot of a grandson". |
| Date: 2007/03/11 10:43:24, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
[quote=Kristine,Mar. 11 2007,08:08]
He sold lots of books, invented CSI (*) and farted like a god. (High praise Dembski-style) edit: (*) independantly of course. |
| Date: 2007/03/16 12:25:33, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I expect some of his payloads drift off into space, because if you can't predict exactly where on Earth something will land, it is equally likely to miss it completely. His computer models may improve a little, if he stands his computer in front of a big fan so that it also gets buffeted by high winds. |
| Date: 2007/03/17 12:24:21, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
[quote=J-Dog,Mar. 16 2007,21:00]
I assumed that you were talking about the old Dodg'em post (archives/1660). Gil and DS were criticised there by people not immediately banned. It was too soon after DS's return to the fold. AFAICT, all the comments have remained unchanged since I made my copy in october last year. They are still all there. Shortly afterwards of course, Gil tried to move the discussion to his home turf, Parachute drops He and DS received further drubbings from Karl Pfluger and Tom English. Gil tried to make out that his previous post was a joke (maybe he was just taking the piss out of creationists or something?) and then the thead mutated into a discussion about simulation of electronics which caused much amusement here. And then the bannings started. |
| Date: 2007/03/18 10:39:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScot
I've pointed this out before but "Acts of God" does not mean "non-material cause" it means "Events that couldn't have been prevented by human foresight and for which no human could be held responsible". A bolt of lightning may be termed "Act of God" in an insurance contract, but it actually has a material cause. There's nothing in that Google Scholar search to suggest otherwise. Normally DS would verify that using wikipedia and then try and find some special case in which he might have been right, or write a new post claiming he knew that all along. I'm surprised he could just repeat something so obviously wrong. |
| Date: 2007/03/20 17:33:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I don't think he's banned at Pharyngula. PZ has a complete list of the banned here. Maybe DS considers the certainty that he would run away from PZ very quickly and being banned as roughly equivalent. I vaguely recall PZ specifically mentioning DS as one who isn't banned, but I couldn't find it in the first 2-3 minutes of searching and gave up. |
| Date: 2007/03/25 10:42:37, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
You are right. She doesn't seem to have followed the link to redstaterabble] where Dembski's "mistake" was dealt with.
Instead she argues that Darwin must have been a racist because he was a British Toff, which is racist in itself. But if all "British Toffs" were racist as she claims, why single out Darwin for special treatment? edit: Bob O''H, did you try escaping the apostrophe with a second apostrophe? Databases don't usually escape with backslashes. |
| Date: 2007/03/27 12:23:10, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Of course at UD they would never stoop to insults over something like this:
|
| Date: 2007/03/27 17:43:45, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Hexagonal patterns are seen in snowflakes. They are not designed. Hexagon patterns are also made by bees. Bees are not particularly intelligent, however bees are designed. Therefore hexagonal patterns can be second order design. Hexagon patterns in crop 'circles' are designed. Therefore Saturn's hexagon is not designed, indirectly designed and designed. HTH. |
| Date: 2007/04/03 14:27:10, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Dembski writes
Of course ID proponents would never do that. Oops, no wait, the whole thing was just an excuse to add "and PZ is the lowest of the low".
|
| Date: 2007/04/03 16:20:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
He didn't say there are morons on the ID side - merely that evolution supporters (presumably wrongly) believe that there are. However he does believe that a significant proportion of the evo side are morons (and name callers) who can't read books written for grown ups . But that doesn't make him a hypocrite. |
| Date: 2007/04/03 18:09:24, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I think you could be over-reacting a little Kristine. Calm down and count to 10 (thousand if necessary). Leave the drinking to people like me and SteveStory who become more attractive and sophisticated after a few percents. There have always been opinionated people and people who get a bit carried away with the invective but I don't think they are all out to crush us all under some jackboot or other. (OK, there's DS with his "nudge nudge, wink wink, I wouldn't be surprised if the Kitzmiller pupils got beaten up" message to the kids at Dover and his "maybe PZ will beat himself up" hint to any thugs in Morris. But DS has always been a bit special ) :) |
| Date: 2007/04/07 17:42:08, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Parody site owner (possibly Dembski under an assumed name) promoted to contributor status at uncommondescent.com. Is this the best the ID movement has? Galapagos Finch, Galapagos Finch, William Dembski, William Dembski, Demsbki/Finch |
| Date: 2007/04/09 10:57:35, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| tribune7: Global warming failed to predict earthquake |
| Date: 2007/04/11 16:28:57, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
TTBOMK, Fross had always been on our side. (s)he has 43 posts here, the last one being on page 466. |
| Date: 2007/04/22 15:21:15, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2007/04/25 17:33:37, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
|
Incidentally, my inspiration for the snowflake in stones or crop-circles questions are these messages from DS. http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....circles
and http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....vidence
Without mentioning the first post, I made the following point in the second thread, hoping to get banned for putting words into DaveScot's mouth which was one of his favorite grounds for bannination back then.
but he didn't bite - or respond in any way. |
| Date: 2007/05/07 16:02:02, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....g-bangs
IIRC, "Agnostic" Dave has argued against 3 and 4 at UD. Why is he now repeating them without comment? Secondly, how does agnosticism deal with these questions? Or for that matter theism? God breathed life into dust and spoke the universe into being, FFS? Meanwhile on the Denyse version of this post bornagain77 informs us that a) Scientists don't know in which areas of the brain memory resides. b) when they block out those areas (which they don't know about), the memories become more vivid. edit: and if bornagain77 is reading this. Can you explain how brain damage has caused many people to be incapable of remembering things that happened a few minutes ago but they have no problems remembering stuff from several years back? For others: does the loss of memory due to blow to head thing beloved of all TV script writers ever really happen? |
| Date: 2007/05/29 20:21:33, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
The graphs don't show total CO2, only increase in CO2. Sometimes the increase can be more then double the previous year's increase or less than half of it. However it's always an increase (never a decrease) and generally an increasing increase. I think DS is trying to portray a smaller increase some years as an absolute decrease, rather than a reduced increase. I hope that makes some sort of sense. AIUI, The report from which the graphs are taken concludes that human activity has contributed rather a lot to the net warming influence since 1750. edit: Do'h! I just read Richard Simons' post which made the point far more succinctly. |
| Date: 2007/05/31 17:18:50, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| board v. slow. Why board slow? |
| Date: 2007/06/14 20:01:08, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Aye, an' that was just t' swimmin' t' Galapagos part - an' we di'n't have no Richard Dawkins wi' us! |
| Date: 2007/06/29 16:12:51, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
The only one I can think of is this: Public Retraction and Apology to Kevin Padian Strictly speaking though, it wasn't a point about ID/Religion, which would have made it considerably easier for him. Still, he does seem to go on to add a certain amount of "but actually, come to think of it, I was right and you are a bigot" towards the end. Normally "conceding" takes the form of removing the page on which the original point was made and/or banning people. |
| Date: 2007/06/30 14:49:16, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Although we'd call that a quote mine, Slimy would probably prefer to call it a "literature bluff" because he is relying on nobody at UD being capable of following the link or understanding that what was written there does not support his claim. Also, despite his recent repetion of a wrongful accusation of Equivocation against Elsberry and Shallit, he is actually equivocating on two different meanings of "Intelligent Design" here (as many at UD do from time to time, including der der Fartmeister himself) Intelligent Design: People designing things and Intelligent Design: Pseudoscientic claims about Design Detection edits: |
| Date: 2007/07/01 07:39:38, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
He's C&P'd it into at least 5 threads at UD over the last few months - and also to PT and Scienceblogs' EvolutionBlog using a different name. |
| Date: 2007/07/02 17:56:33, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
The newly revitalised and important overwhelmingevidence.com seems to be destined for greatness this time: 4 posts from 4 days ago 3 posts from 3 days ago 2 posts from 2 days ago 1 post from 1 day ago 0 within the last day. Therefore one would expect 1 post deleted tomorrow 2 the day after that 3 the day after that. edit: s/post/comment/g |
| Date: 2007/07/03 07:27:55, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Whoever it is, they have already "demonstrated excellence and courage in research and promotion of intelligent design" so our guys will already be on to them. I don't think possesion of $100 and a book is going to make things any worse for them. |
| Date: 2007/07/04 13:53:23, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
MIT’s Department of Biological Engineering DaveScot
Leaving aside the question of wether a heart bypass operation is a heritable trait or not, everyone at UD was quick to point out that the inheritable traits tinkered into existance by known designers were degenerative ("Proud wolves" to "sick poodles" or wtte). Dembski
This seems to be saying: There is no proof of concept for Intelligent Design as far as origin of life is concerned. |
| Date: 2007/07/05 17:00:20, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Meanwhile, over at Thesciphishow.com, Salvador Cordova is about to present a worked-through example of how to calculate CSI ......... |
| Date: 2007/07/05 18:33:51, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Language!, oldmanintheskydidntdoit. Shame on you! Sal is desperate to settle this issue, but I don't see how he could possibly do it even if just one person, anywhere, is questioning his willingness or ability to do so. Just go buy Demsbki's next book and his last one and the one before that, and all will become clear. |
| Date: 2007/07/05 18:55:27, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Curses! fartmeister.com is already taken! How will my inane ramblings ever become respectable science if things continue as they are!! and ! |
| Date: 2007/07/10 17:50:32, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
You are a slightly disreputable conveyor of pseudoscience to the religiously uninformed. A foundation with more money than sense offers you a wad of cash to produce a book about theology, which is a hobby of yours. Unfortunately, you wish to distance yourself from that for the sake of your book sales and notions of sciencyness. Do you: A) promise them a book on theology, and then write it, B) offer to write them a book on your pet subject which has unfortunately has nothing to do with theology and hope they accept, or C) offer to write a book on theology, but deliver a book on your pet subject and run away with $100,000? Examples of non-credit answers: A & B. |
| Date: 2007/07/26 17:01:29, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Shah, Shah, shah, BarryA. maybe I have a higher opinion of your fellow (Christian or other) projected beings than you do, but I think that most would be horrified rather than pleased to hear about the murder of a fellow human being - even if he did think of things in a different way to them. p.s what happened to DS and global warming? |
| Date: 2007/07/26 18:19:09, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I think this deserves the 10th runner up prize for the anonymous 2007 Salvador Cordova award for mining the essense of a quote if not the actual words. Places one and one to nine reserved for the sponsor, whoever he be, natch. |
| Date: 2007/08/03 16:34:09, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I think I can help out here. Now, you see a Turing machine consists of a tape and/or helix which contains sequences written using a finite alphabet, and a head reads the symbols and uses the current state and a symbol to look up a new state in a lookup table and then move the head backwards or forwards along the tape and/or helix. That's pretty much exactly what a cell does. You can work out the details by reading Minsky 1967, and Demsbki/Behe (passim), or by reading again any of the many detailed explanations I already gave you. If you seriously want spoon feeding with stuff you should know already, you will have to prove your willingness to take my explanations seriously by implementing a simple bubble sort in brainfsck and after that, if you haven't caused any offense, or disappeared to your own thread, and I haven't run away with my fingers in my ears, I will see what I can do. hth slimey steve. |
| Date: 2007/08/03 17:00:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Actually we could have been designed by aliens. They would be living aliens, obviously, but they wouldn't contain complex nano-machines, or fracterial bagelums. They would get thier life, vast intelligence, artistry, sense of justice, and love of guns from simpler arrangements which look complex to the initiated but are just a natural product of chemical and physical laws. I dunno, like, er, snowflakes, or sumfin. That's why global warming is a good thing. We can't let the snowflakes take over. |
| Date: 2007/08/09 07:27:01, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
The last post still in is from 16 July. Three posts later Dembksi announced the new link to Baylor’s fleeting Evolutionary Informatics Lab, www.evolutionaryinformatics.org google: cache:http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/baylors-evolutionary-informatics-lab-better-link/ (Via "latest news" at the ever popular ud4kids site, if anyone wants to try and rescue and other goodies) |
| Date: 2007/08/10 13:32:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
He doesn't volunteer that sort of objection any more (he'd called that a "lie by omission" if it were us), but when pressed by Mark Frank:
|
| Date: 2007/08/12 15:06:20, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
or more recently:
From the second paragraph of the wikipedia entry for von Däniken:
ok, it's not talking about OOL but "Aliens designed Humans" is certainly an ID position. |
| Date: 2007/08/14 03:27:42, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Doesn't he mean "this has nothing to do with religion"? Was there more of this? UD4Kidz only shows up to the fold. Note: some snippage, in order to keep it "fair-use" ;-) edit: I dun added a link |
| Date: 2007/08/14 03:43:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
"If it’s been edited out, it didn’t happen?!" - William Dembski |
| Date: 2007/08/14 18:57:01, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
1. "hate god" is somehow tied to the concept of original sin. 2. Christians have original sin too. 3. Therefore christians have strong feelings about god, which we may refer to as hatred. I.e Christians hate god, Muslims hate god, Buddists hate god, followers of Thor hated god --- everyone alive hates god and everyone dead hated God. So why single out atheists as God-haters when you are clearly a god-hater yourself, God-hater? |
| Date: 2007/08/15 15:50:41, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Heddle: you are using the word "hate" in a way that the majority of english speakers do not. Your version of "hate" does not appear in most dictionaries (if any). Wouldn't it make more sense to use words with widely accepted meanings when dealing with a wide/unknown range of english speakers or to put the words between quotation marks? |
| Date: 2007/08/19 15:01:19, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
There seem to be question marks where UD has changed normal quotation marks to special left and right curly quotation marks (66 and 99) which have codes higher than 127. On page one of this thread, multiple spaces (in a code block) in my comments, have been replaced by a character which looks like an A with a caret (^) symbol over it. ? Testing some german chars: ?????? Those should have been aou and AOU with umlauts. So I guess anything outside of 0x01-0x7F is potentially a problem. |
| Date: 2007/08/20 06:50:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Most of what she writes is just a load of old lox. |
| Date: 2007/08/21 15:23:59, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
Scordova takes Ed to task
Over at Ed's site Andrea observes:
edit: "quote mending" |
| Date: 2007/08/22 07:22:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
O'leary posted churchside, over a month ago that:
Is there anyone not banned tardside who can ask her? |
| Date: 2007/09/03 20:10:56, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
Trying to make sense of the Dembski-Marks-Baylor-UnwittingLabHosts thing to which Dembski relates in a series of flashbacks in no particular order at :http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....owship- (I tried to put the dates in a neutral format, and in more or less the correct order): 1999-2005 Dr Dr Demsbki at Baylor. Booted out. (unspecified) Distinguished Distinguished Proffesor Marks secures a grant from Lifeworks. 06 NOV 2006 Dr Dr Demsbki appointed Senior Research Scientist at Baylor. 04 Dec 2006 Dr Dr Dembski called into Dean's office: "you're not supposed to be here, are you?" 05 Dec 2006 Meeting about Dr Dr Demsbki at Baylors Faculty Senate. Demsbki's position to be revoked. 07 Dec 2006 Dr Dr Demsbki learns his postion is about to br revoked. 07 Dec 2006 Distinguished Distinguised Prof Marks and and another DDP Walter Bradley tried to persuage Dean Kelley to let Dembski stay 08 Dec 2006 Baylor claim to have good reason to terminate the good Dr Dr. He's basically been moonlighting. 08 Dec 2006 (later) Dr Dr Dembski gets email inviting him to collect all of his crap from his desk. 09 Dec 2006 Dembski tries to get subsidised meal from an institution which no longer employs him and is escorted off the premises by security (forcefully I hope :)) 01 Jan 2007 Dembski looks forward to ID-friendly research center at Baylor. Despite the fact that he's not even allowed to eat there anymore. Hasn't he read his own summary ferchrisakes? http://www.uncommondescent.com/darwinism/2007-buckle-your-seat-belts/
02 Jun 2007 Dembski announces the Baylor Informatics Lab, a collaboration of him and Robert Marks at (a university that won't even allow him to eat on their premises). The lab is a virtual entity within the "personal" sub-pages of Robert Marks II (not distinguished professor Marks?). Baylor don't know about it yet. 02 June 2007 Botnik, AKA William Dembski is the first to congratulate Dembski on the new lab.
03 June 2007 Bob O'H first ATBC person to poke fun at informatics lab. 06 Jun 2007 Steve Story reveals that he has had 20 year old girlfriends with D-cups (That doesn't belong here, but, bastard). 12 July 2007 Dembski and Marks nearly eviscerate "The Jesus Tomb", but it turns out they're a tard late -- every else had already been there and done that. Link still http://ecs.baylor.edu/Research/EILab XX July 2007 Demsbki acquires domain name www.evolutionaryinformatics.org. 15 July 2007 A better link to the Informatics lab revealed at UD 16 Jul 2007 RichardHughes notes "Bwahahahahahaha..." 16 Jul 2007 etc. etc. 17 Jul 2007 Albatrosity2 posts picture of Ben Stein (who he?, ed) 20 Jul 2007 Reference to Informatics Lab in Archie Bunker thread 20 Jul 2007 Casey Luskin interviews Robert Marks converning the new Evolitionary Informatics Lab 27 Jul 2007 (O'L) Kelley tell Marks he must remove his (fraudulent) website. ?(SH added Fraudulent because it was) 29 Jul 2007 (O'L) Kelly suggests a meeting, Marks gets a lawyer. 02 Aug 2007 Wesley notes that the "Evolutionary Informatics" group link is dead. 03 (O'L) Kelly removes content from Marks "Baylor" web space which Baylor owns, without asking his consent. 03 Aug 2007 At UD, rrf asks why the informatics link is not working. He/She is Ignored. 04 Aug 2007 At UD, IrishFather42 points out that the Baylor Informatics Link no longer works. He/She is ignored. 08 Aug 2007 At UD, Grayman asks if anyone can shed any light on the non-workingness of the BIL. He/She is Ignored. XX Aug 2007 Slimey Sal ( not his real name), aka Salvador Cordova (not his real name), currently in hiding, attempts to apply for position at Informatics Lab, which everyone else knows has been defunct for some time (at the very best). edits: question marks, Dembski mispellings, Casey mispelled, removed business seminar ref, incorporated O'Leary timeline. "Personal" quoted. "Fraudulent" quoted |
| Date: 2007/09/04 03:23:47, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I know I said "Botnik AKA Dembski" but a thought just occurred to me (Well, it is the first Tuesday of the month): ? Could Botnik, who has just caused some embarrassment with his fake letter, be Joel ?"ID is ?creation in disguise" Borofsky, the world's |
| Date: 2007/09/05 15:57:08, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
The story of how Demsbki was forced to come out of his closet (*) may make it to film.
edit: (*) aka the Baylor Evolutionary Informatics Lab. |
| Date: 2007/09/06 20:44:23, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Maybe that was his policy, but I think he got a bit of talking to and was forced to reconsider unless he wanted to spend the rest of his life in (greater) obscurity at the floating command center. Since then, TTBOMK, DS has made a point of never speaking against big tent denizens who argue about common descent -especially "I'm not descended from no monkey". Also, IIRC, he's fairly comfortable with the materialist idea that brains are responsible for all things connected with "the mind" but opts for conspicious self-censorship over bannination when the others go on and on and on about how only souls can explain such and such (E.g. anything by OwhywontyoubuymybookLeary). |
| Date: 2007/09/07 16:17:13, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Where F is the Fastness or the rate of Falling. |
| Date: 2007/09/07 16:53:45, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Richard is right when you take into account the falling is relative. One black hole and one feather would accelerate towards a fixed second black hole at the same rate. But if the second black hole is not fixed, it would accelerate towards the first black hole more than it would to a feather at a similar distance leading to a higher relative acceleration. (Disclaimer: it's a long time since I did any physics and I was never brilliant at it). |
| Date: 2007/09/07 17:07:20, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Once I saw Gödel at a Motörhead concert. |
| Date: 2007/09/07 18:36:33, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Don't worry, it's still all done by Angels, but as part of a family business. |
| Date: 2007/09/09 15:19:10, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
Dembski links to a WacoTrib article.
William Dembski reproduced the following quote from Marks's site on his blog: http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelli....versity
My bolding. |
| Date: 2007/09/10 16:32:07, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Dembski notes that it's OK to publish emails sent to you, if the sender also sent copies to some other people
I don't know who those other people are (maybe they were the sort of person one might expect to be copied: personel dept, Sysadmins etc, not just people Marks had been trying to impress socially or whom Baylor employed to mock thier employees in public), so I won't get into that side too much, but this post did remind me of something from last year. In December 2006, Dembski sent an email to Dawkins and copied to all of the people he featured in ID's greatest work to date, the flash fart animation. Dawkins reproduced it on his web site and Demsbki got all self righteous about it. He used it as an excuse to publish a previous (2006) email sent by Dawkins to Dembski (alone) and thereafter they both printed each others emails (according to DDD - I don't often read Dawkins site), but with Demsbki complaining about the fact that Dawkins was now doing the same thing as himself. I'm not sure if Dembski is now saying that Dawkins was right all along to publish his first multiple-recipient email and Dembski was just being melodramatic, or whether he still thinks it was wrong, but is using one person's immoral behaviour towards him as an excuse to act immorally towards someone else. http://www.uncommondescent.com/just-fo....lment-i http://www.uncommondescent.com/culture....s-crime |
| Date: 2007/09/11 13:49:44, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
D'OL Writes Post at UD Shock! So where ARE the plugs for The Spiritual Brain? For uncommonlydenyse's other blogs? So where ARE the Friends of Robert Marks? Of intellectual freedom at Baylor? |
| Date: 2007/09/18 17:03:09, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
The old headers had no copyright notice (edit: but there has been a copyright notice in the footer for some time): Here's the previous William and Denyse header: http://www.uncommondescent.com/wp-cont....r_1.jpg |
| Date: 2007/09/20 19:04:47, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
and home economics and religious studies. :) |
| Date: 2007/09/20 20:23:10, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Jasini
Not taking the piss for once, I think this guy has it wrong. Experience tells me that if I run along pushing a bike and then let it go, it will run along itself for some time, gradually steering off to one side and eventually toppling over. If it's not moving it will fall over within a very short time indeed. My first thought was that there is some sort of gyroscope effect due to the rotation of the wheels, but in the end I think it's just that the axis around which the front wheel turns is positioned in such a way that the bike will turn into the direction of lean, causing the bike to turn in that direction and a centripetal force to force the bike back towards the upright. We take advantage of that natural turning when we ride no-handed, or try to steer the bike by running alongside holding only the saddle. Maybe we could reorientate the axis so the bike turns away from the direction in which we lean, and the bike would be very unstable indeed. OTOH, if scientists can't prove something which obviously happens in my experience, then it does seem slightly premature to assume that, for e.g., "if science can't give a blow by blow account for the the fractieral blagellum, then god must have dunnit". Presumably angels are balancing my bike and eventually steering it into a wall after I let go. |
| Date: 2007/09/22 15:14:44, Link 194.209.71.245 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScot:
Nitpick: no you didn't. ;) |
| Date: 2007/09/26 18:14:57, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Rotary? Ok I guess it could be "linear" or "random" instead. "Motor Driven" could be "elastic band driven", I guess. "Bidirectional" could have been "unidirectional", or "non-directional" To compensate, I would add "super-dooper", "microscopic", "biological", "international standards based" -- and maybe do away with the analysis of English language concepts altogether as the basis of the calculations, and consider instead potential chemical and biological precursors. |
| Date: 2007/09/26 19:58:39, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Uncommonly Densye defending "classis crackpot" Stuart Pivar
So, Densye sends her copy of the book to an open minded reader, Jerry Bergman of the Institute for Creation research; Two months later, he delivers his verdict and PZ Myers' original partisan verdict is exposed as the Darwinoid hatchet job wot it is.
|
| Date: 2007/10/16 20:55:55, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
13. Materialism didn't predict that, but theism did (ed: seems a bit short, try and |
| Date: 2007/10/25 07:42:24, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScot
DS tried to cover his many errors in subequent exchanges by displaying his knowledge of black body radiation and explaining how we measure the temperature of individual photons etc. Discussion around here started just before this post by ss on page 39 and continued for a while after. |
| Date: 2007/10/25 17:10:54, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScot at UDOJ
|
| Date: 2007/10/25 21:59:36, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
One of my favorites from "“IEEE Transactions on Information Forensics and Security” Dr Dr :
DaveScot:
At the time of writing, Dembski had already disappeared James Wynne's (*) comment asking "what has this got to do with ID". DS searches for Forensic Information & Dembski. All of the early results are to uncommondescent, arn, and other usual suspects. None to sites involved in Forensic Science. Take away the "Dembski" and the situation reverses. James Wynne was banned by Dembski after one more comment. I shouldn't mention that here because it's a DaveScot thread. |
| Date: 2007/10/26 07:36:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Michael Shermer Admits Science Is Religion To Him
Zachriel
|
| Date: 2007/10/29 11:12:32, Link 194.209.71.243 | ||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||
Evolutionary Theory and Monty Python’s Black Knight, Dembski:
The Problem of Improvable Design DaveScot:
Glen Davidson - Candidate for Stupid Question of the Year, DaveScot:
Darwinism the Invincible Douglas Moran |
| Date: 2007/10/29 15:25:20, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Just an average memory and Google Toolbar's 'search only on on this site' thingy. I remember thinking "not the black knight again" as one of the later ones appeared ( especially as PZ had done one around about the same time). |
| Date: 2007/10/29 16:20:44, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| I wonder if Barry always gets DaveScot's name wrong deliberately. |
| Date: 2007/10/30 21:18:02, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I'm not especially proud of these. Note to self: be more high-brow in future. Brazil (seen too many times, can't watch any more) Notting hill (almost ditto) Being John Malkovich (code 1, current player code 2) Fargo / The big Lebowski (Fargo on video, VCR dead) Dogma Shaun of the dead (Hot Fuzz ok but doesn't quite do it for me) The sixth sense Erin Brokovich The Elephant Man La Vita è bella (although, of course, I know it only as "Life is Beautiful") Easily manipulated, I inevitably get something in one of my manly eyes whenever I watch four of them. Hated: Twister (I wonder what's going to happen to all those wind chimes etc and how strong will the wind be exactly? Couldn't stand the dialog, but loved Buffy and Firefly/serinity, how could the same guy be behind them?) Once Worked (unsuccessfully) where they shot: Life Story (TV) - recognised about 10 seconds (Franklin leaves the building at night). Chumley Warner Link |
| Date: 2007/11/01 14:39:04, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I wonder if Gil could write a program to model a load of unevenly shaped boulders as they tumble down a hill into a lake causing ripples to appear in the water and damage to the rocks and their surroundings. Surely that can happen on this planet without an intelligence orchestrating it? Come on Gil, let's see you do an accurate simulatation without using fancy programming techniques such as using data structures to hold data about the terrain, or mathematical formulae to calculate distances between objects, centers of gravity and the like. And to further Richard's point, your program must run in real time on a computer which is tumbling down a hill into a lake. |
| Date: 2007/11/07 18:26:14, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Radiohead: House of Tards. Um, er, branching out into albums: Manic Street Preachers: this is my truth don't tell me yours. ELP: Tardus. Paul Simon: songs from the tardman. Mike Batt: The hunting of the tard. Roy Harper: Bulinamingtards. CCR: Tardi Gras. and anything by the Tardigans. |
| Date: 2007/11/12 16:05:14, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
BarryA not attributing bad actions to Darwinism:
BarryA explains that Darwinism is responsible after all.
Make your mind up Barry. Was it Darwin's theory that is morally responsible or Harris's and Klebold's misunderstanding of it? If it's the latter, who do you think is doing the most to foster future misunderstandings? - for example, by describing Darwin's theory as an attempt to explain how people should behave rather that as an attempt to explain why nature, good or bad, turned out how it did. |
| Date: 2007/11/13 18:16:45, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
|
on moral progress: Getawitness
Jason Rennie
It means something to me. It means that Getawitness can't coldly rationalize away the deaths of an entire people because they are religiously "the wrong sort" in the same way that Jason can. Some people really do give me the creeps. Jason has been doing so since he told us how he objectively values all people's lives so much at the sciphishow. |
| Date: 2007/11/14 17:39:03, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
I made a snapshot of the no black swan thread a few days ago (Last post was #50 by jack krebs). Here are the deleted comments. There could be some mistakes. My side by side comparison algorithm was thrown off once by the appearance of an early post that had been held in moderation. There may also be some unintended paragraph breaks - I copied from iexplorer not from the "view source" text. 15. Getawitness
17. Borne
19 Getawitness
25. Borne
26. Gerry Rzeppa
28 Berceuse
31 Getawitness
35 bornagain77
36 getawitness
37 Jerry
38 Jack Krebs
39 bornagain77
40 bfast
45 Getawitness
50 Jack Krebs
|
| Date: 2007/11/18 15:41:30, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
“Cheryl Crowe’s Single Sheet Really Really Clean Tissue” declared unsafe by the ACU Rereleased - with childish flatulence and remarks that some people felt to be offensive (eg "What happened to that Marks and Dembski paper?") removed. +: I, for one, am glad. It would have been a shame for such a classic example of ID research to have been lost to the world due to the actions of one inconsiderate individual. |
| Date: 2007/11/19 20:15:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I thought that too. However, there's a difference between banning trolls attempting to misrepresent ID with strawperson caricatures and banning serious opposing view points. No doubt they would use one to justify the other. Maybe they are also writing thier own troll posts to justify a clampdown. |
| Date: 2007/11/27 15:39:25, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DS explains CSI
Armed with this specification of a car, we could now all go out and build one for ourselves should we get the urge. If you would rather build something else, here are some specifications which would allow you to do so: Motor boat: "a self-powered transportation device" Helicopter: "a self-powered transportation device" Submarine: "a self-powered transportation device" Space Rocket: "a self-powered transportation device" Donkey: "a self-powered transportation device" Fracterium with blagella. "a self-powered transportation device" Notes in edit: DS is still a white-box. |
| Date: 2007/11/28 22:28:03, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
RWT featured a discussion on this only recently (70's I think). |
| Date: 2007/11/29 17:24:22, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Colin comes dangerously close to admitting that his opponent could be right:
|
| Date: 2007/11/29 17:59:03, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Oh Noooooooh!!! (Yawn) Sorry - what were you saying? Flippin' eck! Is that the time? Fee ee ling sle.. must stay awa... Snort, Hey wow! great! I'm buzzin' edit: (Jumps into a corner) Wonder what the tards are up to. Oh bugger! edit: Just realised, I could have been channelling Black Adder III above. |
| Date: 2007/12/01 10:57:48, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
The latest wave of media interest over the sneaking of undesirables into the Baylor cafteria scandal (from the Baylor Lariat):
been available on line at the Lariat for some days for some days now, but surprisingly not at UD. |
| Date: 2007/12/02 17:23:09, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
This materialistic version of what's going on is clearly getting us nowhere. Other scientists have produced much better models. For example, O'Leary and Beauregard have established that memories are not stored in the brain but in the mind. We know this because no one has been able to pinpoint exactly where individual memories are stored within the brain. Since memories are stored in the mind and/or in the soul, the brain does nothing when you try to access memories except open a channel to the mind to advise it to access a memory and experience it. Except the mind is in control and doesn't take instructions from the brain. So, when your mind tries to remember something it must access a memory that is stored non-materially in the mind, but if the brain isn't working properly the mind can not access those memories. You'll have to buy the book to find out why. I'd like to tell you more but there's been so much talk of plagiarism lately. When you had your accident, the informationary pipe connecting your brain to your mind became non-operational. Therefore your mind was not receiving the information it needed from your brain to store as memories, although it was receiving the same information on a different channel in order to maintain some semblence of lucidity in the forgotten conservation your body had with the people around you - but your mind wouldn't have permanently stored it because it was a "nosave" channel. However, your mind was able to access memories it already had and send them to you brain so that it could order your vocal cords to talk about them. Words are stored in the language areas of the brain. Words are not memories - they are facts which are remembered differently. When you had your aphasia, er, thingummy, your mind was forming thoughts as per normal and then accessing your damaged brain for the words so that your mind could then remember thinking about them and then instruct your brain to order your vocal cords to voice them. However the materialistic part let the side down once again. We see that all too often. Material stuff is crap. I'm not sure how memory blocking works. I expect the medicine has a non-material-mind-acting part somewhat akin to homeopathy which possibly makes use of quantum effects. HTH (I recently had root-canel work and a rather horrible tooth scraping session which I remember all too well. Do I win?) edited: for (cough)clarity |
| Date: 2007/12/04 19:02:44, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Chimps can outperform humans in some memory tests. Memories are not stored in the brain, therefore they must be stored by the soul. According to conventional wisdom, animals don't have souls, but chimps, apparently do after all, which means they deserve to go to monkey hell. Hurrah! edit: reverted last edit. Hah! |
| Date: 2007/12/05 20:16:01, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
IIRC, Dembski once unwittingly claimed eugenics as an intelligent design discipline. I don't remember enough context to Google it though. It was one of his "people can intelligently design things, therefore intelligent design is the one true theory of origins" posts. edit: no edits made this time. edit: ignore last edit, I was stuck in a "Dollis Hill loop" when I made it. |
| Date: 2007/12/06 17:48:15, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
tards claim victory! X is no longer with us. then, go buy these books ... edit: Rats! Mister DNA did "buy books" already. Here are ten things that Materialists di'n't guess but theists did .... d'oh |
| Date: 2007/12/08 08:19:57, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DS is right for once. Forwarding emails that don't reflect official company policy is wrong. What she should have done is set up a web site called the Texas Education Agency Darwinism Lab on the agency's web server and posted the email there. |
| Date: 2007/12/11 14:45:56, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I am not saying that BarryA is some sort of immoral sleazebag lawyer, who would attribute any mass shooting whether by atheistic darwinists or by (possibly lapsed) christians incited by Darwinists, to score points against the theory of evolution and/or people who accept it, BUT, if we assume for the sake of argument that he is, and without straying outside of the bounds of the discussion as I set it, would that make BarryA a good person or a bad person? And assuming BarryA will always find some way to blame people who disagree with him for every tragedy, which am not saying is necessarily the case, should he be criticised for what amounts to incitement to hatred (as he understands it)? Edit: Rats! R.B got in with a "Darwin at Columbine" link while I was away working on mine. |
| Date: 2007/12/11 21:38:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Er, this thread is dedicated to discussion of posts and comments at www.uncommentdescent.com. It is not intended as a repository of original works of literature. Unfortunately we have to quote the parts of posts on which we comment because the originals at UD could disappear at any time. edit: Looking back at the last few pages, I think 70% own-to-referenced-material would be an over-generous appraisal of your own contribution here. Accordingly, I would not be surprised to learn that you were posting this under the influence of something or other (like everyone else here apart from Wesley). I know I am. edited for *hic*. |
| Date: 2007/12/11 22:16:46, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Annyday and Reciprocating Bill, My apologies. I refer you both to my earlier remarks which I copied from somebody else. edit: @#°§ !!! |
| Date: 2007/12/14 14:15:40, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
if the Texas Education Agency heartily endorses BadAstronomy.com I will not only visit it, I will also believe everything I read there. Or did you mean "f.y.i" (The T.E.A. brings this event and/or website to your attention so you can picket and/or destroy it)? |
| Date: 2007/12/14 16:50:05, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I just noticed that all of Densye's recent posts are filed under "The Design Of Life". I wonder if that's just her natural book plugging instinct kicking in - or if this is an attempt to get traffic to her own blogs once interest in this science shattering masterwork takes off. Sorry if this has been pointed out already. |
| Date: 2008/01/07 17:50:16, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
One "often" hears the phrase "blind watchmaker Darwinism" (seven [7] times according to google) but it's always uttered by creationists offering up strawmen, usually on UD. |
| Date: 2008/01/07 18:08:10, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Going back a bit:
Earlier Barry gives us a humble example of something much better than "We have no idea".
|
| Date: 2008/01/07 18:39:27, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
| Date: 2008/01/08 16:46:16, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
I'm thinking of the arrow heads; For thousands of years they existed as rocks and then suddenly, like almost overnight, they are arrow heads on Barry's wall. Some sort of front-loaded timer mechanism is surely the best explanation for that. |
| Date: 2008/01/15 15:34:33, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Quite. I want to hear how DS's aliens created the cosmos that we and they live in. And how did they bypass the origin of life obstacle which kills any chance of explaining subsequent Darwinian processes. Dead!
|
| Date: 2008/01/15 19:40:13, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I would add as an ID prediction: [5] most Junk DNA is disabled versions of front-loaded DNA for totally unrelated species. DS predicted somewhere that [6] junk DNA was actively encoding instinctive behaviour or that it is [7] "trial balloons" to be launched at some point in the future and that some parts of it constitute some sort of [8] additional channel for carrying extra special information on top of its junk role. That's not to say that ID can make any prediction and therefore predict nothing of course. |
| Date: 2008/01/17 17:25:10, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
DaveScot had a totally *new* and *original* insight into the way things really are:
Oh yeah, and Barry just churned out some more crap about how you can't emulate human minds in two or three lines of visual basic or something, again. edit: emphasized sarkiness. edit: given "tongue in cheek" qualification, maybe whoever first mentioned selfish bacterium was him. If so, D'oh again. I stick by my Barry remark. |
| Date: 2008/01/20 15:21:55, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Grandma has published some id "predictions" on her blog and linked to them from UD . It's not clear to me if any of those are the ones that she gathers Dr Dr Dembski has sent to the TV producer. None of her predictions follow from the statement "Some things are better explained by design" - several are about human consciousness and mind-body separation of which ID does not speak. In fact they all seem to boil down to "one day Materialists will be shown to be wrong, and we will be shown to be right and then things will be much better for everyone" Maybe they should rewrite the definitions of ID in order to make her "predictions" into predictions. "ID is the theory that some patterns in nature and the universe are best explained by the statement 'that was designed, that was'. And that the human mind exists separately from the human body as a real non-physical entity with free will. And the earth was designed to thwart our efforts to destroy it. And Junk DNA will be shown to always have a purpose except from some occasions when it hasn't. And no intermediate fossils will be found other than the ones that are. And wife beating will be found to be morally relative and depend upon which culture you belong to (That can't be right. Ed.). And Baylor's cafetaria will be closed down after an anonymous tip-off." |
| Date: 2008/01/21 13:17:34, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Gil was "only joking", Granville.
Still, Bill's "predictions" post is off the main page and that's the main thing. |
| Date: 2008/01/21 17:12:51, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
|
Gil has replied to GS and unwittingly failed to mention his previous drubbing at the hands of Tom English and Kurt Plfuger. He also writes:
A few things stand out AFAIC: Gil seems to realise that Granville's "clear simple proof" is bollocks. Not only is it a very unrealistic computer simulation, it's an imagined unrealistic computer simulation. Well, actually he doesn't make the association with GS's proof - his criticisms are aimed only at evolutionary models. He seems to think that if something can't be modelled accurately because of our ignorance of the details then it can't have happened in the real world. Also he doesn't seem to realise that he has identified one reason why Dembski's and Behe's probability calculations are so meaningless and why it's not really valid to claim that your own supernatural explanations are to be favored until the other side puts forward some mutation by mutation history. |
| Date: 2008/01/22 20:18:41, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| bum kn[iao]ckers wee-wee anyone? |
| Date: 2008/01/24 04:58:40, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
That rush of activity is put into perspective by the sheer deluge of comments that has hit the design of life blog since comments were enabled there. Last time I looked they were well into double figures (*) with comments from a broad cross section of humanity including: - Canadian cross dressers. - Grandmothers. - Semi-literate churchgoers. - Student pseudoscience bloggers. * all 'I' (as of Jan-XXIII, MMVIII) |
| Date: 2008/01/29 16:49:14, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
Once again DO'L demonstrates the non-material nature of the mind: Mind and brain: How do unconscious people know when to wake up? Yes it sounds so silly. People expect to be woken up at a certain time, they wake up shortly before. The unconscious brain can't wake itself up; That would be silly. Instead the non-material mind wakes the brain up non-materially by releasing It probably doesn't matter that my mind does all this without my mind ever being aware that it is doing it; Unconscious activity is only a problem for brains. It probably also doesn't matter that Granny believes consciousness is something that happens in the mind not in the brain. The mind unconsciously triggers some chemicals to activate the brain, whch isn't the seat of consciousness, but can at least ask the mind to become conscious possibly by subsequent release of hormones that trigger supernatural stuff to happen. Or something. Pathetic detail and all that. |
| Date: 2008/01/29 17:17:04, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
(My emphasis) Abbreviated a bit, hmmm, what was removed and replaced by that ellipsis?
"Darwin’s clash with Christianity is winding down" Rather suggests that Darwin's disagreement with Christianity was about the supernatural stuff. The racist stuff was not something they disagreed about (*). No wonder DO'L had to "abbreviate a bit". (*) if you don't take into account that Darwin was significantly less racist that the average christian (or anyone else) of the day. |
| Date: 2008/02/01 14:38:11, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||
From the article:
|
| Date: 2008/02/02 17:12:55, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
Bannination
edit: Bannination aside, DS is right. ID proponensists never claim that origin of life (OOL) is an impossible hurdle for non-intelligent processes to overcome. Never. |
| Date: 2008/02/02 20:30:29, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
larrynormanfan on the other hand, manages to scrape by uite well without it. edit: for the time being. |
| Date: 2008/02/03 09:11:14, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
and here's the post where Dave Scot affectionately first accuses the Pandas Thumb of hate speech and encouraging violent acts. |
| Date: 2008/02/05 18:59:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
John Davison challenges PZ myers to a debate
Davison is a kook. As DaveScot has pointed out, he was once quite productive, but then that all changed at the same time he discovered ID. I see no reason why PZ would accept a challenge with this guy - everyone would lose. However, on a more positive note, I see that JAD takes the opposite view to DS on global warming and (using Demsbki/Forest Mims logic) wants to kill most of the world's human population (quick! call homeland security!) and DS sees debating Davison as a good thing which only a lilly livered, yellow streaked, cowardy custard girl (ducks) would decide against. So how about it? A debate in which DaveScot will argue that Global warming is a liberal science conspiracy and Davison will take the opposing view (and continue jabbering on to himself long after everyone has left)? |
| Date: 2008/02/06 06:25:55, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DaveScot
More DaveScot revisionism. His chicken egg remarks are here on 2005-02-21:
He continues on that thread without disemvowelling.
PZ
Only one more reply from DS (to Grey Wolf) on this thread. It was not disemvowelled From this point on, according to DaveScot, his comments were summarily disemvowelled but on 2007-02-2005 on PZ's "Penis Evolution" thread he continues:
Note the vowels! Then on 2005-03-04 he comments on another PZ thread "The brain of Homo floresiensis"
On 2005-03-06 The Tangled bank is going to be half my age, Davescot wishes PZ:
and Slimy Sal wishes PZ a happy birthday too! 2005-03-14 DS contributes to PZ's "Berlinski: I can’t believe I’m wasting time on this guy" thread.
DaveScot still has vowels but the inappropriatly cut and pasted full dissent from Darwinism list has been remoeved
PZ 2005-03-15
2005-03-20 PZ warns
Which I guess was orginally something like: Myer's tactics are'nt despicable. They're predictable. What did you expect, John, from scientists who use the judicial system to stifle criticism of thier atheist faith? He going to do whatever it takes to shut you up. So, PZ didn't disemvowel him for the chicken remark, but along with JAD, for numerous sarcastic, insulting remarks, and repeated attempts to derail threads. Anyone not yet banned at UD want to try posting the Steve's list on one of DaveScots threads there? edit: Somehow I changed "Dick" into "Disk". Apologies in advance for any other errors or omissions. |
| Date: 2008/02/07 16:59:41, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
or a "Prefect" for that matter. |
| Date: 2008/02/12 18:26:32, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
| Patience please! I'm sure Dr Dr Dembski will enlighten us once his predictions have been rigorously and scientifically confirmed. |
| Date: 2008/02/13 06:32:27, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
She gave that example twice. I suspect she actually bought two things costing $24.99. Hopefully she chose the example after doing the shopping, rather than choosing the numbers and then searching the shops all morning for things that cost that much. |
| Date: 2008/02/13 19:57:55, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
as the old joke goes: doesn't bite, but can give you a nasty suck! |
| Date: 2008/02/14 06:44:28, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
and also the Did math accidentally evolve? and Where does disbelief in Darwin lead? threads. |
| Date: 2008/02/14 15:11:46, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
There is more good news for Dawkins and the people who wish him well (such as Dembski) It looks like another company has bought the UK and commonwealth rights for Dawkins' next book for a "substantial sum" which means, if I understand this correctly, that the $3.5 million is just for the US rights. |
| Date: 2008/02/14 16:10:52, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
I think he was arguing from a perspective he does not actually share with that printing press remark. I thought that the his performance on this thread has been pretty good and he has gone up considerably in my estimation. I'm not sure if I should add "despite yesterday's events" because I suspect that the tinyurl change and closing of comment may have been down to Dembski, once he realised what had been going on. ETA: not so impressed by the "hope you burn in hell" remark though. I don't think he could mean that given his opposition to suffering in all animals. |
| Date: 2008/02/14 17:29:14, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
I am now slightly more confident that my hypothesis (ok wild guess) about Dembski being the real genius behind the link modification to PTET, is correct. Still Semprini (language timothy!) has provided a new one. edit: touch of sarcasm |
| Date: 2008/02/14 18:05:44, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
4. To insinuate that Dawkins is motivated by greed rather than intellect. 5. To give the old Materialist/Materialist equivocation a bit of a run, 'cause some of our dopey readership will be taken in by it. |
| Date: 2008/02/14 19:09:59, Link 157.161.30.182 |
| Author: steve_h |
|
A theory is a sort of wild guess drawn out of thin air, and a law is a decree which states that you can choose to do or not do something, but will be punished for doing if you choose to do it (or not depending on the phrasing). Example: The latter requires a law maker, who might punish you for falling upwards after stepping off a high building. ETA: eg. |
| Date: 2008/02/14 20:44:35, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
I don't see how that's a prediction of ID. ID can produce things which happen to have mostly junk in them or they can produce pure non-junk. For instance: Front loading. Our ancesters - ok not our ancesters, we were produced directly by the designer - but the ancesters of chimps and gorillas and cats and dogs and rabbits and sloths and cows and geese and hippos and sharks and whales were rather complex frontloaded thingies with all of the frontloaded information required to make all of the above. Therefore one might expect a chimp to contain front-loaded information for making hippos and deer and whales and anchovies which has been disabled or "made safe" via detrimental mutations. The so called junk would actually be knobbled other-species code. It would still be junk but it would be junk that bore a striking similarity to non-junk in distantly related species. The chimp would contain all sorts of junk, and its DNA would be very different from Human DNA, which would have no historical reason for the junk. Human DNA would bear some relationship to that of the chimp - we do have certain physical traits in common, but human DNA would not be front-loaded with disabled code for stoats and badgers and gorillas because we are not related to them. Therefore the DNA of a chimp and a badger should be more similar to that between either of those and a human. The badger will contain disabled chimp DNA and the Chimp disabled badger DNA due to thier animalistic front-loadiness, but the human will be something quite different, distinct and special. His or Her DNA will be better crafted, and the various letters G, A, T & C will be precisely formed in a pleasing typeface as opposed to the lazy scrawl of the so-called chimp (Pan troglodytes) and the so-called badger (Melus Garethsouthgaticus). |
| Date: 2008/02/18 17:08:03, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
just make sure you don't get burned. |
| Date: 2008/02/19 17:06:32, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Actually, he said one letter had changed, not one bit. However, a two-bit change is well below the UPB and you don't calculate CSI just by counting the bits - you are supposed to work out how specific, the change was. For instance. If you change 2 bits at random in the url, you are most likely to break the URL - some bits can be changed because the URL isn't case-sensitive. A change that is more likely to be successful than not does not indicate design. However I calculate 63 out of 64 2-bit changes to the URL would break it. Therefore not design ! If on the other hand, you calculate the number of possible 2-bit changes that DS could have applied to the internet in an attempt to break the URL, and calculate the specificity by assuming the english phrase "BREAKS LINK" as an independant specification you get: log_2 [ (8x2x10^16)^2 / (2x10^5)^2 * k * Z ] where 2x10^16 is a the number of bytes Google processes each day [1]; 2x10^5 is the number of words in my limited english dictionary [2] ; k is the number you first thought of; and Z is a number between 1 and infinity which reflects how acquanted you are with UD revisionism. Then you conclude: Therefore design ! [1] man in pub. [2] man in pub |
| Date: 2008/02/22 16:41:18, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
ID prediction #1: There is a small pin-sized hole somewhere in your back which can be used to invoke a factory reset. ID Prediction #2: When somebody is waking, poke them repeatedly on various parts of the body. This will cause a BIOS menu to appear. This menu will allow you to disable limbs and organs or boot the person in safe-mode. ID prediction #3: you are "backed up" off-site somewhere at regular intervals. If you die it won't be a problem - your aquired knowledge and experiences will be downloaded into a new body and continue as if nothing had happened, albeit noticably faster. ID Prediction #4. At some point in the next year or so, you will be presented with the option of downloading a live fix for the HIV virus from Dembski Labs™. It may require a reboot. ID prediction #5: some people are big-endian and some people are little endian. I personally am edit: Because I must; Errors developed on send. ETA: ID Prediction #6: At least one of your bodily orifices should support one of the following formats: USB (1/2), Firewire, RS232. It may take several hours for the required automatic downloads to take effect. |
| Date: 2008/02/28 13:25:01, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||||||
Kevin Miller has a you tube video of Ben Stein in which he says
Admittedly I'm doing a bit of a "Slimey Sal" here, because Imperialism and Genocide didn't come up in that interview. It just astounds me (it shouldn't, I know) that he can flip between "Darwin the brilliant" and "Darwin is teh evil" depending on who he is talking to. |
| Date: 2008/02/29 05:48:50, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||
| Author: steve_h | ||
It's a link farm. Its only role now (now?) is to lead the gullible to the many places where they can buy her book(s). edit: moved apostrophe from "It's" to "Its" |
| Date: 2008/03/06 14:31:20, Link 157.161.30.182 | ||||
| Author: steve_h | ||||
Sal explaining the difference between hypothetically dropping out of a GMU course due to being hopelessy behind with everything and nothing seeming to be sinking in (not true, obviously) ,and being expelled!!oneone! because he is just too brilliantly sciency for them (yeah that's it)?
|
)
.. 