form_srcid: utidjian
form_cmd: view_author
Your IP address is 38.107.191.99
View Author detected.
view author posts:
Retrieve source record and display it.
form_author:
form_srcid: utidjian
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 'utidjian%' and forum_view_threads LIKE '*' ORDER BY POST_DATE ASC
DB_err:
DB_result: Resource id #4
| Date: 2008/06/09 06:57:15, Link 69.125.193.130 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Ceiling Cat, That was an excellent post. Too bad it won't/can't be posted at UD. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/07/07 15:12:51, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
reciprocatingbill: I just posted that I couldn't find one there (at UD). I looked for it earlier. But now it IS there. Under "Friends of Descent" header about 3 entries down. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/07/28 09:49:52, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Damn sure was a good innings. I left a post at UD, right after your bannination: "That is a shame. I rather liked reading Bobs challenges and how they were handled. I am also not so sure he was ever “with” this forum, but I get the meaning." You will be missed but not missing it. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/07/29 09:03:43, Link 69.125.193.130 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Oh the Dark Matter TARD! (not on UD). Perhaps angels push the galaxies around? -DU- |
| Date: 2008/07/29 09:13:59, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Ooops forgot to add some quotes:
and
and
-DU- |
| Date: 2008/08/08 18:38:37, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Jeffox, Nice T34. Looks like you stripped it down for more streamlined fuel efficiency (no baggage(or boxage)). I would love to drive one of those. There is a very nice one in a museum in London UK. I forget the name of the place but it has a HUGE naval gun out front. I am greener than your tank with envy. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/08/15 15:50:08, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Damn that is funny!!! I guess conservapedians[sic] don't read much about reality I guess. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/08/23 16:17:25, Link 69.125.193.130 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
I couldn't find any town named "Butteville" it is just the school district name. It appears it serves the Weed CA community for grades K-8. The school district has a whopping total of 152 students for all 9 grades combined. The entire targeted 7th grade class is 15 students which is about 1/3 the size of the AP Bio class I took in high school. My high school (Berkeley High, Berkeley CA) offered about 12 sections of Biology at one level or another each semester. Roughly about 500 students took Biology each year. Weed seems to be a fairly economically depressed community. Low median income, high unemployment, large proportion living below poverty line. Doing a google maps on Weed CA and then a search for "church" yields quite a few. Some of them seem fundy. The board president, Stephen Darger, term ends in 2010. What is it with retired police officers and ID?? -DU- |
| Date: 2008/08/28 20:30:47, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Lou, Outstanding series of posts. I haven't taken any regular biology classes since HS (physics major.) One other test I thought of for your termites might have been: Hypothesis: Is it the ink alone or an interaction with the ink and the paper. Prediction: It is the ink alone. Mark out a new circle with the best ink (Squitchy Britches black pen) on the transparency film or on a clean sheet of frosted glass (so the ink will actually adhere.) See if the termite follows the ink. Thanks again for a great series of posts. I will be watching this thread regularly. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/10/02 11:29:17, Link 69.125.193.130 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Some good posts following that up indicating how silly the comparison DT is trying to make. I wonder how long they will last. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/06 23:05:01, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
1 part in 10^40, hmmm..... How the heck is whatever they are talking about being measured to that accuracy? I do experimental physics (undergrad research level) and I have no knowledge of any quantity that can even be measured to one part in 10^40. Sometimes the Tard is just stultifying to even consider. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/07 01:25:33, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
stevestory, Ah OK. I think I quoted the wrong post from TPH. In the one where he quotes planetwisdom(?) "To be exact, gravity must be fine-tuned to one part in 1040 (that's one part in 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000)." (or some such.) Which is also gobbledy-gook. I think where they may be getting it from is by comparing magnitudes of the electromagnetic force and the and the gravitational force which... between say a proton and an electron is about 10^39. Are they suggestiong that if this were not "just right" that we wouldn't exist? Or are they just throwing out numbers to give their talks some scienciness? We routinely (with some effort) measure "little" g in our lab to 5 places using a simple Kater pendulum, a photogate, and a very fast crystal clock. We just got a new "Big" G apparatus and I haven't seen the students latest results. Wikipedia lists G to 5 places +/- 0.00067 (MKS). I listened to the MP3 of the "tag team" session. It was interesting to note that Dembski said something about research in ID being quashed. About three years ago I signed up for the idurc (intelligent design undergraduate research center) yahoo group. This was just to see what was going on. There are about 86 members in the group. Last post to the group was back in late February 2007. I asked about any "research" going on and never got a reply. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/16 16:45:57, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
olegt, I read that entire bit of tard by Granville Sewell. It kinda reminds me of discussions one might have after a first semester Physics class and a couple of bong hits. Kinda revelling in buzzwords of Physics but not really knowing what they mean and how they got their meaning. Thanks for your clarification and links on the origins of the Schroedinger Equation. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/16 20:45:42, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Thanks blipey. I have added that book to my Amazon wishlist :) I work at a small college in Northern NJ as the Physics Lab Coordinator (fancy name for technician) and I am still an undergrad in Physics. I can do and troubleshoot experiments, which is how I got the job. After eight years of this I have a pretty good grasp of experimental physics at the undergrad and even the gradate level. I understand the quantum mechanics stuff pretty well also and what the experiments are telling us and why the theory, so far, is correct. I am not, yet, so good at the math... but I am working on it. Even with my limited theoretical knowledge I can see the bogosity in Granville Sewells argument. As I see it, the Schroedinger Equation is derivable from first principles starting with something as simple as a vibrating string. There are several other approaches depending on how low a level (mathematically) one wants to start from. Thanks again for the book suggestion. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/24 23:55:22, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Ptaylor, All four comments are there for me. Try a Shift-Reload and see if they don't all show up. Kinda lame the way the UD crowd tries to make a joke. They steal someone elses joke and cut out the funny part and it still doesn't quite work for them. Would this be a "jokemine"? -DU- |
| Date: 2008/11/25 01:10:49, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Update... I guess I "fixed" that. The Chortle post has been Expelled. I posted to UD the link to the original on monkeyfluids and mentioned the copyright. It was getting boring anyhow. -DU- |
| Date: 2008/12/24 09:18:24, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
WTF was all that about!!?? Reminds me of some of the papers that people diagnosed with ADHD write. Thanks for 'preserving' that keiths. I just can't handle the raw TARD any more. I prefer to get my carefully selected TARD by reading what you guys distil from UD. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/01/07 18:36:55, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
One of the things I do running the physics labs where I work is machining. Machining is a subtractive process. The chips are removed (and recycled!) and I create something new. At the very basic level just about everything that humans make out of materials is a combination of additive (welding, gluing, screwing...), subtractive (cutting, machining, etching...) and formative (forging, casting, heat treating, bending...) processes. Apparently Gil doesn't understand several hundred thousand years of tool and thing making. It is one of the ways we make stuff. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/01/09 13:11:54, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Self-Seplicating Chemicals Evolve in Lifelike Ecosystem I am afraid that much tard will come of that article. It would be nice to see the original paper. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/01/26 02:29:31, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Why? Because Abbie uses "machinery'? (and we all know that "machines" are "designed" by an "intelligence") Woah!! What a head rush.... I think I am coming down with the tard. I feel sick :puke: -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/01 20:51:46, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Good work sledgehammer. That is a very interesting discussion. I can only speculate on what sort of mental gymnastics an ID proponent like Durston has to go through to manage what said then and what he is saying now. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/02 12:04:22, Link 69.125.193.130 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Thoided! (or is it Foisted! (?)) -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/03 01:41:06, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Bob, I seem to remember that she defended "Slimy" Sal Cordovas article that implied that Skatje was in to bestiality. Hard to find links on this stuff because many of the original posts and threads have been pulled off the intertubes. I think somewhere here on AtBC there is a thread where FtK defends Sal. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/04 19:51:58, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Venus Mousetrap: I have often heard the creationists claim that 'Evolution is not a real science because it does not have a mathematical basis like Physics' (or words to that effect). When it is something that I have an inclination to reply to I refer them to the Hardy-Weinberg Principle as a place to start. It reliably shuts them up about the 'no mathematical basis' claim.... at least in the current discussion. I remember learning about H-W-P back in high school biology. IIRC we even did some simple example problems. That was over 30 years ago and I am fuzzy on any more details. Perhaps it would be worthwhile to dig up some 'demonstrations' of the application of H-W-P, no? -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/22 18:33:44, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
LULZ! Good pick for a pic Abbie. Too bad that series never made it. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/22 20:43:37, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Nah if UD goes away or even starts to run dry there are always places like The Science and Origins Forum over at Christianity.com. There are some regulars and even sane posters. Bettawrekonize (who was here a while back and banned twice form UD) is on of their most prolific fountains of tard. For the weapons grade tard there is JHud and drmark. The moderator, Bonky, never disappoints. Anyhow... just in case. it is always good to have a backup pusher when the others fall through. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/02/24 02:40:18, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Wesley, That is an interesting description. I have often wondered what makes a literalist and even many not so literalist Christians cling to their mistakes with such tenacity. Especially so in the presence of a non-believer. I always assumed that it had more to do with pride rather than denial and fear. I am most likely wrong. Good thing it doesn't scare me to admit that ;-) -DU- |
| Date: 2009/03/25 23:04:48, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Olegt, I fixed your linky and copy-pasted your comment over at UD. Not sure why but it appears that my comments are not (yet) held in moderation limbo. Could be useful... not sure for what though. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/03/25 23:08:17, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
See if this works: OK now? -DU- |
| Date: 2009/03/31 22:47:07, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
RTH, That was such a friggin good one I couldn't resist posting your co-inky-dink on the UD. I wonder how long that one will last. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/03/31 22:56:22, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
|
OK... it is so damn close to 4/1 that I don't know whether to laugh at the pranks or at the usual UD shennannigans: Linky
-DU- |
| Date: 2009/04/06 19:54:46, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
[quote=GCT,April 06 2009,18:02]
You talk to much. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/04/15 18:35:35, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Texas T, I like it. Are there any issues with respect to copyright of tardacious text from weblogs like UD? What I mean to say is, I understand there is no problem with quoting excerpts but what about whole comments? We seem to be able to do that here with impunity. I suppose a single (or even several) comments in their entirety could be considered an "excerpt" from the larger topic and thread. Must have correct attribution of course... where would the fun be if we didn't know who said what to whom. And so on, blah blah. Damn I am tired. Tired of the Tard. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/05/07 10:41:40, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Heh... first time I saw that emoticon used I thought it would translate to: I [am less of an ass then] Tom English. or I [have lesser boobs than] Tom English. or I [am less than three times] Tom English. but I think it really means: I [heart] Tom English. Which, when ya think about it, makes even less sense than the other two. K enough tare... back to the real tard. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/05/12 20:30:54, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Wow... that is an interesting hypothesis. Good catch Zach. Be interesting to see what the TARD response is to that. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/05/28 18:27:41, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||||
Unfortunately Behe has already reproduced, I think, about nine times already.
Heh. Short story: I was at Lehigh University in November 2008 to attend a former students wedding. He had just completed his PhD in theoretical physics, was getting married, soon to do his post-doc at Ecole Polytechnique in Paris. Anyhow... The wedding reception was held at the Humanities Center on campus. I arrived a bit early to set things up and make sure the booze was of the required quantity and quality. The Humanities Center is a very nice early 20th century house. The room we used for the reception was a large comfortable living room. It had built in book shelves with many "humanities" sorts of books. One book on a shelf near the window caught my eye because of its chromed cover. It was a very worn and beat up copy of The God Delusion (Dawkins, reprint 2008). This copy of TGD had been "critically" read by at least three people judging by all the notes in at least three different styles. Almost every page was commented and underlined in one way or another. On a shelf above was also a copy of Darwin's Black Box (Behe, pub 1996) that was actually signed on the inside with what appeared to be Behe's signature. In contrast this copy of DBB did not appear to ever have been read by anyone. The shelf was near a window and the pages of DBB appeared to have yellowed a bit around the top edges. Make of it what you will. |
| Date: 2009/06/09 21:40:59, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Why... that is almost .sig-worthy. Good job Clive! -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/10 11:51:21, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Just looked at the Mendel's Accountant website: http://mendelsaccountant.info and the sourceforge page... seems that a.) there is no longer a Linux version and b.) there is no source. Which leads me to wonder why it is on sourceforge to begin with. I am not aware of a requirement that source also be posted but... just seems strange to post it without the source on sourceforge. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/10 14:10:39, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Dr. GH, Where did you read that (the Sam thing)? -DU- and thanks... but now I gotta boot to Windows :( Ithink there used to be a linux util for unpacking Windows installers but I forget what it is called. Perhaps I will try it in Wine. |
| Date: 2009/06/11 00:05:54, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Thanks Wes, Headed over there. And thanks Dr. GH. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/11 00:18:06, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
|
Ok... I downloaded the .exe files. Both the earlier version and the update from sourceforge. I am running Linux (Fedora 10) on a Intel iMac with 1G of RAM. I unpacked the files with Wine. First the older version and then the newer one. Man it installs a lot of stuff. The Linux source is in /home/utidjian/.wine/drive_c/Mendel/Source on my system. Not much in there. listing:
The main file in there is mendel.f. Lots of comments. I can "read" Fortran but I don't know diddly about Population Genetics. Time for bed. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/11 12:17:52, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
|
Is anyone else playing with the source (or even reading it)? I also found this file in the Source folder:
Anything interesting in there? -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/20 20:17:03, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
No sockulating from me. I seem to have unfettered posting privs at UD... but I am not clever enough to run a really good sock. Much more fun watching the AtBC regulars run them. I hardly ever read UD any more... the TARD is so thick there now that it is just too powerful for me. I also scan some fundie forums like this one from time to time. (Be warned the god soaked tardology on that site can be toxic.) At least their TARD isn't pretending to be non-religous, nor are they claiming any expertise in the sciences. Reading AtBC threads of UD (and other TARD) is like watching really bad sci-fi on MST3K... it makes it all into entertainment. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/21 15:15:16, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Yeah. Lisa Luper is the new mod of that section. There only used to be a drive-by mod... and it was a much more "liberal" back then. Lisa is also a self confessed second generation homeschooler who has no training in science. She can't even get basic logic correct. You may recognize a few names like: Bettawrekonize. I think Betta has been here and over on UD. He (or she) was banned from UD back when DT was moderator. SFS. Actually has some good arguments and is on our side. JHud: Is quite the obfuscator. Claims to have a degree in Biology from U Iowa (or something.) He seems to have the most cachet amongst the creotards. DrMark: A bible thumping IDiot. GHitch: Another thumper. DanJames: Kind of interesting. A solid creotard but he appears to be an honest creotard (in the Kurt Wise sense.) I think he is an undergrad in biochemistry. He trots out some old long debunked creationist claims and will adjust his views to accommodate real evidence. He does not think of scientists as all a bunch of dishonest charlatans (as DrMark does.) Illuvatar: good guy. Veritas: good guy. I rarely ever post there any more. Whenever I do it really ticks off JHud. But in that sense it is worth it... just to see him froth. I prefer to play a close hand over there. Only bother when I can really zing JHud. Anyhow... I keep tabs on the place just to see what the rank-and-file tards are thinking. Also interesting to read their "Current Events" forum. I was sort of amazed to see that in the thread "have you changed your mind since you came here?" that 12% (3) of the respondents chose:"i used to be yec, now i believe in evolution" as their answer. The restriction on TO linking was added when Luper became moderator. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/06/24 20:23:45, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||||||
The Thought Word of the Day is: Hmmmmm.... I feel smarter already. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/01 12:13:29, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
Just had to share this one from Christian Forums:
And the creotards will eat that kind of creologic up. The problem with the above is that there were plenty of wars, famine and natural disasters long before the concept of evolution even existed. Therefore the concept of evolution could not possibly be responsible for thousands of years of wars, famine, and natural disasters. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/01 12:17:53, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
ETA: May be time to put on my socks. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/03 07:04:37, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
How did you figure that out? I looked that "History" of the wikipedia page and I can't see that he created any of it nor edited any of it. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/30 12:33:19, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Yeah I don't "get" the fine tuning argument so much either. What I find more interesting and more critical to "the existence of the universe as we know it" (or whatever) is not the, so called, fine tuning of various physical constants but that in the various laws and relationships in physics we have have factors like 1/r² (inverse square law) and that the "square" is exactly 2. I know this holds for Newtons law of gravitation but I am not sure about Einsteins general relativity. I suppose that G could vary a little bit (or even a lot) and we would just see a different universe if there was anything to see at all. Same thing in Coulomb's law. I guess it just "follows from the geometry" but I don't see why it has to.... just that it does. midwifetoad, do you have a linky for that number? -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/30 23:00:34, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Ah, thanks for the clarification. So clear, in fact, that it completely obliterated what I was thinking of. I think it had something to do with me thinking it was some thread or comment on UD that you were commenting on. After reading your linkages I see your point. You could even be off by dozens of orders magnitude... but like you said... what does it matter. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/07/31 18:32:53, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
midwifetoad, Thanks. That is an interesting perspective on the FTU numbers game that the tards are always playing. I suppose that one could also argue that even the world, throughout its history, is not all that "finely tuned" for our existence. I seem to remember a talk by Neil deGrasse Tyson on that subject or one very similar. ::me heads over to youtube to find it:: -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/01 09:41:41, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
KF is truly amazing. I don't think I have ever run a cross a kook that can crank out so much tard and other goofiness at the rate he does. Hard to imagine him being gainfully employed at any job that requires more than a couple hours a week in order to get paid. Anyone know his occupation? -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/07 13:30:08, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
I think he showed up on Pandas Thumb recently.... (digging for reference) Found it, linky. There are several others from "springer" further down in the comments. -DU- PS (for concerned onlookers) I think this is the first time I answered a question on AtBC! ::toasts self:: |
| Date: 2009/08/15 09:12:19, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||||
I have used a similar argument against Apollo Moon Mission deniers: It is extremely unlikely that, after all these years, not a single scientist, engineer, or technician of the tens of thousands that were involved in the project would not have come forward by now and denied that it really happened. Main difference between the resurrection and the torah thing and the Apollo Mission being that many of the witnesses are still alive today. That and a tremendous amount of hard data and evidence. Whatever the difficulties, Jules Verne's From Earth to the Moon, published in 1865 is more believable than the bible. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/19 14:30:01, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
|
My comment on the Water-strider thread hasn't been dissappearinated yet but just in case: Linky Texty
I was going to get in on the Dembski paper thread but I figured that commenting on that was not as important as finishing watching Alien vs Predator: Requiem Seems that others got the message across to Dr. Dr. anyhow. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/27 07:40:36, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
From a Xtian forum:
From Dictionary.com:
I can agree with that... indeed, I couldn't have said it better myself. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/28 07:50:06, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
RBill, Was that a real UD webpage? I looked for it at UD and couldn't find it. I do vaguely remember the Baylor Regents phone number brouhahah but I wasn't aware that Dembski "notpologized" for it. If the page is (or was) real, I wonder why it was pulled (and a good catch for whoever snapshotted it.) -DU- |
| Date: 2009/08/28 10:37:00, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
RBill, Thanks for the clarification. I find it sometimes a bit difficult to keep up with the shenanigans of UD and the parodies of UD posted here. I have been Poe'd. I agree with J-Dog, your notpology was more accurate and gracious in tone than the real one. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/11/15 14:59:24, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
My comments on UD rarely get moderated long (if at all.) But then I rarely comment here or at UD. BTW... in response to an earlier request: I am de-lurking. Hi all. I don't say much because all you pro-tards seem to do an excellent job as it is. Very difficult to handle the pure tard at UD without the filtering and additional comments that go on here. I very much admire the patience and sheer fortitude of Allen MacNeil... and many of the regular socks over at UD. Allen is un-usually polite considering the abuse they throw at him. I guess they kind of have to put up with(???) Allen since he did a summer seminar at Cornell on ID. He (in fact an ID proponent/student) ran the blog for the class and had it open to public contribution. The moderation policy was MUCH more fair and consistent than UD. Come to think of it that is an unfair comparison. The arbitrary "policies" for commenting and moderation at UD are absurd. In my mind their moderation practices at the UD blog are the second most important factor in determining how the public perceives ID (and ID proponents.) Of course... the most important factor is the idiocy of the articles themselves. Why am I telling you all this... you know it! It is the whole reason for AtBC UDT3. OK... back to lurking. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/12/07 09:57:46, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||||
Done Since I have been such a wussy UDer I don't need no steenking moderation! Perhaps that will change soon. See how long it lasts anyhow. -DU- |
| Date: 2009/12/11 01:27:00, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
|
RDK, From your YouTube link:
Try again? -DU- |
| Date: 2010/02/18 00:20:47, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
Done. -DU- |
| Date: 2010/02/18 21:28:56, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||
CannuckianYankee
So, ummmm... morality comes from the sun and from the heat of thermonuclear reactions within the earth? I think that is what is called a "category error."
I know, I know.... it comes from the sky!? -DU- |
| Date: 2010/04/22 22:23:19, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||
Olegt, Wow! fnxtr's earlier comment came immediately to mind after reading that. I just couldn't resist sacrificing my sock over at UD: Link
-DU- |
| Date: 2010/05/02 03:11:44, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
|
I figured I would take a peek at ratemyprofessor.com to see if Dembski had an entry... and he does: William Dembski at SBC Loved this entry:
(bolding mine) Last entry was in March of 2007. Perhaps he hasn't been teaching much in the past three years. -DU- |
| Date: 2010/05/02 04:56:34, Link 198.138.209.25 | ||||||||
| Author: utidjian | ||||||||
Agreed, for math there is little substitute for TeX/LaTeX. Word has always sucked for doing math. Many of my physics colleagues use Word for physics though. I prefer LyX (basically a GUI for LaTeX.) Are mathematicians still using plain TeX/LaTex? I suppose I could go down tha hall and ask some of our new professors but... not too many of them here at 6AM on a Sunday :P -DU- |
| Date: 2010/05/11 08:36:01, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Does Gordon E. Mullings have a MSc. in Physics? Linky Apparently his office isn't just in the Administration Building, it IS the Administration Building. I guess it depends on how you interpret it. Seems he is teaching an evening class in Intro to Philosophy. Gosh that must be a fun class. Anyone know what his day job is? -DU- |
| Date: 2010/05/25 21:18:16, Link 198.138.209.25 |
| Author: utidjian |
|
Oh man... just read that navel thread. I haven't read the direct tard in a while. I usually get it from here condensed and sanitized. That whole thread is why I am actually glad that UD is around. The whole thing is an example of Poe's Law. Like Nakashima (congratulations BTW on your engagement) I wanted to ask BA^77 WTF he thought was so damning of evolution in his linked article on stromatolites. -DU- |
| Date: 2010/07/23 11:06:55, Link 173.3.31.165 | ||
| Author: utidjian | ||
David Brooks is actually OK for a conservative. I think I would more likely call him a "progressive" than a conservative since he fits almost none of the current "conservative movement"-neocon-Republican profiles. Interesting op-ed anyhow. -DU- |
| Date: 2010/07/28 00:15:25, Link 173.3.31.165 |
| Author: utidjian |
| My guess is that their mods will consider being told that they are wrong as "flaming" and not allow those comments through. Especially so if the are told definitively, with examples, references, logic, and evidence and whatnot to back it up. |
=====
