AE Public Forum
Antievolution.org is the critic's resource on antievolution. The public bulletin board is a lightly moderated place for general discussions, using a set of rules first implemented in 1992 for the Fidonet "Evolution Echo".
Updated: 10 years 29 weeks ago
Cornelius Hunter Thread
Post by midwifetoad
Corny stoll his webpage images from somewhere:
http://informatika.stei.itb.ac.id/~rinald....076.pdf
And does Ken ham show up in one of the slides?
http://www.darwinscholars.com/....ars.com
Corny stoll his webpage images from somewhere:
http://informatika.stei.itb.ac.id/~rinald....076.pdf
And does Ken ham show up in one of the slides?
http://www.darwinscholars.com/....ars.com
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
It would still be appallingly anti-semantic.
It would still be appallingly anti-semantic.
Categories: AE Public BB
Cornelius Hunter Thread
Post by Doc Bill
Did you see the latest?
"Darwin Scholars" an affordable on-line course offered by none other than Corny his own self.
$1600 for the full set!
Holy Shamoly, he's become a televangelist!
Did you see the latest?
"Darwin Scholars" an affordable on-line course offered by none other than Corny his own self.
$1600 for the full set!
Holy Shamoly, he's become a televangelist!
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by stevestory
I'll be happy to award that Sentence of the Week, but first we'll need to find a group of Theoretical Grammarians who can translate it into Standard American English.
I'll be happy to award that Sentence of the Week, but first we'll need to find a group of Theoretical Grammarians who can translate it into Standard American English.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by JohnW
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 02 2014,21:51) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ June 02 2014,23:00)From the NCSE thread:
Quote
Gary Gaulin • 5 days ago
Hi Stephanie.
I'm wondering whether you believe this is a testable scientific theory or "God in the gaps" religion:
http://theoryofid.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com
Wishing you luck!
Quote
Wesley Elsberry Gary Gaulin • 9 hours ago
It's incoherent, self-contradictory word salad. See http://tinyurl.com/p7ye4n8....p7ye4n8
I responded to a similar entry by Gary at a Smithsonian online article:
Check it out for how Gary responds to anything other than instant adulation. (The start of that can be seen happening once again here.)
Synopsis: Gary's code doesn't implement any of Arnold Trehub's actual neural models, nor does Gary's code implement anything beyond a simulation premised on David Heiserman's "beta"-class robot, though Gary's text relies on Heiserman's use of "educated guess" ("good guess" in Gaulinese) that Heiserman reserved for his "gamma"-class robots, a long step beyond what Gary so far publicly offers code for. In response to criticism, Gary will, on past form, denigrate any critic's credentials (though Gary has not much himself so far as I know); claim that critics must be dissing the sources Gary cites rather than Gary's bizarre mash-up of them; thoroughly misunderstand and misrepresent sources (including ones he himself cites); bizarrely claim that unless someone can offer something better for establishing the result he wishes his code and text might establish, his work thus is supported; pretend that his code is biologically plausible for things it can't possibly be considered to approach in any biologically plausible manner; and project every fault he has onto his interlocutors.
The origin of intelligence may be Gary's favorite topic, but I think it's far less likely that anyone else is going to have "listening to Gary go on about the origin of intelligence" be one of their favorite things. In order to bypass evolutionary hypotheses, it looks to me that Gary seeks to establish intelligent action at logically prior, lower levels, those of molecules and cells. In my experience, any data that does not accord with this idee fixe' is relentlessly rejected or disputed by Gary. Gary certainly has shown no compunction in dismissing relevant work on the evolution of intelligence.
Do be careful, though; Gary did note that he consulted with a Discovery Institute lawyer [Casey Luskin] prior to engaging the "After the Bar Closes" forum to figure out when to sue someone in online discussion. See http://tinyurl.com/pnjnj5x....pnjnj5x
Quote
Gary Gaulin Wesley Elsberry • 7 hours ago
Hi again Wesley. Hopefully you're done giving your forum shameless plugs. Yes I mentioned additional information being in this thread in the Smithsonian Institution thread but that was your fault for making me need to link here after that. I now need a direct link back, for readers to see what you're trying to talk about:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...
For "interlocutors" the best conspiracy theory I can come up with is Rev Theory as per KCFS forum lore the black hole sun producing (& toes in the sand) "Lucky Lady" is stealthy Kathy Martin whose talent for giving the press exactly what they wanted caused legendary hoopla that got folks talking science now here we are with the angel story being continued, but I don't know where. It's as though the video is tempting to rev up some theory by leaving a key around for anyone to try out. It must make no sense to you but Stephanie might still get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Quote
Wesley Elsberry Gary Gaulin • 22 minutes ago
I appreciate Gary following up to make clear to everyone that my statements are right on the money. Gary's response to my description of his screed as incoherent word salad is, predictably, more incoherent word salad.
And even where Gary manages to make brief contact with coherency, his accusation that I am "spamming", he confirms my statement:
"and project every fault [Gary] has onto his interlocutors."
It's particularly amusing as Gary's initial forays both here and at the Smithsonian site immediately link to the PDF of his screed. Here, Gary seemed particularly strained in coming up with an excuse to put in his link. It does demonstrate that Gary's accusations about others are the clearest window into his own soul.
For myself, I'm not particular about what archive of interaction informs the reader. If Gary has over 3000 posts at some other site, he need merely let me know where that might be, and I'll certainly add it as a resource for those who are new to Gary's ... creative ... approach to communication.
PotW
Quote For "interlocutors" the best conspiracy theory I can come up with is Rev Theory as per KCFS forum lore the black hole sun producing (& toes in the sand) "Lucky Lady" is stealthy Kathy Martin whose talent for giving the press exactly what they wanted caused legendary hoopla that got folks talking science now here we are with the angel story being continued, but I don't know where.
Sentence of the week.
I'm still very ambivalent about participating in this thread. By doing so, I'm helping to deprive a street corner of its loony.
Quote (Richardthughes @ June 02 2014,21:51) Quote (Wesley R. Elsberry @ June 02 2014,23:00)From the NCSE thread:
Quote
Gary Gaulin • 5 days ago
Hi Stephanie.
I'm wondering whether you believe this is a testable scientific theory or "God in the gaps" religion:
http://theoryofid.blogspot.com/....pot....pot.com
Wishing you luck!
Quote
Wesley Elsberry Gary Gaulin • 9 hours ago
It's incoherent, self-contradictory word salad. See http://tinyurl.com/p7ye4n8....p7ye4n8
I responded to a similar entry by Gary at a Smithsonian online article:
Check it out for how Gary responds to anything other than instant adulation. (The start of that can be seen happening once again here.)
Synopsis: Gary's code doesn't implement any of Arnold Trehub's actual neural models, nor does Gary's code implement anything beyond a simulation premised on David Heiserman's "beta"-class robot, though Gary's text relies on Heiserman's use of "educated guess" ("good guess" in Gaulinese) that Heiserman reserved for his "gamma"-class robots, a long step beyond what Gary so far publicly offers code for. In response to criticism, Gary will, on past form, denigrate any critic's credentials (though Gary has not much himself so far as I know); claim that critics must be dissing the sources Gary cites rather than Gary's bizarre mash-up of them; thoroughly misunderstand and misrepresent sources (including ones he himself cites); bizarrely claim that unless someone can offer something better for establishing the result he wishes his code and text might establish, his work thus is supported; pretend that his code is biologically plausible for things it can't possibly be considered to approach in any biologically plausible manner; and project every fault he has onto his interlocutors.
The origin of intelligence may be Gary's favorite topic, but I think it's far less likely that anyone else is going to have "listening to Gary go on about the origin of intelligence" be one of their favorite things. In order to bypass evolutionary hypotheses, it looks to me that Gary seeks to establish intelligent action at logically prior, lower levels, those of molecules and cells. In my experience, any data that does not accord with this idee fixe' is relentlessly rejected or disputed by Gary. Gary certainly has shown no compunction in dismissing relevant work on the evolution of intelligence.
Do be careful, though; Gary did note that he consulted with a Discovery Institute lawyer [Casey Luskin] prior to engaging the "After the Bar Closes" forum to figure out when to sue someone in online discussion. See http://tinyurl.com/pnjnj5x....pnjnj5x
Quote
Gary Gaulin Wesley Elsberry • 7 hours ago
Hi again Wesley. Hopefully you're done giving your forum shameless plugs. Yes I mentioned additional information being in this thread in the Smithsonian Institution thread but that was your fault for making me need to link here after that. I now need a direct link back, for readers to see what you're trying to talk about:
http://www.smithsonianmag.com/...
For "interlocutors" the best conspiracy theory I can come up with is Rev Theory as per KCFS forum lore the black hole sun producing (& toes in the sand) "Lucky Lady" is stealthy Kathy Martin whose talent for giving the press exactly what they wanted caused legendary hoopla that got folks talking science now here we are with the angel story being continued, but I don't know where. It's as though the video is tempting to rev up some theory by leaving a key around for anyone to try out. It must make no sense to you but Stephanie might still get it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Quote
Wesley Elsberry Gary Gaulin • 22 minutes ago
I appreciate Gary following up to make clear to everyone that my statements are right on the money. Gary's response to my description of his screed as incoherent word salad is, predictably, more incoherent word salad.
And even where Gary manages to make brief contact with coherency, his accusation that I am "spamming", he confirms my statement:
"and project every fault [Gary] has onto his interlocutors."
It's particularly amusing as Gary's initial forays both here and at the Smithsonian site immediately link to the PDF of his screed. Here, Gary seemed particularly strained in coming up with an excuse to put in his link. It does demonstrate that Gary's accusations about others are the clearest window into his own soul.
For myself, I'm not particular about what archive of interaction informs the reader. If Gary has over 3000 posts at some other site, he need merely let me know where that might be, and I'll certainly add it as a resource for those who are new to Gary's ... creative ... approach to communication.
PotW
Quote For "interlocutors" the best conspiracy theory I can come up with is Rev Theory as per KCFS forum lore the black hole sun producing (& toes in the sand) "Lucky Lady" is stealthy Kathy Martin whose talent for giving the press exactly what they wanted caused legendary hoopla that got folks talking science now here we are with the angel story being continued, but I don't know where.
Sentence of the week.
I'm still very ambivalent about participating in this thread. By doing so, I'm helping to deprive a street corner of its loony.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by stevestory
i meant mg. A 500 ml Xanax would cost more than $10, that's for sure.....
i meant mg. A 500 ml Xanax would cost more than $10, that's for sure.....
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
I'd suggest that Gary is in need of drugs, but evidence suggests that he's overstocked and over consuming.
Perhaps a drying out period would help.
Gods forbid this is his base state!
I'd suggest that Gary is in need of drugs, but evidence suggests that he's overstocked and over consuming.
Perhaps a drying out period would help.
Gods forbid this is his base state!
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by fnxtr
Quote (stevestory @ June 03 2014,09:09) Quote I was then able to stay focused on the computer models and other things that makes the theory happen and went to Panda's Thumb After the Bar Closes forum Wesley nervously rules, which now has 365 pages of science mayhem they have to do something about.
Wes, if you need help with all the anxiety Gary has caused you, I can get you 500 ml Xanax tabs for $10 a piece, No Questions Asked....
Riiight. In the same way I have to "do something about" what's in our cat's litter box.
Quote (stevestory @ June 03 2014,09:09) Quote I was then able to stay focused on the computer models and other things that makes the theory happen and went to Panda's Thumb After the Bar Closes forum Wesley nervously rules, which now has 365 pages of science mayhem they have to do something about.
Wes, if you need help with all the anxiety Gary has caused you, I can get you 500 ml Xanax tabs for $10 a piece, No Questions Asked....
Riiight. In the same way I have to "do something about" what's in our cat's litter box.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by stevestory
Quote I was then able to stay focused on the computer models and other things that makes the theory happen and went to Panda's Thumb After the Bar Closes forum Wesley nervously rules, which now has 365 pages of science mayhem they have to do something about.
Wes, if you need help with all the anxiety Gary has caused you, I can get you 500 ml Xanax tabs for $10 a piece, No Questions Asked....
Quote I was then able to stay focused on the computer models and other things that makes the theory happen and went to Panda's Thumb After the Bar Closes forum Wesley nervously rules, which now has 365 pages of science mayhem they have to do something about.
Wes, if you need help with all the anxiety Gary has caused you, I can get you 500 ml Xanax tabs for $10 a piece, No Questions Asked....
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by OgreMkV
Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 03 2014,07:32) Quote (Henry J @ June 03 2014,03:55)As long as that circular reasoning doesn't lead to going off on tangents!
Has there been any sine of that?
That struck a chord.
Here we go again, round and round, just an infinite cycle repeating itself.
There's a series of these all over this thread. Feels like Deja vu from the Matrix.
Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 03 2014,07:32) Quote (Henry J @ June 03 2014,03:55)As long as that circular reasoning doesn't lead to going off on tangents!
Has there been any sine of that?
That struck a chord.
Here we go again, round and round, just an infinite cycle repeating itself.
There's a series of these all over this thread. Feels like Deja vu from the Matrix.
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by Soapy Sam
Quote (Henry J @ June 03 2014,03:55)As long as that circular reasoning doesn't lead to going off on tangents!
Has there been any sine of that?
That struck a chord.
Quote (Henry J @ June 03 2014,03:55)As long as that circular reasoning doesn't lead to going off on tangents!
Has there been any sine of that?
That struck a chord.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Yup -- just like the pre-paid funeral folks and debt relief agencies who send me literally pounds of advertising mail.
I haven't asked them to stop, so I clearly approve of their efforts. Each new piece of mail is studied more carefully than the previous, each new piece makes a more and more favorable impression on me of the companies and their products.
I mean, this is why these things work, right?
Even though I don't buy, they're a success, right?
Gary is so on top of 'intelligence' that he's become a veritable black-hole of 'intelligence' -- it's all there but it can never escape to be observed.
Yup -- just like the pre-paid funeral folks and debt relief agencies who send me literally pounds of advertising mail.
I haven't asked them to stop, so I clearly approve of their efforts. Each new piece of mail is studied more carefully than the previous, each new piece makes a more and more favorable impression on me of the companies and their products.
I mean, this is why these things work, right?
Even though I don't buy, they're a success, right?
Gary is so on top of 'intelligence' that he's become a veritable black-hole of 'intelligence' -- it's all there but it can never escape to be observed.
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by Richardthughes
Quote (Zachriel @ May 31 2014,07:48)Friday Meltdown
It was always going to end like that. Well done for showing restraint, Zach. Joe keeps adding to that monument to his own stupidity.
Quote (Zachriel @ May 31 2014,07:48)Friday Meltdown
It was always going to end like that. Well done for showing restraint, Zach. Joe keeps adding to that monument to his own stupidity.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by Jim_Wynne
Quote (NoName @ May 31 2014,08:45)I mean, come on -- we all know that unsolicited mail becomes more important and more likely to be viewed, even more likely to be positively viewed, the more times it's received.
That's just basic, right?
'Intelligence' seems to be something Gary's only heard about, but never experienced.
ROFLMAO
Well, the fact that the NAS didn't ask GG to stop indicates that they were deeply impressed and affected by his work. Of course, their primary mission of science-stopping prohibits them from explicit endorsement, but it seems clear that they must think Gary's on the right track.
Quote (NoName @ May 31 2014,08:45)I mean, come on -- we all know that unsolicited mail becomes more important and more likely to be viewed, even more likely to be positively viewed, the more times it's received.
That's just basic, right?
'Intelligence' seems to be something Gary's only heard about, but never experienced.
ROFLMAO
Well, the fact that the NAS didn't ask GG to stop indicates that they were deeply impressed and affected by his work. Of course, their primary mission of science-stopping prohibits them from explicit endorsement, but it seems clear that they must think Gary's on the right track.
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by Amadan
Quote (Quack @ May 31 2014,06:31)What if Joe would look up Brownian motion?
He'd think you were referring to peristalsis in the lower digestive tract.
Quote (Quack @ May 31 2014,06:31)What if Joe would look up Brownian motion?
He'd think you were referring to peristalsis in the lower digestive tract.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
I mean, come on -- we all know that unsolicited mail becomes more important and more likely to be viewed, even more likely to be positively viewed, the more times it's received.
That's just basic, right?
'Intelligence' seems to be something Gary's only heard about, but never experienced.
ROFLMAO
I mean, come on -- we all know that unsolicited mail becomes more important and more likely to be viewed, even more likely to be positively viewed, the more times it's received.
That's just basic, right?
'Intelligence' seems to be something Gary's only heard about, but never experienced.
ROFLMAO
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by Jim_Wynne
Quote (GaryGaulin @ May 30 2014,19:48) Quote (didymos @ May 30 2014,17:47)You know what the NAS did with it, Gary? It went into the crank file:
I sent it a few times, in regards to stereotyping crap that is getting them in trouble with the general public (who pays their bills).
If they took it as a crank then the damage they are doing to themselves is certainly not my fault.
Please describe specifically the "stereotyping crap that is getting [the NAS] in trouble with the general public." Provide examples.
Quote (GaryGaulin @ May 30 2014,19:48) Quote (didymos @ May 30 2014,17:47)You know what the NAS did with it, Gary? It went into the crank file:
I sent it a few times, in regards to stereotyping crap that is getting them in trouble with the general public (who pays their bills).
If they took it as a crank then the damage they are doing to themselves is certainly not my fault.
Please describe specifically the "stereotyping crap that is getting [the NAS] in trouble with the general public." Provide examples.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by Woodbine
Quote But they did not write back to tell me to stop.
Damn, there's an entire lifetime of delusion encapsulated in that one sentence.
Quote But they did not write back to tell me to stop.
Damn, there's an entire lifetime of delusion encapsulated in that one sentence.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Quote (GaryGaulin @ May 30 2014,20:48) Quote (didymos @ May 30 2014,17:47)You know what the NAS did with it, Gary? It went into the crank file:
I sent it a few times, in regards to stereotyping crap that is getting them in trouble with the general public (who pays their bills).
...
Well of course you did.
After all, as the "theory" of 'intelligence' states, if you're not getting the desired or intended results, you should continue repeating the behavior unchanged until you do get the desired or intended results.
Oh, wait. That's not at all what the "theory" of 'intelligence' asserts.
How is it you remain blind to all the many ways your own behavior falsifies your "theory" Gary? Is it that you are not 'intelligent'? That's what's entailed by your "theory"...
Quote (GaryGaulin @ May 30 2014,20:48) Quote (didymos @ May 30 2014,17:47)You know what the NAS did with it, Gary? It went into the crank file:
I sent it a few times, in regards to stereotyping crap that is getting them in trouble with the general public (who pays their bills).
...
Well of course you did.
After all, as the "theory" of 'intelligence' states, if you're not getting the desired or intended results, you should continue repeating the behavior unchanged until you do get the desired or intended results.
Oh, wait. That's not at all what the "theory" of 'intelligence' asserts.
How is it you remain blind to all the many ways your own behavior falsifies your "theory" Gary? Is it that you are not 'intelligent'? That's what's entailed by your "theory"...
Categories: AE Public BB
