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: 9 years 46 weeks ago
The Bathroom Wall
Post by Schroedinger's Dog
Fred Phelps is gone. Did he find redemption?
Fred Phelps is gone. Did he find redemption?
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Worse, it is recognized as not science.
Worse, it is recognized as not science.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by didymos
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 16 2014,04:11)I'm already well enough recognized for my science work...
Gary, not only are you not recognized for your "science work", your work is not recognized as science.
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 16 2014,04:11)I'm already well enough recognized for my science work...
Gary, not only are you not recognized for your "science work", your work is not recognized as science.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 16 2014,07:11)...
I'm already well enough recognized for my science work, …
Are you sure? Laughing and pointing is hardly what the sane amongst us would count as 'well enough recognized'.
Odd that you remain unable to identify a single scientist who takes your work even remotely seriously.
Or is the 'positive recognition' the absurd coding award from 5 voters?
Quote ...
I do not want to dwell on your need to get the philosophical results you wanted using a “natural selection” variable that eliminates all the intelligence required to create real living things from your models. It's no surprise your algorithms only go where the “Natural Selection” variable is set to go, instead of controlled by a trinity of intelligence levels going where they together want to go, and can learn to stay warm using camp-fire then later invent electric space heaters and other climate control systems for even in outer space. The eldest intelligence level is said to be at least trillions of years old. ...
Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new. It's more like science finally figures out what religion has right along believed was somehow true. For you though it's a major paradigm shift, you'll just have to get used to...
More absurd swill from the world's foremost effluent generator.
No one in their right mind codes a 'natural selection' variable in a simulation. NS is a process, not a state.
That you persist in this elementary error is more than sufficient evidence that you simply do not understand evolutionary theory in the slightest.
As to a 'trinity of intelligence levels', well, that asserts facts not in evidence as we continue to point out.
You are unable to say what intelligence is -- you lack an operational definition at each of your three 'levels'.
You contradict yourself on the reality of the alleged 'bottom' level of 'molecular intelligence'.
You are unable to show reciprocal causation between any of the levels; that you continue to assert it does not in any way count as showing it.
Who says that anything is 'at least trillions of years old'? That's worse than absurd, given that the universe is not even a tenth of a trillion years old. Your physics and astronomy are seen to be as bad, as ill-informed and confused, as your biology.
As to your claim "Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new", well, you would have been correct if you had stopped one word short of where you did. Congratulations on composing a sentence that is concise and direct, but as far as content goes, it is as mad as everything else you post.
You haven't shifted anyone's paradigm, you haven't presented a new paradigm, you haven't shown how your "paradigm" has greater explanatory power, coherence, and cohesion than the existing models, nor have you shown a single flaw in the existing models -- physics, chemistry, and biology are all entirely untouched by your effluent.
So there really isn't anything we have to 'get used to'.
You, however, need to get used to being a crank -- and get used to be seen as a crank for that seems to be the outcome of the entirety of your careening progress across the net.
You're a loon, Gary.
A loser, a poseur, a deluded crank who has thrown away his life on a quest that doesn't even rise to the level of the quixotic. You have managed to find a level of meaninglessness lower than the dadaists.
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 16 2014,07:11)...
I'm already well enough recognized for my science work, …
Are you sure? Laughing and pointing is hardly what the sane amongst us would count as 'well enough recognized'.
Odd that you remain unable to identify a single scientist who takes your work even remotely seriously.
Or is the 'positive recognition' the absurd coding award from 5 voters?
Quote ...
I do not want to dwell on your need to get the philosophical results you wanted using a “natural selection” variable that eliminates all the intelligence required to create real living things from your models. It's no surprise your algorithms only go where the “Natural Selection” variable is set to go, instead of controlled by a trinity of intelligence levels going where they together want to go, and can learn to stay warm using camp-fire then later invent electric space heaters and other climate control systems for even in outer space. The eldest intelligence level is said to be at least trillions of years old. ...
Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new. It's more like science finally figures out what religion has right along believed was somehow true. For you though it's a major paradigm shift, you'll just have to get used to...
More absurd swill from the world's foremost effluent generator.
No one in their right mind codes a 'natural selection' variable in a simulation. NS is a process, not a state.
That you persist in this elementary error is more than sufficient evidence that you simply do not understand evolutionary theory in the slightest.
As to a 'trinity of intelligence levels', well, that asserts facts not in evidence as we continue to point out.
You are unable to say what intelligence is -- you lack an operational definition at each of your three 'levels'.
You contradict yourself on the reality of the alleged 'bottom' level of 'molecular intelligence'.
You are unable to show reciprocal causation between any of the levels; that you continue to assert it does not in any way count as showing it.
Who says that anything is 'at least trillions of years old'? That's worse than absurd, given that the universe is not even a tenth of a trillion years old. Your physics and astronomy are seen to be as bad, as ill-informed and confused, as your biology.
As to your claim "Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new", well, you would have been correct if you had stopped one word short of where you did. Congratulations on composing a sentence that is concise and direct, but as far as content goes, it is as mad as everything else you post.
You haven't shifted anyone's paradigm, you haven't presented a new paradigm, you haven't shown how your "paradigm" has greater explanatory power, coherence, and cohesion than the existing models, nor have you shown a single flaw in the existing models -- physics, chemistry, and biology are all entirely untouched by your effluent.
So there really isn't anything we have to 'get used to'.
You, however, need to get used to being a crank -- and get used to be seen as a crank for that seems to be the outcome of the entirety of your careening progress across the net.
You're a loon, Gary.
A loser, a poseur, a deluded crank who has thrown away his life on a quest that doesn't even rise to the level of the quixotic. You have managed to find a level of meaninglessness lower than the dadaists.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2014,01:57) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 15 2014,11:04)Still though, it has been a great way to connect with AI and cognitive experts, who are working on the same core scientific problems.
Weaponizing boredom?
POTW
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 16 2014,01:57) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 15 2014,11:04)Still though, it has been a great way to connect with AI and cognitive experts, who are working on the same core scientific problems.
Weaponizing boredom?
POTW
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (N.Wells @ Mar. 15 2014,07:54)Gary finds a buddy:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums.....-619870
Gary, if you could keep your description to something along the lines of that hippocampus paragraph you just posted (only rewritten in halfway decent English) and restrain yourself from mentioning any of the unsupported and unsupportable crap that marks you as a loon (claiming that your model has anything to do with the origins of intelligence, reference to fractals without supporting equations, showing your feedback levels diagram, defining humans in a way that includes silky marmosets, and generally talking about ID theory, molecular intelligence, supposed problems with natural selection, salmon defending their young, and so on and so forth), then you might stand a reasonable chance of bamboozling a few harried reviewers and double-talking your way through to an Allen grant on the premise of modelling brain architecture requirements necessary to perform primitive behaviors such as simple foraging. However, given your nature, you will be able to do that only after the pope gets married amidst a swarm of flying pigs in a frozen-over Hell and fisherman and politicians stop lying.
I was going to propose a contest along the lines of "Gary's genius will be recognized when ..........", because the world needs some fresh metaphors for impossibility. However, that may be a backward approach, because for anyone who knows about Gary the ultimate adynaton might be "When the world recognizes Gaulin's genius".
I'm already well enough recognized for my science work, thank you, and I do not want to go in circles with your dizzying semantics where a nest-full of developing young that salmon parents defend are not their young.
Also, the IDLab model is now demonstrating “place avoidance” skills in an arena where neuroscientists can also watch AI's only “foraging” get sizzled trying to compete against a model that has temporal Grid Border and Place Cell internal world model in its confidence circuitry. The critter's origin is accounted for in the Theory of Intelligent Design (unnecessary Cambrian Explosion detail that became problematic was made gone by being precise by using theory specific phrase for that developmental level) gets into biological detail not yet technologically possible to model, where scientists understand why that is not include in this one that only has to get that part of the multicellular intelligence level right. It's a new benchmark, for AI, that's like from hell for models you would believe are intelligent just to use them as evidence to support your oversimplified world view, I love to complicate.
I do not want to dwell on your need to get the philosophical results you wanted using a “natural selection” variable that eliminates all the intelligence required to create real living things from your models. It's no surprise your algorithms only go where the “Natural Selection” variable is set to go, instead of controlled by a trinity of intelligence levels going where they together want to go, and can learn to stay warm using camp-fire then later invent electric space heaters and other climate control systems for even in outer space. The eldest intelligence level is said to be at least trillions of years old. Phylogenetics related sciences are now trying to read their mind to find out what they recall having happened, since having been created by more algorithmically precise “all knowing” forces that do not have to be intelligent to exist as matter producing consciousness.
Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new. It's more like science finally figures out what religion has right along believed was somehow true. For you though it's a major paradigm shift, you'll just have to get used to...
Quote (N.Wells @ Mar. 15 2014,07:54)Gary finds a buddy:
http://www.kurzweilai.net/forums.....-619870
Gary, if you could keep your description to something along the lines of that hippocampus paragraph you just posted (only rewritten in halfway decent English) and restrain yourself from mentioning any of the unsupported and unsupportable crap that marks you as a loon (claiming that your model has anything to do with the origins of intelligence, reference to fractals without supporting equations, showing your feedback levels diagram, defining humans in a way that includes silky marmosets, and generally talking about ID theory, molecular intelligence, supposed problems with natural selection, salmon defending their young, and so on and so forth), then you might stand a reasonable chance of bamboozling a few harried reviewers and double-talking your way through to an Allen grant on the premise of modelling brain architecture requirements necessary to perform primitive behaviors such as simple foraging. However, given your nature, you will be able to do that only after the pope gets married amidst a swarm of flying pigs in a frozen-over Hell and fisherman and politicians stop lying.
I was going to propose a contest along the lines of "Gary's genius will be recognized when ..........", because the world needs some fresh metaphors for impossibility. However, that may be a backward approach, because for anyone who knows about Gary the ultimate adynaton might be "When the world recognizes Gaulin's genius".
I'm already well enough recognized for my science work, thank you, and I do not want to go in circles with your dizzying semantics where a nest-full of developing young that salmon parents defend are not their young.
Also, the IDLab model is now demonstrating “place avoidance” skills in an arena where neuroscientists can also watch AI's only “foraging” get sizzled trying to compete against a model that has temporal Grid Border and Place Cell internal world model in its confidence circuitry. The critter's origin is accounted for in the Theory of Intelligent Design (unnecessary Cambrian Explosion detail that became problematic was made gone by being precise by using theory specific phrase for that developmental level) gets into biological detail not yet technologically possible to model, where scientists understand why that is not include in this one that only has to get that part of the multicellular intelligence level right. It's a new benchmark, for AI, that's like from hell for models you would believe are intelligent just to use them as evidence to support your oversimplified world view, I love to complicate.
I do not want to dwell on your need to get the philosophical results you wanted using a “natural selection” variable that eliminates all the intelligence required to create real living things from your models. It's no surprise your algorithms only go where the “Natural Selection” variable is set to go, instead of controlled by a trinity of intelligence levels going where they together want to go, and can learn to stay warm using camp-fire then later invent electric space heaters and other climate control systems for even in outer space. The eldest intelligence level is said to be at least trillions of years old. Phylogenetics related sciences are now trying to read their mind to find out what they recall having happened, since having been created by more algorithmically precise “all knowing” forces that do not have to be intelligent to exist as matter producing consciousness.
Theologically speaking I'm not saying anything new. It's more like science finally figures out what religion has right along believed was somehow true. For you though it's a major paradigm shift, you'll just have to get used to...
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by didymos
Quote (DiEb @ Mar. 16 2014,03:19) Quote (socle @ Mar. 16 2014,02:33)The NY Times has published a link to what appears to be the youtube account of the MH370 pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah. Zaharie's subscriptions include the channels of the Richard Dawkins Foundation and Tim Minchin and he has liked other atheism-related content.
Will Barry Arrington and KF be able to restrain themselves from speculating on the matter until the facts are known?
What are you talking about?
The pilot of the missing flight was apparently a godless materialist. Barry loves to blame any tragedy he can on such people. Thus the question: will he go there this time?
Quote (DiEb @ Mar. 16 2014,03:19) Quote (socle @ Mar. 16 2014,02:33)The NY Times has published a link to what appears to be the youtube account of the MH370 pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah. Zaharie's subscriptions include the channels of the Richard Dawkins Foundation and Tim Minchin and he has liked other atheism-related content.
Will Barry Arrington and KF be able to restrain themselves from speculating on the matter until the facts are known?
What are you talking about?
The pilot of the missing flight was apparently a godless materialist. Barry loves to blame any tragedy he can on such people. Thus the question: will he go there this time?
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by DiEb
Quote (Learned Hand @ Mar. 15 2014,08:16)What a coincidence, I stopped by to mention that I just got back from the first day of the REASONS conference. I heard Dembski and Meyer speak, and spoke a bit to Dembski afterwards. I probably won't have time to write it up for a couple of days, but it was interesting.
I'd love to read your essay. When and where will you publish it?
Quote (Learned Hand @ Mar. 15 2014,08:16)What a coincidence, I stopped by to mention that I just got back from the first day of the REASONS conference. I heard Dembski and Meyer speak, and spoke a bit to Dembski afterwards. I probably won't have time to write it up for a couple of days, but it was interesting.
I'd love to read your essay. When and where will you publish it?
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by DiEb
Quote (socle @ Mar. 16 2014,02:33)The NY Times has published a link to what appears to be the youtube account of the MH370 pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah. Zaharie's subscriptions include the channels of the Richard Dawkins Foundation and Tim Minchin and he has liked other atheism-related content.
Will Barry Arrington and KF be able to restrain themselves from speculating on the matter until the facts are known?
What are you talking about?
Quote (socle @ Mar. 16 2014,02:33)The NY Times has published a link to what appears to be the youtube account of the MH370 pilot, Zaharie Ahmad Shah. Zaharie's subscriptions include the channels of the Richard Dawkins Foundation and Tim Minchin and he has liked other atheism-related content.
Will Barry Arrington and KF be able to restrain themselves from speculating on the matter until the facts are known?
What are you talking about?
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Driver
Quote (khan @ Mar. 16 2014,00:31)TC; DR
Too crazy...
What do you mean?
Quote As I will explain in a future article, the false Jews, or the "synagogue of Satan", represent the church of Laodicea, which I interpret to symbolize the cerebellum, a supervised sensorimotor mechanism used for routine or automated tasks. The cerebellum receives sensory signals only from rich sensors.
Quote (khan @ Mar. 16 2014,00:31)TC; DR
Too crazy...
What do you mean?
Quote As I will explain in a future article, the false Jews, or the "synagogue of Satan", represent the church of Laodicea, which I interpret to symbolize the cerebellum, a supervised sensorimotor mechanism used for routine or automated tasks. The cerebellum receives sensory signals only from rich sensors.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Driver
Quote (Ptaylor @ Mar. 16 2014,07:40)In a conversation about mitochondrial Eve, PaV decides he has a good reason to excuse himself from responding to anything wd400 might have to say:
Quote wd400:
From what I know, aren’t you about 30? That means you were what, ten years old when all this was going on, while I was in my forties. Do you want me to deny reality? Is that what you’re asking me?
It was in the papers. It was a topic of discussion. I remember it vividly. I waited expectantly for their results exactly because if there were multiple origins of “Eve” this would prove troubling. And then they were surprised when it turned out that there was only ‘one’ Eve. I remember all of this very well. We’re not in a communist state, yet; so I’m in no way going to deny reality.
Unless you’re older than forty, I’m not going to accept a word you say. Darwinists, like Communists, rewrite history to please themselves. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid, wd400.
...
Also note the communism references - Tea party much, PaV?
UD link
You know someone has no reply when all they have left is ageism.
Quote (Ptaylor @ Mar. 16 2014,07:40)In a conversation about mitochondrial Eve, PaV decides he has a good reason to excuse himself from responding to anything wd400 might have to say:
Quote wd400:
From what I know, aren’t you about 30? That means you were what, ten years old when all this was going on, while I was in my forties. Do you want me to deny reality? Is that what you’re asking me?
It was in the papers. It was a topic of discussion. I remember it vividly. I waited expectantly for their results exactly because if there were multiple origins of “Eve” this would prove troubling. And then they were surprised when it turned out that there was only ‘one’ Eve. I remember all of this very well. We’re not in a communist state, yet; so I’m in no way going to deny reality.
Unless you’re older than forty, I’m not going to accept a word you say. Darwinists, like Communists, rewrite history to please themselves. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid, wd400.
...
Also note the communism references - Tea party much, PaV?
UD link
You know someone has no reply when all they have left is ageism.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Ptaylor
In a conversation about mitochondrial Eve, PaV decides he has a good reason to excuse himself from responding to anything wd400 might have to say:
Quote wd400:
From what I know, aren’t you about 30? That means you were what, ten years old when all this was going on, while I was in my forties. Do you want me to deny reality? Is that what you’re asking me?
It was in the papers. It was a topic of discussion. I remember it vividly. I waited expectantly for their results exactly because if there were multiple origins of “Eve” this would prove troubling. And then they were surprised when it turned out that there was only ‘one’ Eve. I remember all of this very well. We’re not in a communist state, yet; so I’m in no way going to deny reality.
Unless you’re older than forty, I’m not going to accept a word you say. Darwinists, like Communists, rewrite history to please themselves. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid, wd400.
...
Also note the communism references - Tea party much, PaV?
UD link
In a conversation about mitochondrial Eve, PaV decides he has a good reason to excuse himself from responding to anything wd400 might have to say:
Quote wd400:
From what I know, aren’t you about 30? That means you were what, ten years old when all this was going on, while I was in my forties. Do you want me to deny reality? Is that what you’re asking me?
It was in the papers. It was a topic of discussion. I remember it vividly. I waited expectantly for their results exactly because if there were multiple origins of “Eve” this would prove troubling. And then they were surprised when it turned out that there was only ‘one’ Eve. I remember all of this very well. We’re not in a communist state, yet; so I’m in no way going to deny reality.
Unless you’re older than forty, I’m not going to accept a word you say. Darwinists, like Communists, rewrite history to please themselves. Don’t drink the Kool-Aid, wd400.
...
Also note the communism references - Tea party much, PaV?
UD link
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 14 2014,20:36)Gary why don't you head over to Dembski's old blog, http://uncommondescent.com/....ent....ent.com and see if you can find supporters who might promote your theory?
I could maybe send an email promising to not be tyrannical then register every 12 hours in hopes of getting in. But then again I have been very busy (hiding out) showing the Grid, Border and Place Cell model to AI and neuroscience experts, while finishing up the remaining IDLab4 work, and explaining where place avoidance experiments logically go after after neural data has been recorded and experiments need comparable data for pampered rats that like playing in an invisible shock-zone arena (not necessarily electric) for treats even though they get blasted with air or something for stepping in the wrong place at the wrong time.
This is what I now have for accurate as possible description:
Quote Grid and Border Cell Attractor Network for navigation to memory mapped Places.
This is a demonstration program for the attractor network that is making it possible for the next Intelligence Design Lab critter to master the invisible moving shock zone arena test, which required a well designed hippocampus (construction began in the IDLab3) and related circuitry added to its Confidence system. It's the critter's internal world model where its path around obstacles is planned out, visualized. As in biology border cells are mixed into a population of grid cells that have a hexagonal array/lattice electrochemical field whereupon a similar network of place cells temporarily map relevant places into this spatial representation of the external environment. A cyan colored grid attracting location (food or other need) emits continuous AC waves, as in radio transmission. Waves will propagate from the grid attractor to the yellow with tan inside (critter) location that is then guided to it by the violet color vectors indicating head-direction angles to stay between for the shortest path around the border cell created barrier that blocks wave propagation, waves must propagate around it. How our brain or other cognitive system might produce and combine signals into such a spatial representation does not matter to this model. There are simply places with borders (boundary or barrier) mapped onto a hexagonal grid that behaves in a way that at each grid location is an angle vector pointing in the direction of what the critter is currently attracted to (if hungry then food locations propagate signal that changes angle vectors towards them). Borders can optionally include those of invisible hazards to avoid where beyond a certain point it gets a shock, or bumps into a transparent wall. Since this minimal code demonstration simplifies the understanding of what is most important to know in regards to how the upcoming IDLab4 works it made sense to start with this more simplified model, now ready for you to experiment with.
With it being important I keep up with a scientific revolution made of computer models like this what's up at UD is for at least right now something I should maybe not even get involved in. But they are welcome to say hi in this thread, where rules are all can talk as religiously as they want about the Theory of Intelligent Design, especially on Sunday. The more formal “science” happens in emails to scientists and forums where that would be out of place there, but fits right into this thread. This forum is for those who like to dwell on all the religious implications, so be it. What happens in this thread is an interesting way of diffusing the energy. I'm able to get away with what UD has a hard time with, that comes from trying to represent both science and religion in the same place.
The most important thing of them all right now is what is happening everywhere else, besides this thread. I have to stay focused on what already promotes itself that I'm already very caught up in the momentum of. If they want to help, then they can (metaphorically speaking) send food to the one most stuck with all the science work.
Quote (stevestory @ Mar. 14 2014,20:36)Gary why don't you head over to Dembski's old blog, http://uncommondescent.com/....ent....ent.com and see if you can find supporters who might promote your theory?
I could maybe send an email promising to not be tyrannical then register every 12 hours in hopes of getting in. But then again I have been very busy (hiding out) showing the Grid, Border and Place Cell model to AI and neuroscience experts, while finishing up the remaining IDLab4 work, and explaining where place avoidance experiments logically go after after neural data has been recorded and experiments need comparable data for pampered rats that like playing in an invisible shock-zone arena (not necessarily electric) for treats even though they get blasted with air or something for stepping in the wrong place at the wrong time.
This is what I now have for accurate as possible description:
Quote Grid and Border Cell Attractor Network for navigation to memory mapped Places.
This is a demonstration program for the attractor network that is making it possible for the next Intelligence Design Lab critter to master the invisible moving shock zone arena test, which required a well designed hippocampus (construction began in the IDLab3) and related circuitry added to its Confidence system. It's the critter's internal world model where its path around obstacles is planned out, visualized. As in biology border cells are mixed into a population of grid cells that have a hexagonal array/lattice electrochemical field whereupon a similar network of place cells temporarily map relevant places into this spatial representation of the external environment. A cyan colored grid attracting location (food or other need) emits continuous AC waves, as in radio transmission. Waves will propagate from the grid attractor to the yellow with tan inside (critter) location that is then guided to it by the violet color vectors indicating head-direction angles to stay between for the shortest path around the border cell created barrier that blocks wave propagation, waves must propagate around it. How our brain or other cognitive system might produce and combine signals into such a spatial representation does not matter to this model. There are simply places with borders (boundary or barrier) mapped onto a hexagonal grid that behaves in a way that at each grid location is an angle vector pointing in the direction of what the critter is currently attracted to (if hungry then food locations propagate signal that changes angle vectors towards them). Borders can optionally include those of invisible hazards to avoid where beyond a certain point it gets a shock, or bumps into a transparent wall. Since this minimal code demonstration simplifies the understanding of what is most important to know in regards to how the upcoming IDLab4 works it made sense to start with this more simplified model, now ready for you to experiment with.
With it being important I keep up with a scientific revolution made of computer models like this what's up at UD is for at least right now something I should maybe not even get involved in. But they are welcome to say hi in this thread, where rules are all can talk as religiously as they want about the Theory of Intelligent Design, especially on Sunday. The more formal “science” happens in emails to scientists and forums where that would be out of place there, but fits right into this thread. This forum is for those who like to dwell on all the religious implications, so be it. What happens in this thread is an interesting way of diffusing the energy. I'm able to get away with what UD has a hard time with, that comes from trying to represent both science and religion in the same place.
The most important thing of them all right now is what is happening everywhere else, besides this thread. I have to stay focused on what already promotes itself that I'm already very caught up in the momentum of. If they want to help, then they can (metaphorically speaking) send food to the one most stuck with all the science work.
Categories: AE Public BB
Board Mechanics
Post by Quack
I have not seen the “Feedback” problem in a long time but now it is worse than ever:
_Topic Title_Forum_Topic Starter_Replies_Views_Last Post
_ _Uncommonly Dense Thread 5 (Pages 1 2 3 ..21 )Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet_After the Bar Closes..._stevestory_617_26380_Mar. 15 2014,02:16Last Post: Learned Hand
_ _hitesh langauge _Feedback_acfvpbugy_0_0_Mar. 15 2014,00:34Last Post: -acfvpbugy-
_ _cech leningrad's _Feedback_cfsosfsqg_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,23:45Last Post: -cfsosfsqg-
_ _Joe G.'s Tardgasm (Pages 1 2 3 ..244 )How long can it last?_After the Bar Closes..._Tom Ames_7300_868736_Mar. 14 2014,22:15Last Post: Henry J
_ _gnosticizing graupi _Feedback_outletnadou_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:55Last Post: -outletnadou-
_ _snarly ordway mizz _Feedback_outlethpqwr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:17Last Post: -outlethpqwr-
_ _fairest vhayu gedda _Feedback_outletdadwq_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:17Last Post: -outletdadwq-
_ _elergie caudillo co _Feedback_outletaqtjg_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:59Last Post: -outletaqtjg-
_ _leaena sawbridgewor _Feedback_outletkctqr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:56Last Post: -outletkctqr-
_ _A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin (Pages 1 2 3 ..326 )As big as the poop that does not look_After the Bar Closes..._keiths_9757_265454_Mar. 14 2014,20:36Last Post: stevestory
_ _perryville kalaazar _Feedback_outletncwol_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:04Last Post: -outletncwol-
_ _trepanned tolorance _Feedback_outletaftmx_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:55Last Post: -outletaftmx-
_ _hegglun conferernce _Feedback_outletdklvb_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:50Last Post: -outletdklvb-
_ _homies prana pokhar _Feedback_outletnxmkk_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:12Last Post: -outletnxmkk-
_ _factset breteche ma _Feedback_outleteikno_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:11Last Post: -outleteikno-
_ _morta gleamed karla _Feedback_outletwsqsr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:10Last Post: -outletwsqsr-
_ _sarala vshorad smal _Feedback_outletocsur_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:07Last Post: -outletocsur-
_ _rito hoplite cholbi _Feedback_outletqldvw_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,18:50Last Post: -outletqldvw-
I have not seen the “Feedback” problem in a long time but now it is worse than ever:
_Topic Title_Forum_Topic Starter_Replies_Views_Last Post
_ _Uncommonly Dense Thread 5 (Pages 1 2 3 ..21 )Return To Teh Dingbat Buffet_After the Bar Closes..._stevestory_617_26380_Mar. 15 2014,02:16Last Post: Learned Hand
_ _hitesh langauge _Feedback_acfvpbugy_0_0_Mar. 15 2014,00:34Last Post: -acfvpbugy-
_ _cech leningrad's _Feedback_cfsosfsqg_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,23:45Last Post: -cfsosfsqg-
_ _Joe G.'s Tardgasm (Pages 1 2 3 ..244 )How long can it last?_After the Bar Closes..._Tom Ames_7300_868736_Mar. 14 2014,22:15Last Post: Henry J
_ _gnosticizing graupi _Feedback_outletnadou_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:55Last Post: -outletnadou-
_ _snarly ordway mizz _Feedback_outlethpqwr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:17Last Post: -outlethpqwr-
_ _fairest vhayu gedda _Feedback_outletdadwq_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,21:17Last Post: -outletdadwq-
_ _elergie caudillo co _Feedback_outletaqtjg_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:59Last Post: -outletaqtjg-
_ _leaena sawbridgewor _Feedback_outletkctqr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:56Last Post: -outletkctqr-
_ _A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin (Pages 1 2 3 ..326 )As big as the poop that does not look_After the Bar Closes..._keiths_9757_265454_Mar. 14 2014,20:36Last Post: stevestory
_ _perryville kalaazar _Feedback_outletncwol_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,20:04Last Post: -outletncwol-
_ _trepanned tolorance _Feedback_outletaftmx_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:55Last Post: -outletaftmx-
_ _hegglun conferernce _Feedback_outletdklvb_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:50Last Post: -outletdklvb-
_ _homies prana pokhar _Feedback_outletnxmkk_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:12Last Post: -outletnxmkk-
_ _factset breteche ma _Feedback_outleteikno_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:11Last Post: -outleteikno-
_ _morta gleamed karla _Feedback_outletwsqsr_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:10Last Post: -outletwsqsr-
_ _sarala vshorad smal _Feedback_outletocsur_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,19:07Last Post: -outletocsur-
_ _rito hoplite cholbi _Feedback_outletqldvw_0_0_Mar. 14 2014,18:50Last Post: -outletqldvw-
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Learned Hand
What a coincidence, I stopped by to mention that I just got back from the first day of the REASONS conference. I heard Dembski and Meyer speak, and spoke a bit to Dembski afterwards. I probably won't have time to write it up for a couple of days, but it was interesting.
What a coincidence, I stopped by to mention that I just got back from the first day of the REASONS conference. I heard Dembski and Meyer speak, and spoke a bit to Dembski afterwards. I probably won't have time to write it up for a couple of days, but it was interesting.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by sparc
Indeed, none of these Quote primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) will ever join a meeting which claims
Quote “The goal of REASONS 2014 will be to demonstrate the beautiful compatibility and synergy of the natural sciences and orthodox Christianity.”
Indeed, none of these Quote primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) will ever join a meeting which claims
Quote “The goal of REASONS 2014 will be to demonstrate the beautiful compatibility and synergy of the natural sciences and orthodox Christianity.”
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by sparc
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,23:03) Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 14 2014,21:51) Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Barry gave it to those three no-marks and passed Joe over. Poor Chubsy. Do it for the Lulz, Barry!
you beat me on that: Quote 117 Barry Arrington March 14, 2014 at 5:53 pm Quote GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privilegesAgreed. They now have them.
Some preview from a current comment:
Quote
116
Eric AndersonMarch 14, 2014 at 5:50 pm
Mapou @109:
Intelligent design has been defined by the primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) as the idea that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process.” Period. That’s it.
Yes, that inference includes — by definition if something is designed — a reference to the existence of a designer, but it does not get into questions about the designer’s intent, identity, purposes, desires, motives, methods or otherwise.
These second-order questions may be interesting in their own right. And an affirmative answer to the design question may have implications for some of these second-order questions, but they are logically distinct and separate and must be recognized as such.
The fact that a forum like UD hosts various threads and contains comments and tangents, including from those who desire to delve into these second-order questions, has nothing to do with whether or not these issues should be kept carefully separate. I will be the first to acknowledge that the second-order questions are interesting, but they must not be conflated with the fundamental questions that intelligent design asks.
A tremendous amount of effort, time, energy, and spilled ink has been spent by the primary proponents of intelligent design to make sure everyone is clear on this point.
Unfortunately, as anyone familiar with the debate knows, and as UB has aptly pointed out, one of the primary ploys of anti-ID rhetoric is to conflate the question of design detection with secondary questions about the identity, intent, methods, motives, etc. of this or that putative designer.
It is therefore supremely unhelpful for anyone who is hoping to advance the debate or bring clarity to the discussion to conflate the two and claim that ID somehow includes or “merges” these second-order questions with the purely objective and scientific inquiry about whether design is detectable. It is extremely unhelpful for public perception, and it is wrong logically.
In other words: Quote So! It's all forgotten now, and let's hear no more about it. So, that's two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Hermann Goering, and four Colditz salads.
Indeed, none of the primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) ever join a meeting which claims Quote “The goal of REASONS 2014 will be to demonstrate the beautiful compatibility and synergy of the natural sciences and orthodox Christianity.”
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,23:03) Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 14 2014,21:51) Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Barry gave it to those three no-marks and passed Joe over. Poor Chubsy. Do it for the Lulz, Barry!
you beat me on that: Quote 117 Barry Arrington March 14, 2014 at 5:53 pm Quote GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privilegesAgreed. They now have them.
Some preview from a current comment:
Quote
116
Eric AndersonMarch 14, 2014 at 5:50 pm
Mapou @109:
Intelligent design has been defined by the primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) as the idea that “certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process.” Period. That’s it.
Yes, that inference includes — by definition if something is designed — a reference to the existence of a designer, but it does not get into questions about the designer’s intent, identity, purposes, desires, motives, methods or otherwise.
These second-order questions may be interesting in their own right. And an affirmative answer to the design question may have implications for some of these second-order questions, but they are logically distinct and separate and must be recognized as such.
The fact that a forum like UD hosts various threads and contains comments and tangents, including from those who desire to delve into these second-order questions, has nothing to do with whether or not these issues should be kept carefully separate. I will be the first to acknowledge that the second-order questions are interesting, but they must not be conflated with the fundamental questions that intelligent design asks.
A tremendous amount of effort, time, energy, and spilled ink has been spent by the primary proponents of intelligent design to make sure everyone is clear on this point.
Unfortunately, as anyone familiar with the debate knows, and as UB has aptly pointed out, one of the primary ploys of anti-ID rhetoric is to conflate the question of design detection with secondary questions about the identity, intent, methods, motives, etc. of this or that putative designer.
It is therefore supremely unhelpful for anyone who is hoping to advance the debate or bring clarity to the discussion to conflate the two and claim that ID somehow includes or “merges” these second-order questions with the purely objective and scientific inquiry about whether design is detectable. It is extremely unhelpful for public perception, and it is wrong logically.
In other words: Quote So! It's all forgotten now, and let's hear no more about it. So, that's two egg mayonnaise, a prawn Goebbels, a Hermann Goering, and four Colditz salads.
Indeed, none of the primary proponents of ID (Dembski, Behe, Meyer, et al.) ever join a meeting which claims Quote “The goal of REASONS 2014 will be to demonstrate the beautiful compatibility and synergy of the natural sciences and orthodox Christianity.”
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 14 2014,21:51) Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Barry gave it to those three no-marks and passed Joe over. Poor Chubsy. Do it for the Lulz, Barry!
Quote (OgreMkV @ Mar. 14 2014,21:51) Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Barry gave it to those three no-marks and passed Joe over. Poor Chubsy. Do it for the Lulz, Barry!
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by Henry J
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 14 2014,12:54)Doesn't look like Petrushka even knows that Joe exists.
Some people have all the luck?
Quote (midwifetoad @ Mar. 14 2014,12:54)Doesn't look like Petrushka even knows that Joe exists.
Some people have all the luck?
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by OgreMkV
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 14 2014,14:32)A terrible idea:
Quote 108
StephenBMarch 14, 2014 at 1:01 pm
UD administrators: I believe that GPuccio, Eric Anderson, and Timaeus should be given posting privileges
A great idea:
Give Joe G, Batshit77 and Gary Gaulin positing priveleges.
Look, UD / ID is dying a tragic, slow death. Let's make the last season awesome with SWEARING! YOUTUBE! and MYTHEORYOFID!
If they really wanted to get back in blog hits, they would give one of us posting rights.
Categories: AE Public BB
