news aggregator
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
KF yearns to descend to the Joe G level of 'pathetic'"
Quote 299
kairosfocusMarch 6, 2014 at 6:20 pm
PS: To correct a distortion, the recently Dr Matzke (some time back, I was corrected going the other way, for addressing as Dr, I just learned of his promotion) slandered me a couple of months ago then popped up in a thread yesterday as if nothing happened. I instructed him he was on strike 2 and needed to make amends. He doubled down, and just as I warned, I deleted posts he made beyond that point, to call him to order. He and his ilk know that all he needs to do to return to threads I own is to simply make amends for a toxic false accusation. This, he obviously cannot bring himself to do. Unless and until he makes such amends, I will treat him as a disruptive heckler and will do the online equivalent of calling security to have him removed from premises he has worn out his welcome at through uncivil conduct. That is what Franklin and others are trying to label as censorship in order to smear me for standing up for civil conduct in the teeth of slander, and it shows the fundamental incivility and arrogant rudeness of such. Since Franklin knows or should know better than the smear he just tried to spread, that too is a second order slander. Franklin has just revealed himself as a heckler and enabler of heckling for the world to see.
Thanks Big Brother! Its easier if you decide what's right and wrong for me before I even have to read it!
KF yearns to descend to the Joe G level of 'pathetic'"
Quote 299
kairosfocusMarch 6, 2014 at 6:20 pm
PS: To correct a distortion, the recently Dr Matzke (some time back, I was corrected going the other way, for addressing as Dr, I just learned of his promotion) slandered me a couple of months ago then popped up in a thread yesterday as if nothing happened. I instructed him he was on strike 2 and needed to make amends. He doubled down, and just as I warned, I deleted posts he made beyond that point, to call him to order. He and his ilk know that all he needs to do to return to threads I own is to simply make amends for a toxic false accusation. This, he obviously cannot bring himself to do. Unless and until he makes such amends, I will treat him as a disruptive heckler and will do the online equivalent of calling security to have him removed from premises he has worn out his welcome at through uncivil conduct. That is what Franklin and others are trying to label as censorship in order to smear me for standing up for civil conduct in the teeth of slander, and it shows the fundamental incivility and arrogant rudeness of such. Since Franklin knows or should know better than the smear he just tried to spread, that too is a second order slander. Franklin has just revealed himself as a heckler and enabler of heckling for the world to see.
Thanks Big Brother! Its easier if you decide what's right and wrong for me before I even have to read it!
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (didymos @ Mar. 06 2014,05:27) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,02:42) Quote (didymos @ Mar. 06 2014,02:48) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,00:20)I'm very seriously here because science requires me to publicly kick your ass, in your own damn game.
SCIENCE DEMANDS IT!
(BTW, you done fucked that up too, Gary)
This time, the side you're representing does not get to declare their own victory.
I'm not declaring victory, you dimwit. I'm declaring your incompetence at public ass-kickery.
In this case, it's not the head-game kind of ass kicking, where as you can see from the replies to this thread already has a line of volunteers willing to have their asses kicked that way, it's from what quietly goes on everywhere else. Which is why I have to get back to work on the new ID Lab, where we've got thrills and shocks, even supersonic fighting cocks (when design is rudely changed to appear like one then that's clicked into Turbo mode for going 1000 or so mph).
Quote (didymos @ Mar. 06 2014,05:27) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,02:42) Quote (didymos @ Mar. 06 2014,02:48) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,00:20)I'm very seriously here because science requires me to publicly kick your ass, in your own damn game.
SCIENCE DEMANDS IT!
(BTW, you done fucked that up too, Gary)
This time, the side you're representing does not get to declare their own victory.
I'm not declaring victory, you dimwit. I'm declaring your incompetence at public ass-kickery.
In this case, it's not the head-game kind of ass kicking, where as you can see from the replies to this thread already has a line of volunteers willing to have their asses kicked that way, it's from what quietly goes on everywhere else. Which is why I have to get back to work on the new ID Lab, where we've got thrills and shocks, even supersonic fighting cocks (when design is rudely changed to appear like one then that's clicked into Turbo mode for going 1000 or so mph).
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
Quote Franklin:
you just tried an ad hominem atmosphere-poisoning distractor to polarise and divert discussion instead of dealing with a key matter on its merits.
You full well know that I gave a specific offer to host such an essay in toto, here at UD, and that it could freely be hosted elsewhere in parallel (I suggested TSZ).
No censorship or manipulation of such a post would be feasible under such circumstances, so you are making a deliberate misrepresentation in the teeth of what you know or should know.
It is also the case in describing showing hecklers and slanderers the door until they can find a civil tongue in their heads, as censorship.
Shame on you.
But then, this sort of diversion, twisting about, poisoning the atmosphere and making of threats is unfortunately all too common in the circles of toxic critics UD has had to deal with.
For instance, should I take your behaviour just now as willful enabling of the sort of behaviour where some attempted to identify and publicly name my uninvolved wife and minor children? Or, those who tried to reveal my residential address under similar circumstances?
I would suggest to you and ilk that leaving such information up and entertaining the sort of thug who does that IS enabling, and “freedom of expression” has limits of civility long before we come to libel and slander issues because there are ill willed, maladjusted bullies and crazies like that out there.
KF
tl:dr - Censorship is okay when KF does it.
Quote Franklin:
you just tried an ad hominem atmosphere-poisoning distractor to polarise and divert discussion instead of dealing with a key matter on its merits.
You full well know that I gave a specific offer to host such an essay in toto, here at UD, and that it could freely be hosted elsewhere in parallel (I suggested TSZ).
No censorship or manipulation of such a post would be feasible under such circumstances, so you are making a deliberate misrepresentation in the teeth of what you know or should know.
It is also the case in describing showing hecklers and slanderers the door until they can find a civil tongue in their heads, as censorship.
Shame on you.
But then, this sort of diversion, twisting about, poisoning the atmosphere and making of threats is unfortunately all too common in the circles of toxic critics UD has had to deal with.
For instance, should I take your behaviour just now as willful enabling of the sort of behaviour where some attempted to identify and publicly name my uninvolved wife and minor children? Or, those who tried to reveal my residential address under similar circumstances?
I would suggest to you and ilk that leaving such information up and entertaining the sort of thug who does that IS enabling, and “freedom of expression” has limits of civility long before we come to libel and slander issues because there are ill willed, maladjusted bullies and crazies like that out there.
KF
tl:dr - Censorship is okay when KF does it.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
And know KF has just had another BIGNUM / 747 Junkyard / NOMATH blurt. Still no CSI calcs, KF? Sad, and very telling.
And know KF has just had another BIGNUM / 747 Junkyard / NOMATH blurt. Still no CSI calcs, KF? Sad, and very telling.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense: The BlogCzar Years. Er, Months.
Post by JohnW
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 06 2014,14:31) Quote As for NM’s failure to acknowledge that a double headed coin landing H is not attributable to chance, that is a case of reduction to absurdity on his part.
Huh? This is listed as part of the justification for obliterating NM's words. What if it had a picture of a duck on it? How do its markings influence a spun disk's final position?
Jesus could have turned the head into a picture of a duck if he wanted, but chose not to. Therefore not chance.
Quote (Soapy Sam @ Mar. 06 2014,14:31) Quote As for NM’s failure to acknowledge that a double headed coin landing H is not attributable to chance, that is a case of reduction to absurdity on his part.
Huh? This is listed as part of the justification for obliterating NM's words. What if it had a picture of a duck on it? How do its markings influence a spun disk's final position?
Jesus could have turned the head into a picture of a duck if he wanted, but chose not to. Therefore not chance.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Ptaylor
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 07 2014,10:49)I WUV YOU FRANKLIN:
Quote yes, it does speak volumes that the environment here is not conducive to uncensored/unmodified responses. IOW, no one trust you…just look at your (Kf) recent censoring of Dr. Matzke.s responses and your subsequent modification of one of his posts….yes, Kf, it does speak volumes. It also speaks volumes that you refuse to engage those you wish to engage in a forum where they (and you) are free to make uncensored points/opinions.
You are either against censorship or you are not. Apparently, given your actions and your requests that others be censored elsewhere puts you in the “yes I approve of censorship’ category.
And note the emphasis of Dr. in the original
Quote (Richardthughes @ Mar. 07 2014,10:49)I WUV YOU FRANKLIN:
Quote yes, it does speak volumes that the environment here is not conducive to uncensored/unmodified responses. IOW, no one trust you…just look at your (Kf) recent censoring of Dr. Matzke.s responses and your subsequent modification of one of his posts….yes, Kf, it does speak volumes. It also speaks volumes that you refuse to engage those you wish to engage in a forum where they (and you) are free to make uncensored points/opinions.
You are either against censorship or you are not. Apparently, given your actions and your requests that others be censored elsewhere puts you in the “yes I approve of censorship’ category.
And note the emphasis of Dr. in the original
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (Driver @ Mar. 06 2014,08:38) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,11:28) Quote (Driver @ Mar. 06 2014,04:43) Quote (Ptaylor @ Mar. 06 2014,01:59) Quote As for his attempts to belittle and derail discussion of a report that something out there has caused VJT’s thread to go viral, which turned out to be a republication of a story; let the resort to pettiness, churlishness, out of order behaviour, rudeness and the like speak for itself in the context of over a year in the which any objector to design theory anywhere in the world has had a free kick at goal, and there has been a refusal to take it. Likewise, it should be quite clear that I have no power to censor NM, i.e. suppress his freedom to express himself as he likes, but I am taking the step of saying his rudeness and pattern of false accusations of dishonesty have worn out his welcome in threads I own. I trust that this modest disciplinary step may help wake him up after his tantrum passes, and he will find it in himself to make amends. Enough is enough. KF
F/N Such red herring tactics designed to poison the well and cloud the atmosphere are straight out of the Alinskyite playbook. Cf Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals
F/N Plato warned about this behaviour in book XI of The Laws...
F/N I have personal experience on the front line of fighting Marxists and their turnabout tactics. You will not win, sir!
BYDAND!
And good for you. None in this forum should mind your enablers having made themselves equally irrelevant in judging the scientific merit of the Theory of Intelligent Design.
Who are my enablers?
Your “enablers” are at a personal blog, Uncommon Descent, where all views expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily represent the Discovery Institute where the Theory of Intelligent Design has long been well enough defined in a single page of information.
There is nothing wrong with their blogging their opinions. As earlier shown, I sometimes get Ideas from UD. But they cannot change what happens in scientific communities that for the most part do not know about them, or would bother keeping up with all of that.
It may seem like what the blogs are saying is important to the future of the Theory of Intelligent Design but that is fully dependant on how scientifically useful the theory becomes, to anyone who reads it.
This forum is equally powerless against what everyone else thinks, after knowing what is already possible by having followed the scientific evidence, wherever it leads from the theory that the Discovery Institute premised, not UD.
Quote (Driver @ Mar. 06 2014,08:38) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Mar. 06 2014,11:28) Quote (Driver @ Mar. 06 2014,04:43) Quote (Ptaylor @ Mar. 06 2014,01:59) Quote As for his attempts to belittle and derail discussion of a report that something out there has caused VJT’s thread to go viral, which turned out to be a republication of a story; let the resort to pettiness, churlishness, out of order behaviour, rudeness and the like speak for itself in the context of over a year in the which any objector to design theory anywhere in the world has had a free kick at goal, and there has been a refusal to take it. Likewise, it should be quite clear that I have no power to censor NM, i.e. suppress his freedom to express himself as he likes, but I am taking the step of saying his rudeness and pattern of false accusations of dishonesty have worn out his welcome in threads I own. I trust that this modest disciplinary step may help wake him up after his tantrum passes, and he will find it in himself to make amends. Enough is enough. KF
F/N Such red herring tactics designed to poison the well and cloud the atmosphere are straight out of the Alinskyite playbook. Cf Saul Alinsky, Rules For Radicals
F/N Plato warned about this behaviour in book XI of The Laws...
F/N I have personal experience on the front line of fighting Marxists and their turnabout tactics. You will not win, sir!
BYDAND!
And good for you. None in this forum should mind your enablers having made themselves equally irrelevant in judging the scientific merit of the Theory of Intelligent Design.
Who are my enablers?
Your “enablers” are at a personal blog, Uncommon Descent, where all views expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily represent the Discovery Institute where the Theory of Intelligent Design has long been well enough defined in a single page of information.
There is nothing wrong with their blogging their opinions. As earlier shown, I sometimes get Ideas from UD. But they cannot change what happens in scientific communities that for the most part do not know about them, or would bother keeping up with all of that.
It may seem like what the blogs are saying is important to the future of the Theory of Intelligent Design but that is fully dependant on how scientifically useful the theory becomes, to anyone who reads it.
This forum is equally powerless against what everyone else thinks, after knowing what is already possible by having followed the scientific evidence, wherever it leads from the theory that the Discovery Institute premised, not UD.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
I WUV YOU FRANKLIN:
Quote yes, it does speak volumes that the environment here is not conducive to uncensored/unmodified responses. IOW, no one trust you…just look at your (Kf) recent censoring of Dr. Matzke.s responses and your subsequent modification of one of his posts….yes, Kf, it does speak volumes. It also speaks volumes that you refuse to engage those you wish to engage in a forum where they (and you) are free to make uncensored points/opinions.
You are either against censorship or you are not. Apparently, given your actions and your requests that others be censored elsewhere puts you in the “yes I approve of censorship’ category.
I WUV YOU FRANKLIN:
Quote yes, it does speak volumes that the environment here is not conducive to uncensored/unmodified responses. IOW, no one trust you…just look at your (Kf) recent censoring of Dr. Matzke.s responses and your subsequent modification of one of his posts….yes, Kf, it does speak volumes. It also speaks volumes that you refuse to engage those you wish to engage in a forum where they (and you) are free to make uncensored points/opinions.
You are either against censorship or you are not. Apparently, given your actions and your requests that others be censored elsewhere puts you in the “yes I approve of censorship’ category.
Categories: AE Public BB
Uncommonly Dense Thread 5
Post by Richardthughes
KF is *very* excited about a video.
He comments:
Quote PS: In only a few minutes, another 100, it is going viral.
He then graciously gives us time stamps and counts:
Days_Count
0.00_82000
0.03_82600
0.09_83602
0.15_84272
0.38_87300
What's the best fit for this? A linear regression (r^2 .9958). That's the very definition of NOT VIRAL.
KF is *very* excited about a video.
He comments:
Quote PS: In only a few minutes, another 100, it is going viral.
He then graciously gives us time stamps and counts:
Days_Count
0.00_82000
0.03_82600
0.09_83602
0.15_84272
0.38_87300
What's the best fit for this? A linear regression (r^2 .9958). That's the very definition of NOT VIRAL.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (N.Wells @ Feb. 26 2014,20:55)You have all manner of unsupported assertions outstanding, from large matters to small. We've been asking for your evidence since the beginning of this thread, so show us up and share some of it..............
You are at least two years too late to pretend that I owe you or anyone else anything:
Quote This is the fourth in a series of cognitive systems for experimenting with the basics of intelligence and for programming towards a computer model to produce the phenomenon of intelligent cause (collective of intelligent entities at one intelligence level on their own combine to create another level of intelligence). The current design finishes up earlier hippocampi work, and now the critter does very well in the shock arena test. This cognitive ability required adding a four layer navigational Grid Cell Network with Boundary Cells that are set by a Place Cell Network, which stores the What, Where and When (episodic memories) of bumps and shocks received in a circular arena with an invisible moving shock-zone it must learn to avoid, based upon the angle of its arena to a white cue-card on the wall of the room it is inside (see Notes folder) that is either current time or future time. This is analogous to using the angle of the sun as a time reference, then using that in our internal world model (the Grid Network) to visualizing what will change in the hours ahead. How its brain works is based upon scientific literature (as recent as 2014) and experimentation. Although the code is based on Attractor Network Theory that predicts an interaction such as this might occur in the brains of animals, I know of no computer model like this one. It is (to the best of my knowledge) original scientific software, with no known equivalent. To simplify the project and its code the X,Y position of the critter and its head angle are from the Environment module (as opposed to using step-counting and visual information) that updates its location and draws to the screen, which is similar to navigating by the stars (and/or polarized light) in darkness towards an earlier encountered food source, it sometimes has to feel around for using its mouth. The IDLab4 is the next logical step towards systems biology related cognitive models that can truly scientifically answer the big-questions (other algorithms honestly can't), which pertain to how our brain works, and its origin. Enjoy the science!
If your do-nothing crowd does not want to participate in the scientific process then that's fine by me. All in it already disgraced themselves, real bad, and deserve all that goes along with so well proving how scientifically useless y'all are.
Quote (N.Wells @ Feb. 26 2014,20:55)You have all manner of unsupported assertions outstanding, from large matters to small. We've been asking for your evidence since the beginning of this thread, so show us up and share some of it..............
You are at least two years too late to pretend that I owe you or anyone else anything:
Quote This is the fourth in a series of cognitive systems for experimenting with the basics of intelligence and for programming towards a computer model to produce the phenomenon of intelligent cause (collective of intelligent entities at one intelligence level on their own combine to create another level of intelligence). The current design finishes up earlier hippocampi work, and now the critter does very well in the shock arena test. This cognitive ability required adding a four layer navigational Grid Cell Network with Boundary Cells that are set by a Place Cell Network, which stores the What, Where and When (episodic memories) of bumps and shocks received in a circular arena with an invisible moving shock-zone it must learn to avoid, based upon the angle of its arena to a white cue-card on the wall of the room it is inside (see Notes folder) that is either current time or future time. This is analogous to using the angle of the sun as a time reference, then using that in our internal world model (the Grid Network) to visualizing what will change in the hours ahead. How its brain works is based upon scientific literature (as recent as 2014) and experimentation. Although the code is based on Attractor Network Theory that predicts an interaction such as this might occur in the brains of animals, I know of no computer model like this one. It is (to the best of my knowledge) original scientific software, with no known equivalent. To simplify the project and its code the X,Y position of the critter and its head angle are from the Environment module (as opposed to using step-counting and visual information) that updates its location and draws to the screen, which is similar to navigating by the stars (and/or polarized light) in darkness towards an earlier encountered food source, it sometimes has to feel around for using its mouth. The IDLab4 is the next logical step towards systems biology related cognitive models that can truly scientifically answer the big-questions (other algorithms honestly can't), which pertain to how our brain works, and its origin. Enjoy the science!
If your do-nothing crowd does not want to participate in the scientific process then that's fine by me. All in it already disgraced themselves, real bad, and deserve all that goes along with so well proving how scientifically useless y'all are.
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by didymos
LOL. Joe is trying to revise history again:
Quote Just because I threw some watermelon rinds out into the woods and they collected ticks- yup 8 legs and all- ,which was totally unexpected, evos are having a hissy fit. And yes I did reproduce it.
But that was years ago and it ws a very dry summer. Dry enough to dry out the vernal pool at the bottom of the hill- something that I had also never observed.
I don't know what the ticks were doing there but the more I thought about the more I figured they were hanging out waiting for a host. A potential host-birds, chipmunks, red and grey squirrels- comes by looking for something with water and some ticks attach themselves.
Anything else I can help you with?
Yes, I'm sure that conclusion had nothing to do with everyone pointing out how egregiously stupid the whole idea of watermelon-eating ticks was.
LOL. Joe is trying to revise history again:
Quote Just because I threw some watermelon rinds out into the woods and they collected ticks- yup 8 legs and all- ,which was totally unexpected, evos are having a hissy fit. And yes I did reproduce it.
But that was years ago and it ws a very dry summer. Dry enough to dry out the vernal pool at the bottom of the hill- something that I had also never observed.
I don't know what the ticks were doing there but the more I thought about the more I figured they were hanging out waiting for a host. A potential host-birds, chipmunks, red and grey squirrels- comes by looking for something with water and some ticks attach themselves.
Anything else I can help you with?
Yes, I'm sure that conclusion had nothing to do with everyone pointing out how egregiously stupid the whole idea of watermelon-eating ticks was.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by N.Wells
Quote I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
You have all manner of unsupported assertions outstanding, from large matters to small. We've been asking for your evidence since the beginning of this thread, so show us up and share some of it. However, bear in mind that evidence is documented, corroborated information that logically supports the conclusion, not just hollow assertions.
Quote I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
You have all manner of unsupported assertions outstanding, from large matters to small. We've been asking for your evidence since the beginning of this thread, so show us up and share some of it. However, bear in mind that evidence is documented, corroborated information that logically supports the conclusion, not just hollow assertions.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by NoName
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,18:44) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,17:32) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
My break is over. Back to the science work!
Except of course you have no definition of 'intelligence' nor a "theory" that can handle any instance of intelligence that does not include motor activity.
Nor have you ever presented any evidence in support of your gibberish.
Epic fail, as so often is the case with your bluster and bravado.
BTW, evidence suggests you couldn't distill the whiskey out of a bottle of bourbon.
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,18:44) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,17:32) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
My break is over. Back to the science work!
Except of course you have no definition of 'intelligence' nor a "theory" that can handle any instance of intelligence that does not include motor activity.
Nor have you ever presented any evidence in support of your gibberish.
Epic fail, as so often is the case with your bluster and bravado.
BTW, evidence suggests you couldn't distill the whiskey out of a bottle of bourbon.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by jeffox
Quote I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
No, it involves making logical conclusions based on actual evidence - but we've told you that numerous times already.
Ha ha, now we're just rattling your cage, Goo Goo! Bwhhhahahahahhahahah!!!!!
You're a hoot!
Quote I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
No, it involves making logical conclusions based on actual evidence - but we've told you that numerous times already.
Ha ha, now we're just rattling your cage, Goo Goo! Bwhhhahahahahhahahah!!!!!
You're a hoot!
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,17:32) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
My break is over. Back to the science work!
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,17:32) Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
I'm currently distilling more evidence than your head can even hold. Not that it seems you would be interested in anything that pertains to "intelligence", in a debate pertaining to "intelligence".
My break is over. Back to the science work!
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by Glen Davidson
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,17:28) Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Ah, can't take a little evidence, eh?
The persecutions that you go through for being a raving lunatic...
Glen Davidson
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Quote (Glen Davidson @ Feb. 26 2014,16:16)So you've been doing science as well?
I guess that the answer depends on how you define "doing science". If it involves bending over for the swellheads then no, I stay away from that.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by GaryGaulin
Quote (N.Wells @ Feb. 26 2014,16:54)That would be the UD / ID world that's full of nutcases who use Intelligent Design as a wedge to promote a religious agenda.
Then you are saying that you have more in common with your enemy, than you are able to realize.
Quote (N.Wells @ Feb. 26 2014,16:54)That would be the UD / ID world that's full of nutcases who use Intelligent Design as a wedge to promote a religious agenda.
Then you are saying that you have more in common with your enemy, than you are able to realize.
Categories: AE Public BB
A Separate Thread for Gary Gaulin
Post by N.Wells
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,15:42) Quote (fnxtr @ Feb. 26 2014,09:04)You're an attention whore.
After over 300 pages of being trashed for NOT being an attention whore for the science news media (primarily journals) your accusation is an oxymoron.
But do have fun with your sock-puppets, while I try to get some more science work done.
So we can add attention whore, science news media, scientific journals, oxymorons, and sockpuppets to the ever-growing list of concepts that you don't fully comprehend.
Quote That will teach me, for attempting to have a scientific discussion with hopeless nutcases, in a forum for promoting a religious agenda that uses the Theory of Intelligent Design as a weapon. That would be the UD / ID world that's full of nutcases that use Intelligent Design as a wedge to promote a religious agenda. The only hopeless nutcase around here is yourself. This site is more for amusement than serious science, but we are clearly in favor of science rather than religion and are holding Intelligent Design up for ridicule as its proponents have so far been unable to show that it is good for anything else. You have shown that you have no interest in scientific discussion, given that whenever someone raises a legitimate criticism (the way one does in scientific discussion), your responses are deflection, whining, insults, posting links to music, ignoring the criticism, changing the topic, and posting about supposed advances in your program. You give the impression that for you "scientific discussion" means only conversations that run along the lines of "GG: Here buried in this incomprehensible pile of verbiage without any supporting evidence is my self-evident model in all its amazing wondrousness; Rest of the world: Wow, that's fantastic, you're a genius". However, it isn't, you're not, and science doesn't work that way.
Quote (GaryGaulin @ Feb. 26 2014,15:42) Quote (fnxtr @ Feb. 26 2014,09:04)You're an attention whore.
After over 300 pages of being trashed for NOT being an attention whore for the science news media (primarily journals) your accusation is an oxymoron.
But do have fun with your sock-puppets, while I try to get some more science work done.
So we can add attention whore, science news media, scientific journals, oxymorons, and sockpuppets to the ever-growing list of concepts that you don't fully comprehend.
Quote That will teach me, for attempting to have a scientific discussion with hopeless nutcases, in a forum for promoting a religious agenda that uses the Theory of Intelligent Design as a weapon. That would be the UD / ID world that's full of nutcases that use Intelligent Design as a wedge to promote a religious agenda. The only hopeless nutcase around here is yourself. This site is more for amusement than serious science, but we are clearly in favor of science rather than religion and are holding Intelligent Design up for ridicule as its proponents have so far been unable to show that it is good for anything else. You have shown that you have no interest in scientific discussion, given that whenever someone raises a legitimate criticism (the way one does in scientific discussion), your responses are deflection, whining, insults, posting links to music, ignoring the criticism, changing the topic, and posting about supposed advances in your program. You give the impression that for you "scientific discussion" means only conversations that run along the lines of "GG: Here buried in this incomprehensible pile of verbiage without any supporting evidence is my self-evident model in all its amazing wondrousness; Rest of the world: Wow, that's fantastic, you're a genius". However, it isn't, you're not, and science doesn't work that way.
Categories: AE Public BB
Joe G.'s Tardgasm
Post by JohnW
Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 26 2014,14:43)Over at Untelligent Reasoning:
Quote If you had my command of the englich language...
I don't think anyone knows Englisch like Joe.. Does it have Germanic roots?
Beautiful.
We really must introduce him to Gary. Virtual vegan ticks, here we come!
Quote (Richardthughes @ Feb. 26 2014,14:43)Over at Untelligent Reasoning:
Quote If you had my command of the englich language...
I don't think anyone knows Englisch like Joe.. Does it have Germanic roots?
Beautiful.
We really must introduce him to Gary. Virtual vegan ticks, here we come!
Categories: AE Public BB
