|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
28th October 2005, 10:11 AM | #281 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,413
|
|
28th October 2005, 10:14 AM | #282 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
Originally Posted by Hammegk
Quote:
~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
28th October 2005, 10:21 AM | #283 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
For future reference, I recommend:
a) Reading the post you are responding to. b) Making sure you understand all the words used in that post. c) Making sure you understand all the words used in the post when you string them together in the same way the author of the post strung them together. d) Trying to incorporate some thoughts about that post in your response to it. e) Making sure your response actually makes sense to other native English speakers (as opposed to being a meaningless jumble of incoherent nonsense unrelated to anything anyone is talking about.) I also note you didn't take issue with my post about Genetic Programming being un-designed despite the fact that humans obviously designed genetic programming. Could it be that you don't understand the subject at hand? Or can you not define "design" sufficiently well? Or both? |
28th October 2005, 10:33 AM | #284 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
|
28th October 2005, 10:43 AM | #285 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
|
28th October 2005, 10:53 AM | #286 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 21,629
|
Because they had to.
Buckingham's statements, as reported in the press, using words like "creationism" and statements about "two thousand years ago, somone died on the cross for us; won't someone take a stand for Him?" (I apologize if that's a misquote; I didn't bother to cross-check.) are direct and clear-cut evidence about the religious motivations of the government officials who made the policy. By extension, it's clear-cut evidence that the government policy itself is motivated by religious, not secular, purposes, violating the first prong of the Lemon test. Without some way to refute those newspaper reports, the game is as good as over. And the only person who can credibly testify about what Buckingham said is Buckingham himself. (Imagine if the defense tried to refute those statements without Buckingham's testimony. Wouldn't you find that a little suspicious?) I suppose another strategy might have been for the entire board to try to distance itself from Buckingham -- "Well, he may have had religious motivations, but I agreed with the proposal for sound pedagogical reasons, which I am inexplicably unable to articulate at this moment due to an acute confusion between whether my foot belongs in my shoe, or my mouth." However, I really doubt that dog would hunt either; the judge is demonstrably no fool. Other than that, I think that all the defense can really hope for is to muddy the waters enough to make a credible case on appeal. I honestly don't see (from my reading of the transcripts) how the trial judge could make any finding other than for the plaintiffs. |
28th October 2005, 11:06 AM | #287 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
It just seems like nobody did their homework or got their stories straight (in Behe and Buckingham's cases, it seems like they didn't even bother getting their stories traight with themselves!) It couldn't be any more obvious these people are dishonest. I really don't see how they could hope to get an appeal at this point.
What were they thinking? Does it really just simply boil down to their being blinded by faith? |
28th October 2005, 11:12 AM | #288 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,413
|
Pedants are so interesting ... I tossed in rna to cover all terran life as it's usually defined by y'all.
Quote:
Quote:
I do like that "designed un-designed design" concept.
Originally Posted by Paul C A
And to all now dancing in the streets in glee, Scopes won the day and held it for The Theory many decades. Assuming ID losses this trial, how long this time until the next assault as Religion(vs. Science) tries again. |
28th October 2005, 11:20 AM | #289 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,658
|
Quote:
|
28th October 2005, 11:31 AM | #290 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
Yes. You were too quick to lie and try to stuff words in my mouth. Like I said, read the original post before you respond. I never said "all Christians," but you still quote me as saying exactly that.
Buckingham and Behe are most certainly self described Christians and are most certainly liars. How do they justify this to themselves? Why is there not an uproar from the Christian community about these people who purport to represent the religion in public? |
28th October 2005, 11:35 AM | #291 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
Originally Posted by Hammegk
~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
28th October 2005, 11:41 AM | #292 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jan 2004
Posts: 342
|
It's my understanding that Buckingham was called by the prosecution (hostile witness rules and all) out of turn becuase he was unavailable when they presented their case and allowances were made for just this sort of thing.
I think the defense would have been happier to have him spend the trial buried under a rock on some remote planet. I think everyone ought to get together and sign thank-you cards to the defense counsel and witnesses for shredding every vestige of credibility that ID claimed to have. Maybe we can give them some Darwin fish for their cars too. |
__________________
The best time to be a hero is when all the other chaps are dead, God rest 'em, and you can take the credit. H. Flashman V.C. K.C.O.B |
|
28th October 2005, 11:44 AM | #293 |
fishy rocket scientist
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: among the machines
Posts: 2,682
|
|
28th October 2005, 12:39 PM | #295 |
Pastor of Muppets
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 3,457
|
Hey guys. There's a really funny article at Slate by William Saletan comparing Dr. Behe's testimony to a Monty Python sketch.
Last paragraph:
Quote:
|
__________________
"I love you like a fat kid love cake." - 50 Cent |
|
28th October 2005, 12:43 PM | #296 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,371
|
Miss Anne Elk!
|
28th October 2005, 12:53 PM | #297 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,092
|
|
28th October 2005, 01:00 PM | #298 |
Graduate Poster
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,092
|
Where did delphi_ote use terms like "most" or "many"? He noted that Behe and Buckingham are self-professed Christians, that Christian scripture contains several prohibitions on telling falsehoods, and noted the apparent discrepancy between Behe and Buckingham's self-professed adherence to Christianity and their failure to avoid activity prohibited by scripture. The evidence to back up that statement is there for all of us to see, in the trial transcripts for starters.
Stop trying to be clever, hammy; you haven't got what it takes to pull that off. I might add that your instruction to Chipmunk Stew to "either add something, or stfu" is the height of chutzpah coming from someone the majority of whose posts add exactly zero value to the conversation, consisting of messages to the effect that "you're wrong, but I'm not going to argue why; instead, you have to come up with the arguments I can't produce myself." |
__________________
"Sergeant Colon had had a broad education. He’d been to the School of My Dad Always Said, the College of It Stands to Reason, and was now a post-graduate student at the University of What Some Bloke In the Pub Told Me." - Terry Pratchett, Jingo by birth, by choice |
|
28th October 2005, 01:05 PM | #299 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 377
|
Hammy, can you prove to us that Creationism and Intelligent design qualify as science, and belong in the science curriculum for high school students?
|
28th October 2005, 01:13 PM | #300 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2002
Posts: 7,776
|
"I find out-of-the-box thinking more interesting than regurgitation of liturgy."
How does that work when the "out of the box" thinking is designed specificallly to get you back to dogmatic regurgitation of liturgy...for the expressed motives of the ID movment isn't scientific, it is to bannish "materialist" science and to return to education founded in religious dogma...and than they can, once again, turn on each other like they've done for thousands of years. |
__________________
Weaseling out of things is important to learn. It's what separates us from the animals ... except the weasel. -- Homer Simpson |
|
28th October 2005, 02:01 PM | #301 |
Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 130
|
Egads! I´m away for a couple of hours and it´s troll heaven! Oh how fun these internets are! However, natural selection keeps on being anything but random. Oh, and there are many mutational mechanisms, all of them not strictly random either...and of course, there is no known mechanism of ID, short of those guided by humans, apes, crows etc, i.e. living organisms of the natural world. Now, let´s get ourselves a couple of fresh Kitzmiller vs. Dover transcripts and laugh our collective guts out. And btw, Hammegk, why not join us? It´s great fun!
|
__________________
"Where there´s a will, there´s a lawyer" - Kinky Friedman "We've been attacked by the intelligent, educated segment of the culture" - Pastor Ray Mummert, Dover, PA “We are all atheists about most of the gods that humanity has ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further” - Richard Dawkins "Very funny, Scotty. Now beam down my clothes." "Scientist" is a profession. Science is a method. "Scientism" is neither a political ideology, nor a religion. |
|
28th October 2005, 02:47 PM | #302 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
|
28th October 2005, 03:26 PM | #303 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 377
|
Hammy... can you please demonstrate how ID qualifies as science? Pwease?
|
28th October 2005, 03:41 PM | #304 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,413
|
Of course not. I can offer some others' words regarding the ongoing debate, which as I see it, is not that specific question anyway.
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
28th October 2005, 03:50 PM | #305 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17,766
|
|
28th October 2005, 04:20 PM | #306 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 16,279
|
Yes, please, more transcripts!
|
28th October 2005, 04:36 PM | #307 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 8,658
|
|
28th October 2005, 04:45 PM | #308 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,413
|
I see. And you find that Dawkins has proved "The universe we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil and no good, nothing but blind, pitiless indifference."?
And more to the point, you also find it so, provably? |
29th October 2005, 06:41 AM | #309 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
Originally Posted by Hammegk
http://www.the-scientist.com/news/20050323/01 Any such non-DNA inheritance is still under the influence of natural selection, of course. ~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
29th October 2005, 06:45 AM | #310 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
Originally Posted by Dr. A
Talkorigins has them in HTML format: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/dove...r_v_dover.html ~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
29th October 2005, 06:58 AM | #311 |
Banned
Join Date: Aug 2004
Posts: 17,766
|
Behe plays it dumb, loses:
Quote:
Quote:
|
29th October 2005, 08:07 AM | #312 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
This is getting surreal. Dr. A., where is the transcript with those bits?
~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
29th October 2005, 08:23 AM | #313 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,371
|
Quote:
Show me where he said that. My head is exploding.... |
29th October 2005, 08:30 AM | #314 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2002
Posts: 8,413
|
|
29th October 2005, 10:29 AM | #315 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
|
29th October 2005, 10:50 AM | #316 |
Mostly harmless
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 39,491
|
More from Geesey:
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield "The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky |
|
29th October 2005, 11:06 AM | #317 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 42,371
|
Just out of curiosity, but has anyone noticed any howlers from the Evolutionist side?
It can't merely be the Creationists who mess up... |
29th October 2005, 11:35 AM | #318 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 5,994
|
|
29th October 2005, 01:06 PM | #319 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 3,607
|
|
29th October 2005, 01:13 PM | #320 |
Nap, interrupted.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 19,141
|
Originally Posted by Hammegk
Now you guys are starting to make this transcript stuff up. There is no way that it's really this absurd. We're through the looking glass for sure. ~~ Paul |
__________________
Millions long for immortality who do not know what to do with themselves on a rainy Sunday afternoon. ---Susan Ertz RIP Mr. Skinny, Tim |
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|