Search
Archive Calendar
| M | T | W | T | F | S | S |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | |
Archives
Categories
- A Government That Can Force You to Buy Health Insurance Can Make You Do Anything (3)
- a protein wisdom philosophy primer (3)
- academics (25)
- armadillo (8)
- Friday Fiction 100 Word Challenge (51)
- from the protein wisdom conceptual series (136)
- identity politics (33)
- If Republicans Win the Senate in 2014 (1)
- in which celebraties comment on current events (67)
- language / intentionalism (88)
- legal (6)
- My brief conversations with inanimate objects (130)
- NSA / FISA (46)
- One Term to Serve, the 2012 Revival (6)
- Overheard in a Fallujah bunker (27)
- Poems from 196x, Revised by the Ghost of Richard Brauti (27)
- protein wisdom's DNC coverage (30)
- protein wisdom's RNC coverage (29)
- protein wisdom: the movie Lists (20)
- Provocateurism (16)
- real-time empirical observations (51)
- red pills found behind the sofa cushions (42)
- Scenes from my driveway (61)
- Talking back to 80s music (41)
- The Martha Stewart Chronicles (58)
- The protein wisdom interviews (10)
- The protein wisdom original poems (142)
- Uncategorized (20,046)
- Zen and the art of motorcycle maintenance, abridged (34)
Recent Comments
- In The Mailbox: 02.28.23 (Afternoon Edition) : The Other McCain on Hey, longtime pw readers…
- In The Mailbox: 12.23.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll truly IS a sad, embittered psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- Danger on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
- In The Mailbox: 07.18.22 : The Other McCain on Patrick J. Carroll might be a psychopath
Thanks, Dan. Now I have to gouge out my eyes.
Does she need protection from us two-digets?
We can’t leave her alone if she never leaves!
Boo!
That’s a man, right?
Jeffersonian: I’d recommend continuous flushing of the eyeballs with concentrated bleach for a minimum of three hours.
Ack, must go now… collins u r evul!
I’m thinking Chrissy’s on the fast track for bishop in the Episcopal Church.
– Possibilities: Lead singer in “Obama’s Cabana’ boys”? (jess for you nishi hunny)
– Hey…..the girls can’t get all the breaks.
Damn you and such !
sparky’s a Dartmouth grad too And Kuzy’s jeff.
samwell’s very funny. Bite that Chocolate Heart! but the cross?
Wait. Who’s Sparky?
It’s an eye- and ear-gouger, today. Four for the price of two.
eh, some guy in VT. not the guru in the Video. just pulling a thread or two….like my getting Richard Clarke and Joe Wilson mixed up sort of thing… damn, I am coming here more for music reviews and internet cultural stuff more and more…..can’t keep with my son’s stuff either…google pranks and such. have a great weekend, folks!
For some reason, this keeps making me laugh.
We might as well get all the unpleasantness out of the way at once.
Bitch Puleeeeeze!
There’s a new movie coming about regarding the stifling of debate regarding Darwinism.
Yes, I’m poking with a stick. That’s just the way I roll.
I still think he’s way more cooler than average.
theres a game coming out that will make theory of evolution as natural as breathing…or as playin a game.
highschools are pre-ordering copies.
all ur
basechildren are belong to us.What makes you think I have any problem with evolutionary theory, nishi?
list of scientific societies rejecting intelligent design
btw, butters did that watwat song much better on South Park this week.
It looks conceptually cool but sort of cheapy and pedantic. Cheapy and pedantic is hard to put across. I mean, not just really simple-mindedly granola, but really sort of just visually stupid.
Oh.
That’s the caption for the image linked above.
It keeps promising to go away, yet it won’t. LIAR
Who on this blog is a proponent of intelligent design anyway? That’s what maybe Red State is for. Or that Free Republic thing. Even Cap’n Ed gets the id thing right.
u guz xtian theocons wth carin theoconnette r pwnd bye evuloshun lulz soon bama prez n eye oil thi’s wth xtra virgen (hee) oliv oil fr rubng al ovr bama prez pictz. oooooo … bebee bebee nw his sceinc makz mee swet lulz lol !!11eleventy!!11
I am glad to hear that kids will finally be learning stuff from video games. Now if you’ll excuse me, I need to go find a hooker so that I can increase my health.
stupid phony names, that last was me.
The doppleganger makes more sense than the original, and smells better, too.
itz teh oliv oil merg lol
I wasn’t pushing ID, I was pushing this (from Happy’s link):
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance. The debate over ID vs Darwinism sets the table for a truly disturbing look at academia. Science should be about the free debate and research of ideas and hypotheses for duplicable results and provable theorems. However, as the examples Stein and the film provide amply show, the Darwinist academic establishment will brook no dissent from the orthodoxy — and scientists have to be shown with hidden faces to speak to the issue for the film.
I would present my personal opinion regarding ID, Evolution – but that doesn’t really matter anyway, since the TTP has already decided (with her HUGE brain) what I feel. Facts matter not.
Anyway – I downloaded some Thomas Dolby today. Flat Earth. Good stuff.
I can’t tell the difference between the two.
Carin,
FLAT-EARTHER!!!
Go ahead, Karl. Might as well just add that to the list.
The Earth can be any shape you want it
Any shape at all
Dark and cold or bright and warm
Long or thin or small
But it’s home and all I ever had
And maybe why for me the Earth is flat
And, Dan – this picture has scarred my son.
carin theoconnette gud think up teh wrld wit hs desine iq lol id is teh suxor lik fosil mcane coot but bama mmmm heh swety agin he’l hav teh scienc !1! wit dahwan dayz on teh whit hse lawnn eye goe to due Easter Head gras rolin chase n hid n seeke frut flyz. then haz piktur takn wit bama n hav massiv gasm lulz lol
OF course, if I hadn’t taught my son to be a homophobe, he would be able to embrace the image of Chris Crocker. So, now TTP can pin THAT rap on me too.
Doppleganger is cracking me up.
Thanks a diaperload, Dan! That vid’s enough to gag a dragon!.
heh, theoconnette yo hatz teh gayz n past it dwn too yur proganie cuz gayz not prt o id [?] teh gayz evuloooshun of fem theerie lik swety hotz thi’s rub wit bama mmmmmmmmmm eye jst bye oliv oil bye galonz fr rubingz lulz n xtian snak hanlrz wer clwn suts lol
One would think that nishi (who I still think seriously needs to get laid…and by a guy this time…:), with all her Sooper Dooper Brain Power, would know that you can’t prove a negative.
I’m no proponent of “intelligent design”, but on the other hand, no one can prove there wasn’t any. Certainly there does seem to be a certain symmetry in how the Universe works. Why this is, I would not hazard a guess.
However, there is a reason it’s called Darwin’s THEORY of evolution, as opposed to Darwin’s LAW of evolution. Yes, the data does indicate that life developed on this planet in “evolutionary” stages. But there are still huge gaps in the data that leave a lot of wiggle room. Of course, the same thing can be said about branches of science like cosmology, particle physics and other “let’s think DEEP thoughts” fields.
If there were any such, Nishi’s existence would have blown the pro-ID argument right out of the water.
Not that ID has anything to do, really, with evolution — except in the “minds” of typing telephone poles.
The debate over ID vs Darwinism …….doesnt exist.
Science should be about the free debate and research of ideas and hypotheses for duplicable results and provable theorems
that is why ID can never become a science…ID disdains research and proveable theorems in favor of litigation and brow beating schoolboards….and the infamous Wedge Strategy.
lol!
ID can’t become a science by tryin to poke holes in theory of evolution.
ID needs to do the heavy lifting, like peer-reviewed journals, college curriculae, text books, endowed chairs, grad students, research assistants.
and….better hurry!!! the singularity approaches, hehe.
likely one reason the highly-educated dislike xians is the idea (promoted by the odious Discovery Institute) that ID can become a science without employing the scientific method.
that documentary is just sillie chaff….a slight of hand to distract attention from the fact that ID is not science, and never will be.
hmmm…let me see…uber-boring fauxdocumentery vs. mad fun game?
which gets more plays?
Dr. Yes said this cool thing–
“People keep asking about my “next book,” and I’m beginning to think that the social impact of gaming — games are the “dark matter” of contemporary culture, getting far less attention than they deserve in terms of their impact — may be the way to go.”
feets that is an excellent tool to demonstrate that carbon emissions causing greenhouse gases is junk science.
the amount of nitrogen needed to effect change is riddikkulous.
Spore may become a research tool.
like critters. ;)
the dark matter of the cultural metaverse.
shall we play a game?
cave bear, its all called theory.
let me fisk this for you:
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance. The debate over ID vs Darwinism sets the table for a truly disturbing look at academia.
there is no debate.
Science should be about the free debate and research of ideas and hypotheses for duplicable results and provable theorems.
there is a large body of evidence for theory of evolution. there is research, peer-reviewed journals, proven theorems, genetic experiments, research endowments, text books, curriculae, graduate students, research programs….
ID has none of that.
ID has the Discovery Institute and the Wedge Strategy.
thats it.
The debate over ID vs Darwinism
that is from feets link.
but….NONE of u are ID proponents?
then wtf are we talking about?
say it with me then.
ID is not science, and never will be, unless it attempts the scientific method.
and u wonder why u get stereotyped as stupid.
lolz!
sorry, carin, nishi’s right about Creationism being stuffed down the throats of school boards and such…but like most BS lost the intellectual battle…but rest assured McCain’s minions might just try to do it again. But I like Ben Stein..but is it a comedy or a documentary or both?
have to say something good about nishi after criticizing her and the Intelligenzia’s lack of breeding future Science-freaks while those Creationists breed like rabbits.
and Chris Crocker can’t do Betty Crocker, ah maybe (s)he can?
fuck these sockpuppets!!!
ID is not science, and never will be, unless it attempts the scientific method. But also it’s really not the biggest dealio in the world I don’t think, not when my best friend wants me to go in on a case of 24 bottles of bee pollen (nature’s perfect food!). Good Lord. But you gotta starts somewhere I guess.
IT IS SETTLED SCIENCE YOU DUM MOTHER FUC**ERS!!!!!!!!! NISHIDIOT SAID SO> DO NOT QUESTION HER PERCEPTION THEOCONZ
jeffy, we will be transhumans and the theocons will be relegated to antique genome reservations, where no one can mess with their genomes.
afterall, ESCR and genetic engineering WILL GET U SENT TO HELL.
homo sapiens transhumanicus’ lifespan and fertility will be increased sufficiently to out-breed them.
they will be shortlifes.
Nishi’s right: Creationism and ID are just flat wrong, and they constitute an achilles heel of the Right.
and their children will be shortlifes.
Creationism and ID are just flat wrong, and they constitute an achilles heel of the Right.
and they make the Right look stupid.
snicker.
the nishidiot thinks it is worse to look stupid than to be demonstrably stoopid like she is.
okfine…then u dont just look stupid….you are stupid.
which is it?
my advice?
give up on ID.
lets say God invented evolution….
but then you will have to go after the cosmology theory guys.
I actually feel a bit guilty about this. I’m sorry.
And, FTR, I have no stance on the whole ID, evolution debate. Not my ‘thang. It’s just funny to wind to top. But, the Darwin fishes do piss me off.
I can’t “give up” what I never advocated. But, you know, nishi, I don’t want to confuse your image of me with facts or anything.
The Cosmic Landscape: String Theory and the Illusion of Intelligent Design.
Susskind might be harder to attack than Darwin tho….cuz like, he’s still alive.
But, the Darwin fishes do piss me off.
im buyin a case and giving them out at work then.
I may not be much,
But I’m all that I think about.
I gotta gro up!
never gonna grow up, never grow up, not me!
So, if I get a “Islam, religion of pieces” bumper sticker you’re not gonna get all offended on me, are you?
Perhaps I’ll have to be the lone ID defendant then – actually I’m a creationist which is rather even more old school I suppose.
I won’t take up PW comment space to debate this, besides I’ve produced a reasonably body of work on my blog that considers the key issues and I’m happy to enter into any discussion that contributes to the marketplace of ideas there.
I did put up a rather unnoticed post (except by Nishi) on the Pub last week commemorating the most discussed subject on the ‘sphere during late March…
we should have a dinner party here: here
don’t be shy, MC. I’ve eaten whole boots of self-abnegation here.
I can’t do ID. It’s too demandy and nuanced. ID needs to work on its elevator pitch more I think. The good thing about ID is that it’s free. Bee pollen is $7 a bottle but only if you agree to buy 24 of them. Otherwise it’s like $16 a bottle. So, there’s that consideration.
nope carin, i absolutely dont care.
u can say wat u like about Muhammed too.
:)
ima southpark muslim i guess…
its all fair game.
u hafta be able to make fun of everything.
either it’s all fair to make fun of, or none of it is.
the pinnacle of homosapiens sapiens evolution is self-deprecating humor after all.
Climate change is not teh funny though. That’s a for real stoopid and dangerous distortion of science I think.
and actually im more mad at Goldberg about the darwin fishes than u carin.
he said they were cowardly and intolerant.
but i think they are snarky and good, they move things forward.
ID is soooooo passe, we need to get ready for the singularity.
its a waste of time.
sry MC.
Jonah an me had a gmail throwdown, an he accused me of intellectual base-stealing and bad faith argument.
i said he was a coward cuz he wudnt debate me an he said he wasnt cuz he debates lefties an libruls alla time.
so i said i’d be tougher, cuz ima repub.
no feets, global warming is SCIENCE.
we are in a warming cycle.
global warming CAUSED by carbon emissions is junk science.
u cant say that.
no evidence.
McCain’s minions? What fucking planet do you live on? Is it one where Maverick doesn’t piss the religious right off at nearly every turn, and where instead they’re subservient to him? And when are you going back there?
Dear God, the stupid is thick like fog.
Ah, Goldberg still has a grasp of the utterly obvious. That’s good to know.
Evolution, just FTR, starts after life has already arisen. ID, as I understand it, goes back a few billion years farther.
Before it got perverted by anti-evolutionists, ID was perfectly compatible with … evolution.
But that was before the nishtoon was first booted up, so she wouldn’t remember.
but i think they are snarky and good, they move things forward.
ID is soooooo passe, we need to get ready for the singularity.
The Jesus Fish don’t represent ID, nishi, just Christianity.
ID was perfectly compatible with … evolution
Exactly. I don’t know how if you believe in God, you don’t believe He could create the world however He wanted to. I absolutely believe in evolution, and think ID doesn’t belong in public school unless it’s in a World Reglions class.
I certainly don’t see how ID is nuttier than the singularity.
Precisely.
Of course, to someone who wants to be her own personal Jesus, the idea that God might have wanted to create the universe His way instead of, say, nishtoon’s way, is heresy of the highest order.
I blame Carin, and Halliburton, but not Karl or Dan. ;-)
global warming CAUSED by carbon emissions is junk science.
Yes. I know. It’s getting really stale that people think it’s somehow insightful to say that there is a warming cycle. We knew that already. It’s not newsy or interesting, and it’s not at all related to what people are talking about when they say climate change is teh stoopid or teh mostest direst. The whole thing. The whole idea that we need to be talking about a centuries-long flipping cycle when there are actual things what we should be doing with our one God-given life and these things do not include anally obsessing about squiggly bulbs and whether or not you can can compost a chicken breast. Ok I feel better.
stealth-comment SPAM here
well ok then!
we are in agreement (except for MC), that the documentary is just sillie misdirection and a total waste of time.
there is no actual debate between ID and Darwinian evolution.
and i absolutely believe in god/allah/hashem.
god/allah/hashem exists.
but you cannot say wat is the nature of god/allah/hashem.
unknown.
the singularity is Math!
not “superstition”.
but you cannot say wat is the nature of god/allah/hashem.
unknown.
Then you cannot say that God did not create the earth.
we are in agreement (except for MC), that the documentary is just sillie misdirection and a total waste of time.
I thought that we were in agreement that u hafta be able to make fun of everything.
either it’s all fair to make fun of, or none of it is.
(Unless, of course, it pokes the snake.)
creationism is Math! not “superstition”.
2 + 2 = 8.7 is also math.
The documentary is a waste of time to the extent that anti-evolutionists flocked to ID — but that flocking was inspired by anti-ID types labeling it “creationism” at a time when creationists had never even heard of ID.
I’ve posted about “intelligent design” a few times on my own blog. If one were to use the sidebar search box on my site, with the phrase “tag: intelligent design debate”, one might find those posts interesting.
Assuming one’s “mind” were open to such things.
exactly wat is bee pollen for?
“The Singularity” is science fiction.
Singularities are celestial phenomena postulated as a result of Einstein’s math in General Relativity. What they have to do with the rise of Cylon-like technological “life” escapes me.
I thought that we were in agreement that u hafta be able to make fun of everything.
either it’s all fair to make fun of, or none of it is.
the documentary is satire?
/confuzzled
For pollinating bees, of course.
Duh!
There is a warming cycle. At least on newer dryers there’s a setting so you can have “tumble dry, no heat.”
Actually, I guess that’s a “no-warming” cycle. Never mind.
I feel like nishi and I almost made up.
God, I need a beer.
JD – so that’s how it is … I’m lumped in with Halliburton?
no Mcgeehee
the Singularity is the knee of the curve, where technological advance, rate over time, goes exponential.
The documentary is not a waste of time. It’s about an aesthetic of academic inquiry. There will be much accepted science that will be totally given a rethink post-Singularity, so really you should be trying more harder to get into the spirit of the thing I think.
Oh, like AGW.
Einstein will still have the last laugh, I think.
Something similar, I think, to how no matter how much you accelerate you can never quite reach the speed of light.
Happyfeet, see my comment at 5:27 pm. Considering the promoters’ use of the terminology, I think the similarity is utterly apt.
Carin – Coming from me, that is a compliment.
I see. You’re right there’s something a bit return of the Mahdi about Singularity anticipation. My feeling is a proper Singularity won’t be really particularly noticeable at all. People adapt or they don’t. All I know is I hate my treo.
@ #49 & 51
Bakazono, we’ve all the… punctuations.
What he said.
The documentary is not a waste of time. It’s about an aesthetic of academic inquiry.
oh noes feets. it is not.
it is simple misdirection.
if ID truly wants to be a science, then it must make its bones in academe.
fifty years ago quantum field theory was in zactly the same place as ID theory.
there were no tools to measure the very small.
ppl laffed.
now, today, to teach highschool physics in colorado, u must have 3 cred hours of quantum mechanics.
ID wants to be science, but not do the work, the heavy lifting.
so it tries to sneak into highschools, it says, mean orthodox scientists oppress me, it says, evolution is fulla holes…
it is cheater detection.
ID wants to cheat an go right to the head of the line without makin its bones in academe.
one theory supplants an existing theory by becoming better….a better explanation.
ID tries to discredit evolution, trys to cry foul, trys to sneak around without doin the work of science.
the scientific method.
that is the way to become a science.
not by throwin chaff.
Cap’n Ed said it was more about the importance of academia being an open and free space where orthodoxy can be questioned and he’s seen it so I believe him is all. He’s not dumb he’s just different.
@ #101
Punctuation after every thought !
Subversion from within !!
!!!
HAT TRICK !!!
You nishi, are politicizing teh science, when really it’s just science. ID is easily contextualized and framed as non-science but yet a respectable framework of inquiry. It doesn’t hurt anything I don’t think. Harmless like jellybeans really.
You’re oversensitive but you have no idea how plain dumb science looks wrestling the ID pig.
it was more about the importance of academia being an open and free space where orthodoxy can be questioned
but feets…..that is wat academia is.
the arena of ideas.
that documentary is just about throwin chaff.
cuz that is all ID has got.
And also ohnoes the earth is a fraction of a degree warmer let’s all embrace Marxism is really stupefying to the for real children of the Enlightenment.
how plain dumb science looks wrestling the ID pig.
then there is no value in the documentary.
:)
admit it plz.
Yes. But science may as well get its panties in a wad about voodoo in Haiti or scratch-off tickets or local tv news but they’re really a lot selective about the irrationalities what offend them. This is a lot because they are very brittle and not particularly centered individuals I think. Not you but in general.
I haven’t seen it. I don’t plan to. I did see a trailer for Speed Racer and I denounce it. That just looks stupid.
ima southpark muslim i guess…
You like to say you are Muslim for the shock value, you have given no indication you have any actual faith whatsoever.
and actually im more mad at Goldberg about the darwin fishes than u carin.
he said they were cowardly and intolerant.
Goldberg was offended by it. Well I have one of those things on my guitar because I thought it was funny. Fuck him if he can’t take a joke, no need to get mad about it.
but you cannot say wat is the nature of god/allah/hashem.
unknown.
Then you cannot say that God did not create the earth.
Exactly. I have made the case repeatedly that evolution is intelligent design. Nobody has yet tried to dispute it. The only real question to me is whether the rules holding everything together has a conscience or not.
I’ll probably see it though eventually. Christina Ricci is neat.
[…] Vintage happyfeet. Posted by Dan Collins @ 7:02 pm | Trackback Share This […]
“Yes.”
thank u.
;)
Exactly. I have made the case repeatedly that evolution is intelligent design.
thenu agree that documentary is a stupid timewaster?
Evolution is just science. You don’t believe in it. You either understand it or you don’t. You start teh believing in it and you’re not a scientist anymore, you’re a priest.
Ok do over
Evolution is just science. You don’t believe in it. You either understand it or you don’t. You start teh believing in it and you’re not a scientist anymore, you’re a priest.
I offered to buy my wife an umbrella the other day. She said she doesn’t believe in them.
She’s a strange person.
oh, i unnerstand it all right.
evolution is elegant, parsimonius, inexorable, powerful and simple.
and best of all, mathematical.
;)
I’m just parsimonious, inexorable and simple.
Well said.
Evolution is also glacially slow and not particularly a big player in the whole life liberty and the pursuit of happiness game. It’s a nice framework but not too many patents what come out of it, and the left on purpose puts an anti-religion spin on it. Snake-pokers.
you have given no indication you have any actual faith whatsoever.
that wud be between me and allah/god/hashem, wudn’t it?
:)
feets…
evolution is quadratic; genetic, epigenetic, behavioral and symbolic.
some of those are speed of thot.
It said this?
Properly put, certain people, who did not have anything to do with developing ID as a proposition, say they want ID to be regarded as scientific.
Muddled expression, nishtoon, betrays your muddled thinking.
that wud be between me and allah/god/hashem, wudn’t it?
What happened to the Official Academic Review Board of Super Genius Scientific Dudes?
But then, the people who have turned ID into Creationism v2.0 — both pro-ID and anti — are also betraying muddled thinking.
A lot of those are scientists.
trolling is fun, lulz!
I trulz trulz, lulz!
Yes… we did the quadratic; genetic, epigenetic, behavioral and symbolic thing already. But in popcultural signification evolution a lot just means Jesus came from a monkey. Y’all should tone that down. That’s not a good way to get grant approval if you ask me.
the documentary is satire?
/confuzzled
Does something have to be satire to make fun of something else?
No, it isn’t satire. I don’t plan to see it, but it is poking fun at academia for not allowing God into the discussion.
Y’all should tone that down.
why?
we all came from apes.
gorilla betaglobulin differs in only 2 out of 256 codons from homosapiens sapiens betaglobulin.
the odds that that is a coincidence approach negative infinity.
lim aleph 0 we say.
;)
Tact is key. That’s how you get the good parking spots at work.
beetz… suplise!
“but it is poking fun at academia”
oh no, false.
this is wat it claims:
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance. The debate over ID vs Darwinism sets the table for a truly disturbing look at academia.
I think happyfeet is talking about troubling cultural perceptions about you evolutionists.
Which, by your logic nishtoon, are your fault as the ones to whom they’re applied, and not the fault of those who apply them.
but i have a good parking spot.
Academia doesn’t look at itself very much, that’s pretty clear. So the job ends up getting outsourced. It’s parsimonious, inexorable and simple.
Fuck. NOW you tell me.
Yeah well I don’t have a good parking spot. It’s cause I’m whimsically passive aggressive I think.
but mcgeehee, i dont care.
you seem to care about cultural stereotypes of xians…..so does goldberg.
“but it is poking fun at academiaâ€Â
oh no, false.
this is wat it claims:
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance
Ok. How does that make what I said false?
im guna be a processor! i hop im quad core.
ima evolutionary biologist or a sociobiologist.
wat is an evolutionist?
Yeah, Jews are usually all about that. Me, I’m concerned with cultural stereotypes of Rastafarians.
But in a way, this is all secondary to the real issue of the film: academic intolerance…
This part is from that Cap’n Ed link, just for people who didn’t click. Go ahead. It’s a really lucid post.
oh. link
but i have a good parking spot
As another penguin drowns.
Thanks, zono.
maybee…i do not detect any humor.
the blurb feets linked seems devoid of levity.
neither of us have seen it tho.
Hairballs.
1- something doesn’t have to be funny to make fun of something. Like, I didn’t lol at the Mohammed cartoon, you know?
2-It is Ben Stein, who is a comedian, and the title of the story about it Carin linked to is “Seriously funny:
Ben Stein takes on the debate-phobic Darwinian establishment “
Here is NPR’s thinger on Expelled. They set the bar for success a little high, and the sound a little skeptical. Way more skeptical than they recently sounded about another movie what they liked more better. We’ll see I guess.
*they sound* … it kinda needs to make upwards of $300 million to validate itself is their implication. Tools.
ah.
i read it feets.
the arena of ideas exists already.
it is called academe.
IDists do not do battle in that arena.
they could, if they used the scientific method.
but the Wedge Strategy and the Discovery Institute have engendered hostility by attempts at cheating.
my colleagues do not feel ID, at this point, deserves consideration.
there is a process to open the discussion to ID in academe.
it is called the scientific method.
like i said, ppl laffed at quantum field theory 50 years.
quantum theorists cowboyed up and did the work.
if ID wants to be treated like a science, it must act like a science.
the conversion is open…..but the price to enter is the heavy lifting of research and study.
that is why scientists that endorse ID loose the name of scientist and become pariahs.
I care about people promoting false stereotypes of Christians and Christianity.
People like you.
There, I said it. I care about you.
Because I’m a Christian.
(She won’t get it. She never does.)
Ok, now that’s funny. Congrats, nishi! You added value.
There you go again with “ID wants.”
When did ID get to have desires? It’s not a person. It’s not even a Cylon.
But there’s still a marketplace of ideas. Scientists seem a lot averse to it. If ID is really such a big deal, there will be empty classrooms, and the market will correct. It’s not that complicated really, and there’s really not a lot at stake at the end of the day. It’s not like kids don’t have a ton of unlearning to do after public school anyway, what’s one more thinger?
this movie is just more misdirection.
tell me this…if ID IS scientific, and worthy of debate, why do scientists not enter the arena of ideas?
and prove, using the scientific method, that ID supplants evolution?
i think they do not believe it can be done.
so they throw chaff.
More like confetti, really.
A surprise party?
I’ll bet ID would like that.
159.
zactly feets.
the Discovery institute should fund chairs, departments at universities, peer-reviewed journals, teaching assistantships, research programs, scholarships.
instead of litigation to bully schoolboards.
it is not the university’s job to fund unproven science.
the Discovery institute should do that.
then students….in college….can choose in the arena of ideas, the marketplace of ideas.
highschool students do not choose.
they are forced.
Maybe with a big cake.
Are you really reading the blurbs about the movie, nishi?
From Happy’s Cap’n Ed link:
Overall, though, the film presents a powerful argument not for intelligent design as much as for the freedom of scientific inquiry. If scientists get punished for challenging orthodoxy, we will not expand our learning but ossify it in concrete.
—
The whole idea is that scientists in academia are punished if they broach the subject of a creator.
I don’t know if that’s true, but that is what the movie is about.
You seem very interested in the movie, really.
guins, do you think ID wants a nekkid girl to jump out of the cake?
’cause I would.
But I don’t really know ID that well so I don’t know what it wants.
Nishi seems to. Maybe I should ask her.
and show me the university that will turn down an endowment.
rawr.
The whole idea is that scientists in academia are punished if they broach the subject of a creator.
i expect that is a lie.
i expect they are punished if they attempt to discuss a nonscientific discipline in their classrooms where students have paid tuition to learn science.
the university will not fund unproven science, and also the Wedge Strategy pissed a lot of scientists off.
i find it obscene myself.
Flying Spaghetti Monster forbid you should look into it before arriving at a conclusion.
Some scientist you are.
let the Discovery Institute give fundage.
let ID compete in the arena of ideas.
no one will object to that.
Universities are a lot just ashamed cause most of thems what have big names came from churches, so they overcompensate I think. It’s like how teenagers won’t go to the mall with their mom.
McCain could be the Singularity…and like Hillary, he’ll do anything to get to the Presidency as he’s got nothing else to go for….and he’ll embrace the religious right just like he embraced his one time nemesis, GW Bush. That ain’t stupid, ,,,, you the stupid (ah ha).
And Obama (or Hillary) will give him a test so he’ll need all the minions he can get. But then, here’s hoping for Obama or Hillary. I am expecting McCain though. Until things change.
The Economy is the Singularity at the moment. How bad will it get and how dumb will either candidate deal with it?
And I doubt Ben Stein’s an ID kind of guy…look on how he’s sounding more socialistic about taxing the wealthy more in order to balance the budget. I linked that before if you recall. In a word, he’s a “politician” too in that he flip flops occasionally on policies.
I owe you all $5 each. U saved me big on happy hour.
but i doubt many students will choose it.
if ID is science, let it compete in the arena of ideas.
otherwise teach it in a seminary.
But no one here is arguing for ID. MC a little I guess. This is why I’m not sure you really get the marketplace of ideas thing.
Cynn, you can pitch my $5 in for the cake. I’m pretty sure ID wants the cake, even if we can’t find a girl to jump out of it.
Sometime you’re a lot Alanis Morissette’s second cd.
*Sometimes* I mean…
Well technically the one after Jagged. Not the dancey one no one really bought except some Canadian people.
MONSTERS!!!
FROM THE ID!!!
/Morpheus
But mostly she’s yokozonoemo.
I think that might cost more than $5.
I agree with Nishi on this; if the Intelligent Design adherents want their doctrine to be in the publicly funded schools, it needs to be taught, not preached. I’ll leave the distintion to you.
film presents a powerful argument not for intelligent design as much as for the freedom of scientific inquiry.
Sounds like he’s for research into AGW. as you call it. Bush et al certainly were against scientific inquiry in that regards as is the bulk of PW’ers.
ah, nishi, you’re not a scientist..but a drone if you think this is not significant:
“Beginning with the industrial revolution in the 1850s and accelerating ever since, the human consumption of fossil fuels has elevated CO2 levels from a concentration of ~280 ppm to more than 380 ppm today. These increases are projected to reach more than 560 ppm before the end of the 21st century. It is known that carbon dioxide levels are substantially higher now than at any time in the last 750,000 years.[4] Along with rising methane levels, these changes are anticipated to cause an increase of 1.4–5.6 °C between 1990 and 2100.”
alright, “junk science”…you denialists. go to wiki and edit it…but with what? You have no science, only belief.
OK.
Research is entirely about investigating things that aren’t proven, ya dumbass.
Do you know what ppm means?
Wait.
<goes back and reads Nishi’s comments>
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
“…ID wants…”
Where do you find her saying anything about ID’s adherents wanting anything?
Is there some kind of code to this?
This is why I’m not sure you really get the marketplace of ideas thing.
oh, i do.
but if ID the product, who pays for the development?
not the university. not their job.
proponents of ID must pay for the development.
universities dont turn down money.
it doesnt have to be ID…but inorder to market a “science”, u need all things i described.
professors, textbooks, classrooms, research grants, office space, peer-reviewed journals.
the proponents of ID seem to feel it should get a free ride.
after the Wedge Strategy?
it is to laff.
ID doesnt get a free ride.
it has to do the heavy lifting, just like quantum field theory, just like theory of evolution, just like string theory.
it is competitive, the arena of ideas…where ideas do battle.
ID simply hasnt paid the price of admittance.
@ #188
Yet your continued comments drown another penguin.
Hairball.
Ah HA!
Cynn, you cheated! You pulled some kind of quantum, wormhole, time travel thingie and agreed with a comment Nishi hadn’t posted yet!
That could come in handy. Who’s going to win this year’s World Series?
Yes. This is the spirit of scientific inquiry datadave person endorses, as filtered by cbsnews…
SCIENCE!!
Hey, maybe we could get Thomas Dolby to jump out of the cake.
200th!
(via time travel)
I think ID would like to be taken to this movie.
hf, ID is politically driven. It’s Reich’talk, It’s for the Homeland! ID, means belief, not science. The Singularity is GOD. It’s Birth and Creation. It’s Jesus, Budhha and Mohamad all in one. Believe it! Whereas science doesn’t toot its horn…unless Lenin did it. And Stalin messed with it and believed false science as the real stuff didn’t suit him…then Mao politicized it too so that bad iron was made in backyard smelters that just sickened people. Science in fact brought us Environmentalism…enough to call out the Thought Police ala Reagan and James Watt. Thus Science is on the ropes as far as Meatheads are concerned. Too threatening to the status quo…thus the secret desire for certainty of thought: I.D. and theo-conservatism. The scientists might be wrong about AGW, but you’re not are you? So righteous and sure about while grasping at the shakiest threads like recent snowfall in ske resorts or something. Let science be taught as it isn’t an Ideology but skepticism.
“the freedom of scientific inquiry.”
dolt!
scientific inquiry IS free!
ask anything u want…..on your own nickle.
its freemarket baby, the marketplace of ideas.
the DI just needs to give the unis several million for research, endow a chair or two.
established scientists are not going to teach ID or any other unproven protoscience on their fundage!
sheesh.
Iris Dement? I’ll take her even if she talks a little twanggy.
I don’t know. He just doesn’t strike me as the documentary type.
proponents of ID must pay for the development.
ESCR?
If you ask me, he seems like one of those kinds of guys that likes a “chick flick.”
NTTAWWT.
Um. I think you’re a lot misframing the point of the movie. A PhD either means something or it doesn’t. It’s really that simple.
Maybe it’s just as well nobody’ll jump out of the cake.
150th!
Research is entirely about investigating things that aren’t proven, ya dumbass.
yup twodigit.
the university teaches proven science.
research grants, research assistantships, that fundage comes from a lot the government, industry, military.
Teh university is not a monolith, unless you’re fascist or something.
student tuition pays for instruction.
I think I might speak Nishi. Scientific inquiry is not necessarily free. I.D. boosters need to secure their own funding to establish the canon, fund their own chairs within schools, and determine the criteria that would grant credentials. Not happening with the sky spook.
You confuse research with product development. That which has a rational basis ought to be investigated by rational scientists as a matter of inquiry, without regard for who supports the notion and only regarding the facts of the matter. But you pooh pooh the notion of a creator while you call yourself a muzlim. Mo would kick your binge drinking ass.
Right. And students get to pick courses. They won;t pick dumb ones. That’s how I took the one on Lord of the Rings. I learned a lot, but still this is a lot why I kinda resented my student loan down the road I think.
Yeah, 161. One of the digits appears twice, silly.
So it wasn’t time travel?
:-(
I was really looking forward to knowing who’s going to win the World Series.
I would’ve split the winnings with you, too.
It’s about the individual nishi. A perfectly happy and well-respected science professor person with a PhD what he’s earned who accidentally picks up a book on ID and gets intrigued for whatever reason I don’t think should get the Shirley Jackson lotto treatment.
Oh, did I mention that I’ve spent plenty of time reviewing grants for NIH? There’s a very significant little term that gets tossed around quite a bit. It’s “institutional support”. You might want to look it up, genius.
look..i dont care…diddle around with ur conspiracy theory until the Singularity comes over u like a tsunami.
ID isnt a science.
it wont be taught at unis.
academe IS the arena of ideas.
but the price of admittance to the arena is the scientific method, for sciences an wannabe sciences.
ID can’t get in as it is, and its proponents seem more interested in whining about bias and prejudice than in doin any heavylifting or godforbid actual research.
therefore it will never be able to compete.
it cant even get in.
Godspeed, little Egbert.
*sniff*
I don’t think should get the Shirley Jackson lotto treatment.
doesnt happen.
or they could sue, lolz.
the wedge strategy left a bad taste in a lot of ppls mouths.
i imagine associating with the DI might have some repercussions.
I have no idea who will win the World Series. I only know it wasn’t intelligently designed.
Academe is a groupthinky and parasitic guild what is a lot condescending to its clients. They don’t get happyfeet’s monies.
Cynn, please. If you really do have the secret of time travel, share it with us.
For Egbert’s sake if not for mine.
Can’t argue with that. Just looking at how the leagues and divisions are organized pretty well scotches that idea.
look, i give up.
be stupid.
everyone thinks u are anyways.
Likewise. You can bank on it.
but i wurkd so hard awn my spelin an punktuashun!
…I guess it’d be pointless to ask Nishi if she’d be willing to jump out of the cake.
ID might want that.
BTW, has anyone on this thread put forth the notion that ID is fact? Anyone?
But… no one here is arguing for ID. I think it’s a lot silly personally, but I’m not gonna ostracize people what don’t think that. That would really be just a lot intolerant I think.
Yes. What Pablo said.
You’re no fun.
The Singularity, OTOH….
Bwahahahahaha!!!!
This is not something to shoot for I don’t think.
Although, it seems to me that with Nishi going on and on about “ID wants” this and “ID wants” that…
How could ID “want” anything if it wasn’t fact?
I’m gonna be so hung over in the morning.
And considering I haven’t even been drinking…
everyone thinks u are anyways.
See this is the groupthinky part.
Yeah ‘feets, I think there’s a whole lot of people who aren’t part of everyone. Probably the vast majority of Muslims included, along with the rest of the Godbotherers.
I know, quite for certain, that Aristotle bandied about certain elements of I.D. under a different name, wherein the designer/mover is designated ÀÃÂῶÄον κινοῦν ἀκίνηÄον.
Contrary to popular opinion, Aristotle and Jesus did not attend High School together. In fact, because Aristotle predated Jesus by a few centuries, the opportunity to become a Christian of any stripe entirely escaped him. One wonders about which of the pro-I.D. types are burning goat fat at an altar of Zeus or Ares.
I.D. is a variant of the same teleological argument that we in the West have been engaged with for well over 2,000 years, and its provenance within the history of ideas is both beyond question and superior – in the quality of minds that have considered and accepted it – to “evolution.”
Now, having said this, let us all poke fun at the censorious, miseducated ignoramuses who cannot recognize an idea that every schoolboy until about 1959 would know at first.
Ignorant, hipster bookbanners is what they are.
Hey, Nishi, bite me. I happen to agree with many of your opinions I can comprehend. But these people are not stupid. They are offensive, opinionated, and sometimes wrong, but I wouldn’t have hung out here this long if they weren’t at least informed, interesting and articulate. Quit flippin the bird, swallow some bile, and walk among the repub wounded. It’s instructive if nothing else.
Obnoxiousness appears to be tolerated. That’s a plus.
That was just a beautiful thing to read after all that. Thank you.
Not you cynn, but thank you too.
That was sweet, in an ugly sort of way. If I weren’t currently a registered Democrat, I’d be feeling the love.
Of course, it helps to remember that nishi is trolling and all that that entails. Long story short: Don’t expect much.
grrr
the treatment of ID by the scientific community is the topic.
some of the treatment is specific to ID because of the DI and the Wedge Strategy, because of cheating.
some of it is not.
any unproven protoscience that claimed special dispensation from following the scientific method would be exactly so disdained.
this has nothing to do with the supression of valid avenues of inquiry by orthodoxy.
the example, ID theory, simply hasnt paid its dues.
no street cred.
“any unproven protoscience that claimed special dispensation from following the scientific method would be exactly so disdained.”
Then maybe you should police your own and tell them to quit positing that evolutionary theory permits only of material causes.
If the question is “what happened?” Maybe you can tell them that the answer isn’t “there is no God.”
Tell me again about AGW and academe….
Heretic! Burn the blasphemer!
but I’m not gonna ostracize people what don’t think that
neither me.
but ID theory can never be taught in unis as a science until it becomes a science.
wilin out on “orthodox” scientists is just more misdirection.
STFU and do the work and quit wastin ppl’s time.
or teach it in seminaries.
you all maintain that u do not believe in ID theory, yet want to pimp it as an example of valid scientific inquiry.
it is not valid scientific inquiry.
how can this be an example of supression of free inquiry?
“The unequivocal consensus in the scientific community is that intelligent design is not science but pseudoscience.[11][12][13][14] The U.S. National Academy of Sciences has stated that “intelligent design, and other claims of supernatural intervention in the origin of life” are not science because they cannot be tested by experiment, do not generate any predictions, and propose no new hypotheses of their own.[15] The US National Science Teachers Association and the American Association for the Advancement of Science have termed it pseudoscience.[16] Others have concurred, and some have called it junk science.[17]”
Nish: Please make sense: are you talking about the posture of the establishment scientific community with regard to Intelligent Design theory?
What is this DI and wedgie theory?
To my knowledge, there are no sanctioned courses of study in either discipline.
Consider this
The hint of the century
Consider this
The slip that brought me
To my knees failed
What if all these fantasies
Come flailing around
Now Ive said too much
I thought that I heard you laughing
I thought that I heard you sing
I think I thought I saw you try
But that was just a dream
That was just a dream
That’s either the Ramones or REM. Intelligent design would know.
Alec, again, poking holes in evolution wont work.
ID theory has to beat theory of evolution in the competitive arena of ideas, academe.
ID theory cannot accomplish that, because ID theorists are unwilling or unable to the heavy lifting required to be competitive, prefferrin instead to whine about prejudice or nefariously weasel into the head of the line via the Wedge strategy.
“Nishi’s right”
Sure, but she’s right in the wrong fucking thread. She’s arguing against no opponents. She’s bashing the living shit out of a strawman.
Typical.
Disclaimer: no harm against any strawman, living or dead, was suggested in this comment. Double-digeters, take note.
“cannot be tested by experiment”
Can you make something complex evolve in a lab?
Get me a pig with wings, maybe by storing all the piggiechow up high, you know, until they sprout wings and the winged pigs outscrew the grounded ones. My uncle would love one, he’s really into Floyd.
Perhaps the problem is that evolutionary theory and I.D. are both pseudoscience. One or both may be true, but neither science.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discovery_Institute
“Alec, again, poking holes in evolution wont work.”
What the fuck are you talking about? I was suggesting in that post that you police the assholes pushing materialist philosophy as evolution science.
I’ll keep my philosophy off of your science so long as you keep other philosophy off of your science.
im goin to go get drunk
it is profoundly depressing to me that most here dont unnerstand that to be a science, a discipline must embrace the scientific method.
Slart: Wrong again! This post was about a preening prancing posing poser poster who was slated to be mocked. I responded in what I thought was the spirit of the post. If I am wrong, let me know ASAP and I will retract all nastyisms.
I want to be a science; who do I have to hug?
I could kiss you right now.
“im goin to go get drunk”
My mistake; I thought you were already shitfaced. You should let us know beforehand, next time.
“it is profoundly depressing to me that most here dont unnerstand that to be a science, a discipline must embrace the scientific method.”
I bet it’s even more depressing to discover that we’re all space aliens, and you had no idea.
Equally true, those two statements.
“Slart: Wrong again! This post was about a preening prancing posing poser poster who was slated to be mocked.”
Oh, see, I thought I mentioned that Dan’s tangential bent is lost on me, sometimes.
“it is profoundly depressing to me that most here dont unnerstand that to be a science, a discipline must embrace the scientific method.”
I performed optics experiments in college lab. According to the scientific method of testing a hypothesis. Same with ballistics in college lab. I pretty much DID the thing that illustrated the applicable law of physics and observed it. Cool shit.
Now, how do you “observe” evolution, “test” evolution in the same way? Honest question – I really don’t know, and can’t imagine how you would do it – according to the scientific method?
It’s easy. You put little living thingers in an adverse environment and the ones that don’t die is different. Then you take them and eff with them some more. And then more. Especially the freaky-looking ones that happen randomly. Then you build up a population of them and make them have sex and stuff with other freaky ones, and then you select the freakiest offspring. Pretty soon you has people. Or maybe marmosets. I’m not sure really.
Happy, what you’re describing sounds disturbingly like PW.
Everything evolves, McG. Nishi says that a lot. She sure is grumpy about it sometimes though.
I suspect threads like this make her feel like a character in one of these books and she can’t figure out why.
*
holy fuk bejesus, walk away, talk on the phone, come back almost 50 wanking replys to whatever. Thx to alex and cynn for at least listening and comprehending the noise. And nishi, life isn’t just some game y’know? smart you are in a limited fashion…but insecure as we might be too. Admit your humanity. Singularity sounds like the Rapture to me, about as hocus pocus and ‘special’ and unscientific as any thing I’ve heard here. I disagree about the teleological argument with alex…..too, but sleep time is coming. For alex: (http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/) Hume knocked the teleological argument on it’s ass and that’s from before scientific skepticism became more mainstream. We can understand ‘science’ can also be ‘religious’ in it’s exclusivity esp. if erroneously called to defend a religion such as Marxism or Monotheism. (Russians tell me Marxism was a religion and I believe them.) But science by it’s true nature has to accept new ideas and analyze them even if uncomfortable (like global warming is to Geologists who are on payrolls of large oil companies for example). Many have analyzed teleological logic or its lack of logic And “Intelligent Design” but it’s not proven Unlike evolution has been again and again. It’s worthy of discussion…but not a whole curriculum.
damn those Maori’s scared the shit outta me. I admit it, it’s a human-thing.
whoa, the dumb: “student tuition pays for instruction.”..what college is that? maybe a quarter of the cost of a major college is funded from tuition. Harvard and Dartmouth don’t even need the tuition.. it’s such a minor part of their funding.
sometimes happy, u gotta getout of the cubical; ppm parts per million or particles pm. dude, the science doesn’t lie, but you’re emotional display of scaredness that it might be true shows thru everytime. I may have Prejudices that it might exist as you Politically have opposite…but why block the Science as Reagan/Bush’s did?
The reason that Gore, et al, are screaming louder about what scientists are saying about climate change is that the Resistance to change of any fashion, the Status Quo-ers, the Establishment, is so thick and won’t listen so a little Hollywood is needed.
I appreciate the Skepticism here or else I’d leave you like the friken ignoramuses at Free Republic, who are purely fascist drolling idiots totally committed to the PetroKapitalists, the Saudi funded Bush/Carlye/Citigroup anti’s who fear freedom of choice and self sufficiency…in a phrase they who fear competition from nature and science and want monopolies of thought and consumption. For this reason, some salesmanship and shrill antidotes were needed to bring attention to what to many scientists warrant’s concern…as terrorism as we experienced it so far is very minor in comparison in it’s effects upon a world of people many if not most who are living near shorelines of a rising ocean.
Anyway, nice talking with you all tonight albeit briefly.
I just don’t think a 100 parts per million increase of CO2 is bad. My Diet Dr. Pepper has way more than that and I drink two a day and I’m still 98.4. The doctors say don’t worry about the .2 it’s just one of those things.
Thanks, datadump. Yes, I’m a bitch. OK, I’ll take the happy pills now.
alright
your base premise about the documentary is wrong.
scientists are not reacting to just any inquiry, but to ID.
so you cannot use the reactions of scientists to prove they are against freedom of inquiry–they are only against ID.
i wonder if the Wedge Strategy is mentioned in the documentary?
i guess panda’s thumb or pharangyla wud kno.
or razib….ill go see.
Dr. Pepper (Diet) got me thru Design Studio. no sleeping allowed.
in comparison it’s like major percentages I think. Hey, I don’t think global warming is so bad, and it’s cold here and I am about a thousand feet above sea level. But just saying it doesn’t exist…what’s to be afraid off..change? Then I think of Bangladesh being like average a few feet above sea level.. and add up a the other coast lines and eh, add up how many people and ….?
oh, good night. feet’s and all.
I’m wondering if taking one person’s statement, twisting it until it could propel a balsawood airplane to the moon, and then claiming that everyone else in the room agrees with said twisting, is a tactic that’s widely accepted in the scientific community.
If so, the scientific community can go fuck itself.
and the PW comment community is not evolving feets.
it is devolving.
:(
273? excuse me for some misunderstanding ….i’m not even sure of gender here anyway….
Cap’n said it’s about inquiry. I don’t think he would make stuff up like that. Either way really, the scientists that bully the other scientists must not come off very well or the movie wouldn’t be getting the kind of marketing it’s getting and NPR would have just ignored it. It must have really bugged them.
It’s not devolving. You came back. Also, g’night datadave person.
haha, those hagee books.
my eurofriends love those…they cant believe americans are stupid enuff to buy them.
they adore sneering at american stupidity.
no…i feel more like Alice thru the looking glass.
ima go hang at the science blogs.
this place is toxic anymore.
i miss jeff.
kthxbye
dont let the dor hit you in the as on the way out
I miss jeff too. Maybe if we all get tattoos and put on our snarly face and take off our shirts he’ll like us more better. I’m game if you are.
Not tonight though cause it got cold.
“There is no such thing as philosophy-free science, There is only science whose philosophical baggage is taken on board without examination.”
Some knuckle-dragging creationist cretin? Some faux-scientific IDist? Nope. Daniel Dennett, Darwinist (some like Stephen Jay Gould say Darwin Fundamentalist) in Darwin’s Dangerous Idea.)
We suffer in discussions like these by ill-defined terms and the marginalized characteristics of communication in our culture. Almost nothing whatsoever in origins discussion has anything to do with science (and I use that term in its classical meaning – i.e. observable, testable, resolvable by experiment). It is, rather, almost all religion, philosophy and metaphysics (and I use those terms with their classical meaning).
The current situation we have with academe is that the Brahmans of Science call their own religion, philosophy and metaphysics science and call any other religion, philosophy and metaphysics not-science. It’s the very thing that, if there is a meme as mantra at PW, Jeff has decried for the long term – intentionalism and language deconstruction at work.
Should we have an open marketplace of ideas there would be equivalent propositional value given for an a priori postulate of “There is God” or “There is not God” – or “We have a machine” or “We are a machine” – or “Irreducible complexity” or “The search for a common ancestor”. Alas, such propositional calculus is not allowed – one set of these assertions (as determined by the dedicated Darwinian priesthood) is science, the other is not. Such is that state of affairs in the public square (and origins discussion is not the only area of inquiry where such hegemony reigns.)
It is this stranglehold that Expelled sheds light on and I think it has good value in that context.
feets most scientists loathe ID with the fire of a thousand suns.
it is not just “inquiry”.
puffy capn ed is disengenuous.
ppl keep trying to cram it down our throats.
the wedge strategy didnt work, and the DI hasnt been able to force it on highschoolers, so now they want to force it into unis under the guise of “freedom of inquiry”..and the unis pay for it!
never!
/spit
Yet, somehow nishi, without any evidence whatever, has claimed that PW is collectively a bunch of idiots who have bought into ID.
Which is sheer, ascientific hucky-puck.
The irony.
Loathing ID with the fire of a thousand suns is not very scientisty. Specially not when there’s 380 ppm of pesky earth-suffocating molecules what will trap all that heat. But warped priorities and passions aside, no one’s suggesting that scientists averse to ID have to have anything to do with it. Yours is good for you, theirs is good for them. PhDs sometimes need to be able to explore different ideas I think without fear of censure.
Maybe she’s hooked up an ethanol IV and gone surfing the science blogs, feets, where people are more tolerant of her horseshit.
Science people don’t sound very tolerant at all from what I gather though. They should strive to be more open-minded I think.
ppl keep trying to cram it down our throats.
who? who is trying to cram it down our throats? How are they doing this violent thing?
I’ve heard of a few people here and there trying to get the school districts to do ID. Most have failed, but you know who hasn’t failed? The zero tolerance people. Now, tell me that isn’t more poisonous than ID.
I think they just failed here in FL.
Which is a good thing, I think. Might as well be teaching Trutherism in physics class.
Also the part where capitalism is pathologized is kind of poisonous too I think. A lot more than ID for sure. Definitely though kids who think their first car has to be a hybrid need to buy their own damn car I think.
– JD, et al, the problem with evolution is not simply that there are “gaps”, which are more accurately described as massive breakdowns. The problem is that there are absolutely no provable connections.
– Think of it this way. Evolution is like a giant computer, whose individual parts work beautifully, but have no interconnections, with zero evidence they ever will be. Not a happy situation for believers, and so they work feverishly to ignore the problem.
– nishi.
– Science. Observe an action. Use math and past experience to generate a “model”. Plug “model” into prediction. fail = change model. Success = “keep model”. Use model for new prediction. rinse and repeat.
– “model” is still just a model. Says nothing factual about reality.
– Only a non-scientist believes science is a reality based construct. Any honest scientist knows the truth. Think daffy duck worshiping Superman, and you’ll get a flavor for the situation.
– Are you following this nishi hunny?
FTR, I happen to think John took the brown acid.
And as my asterisk predicted, you didn’t get it. you never do.
In your case, nishtoon, I refer to the way someone else in a different thread referred to Teh Singularity as your version of the Rapture.
You’re afraid of being left behind.
(I hate having to explain my deeper meanings.)
– Oh, and btw. When you think of Evolution as that giant computer. lacking a single interconnect that can be found, keep in mind that an even bigger problem is that no one can figure out where the hell the computers individual parts came from in the first place.
– With all that in mind, please do continue. Its amusing. Kind of like watching two morons fighting over a poison berry, made worse because Le ob’ject de ador knows we’re all morons in the face of reality, as well as G_d.
– And McGehee, your reference to the singularity comment may be closer to the truth than we know, and may also pinpoint the moment when the post modern intelligentsia found their Valhalla.
– Back some time ago, the modernists guru of all things right and plausible, Stephen Hawkings, postulated in one of his many landmark lectures, “[that] singularities not only absorb everything, but also radiate slowly, thereby eventually dissipating”. This process of slow dissipation has two characteristics he believes. The first centers on the idea that once any matter is absorbed within the event horizon, all distinguishing aspects are lost, such that the “stuff” inside the singularity event horizon is a sort of primordial soup that is the possible source of anything and everything. This, said he, means that the “random radiation” can take on the form of any object, including the building blocks of life. “[Thus] a singularity should have as much chance of radiating a 1956 Buick, complete in all its material foem, as simply radiating an atomic particle. The second characteristic, less interesting possibly, would be that the dissipation would proceed for billions of years, culminating in a horrendous sudden re;ease of unimaginable levels of energy at the moment that the singularity was reduced to some “critical” mass, a possible source for the impossibly energetic space objects known as Quasars.
– He ended his lecture by stating that everyone, most notably physicists and astrologists, might want to think of adding a copy of the holy bible to their libraries, and substituting the word “singularity” for the word “G_d” throughout.
– Thus very possibly was the ideology of “teh science” as the Creator born for the elite.
– Its to laugh. The arrogance of man knows no bounds.
likely one reason the highly-educated dislike xians
I take from this statement, Dr. nishi, that there are more reasons for the “highly-educated” disliking Christians. And that the one reason you submit, is “likely”. However, it is, according to your scientific research, a fact that “the highly-educated” dislike Christians.
So any highly-educated Christians hate themselves? And their Christian spouses if such is the case? Or are any highly-educateds who find themselves liking Christians outliers? You know, like the Earth cooling for the last 10 years.
I ran into a gorilla the other day. He was sticking his finger up his butt and smelling it. Then he was drinking his own pee, fountain style. I asked “Hey, gorilla, what are you doing? That’s over dude. We rule the world now. Mp3’s, microwaves, socks that stay up. You’re missing it with the gorilla bit. Take the monkey-suit off and jump in. No? Bad choice my brutha.”
I’m sorry I missed this thread last night. Looks like loads of fun. Classic Happyfeet -you were ON last night.
“Hume knocked the teleological argument on it’s ass”
I disagree. However, even if he had, it would be irrelevant.
The teleological argument is a fine idea. I.D. is in the tradition of the teleological argument, refigured for more elementary contemporary minds. It is not found in the Bible, or the Koran. It was discussed in the West before there were Christians, and initially, by men who themselves departed from the State’s prescribed religion.
I.D. has nothing to do with creationism. I.D. is not an article of any particular religious faith. Despite this, and because so-called scientists are frail, brittle types, the faint squeak of dissonance must be destroyed.
FYI, this is why we don’t let scientists run anything important, and prefer lawyers (yes, lawyers!) who, at the very least, tend to have a sense of humor and are comfortable with some degree of unresolved ambiguity.
ok
i checked the science blogs last night, and here is what they are sayin.
the documentary doesnt highlight reaction to free inquiry by orthodox scientists….it highlights reaction to a PARTICULAR inquiry, Intelligent Design theory.
Almost none of you will admit to belief in ID theory (cuz, like, it is stchoopid), but you all seem to think the unis should fund inquiry into ID on their own dime, and allow discussion of ID on their own time.
the only way that can happen is for ID to do the heavy lifting of research.
the avenue for ID to be inserted into unis (now that the DI has failed to force it onto highschoolers) is the scientific method.
“The teleological argument is a fine idea.”
this is true. but until ID theorists can follow the scientific method it belings in seminaries, not unis.
it is dishonest in the extreme to say the reaction of the scientific community to ID applies to all avenues of inquiry.
50 years ago, QFT(quantum field theory) was just where IDT(intelligent design theory) is today.
ppl laffed, there were no tools, no metrics, quantum theorists were mocked and reviled by the established scientific community.
today 3 credit hours of quantum mechanics is required coursework for highschool teacher ceritification.
ID has repeatedly tried for illegitimate insertion into the scientific community…the reaction to this latest ploy is natural, and not a demonstration of frailty, brittleness of supression of free inquiry.
the path exists for IDT to become a legitimate science….ID proponents disdain to use it.
but Kurzweil and others project the advent of the Singularity at 25 years out.
so there may not be enough time.
I’ll get ID on the phone and tell it to get to work. I’ll tell it to give AGW a call for some advice on how to proceed.
i am referring to the Technological Singularity, sry for confusion.
the only way that can happen is for the proponents of ID to do the heavy lifting.
sry for shorthand…i thot that was obvious meaning.
Wrong again.
MAybee, you are trying to project “zero tolerance for freedom of inquiry”.
I agree that it may be zero tolerance for IDT at this point.
because IDT has a lot of baggage involving rejection of the scientific method in favor of things like the Wedge Strategy, which nearly all scientists feel is very dishonest.
the Wedge Strategy was attempt to manipulate society to recognize IDT as a science, and to force it’s teaching into high schools.
we may…in the Singularity…. actually find god, determine the nature of god/allah/hashem.
why is it so important to you that god/allah/hashem be the Creator?
cudn’t god/allah/hashem be an emergent property of the metaverse?
energy is neither created or destroyed.
You’ve got that exactly backwards.
??
dont get it pablo.
I cry bullshit. Evolution is a theory that happens to explain observed phenomena better than any competing theory. This doesn’t mean it’s true, any more than Newton’s law of gravitation is true. It just means it’s a theory that fits, and fits rather well. Although there may be some people who are true believers, there’s a huge number of people who aren’t. If you have any specific problems that you see with TOE, please come out with them.
This is a death-spiral conversation in the area of whether you can truly “know” anything. I’d be happy to let you win this one, and you can go on knowing nothing. Me, I tend to think of models whose usefulness has been demonstrated as useful, and regard that usefulness itself as useful. Newton’s law of gravitation is both nondescriptive and demonstrably inaccurate, but it’s still useful. It doesn’t mean that it’s wrong; it’s just not all the way right, yet. I still use it every single day, though, and it’s still good enough that every single day it works exactly as well as I need it to.
No one knows where protons came from, either, but that doesn’t invalidate all physical theory. The fact that we don’t know it all isn’t an excuse to invalidate all we do know, though. It’s incentive to keep looking, is all. I’d guess that the more we keep looking, the more we’ll find out there is to know.
Your comment about Hawking is interesting; ISTR that Hawking recently repudiated part of his past theory of how black holes appear to radiate. Said repudiation, legend has it, came along with the payment of a cash wager. Does that bit of adjustment of theory invalidate all of physics? No, physics remains a reliable predictive tool for physical phenomena. The fact that it doesn’t offer positive proof of where matter came from in the first place doesn’t diminish its usefulness by any regardable amount.
If there’s an entity responsible for creation, it would be God as we understand the concept, by default.
It is this stranglehold that Expelled sheds light on and I think it has good value in that context.
no MC.
Expelled only documents reactions to a sample of 1.
only reactions to IDT.
not scientific, and a bad experimental design.
you cannot prove your hypothesis with a sample of one.
;)
And, nishi, the fact that you think we’re all lockstep-ish on the ID issue just shows that you haven’t been paying attention. This is a conversation that we get into repeatedly, and there’s nothing like consensus here.
To me, as an aside, the question of whether ID is associated with religion (and it is absolutely driven by religious folks, make no mistake about that) is pretty irrelevant, where it comes to ID’s viability as a theory, and its usefulness. I think anyone can be free to postulate a designer, as long as there’s a what-now course of action pursuant to that postulate. Otherwise, it’s a theory without application, and a theory that explains and predicts nothing. As it is, though, it’s to science what the Flying Spaghetti Monster is to religion.
Evolution is a theory that happens to explain observed phenomena better than any competing theory.
Slart is zactly correct.
Science is a competing marketplace of ideas.
proponents of IDT have made no effort to compete.
anyone can be free to postulate a designer
trudat also.
but that must also be made competitive in the marketplace of ideas.
Stop sucking the credibility out of my arguments, nishi.
The problem of the place where science and religion hit is that it’s everywhere, not just in a few places. Christianity tells us nothing at all about science, so people that struggle with the faith/science boundary nearly inevitably look to their faith for resolution, and no resolution is there. The temptation to declare science faulty for failing to fill in the gaps is…well, wrong, in my opinion.
I say this as one who has struggled with that very thing, and decided that if your faith can’t survive contact with physical reality, it’s a poor faith indeed. Best to have none, and get it over with. That’s not the path I chose, but I can let my faith take the load.
i say proponents of IDT have no faith in the validity of their theory.
or they would start working on body of proof and evidence rather than whining about how scientist are “unfair”.
It appears that they have, in the marketplace of ideas. The result?
Or so I’m told. But then there’s this guy:
Guess who?
Pabs, I don’t have any problem at all, imagining all of this as God’s work. But: what, then? Where does that lead you? What lines of scientific inquiry are suggested by such a hypothesis?
i imagine that is Collins.
from his book?
but Collins sees no conflict between TOE and IDT.
certainly he does not think that IDT should replace TOE.
Collins doesnt see them as competing theories.
and more importantly, Collins does not endorse validating IDT as a “science” in unis.
so discuss IDT in philosphy or theory of religion.
and quit whining about the scientific guild supressin “freedom of inquiry”.
from my perspective, i see this as just another sneaky dishonest way to try to force IDT on highschoolers.
i dont think IDT proponents believe in IDT as science.
they just want it taught as science in highschools.
and IDT proponents know full well that IDT wont be competitive in unis, where students choose.
at least not without a lot of work.
which they seem profoundly unwillin to do.
Slart, I think there’s little that can be done to prove or disprove any theory (other than creationism, which suffers from having all available evidence contradicting it) regarding the origins of nature/life/whatever, other than the archaeological sort, which, while instructive, won’t lead us all the way back to the beginning. We’re still finding things out about the relatively recent past that upend our previous “knowledge” (which was totally scientific, natch), and we’re likely to continue making such discoveries, maybe even because of the dookie!
Many of these things will always remain theories, and as you note, theories often serve well enough to get us through the day. I think there are numerous things that are beyond our ability to comprehend and/or fully investigate, and that this shall always be the case. My purpose in this discussion is not to proffer one theory over any others, but to simply note the closed-minded arrogance on display. That, and to play with the troll.
it appears that they have, in the marketplace of ideas.
no pablo they have not.
to be competitive, the DI and private contributers should fund research, endow department chairs, fund peer-reviewed journals, endow scholarships, fund graduate research assistantships.
for example, there are a few scientists that endorse ID, and they complain they cant publish in peer-reviwed journals.
but those are not their peers. they need their own journal, the Journal of IDT.
the DI prefers to fund things like the wedge strategy and litigation attempts to force IDT onto highschoolers.
to me, that displays a profound lack of commitment to the cause of validating ID as science.
unserious.
MAybee, you are trying to project “zero tolerance for freedom of inquiryâ€Â
No I’m not.
I’m comparing the successful implementation of those two different ideas in our schools. Or, getting shoved down our throats, as you say.
ID loses in the schools. Too often, zero tolerance policies win, and I think zero tolerance is dangerous.
actually there is the NASA “biological soup” experiment that seeks to recreate the origins of DNA.
still ongoing. ;)
pablo, we have discovered matter changes under observation…why not discover the nature of god/allah/hashem?
maybee, zero tolerance doesnt cause IDT to fail in the schools.
it is the not-being-a-science part.
dont whine.
go out and make it a science.
If they hadn’t, you wouldn’t have your panties in a knot. You do, ipso facto, they have.
That is utter nonsense.
nope, i dont have my panties inna knot.
i unequivocably believe in the existance of god/allah/hashem.
i think IDT could become a science if the proponets were to commit, and do the heavy lifting.
think about QFT…there were no tools to measure the very small…so quantum theorists built them.
That is utter nonsense.
why?
maybee, zero tolerance doesnt cause IDT to fail in the schools.
??????
That’s not what I’m saying.
They are two different things.
You are saying ID is getting crammed down our throats and thrown at our school kids.
I am saying, not so. ID in schools isn’t widely supported at all, and it usually fails when it is brought up.
But you know what really is getting crammed down our children’s throats?
You know what really is getting thrown at our school kids?
Zero tolerance policies.
Which are dangerous.
but i dont really think IDT would ever be competitive with TOE.
Cosmology theory maybe.
;)
You know what really is getting thrown at our school kids?
Zero tolerance policies.
false.
You are saying ID is getting crammed down our throats and thrown at our school kids.
no, i am saying that is wat the DI has invested in so far.
students are taught the scientific method which will cause them to reject ID-as-science.
IDT is not kept out of either highschools or unis because of zero tolerance policies….it is kept out because of lack of credentials as a science.
Why? Because it says that scientists with competing theories and/or hypotheses are not peers and cannot perform peer review. IOW, nonsense.
false.
compelling.
IDT is not kept out of either highschools or unis because of zero tolerance policies….it is kept out because of lack of credentials as a science.
IDT and zero tolerance policies have nothing to do with each other. Nothing.
Am I that unclear?
Are those the same schools that show An Inconvenient Truth?
Heh.
btw, IDT is welcome in non-science curriculae. like theory of religion and philosophy.
but IDT cannot be taught as science until it is one.
pablo, false analogy.
the problem with that is global warming IS science.
global warming caused by carbonbased emissions is junk science.
IDT is no kind of science.
why is the Journal of IDT utter nonsense pablo?
btw, IDT is welcome
Thank you, school board member nishi.
But yes, I agree as I said about 5,000 posts ago that if ID is taught it should be in a world religions class.
Which is pretty much where it is taught, because ID isn’t really being crammed down our throats.
(but you know what is….?)
#
Am I that unclear?
#
yes.
give me an example of zero tolerance policy then.
because ID isn’t really being crammed down our throats
not for lack of trying.
DAN, keep telling someone to Ignore someone is just all the more reason to ignore your prescriptions. We’re all Teenagers here!!! DAD!
nishi, I was the one who said Rapture = Singularity here, not to be derisive but to note that maybe you’re talking over our heads. Like explain more clearly…I am guessing you’re in AI but with some interest in teaching as in above statement.
Let’s start with my standby… And Wikipedia is probably the best thing on the internet still despite Right Wing assaults upon it as it doesn’t bend to their “free market” orthodoxy where money rules all…(just an aside):
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singularity
obvious the scifi singularities (maybe), the mechanical, physical singularities aren’t what you’re getting at so I’ll jump to the obvious:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technological_singularity
ok, maybe clearer for some of us who might be put off by the autocratic zealotry of a religious nature in espousing ‘science’ and the advent of a “technological singularity”. I know dealing with Meat heads maybe makes one defensive and a little loud….. as I Sure Do It!!! ? anyway, clarify for us.
now e.g. :”Critics of Kurzweil’s interpretation consider it an example of static analysis, citing particular failures of the predictions of Moore’s Law. The Singularity also draws criticism from anarcho-primitivism and environmentalism advocates.”
…ah right! I see why you’re driven to attack the Organic Scientists or Environmentalists.. hmm, as your field is a bit touchy about restraints upon certain polluting industries….like the sudden embrace of a flaming semi-anti-AGW theorist from Denmark..who’s backed off from his earlier diatribes against the scientific community but is still embraced by silicon valley execs as a Great Thinker (and has good hair and pleasant looks).
Maybe the Singularity has passed already is another option too?…like around year 1999 when Y2K was promoted by so many in the AI community for the simple need of Mercenary bucks… (400 Billion from the scared idiots of big capital) or when Moore’s Law no longer is applicable?? All questions not certainities btw. fwiw.. not much….. but then yapping like a cubical gangbanger w/ tatoos while safely ensconched in some preppy staffed-elitist subculture is hardly clarifing to us readers. ( So even if on the non tech margins of technology i’ve seen the culture up close as we are shared cheap housing in hipster proximity in order to spend the bucks on better things…Like art supplies, musical instruments, skiing, climbing, trips to Taiwan, etc. anything better than paying rent. Ask Moby.
also, I.D. probably is a ‘dead horse’. Ain’t happening. But keep up the vigilance as who knows what knuckle draggers McCain will drag in with his Forced Pregnancy* mavens lining up. (* so-called “Pro-life” ppls)
note that Jeff’s LifeBoat association is somehow linked to ‘techno singularity’.
i thot u said that documentary, expelled, highlighted zero tolerance policies…..it does not.
it highlights opposition to a single theory, IDT.
a sample of one is bad science.
your hypothesis is unproven maybee.
This stuff writes itself.
Junk science is not science, btw. It can’t withstand peer review. Junk science is just a nice way of saying “bullshit”.
ah, you got to that sort of already…but I was researching for the last hour or so about quantum stuff dealing with old associates of mine back in the day:
“n 1971, the first e-mail message was sent over a network developed by BBN Technologies. That network, called ARPANET, marked the birth of the worldwide Internet that we can’t do without today. ARPA, now changed to DARPA, stands for Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency, part of the Department of Defense group that supports the new quantum key network. BBN’s Chip Elliot is the principal engineer of the project. Tai T. Wu, Gordon McKay Professor of Applied Physics and professor of physics, leads the Harvard effort. Ditto for Alexander Sergienko, associate professor of ……. ”
singularities? when do they start? when do they end?
data, i prefer Hawkins Lifeboat, ie colonization of other planets.
that lifeboat ur talkin about is just OSHA for technology.
prevents minor workplace accidents but not having a safe dropped on us.
i thot u said that documentary, expelled, highlighted zero tolerance policies…..it does not.
it highlights opposition to a single theory, IDT.
Yeah, I didn’t say the film highlights zero tolerance policies.
I said zero tolerance policies are more pervasive and more harmful to our school children than the proponents of ID.
ID is your bugaboo, but it is the monster under the bed. It isn’t threatening schools. It isn’t pervasive.
There are other things that currently are the policies of our schools. Like zero tolerance policies. That’s a real problem, not a made-up one like your fear of ID being taught.
pablo, i think IDT could become a science.
it is not science now.
and junk science is debatable.
There are other things that currently are the policies of our schools.
example plz maybee.
give me data.
i have no fear of IDT being forced on highschoolers in science class.
that was a failure.
and i believe IDT could be taught as science in unis, but the proponents must do the heavy lifting to make IDT a valid science.
There are other things that currently are the policies of our schools.
example plz maybee.
give me data.
Do you honestly not know? Do you know nothing about schools?
Give me data about how many school districts teach ID as science.
Science is the application of the scientific method. It doesn’t require recognition, endowments, journals or your applause.
Evolution theory isn’t science either. Science is the investigation of theories, not the theories themselves.
As you live to demonstrate, everything is debatable. No matter the argument, you can always find some stupid asshole to debate it.
that was a failure.
So it isn’t being crammed down our throats.
And your constant bringing it up is for really no reason.
“Slart, I think there’s little that can be done to prove or disprove any theory ”
Well, no, oops: one can certainly disprove a theory, by contradicting it. This is how science works, Pablo, or at least, how it’s supposed to work.
ummm I meant this Lifeboat
OTOH, Pabs, if you’re just trolling the troll, carry on with my blessings.
“carbonbased emissions is junk science”
keep saying that, wacko. how many ppm of plutonium will kill ya? a hundred percent of CO2 might not kill ya but it just might increase greenhouse gases….but since you’re an AI person…(CS has actually had a very poor growth rate of new theories btw…it’s all engineering, chemical, nano, subsets of physical sciences, not CS that driving the ‘singularity’…but hardly new science… marketing is at the top….like Atari’s ex salesman: steve jobs)
but it’s fun seeing you flummox others here, brava!
100 percent increase of CO2 to be exactomento
You’ll note the rest of the sentence you’re quoting acknowledges just that in regard to creationism. Context, please. What I’m saying is that I don’t think we’ll ever find enough evidence to prove the origins one way or another. Which is not to say that we shouldn’t be trying, because the bits we find increase our understanding, a good thing. But I don’t think we’ll ever resolve it to a standard of scientific proof.
I wish I could, but I’ve gotta run. :-P
well….okfine then.
just give up and whine about the unfairness of it all i guess.
like u usually do.
;)
I think it’s fair to let the audience decide if ID is a suitable lens for an examination of intolerance among academics. There is already a growing body of work on this subject, and it resonates a lot with that thinger where those fascist academic monkeys at Duke tried to lynch those kids. There will probably be a movie about that one too. I think the real gist if it is that you have to really wonder if students think that there’s an atmosphere of academic freedom and tolerance of unconventional thinking at their schools. I think the kids what are liberals would say yes, yes there is. After all, nobody censored Ahmadinejad.
Dan’s somewhere snickering….
*of* it I mean.
And your constant bringing it up is for really no reason.
no maybee, it is data.
the failed attempts to force IDT onto highschoolers likely has prejudiced the scientific community against IDT.
my point was, “expelled” does nothing to prove scientists are against ALL freedom of inquiry as u maintainn, just against IDT.
well….okfine then.
just give up and whine about the unfairness of it all i guess.
like u usually do.
;)
Is this directed toward me?
I don’t whine about unfairness.
happy, can you two just go meet up somewhere??? like I think you share the same coast or state or something? I wish you two well.
no feets.
you are wrong.
IDT has to follow the protocol like every other science…..or just stfu.
my point was, “expelled†does nothing to prove scientists are against ALL freedom of inquiry as u maintainn, just against IDT.
I maintain no such thing. As I understand it, the movie focuses on IDT, and the viewer can decide if there may be a broader picture here.
A viewer may consider the Lawrence Summers situation, for example.
the failed attempts to force IDT onto highschoolers likely has prejudiced the scientific community against IDT.
There goes another irony meter.
The burden of proof is on the university scientist people though I think.
IDT….can we add vowels?
Oh. Burden of proof about whether scientists are against ALL freedom of inquiry is what I mean.
happy, and let’s sue the university scientists for all the costs of their theories too. Better yet de-fund the universities as they are nest beds of radicals and naysayers to Capitalism. But keep the Business Schools and English Depts… and sports depts.
how many ppm of plutonium will kill ya?
Wrong.
a hundred percent of CO2 might not kill ya
Wrong.
CS has actually had a very poor growth rate of new theories btw…
Wrong.
like Atari’s ex salesman: steve jobs)
Wrong.
Other than that, great points!
Any credentialed professor or scientist what incorporates aspects of IDT into his or her worldview should be fired and blacklisted. These thoughts are wholly unacceptable, and while they should be made to successfully complete a lengthy reeducation programme, they could never be entrusted with a position in academia or the sciences again I think.
pooor, pitiful Lawrence Summers, was on NPR again a few days back.
Hopefully, Stein’s film will do much of the work for us in helping us identify those people who must be purged. Monitors should be posted at all screenings of this film I think.
300+ comments and nishi has said the same thing about 150 different times. Heavy lifting. Wedge. DI. Boo. Theoconz.
We need a New Direction.
Hopefully, Stein’s film will do much of the work for us in helping us identify those people who must be purged
Has nishi noted yet that Stein and the movie makers are not xians?
Any credentialed professor or scientist what incorporates aspects of IDT into his or her worldview should be fired and blacklisted. These thoughts are wholly unacceptable, and while they should be made to successfully complete a lengthy reeducation programme, they could never be entrusted with a position in academia or the sciences again I think.
Well, until they do all that heavy lifting, which the “scientific community” is going to ignore because how could you take seriously someone who believes that?
Jobs was listed as a ‘technician’ at Atari…but always the salesman. Not to knock him but Apple’s technical side wasn’t his, but Steve Wozniak’s. they met even before his two stints at Atari. I love Atari stuff btw.
he’s joking, B moe. me thinks, feets.
hey JD- no labor, eh?
Jobs was listed as a ‘technician’ at Atari
In other words, you were wrong.
You were wrong about all that other stuff, too.
1) Plutonium is a toxic element, but not inordinately so (about the same as lead, much less than arsenic or thallum).
2) A 100% CO2 atmosphere will kill you in short order, both due to asphyxiation (lack of oxygen) and because CO2 itself is toxic at high levels.
3) 767,558 papers in CiteSeer alone, most of which are on CS and IT.
4) Jobs was not a salesman at Atari. Ever.
300th!
The needle’s skipping. Just give it a good whack on the side of the case and that should fix it.
“This End Slightly Off True Horizontal from Straight Up.”
No labor. She was just faking me out last night. Some fake contraction BS. I did not sleep much.
he’s joking, B moe. me thinks, feets.
Can’t slip nothing past ole dave!
Mike Adams over at Townhall writes pretty well about intolerance on campus, but he’s a xian.
No labor. She was just faking me out last night. Some fake contraction BS. I did not sleep much.
Wow. That is really inconsiderate of her.
Plus, there’s us. Waiting waiting waiting.
I think it’s fair to let the audience decide if ID is a suitable lens for an examination of intolerance among academics.
No it is not.
1. A sample of one cannot prove a hypothesis. You cannot use the reaction of scientists to IDT to prove they are against ALL theories.
2. IDT is also a contaminated sample. Baysian or a priori data informs the collection of sample data from scientists already exposed to IDT. IDT has already been rejected emphatically by the scientific community.
if i say this one more time will you finally get it?
IDT cannot enter the arena of scientific ideas in the academic community until there is some body of work or evidence that it is a science.
discuss it freely in the philosphy department where it currently belongs.
so, do the work or STFU.
Are we going to have to wash your mouth out with soap, young lady?
maybee i am still waiting for your “zero tolerance” example.
Any credentialed professor or scientist what incorporates aspects of IDT into his or her worldview should be fired and blacklisted.
oh? has francis collins been blackballed? last i heard he was still headin the human genome project.
cut the BS.
it is still all about IDT.
the philosophy department will welcome your inquirires, i am sure.
academe is not just scientific academe.
IDT doesnt belong in science.
tant pis
It’s all still a lot contrived though nishi cause no one here is carrying ID water. Whether ID lives or dies is just not gonna change the price of peanut butter I don’t think. The climate change nonsense if a lot more material, and it’s definitely a way better measure of how the scientific community is in pretty pitiful shape than whether or not they can abide anything what smacks of metaphysics. Scientists I don’t think are mature enough to really get a handle on contextualizing ID yet, so mostly they just cry witch.
I’m still baffled by someone who makes fun of Christians for believing in the Rapture can talk about “singularity” with a straight face.
And who proclaims the supremacy of science while also claiming to be Muslim.
Oh, and nishidiot, the “singularity” may be “math”, but it’s a degenerate form of mathematics. It’s a supposition based on imagination — the infamous “plot the trend and it’s asymptotic!” graph is in what units? OK, the x-axis is time, but what’s the y-axis? How is it measured? Who measured it?
It’s pure fantasy, as realistic as Narnia and as likely as Star Trek.
– Slart. I checked over what I wrote fairly closly, and I failed to find any mention pertaining to “teh us fullness” per the “model”.
– I must have made my point poorly. I was laughing at the frustrations I watch as non-scientists play whack-a-mole with the various man generated theories, knowing that science finds its best value in its usefullness, and not its absolute reality or eveb long term accuracy.
– Aside from that, y’all are somewhat behind the curve in some fairly important regards when you discuss the competing theories.
– For starters, Hawkins so call repudiation aligns with one of Einsteins forever self imposed mindfucks, having to do with “to ether or not to ether”. But I digress.
– Physicists are deep into trying to apply Quantum theory to everything, since it was one of the possibilities that Einstein absolutely hated, and refused to consider. Everyone knows that giant minds very often do make giant mistakes, so I suppose its only natural to pursue that line of dialectic.
– All of this on a background that has existed for some 10+ years, that drives up the scientific angst level to warp drive 15, namely we are now in the age of “effecting irreversibly” the cause by simply observing. Which, of course, needs must throw everything into question.
– Again my point. We are all novices, scientist and laymen alike, when we get into questions concerning creation. Says not a thing about how “valuable” logical thinking may or may not be.
– The interesting thing is that it seems to not matter whether the thinker knows the latest “in” science. Either way, nothing changes, except maybe we move on a bit along the tech road.
– As to the schools situation. Fotunately for humanity, there is always a fair number of people (yes even students), that respond to obvious manipulation by insisting on thinking for themselves. In the case of the Left collective, it just takes a little longer, or they never grow up. One or the other.
Right. The Singularity, like McGehee intimated with his speed of light analogy, is a self-limiting reaction cause of anemic information input if it can’t incorporate values-based data. This is always a problem in marketing. Yes but which Men 18-34 are we talking about really? It’s not that the singularity, but why that will be the interesting part. The Middle East is a good measure of how really easily people can opt out of these sorts of things I think. I think that really bothers nishi.
And yet it still talks about the “singularity”!
Indeed, I like to think that the speed of light (thanks happyfeet ^^ for the reminder) constitutes a tangible boundary line between science and imagination — between proof and faith.
if i say this one more time will you finally get it?
You mean, will we agree with you ? I doubt it, but that hasn’t stopped you before.
The whole “singularity” nonsense also ignores systemic friction (as systems grow more complex, they consume more energy in maintaining themselves) and (whisper it) collapse.
If nishi’s co-religionists have their way, the world will plunge into a new Dark Ages. Hard to reach singularity when you’re reduced to burning dung for food.
I have noticed that nishi has a hard time separating science fiction from science. It’s rather sad, because it’s folks like her are what keep me from ever attending an SF con or getting back into the SCA.
nishi- you can start here
And then there’s stuff like this
But I’m not going to work any harder than that because I’m certain you aren’t really interested. I know you know about zero tolerance policies in the schools.
– Singularities suck.
– Jeff: bunnies
MayBee – Zero tolerance is not on her list of approved “scientific” topics.
And, BOOBS !
I don’t know what you mean by that.
Slightly different discussion than whether evolutionary theory has anything substantial to it, I submit.
I’m getting the feeling we’re talking past each other, though. Maybe I should stop trying to be clever.
–“I don’t know what you mean by that.
– Reread the following paragraph were I mention two of the contemporary lines ofr thought, wholesale application of Quatum mechanics, and “Observation as part of the experiment”.
Major John is so going to kick all of your asses when he gets back.
TTP ENABLERS!!!11ELEVENTY11!!
– As far as talking past each other, I neither commented on the practicability of any of the theories, nor would I do so, since I don’t believe man can ever really know what hes talking about when discussing the very framework of his existence. Some theorist who’s name escapes me postulated that rule many moons ago, and I think its probably true.
– In his musings concerning singularities, even Hawkings misses the point. If it exists, then the Creator, by definition, must have created it.
– G_d doesn’t stop at the waters edge.
#408
Dude. I’m still chuffed that somebody invented beer.
– and BOOBS!!!!111eleventyone!!!
Ohnoes. Here go.
yay! free samples!
– Life always comes down to simple choices, huh feets…..
I agree.
Yeah, but that’s not working in academia, that’s working for the stupid theocon Bu$hco gubmint.
1) Plutonium is a toxic element, but not inordinately so (about the same as lead, much less than arsenic or thallum). Radioactive Plutonium as in ‘dirty bomb’ heard of it? …very low ppms needed to kill.
2) A 100% CO2 atmosphere will kill you in short order, both due to asphyxiation (lack of oxygen) and because CO2 itself is toxic at high levels. A 100 per cent increase of CO2 by mid century said that in post appended
3) 767,558 papers in CiteSeer alone, most of which are on CS and IT.
that’s publishing, not science twitting with minor variation of variables aren’t major theorem breakthrus…those are in the physical sciences maybe papers on lit crit should be added.
4) Jobs was not a salesman at Atari. Ever.
Always a salesman and more I’ll admit, maybe it was the acid he did and the gurus in India prior to his assendence but always the Salesman par excellance as in this Parody
fuckin’ gibberish does not an argument make, dd.
you’re right
, sleep well, you’ll need it. and best of luck on the growing family.
that’s working for the stupid theocon Bu$hco gubmint.
err….no. clinton started the project.
GW, Kass and the bioloddite council would have cut it off except that that there was a parallel commercial effort at IBM and they coundn’t.
congress wouldnt let them.
Here is GW’s idea of a good scientist.
Two weeks after President Bush announced his American Competitiveness Initiative to encourage research and education in the physical sciences [ed. never the bological sciences], NASAâ€â€one of the plan’s primary beneficiariesâ€â€is embroiled in scandal following the resignation of a presidential appointee.
On February 7, George Deutsch, a 24-year-old Bush appointee in NASA’s public relations department, resigned amidst allegations that he lied on his resume about having graduated from Texas A&M. NASA hired Deutsch after he served on Bush’s re-election campaign in 2004.[ed. never graduated from college! damned academe]
Further fanning the flames of controversy, Deutsch allegedly told public affairs workers at NASA to keep reporters away from James Hansen, the agency’s top climate scientist, and has also been accused of sending an e-mail message last October telling a web designer to add the word “theory” after every mention of the Big Bang.
Hansen did however sympathize with the plight of scientists working at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
“My colleagues at NOAA have told me their problems are worse,” he said. “They have to have a listener on the phone every time they talk to the press to examine what they are saying. This seems more like something Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia would do.”
Dr. Paul Ehrlich, president of the Center for Conservation Biology at Stanford, stated at same conference that tampering with scientific evidence is unacceptable.
“We pay a lot of tax dollars for unbiased scientific information,” he said, “and we don’t want someone standing in between scientists and the public, like some kid who didn’t graduate from Texas A&M.”
could this be one reason we see hostility in academe towards theocon sponsered pseudoscience like IDT?
hahahah
hahaha..i wonder of poor Francis had to embrace the notion of the creator to keep his job?
lolz.
still..that is the point of attack the theocons will have to take now.
IDT is non-competitive with TOE (an its proponents arent going to do the heavylifting to try to make it a better model than TOE)…you all realize that…….
so IDT will have to attempt competition with cosmology theory.
haha,
bonne chance
Um, yes, he works for the Bush Administration now. Calendar much?
nishi, do me a favor, love. Don’t make this so bloody simple. A challenge, please. Or don’t bother.
Oh, and the Human Genome Project? It formally began in 1990, it did. That’d be under Bush I. Which would still not be today.
Pablo i despise both sides trying to use science as political fodder.
GW has consistantly played the “eevul mad scientist” card…do u think we will love him for that?
every frickin SotU GW pimps the physical sciences..never a good for eevul biology, the red headded stepchild of science as far as GW is concerned.
get a clue.
science is non-seperable…..u cant just pick the parts u like, like GW and the theocons try to do.
IDT will never be a science unless the proponents do the heavylifting science involves.
all the wriggling and sideways attacks just piss the scientific community off.
science is all about the marketplace of ideas…..but just advertising doesnt cut it.
there has to be actual SCIENCE to support the theory.
the academic and scientific community found Deutsch very offensive.
and i do think that is GW’s idea of a good scientist….a propagandist with no academic cred.
;)
do u really not unnderstand why scientists and academics loathe IDT and the religious right?
Expelled specifically documents reaction to IDT, not to all new inquiry.
at this point i think it is deserved.
you should blame GW for a lot of the hostility from the “highly edcuated” towards the religious right.
the bioluddite council appointments are pretty offensive to most of us.
Pellegrino has come out against plastic surgery as non-natural for cripes sake.
GW has essentially decried “good” and “bad” sciences.
how can we not resent that?
before you start feets there are plenty of climatologists that think Gore is a fraud.
global warming caused by carbon based emissions is junk science….that means scientists argue about it, a cuz of evidence that mostly discounts it.
IDT is called a psuedoscience by most….i actually think of it as a protoscience.
IDT could become a science, if its proponents were interested in doing the work involved.
declared “good” and “bad” science.
So, how far are you going to stray from the fact that Collins is working in government and not in academia? At this rate, we’d be talking about Tibet in no time. Instead, you’ve got this pesky problem of being, uh, wrong and I’ve got a disinterest in changing the subject. Pity that, ain’t it?
u dont get it.
the only reason collins is still working there is because he is a creator-believer.
he could work in academe also…..because he isn’t the false meme that IDT is science, is he?
im not changing the subject.
im telling you GW has declared infowar on the biological sciences.
that is one reason the highly educated and academe have antipathy towards the religious right.
isn’t pushing the false meme
So, merit has nothing to do with it? Leading the project that unraveled DNA is irrelevant? Either you’re an idiot, nishi, or you’re doing a damned fine job of playing one on the internet.
You know what? Prove that. Let’s see your work. Take us through the logical sequence that leads you to the conclusion that Collins’ faith is the sole reason for his continued employment.
not the sole reason, collins is a fine geneticist.
he has lots of peers.
but i suggest….he is sanctioned by GW, because of creator-belief.
OTOH…..does Collins endorse IDT?
i cant find anything that says he does.
a lot of IDT proponents whining a cuz he wont is all.
GW chose the bioluddites on the bioethics council because they disdain biotech.
every SotU, every single one, GW pimps the physical sciences and never mentions the biological ones.
GW vetoed ESCR fundage, twice.
GW signed terris law at 1:00 am.
GW said IDT shud be taught along side TOE in highschool science class.
see a pattern?
Radioactive Plutonium as in ‘dirty bomb’ heard of it?
Sure. I’ve even been within three feet of a sample of it. Hint: I’m still alive.
that’s publishing, not science
Translation: you don’t have the slightest clue what you’re jabbering about. As always.
Always a salesman
Translation: you were wrong.
Isn’t it time for your morning toke or something?
Bioluddites?
Elizabeth Blackburn, Ph.D. Professor, Department of Biochemistry and Biophysics, University California San Francisco. Professor Blackburn, a distinguished cell biologist whose research is on chromosome telomere structure, holds a number of awards and prizes, including the California Scientist of the Year Award (1999) and the American Association for Cancer Research-G.H.A. Clowes Memorial Award (2000). She is an elected fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences (1991) and a member of the Institute of Medicine (2000). She has also served as President of the American Society for Cell Biology (1998).
Michael Gazzaniga, Ph.D. Director, Center for Cognitive Neuroscience, Dartmouth College. Professor Gazzaniga conducts research on how the brain enables the mind. He is a fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science and the American Neurological Association. His publications include The New Cognitive Neurosciences (2000) and The Mind’s Past (1998).
Charles Krauthammer, M.D. National Columnist, The Washington Post. Dr. Krauthammer, who received his medical degree from Harvard Medical School and practiced psychiatry at Massachusetts General Hospital for several years, writes a nationally syndicated editorial page column for The Washington Post Writers Group. He won the 1987 Pulitzer Prize for distinguished commentary. He has written many newspaper and magazine articles on bioethical topics, including stem cell research, cloning, euthanasia, and assisted suicide.
Janet D. Rowley, M.D., D.Sc. Blum-Riese Distinguished Service Professor of Medicine, Molecular Genetics and Cell Biology, and Human Genetics, Pritzker School of Medicine, University of Chicago. Dr. Rowely is internationally renowned for her studies of chromosome abnormalities in human leukemia and lymphoma. She is the recipient of the National Medal of Science (1999) and the Albert Lasker Clinical Medicine Research Prize (1998), the most distinguished American honor for clinical medical research.
Um, yeah. Bioluddites. And you’re a ballerina astronaut.
Daniel Foster, M.D. Donald W. Seldin Distinguished Chair in Internal Medicine and Chairman of the Department of Internal Medicine, University of Texas Southwestern Medical School. Dr. Foster, whose research is in intermediary metabolism, has received the Banting Medal, the Joslin Medal, the Tinsley R. Harrison Medal and the Robert H. Williams Distinguished Chair of Medicine Award for his work. He is a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences and is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.
500!
What? I’m too early? Well, I’ll be busy later.
Carry on.
wich is to say that wut i wuz sayin is totul bulshit.
yup except for Dr. K.
an he is likely a mole.
bioluddite means their views on scientific advancement of biotech, paplo….has nuttin to do with their credentials.
Leon Kass
“Kass places “special value on the natural human cycle of
birth, procreation and death”, and views death as a
“necessary and desirable end”. As such, he has opposed
most kinds of interference in the reproductive processâ€â€including
birth controlâ€â€as well as all
deliberate efforts to increase human longevity. [5]
that bioluddite was replaced by Joseph Pellegrino, this catholic idiot
now he prolly believes in IDT…..and the tooth faery.
oops, edmund pellegrino
jesus-h-christ-inna-hand cart.
“pre-embryos”????????????
lawls.
an u wunner why ppl think ur stupid!
“Kass places “special value on the natural human cycle of
birth, procreation and deathâ€Â, and views death as a
“necessary and desirable endâ€Â. As such, he has opposed
most kinds of interference in the reproductive processâ€â€including
birth controlâ€â€as well as all
deliberate efforts to increase human longevity.
I hate to challenge a human supercomputer such as yourself, but that outlook would support evolutionary theory, and be opposed to the human intelligent design, or perhaps redesign, that you advocate.
Why are we still going on about ID? I thought we’d already established it is no longer being crammed down our throats.
The next issue we’ll have to contend with is mixing animal and human dna.
an u wunner why ppl think ur stupid!
All time winner, right there.
And this after she declared in another thread,
Apparently she doesn’t know how to extricate herself from an argument she deems bogus.
This is her weakness. This is how we will destroy her.
<evil, maniacal cackle>
We’ll have to keep an open mind, could be kinda cool, MayBee.
Not credentials. Achievements. Deeds. Areas of study. They speak far louder than your shrieking about their views, numbskull.
Academics? Like “*Edmund D. Pellegrino, MD, Director, Center for Clinical Bioethics and The John Carroll Professor of Medicine and Medical Ethics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, D.C.?”
Do you think that “preembryo” is Pelligrino’s construct? I find that hard to believe, because that would mean that you can’t read, yet somehow you managed to cough a link up. In fact, you could look here and find what those you see as your adversaries think of the term. Are you really dumb enough to think that pelligrino made it up?
no wunner ppl think u r stupid, lulz.
I’m content to leave it at Spiderpig.
It amuses me greatly that someone who can’t stop lying deems herself an authority on correct ethics.
462nd!
Slart: I cry bullshit. Evolution is a theory that happens to explain observed phenomena better than any competing theory…
I’ll do the same. That’s a point of view, rather than an appeal to actual explanatory power. Viewed outside the context of the postmodern religion, observable phenomena does not meet the basic conditions that evolutionary theory requires.
Well yeah but there’s nothing wrong with granting the theory a certain sure-isn’t-stupidness. It’s really a pretty darn good theory. It’s a neat thing what people figured out all by themselves.
It’s engaging for people who make an a priori natural/materialist requirement for understanding the world. Otherwise, not so much.
That seems kinda snotty really. People just were trying to understand their world is all. We used to call them natural historians. There’s a big museum in Washington. I went there when I was little and saw the dinosaurs but I kinda got in trouble cause I was so behind the rest of my family cause I had on the headphones and I was listening to everything and I think they got hungry.
In the last century and a half it hasn’t been about understanding their world is all – it’s been about secularizing ‘science’.
I like the dino’s too. What’s going to happen when they find a fully preserved dino in the ice? Because they will, and sooner than the ‘singularity’. That will be ohnoes – 65 million years – poof!
I don’t get it. Oh yeah well there maybe could be a frozen one is not something I would really want to confront nishi with. But you go ahead.
I’m not talking to nishi.
She’s been quiet today. But she stayed up late and got up early. She might could just be tired.
Richard Lewontin, Harvard Biologist, Billions and Billions of Demons, The New York Review of Books [Subscription required], January 2007.
And I don’t make up what the state of the public square is.
They are pretty rough on metaphysics, but I think there’s a method to it though.
Yes, feets, there’s a method. One which supposes that human reason can explain all of reality. By inspection, it cannot.
Well yeah, but it’s the paradigm. Paradigms are really hard to supplant is all. Some of this is a lot arbitrary I’m afraid.
It’s recent paradigm which supplanted the previous paradigm what that allowed more than human reason to account for ‘understanding their world is all’. The recent paradigm subtracts a significant amount of reality from contemplation.
I’d say that’s a lot true. But it’s still sort of a quixotic thing to rail against. All in all, not a bad little epoch we have here.
Why quixotic? I’m thinking that academe cannot forever live in the Temple of Reason. At some point they’re going to run out of food.
Epoch? Not enough trials for the appearance of a transitional form anyway.
I request a translation to English, please. What basic conditions do evolutionary theory require, and who’s contextualizing anything with “postmodern religion”, whatever that is?
What basic conditions do evolutionary theory require…
One example of a basic condition would be a fossil record that clearly demonstrates gradual speciation change. It does not. [And before you throw out the tired old arguments about fossil formation, please read the parts of this post that debunk those arguments – in the comments as well.] There are more – but this one is good enough to be rather insurmountable IMO.
who’s contextualizing anything with “postmodern religion 
Natural materialism is the “postmodern religion” I am referring to. It elevates human reason and human information sensing to be the final arbiter of reality – which by rather simple inspection it is not. It requires as much if not more faith to be exercised than any other religion/metaphysics/philosophy.
I don’t find your arguments compelling. You claim that there’s no evidence of gradual speciation without defining “gradual”. When gradual is up for serial redefinition, it’s an invitation to carting the goalposts about. Tell me what you’d need to be satisfied, and we can talk further.
I don’t have a problem with religion, and I don’t either have a problem with objecting to relying overly on reason. But reason is one iof the few things we do have, and the questioning of reliance on reason comes from the ability to reason, so there’s a certain snake-eating-its-tail aspect. Anyway, that’s metaphysics, and we’re talking science.
Your discussion on isotopes and dating, from your link, makes no sense at all. Or, rather, it makes sense, but it only makes sense if you postulate some merry prankster who’s going about adding or subtracting components of matter, everywhere. Boundary conditions, in this case, are meaningless, because you’re postulating a given rock sample as self-contained, rather than part of a larger, relatively homogeneous mass. When you’re talking about huge numbers of rock samples that are more or less equally taken from larger environs, boundary conditions as a concern as applies to radioisotope dating are meaningless.
Again, here, you’re using reason to attack itself. If reason is invalidated by reason, then the reason used to invalidate reason is itself invalid, and you’ve just kicked your last leg out from underneath any argument you might have had.