Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9163 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,419 Year: 3,676/9,624 Month: 547/974 Week: 160/276 Day: 34/23 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Side Orders ⇒ Coffee House ⇒

for Terry Trainor

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   for Terry Trainor
derwood
Member (Idle past 1897 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001

derwood Posts Only
Message 1 of 8 (36086)
04-02-2003 9:28 AM

In a post on Phillip Engle, you mention me, in that I said I had never heard of Engle, and that you had done a search and got 59 hits.
​
Implying, as is the creationist hypocrites way, that I lied.
​
I did not. I have never heard of Phillip Engle. Doing a literature search, I found nothing. Doing a google search, I found many, just like you. The majority of the hits were for geneaology pages. The few pages that were about the author were ALL links to either ARN or his LaurelHighlands media page.
​
So my question - Who is he? And who cares?
​
And more importantly, why are you bringing me up on a board that I resigned from?
Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Mammuthus, posted 04-02-2003 10:25 AM derwood has not replied
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 04-02-2003 10:57 AM derwood has not replied
  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002

Mammuthus Posts Only
Message 2 of 8 (36090)
04-02-2003 10:25 AM 		Reply to: Message 1 by derwood
04-02-2003 9:28 AM

Isnt Philip Engle the father in Little House on the Prairy?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by derwood, posted 04-02-2003 9:28 AM derwood has not replied
  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2

PaulK Posts Only
Message 3 of 8 (36094)
04-02-2003 10:57 AM 		Reply to: Message 1 by derwood
04-02-2003 9:28 AM

I tried "Philip Engle" and saw 61 hits, with Google claiming "about 82" total.
​
I tried my name and got many times that number of hits with Google claiming "about 19500" I used my FULL name and got 25 hits displayed - 19 of which were genuine references to me.
​
"Scott Page" gets "about 11300" and "Terry Trainor" lists a mere 81 of which only 40 are displayed.
​
All of which goes to show the uselessness of searching by name. And that I am obviously more famous than this Philip Engle
​
[Added by edit] And googling for '"Philip Engle" evolution' gets no hits at all.
​
[This message has been edited by PaulK, 04-02-2003]
This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by derwood, posted 04-02-2003 9:28 AM derwood has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by Mammuthus, posted 04-02-2003 11:11 AM PaulK has replied
  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002

Mammuthus Posts Only
Message 4 of 8 (36095)
04-02-2003 11:11 AM 		Reply to: Message 3 by PaulK
04-02-2003 10:57 AM

I hate to disappoint you PaulK but searching google with "semi-meiotic" got 21 hits which beats your 19...so salty is ahead
Though he has a bit of catching up to do with "Scott Page"..actually with me to...I got 420 hits with my name...and Mammuthus gets 3,770
This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by PaulK, posted 04-02-2003 10:57 AM PaulK has replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by PaulK, posted 04-02-2003 11:21 AM Mammuthus has not replied
  
PaulK
Member
Posts: 17825
Joined: 01-10-2003
Member Rating: 2.2

PaulK Posts Only
Message 5 of 8 (36098)
04-02-2003 11:21 AM 		Reply to: Message 4 by Mammuthus
04-02-2003 11:11 AM

But only 13 hits for "semi-meiotic" were displayed - so my 19 beats that. Hah!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Mammuthus, posted 04-02-2003 11:11 AM Mammuthus has not replied
  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1897 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001

derwood Posts Only
Message 6 of 8 (36109)
04-02-2003 2:20 PM

Searching for "John A. Davison" gets some interesting results - our boy salty seems to be a darling of sites like ICR....
Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Quetzal, posted 04-03-2003 12:13 AM derwood has not replied
  
Quetzal
Member (Idle past 5893 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 01-09-2002

Quetzal Posts Only
Message 7 of 8 (36150)
04-03-2003 12:13 AM 		Reply to: Message 6 by derwood
04-02-2003 2:20 PM

The single best comment on that link was salty's, however:
​
salty writes:
​
I am writing a paper entitled "Is evolution finished?" The short answer is of course it is. The introduction summarizes some of the things we do not know about evolution.1. We have no idea how life could possibly be produced by chance. 2. We have no idea how many times life has appeared. My own guess is several times. 3. We have no experimental or descriptive evidence that any evolutionary event involved chance. The main reason the Darwinian model has prevailed is due to the blind appeal to authority. The first authority, which profoundly influenced Darwin and Wallace was Charles Lyell with his Uniformitarianism doctrine. The second authority was Gregor Mendel who discovered the transmission genetics associated with sexual reproduction. Since sexual forms are quite incapable of speciation, the influence of these two authorities has served only to inhibit progress in evolutionary science. salty
And now we see the epitome of projection - the man who could ONLY produce, reproduce, replay, re-assert, etc the equivalent of "argue with me and you argue with Broom, Berg, de Grasse, Schindwolfe, the greatest minds in history". IOW, could only appeal to authority and was totally unable to support his own contentions, claims that evolutionary theory rests solely on an appeal to authority!
​
That's got to be the most ludicrous assertion even salty has ever made. If it was at least funny, I'd post it over on the "Best One-liner of the Month" thread. Unfortunately, it's just sad.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by derwood, posted 04-02-2003 2:20 PM derwood has not replied
Replies to this message:
 Message 8 by Mammuthus, posted 04-03-2003 4:16 AM Quetzal has not replied
  
Mammuthus
Member (Idle past 6496 days)
Posts: 3085
From: Munich, Germany
Joined: 08-09-2002

Mammuthus Posts Only
Message 8 of 8 (36164)
04-03-2003 4:16 AM 		Reply to: Message 7 by Quetzal
04-03-2003 12:13 AM

Let's not omit salty's nice little historical mistake about who influenced Darwin...Mendel influenced Darwin? That is a new historical revision...but if salty were to suddenly become accurate or knowledeable we would all be surprised.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by Quetzal, posted 04-03-2003 12:13 AM Quetzal has not replied
  
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024