Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Cdesign proponentist troll recruiting center
Dirk
Member (Idle past 4024 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-20-2010


(1)
Message 61 of 107 (589448)
11-02-2010 4:48 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 4:27 PM


Re: Final exam questions
Hi Dawn,
it seems you are not far removed from Hillary trying to control what people think and thier opinions to make them hate crimes. Sorry jr thats why they are private colleges so they dont have to be controlled by tyrants like yourself and Dawkins
No one here was trying to control what should or should not be taught at these institutions. Some well-meant suggestions were made, and a kind invitation by RAZD that their students could come and debate here if they wanted. For the rest, I would say, most participants are probably just ROFLing on this kind of "education"...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 4:27 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:01 PM Dirk has replied

  
Species8472
Junior Member (Idle past 4882 days)
Posts: 29
Joined: 01-13-2010


Message 62 of 107 (589449)
11-02-2010 4:50 PM
Reply to: Message 60 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 4:47 PM


Re: Final exam questions
Who designed the designer?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 60 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 4:47 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 86 by Larni, posted 11-03-2010 4:47 AM Species8472 has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 63 of 107 (589450)
11-02-2010 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by Larni
11-02-2010 11:09 AM


Re: Final exam questions
The point is: ID is dressed up theology. Nothing more, nothing less.
See here is your problem, you cant see the forest for the trees. your so intent on proving ID wrong or religious, you cant see that its simply, evidence of a thing, the same way evolution is not counter religious, but it does imply the eternality of matter
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by Larni, posted 11-02-2010 11:09 AM Larni has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by Larni, posted 11-03-2010 4:45 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 64 of 107 (589453)
11-02-2010 5:01 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Dirk
11-02-2010 4:48 PM


Re: Final exam questions
No one here was trying to control what should or should not be taught at these institutions. Some well-meant suggestions were made, and a kind invitation by RAZD that their students could come and debate here if they wanted. For the rest, I would say, most participants are probably just ROFLing on this kind of "education"...
wrong. You have public guests at this site, when they read your comments, it influences thier thinking concerning those matters. A counterfactual presentation is required
So what is the difference in DEBATING "real science" here, verses the public arena? I thought thry could not be conjoined with debate or public opinion
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Dirk, posted 11-02-2010 4:48 PM Dirk has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Dirk, posted 11-02-2010 6:52 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
subbie
Member (Idle past 1255 days)
Posts: 3509
Joined: 02-26-2006


(1)
Message 65 of 107 (589454)
11-02-2010 5:04 PM


TOPIC PLEASE
This is not another general creationism topic for Bertot to display his ignorance and everyone to pile on. Could we please limit discussion to the actual topic?
Thank you.

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson
We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat
It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate
...creationists have a great way to detect fraud and it doesn't take 8 or 40 years or even a scientific degree to spot the fraud--'if it disagrees with the bible then it is wrong'.... -- archaeologist

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:10 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied
 Message 73 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-02-2010 6:30 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 66 of 107 (589455)
11-02-2010 5:07 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Taq
11-02-2010 12:00 PM


Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
So what ID research are you going to discuss? Can you please reference the peer reviewed papers from scientific journals that we will be discussing?
Observation, investigation, experimentation, conclusions, predictions, shalll i go on?
Ive demonstrated that Id follows all the same rules as does you S&M.
Since I am clueless, tell me what other test I need to conducted that have not already been demonstrated to constitute it as a scinentific investigation
List them one, two, three
Ill be waiting
Dawn Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Taq, posted 11-02-2010 12:00 PM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Taq, posted 11-02-2010 5:39 PM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 69 by frako, posted 11-02-2010 6:01 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 70 by Coragyps, posted 11-02-2010 6:09 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied
 Message 72 by Dr Adequate, posted 11-02-2010 6:29 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 67 of 107 (589456)
11-02-2010 5:10 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by subbie
11-02-2010 5:04 PM


Re: TOPIC PLEASE
This is not another general creationism topic for Bertot to display his ignorance and everyone to pile on. Could we please limit discussion to the actual topic?
Thank you.
Ok, so how do thier requirements, prevent thier qualifications from being science or ligitimate
Dawn Bertot
Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by subbie, posted 11-02-2010 5:04 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.7


(1)
Message 68 of 107 (589460)
11-02-2010 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 5:07 PM


Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Observation, investigation, experimentation, conclusions, predictions, shalll i go on?
Keep going until you get to the part that contains authors, name of journal, title of paper, volume, number, pages.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:07 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 7:57 PM Taq has replied

  
frako
Member (Idle past 306 days)
Posts: 2932
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010


(1)
Message 69 of 107 (589463)
11-02-2010 6:01 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 5:07 PM


Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Ok let me retrace your steps
Hypothesis:
the grate spagettie monster created the universe and desighned it
Well science says cosmic strings colided and made the big bang go bang and these cosmic strings are the noodles of the grate spagetie monster what else could they be.
Further proof of the spagetie monster can be found in the order you can observe in nature where else could it come from?
And if you can listen to the spagetie monster you can se all the laws he made for us and all the other creatures. Look at nature you either eat or be eaten and if you follow his laws he rewards you look at all the ceos and buissnes owners they dont care abbout the poor they only care abbout themselves like the creatures in nature do and the grate Noodels rewards them for it they get lots of money women .... further proof of his exsistance
You want more proof look at all the true doo gooders they are all poor and misorable, Noodles is punishing them for not obeying his laws that he bestowed on all creatures.
You still do not belive in Noodels
oservation: cosmic strings made the universe, and there is order
hypothesis: there is a desighner that has cosmic strings ergo Noodels
predictions: If ou follow his laws that one can see in nature you are better off
Testing: look at who makes the moste money = those who dont give a rats ass abbout others
Conclusion: Noodels is real and if you do not follow his laws you will be worse off.
NOW DENOUNCE YOUR FALSE GODS AND IDOLS AND WHORSHIPE NOODELS

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:07 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 734 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 70 of 107 (589466)
11-02-2010 6:09 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 5:07 PM


Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Ive demonstrated that Id follows all the same rules as does you S&M.
Quoted because, well, because it needed to be.[/snark]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:07 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Tram law
Member (Idle past 4704 days)
Posts: 283
From: Weed, California, USA
Joined: 08-15-2010


Message 71 of 107 (589467)
11-02-2010 6:19 PM


Hmmmm...
ID follows all the rules of S&M?
Nice.
Break out the whipped cream.
Edit:
Here is a more serious question, not for the proponents of ID though since they're so rabid about imposing their will that "it is absolutely science because I say so and anybody else who does not agree is stupid".
Would test tube babies and cloning be considered serious evidence for the existence of a generic creator?
And what would be testable evidence that there is a creator that real science would accept?
Edited by Tram law, : No reason given.

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 72 of 107 (589470)
11-02-2010 6:29 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 5:07 PM


Re: What, judges cant be idiots like yourselves?
Observation, investigation, experimentation, conclusions, predictions, shalll i go on?
Since I am clueless, tell me what other test I need to conducted that have not already been demonstrated to constitute it as a scinentific investigation
The cdesign proponentists need to actually do some "observation, investigation, experimentation, conclusions, predictions" rather than you reciting it like a mantra. That would be kinda the missing step --- the step between saying stuff and doing it.
Instead it seems that they're too busy writing papers about the theological significance of their gibberish. It's really no substitute.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:07 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 8:16 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 73 of 107 (589471)
11-02-2010 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by subbie
11-02-2010 5:04 PM


Re: TOPIC PLEASE
This is not another general creationism topic for Bertot to display his ignorance and everyone to pile on. Could we please limit discussion to the actual topic?
Oh, sorry, I missed that. At least I referred to the topic.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by subbie, posted 11-02-2010 5:04 PM subbie has seen this message but not replied

  
Dirk
Member (Idle past 4024 days)
Posts: 84
Joined: 08-20-2010


(1)
Message 74 of 107 (589473)
11-02-2010 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 5:01 PM


Re: Final exam questions
Hi Dawn,
You have public guests at this site, when they read your comments, it influences thier thinking concerning those matters. A counterfactual presentation is required
Are you serious? Let me think, what's that thing called what christians do, you know, going from door to door, trying to influence people in thinking that there is a god? Evangelism, isn't that what it's called?
Oh, and you know, they also got that book, I forgot the name, the one with the most copies printed ever (no, not the IKEA catalogue); doesn't that book try to influence people in thinking that there is a god?
Me thinks, a "counterfactual presentation" is definitely required!
Anyway, in order to stay on topic, you are saying that we are not allowed to comment on the courses that are given in those institutions? I mean, we even gave some suggestions for improvement. Surely that must be appreciated. And even if it's not, I'm sure that all comments were still made in the utmost sincerety, and that no one here was trying to set them up.
Edited by Dirk, : No reason given.
Edited by Dirk, : No reason given.
Edited by Dirk, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 5:01 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 8:25 PM Dirk has not replied

  
Nij
Member (Idle past 4889 days)
Posts: 239
From: New Zealand
Joined: 08-20-2010


(1)
Message 75 of 107 (589478)
11-02-2010 7:45 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by Dawn Bertot
11-02-2010 4:42 PM


By "IT" I meant pointing out your plain idiocy regarding the EvC court cases and correct your misapprehensions about science, just in case anybody couldn't notice that for themselves and just in case anybody lurking was gullible enough to believe your ranting.
You refuse to consider something not derived from your idiosyncratic point-of-view and completely ignore any explanation of others. Rather than address the points raised, you get defensive and complain about "tyranny" and playing ad hominem games. People have explained dozens of times what science -- i.e. following the scientific method -- is and yet you still whine about scientists "setting up the rules .. in {their} own little world".
You keep throwing out these keywords like evidence and reason and logic, thinking that somehow the person who uses them best is the person who uses the names most. You dig up rabbitholes to run through, ignoring the fact that everybody else is playing up on the surface. When presented with the evidence you request so often, instead of applying rationality to it, you dive off into another tirade of "No True Scotsman", begging the question and circular logic fallacies.
It's a little difficult to tell whether you know you're wrong and are deliberately trolling, or whether you're just another moronic creotard with its own spin on science, reality, logic and the definitions thereof. Either way, I'm not dealing with you any more. It's not worth the effort.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 4:42 PM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 8:11 PM Nij has not replied
 Message 80 by Dawn Bertot, posted 11-02-2010 8:20 PM Nij has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024