Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,912 Year: 4,169/9,624 Month: 1,040/974 Week: 367/286 Day: 10/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ID Failing--at Christian Institutions
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 11 of 38 (267843)
12-11-2005 5:30 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by randman
12-11-2005 3:57 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
I see it as evidence ID can get research money, and if the scientists it was offered to turned it down, I strongly suspect you will see some that get some grants for specific research.
And I strongly suspect nobody gives a flying f**k what you suspect - put up or shut up. Show us a case of actual ID research being funded.
ID is still on the rise
ID might still be on the rise in terms of the social/political/religious agenda that really lies behind it, but in terms of real science it's still got what it's always had.
Nothing - Squat - Zero - Bugger All - Nada - you get the picture.

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 3:57 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 10:23 PM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 15 of 38 (267942)
12-11-2005 10:46 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by randman
12-11-2005 10:24 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
No ID researchers were offered any money because they failed to offer any proposals. So it certainly is NOT evidence that "ID can get research money"--it is evidence they cannot produce minimally acceptable research proposals.
Assuming that is correct, I think that will change because I just thought of a bunch of good ideas for proposals, and I beleive ID scientists will take advantage of the offer of research money.
Are you getting delusions of adequacy randman?
So you are seriously telling us that ID is going to change from not being able to produce minimally acceptable research proposals because you came up with a bunch of good ideas on an internet forum?
Either you're even more barking than I thought or you're a long-term troll who's just seeing how far he can push the edges.

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 10:24 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by AdminNWR, posted 12-11-2005 11:24 PM MangyTiger has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 22 of 38 (268239)
12-12-2005 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 13 by randman
12-11-2005 10:23 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
So you can't provide any examples of ID research being funded.
Correct?

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 13 by randman, posted 12-11-2005 10:23 PM randman has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 23 of 38 (268248)
12-12-2005 2:48 PM
Reply to: Message 21 by randman
12-12-2005 12:59 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
For example, evos claim the reason 99.9% of transitional forms are not seen is due to fossil rarity,
Please provide a source where an evolutionary biologist or paleontologist (or a scientist in any other relevant discipline) states that 99.9% of transitional forms are not seen and that this is due to fossil rarity.
but that is an unsubstantiated claim because it does not explain why, if fossilization is so rare, it is also so common for many species.
Please provide quantitative research demonstrating fossilation is so common for many species. This will need to explain how the calculation of how many individuals existed vs. how many fossilised was done (just as a start).

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 12:59 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 4:51 PM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 27 of 38 (268340)
12-12-2005 5:25 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by randman
12-12-2005 4:51 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
Mangy, you asked. I answered
You posted this in your Message 26. Here is the message chain preceding it:
Message 26 - your reply to me in
Message 23 - my reply to you in
Message 21 - your reply to schrafinator in
Message 20 - her reply to you in
Message 9 - your general post to the thread
Could you show me where in this chain you answered these questions:
Please provide a source where an evolutionary biologist or paleontologist (or a scientist in any other relevant discipline) states that 99.9% of transitional forms are not seen and that this is due to fossil rarity.
Please provide quantitative research demonstrating fossilation is so common for many species. This will need to explain how the calculation of how many individuals existed vs. how many fossilised was done (just as a start).
If you want to link to a message in another thread where appropriate research has been cited that's fine of course.
I believe Forum rules require you to produce evidence to back up your claims. You made the claims in Message 21 - produce evidence or withdraw them.

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 4:51 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 5:49 PM MangyTiger has replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 29 of 38 (268375)
12-12-2005 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 28 by randman
12-12-2005 5:49 PM


Re: I wouldn't count ID out.
I did specifically state all you had to do was point to another thread where your claims were substantiated (which is not just a thread on the same topic by the way). Although I didn't explicitly state it this would have allowed the discussion to proceed outside of this thread.
You are apparently unable or unwilling to do.
The record shows you made a claim and would not either back it up or withdraw it.
I'm content to leave it at that.

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 28 by randman, posted 12-12-2005 5:49 PM randman has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 32 by Theodoric, posted 12-14-2005 2:37 AM MangyTiger has not replied
 Message 34 by nator, posted 12-14-2005 8:21 AM MangyTiger has not replied

  
MangyTiger
Member (Idle past 6383 days)
Posts: 989
From: Leicester, UK
Joined: 07-30-2004


Message 37 of 38 (269500)
12-14-2005 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by Theodoric
12-14-2005 8:33 PM


Re: On being off topic
randman has said in other threads he's away travelling until Thursday or Friday.

I wish I didn't know now what I didn't know then

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by Theodoric, posted 12-14-2005 8:33 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by randman, posted 12-15-2005 4:01 PM MangyTiger 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