Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
69 online now:
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,178 Year: 4,290/6,534 Month: 504/900 Week: 28/182 Day: 16/12 Hour: 2/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   ICR Sues Texas
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5069
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 286 of 549 (578895)
09-02-2010 11:39 PM
Reply to: Message 277 by Dawn Bertot
09-02-2010 8:26 PM


Gamers are Your Superiors
This from a man that openly admits to being a gamer. Ouch

Computer gaming is the epitome of the personal computer world. Gaming software incorporates virtually every aspect of software design. Games push the hardware to its absolute limits. Serious gamers, of which hooah appears to be one, live and operate on the bleeding edge of computer technology. Not only must they be intimately familiar with the operation of every piece of hardware on their systems, including how those pieces interact with each other, but they must also know how to push their hardware beyond its design parameters, pushing the envelope even further.

I said overclocker

Ok, what is that

Central Processing Units (CPUs) are the central brains of computers. They are constructed of combinatorial and sequential binary logic circuits (my Air Force technician training included the detailed tracing of logic signals, AKA "chasing sparks", through the logic diagrams of a functional CPU). The sequential circuits require a clock, a square wave signal that steps the CPU through its instruction-acquisition and -execution sequences. The faster the clock rate, the faster the CPU will run. Obviously, if you want the CPU to run really fast, it needs to be able to handle a high clock rate.

Every CPU is rated for the maximum clock rate that it can handle. This is one factor in determining how fast a computer is -- remember that the next time you shop for one. Overclocking is when you run a CPU faster than it is rated for. This is a rather dangerous thing to attempt, since overclocking can fry a CPU if you don't handle it right. IOW, you really have to know what you are doing and you really need to know how to test whether you have exceeded that individual CPU's own capabilities.

With all due respect, you don't have a clue.

And I have to agree with hooah's warning, your brain probably can't handle it.

PS
Now then, just how is this dang-fool ID-science/creation-science supposed to actually function?

Edited by dwise1, : PS


This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-02-2010 8:26 PM Dawn Bertot has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2010 11:54 PM dwise1 has replied
 Message 288 by crashfrog, posted 09-03-2010 12:54 AM dwise1 has taken no action

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 36 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 287 of 549 (578899)
09-02-2010 11:54 PM
Reply to: Message 286 by dwise1
09-02-2010 11:39 PM


Re: Gamers are Your Superiors
Serious gamers, of which hooah appears to be one

I am more of a hardware/overclocking junkie for the sake of having a badass rig that CAN play any damn thing thrown at it. I do game, but the hardware side is where I am at. But I digress........


Your god believes in Unicorns

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by dwise1, posted 09-02-2010 11:39 PM dwise1 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 289 by dwise1, posted 09-03-2010 1:12 AM hooah212002 has seen this message

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 702 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 288 of 549 (578921)
09-03-2010 12:54 AM
Reply to: Message 286 by dwise1
09-02-2010 11:39 PM


Re: Gamers are Your Superiors
Gamers represent!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 286 by dwise1, posted 09-02-2010 11:39 PM dwise1 has taken no action

  
dwise1
Member
Posts: 5069
Joined: 05-02-2006
Member Rating: 2.7


Message 289 of 549 (578923)
09-03-2010 1:12 AM
Reply to: Message 287 by hooah212002
09-02-2010 11:54 PM


Re: Gamers are Your Superiors
In the Air Force, I was a 30574 (Electronic Computer Repairman, Supervisor Level -- though the USAF has since transitioned to an MOS system). In the Navy, I was a Data Systems Technician Chief Petty Officer, until that rating was merged in with Electronic Technician (ET). In civilian life, I'm a Senior Software Engineer, working primarily in embedded software in C with utility test software in C++, though in the past I've done a fair amount in assembly (boy, that would certainly blow D.B.'s mind!). I have seen so many programmers who viewed hardware as some abstract concept, but as a technician (and an electrical engineering student, though as a computer science major I took the EE course just for fun -- in the microprocessor class, it was fun to see the proud EE majors flounder with such simple concepts) I have been down to the metal!

My personal regret is that, as a family man, I have never had the time to devote to gaming (as a member of the military, gaming offers valuable training, but my military role has always been support (in Viet Nam, the Army's story was that for every single combat troop there were 100 support troops) and as a family man I have never had sufficient time for gaming, though I'm still working on my personal software project to support Larry Bond's Harpoon).

Still, gaming is what drives personal computers out on the bleeding edge! My game is software, but the arena is still hardware!


This message is a reply to:
 Message 287 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2010 11:54 PM hooah212002 has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 295 by Omnivorous, posted 09-03-2010 7:43 AM dwise1 has taken no action

  
Nij
Member (Idle past 4124 days)
Posts: 239
From: New Zealand
Joined: 08-20-2010


Message 290 of 549 (578928)
09-03-2010 2:03 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by hooah212002
09-02-2010 3:40 PM


Re: ICR concedes defeat over its graduate school
{pop} "So, who else wants champagne? No? How about some spirits, then..."

Perhaps they've finally realised that creationism simply isn't science, that everybody recognises that fact, and are prepared to focus on using faith instead of lying to achieve their goals?

Well, I say "instead of", but to me they're barely differentiable.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2010 3:40 PM hooah212002 has seen this message

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 6637
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 291 of 549 (578929)
09-03-2010 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 270 by hooah212002
09-02-2010 3:40 PM


Re: ICR concedes defeat over its graduate school
Totally off-topic.

So you're saying that the Great Independent State of Texas is not controlled in all things by Creationist yahoos bent on usurping all science curricula in all schools?

Yet, from all the past threads and messages the impression was left that Texas was a hopelessly lost cause for Mom, Apple Pie and the Empirical Way.

Maybe ... just maybe ... the good people of the Great Independent State of Texas are not all the morons they have been made out to be?

That maybe there is rationality and good scientific reasoning in the populous?

That maybe the creationist yahoos get the high press because, in Texas, all are free to be stupid or not and we like to laugh at the stupid so we put it in our newspapers so everyone can join in the fun, point fingers and laugh?

Every few years we hear about "the textbooks" with the creationists wanting equal time or nutjobs wanting more "conservative values" and we all hear that and have a great laugh. But in the end these stupids lose, the textbooks are just fine, but you never hear that part in the media.

You want real stupid? Go see Kansas. For god sake they actually did change their state-wide school curriculum for their creationist yahoos.

How bout a li'l love for Texas, y'all.

----------------------------------------------

One of our local farmers had two cows that froze to death last August.

It seems that they had crawled through a fence into a field of popcorn. It got so hot that the corn started popping, the cows thought that it was snowing and froze to death.

-----------------------------------------------

A Texas rancher was complainin' bout the drought.

“Well, all my stock tanks have gone dry and I have dug three water wells and so far all I have gotten is oil, so I guess I will have to sell my cattle for whatever the market will bring, take my loss and try again next year.”

------------------------------------------------

A Texan took me duck hunting and we sat in a blind all day and never saw a thing. Then about sundown a lone duck flew overhead so high you could hardly see it. When it was directly overhead the Texan raised his shotgun and fired.
The duck kept right on flying.

Then the Texan turned to me in amazement and said, "Son, yore witnessing a miracle. Thar flies a dead duck."

------------------------------------------------

There are a lot of folks that can't understand how we ran out of oil here in the USA. Well, here's the answer: It's simple. Nobody bothered to check the oil. Didn't know we were getting low.

Of course the reason for that is geographical. Most of the oil is in Texas and all the dipsticks are in Washington.

---------------------------------------------------

Ya gotta love a people that can take the bull and make a yarn from it.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 270 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2010 3:40 PM hooah212002 has seen this message

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 292 of 549 (578947)
09-03-2010 6:50 AM
Reply to: Message 279 by subbie
09-02-2010 8:41 PM


Re: There is no Theory of Creation
You claim that the orderly, coherent, logical way in which the natural world works is evidence of design. Design implies a designer. Thus, whether you said it or not, your claim imply it. If you are now claiming that the orderly, coherent, logical way the natural world works does not imply a designer, please say so, one way or another.

Your not paying attention, you are anticipating what you want to hear. I am saying that the coherent, logical and law abiding observable evidence, implies ORDER. That is observable and testable, in the same way the change in strata implies evolution.

Both are direct evidence of the fact that a thing has and did take place. One implies definate design and one implies change over long periods of time.

Neither is provable absolutley, but the direct evidence for order and law is irrefutable. Now watch and pay close attention. How will you or how could you set out an argument refuting ORDER, CONSISTENCY in living organisms that is visible and demonstratable

The ORDER and the rules it follows is direct evidence of design, in the same way gradual change in strata, is evidence of some form of evolution.

This why there have only been the two logical possibilites since time began, they are the only two testable hypothosis

Sorry, I cannot understand what you are saying. How could anyone show evidence that something is not what it is?

This is comical. If order is not what it is, both visible and demonstratable, please explain to me, what it is

My position is that if you can explain the existence of something without including a designer, there's no reason to insert one. Do you agree with that or not?

Of course I do. My position is that if you can explain the order you see in organisms as a PRODUCT OF THEMSELVES, that is, not simply explain how they work, but show that they arose by and of themselves and show that those materials and its orginization have no originator, you will have won the day.

My guess is that you cannot. Neither position is provable absolutley, but both derive information from solid scientific evidence , which of course should be included in any science classroom.

Organization is DIRECT EVIDENCE of design. Not liking that point is not the same as setting out an argument against its validity

True. But I didn't mean explaining how something works. I meant explaining how something came to be.

Now your getting it

Dawn Bertot

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by subbie, posted 09-02-2010 8:41 PM subbie has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 296 by Percy, posted 09-03-2010 7:51 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 293 of 549 (578950)
09-03-2010 7:16 AM
Reply to: Message 280 by Coyote
09-02-2010 8:43 PM


Re: ID falls flat (again)
You are inferring design, not observing it.

Otherwise, you would be able to produce rules which would unambiguously differentiate between designed and not designed.

Snowflake; quartz crystal; stalagmite and stalactite, etc. What are the rules that unambiguously separate these from items that are designed?

The rules are the same, that is the method I use is the same scientific application as yourself to observe ORDER AND LAW the application of the rules by yourself are what are different

You say mine is not an applicable or scientific endeavor to obtain information and evidence, but it is because it is observable, testable and predictable

No differentiation is required for observing and testing ORDER, it is obvious by direct observation and testing.

Snowflake; quartz crystal; stalagmite and stalactite, etc. What are the rules that unambiguously separate these from items that are designed?

In these instances you are using the relative design these things produce, to CONSTITUTE and they do to a certain degree, the real order that is observable and testable is in the micro-organisms that produce these relative designs.

As I said I stated before, Im a relative good looking stud designed by microscopic organisms, the relative product which shows order is not AS testable for order as its microscopic designers

Your RELATIVE design, as probably a nerd, (as most of the characters on this site)was produced by organisms that display magnificent order, which is direct evidence of design, whether you like it or not.

Just kidding about the nerd part. In school and college I was both a nerd abuser and nerd protector. I had many nerd friends, but I also put no small amount of nerds into huge tumble dryers, all the while never actually causing any permenent damage, except mental perhaps

Love, Dawn

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 280 by Coyote, posted 09-02-2010 8:43 PM Coyote has taken no action

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 294 of 549 (578951)
09-03-2010 7:37 AM
Reply to: Message 282 by jar
09-02-2010 8:56 PM


Re: There is no Theory of Creation
I'm sorry. A Purpose? Get real.

Were is there any indication that any pieces part has a purpose?

What does that have to do with the topic?

You seem to me to be a one deminsional character, try to stay focused. The topic is EVIDENCE in a certain direction. Im saying the obvious ORDER, which is observable and testable, by following its functions AND RESULTS is direct evidence FOR PURPOSE

I dont need to produce a designer or prove purpose, to demonstrate that ORDER, CONSISTENCY AND LAW are present, which are evidence of the above mentioned items, the same way, change implies but does not prove the entirity of evoltionary process

But on the other hand its easily demonstratable that each organism produces an end result both by itself and in harmony with other organisms, why is that not a purpose?

it obviously functions in a logical and orderly fashion to produce an intended purpose, can you show it otherwise?

Dawn Bertot

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by jar, posted 09-02-2010 8:56 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 303 by jar, posted 09-03-2010 9:45 AM Dawn Bertot has taken no action

  
Omnivorous
Member
Posts: 3851
From: Adirondackia
Joined: 07-21-2005
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 295 of 549 (578953)
09-03-2010 7:43 AM
Reply to: Message 289 by dwise1
09-03-2010 1:12 AM


Re: Gamers are Your Superiors
I started gaming (back when I had the time) with id Software's Catacomb, then Castle Wolfenstein, then Wolfenstein 3D. I think I still have my Wolfenstein 3D installatino disks somewhere.

I remember overclocking 486s, plugging 486 overdrive chips into 386 motherboards, trying to get the best 1MB video cards

I haven't kept up, but one of my proudest achievements was playing through Doom at nightmare level using only the keyboard and no hacks.


Have you ever been to an American wedding? Where's the vodka? Where's the marinated herring?!
-Gogol Bordello

This message is a reply to:
 Message 289 by dwise1, posted 09-03-2010 1:12 AM dwise1 has taken no action

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 20754
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 2.2


Message 296 of 549 (578955)
09-03-2010 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 292 by Dawn Bertot
09-03-2010 6:50 AM


Re: There is no Theory of Creation
Hi Dawn Bertot,

No one's arguing there's no order in nature. What we're saying is that as far as we can tell, any observed order in nature is the product of matter and energy following the physical laws of the universe. Some other origin of this order can only be considered realistically possible once it's been observed and researched and established to actually exist. Then it could be considered part of science, ICR could teach it, and Texas could accredit it.

We observe the entire life cycles of many, many different types of organisms, including ourselves, and never has anything been observed that was not just matter and energy following the laws of nature. This is true of the part of the life cycle where organisms compete to survive and procreate, and it is even true of the specific part of the life cycle concerned with reproduction where heritable mutations occur. There is no evidence of any kind of outside intervention at the current time.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 292 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-03-2010 6:50 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 298 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-03-2010 8:37 AM Percy has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 297 of 549 (578967)
09-03-2010 8:16 AM
Reply to: Message 281 by hooah212002
09-02-2010 8:43 PM


Re: An experiment for Buz
My main goal for this is to get the anti-science crowd to appreciate what science is and for them to stop thinking that it is something out to get them.

I am not anti science, neither are any of the other creationists. Logic is the oldest form of science, when we apply simple logic by observation, to the natural world we observe ORDER, TESTABILITY AND PREDICTION, consistency and laws operation in an orderly fashion, that is called science, not all science but science nonetheless.

I dont need to keeping doing test on my computer to know its operating in an orderly, designed fashion.

How many test do i need to conducted to demonstrate the presence of ORDER

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 281 by hooah212002, posted 09-02-2010 8:43 PM hooah212002 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 299 by hooah212002, posted 09-03-2010 8:40 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 307 by Taq, posted 09-03-2010 11:52 AM Dawn Bertot has taken no action

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 298 of 549 (578974)
09-03-2010 8:37 AM
Reply to: Message 296 by Percy
09-03-2010 7:51 AM


Re: There is no Theory of Creation
No one's arguing there's no order in nature. What we're saying is that as far as we can tell, any observed order in nature is the product of matter and energy following the physical laws of the universe. Some other origin of this order can only be considered realistically possible once it's been observed and researched and established to actually exist. Then it could be considered part of science, ICR could teach it, and Texas could accredit it.

Not if rules of evidence all followed closely. If there is order as you admit and its the product of matter and energy, what is the product of energy and matter? Energy and matter when broken down demonstrate the same order.

Unobserved behavior in this instance creation of these items is no reason to believe that they were not designed.

The simple rule of evidence, when applied correctly and across the board is that if i were a gasous form of life never having experienced or seen human life and came across a computer and I observed its functions and operation, the rule of evidence would be to assume because it has order it was designed.

And never having ever experincing that form of life, I would have been correct.

Evidence is what you can establish as evidence logically, not simply scientifically. this rule of evidence is valid, with no fear of contradiction. thats how evidence works

Evidence is not limited to the so-called scientific method.

If some board never gives accreidation to someother group, this does not imply that order is NOT evidence of design. IT IS, BOTH SCIENTIFICALLY AND LOGICALLY

Reality and logic dictate evidence, not some contrived method, even though its basic tenets are valid. theres more to it than that

There is no evidence of any kind of outside intervention at the current time.

Thats because you have a limited understanding and application of what evidence is actually

Dawn Bertot

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.

Edited by Dawn Bertot, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 296 by Percy, posted 09-03-2010 7:51 AM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 301 by Percy, posted 09-03-2010 9:11 AM Dawn Bertot has replied
 Message 304 by bluescat48, posted 09-03-2010 10:58 AM Dawn Bertot has taken no action

  
hooah212002
Member (Idle past 36 days)
Posts: 3193
Joined: 08-12-2009


Message 299 of 549 (578977)
09-03-2010 8:40 AM
Reply to: Message 297 by Dawn Bertot
09-03-2010 8:16 AM


Re: An experiment for Buz
How about you take it to the thread I mentioned? Or are you afraid of the science section because you will actually need to provide evidence? Put up or shut up and stop talking about your computer because you've been outclassed in that department.


Your god believes in Unicorns

This message is a reply to:
 Message 297 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-03-2010 8:16 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 300 by Dawn Bertot, posted 09-03-2010 8:44 AM hooah212002 has seen this message

  
Dawn Bertot
Member (Idle past 735 days)
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 300 of 549 (578979)
09-03-2010 8:44 AM
Reply to: Message 299 by hooah212002
09-03-2010 8:40 AM


Re: An experiment for Buz
How about you take it to the thread I mentioned? Or are you afraid of the science section because you will actually need to provide evidence? Put up or shut up and stop talking about your computer because you've been outclassed in that department.

I did respond to this bantering, so why dont you just put in simple question form what is is I need to do. i dont like to play games,not even cards

Dawn Bertot

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


This message is a reply to:
 Message 299 by hooah212002, posted 09-03-2010 8:40 AM hooah212002 has seen this message

Replies to this message:
 Message 302 by Percy, posted 09-03-2010 9:19 AM Dawn Bertot has taken no action

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022