Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
5 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Salty Discussion Post-mortem
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 16 of 82 (35447)
03-27-2003 11:06 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 11:03 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
Oh, I forgot. I've been banned at Terry's forum. I am simply crushed!! salty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 11:03 AM John A. Davison has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 18 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-27-2003 11:52 AM John A. Davison has replied

  
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3217 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 17 of 82 (35454)
03-27-2003 11:49 AM
Reply to: Message 15 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 11:03 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
Salty, I have to say that I find the continual lack of substance in your replies to be both quite illuminating and irritating, especially when they are in response to questions which you never answer.
Now, I am aware that this was not directed at me but since you find the pseudonyms so troubling, my name is XXXXXXXXXXX and my latest degree is a doctorate in Biochemistry and Cell Biology. You can do a search for the papers that I have published, although you will see a very limited number of the last 8 years as I moved to industry and most of my publications here have been in more technical documentation for the FDA or as patents, many of which have not yet issued. I was not putting my name on these posts earlier because my wife is a member of a church which has a few (happily very few) fundies and I did not want them to be giving her grief over me. However, I have decided that open info is better, not to mention that they know me well enough to leave her the hell alone.
Now, as to how I feel about Behe, I like some of his DNA work but his IC theories are in error, both from a theoretical point and from the data as well. But I have addressed that elsewhere on this board. Dembski I have little respect for as he uses mathematical procedures that are grossely irrelevant to the question at hand, at least according to some of the mathematical/biological reviews of his ID work that I have read.
Feel better now.
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz
Edited to keep TOO many crazies from getting my full name
[This message has been edited by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, 03-27-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 11:03 AM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 24 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 2:58 PM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has replied

  
Mister Pamboli
Member (Idle past 7577 days)
Posts: 634
From: Washington, USA
Joined: 12-10-2001


Message 18 of 82 (35456)
03-27-2003 11:52 AM
Reply to: Message 16 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 11:06 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
quote:
Oh, I forgot. I've been banned at Terry's forum. I am simply crushed!! salty
Are you? But it's what you wanted it, isn't it? How many times have you asked to be banned there? It seems to happen pretty regularly.
People who don't follow that board probably don't realise that. They should read through your past posts over the last year or so. Every now and then you start insulting others and then ask to be banned or suggest that you should be banned. Terry comes back, regular as clockwork, and tells you how important you are, how you are the "Darwinists' worst nightmare" and so on. Hey presto! You feel wanted again. For the next couple of weeks you regularly refer to his supporting words in your posts. After a while this wears off an it's time for you to start again with the insults and asking to be banned, and so the cycle continues.
Maybe this time it actually happened and Ilion took you at your word and banned you? I notice it was lifted pretty damn quickly. And guess wwhat - you continued to post there, just as you have done on every occasion you have asked to be banned, or claimed to be on the verge of giving up posting.
Of course the whole thing is a complete pose. You don't need to be banned from Terry's forum - just don't visit it again! All this asking to be banned or suggesting you should be banned is nothing more than manipulative attention seeking. If they ban you, you can feel victimised and justified in your chosen self-image as a curmudgeonly outsider - if they do not ban you, but ask you to stay or even reinforce how important it is that you do stay, it feeds your ego even more. Your constant juggling of these contradictions is pretty transparent in your posts on that forum and on quite a few in this one.
This kind of attention-seking would be frowned upon in kindergarten. From a soi-disant scientist it is, frankly, a bit disturbing.
The need to always represent your position as contrary to others; the self-deprecation often quite strongly put; the suggestions and requests (even demands) to be rejected; the occasional episodes of fairly detailed discussion which quickly lapse into defensive insults and arguments from authority (you're not disagreeing with me but with these great scientists ...); and above all the cyclical nature of these habits suggest there is something not quite comfortable going on here.
Does anyone on the board know the circumstances of salty's retirement from the university? He jumped before he was pushed, I know, but beyond that have only read his own account.
There is another point that may have passed people's attention. Salty claims his semi-meiotic hypothesis is eminently testable. He also explains that he cannot test it because he no longer has a laboratory. However, he first published the hypothesis in 1984 while still in post at the university. Yet none of his papers include any indication that he did the slightest experimental work, or made any attempt to systematically test his "eminently testable" hypothesis. As a recent post on Terry's board suggested, even funding for such work would not have been a problem. salty suggests the parthenogenesis of some turkeys is semi-meiotic in origin - yet he never thought of approaching the poultry industry for funding to research the origin of this highly sought after trait?
Salty will no doubt see all this as a personal attack, but rather it is an attack on his methods of discussion which are intentionally intensely personal. Salty has an interesting but as yet unsupported hypothesis. The quality of the hypothesis is quite independent of his means of promulgating it. It is primarily salty who intensely personalizes the discussion of his hypothesis. I am seeking to set that personalization in context.
[This message has been edited by Mister Pamboli, 03-27-2003]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 16 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 11:06 AM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 3:26 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied
 Message 37 by wj, posted 03-27-2003 10:34 PM Mister Pamboli has not replied

  
Miguel
Inactive Member


Message 19 of 82 (35459)
03-27-2003 11:57 AM


Bu8sh Loves Saddam

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 20 of 82 (35473)
03-27-2003 1:56 PM


Thread moved here from the Evolution forum.

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 21 of 82 (35476)
03-27-2003 2:06 PM
Reply to: Message 2 by judge
03-26-2003 4:35 PM


ah, judge!
quote:
Maybe he has more important things to do?
Like what? Don't you find it odd that he refused to address simple, straightforward questions about HIS hypothesis, which he claims is so substantial and backed by 'grewat names' in the field (of paleontology, anyway...)?
Nah - why would you?
You never even bothered to finish the discussions on mutations...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 2 by judge, posted 03-26-2003 4:35 PM judge has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 22 of 82 (35478)
03-27-2003 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 7:13 AM


oh, brother... break out the prozac
quote:
I see that Scott Page is not satisfied that the thread has been closed. He has to reopen the discussion and continue to lash out in his own inimitable fashion. He is a great asset to the search for the truth. He is the perfect poster boy for Darwinian atheistic intolerance of anything that threatens the biggest joke in the history of science. salty
I see that John Davison, rather than simply answer questions put to him on a DISCUSSION board about HIS ideas, prefers to go into martyr and insult mode.
John A. Davison is the poster boy for fringe nut cases and crank science masquerading as a 'search for the truth.' Davison matches quite well the criteria for engaging in crank science:
(1) [The crank] considers himself a genius. (2) He regards his colleagues, without exception, as ignorant blockheads. ... (3) He believes himself unjustly persecuted and discriminated against. ... It never occurs to the crank that this opposition may be due to error in his work. ... (4) He has strong compulsions to focus his attacks on the greatest scientists and the best-established theories. ... (5) He often has a tendency to write in a complex jargon, in many cases making use of terms and phrases he himself has coined.
And so it goes.
Davison is content to label and insult me, but his own inability to defend HIS notions speaks volumes.
He is a crackpot. The anti-Darwinism community can have him, as he fits it - and it fits him - like a glove.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 7:13 AM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 28 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 3:35 PM derwood has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 23 of 82 (35482)
03-27-2003 2:51 PM


By the way - I hope the sycophants at Terry's TalkOrigins board do/did follow the posts here. If they have any sense left, they will see how crusty, I mean salty, could not defend his claims here any better than he does there.
He belongs there, with the other egomaniacal ranters.
They sould all check this out:
Page Not Found
"People tend to hold overly favorable views of their abilities in many social and intellectual domains. The authors suggest that this overestimation occurs, in part, because people who are unskilled in these domains suffer a dual burden: Not only do these people reach erroneous conclusions and make unfortunate choices, but their incompetence robs them of the metacognitive ability to realize it."

  
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 82 (35484)
03-27-2003 2:58 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus
03-27-2003 11:49 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
Dr. Welch, Thank you for the psychoanalysis. I think I was banned by MSN for using what I thought was fairly innocuous language. Anyhow, they haven't let me back in so maybe this forum is my last chance to reform my hideous ways. You are right.Theywere getting ready to can me. The Dean actually threatened to detenure me. That should scare hell out of any intellectual in academe. The Provost knew I had been treated shabbily and gave me a going away present of 104 grand as a sort of apology for the actions of the administration. He is now the president of a western university. We both resigned on the same day, December 1, 2000. I notice you didn't comment on Jonathan Wells. I think he and Behe are both great. I don't know much about Dembski. Now if the rest of the members would divulge their identities, we might have a decent exchange of ideas. I don't expect much of a response to this outrageous suggestion. salty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-27-2003 11:49 AM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 25 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-27-2003 3:19 PM John A. Davison has replied
 Message 30 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-27-2003 3:39 PM John A. Davison has not replied
 Message 33 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-27-2003 3:59 PM John A. Davison has not replied

  
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3217 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 25 of 82 (35485)
03-27-2003 3:19 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 2:58 PM


Re: over 200 posts?
Salty, I think that you are mixing part of my post with parts of others. I neither went over your mentality nor your posting on Terry's Board (which I consider to be a bit of a dung heap anyway, Terry is a blind, dishonerable little worm from what I can tell from his posts). I also did not mention you past employment, in fact I was unaware of the conditions for your leaving until I read them on this board.
As to Jonathan Wells, I have only read two of his articles. One, if I remember correctly was on ATPase, and I was less than impressed from a biochemical point of view. The other was on Hox genes and I remember drawing exactly the opposite conclusions as Dr. Wells. I have posted my ideas on Behes IC thesis on several spots on this board including Evidence for Evolution (now closed).
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 2:58 PM John A. Davison has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by derwood, posted 03-27-2003 3:24 PM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not replied
 Message 31 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 3:42 PM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not replied

  
derwood
Member (Idle past 1876 days)
Posts: 1457
Joined: 12-27-2001


Message 26 of 82 (35486)
03-27-2003 3:24 PM
Reply to: Message 25 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus
03-27-2003 3:19 PM


Re: over 200 posts?
Thinking that Jon Wells, on a mission to destroy Darwinism at the behest of Father Moon, is 'great'?
No need to comment on that...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 25 by Dr_Tazimus_maximus, posted 03-27-2003 3:19 PM Dr_Tazimus_maximus has not replied

  
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 82 (35487)
03-27-2003 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 18 by Mister Pamboli
03-27-2003 11:52 AM


Re: over 200 posts?
You have no idea of what I have or have not thought of. Such arrogance! Ilion couldn't have banned me as he isn't a manager any more. He did ban me and took forever to own up to it. Of course I am an outsider and proud of it. Like Groucho Marx I wouldn't belong to an organization that would have me for a member. Einstein once admitted that if he had obtained the academic position that he had sought, he never could have conceived of relativity. I think I have done remarkably well considering that I have been surrounded (at UVM) by a bunch of Darwinian mystics for the last 30 odd years. I am sure that spurred me to expose them as apparently I have, judging from some of the behavior they have exhibited. I don't think being a curmudgeon is half as bad as being a blind follower of a transparent myth. salty

This message is a reply to:
 Message 18 by Mister Pamboli, posted 03-27-2003 11:52 AM Mister Pamboli has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Mammuthus, posted 03-28-2003 3:50 AM John A. Davison has replied

  
John A. Davison 
Inactive Member


Message 28 of 82 (35488)
03-27-2003 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 22 by derwood
03-27-2003 2:17 PM


Re: oh, brother... break out the prozac
Scott baby, I am not a genius. When my I.Q. was measured in 1946 or so it was 141. I'm sure it has declined some but is not yet in the room temperature range like yours so obviously is. Keep up the good work. I love it so!! salty.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 22 by derwood, posted 03-27-2003 2:17 PM derwood has not replied

  
Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 29 of 82 (35489)
03-27-2003 3:39 PM


Could we perhaps elevate the level of the discussion a bit?

  
Dr_Tazimus_maximus
Member (Idle past 3217 days)
Posts: 402
From: Gaithersburg, MD, USA
Joined: 03-19-2002


Message 30 of 82 (35490)
03-27-2003 3:39 PM
Reply to: Message 24 by John A. Davison
03-27-2003 2:58 PM


Split posts
Sorry, I had a timer go off and hit sumbit instead of shrinking the window. As to your last statement
quote:
Now if the rest of the members would divulge their identities, we might have a decent exchange of ideas. I don't expect much of a response to this outrageous suggestion.
I really do not see how the exchange of ideas requires the knowledge of a persons identity, it only requires the free exchange of information on the topic at hand.
------------------
"Chance favors the prepared mind." L. Pasteur
Taz

This message is a reply to:
 Message 24 by John A. Davison, posted 03-27-2003 2:58 PM John A. Davison 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