Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

One of the best answers ever ...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Emphasis mine:
    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
    You remind me of Nick Matzke's 9,400-word "critical review" of Meyer's Darwin's Doubt without having read it (unless you're stupid enough to believe that Matzke read/absorbed/understood the entire 500+-page book in less than a day while fulfilling his work and family and personal duties (such as sleeping, eating, etc.) and wrote the 9,400 words). :duh
    Lying again, Jorge? You know Matzke didn't produce his critique in less than a day. You've made this claim before, and it's been shot down before. Last time you tried to wriggle off the hook by saying that you meant 24 hours and didn't include time for eating/sleeping etc. It didn't work then and it definitely won't work now. So what's you excuse this time?

    Roy
    Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

    mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

    Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
    Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

    Comment


    • #17
      That's why I confined my detailed critique to your claims. Of course you have no substantive response.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Jorge View Post
        Ad hominem to the rescue - up, up and awayyyyyyyyyyyyyy !!!

        You remind me of Nick Matzke's 9,400-word "critical review" of Meyer's Darwin's Doubt without having read it (unless you're stupid enough to believe that Matzke read/absorbed/understood the entire 500+-page book in less than a day while fulfilling his work and family and personal duties (such as sleeping, eating, etc.) and wrote the 9,400 words).

        At least you're "honest" enough to admit that you haven't read Lubenow's book - that puts you one up on Matzke.

        From all that I know I stand by Lubenow's work.
        It might help a bit if you actually read the book.

        Jorge
        ***********************************************

        BTW, the following recent headline supports why I don't blindly swallow the claims of "science" as most of you people do. Not that I expect that this will be understood by most of you (in fact, I'd bet the farm that most of you will 'pooh-pooh it'), but here it is nonetheless:
        http://www.newscientist.com/article/...l#.U75oq0BXfEq

        See, one day they're swearing that they've got the "Holy Grail", the next day they're saying, "Oops, maybe not!" Just like the recent "Find of the century!!!" regarding the "proof" of the Big Bang / gravitational waves. Shortly later, "Oops!" And why are they so anxious to promote their beliefs labeled as "science"? Easy - because the main issue is about beliefs, not about science. As I've always said, science is merely a second-tier servant to ideology. In the meantime, people get suckered into believing the Materialistic view of Reality and many lose their soul in the process. That summarizes the entire matter.

        Jorge

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by Jorge View Post
          ***********************************************

          BTW, the following recent headline supports why I don't blindly swallow the claims of "science" as most of you people do. Not that I expect that this will be understood by most of you (in fact, I'd bet the farm that most of you will 'pooh-pooh it'), but here it is nonetheless:
          http://www.newscientist.com/article/...l#.U75oq0BXfEq

          See, one day they're swearing that they've got the "Holy Grail", the next day they're saying, "Oops, maybe not!" Just like the recent "Find of the century!!!" regarding the "proof" of the Big Bang / gravitational waves. Shortly later, "Oops!" And why are they so anxious to promote their beliefs labeled as "science"? Easy - because the main issue is about beliefs, not about science. As I've always said, science is merely a second-tier servant to ideology. In the meantime, people get suckered into believing the Materialistic view of Reality and many lose their soul in the process. That summarizes the entire matter.

          Jorge
          I thought you understood how science works and humans behave Jorge.

          I believe it was a bunch of those atheistic materialistic scientist who convinced the other atheistic materialistic scientists that they could be wrong. And those atheistic materialistic scientists now agree.

          See how well be behave?

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Roy View Post
            Emphasis mine: Lying again, Jorge? You know Matzke didn't produce his critique in less than a day. You've made this claim before, and it's been shot down before. Last time you tried to wriggle off the hook by saying that you meant 24 hours and didn't include time for eating/sleeping etc. It didn't work then and it definitely won't work now. So what's you excuse this time?

            Roy
            False, unsupported accusations of "lying" again.
            I must ask the Mods, why hasn't Roy been banned?

            You are an ignorant, pompous, intellectually-dishonest buffoon, Roy.
            I hope that I'm not mincing any words and that my meaning is crystal clear.

            Read the following and try not to choke on it:

            "Now, Darwin's Doubt runs to 413 pages, excluding endnotes and bibliography. Neither the book's publisher, HarperOne, nor its author sent Matzke a prepublication review copy. Did Matzke in fact read its 400+ pages and then write his 9400+ word response -- roughly 30 double-spaced pages -- in little more than a day?

            Perhaps, but a more likely hypothesis is that he wrote the lion's share of the review before the book was released based upon what he presumed it would say. A reviewer who did receive a prepublication copy, University of Pittsburgh physicist David Snoke, writes:

            A caution: this is a tome that took me two weeks to go through in evening reading, and I am familiar with the field. Like the classic tome Gödel, Escher, Bach, it simply can't be gone through quickly. I was struck that the week it was released, within one day of shipping, there were already hostile reviews up on Amazon. Simply impossible that they could have read this book in one night.


            http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06...men073791.html

            http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/07...as_074511.html


            See, unlike people such as yourself, I try to secure objective facts before speaking.

            Now, EITHER REFUTE THE ABOVE OR POST A PUBLIC APOLOGY.

            Jorge

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by rwatts View Post
              I thought you understood how science works and humans behave Jorge.

              I believe it was a bunch of those atheistic materialistic scientist who convinced the other atheistic materialistic scientists that they could be wrong. And those atheistic materialistic scientists now agree.

              See how well be behave?
              As is typical for you, you have totally missed the point.

              Jorge

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                False, unsupported accusations of "lying" again.
                I must ask the Mods, why hasn't Roy been banned?

                You are an ignorant, pompous, intellectually-dishonest buffoon, Roy.
                I hope that I'm not mincing any words and that my meaning is crystal clear.

                Read the following and try not to choke on it:

                "Now, Darwin's Doubt runs to 413 pages, excluding endnotes and bibliography. Neither the book's publisher, HarperOne, nor its author sent Matzke a prepublication review copy. Did Matzke in fact read its 400+ pages and then write his 9400+ word response -- roughly 30 double-spaced pages -- in little more than a day?

                Perhaps, but a more likely hypothesis is that he wrote the lion's share of the review before the book was released based upon what he presumed it would say. A reviewer who did receive a prepublication copy, University of Pittsburgh physicist David Snoke, writes:

                A caution: this is a tome that took me two weeks to go through in evening reading, and I am familiar with the field. Like the classic tome Gödel, Escher, Bach, it simply can't be gone through quickly. I was struck that the week it was released, within one day of shipping, there were already hostile reviews up on Amazon. Simply impossible that they could have read this book in one night.


                http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/06...men073791.html

                http://www.evolutionnews.org/2013/07...as_074511.html


                See, unlike people such as yourself, I try to secure objective facts before speaking.

                Now, EITHER REFUTE THE ABOVE OR POST A PUBLIC APOLOGY.

                Jorge
                As an aside, and in reference to your demand at the end of your post. Such demands can only carry weight if you have demonstrated some willingness of your own to be similarly constrained. Since you have repeatedly and in far more offensive circumstances demonstrated the antithesis, you have no moral grounds upon which to make such a demand.

                Jim
                He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me."

                "So in everything, do to others what you would have them do to you, for this sums up the Law and the Prophets"

                Comment


                • #23
                  Still no substantive response from Jorge. The "new" Jorge just posts PRATTs and runs.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                    ***********************************************

                    BTW, the following recent headline supports why I don't blindly swallow the claims of "science" as most of you people do. Not that I expect that this will be understood by most of you (in fact, I'd bet the farm that most of you will 'pooh-pooh it'), but here it is nonetheless:
                    http://www.newscientist.com/article/...l#.U75oq0BXfEq

                    See, one day they're swearing that they've got the "Holy Grail", the next day they're saying, "Oops, maybe not!" Just like the recent "Find of the century!!!" regarding the "proof" of the Big Bang / gravitational waves. Shortly later, "Oops!" And why are they so anxious to promote their beliefs labeled as "science"? Easy - because the main issue is about beliefs, not about science. As I've always said, science is merely a second-tier servant to ideology. In the meantime, people get suckered into believing the Materialistic view of Reality and many lose their soul in the process. That summarizes the entire matter.

                    Jorge
                    Yet more evidence that Jorge doesn't understand how (natural) science works.

                    Or maybe it's just his ideology?

                    K54

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                      As is typical for you, you have totally missed the point.

                      Jorge
                      Which was?

                      Explain in one or two sentences, please.

                      K54

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Edited by a Moderator
                        Moderated By: rogue06


                        Enough is enough. I've asked nicely for y'all to tone it down but nobody seems to want to listen. So if it continues I'll have no problem handing out warnings and infractions.

                        ***If you wish to take issue with this notice DO NOT do so in this thread.***
                        Contact the forum moderator or an administrator in Private Message or email instead. If you feel you must publicly complain or whine, please take it to the Padded Room unless told otherwise.

                        Last edited by rogue06; 07-10-2014, 03:27 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                          Which was?

                          Explain in one or two sentences, please.

                          K54
                          As amply demonstrated by previous exchanged posts, you wouldn't understand if I explained it in one or two books, let alone "sentences". So I'll pass, if you don't mind (and even if you do mind).

                          Besides, anyone with an IQ above that of a tomato would have grasped my point.

                          Jorge

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                            As amply demonstrated by previous exchanged posts, you wouldn't understand if I explained it in one or two books, let alone "sentences". So I'll pass, if you don't mind (and even if you do mind).

                            Besides, anyone with an IQ above that of a tomato would have grasped my point.

                            Jorge
                            My IQ is on par only with a kumquat, so please simplify and repeat.

                            Please be succinct since I have a very short attention span too.

                            K54

                            Hey you! I'm still waiting for a link to a website which gives a pure, direct, simple, straightforward, obvious, literal reading a Genesis.

                            Think of it as schooling the ponderously ignorant.
                            Last edited by klaus54; 07-10-2014, 01:21 PM. Reason: p.s.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                              ... Furthermore, you had better be able to back up your accusation above with actual facts, not with biased perceptions, distortions, selective reporting or manufactured "facts" such as what Omega Red recently tried to do.
                              Naturally, this dishonest statement should not go without response. I quoted you in context (do you want those links again?), which demonstrated not just your initial mouthing off with an incorrect over generalisation, but went on to blunder in your assessment of 4 anti evolutionary papers. Not just once, but twice. Naturally you could not face the shame of having made such a ridiculous error, you instead tried every dishonest tactic at your command to divert the attention away from you. But nothing you tried worked, so you left the thread in a huff, hoping you heard the last of it. As I said before, your antics and blunders in that thread will hound you for the rest of your days in NS301, until you come clean.

                              I am tempted to get you modded if another of your posts contains this level of blatant falsehoods towards me, but then that will give you cause for future complaint that the world is against you rather than keeping you focused on your blunders. Far better to keep reminding you of your blunders by quoting you in context and show the readers of these threads the detestable levels at which you operate given that you have no ability to change your past posts where you have erred and refuse to acknowledge your mistakes.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by Jorge View Post
                                False, unsupported accusations of "lying" again.
                                I must ask the Mods, why hasn't Roy been banned?
                                Jorge's claim: "Matzke read/absorbed/understood the entire 500+-page book in less than a day..."

                                Jorge's support for his claim: "Did Matzke in fact read its 400+ pages and then write his 9400+ word response -- roughly 30 double-spaced pages -- in little more than a day?"

                                Roy
                                Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                                mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                                Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                                Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by lee_merrill, Today, 03:43 PM
                                0 responses
                                6 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post lee_merrill  
                                Started by rogue06, Yesterday, 04:43 PM
                                6 responses
                                37 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by TheLurch, Yesterday, 07:40 AM
                                18 responses
                                58 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Faber
                                by Faber
                                 
                                Started by Cow Poke, 01-13-2021, 04:55 PM
                                5 responses
                                27 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post mossrose  
                                Started by rogue06, 01-13-2021, 09:58 AM
                                32 responses
                                124 views
                                4 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Working...
                                X