In article <474b48ee$1@news.povray.org>, rli### [at] speakeasynet says...
> "Patrick Elliott" <sel### [at] rraznet> wrote in message
> news:MPG.21b4e9db800f84a798a07f@news.povray.org...
> 
> "When you can't tell the difference between satire and what your oppositi
on
> actually believes, its about time to have a good laugh at it all"
> 
> If that's not a great .sig file I don't know what is.
> 
Hmm. Nice idea. Which reminds me, I need to adjust mine a bit, since it 
doesn't account for XP or Vista. There, that should do it.

As for examples of how these clowns operate. The latest BS from Dembski 
involved, roughly 63 or so days ago, being called on the fact that he 
grabbed video from YouTube, which was produced by Harvard for its 
biology talks, *someone* dubbed over a lot of creationist BS, then he 
used it in his talks. His non-apology amounted to claiming he didn't do 
anything wrong, it was just lying there on the internet, he did 
attribute it, "and here is a very blurry image capture", which you can't 
read the main title in, let alone the any supposed attribution, and that 
he promises not to use *this* one again. Mind you, the fact that his 
actions involve copyright infringement, misrepresentation, and, based on 
one statute, piracy (misusing of someone else's work, not for parody, 
but as a means of directly misrepresenting the original work), seems to 
just go right over his head. And the DI, who are supposedly Christians 
can't, for some incomprehensible reason, grasp that its also breaks the 
8th and 9th commandments, against stealing and bearing false witness.

But then, this is what you expect from them and Dembski. Nothing is 
wrong, as long as it supports their cause, and Dembski is never wrong, 
as long as he can come up with some silly babbling non-apology for how 
he misused, misstated or intentionally distorted someone else's work. 
Its getting old at this point.

But it does represent their entire argument in a nut shell, "Its 
unbelievably complex, we don't comprehend how it got that way, including 
the explanation we either didn't bother to listen to, or intentionally 
deleted in order to insert our own 'theory', and therefor, because we 
don't understand it, and it is scary and confusing to us, ***you*** 
people are all wrong and conspiring against us, and well, something sort 
of, but maybe not actually, God did it instead."

Its the same argument they started with, the same whining about science 
getting everything wrong, the same litany of complaints about stuff they 
don't and/or can't comprehend, the same insistence, in the face of 
evidence, that it all makes no sense and is too complicated, and the 
same hypothesis that somehow, if we just stopped asking them for a 
theory, evidence or **research** everyone could just all agree that they 
have a theory, have shown evidence (instead of just complaints) and that 
what they do qualifies as research. I find the way these people think to 
be profoundly disturbing, not the least because they would agree 100% 
what science is *if* you where asking them how a CSI lab works, but 
insist its a conspiracy against them if the same methods are used to 
prove that all they have is more accurately described as old moth eaten 
clothing, with no emperor. Kind of the mirror image reversal of what 
your average con artist tries to sell.

Oh, and true to form, as soon as some people tried to ask him for an 
explanation about how he got the video, who edited it, and why he 
thought it was OK to use it, he immediately closed the commenting system 
to anyone that didn't kiss his ass. Predictable as some people praying 
for rain.

-- 
void main () {

    if version = "Vista" {
      call Slow_by_half();
      call DRM_everything();
    }
    call functional_code();
  }
  else
    call crash_windows();
}

<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
 
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>

Post a reply to this message