Creationism education bills

[IMMensaMind 460]

How does someone with the name "IMMensaMind" give no credibility whatsoever to theory of evolution?

 

 

Unless the name is a fallacy and he is not that smart at all?

 

Not one sycophant has countered this obviously false impression?

 

MTSkiBum: I am not guilty of that which you accuse. Please don't add to the stupidity already present here - the stupidity that claims that I've made false assumptions about people's beliefs while suffering an epidemic of these false assumptions themselves.

 

If you fabricate such a stupid notion or misimpression, you don't diminish me; you diminish yourself.

[IMMensaMind 460]

[IMMensaMind 460]

I'm curious if the antagonistic lefty in this room will even have the stones to answer this question:

 

Are you in favor of what SETI does (Search for Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence)? How so?

[KSB2424 3,087]

There's gonna be some folks headed to the Lake of Fire after this thread is done. That's for sure.

[jerryskids 5,461]

While these processes are quite spectacular, our limited understanding of their development does not necessitate a creator/designer/God/god more than any of the natural world's unexplained phenomena. Effectively this is another face of irreducible complexity. Do these findings add to traditional understanding of cell bio and evolution? Absolutely. Do they negate the role of random mutation in evolutionary change? Not a bit.

 

 

IMO this is the essence of the debate. It is like an asymptote on a graph; as we learn more about the science, the lines get closer, but they will never really touch.

 

Also, this thread has been very informative. In fact, if you cut out the typical insults, it could be a template for a class on the subject. It is clear however that it could not be a part of the public school curriculum, because you would need a special kind of teacher to moderate the discussion, and public school policy cannot rely on the ability of a teacher (unfortunately).

[Frank M 181]

IMO this is the essence of the debate. It is like an asymptote on a graph; as we learn more about the science, the lines get closer, but they will never really touch.

 

Also, this thread has been very informative. In fact, if you cut out the typical insults, it could be a template for a class on the subject. It is clear however that it could not be a part of the public school curriculum, because you would need a special kind of teacher to moderate the discussion, and public school policy cannot rely on the ability of a teacher (unfortunately).

 

 

You know, I don't get why IMMensadoosh even cares about this. Surely he wouldn't subject his golden child(ren) to the horror of public education, so they will likely learn about unprovable stories as science, anyways.

[OldMaid 1,844]

I'm curious if the antagonistic lefty in this room will even have the stones to answer this question:

 

Are you in favor of my grandfather being a yeti? How so?

 

Fixorated

[nikki2200 4]

Yet you keep responding, so claim all you want. You know you're lying; I know you're lying. The only thing I ever reference without provocation is general criticism of liberals. I don't make an insult personal unless it has been first done to me, and usually repeatedly. Period.

 

You can make excuses or make claims, but it doesn't make it so.

 

 

WHO CARES????? YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS FORUM THAT CARES ABOUT NONSENSICAL SHIIT LIKE THIS. SO WHAT IF FRANK M INSULTED YOU FIRST? THERE'S A 99.99% CHANCE YOU DESERVED IT. Everyone insults everyone. WHO FOCKING CARES WHO STARTED IT???

 

And yes I am in CAPS LOCK mode. My God, you have a bigger vagina than I do.

[KSB2424 3,087]

My God, you have a bigger vagina than I do.

Hotdog down a subway?

[IMMensaMind 460]

WHO CARES????? YOU ARE THE ONLY PERSON ON THIS FORUM THAT CARES ABOUT NONSENSICAL SHIIT LIKE THIS. SO WHAT IF FRANK M INSULTED YOU FIRST? THERE'S A 99.99% CHANCE YOU DESERVED IT. Everyone insults everyone. WHO FOCKING CARES WHO STARTED IT???

 

And yes I am in CAPS LOCK mode. My God, you have a bigger vagina than I do.

 

If no one cares, why do they whine when I insult? Two way street, Nikki. Cannot be a hypocrite here. If insulting is something no one should care about, then it shouldn't matter when I insult, first or otherwise. I am an intelligent and reasonable person. I know when someone is trying to bullsh!t me with double standards that destroy the integrity of the debate.

 

You have a funny way of only finding it possible to accuse me of the meat curtain problem, considering that every poster here has whined about me insulting them - the latest of which was penultimatestraw. Do not attempt to claim that I'm the only one doing it. The entire topic of insult was brought up because people were insulting me, and I finally fired back, and these same reprobates fired back "Hah! Look at the hypocrite who says he doesn't insult people now insulting people!"

 

If you cannot find a problem with that, you're a stinky little rag with no business in any kind of a serious debate.

[IMMensaMind 460]

"This most beautiful system of sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful being."

 

-Sir Isaac Newton, original Intelligent Design Proponent

 

[nikki2200 4]

You painted yourself into a corner, as all I've been saying that this is supportive of ID. Now you've said it. Clever of me; stupid of you.

 

By painting you in a corner, my position is vindicated. Sorry. Ain't no escaping this basic truth. Do you need me to type it again for you?

 

So far in this thread you have admittedly lied about an anecdote pertaining to a certain video, you have been proven to blatantly make shiit up including direct quotes that don't exist, you have been proven to draw conclusions from research that the actual focking scientist who did the research does not draw nor does he believe, and you have failed to provide any substantive evidence to support anything you are talking about. And somehow you've been vindicated? Have you no dignity? This is actually making me start to cringe.

[MTSkiBum 1,606]

More presumptions. I am not a member of MENSA

 

Color me shocked

[OldMaid 1,844]

Maybe we should move this over to the conspiracy theory thread?

[Strike 4,131]

So far in this thread you have admittedly lied about an anecdote pertaining to a certain video, you have been proven to blatantly make shiit up including direct quotes that don't exist, you have been proven to draw conclusions from research that the actual focking scientist who did the research does not draw nor does he believe, and you have failed to provide any substantive evidence to support anything you are talking about. And somehow you've been vindicated? Have you no dignity? This is actually making me start to cringe.

 

As I noted earlier in this thread there hasn't been a beatdown of a geek this bad since the infamous "being here illegally isn't a crime" thread. And, of course, that thread resulted in TorridMuhammad leaving this bored in disgrace. Coincidentally, I was heavily involved in that beatdown as well. If you haven't read it, you might find this thread entertaining:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=210446&hl=%20%20illegally%20%20%20crime%20%20%20being&st=0

 

:banana:

[Me_2006 14]

As I noted earlier in this thread there hasn't been a beatdown of a geek this bad since the infamous "being here illegally isn't a crime" thread. And, of course, that thread resulted in TorridMuhammad leaving this bored in disgrace. Coincidentally, I was heavily involved in that beatdown as well. If you haven't read it, you might find this thread entertaining:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=210446&hl=%20%20illegally%20%20%20crime%20%20%20being&st=0

 

:banana:

 

Mensa makes me wish Torrid was still here. He or Scooter would provide amazing hilarity in a debate with Mensa because they didn't have lives that interfered with what strangers on the internet thought of them either.

[KSB2424 3,087]

As I noted earlier in this thread there hasn't been a beatdown of a geek this bad since the infamous "being here illegally isn't a crime" thread. And, of course, that thread resulted in TorridMuhammad leaving this bored in disgrace. Coincidentally, I was heavily involved in that beatdown as well. If you haven't read it, you might find this thread entertaining:

 

http://www.fftodayforums.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=210446&hl=%20%20illegally%20%20%20crime%20%20%20being&st=0

 

:banana:

Hey, this Mensa character may be a little crazy but he's holding his own pretty well. In fact, the scorecard shows a 50-49, 49-50, 51-48 split decision win.... for your new Heavyweight (only 8% BF though) Nerd of the Wooooorrrrld.... MensaMind!@#!.

[IMMensaMind 460]

So far in this thread you have admittedly lied about an anecdote pertaining to a certain video, you have been proven to blatantly make shiit up including direct quotes that don't exist, you have been proven to draw conclusions from research that the actual focking scientist who did the research does not draw nor does he believe, and you have failed to provide any substantive evidence to support anything you are talking about. And somehow you've been vindicated? Have you no dignity? This is actually making me start to cringe.

 

You're being dishonest. I haven't lied about anything. You're purposefully skewing what actually was said to fit in your box - and I'm sure you have plenty of room in there, considering how much use it gets from forearm members.

 

If you want to be nasty, nikki, I'll be nasty too.

 

And just one more thing: where does Shapiro say that this discovery of intellectual genetic programming doesn't support the notion of an Intelligent Designer?

 

You're just on the opposite side of this, without the decency to respect the debate itself.

[IMMensaMind 460]

Color me shocked

 

Want to retract what you claimed before? Or simply add yourself to the pile of people making assertions that they cannot and will not back up, while simultaneously claiming that they're the ones winning this debate?

[MTSkiBum 1,606]

Want to retract what you claimed before? Or simply add yourself to the pile of people making assertions that they cannot and will not back up, while simultaneously claiming that they're the ones winning this debate?

 

 

It is tough to argue with a brick wall.

[IMMensaMind 460]

It is tough to argue with a brick wall.

 

Since I said that I accept the Theory of Evolution in its most general terms - and only question those aspects of it Shapiro also questions (the part where Darwinianism is defended as faith, rather than science), you can retract your claim now. I've explained to you that you were wrong.

 

Are you actually refusing to recant your claim? And you're not thinking you're a brick wall?

[Frank M 181]

As I noted earlier in this thread there hasn't been a beatdown of a geek this bad since the infamous "being here illegally isn't a crime" thread. And, of course, that thread resulted in TorridMuhammad leaving this bored in disgrace. Coincidentally, I was heavily involved in that beatdown as well. If you haven't read it, you might find this thread entertaining:

 

http://www.fftodayfo...20%20being&st=0

 

:banana:

 

Strike, for once, you and I are in total agreement.

 

[Frank M 181]

Hey, this Mensa character may be a little crazy but he's holding his own pretty well. In fact, the scorecard shows a 50-49, 49-50, 51-48 split decision win.... for your new Heavyweight (only 8% BF though) Nerd of the Wooooorrrrld.... MensaMind!@#!.

 

How bad is it when the only one on your side is KSB2424?

 

 

T&Ps for Mensa's dignity.

 

What little of it there was.

[Strike 4,131]

Even Rocky thinks Mensa should "stay down"

 

bump.

 

[Frank M 181]

If no one cares, why do they whine when I insult?

 

They don't. You're the only one that does that.

 

HTH

[nikki2200 4]

You're being dishonest. I haven't lied about anything. You're purposefully skewing what actually was said to fit in your box - and I'm sure you have plenty of room in there, considering how much use it gets from forearm members.

 

If you want to be nasty, nikki, I'll be nasty too.

 

And just one more thing: where does Shapiro say that this discovery of intellectual genetic programming doesn't support the notion of an Intelligent Designer?

 

You're just on the opposite side of this, without the decency to respect the debate itself.

 

OK Mensa since all you have left are semantics, I will try to answer this. Shapiro is very clear that he is not a proponent of ID. FeelingMN taught us that. Isn't that in and of itself enough to stop hijacking his research? If he is not a proponenent of ID, wouldn't that IMPLY that he does not believe his research supports it? Where does Shapiro say it does support it? Are you really that arrogant that you think you can interpret his studies better than he can? Are you that pompous that you honestly believe that you know better than he does what his work means? Apparently you are because you are actually willing to LITERALLY put words in his mouth with quotation marks to boot. We have his e-mail address it appears and I am actually contemplating e-mailing him.

 

Also, thanks for the good laugh on what "A Third Way" really means. That what Shapiro was really saying was the third way bridged creationism and evolution. That was pure awesomeness. You can't make that shiit up.

[jerryskids 5,461]

OK Mensa since all you have left are semantics, I will try to answer this. Shapiro is very clear that he is not a proponent of ID. FeelingMN taught us that. Isn't that in and of itself enough to stop hijacking his research? If he is not a proponenent of ID, wouldn't that IMPLY that he does not believe his research supports it? Where does Shapiro say it does support it? Are you really that arrogant that you think you can interpret his studies better than he can? Are you that pompous that you honestly believe that you know better than he does what his work means? Apparently you are because you are actually willing to LITERALLY put words in his mouth with quotation marks to boot. We have his e-mail address it appears and I am actually contemplating e-mailing him.

 

Also, thanks for the good laugh on what "A Third Way" really means. That what Shapiro was really saying was the third way bridged creationism and evolution. That was pure awesomeness. You can't make that shiit up.

I would speculate that he is intentionally being Switzerland because he thinks that this is really good research which should be built upon, and he doesn't want the myopes on either side focking it up. This is pure speculation of course.

[nikki2200 4]

I would speculate that he is intentionally being Switzerland because he thinks that this is really good research which should be built upon, and he doesn't want the myopes on either side focking it up. This is pure speculation of course.

 

 

Because you don't know what is going on in his focking brain. Apparently MensaMind does. The guy blatantly came out and said he is not a proponent of ID. It could be because he doesn't want to admit it or it could be because he doesn't believe it. The FACT is he said he is not. Now we're going to sit here and not only put words in this guy's mouth, but put thoughts in his brain too? It really truly is unbelievable how far people will go to further their own agendas.

[Mike Honcho 4,191]

Because you don't know what is going on in his focking brain. Apparently MensaMind does. The guy blatantly came out and said he is not a proponent of ID. It could be because he doesn't want to admit it or it could be because he doesn't believe it. The FACT is he said he is not. Now we're going to sit here and not only put words in this guy's mouth, but put thoughts in his brain too? It really truly is unbelievable how far people will go to further their own agendas.

 

 

aint that the truth...I met her mother and told her all her friends were awesome.

[DankNuggs 305]

OK Mensa since all you have left are semantics, I will try to answer this. Shapiro is very clear that he is not a proponent of ID. FeelingMN taught us that. Isn't that in and of itself enough to stop hijacking his research? If he is not a proponenent of ID, wouldn't that IMPLY that he does not believe his research supports it? Where does Shapiro say it does support it? Are you really that arrogant that you think you can interpret his studies better than he can? Are you that pompous that you honestly believe that you know better than he does what his work means? Apparently you are because you are actually willing to LITERALLY put words in his mouth with quotation marks to boot. We have his e-mail address it appears and I am actually contemplating e-mailing him.

 

Also, thanks for the good laugh on what "A Third Way" really means. That what Shapiro was really saying was the third way bridged creationism and evolution. That was pure awesomeness. You can't make that shiit up.

I don't think this is about having a concrete answer...

 

 

how about the fact there is plenty of room to support both ID and darwinism... perhaps Darwinism is a product of ID...

[MedStudent 56]

Hey, this Mensa character may be a little crazy but he's holding his own pretty well. In fact, the scorecard shows a 50-49, 49-50, 51-48 split decision win.... for your new Heavyweight (only 8% BF though) Nerd of the Wooooorrrrld.... MensaMind!@#!.

 

I think you are having another Tiger moment.

[nikki2200 4]

I don't think this is about having a concrete answer...

 

 

how about the fact there is plenty of room to support both ID and darwinism... perhaps Darwinism is a product of ID...

 

 

1. That is not a fact. At least not a scientific fact at this moment.

2. There is plenty of room to support that aliens are the designers and that Scientology actually got it right. That doesn't mean this idea should be taught in a focking science class because it is not science.

[MedStudent 56]

Immensa's whole point seems to be that random mutation cannot do what the darwinists say it does. Some scientists are saying this mutation is not a random mutation. Well for one thing Darwin never even talked about random mutation. And if these scientists are correct in saying that these mutations can be specific as opposed to random then it does nothing to negate darwin's theory. It just builds upon it like all research has built upon it. And the Shapiro guy is saying that this is natural genetic engineering. I fail to see what this has to do with Intelligent design. Shapiro's problem seems to be that he is having difficulty getting some hard headed darwinists to rethink their ideas. It it no way supports a creator or intelligent designer. If anything it is a refinement of Darwinism.

[nikki2200 4]

Professor Shapiro e-mailed me. I would be happy to forward the e-mail to anyone who wants to see it. Since I am not in favor of putting words in anyone's mouths, I will just copy and paste what he said.

 

 

Nicole,

 

I am a scientist and deal only in natural causes. So supernatural explanations of the type proposed by many ID proponents are excluded. However, there is a lot of information processing and decision making going on in living cells and organisms. And I have no problem with theories about how they may fit into the process of evolution so long as they can be tested experimentally.

 

 

Please let me know if this answer satisfies you. I suggest you look at my web site and download some recent papers to get a fuller exposition of my thinking about evolution. There is also a link to video of a long lecture I gave on the subject last October.

 

 

Best wishes,

 

 

Jim Shapiro

 

James A. Shapiro

Professor of Microbiology

Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, University of Chicago

Gordon Center for Integrative Science

GCIS W123B

929 E. 57th Street

Chicago, IL 60637

 

 

Also I really can't believe he responded. I was kinda doing it as a joke.

[MedStudent 56]

Professor Shapiro e-mailed me. I would be happy to forward the e-mail to anyone who wants to see it. Since I am not in favor of putting words in anyone's mouths, I will just copy and paste what he said.

 

 

 

Also I really can't believe he responded. I was kinda doing it as a joke.

 

 

 

 

 

Awesome! The Geek club is evolving into a science class!

[OldMaid 1,844]

It appears we have a clear winner here, and it's NOT Mensadouche!

 

 

Congrats Nic!

[MedStudent 56]

Professor Shapiro e-mailed me. I would be happy to forward the e-mail to anyone who wants to see it. Since I am not in favor of putting words in anyone's mouths, I will just copy and paste what he said.

 

 

 

Also I really can't believe he responded. I was kinda doing it as a joke.

 

 

 

 

 

Here is the lecture on evolution.

[DankNuggs 305]

Immensa's whole point seems to be that random mutation cannot do what the darwinists say it does. Some scientists are saying this mutation is not a random mutation. Well for one thing Darwin never even talked about random mutation. And if these scientists are correct in saying that these mutations can be specific as opposed to random then it does nothing to negate darwin's theory. It just builds upon it like all research has built upon it. And the Shapiro guy is saying that this is natural genetic engineering. I fail to see what this has to do with Intelligent design. Shapiro's problem seems to be that he is having difficulty getting some hard headed darwinists to rethink their ideas. It it no way supports a creator or intelligent designer. If anything it is a refinement of Darwinism.

Science is the observation of order in our universe... ID created the system of order... I don't see anything that subtracts from an ID argument, nor could it...

[FeelingMN 273]

Jealous and incapable of understanding. That's a great combination you have going for yourself. I built what I have solely on my own.

 

Congratulations. Why bring it up then unless it's some sort of defense mechanism? You've proven unworthy of an honest, intellectual debate....so you bust out how much money you make.

 

I have what I want, and want what I have. Ain't jealous of anybody.

 

 

I asked the question because I knew you had no choice but to answer that way. By answering that way, you prove my point. How exactly could a claim of cellular wisdom be derided as the the lunatic rantings of an IDer last year, but this year - when suddenly brought to light to the heavy-weight intelligences that are clearly on display in this forearm - such a discovery has nothing to do with Intelligent Design?

 

You painted yourself into a corner, as all I've been saying that this is supportive of ID. Now you've said it. Clever of me; stupid of you.

 

By painting you in a corner, my position is vindicated. Sorry. Ain't no escaping this basic truth. Do you need me to type it again for you?

 

Of course I had no choice....that's the logical conclusion of intelligent design, and it's what I've been arguing all along.

 

You didn't paint me into a wall...you've just exposed your hypocrisy. Basically you're saying I should have retained a priori beliefs despite viewing evidence to the contrary. Isn't that the essence of confirmation bias? Whatever, I've proven I'm capable of changing my mind....I have an open mind. I was just being honest....and it really doesn't change what I've argued in this thread one iota.

 

It seems like you're saying that past perspectives are relatively static and cannot change. That once you think something....you'll always think that way. Actually, that sounds pretty close to how you operate.

 

 

I would speculate that he is intentionally being Switzerland because he thinks that this is really good research which should be built upon, and he doesn't want the myopes on either side focking it up. This is pure speculation of course.

 

So you'd also speculate that the other scientists engaged in this line of research are also staying neutral?

 

Whatever. If Shapiro really believes his research supports ID, he could get a sh!t ton of private funding for his experiments. Write books. Live the life of a rock star scientist. Prove god really is in the details. Be considered one of the greatest minds in history.

 

But he's just gonna play it close to the vest so neither side focks up his research.

 

OR....or....how 'bout this....he's not a proponent of ID....which is what he was quoted as saying....not Mensaquoted....he was actually quoted as saying he was not a proponent of ID....but that was probably just a political move on his part.

 

 

I don't think this is about having a concrete answer...

 

 

how about the fact there is plenty of room to support both ID and darwinism... perhaps Darwinism is a product of ID...

 

Nobody is gonna sway anybody's opinion here. I have no interest in arguing against God. I've said many times before....and will continue to say Religion is a good thing. It provides meaning and guidance to people's lives. But I think it does run into problems when it tries to answer EVERYTHING about the Universe. Jerry made a good point, science is asymptotic in its pursuit of Reality. It'll never answer ALL the questions....but, it is the best method devised to answer questions of the natural world. While Religion answers questions of a different aspect of reality....our mental realities....spiritual realities. It's one of the things that helps guide us through human existence. But it's a poor construct for delineating how the natural world works.

 

And if Darwinism is the product of ID....we would therefore be the product of ID...which would mean we are programmed on some level and the issue of Free Will presents itself. It reeks of theology. If churches or community groups or whatever want to teach ID. Fine...I'm cool with that. Just don't tell me ID is on par with science. And if you do, bring something significant to the discussion other than made up quotes and sophistry.

[MedStudent 56]

Science is the observation of order in our universe... ID created the system of order... I don't see anything that subtracts from an ID argument, nor could it...

 

It doesn't subtract or add to it. There is still no scientific evidence that ID exists.