|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Salty Discussion Post-mortem | |||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
... the weakness of the "anti-Darwinist" position. Unable to substantiate claims, unable to intimidate detractors, the anti-Darwinist is content to agree that the thread discussion HIS claims be closed.
Who would have thought?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: 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...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
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."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Thinking that Jon Wells, on a mission to destroy Darwinism at the behest of Father Moon, is 'great'?
No need to comment on that...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
I will gladly discuss Wells' comic book, "Icons of Evolution." I will especially be glad to discuss his section on the "growing crisis in molecular phylogeny." I have already documented his dishonest use of quotes.
But, with my room temperature IQ and all, what do I know. My Amazon.com review:
quote: [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-27-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
moose:
Unfortunately, I do also find a lot of truth in Salty's appraisals of SLPx. Like what? Am I intoelrant? Bigoted? A mystic? Please tell me moose. Email me if you'd like.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Please stop trying to set yourself up like this. I have not once claimed that you did such a thing. Others may have, I did not. I clearly was referring to Wells, whom you think "great." And as I wrote in that post, I said I would gladly discuss Wells. As usual, you seem unable or unwilling to actually discuss anything.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
salty:
quote: What evidence is that? The occasional parthenogenic turkey? What is that evidence for? The cessation of macroevolution? Whether or not Eve was a virgin? Your 'evidence', as has been repeatedly pointed out, consists almost entirely of repeated unsupported assertion, appeals to no-longer authority, and a martry complex. Oh, and insults. I think Percy is right.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Actually, my history with Davison only goes back a few weeks. I think Moose and probably Percy actually have a longer history than me. After encountering him at Worm's, I did remember seeing a creationist link to his page a few years ago. As for what happened at UVM, I have no idea, and frankly don't care. From his account, it seems rather Dean Kenyonish - started pushing his ideas in a service course and students probably complained. I am attending a meeting there next week, maybe I will ask around a bit.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote:Like I said, I don't really care. quote: There is a difference between "intolerance" and responding to inflammatory rhetoric. I suggest you look into that.quote: Actually, the difference between you and Behe is that he wrote an entertaining book targeted at the lay public. You have some essays on a web site with out of date and largely debunked references. If this forum did not tolerate 'dissent', you would have been banned. That is what happens at the worm's - call creationism 'pseudoscience' and you are banned, call those that accept evolution not scinetists, mystics, etc., and all is fine. quote: You have nothing to teach any of us. You have not tried., You have, in fact, done the opposite.quote: So is that why our insults are in response to yours? This odd proijection you exhibit... You did, afterall, boast about your role being to "inflame Darwinists." Wearing that as a badge of honor, I can only guess why you would then try to make a big deal out of getting the responses to try to get.quote: Yes. One retiree....
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: Here is what I wrote, emphasis mine:
quote: This was in response to the queries of others. I may or may not care (I do not), but others have expressed curiosity. There is no hypocrisy there at all. But what is here is the typical unwarranted extrapolation that permeates your essays. The 'message' has, of course, been discussed. At least by those of us who found it wanting. You - the messenger- deigned not to discuss it, only to rely on hero worship, assertion, and pleas to be banned so that you can run back to the Worm's and cry about it. There does come a point at which the messenger deserves to be attacked. That is when the message is empty rhetoric yet the messenger continues to assert that it is unassailable. That occurred after about the 10th post or so in the original thread. I assume it happened long ago elsewhere. [This message has been edited by SLPx, 03-28-2003]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
quote: I find that hard to believe. You have - on more than one occasion - boasted of doing just this. And I am far form the only one. However, you confuse cause and effect. You have not "inflamed" me with your science, for you have presented none, and none is evident in your online essays on the subject. You have inflmaed me with your hostile, insulting rhetoric, as should have been clear from my initial posts at the Worm's. of course, consideing the tone of that board, my disgust at your charcterizations was itself seen, ridiculously, as 'attacks' on you. Apparently, creationuts see righteous indignation as insulting.quote:Entirely false. You are received none too politley - or serioulsy - because what does come out of your "little mouth" (sic) is typically a series of blatant, unsupported assertions, aspersion casting, appeals to authority, etc. And then, of course, we have your continual spamming such as above - "...adherents to the "One True Faith" ...". I am no such thing, as are none of the folk I know on this forum. Projection of your own insecurities and psychoses is not an indictment of anyone but you. quote:I have a messy office. Plus, it doesn't take long to refute your empty claims. quote: Now what are you blabbering about? When have I ever mentioned such a thing? Oh, I forgot - the creationist has the uncanny ability to read people's minds...quote: That they were crap?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
Who is Phillip Engle and why should we care?
I did google search and the only things I could find by him were that book and a paper or two at the Intellignet Design site. So, who cares if he mentions you? Why are your only replies to anything about your mythological hypothesis these "look who likes my ideas" schtick? The 'guts' to go after you in a refereed journal? In case you hadn't noticed, your manifesto is on a web site. You sound like ReMine - blabbering on about nobody refuting him in the journals when his silly ideas themselves were never in a journal. If anyone was "afraid" to go after your hero worship, then I fail to see how there could be so many hundreds of posts on this forum dealing with your hollow claims. What a sad case...
|
|||||||||||||||||||||
derwood Member (Idle past 1906 days) Posts: 1457 Joined: |
We are all AFRAID of the mighty truths that salty Davison sets before us! Yes, yes thats IT!
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024